Zevachim 58b — the Talmud in English

Rather, necessarily —

it is Rabbi Yosei! For it was taught: ![](pamud.bmp "

exact location of the column")

Rabbi Yosei says: This is a sign for you: Anything that is taken inside

the Sanctuary

to be placed outside

on the Outer Altar

is not placed

on the Outer Altar

except adjacent

as close as possible toward the inside, in a place

where there is no

other place on the Outer Altar closer

inside

than it.

And anything taken outside

from atop the Outer Altar in order

to be placed inside

in the Sanctuary

is not taken

from the Outer Altar

except in the

place that is

adjacent

inside,

where there is no

place more adjacent than it

to the

inside

side!

And we explain the words of Rabbi Yosei:

“Anything that is taken inside to be placed outside”—what is it? If we say it is the remnants

of the blood of the inner sin-offerings, which are taken inside in order to pour them on the base of the Outer Altar, why does Rabbi Yosei need to give a sign concerning them that they are placed on the western base, which is the closest to the inside?

It is explicitly written concerning them:

“It shall be poured”

“at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering, which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting,”

and from there we derive the place of pouring the remnants onto the base, opposite the entrance!?

And furthermore,

we challenge the words of Rabbi Yosei:

“Anything that is taken outside to be placed inside”—what is it? If we say it is the coals of Yom Kippur,

whose law is that they are taken from atop the Outer Altar in a firepan for the purpose of burning the incense of the High Priest on Yom Kippur, within and further within, behold,

it is explicitly written concerning them: “And he shall take a panful of fiery coals from upon the altar, from before the Lord,” and

from the fact that it is written “from before the Lord,” we interpret that this means adjacent to the inside side, that is, to the Sanctuary; and for what purpose does Rabbi Yosei need to state a sign concerning them?

Rather,

the words of Rabbi Yosei, who said

“Anything that is taken inside to be placed outside,”

should be explained as referring to

the two bowls of frankincense of the showbread

that were taken on Shabbat from atop the Table standing inside, and whose law was that they were burned upon the Outer Altar,

for they are derived from the remnants

of the inner sin-offerings, whose place upon the Outer Altar is at the closest point, opposite the entrance.

And that which Rabbi Yosei said

“anything taken outside to be placed inside”

refers to

the coals

of the incense

of every single day,

whose law is that they are burned upon the Inner Altar,

for they are derived from the coals of Yom Kippur

that are taken from opposite the entrance.

And from here we resolve that according to Rabbi Yosei the entire Altar stood in the north. And we explain:

And what does he hold,

Rabbi Yosei in the beraita in which he gave signs?

If he holds that the entire Altar stood in the south,

then

twenty-seven

cubits

would be required to come

and draw from the southwestern corner toward the north side of the Altar, so that the arrangement would be opposite the entrance. For the length of the Altar was thirty-two cubits and it was entirely in the south, while the entrance of the Sanctuary was ten cubits and the entrance was exactly in the middle of the Courtyard—its northern five cubits were in the north of the Courtyard, and its southern five cubits were in the south. Therefore, if the entire Altar stood in the south, up to the boundary of the middle of the Courtyard, the southern half of the entrance of the Sanctuary, which is five cubits, was aligned with the five cubits of the Altar bordering the central line. Consequently, one must draw twenty-seven cubits [27=5-32] from the southwestern corner of the Altar in order to reach those five cubits aligned with the entrance.

Alternatively,

we shall explain the words of Rabbi Yosei as follows: he

holds that the sanctity of the Sanctuary and the Hall is one,

and we call “before the Lord” also that which is opposite the entrance of the Hall, and not only that which is opposite the entrance of the Sanctuary. The entrance of the Hall was twenty cubits, ten in the north and ten in the south. Nevertheless, it is still difficult, for if so,

twenty-two

cubits

would be required to come

from the southwestern corner toward the north, for the width of the entrance of the Hall was twenty cubits, ten in the north and ten in the south, and since the length of the Altar was thirty-two cubits, one must draw twenty-two cubits [22=10-32] so that the law of “before the Lord” will be fulfilled.

And if Rabbi Yosei holds

Rabbi Yosei

that half

of the Altar was

in the north and half in the south,

it is still difficult, for if so,

eleven

cubits

would be required to come,

since half of the Altar was sixteen cubits, and when one draws eleven cubits from the southwestern corner, it will be within the five cubits opposite the entrance of the Sanctuary.

And alternatively, if he holds that the sanctity of the Sanctuary and the Hall is one,

and that also opposite the entrance of the Hall is called “before the Lord,” and the entrance of the Hall was ten in the north and ten in the south, then

six

cubits

would be required to come,

for half of the Altar on the southern side was sixteen cubits, and the entrance of the Hall was ten cubits. It follows that after drawing six cubits from the southwestern corner of the Altar toward the north, the place would be aligned with the entrance of the Hall [6=10-16].

Rather, is it not

since Rabbi Yosei says that the place of the arrangement is drawn only four cubits from the southwestern corner, necessarily

because he holds

Rabbi Yosei

that the entire Altar stood in the north,

and if so, all five cubits at the southwestern corner are opposite the entrance of the Sanctuary. And the reason that the place of the arrangement is only on the fifth cubit, and they do not bring it closer in the direction of the south, is that it is impossible to arrange the arrangement upon the four southern cubits of the Altar, as will be explained concerning what was on those four cubits.

And these four cubits

are:

one cubit of the base, one cubit of the surrounding ledge, one cubit of the place of the corners, and one cubit of the place of the feet of the priests,

designated for the priests’ walking upon the Altar; and it is impossible to arrange the arrangement upon them. And Rabbi Yosei says that he should arrange the arrangement immediately on the fifth cubit, because

when he proceeds farther forward

toward the north

more

than one cubit,

there is no longer

opposite the

entrance

of the Sanctuary, and it is not called “before the Lord,” for when the entire Altar stands in the north of the Courtyard, it follows that only the five cubits at the southwestern corner of the Altar stand opposite the northern five cubits of the entrance of the Sanctuary [and Rabbi Yosei holds that the sanctity of the Hall is not like the sanctity of the Sanctuary, and therefore it must be specifically aligned opposite the entrance of the Sanctuary] .

Rav Adda bar Ahava said:

It is possible to explain the words of the Mishna in tractate Tamid also not according to Rabbi Yosei, who holds that the entire Altar stood in the north. It is possible to explain that

who is this? —

It is Rabbi Yehuda!

For it was taught: Rabbi Yehuda says: The Altar —

was centered and stood in the middle of the Courtyard,

half in the north and half in the south.

Ten cubits

in the middle were

opposite the entrance of the Sanctuary, and eleven cubits on this side

on the northern side, not opposite the entrance,

and eleven cubits on this side

on the southern side, not opposite the entrance.

It follows that the Altar was aligned opposite the Sanctuary and its walls,

for the width of the Sanctuary was twenty cubits, and the thickness of the walls of the Sanctuary was six cubits for each wall, together thirty-two cubits, which was the width of the Altar.

And we raise a difficulty against the words of Rav Adda bar Ahava:

Ultimately,

there remains a difficulty

according to Rabbi Yehuda

just as we raised a difficulty according to Rabbi Yosei: If he holds that only what is opposite the entrance of the Sanctuary is called “before the Lord,” then

eleven

cubits from the southwestern corner

would be required to come,

as we challenged above according to the possibility that Rabbi Yosei holds that the Altar was half in the north and half in the south.

And if he also holds that the sanctity of the Sanctuary and the Hall is one,

then

six

cubits

would be required to come

from the corner of the Altar toward the middle of the Altar, so that the law of “before the Lord” would be fulfilled. If so, why did we learn in the Mishna there that they draw only four cubits toward the north?

And we answer:

Do you think that these four cubits

that we learned in our Mishna, which they draw from the southwestern corner of the Altar, are

together with the cubit of the base and the cubit of the surrounding ledge [

which means that those four cubits also include the cubit of the base and the cubit of the surrounding ledge]? Do not explain it so. Rather, explain that they must draw

four cubits besides the cubit of the base and the cubit of the surrounding ledge,

which together are six cubits from the beginning of the Altar. And the tanna holds that the sanctity of the Hall and the Sanctuary is one matter, so that from the seventh cubit of the Altar until the twenty-seventh cubit of the Altar it is opposite the entrance of the Hall, whose width is twenty cubits, and it is called “before the Lord.”

And we raise a difficulty: If so, what was Rav Adda bar Ahava challenging Rabbi Zeira with by saying that the Mishna is properly explained according to Rabbi Yehuda, who said that the Altar was centered in the middle of the Courtyard? For it is possible also to establish the above Mishna of tractate Tamid according to Rabbi Yosei and say that Rabbi Yosei likewise holds that the Altar stood in the middle of the Courtyard like Rabbi Yehuda, and there is again no difficulty against Rabbi Zeira. And this is how we challenge:

And let us establish it

for the Mishna stating that the place of the second incense arrangement was drawn four cubits toward the north

according to Rabbi Yosei, and

let us explain the words of the beraita of Rabbi Yosei, “Anything taken inside, etc.,”

as centered,

for Rabbi Yosei also holds that the Altar was half in the north and half in the south, sixteen cubits to each side. And we shall answer concerning Rabbi Yosei as we answered concerning Rabbi Yehuda, that those four cubits are apart from the cubit of the base and the cubit of the surrounding ledge [therefore we needed to draw six cubits, until opposite the entrance of the Hall [16=10+6]. And although Rabbi Zeira’s proof from here—that Rabbi Yosei holds that the entire Altar stood in the north—is refuted, nevertheless it is possible to establish our Mishna also according to Rabbi Yosei].

And we answer: Indeed, it is possible to establish the Mishna according to Rabbi Yosei. And the reason that Rav Adda bar Ahava established it according to Rabbi Yehuda is

because we hear Rabbi Yehuda

explicitly holding that the place of the Altar

was centered,

half in the north and half in the south,

explicitly.

But the words of Rabbi Yosei in the beraita, “Anything taken outside, etc.,” can be explained in every manner in which we establish the position of the Altar—in the south, in the north, or in the middle, each according to his view. We have no necessity to establish the Mishna of measurements, which says that the place of the arrangement was drawn precisely four cubits, according to Rabbi Yosei.

And Rav Sharya said: Who is this?

Our Mishna, which teaches that the place of the second arrangement was drawn four cubits from the southeastern corner toward the north,

it is Rabbi Yosei the Galilean

who holds that the entire Altar stood in the north, and the four cubits of our Mishna are together with the cubit of the base and the cubit of the surrounding ledge,

for it was taught: Rabbi Yosei the Galilean says: Since it is stated, “And you shall place the laver between the Tent of Meeting and between the altar,”

and this implies between the Altar and the Tent of Meeting literally,