Zevachim 116b — the Talmud in English

And we explain: Rahab’s intent in using this expression was to say

that even for intercourse

the organ

also did not become erect ["man" is an expression of male strength; "arose" means became erect].

And from where did she know this

—Rahab the prostitute?

For the Master said: You have no ruler or dignitary who did not engage in intercourse with Rahab the prostitute;

therefore, she knew that the organ had not become erect for intercourse.

They said: She was ten years old when the Israelites left Egypt, and she practiced prostitution throughout all forty years that the Israelites were in the wilderness. After

she had reached the age of

fifty, she converted. She said: May

the Holy One, blessed be He,

forgive me in the merit of the cord, the window, and the flax—through these she merited saving Joshua’s messengers; and it was with those same three things that she had sinned, for adulterers would climb up to her by a cord through the window, and she would also hide them among the flax.

благодаря этим предметам она удостоилась спасти посланников Иеѓошуа; и именно этими тремя предметами она грешила: блудники поднимались к ней по верёвке через окно, и она также прятала их в льняных прутьях.

The Master said: And gentiles in the present era are permitted to do so

—to offer sacrifices on bamot wherever they wish.

And we inquire:

From where are these matters

—that they are permitted to use bamot in the present era?

And we explain:

The Sages taught:

It is written in the passage concerning slaughtering sacrifices outside [Leviticus 17:2]:

“Speak to

Aaron, to his sons, and to all

the children of Israel,”

and we expound:

The children of Israel are commanded regarding

the prohibition of

slaughtering sacrifices outside, but gentiles are not commanded regarding slaughtering sacrifices outside. Therefore, each and every one

of the

gentiles may build a bama for himself and offer upon it whatever he wishes 140 .

Rav Yaakov bar Aha said in the name of Rav Asi:

During the period when bamot are prohibited to Israelites, it is

prohibited

to assist them

and to act as agents for gentiles in offering sacrifices on their bamot.

Rava said: And instructing them

—teaching them how they should proceed—

is permitted.

This is like the incident involving Iphra Hormiz,

the name of a gentile woman who was

the mother of Shapur,

the king of Persia.

She sent a three-year-old calf to Rava. She sent him a message: “Raise it for us”

—raise it

for the sake of Heaven

on a bama.

Rava said to

Rav Safra and Rav Aha bar Huna:

“Go and take,”

go and take

two youths,

two gentile lads,

of equal age,

for this is the beauty of the matter [unclear: the source text is corrupt here], and

see where the sea has deposited silt,

a place where the sea dried up and became solid ground, and we know that no ordinary person has used this place

and take new wood,

take wood that had not previously been used,

and bring forth fire from a new vessel,

bring out fire from a vessel used to produce fire from stones, and let the vessel be new,

and raise it for us for the sake of Heaven.”

We thus find that Rava instructed them how to offer gentile sacrifices on a bama.

Abaye said to

Rava:

According to whom

did you say that the wood must be new?

According to Rabbi Elazar bar Shammua.

As it was taught: Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua says:

It is written [Leviticus 1:8]: “Upon the wood that is upon the fire that is upon the altar,” and we expound:

Just as the altar may not have been used by an ordinary person, so too the wood may not have been used by an ordinary person 148 .

However, there is no proof here that new wood is required, because

Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua admits with regard to a bama

that new wood is not required, as follows.

As it was taught: One verse says, “And David gave to Araunah for the site

[in exchange for the site]

six hundred shekels of gold by weight,” whereas

on the other hand

it is written: “And David purchased the threshing floor and the cattle for fifty shekels of silver.”

How

can these two verses, which contradict one another, be reconciled? [This is Rashi’s version.]

The site of the altar

David purchased

for fifty, whereas

the site of

the entire Temple

he purchased

for six hundred.

Rabbi, in the name of Abba Yosei ben Dostai, says: He collected fifty from each and every tribe, which

from the twelve tribes amounted in total to

six hundred

shekels, and both verses are fulfilled.

Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua says:

This is the meaning of the verses:

“And David purchased the threshing floor”

without specifying here for how much he purchased it, but

as is explained elsewhere

in another place.

And what is explained?

“And David gave to Araunah for this site six hundred shekels of gold by weight.” But the

other things mentioned afterward, namely,

“the cattle for a burnt offering, and the threshing boards and the cattle implements for wood,”

which he purchased in order to kindle fire with them on the altar, David purchased

for fifty shekels of silver.

And from where do we know that David took threshing boards and cattle implements for wood?

As it is stated: “And Araunah said to David: Let my lord the king take and offer up whatever is good in his eyes; see, the cattle for a burnt offering, and the threshing boards and the cattle implements for wood.”

But how could David take the threshing boards and cattle implements from Araunah for use as wood for an offering, given that Araunah had used them? Rather, it must certainly be because this was on a bama [during the period when bamot were permitted, when the Tabernacle stood in Gibeon], and Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua admits that on a bama it is unnecessary to use wood that had not been used by an ordinary person. This presents a difficulty for Rava: Why did he tell them to take new wood?

And we answer:

And Rava could have said to you: There too, they were new;

the threshing boards and the cattle implements used for the wood were new and Araunah had not used them.

What are “moragim”? Ulla said: A board of a turbal.

What is a board of a turbal? Abaye said: A she-goat that scrapes and threshes the straw of the threshing floor.

A wooden board with teeth and grooves, used to cut the stalks after threshing and turn them into straw.

Abaye said: What is

the source in the

verse

that the morag is made in this manner? As it is stated:

“Behold, I have made you a sharp threshing board

[made with grooves]

new, with double-edged blades;

you shall thresh mountains and pulverize them.”

He taught these verses to his son, Rahab,

he taught him these scriptural passages,

and posed verses against one another:

It is written, “And David gave to Araunah,” and it is written, “And David purchased,”

as cited above.

How can this be reconciled? He collected fifty from each tribe, which amounted to six hundred 150 .

And still the verses contradict one another: there it is

it is written "

“silver,”

whereas

here

it is stated "

“gold,”

and the verses have still not been reconciled.

And we answer:

Rather, say: he collected silver

equal in value to

the weight of six hundred

sela of

gold

from all the tribes, and from each tribe he collected silver equal to a total of fifty sela of gold.

We learned in the Mishna:

lesser holy things are eaten throughout the camp of Israel

when Israel were in the wilderness.

Rav Huna said: In all the places of Israel

lesser holy things are eaten.

And it might have been thought that his intention was to say: In every place where there is an Israelite, even if he left outside the camp of Israel, he may eat lesser holy things there.

Rav Nahman said to Rav Huna: Were there not camps in the wilderness?

But it was taught: Just as there were

three

camps in the wilderness, so was there a camp in Jerusalem,

and these are their boundaries:

From Jerusalem

to

the Temple Mount —

the camp of Israel.

From the Temple Mount

to

the Nicanor Gate,

the eastern gate of the Temple courtyard —

the camp of the Levites.

From here onward —

the camp of the Divine Presence, and these are the curtains in the wilderness.

And inside the Nicanor Gate, its sanctity is equal to that of the place inside the curtains in the Tabernacle; and it implies that there was a camp of Israel in the wilderness, and the law is that lesser holy things are eaten only in the camp of Israel, so how did you say that they are eaten in every place? And we answer:

Say

this is what Rav Huna said: lesser holy things are eaten

in every place

that is

the camp of Israel,

that is, even at the time of the breaking of camp, one carries them along with him and eats them in the camp at the place of their encampment.

And we challenge this:

Is it obvious!?

And we answer:

It might have been thought that they became disqualified through leaving

at the time when they were traveling and dismantling the Tabernacle;

it teaches us 153 .

And we challenge this:

But say that this too is so,

that they should become disqualified; and what is the source for validating them?

And we answer:

The verse says: “And the Tent of Meeting shall journey.”

And we expound:

Even though the Tent of Meeting has journeyed, it is

and consequently those traveling with it were considered the camp of Israel .

It was taught: Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai says: There was still

another camp,

an additional one,

the fourth —

there was

in Jerusalem between the Temple Mount and the Temple courtyard, and it is called “

the Women's Courtyard,” and they did not punish for it

one who entered it with corpse-impurity, as they did one who entered the Temple courtyard, since by Torah law its status was like that of the Temple Mount, where one impure through contact with a corpse is permitted to enter; rather, it was the Sages who prohibited one impure through contact with a corpse from entering it.

And in Shiloh there were only two camps.

And we discuss it:

Which of them

of the three camps

was not

in Shiloh?

Abaye said: It is reasonable that the camp of the Levites at least existed,

and the camp of Israel was what was lacking in Shiloh [and they did not discuss the camp of the Divine Presence, for it certainly existed].

For if it enters your mind that the camp of the Levites did not exist

there,