Zevachim 211

אף כאן למזרחה של ירושלים

so here too it means on the east of Jerusalem. And according to the Rabbis,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who employ this verse for a different purpose, as above.');">¹</span>

אלא לרבנן היכא שריף להו כדתניא היכן נשרפין לצפון ירושלים חוץ לשלש מחנות רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר אבית הדשן נשרפין

where did one burn them? - Even as it was taught: Where were they burnt? On the north of Jerusalem, without the three camps.

אמר רבא מאן תנא דפליג עליה דר' יוסי הגלילי ר' אליעזר בן יעקב היא דתניא (ויקרא ד, יב) על שפך הדשן ישרף שיהא שם דשן (שיקדים לשם דשן) ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר שיהא מקומו משופך

R'Jose the Galilean said: They are burnt in the place of the ashes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ashes from the altar must first be placed there, so that they are burnt 'where the ashes are poured out.' - It follows that the first Tanna does not require this.');">²</span> Raba observed: Who is the Tanna that disagrees with R'Jose the Galilean? - R'Eliezer B'Jacob.

אמר ליה אביי דילמא במקומו משופך פליגי

For it was taught: Where the ashes are poured out it shall be burnt: [this intimates] that ashes must be there [first]. R'Eliezer B'Jacob said: It intimates that the ground must slope down.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'poured out', it must be a place where the ashes naturally pour down.');">³</span>

תנו רבנן השורף מטמא בגדים ולא המצית את האור מטמא בגדים ולא המסדר את המערכה מטמא בגדים ואיזהו השורף המסייע בשעת שריפה

Said Abaye to him: Perhaps they disagree whether the ground must slope?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Possibly R. Eliezer b. Jacob too admits that ashes must first be placed there, but he adds that the place must slope too. - Abaye's suggestion is unrefuted.');">⁴</span> Our Rabbis taught: He who burns [the bullocks] defiles [his] garments, but he who kindles the fire does not defile [his] garments, nor does he who arranges the pile defile [his] garments.

יכול אף משנעשו אפר מטמא בגדים תלמוד לומר אותם אותם מטמאין בגדים ומשנעשין אפר אין מטמאין בגדים רבי שמעון אומר אותם מטמאין בגדים ניתך הבשר אין מטמאין בגדים

And what is the definition of 'he who burns'? - He who assists at the time of the burning. You might think that also he [who assists] when they have already been reduced to ashes defiles [his] garments: therefore it states, [And he that burneth] them [shall wash his clothes]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 28.');">⁵</span>

מאי בינייהו אמר רבא איכא בינייהו דשוייה חרוכא:

[when he burns] them they defile garments, but when they have become ashes they do not defile garments. R'Simeon said: [When he burns] them they defile [his] garments.

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך טבול יום</strong></big><br><br>

but when the flesh is disintegrated they do not defile garments. Wherein do they disagree? - Said Raba: They disagree where it [the flesh] is completely charred.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is then disintegrated, yet not ashes. According to R. Simeon, a person who comes to assist in the burning at this stage does not defile his garments, whereas in the opinion of the Rabbis he does.');">⁶</span>

מתני׳ <big><strong>השוחט</strong></big> והמעלה בחוץ חייב על השחיטה וחייב על העלאה

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>HE WHO SLAUGHTERS AND OFFERS UP WITHOUT [THE TEMPLE COURT]. IS CULPABLE IN RESPECT OF SLAUGHTERING AND IN RESPECT OF OFFERING<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A man who wantonly slaughters or offers up a sacrifice without the Temple (by 'offering up' is meant e.g. that he burns it on a block of stone - but v. Mishnah infra ');">⁷</span>

רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר שחט בפנים והעלה בחוץ שחט בחוץ והעלה בחוץ פטור שלא העלה אלא דבר פסול אמרו לו אף השוחט בפנים ומעלה בחוץ כיון שהוציאו פסלו

R'JOSE THE GALILEAN MAINTAINED: IF HE SLAUGHTERED WITHIN AND OFFERED UP WITHOUT, [HE IS CULPABLE];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Bracketed words are added from the separate edition of the Mishnayoth.');">⁸</span> IF HE SLAUGHTERED WITHOUT AND OFFERED UP WITHOUT, HE IS NOT LIABLE, BECAUSE HE OFFERED UP ONLY THAT WHICH WAS UNFIT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One is culpable for offering up without only when it was fit to be offered up within. But this was not, on account of having been slaughtered without.');">⁹</span>

הטמא שאכל בין קדש טמא בין קדש טהור חייב רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר טמא שאכל טהור חייב וטמא שאכל טמא פטור שלא אכל אלא דבר טמא אמרו לו אף טמא שאכל את הטהור כיון שנגע בו טמאוהו

SAID THEY TO HIM: WHEN ONE SLAUGHTERS WITHIN AND OFFERS UP WITHOUT, IMMEDIATELY HE CARRIES IT OUT, HE RENDERS IT UNFIT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even before he offers it up. Nevertheless he is liable; the same therefore applies when he slaughters without and offers up without.');">¹⁰</span> AN UNCLEAN [PERSON] WHO EATS [OF SACRIFICES], WHETHER UNCLEAN SACRIFICES OR CLEAN SACRIFICES, IS CULPABLE.

וטהור שאכל טמא פטור שאינו חייב אלא על טומאת הגוף:

R'JOSE THE GALILEAN SAID: AN UNCLEAN PERSON WHO EATS CLEAN [SACRIFICES] IS CULPABLE, BUT AN UNCLEAN PERSON WHO EATS UNCLEAN [FLESH OF SACRIFICES] IS NOT CULPABLE. BECAUSE HE ATE ONLY THAT WHICH IS UNCLEAN.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> בשלמא העלה כתיב עונש וכתיב אזהרה עונש דכתיב (ויקרא יז, ד) ואל פתח אהל מועד לא הביאו אזהרה דכתיב (דברים יב, יג) השמר לך פן תעלה עולותיך וכי הא דא"ר אבין א"ר אלעזר כל מקום שנאמר השמר פן ואל אינו אלא לא תעשה

SAID THEY TO HIM: WHEN AN UNCLEAN PERSON EATS CLEAN [FLESH], IMMEDIATELY HE TOUCHES IT, HE DEFILES IT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even before he eats it, yet he is culpable.');">¹¹</span> A CLEAN PERSON WHO EATS UNCLEAN [FLESH] IS NOT CULPABLE, BECAUSE ONE IS CULPABLE ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL UNCLEANNESS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 43a.');">¹²</span>

אלא שחיטה בשלמא עונש דכתיב (ויקרא יז, ד) ואל פתח אהל מועד לא הביאו אלא אזהרה מנלן אמר קרא (ויקרא יז, ז) ולא יזבחו עוד

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>As for offering up. it is well: the penalty is written and the interdict<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the warning'.');">¹³</span>

האי מיבעי ליה לכדר"א דאמר מנין לזובח בהמה למרקוליס שהוא חייב דכתיב ולא יזבחו עוד את זבחיהם אם אינו ענין לכדרכה דכתיב (דברים יב, ל) איכה יעבדו תנהו ענין לשלא כדרכה

is written. The penalty, for it is written, And bringeth it not unto the door of the tent of meeting [.

אמר רבה קרי ביה ולא יזבחו וקרי ביה ולא עוד

even that man shall be cut off from his people].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVII, 9. This refers to sacrifices.');">¹⁴</span> The interdict, for i is written, Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt-offerings [in every place that thou seest],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XII, 13: 'Every place that thou seest' means outside the Temple. Thus one text intimates the penalty and another the interdict.');">¹⁵</span>

אכתי מיבעי ליה לכדתניא עד כאן הוא מדבר בקדשים שהקדישן בשעת איסור הבמות והקריבן בשעת איסור הבמות

and in accordance with R'Abin's dictum in R'Eleazar's<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec. Ilai's.');">¹⁶</span> name, vis. : Wherever 'take heed', 'lest', or 'not' is stated, it is nought but a negative command. But as for slaughtering, the penalty, it is true, is stated, for it written, [What man soever. that killeth an ox.] and hath not brought it unto the door of the tent of meeting [. shall be cut off from among his people];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVII, 3f.');">¹⁷</span> but whence [do we derive] the interdict? - Scripture saith, And they shall no more sacrifice their sacrifices [unto the satyrs etc].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 7.');">¹⁸</span> That is required for R'Eleazar's dictum, viz. : How do we know that if one sacrifices an animal to Merculis<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mercurius, a Roman divinity, identified with the Greek Hermes; also a statue or a way-mark dedicated to Hermes, the patron deity of the wayfarer.');">¹⁹</span> he is liable to punishment? Because it is written, 'And they shall no more sacrifice their sacrifices unto the satyrs'. Since this is redundant in respect of normal worship, being derived from, How did these nations serve their gods?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XII, 30.');">²⁰</span> apply it to abnormal worship [as being punishable]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence sacrificing to Merculis, though not its normal worship (its normal worship consisted of throwing stones at it; v. Sanh. 60b) . involves guilt. - Thus the text is required for this!');">²¹</span> - Said Rabbah: Read in this text, and they shall not sacrifice, and read in it, and they shall no more.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., this is really a double injunction, and the first, 'they shall not sacrifice', interdicts sacrificing without, this being the subject of the whol passage.');">²²</span> But it is still required for what was taught: Thus far<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The passage until this verse, and they shall no more sacrifice, i.e., Lev. XVII, 3-6.');">²³</span> it speaks of sacrifices which one consecrated when bamoth were forbidden and offered up when bamoth were forbidden,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., after the Tabernacle was erected. If, however, one consecrated an animal before the Tabernacle was erected, when bamoth were permitted, there is nothing as yet to shew that he is culpable if he slaughters it at a bamah after it is erected.');">²⁴</span>