Zevachim 126

ומקיפין ויורדין דרך שמאל חוץ מן העולה לג' אלו שהיו עולין ויורדין על העקב:

THEN THEY WENT ROUND [THE ALTAR]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For whatever they had to do, e.g., sprinkle the blood or arrange the wood pile.');">¹</span> AND DESCENDED BY THE LEFT, EXCEPT FOR THESE THREE, WHO ASCENDED AND DESCENDED BY RETRACING THEIR STEPS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the left. V. Suk. 48b.');">²</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מנא ה"מ א"ר יהושע אמר קרא (ויקרא ה, יא) לא ישים עליה שמן ולא יתן עליה לבונה כי חטאת היא חטאת קרויה מנחה ומנחה קרויה חטאת

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Whence do we know it? - Said R'Joshua, Scripture saith: He shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon, for it is a sin-offering:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., they returned the same way as they came. (10) Lev. V, 11. This refers to a sinner's meal-offering brought in extreme poverty instead of a bird sin-offering.');">³</span> a sin-offering is designated a meal-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the latter can be a substitute for it.');">⁴</span>

מה חטאת טעונה צפון אף מנחה טעונה צפון ומה מנחה בקרן מערבית דרומית אף חטאת בקרן מערבית דרומית

and a meal-offering is designated a sin-offering: as a sin-offering requires the north, so does a meal-offering require the north;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashi maintains that the text is faulty, because a bird sin-offering did not require the north, nor did a sinner's meal-offering. He conjectures as an emendation: as a (bird) sin-offering is invalid if offered under a different designation, so is a (sinner's) meal-offering invalid in similar circumstances. R. Hayyim in Tosaf. emends: as the blood of a bird sin-offering must be poured out at the base, so must a sinner's meal-offering be presented at the base.');">⁵</span> and as a meal-offering [is presented] at the south-west horn, so is a [bird] sin-offering [offered] at the south-west horn.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., its blood is sprinkled there.');">⁶</span>

ומנחה גופה מנלן דתניא (ויקרא ו, ז) לפני ה' יכול במערב ת"ל (ויקרא ו, ז) אל פני המזבח

And how do we know this of the meal-offering itself? - Because it was taught: [The sons of Aaron shall offer it] before the Lord:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VI, 7. This refers to a meal-offering, and 'before the Lord' means at the altar.');">⁷</span> You might think, at the west [of the altar];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which faced the hekal, and so might appropriately be described as 'before the Lord'.');">⁸</span>

אי אל פני המזבח יכול בדרום ת"ל לפני ה' הא כיצד מגישה בקרן מערבית דרומית כנגד חודה של קרן ודיו

therefore it states, in front of the altar.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 'Front' is the south, where the ascent ran.');">⁹</span> If [it is to be] 'in front of the altar', you might think, in the south; but Scripture says, 'before the Lord'.

ר"א אומר יכול יגישנה למערבה של קרן או לדרומה של קרן אמרת כל מקום שאתה מוצא שני מקראות אחד מקיים עצמו ומקיים חבירו ואחד מקיים עצמו ומבטל חבירו מניחין זה שמקיים עצמו ומבטל חבירו ותופשין את שמקיים עצמו ומקיים חבירו

then was it done? He presented it at the south-west horn, opposite the edge of the horn, and that is sufficient.

כשאתה אומר אל פני ה' במערב היכן קיימת אל פני המזבח וכשאתה אומר אל פני המזבח בדרום קיימת לפני ה'

R'Eleazar said: You might think that he presents it on the west of the horn or the south of the horn; but you can rebut [this], [for] wherever you find two texts, one confirming itself and the other, whereas the second confirms itself but annuls the other, you abandon the one which confirms itself and annuls the other, and accept that which confirms itself and the other too. Thus, if you say 'before the Lord' [means] in the west, how can you confirm 'in front of the altar'?

בדרום היכן קיימת אמר רב אשי קסבר האי תנא כוליה מזבח בצפון קאי:

But when you say, 'in front of the altar', means in the south, you confirm before the Lord as meaning the south<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For variant reading v. Men. 19b.');">¹⁰</span> But how can you confirm this? - Said R'Ashi: This Tanna holds that the whole altar stood in the north.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the south of the altar ended opposite the door leading to the hekal, and so that too would be called 'before the Lord'.');">¹¹</span>

בכל מקום היתה כשירה [וכו']: מאי קאמר אמר רב אשי ה"ק בכל מקום היתה כשירה למליקתה אלא זה היה מקומה להזאתה

NOW. IT WAS FIT [IF DONE] IN ANY PLACE etc. What does this mean?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It cannot be meant as it stands, for if it was fit in any place, why insist on a particular spot?');">¹²</span>

תנינא להא דת"ר מלקה בכל מקום במזבח כשירה היזה דמה בכל מקום כשירה היזה ולא מיצה כשירה ובלבד שיתן מחוט הסיקרא ולמטה מדם הנפש

- Said R'Ashi, This is what it means: Any place is fit for its melikah, but this was the place for its sprinkling. We have thus learnt here what our Rabbis taught: If he nipped it by any part of the altar, it is valid; if he sprinkled its blood on any part [of the altar], it is valid.

מאי קאמר ה"ק מלקה בכל מקום במזבח כשירה מיצה דמה בכ"מ במזבח כשירה

<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sh. M. deletes the bracketed passage.');">¹³</span> provided that he applies some of the life blood<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first blood which gushes forth.');">¹⁴</span> below the scarlet line. What does this mean?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is apparently self-contradictory, as the first states that it is valid if sprinkled anywhere, and then states that it must be sprinkled below the scarlet line.');">¹⁵</span> - This is what he means: If he nipped it by any part of the altar, it is valid; if he drained the blood at any part of the altar, it is v