Zevachim 125

אמר רמי בר חמא כל כבשי כבשים שלש אמות לאמה חוץ מכבשו של מזבח שהיה שלש אמות ומחצה ואצבע ושליש אצבע בזכרותא:

Rami B'Hama said: All the ascents had a gradient of one cubit in three,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They rose one cubit in every three.');">¹</span> except the ascent of the altar, which [rose one cubit] in three and a half cubits and a finger and a third, counting the little fingers.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of which six go to a tefah (handbreadth) . - As heavy limbs of animals had to be carried up on it, it had an easier gradient, nine cubits in thirty-two, which works out as in the text. (The translation adopts the marginal reading.)');">²</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> מנחות היו נקמצות בכל מקום בעזרה ונאכלות לפנים מן הקלעים לזכרי כהונה בכל מאכל ליום ולילה עד חצות:

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE FISTFULS OF MEAL-OFFERINGS WERE TAKEN IN ANY PART OF THE TEMPLE COURT, AND THEY [THE MEAL-OFFERINGS] WERE EATEN WITHIN THE HANGINGS, BY MALE PRIESTS, PREPARED IN ANY MANNER, ON THE SAME DAY AND NIGHT, UNTIL MIDNIGHT. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>R'Eleazar said: If the fistful of a meal-offering was taken in the hekal, it [the ceremony] is valid, for thus we find it in the removal of the censers.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Twelve loaves, called Shewbread, were placed on the Table in the hekal, accompanied by censers of frankincense (v. Lev. XXIV, 5 seq.) . When the censers were removed (a week after they were placed there) , the Shewbread might be eaten by the priests. Thus the removing of the censers corresponded to the taking of the fistful, which likewise rendered the rest permitted; hence, as the former was done in the hekal, so was the latter valid if done in the hekal.');">³</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> א"ר אלעזר מנחה שנקמצה בהיכל כשירה שכן מצינו בסילוק בזיכין

R'Jeremiah raised an objection: And he shall take thence<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.V. thereout, but the Talmud understands the word to bear a local meaning.');">⁴</span> [his fistful]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 2.');">⁵</span>

מתיב רבי ירמיה (ויקרא ב, ב) וקמץ משם ממקום שרגלי הזר עומדות

[that means] from the place where the feet of the zar stand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The verse commences: And he (sc. the zar) shall bring it to Aaron's sons the priests; and continues, And he (sc. the priest) shall take thence etc. Hence 'thence' is interpreted, from the place where the zar is standing. This is now assumed to exclude the ulam and the hekal, where a zar might not enter.');">⁶</span> Ben Bathyra said: How do we know that if [the priest] took the fistful with his left [hand], he must return [the fistful] and take it wit right [hand]?

בן בתירא אומר מנין שאם קמץ בשמאל שיחזיר ויקמוץ בימין ת"ל משם ממקום שקמץ כבר

Because it says, 'thence', [which means,] from the place whence he had already taken a fistful?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus it intimates that it is sometimes necessary to take the fistful twice, which is only possible in this case.');">⁷</span> Some state that he [R'Jeremiah] raised the objection, and answered it himself; others state.

איכא דאמרי הוא מותיב לה והוא מפרק לה איכא דאמרי א"ל ר' עקיבא לר' ירמיה בר תחליפא אסברא לך לא נצרכא אלא להכשיר כל העזרה כולה

R'Jacob<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Marginal emendation.');">⁸</span> answered R'Jeremiah: Bar Tahlifa has explained it: Its purpose is only to declare the whole of the Temple court fit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'From the place where the feet of the zar stand' teaches that the whole of the Temple court is fit for the ceremony, and all the more the hekal and the court of the priests, seeing that this was a priestly ceremony.');">⁹</span>

סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ועולה קדשי קדשים ומנחה קדשי קדשים מה עולה טעונה צפון אף מנחה טעונה צפון

I might argue: Since a burnt-offering is a most holy sacrifice, and a meal-offering is most holy: as burnt-offering requires the north, so does a meal-offering require the north. [Therefore the text informs us otherwise.] As for a burnt-offering, the reason is because it is altogether burnt?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But a meal-offering is not, and so there is no reason for supposing that it requires the north. What then is the need for a text to teach that it does not?');">¹⁰</span>

מה לעולה שכן כליל

- [Then learn it] from a sin-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is not altogether burnt, and yet requires the north.');">¹¹</span> As for a sin-offering, the reason is because it atones for those who are liable to kareth? - [Then learn it] from a guilt-offering.

מחטאת מה לחטאת שכן מכפרת על חייבי כריתות

As for a guilt-offering, the reason is because it is a blood sacrifice. A as for all these too, the reason is because they are blood sacrifices?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., this reason would suffice apart from the others already stated.');">¹²</span>

מאשם מה לאשם שכן מיני דמים

- Rather, [the text] is necessary. I might think, since it is written, And he shall bring it unto the altar.

מכולהו מה לכולהו שכן מיני דמים

.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 8.');">¹³</span> and he shall take up therefrom his fistful:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. VI, 8.');">¹⁴</span>

אלא איצטריך סד"א הואיל וכתיב (ויקרא ב, ח) והגישה אל המזבח (ויקרא ו, ח) והרים ממנו בקומצו

as it must be brought near to the south-west horn,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As is deduced infra.');">¹⁵</span> so must the fistful be taken by the south-west horn.

מה הגשה בקרן מערבית דרומית אף קמיצה בקרן מערבית דרומית קא משמע לן

Hence [the text] informs us [that it is not so]. R'Johanan said: If a peace-offering is slaughtered in the hekal, it is fit, because it is said, And he shal it at the door of the tent of meeting.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' lbid. III, 2.');">¹⁶</span>

אמר רבי יוחנן שלמים ששחטן בהיכל כשרים שנאמר (ויקרא ג, ב) ושחטו (אותו) פתח אהל מועד ולא יהא טפל חמור מן העיקר

and the adjunct cannot be stricter than the principal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it must be killed at the door of the tent of meeting, the tent of meeting (corresponding to the hekal) is obviously the principal place for it, while the Temple court is but an adjunct thereto.');">¹⁷</span> An objection is raised: R'Johanan B'Bathyra said: How do we know that if heathens surrounded the whole of the Temple court,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Shooting arrows and hurling missiles into it.');">¹⁸</span>

מיתיבי רבי יוחנן בן בתירה אומר מנין שאם הקיפו עובדי כוכבים את כל העזרה שהכהנים נכנסין לשם ואוכלין שם קדשי קדשים ת"ל (במדבר יח, י) בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו

the priests enter the hekal and eat there the most holy sacrifices and the remainder of the meal-offering?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Emended text (Sh. M.) .');">¹⁹</span> Because it says, In a most holy place<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Implying the hekal.');">²⁰</span>

ואמאי נימא בחצר אהל מועד יאכלוה ולא יהא טפל חמור מן העיקר

shalt thou eat thereof.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XVIII, 10.');">²¹</span> Yet why [is this text necessary]?

הכי השתא התם עבודה דאדם עובד במקום רבו אמרינן לא יהא טפל חמור מן העיקר אכילה דאין אדם אוכל במקום רבו לא יהא טפל חמור מן העיקר לא אמרינן:

Let us quote, In the court of the tent of meeting shall they eat it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VI, 9.');">²²</span> and the adjunct cannot be stricter than the principal?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the same argument as above: the 'court' is an adjunct to the 'tent of meeting' (the hekal) ; if it can be eaten in the former place, it can surely be eaten in the latter.');">²³</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> חטאת העוף היתה נעשית על קרן דרומית מערבית ובכל מקום היתה כשירה אלא זה היתה מקומה ושלשה דברים היתה אותה קרן משמשת מלמטה ושלשה מלמעלה מלמטה חטאת העוף והגשות ושירי הדם

- How compare: there [that we are dealing with] service, we say, Let the adjunct not be stricter than the principal, since a man can perform a service in the presence of his master. [But as for] eating, since a man cannot eat in the presence of his master.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Eating is for one's own benefit, and it may therefore be disrespectful to do it in the master's (here, God's) presence. - The hekal, being more sacred than the Temple court, is referred to as 'in the Master's presence'.');">²⁴</span>

ומלמעלן ניסוך היין והמים ועולת העוף כשהיא רבה במזרח

we do not say, Let the adjunct not be stricter than the principal. <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE SIN-OFFERING OF A BIRD WAS SACRIFICED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'made', The Mishnah does not say 'slaughtered', as it was not slaughtered but had its neck wrung.');">²⁵</span>

כל העולין למזבח עולין דרך ימין

BY THE SOUTH-WEST HORN. NOW, IT WAS FIT [IF DONE] IN ANY PLACE, BUT THIS WAS ITS [PARTICULAR] PLACE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Gemara discusses what this means,');">²⁶</span> THAT HORN SERVED FOR THREE THINGS BELOW, AND THREE THINGS ABOVE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Below' and 'above' refer to the scarlet line which encompassed the altar.');">²⁷</span> BELOW: FOR THE SIN-OFFERING OF THE BIRD, FOR THE PRESENTING [OF MEAL-OFFERINGS].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before their fistfuls were taken they were presented ('brought near') at this horn.');">²⁸</span> AND FOR THE RESIDUE OF THE BLOOD.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the outer sin-offerings. These were sprinkled there.');">²⁹</span> ABOVE: FOR THE POURING OUT OF WINE AND WATER, AND FOR THE BURNT-OFFERING OF A BIRD WHEN THE EAST WAS TOO MUCH OCCUPIED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Its proper place was at the south-east horn, but if many animal burnt-offerings were being sacrificed there, this was offered at the south-west horn, above the line.');">³⁰</span> ALL WHO ASCENDED THE ALTAR ASCENDED BY THE RIGHT,