Zevachim 235

ורבי יהודה אמר לך כי כתיב הישר (בעיניו) הוא דכתיב אבל בבמה גדולה אפילו חובות נמי ליקרוב

And R'Judah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How does he justify his view that an individual too could offer obligatory sacrifices at the public bamah?');">¹</span> - He can answer you: 'Whatsoever is right' is written in reference to 'in his eyes',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in reference to the private bamah, which one could erect wherever one chose.');">²</span>

אלא הא כתיב איש לאו למימרא דאיש ישרות הוא דליקרוב הא חובות לא ליקרוב כי כתיב איש להכשיר את הזר

but at the great bamah one could offer even statutory offerings. But surely 'man' is written, and does that not intimate that [only] a man may offer voluntary but not obligatory sacrifices?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And if this does not apply to the public bamah too, why is 'man' written? Scripture should simply write, Whatsoever is right in his eyes, and since 'in his eyes' implies a private bamah, it is obvious that the limitation applies to an individual only, for the community did not sacrifice at a private bamah. Hence 'man' must teach that this limitation applies to the public bamah too.');">³</span>

זר (ויקרא יז, ו) מוזרק הכהן את הדם על מזבח ה' נפקא

- 'Man' is written to intimate that a zar is fit. [The fitness of] a zar is deduced from, And the priest shall sprinkle the blood on the altar of the Lord [at the door of the tent of meeting]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVII, 6. The inference is: only 'at the door of the tent of meeting' must a priest sprinkle the blood; but at a bamah a zar (lay-Israelite) too could officiate.');">⁵</span>

מהו דתימא ליבעי קדוש בכורות כמעיקרא קא משמע לן

- You might say, it requires the sanctification of the firstborn, as originally:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though priests are not necessary, yet we require the firstborn, who officiated originally.');">⁶</span> hence it ['man'] informs us [that it is not so].

חכמים היינו תנא קמא

The Sages are identical with the first Tanna?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first Sages (referred to as the first Tanna) say that only peace-offerings and burnt-offerings were offered on behalf of an individual, which implies that the community could offer obligatory sacrifices; while the second Sages (referred to as 'the Sages') likewise maintain that whatever the community could offer at the Tent of Meeting in the wilderness, they could offer at the Tent of Meeting at Gilgal (which was a public bamah) , but that a private individual could offer only peace-offerings and burnt-offerings both at a public and at a private bamah. Thus their views are identical.');">⁷</span> - Said R'Papa: They differ as to whether libations were offered in the wilderness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 111a, q.v. The first Sages hold that libations were not offered in the wilderness, and therefore they merely teach that peace-offerings and burnt-offerings were permitted at the bamah. The second Sages hold that libations were offered in the wilderness, and so they teach: whatever the community had to offer in the wilderness, sc. libations, they also had to offer at Gilgal.');">⁸</span>

אמר רב פפא קרבו נסכים במדבר איכא בינייהו:

The master said: R'Simeon said etc'. What is R'Simeon's reason? - Because it is written, And the children of Israel encamped in Gilgal, and they offered the Passover-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Josh. V, 10. Cur. edd. read: And the children of Israel offered the Passover-offering in Gilgal.');">⁹</span>

אמר מר רבי שמעון אומר וכו': מ"ט דרבי שמעון דכתיב (יהושע ה, י) ויעשו בני ישראל את הפסח בגלגל

Now that is obvious?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That they had to sacrifice the Passover-offering: why then does Scripture state it?');">¹⁰</span> Surely then this is what [the text] informs us: they offered only obligatory [sacrifices] similar to the Passover-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., those which must be offered at a fixed time.');">¹¹</span>

פשיטא אלא הא קמ"ל דחובות כעין פסח הוא דקרב הא לאו כעין פסח לא קרב ואידך

but they did not offer [obligatory sacrifices] which were not like the Passover-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., sin-offerings.');">¹²</span> And the other?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis: how do they explain the verse?');">¹³</span>

מיבעי ליה לכדרבי יוחנן דא"ר יוחנן משום רבי בנאה ערל מקבל הזאה

- It is required for R'Johanan's dictum. For R'Johanan said on R'Bana'ah's authority: An uncircumcised person received sprinkling.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If an uncircumcised person becomes unclean through the dead, he is besprinkled and becomes clean (v. Num. XIX, 17 seq.) , and may then handle sacrifices. He learns this from the present text, 'and they offered the Passover-offering'. Now, the majority of them had been uncircumcised in the wilderness (Josh. V, 5) : according to the Talmud (Yeb, 71b) they were circumcised on the eleventh of Nisan (the first month) ; many of them were unclean through the dead, their parents having died in the wilderness right up to the time of their crossing the Jordan into Eretz Israel. If they had not been besprinkled whilst yet uncircumcised, they would not be clean, for two sprinklings were necessary, and if the first were on the eleventh, the second would be on the fifteenth (v. Num. a.l.) , whereas they had to sacrifice on the fourteenth.');">¹⁴</span>

תני תנא קמיה דרב אדא בר אהבה אין בין במה גדולה לבמה קטנה אלא פסח וחובות הקבוע להן זמן (א"ל יחיד חובות שקבוע להן זמן מנא ליה

A Tanna recited before R'Adda B'Ahabah: The only difference between the great [public] bamah and the minor [private] bamah was [in respect of] Passover-offerings and obligatory-offerings which have a fixed time. Said he to him: in accordance with whom was this told to you?

א"ל אסמייה) א"ל תתרגם מתניתך בעולת חובה דאיכא עולת נדבה דאי חטאת יחיד הוא חובות דקביע ליה זמן מי איכא

In accordance with R'Simeon, who maintained: The only difference between the great bamah and the minor bamah was [in respect of] Passover-offerings and obligatory offerings which have a fixed time; and you must make your teaching refer to a statutory burnt-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., the daily and additional burnt-offerings (v. Num. XXVIII-XXIX) ; these are the 'obligatory offerings which have a fixed time' which you mean, but the statutory sin-offerings of festivals could not be offered there.');">¹⁵</span> as there is also a votive burnt-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which could be offered at a private bamah only.');">¹⁶</span>

ולוקמה במנחת חובה דהא איכא חביתין קא סבר אין מנחה בבמה:

For if you would refer to sin-offerings, is there then a votive sin-offering?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely not. For the passage must mean that apart from Passover-offerings R. Simeon includes only those obligatory offerings of which there were also votive offerings. For if he meant all obligatory offerings which have a fixed time, he should simply mention them, and not the Passover-offering at all, since that too is an obligatory offering with a fixed time. Hence this is what he means: The only difference between the public and the private bamoth was in respect of the Passover-offerings, which were offered at the former but not at all at the latter, while as for other sacrifices which were offered at both, the difference is that at the private bamah only votive offerings were offered, whereas at the public bamah statutory offerings which have a fixed time were also offered. - The text is emended; v. Marginal Gloss.');">¹⁷</span> Yet let him make it refer to an obligatory meal-offering, since there were habitin?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A sort of cake (v. Lev. VI, 13 seq.; the actual word occurs in I Chron. IX, 31 where it is rendered, things that were baked on griddles) . These were statutory daily offerings, and as there were also votive meal-offerings, these too fulfilled the conditions required by R. Adda b. Ahabah.');">¹⁸</span>

באו לשילה וכו': מנא הני מילי א"ר חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן כתוב אחד אומר (שמואל א א, כד) ותביאהו בית ה' שילה וכתוב אחד אומר (תהלים עח, ס) ויטש (את) משכן שילה אהל שכן באדם וכתיב (תהלים עח, סז) וימאס באהל יוסף ובשבט אפרים לא בחר

- He holds that there were no meal-offering[s] at the bamah. WHEN THEY CAME TO SHILOH etc. Whence do we know it? - Said R'Hiyya B'Abba in R'Johanan's name: one text says, And she brought him unto the house of the Lord in Shiloh;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Sam. I, 24.');">¹⁹</span>

הא כיצד לא היתה שם תקרה אלא אבנים מלמטן ויריעות מלמעלן והיא היתה מנוחה:

whereas another text says, And He forsook the Tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which He had made to dwell among men, and it also says, Moreover He abhorred the tent of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ps. LXXVIII, 60, 67. Thus it is called a 'house' in Samuel, but 'tent' in Psalms.');">²⁰</span> How are these reconciled?

קדשי קדשים: מנא הני מילי א"ר אושעיא דאמר קרא (דברים יב, יג) השמר לך פן תעלה עולותיך בכל מקום אשר (אתה) תראה בכל מקום אשר תראה אי אתה מעלה אבל אתה אוכל בכל מקום שאתה רואה

It had no roof, but stones below and curtains above.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus it partook partly of the nature of a house, and partly of the nature of a tent. - Cur. edd. add: 'And that was the rest': this is deleted by Sh. M.');">²¹</span> MOST SACRED SACRIFICES [etc.] Whence do we know it? - Said [R'Eleazar in] R'Oshaia['s name]: Because Scripture saith, 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. This means when they will have come to the rest' (v. 9) ' sc. Shiloh, and 'in every place that thou seest' is understood to mean: in every place whence the Tabernacle at Shiloh can be seen.');">²²</span>

אימא בכל מקום שאתה רואה אי אתה מעלה אבל אתה זובח בכל מקום שתראה

You may not offer 'in every place that thou seest', but you may eat [the sacrifice] 'in every place tha thou seest'. Yet say: in every place that thou seest' you may not offer,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Offer' in its limited sense means to burn the emurim on the altar.');">²³</span>

א"ר ינאי אמר קרא (דברים יב, יד) שם תעלה ושם תעשה

but you may slaughter 'in every place that thou seest'? - Said R'Jannai: Scripture saith, There shalt thou offer. and there thou shalt sacrifice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XII, 14. Lit., 'do' (so E.V.) . - Thus it must be 'sacrificed' (slaughtered) and 'offered' in the same place.');">²⁴</span>

רבי אבדימי בר חסא אמר אמר קרא

R'Abdimi B'Hasa<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sh. M. emends: Hama.');">²⁵</span> said, Scripture saith,