Zevachim 62a (סב.) — the Talmud in English

Rav Yosef said:

When Rav Yosef became ill, his learning was uprooted from him, and at times he would state something and then remember that he had learned the opposite, and retract his statement. And this is likewise the case in our sugya, where Rav Yosef said: How do we say that the reason the exiles added to the altar was that they needed a larger area than in the days of Solomon, because the fire that assisted them in the days of Solomon did not assist them? But

it was not

for that reason, but

rather, this is what was taught:

It is written in the verse:

“And they prepared the altar upon its foundations”;

This teaches

that

the exiles

reached the ultimate dimensions

of the altar: The dimensions of the altar were revealed to them, indicating how far its area could be expanded—something that had not been revealed to Solomon.

They challenged Rav Yosef: How can we say that all the dimensions were not revealed to them in the First Temple, when

it is written

that David said:

“All this, in writing from the hand of the Lord, He made me understand”—

meaning that all the dimensions of the Temple were transmitted to him in writing? And it necessarily follows that the reason Solomon did not make a larger altar was not that the dimensions of the altar had not been revealed to him!?

Rather, Rav Yosef said: The exiles found a verse

The exiles found a verse that had been stated to David, from which it could be understood that the altar could be made as large as sixty cubits; but this could not be expounded by Solomon, since it had not been revealed to him.

And they expounded

the verse to teach that it is possible to add, as it is stated:

“And David said: This is the House of the Lord God, and this is the altar”;

And they expounded: “The altar

as the House”—

just as the House is sixty cubits,

as it is stated: “Its length was sixty cubits,”

so too the altar

may be made

sixty cubits!

Indeed, if they make it less than sixty cubits, it is also valid, since the dimensions of the altar do not invalidate it; but if they wish, they may add until it reaches sixty.

We inquire concerning the location of the altar: When the exiles came to build the Second Temple, how did they know the location of the Temple and the location of the altar?

Granted,

the location of the

House

they knew, because

its form was recognizable;

the remnants of the foundations were still extant.

But

the location of the

altar—how did they know it?

Rabbi Elazar said: They saw

the exiles

a built altar, with Michael the great prince standing and sacrificing upon it,

and they built the altar there.

Rav Yitzḥak the Smith said: They saw Isaac’s ashes lying in that place,

and they built the altar there.

Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: From the entire House they smelled the fragrance of incense,

whereas

from there—

from the place of the altar—

they smelled the fragrance of limbs. Rabbah bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

How did the exiles know the location of the altar?

Three prophets came up with them from the exile:

Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.

One

of the prophets

testified to them concerning

the laws of

the altar,

that its place could be sanctified up to sixty cubits;

one testified to them concerning the location of the altar,

where it had been;

and one testified to them

that it is the halakha

that offerings may be sacrificed

even

though there is no House

built, for an altar is built in its place and offerings are sacrificed there, since the sanctity of the House sanctified it for its time and sanctified it for the future.

It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: Three prophets came up with them from the exile: One testified to them concerning the altar,

that it could be made up to sixty cubits,

and concerning the location of the altar,

where it had been;

one testified to them that offerings may be sacrificed

on the altar

even though there is no House. And one testified to them concerning the Torah,

that its law

is that it be written

in the

Assyrian script,

and not in the ancient Hebrew script [as explained in the Gemara, Sanhedrin 21b].

The Sages taught:

These are the features whose absence invalidates the altar:

A corner—

which was one cubit by one cubit on each side at the top of the altar.

A ramp—

which stood beside the altar, by which the priests ascended it when they went to perform the Temple service on the altar.

A foundation—

a ledge protruding one cubit from the altar on the western side and one cubit on the northern side, five handbreadths high.

Squareness—

for the altar is required to be square.

All these

invalidate

the altar’s fitness, but

the measure of its length, the measure of its width, and the measure of its height

of the altar

do not invalidate it.

From where are these matters derived,

that all these features invalidate the altar?

Rav Huna said:

With regard to all these matters,

the verse states: “the altar” —

and we derive that

whenever “the altar” is stated,

it indicates

that the matter is indispensable.

And we raise an objection:

If so,

since we say that wherever “the altar” is written, we expound that it is indispensable,

the laver, according to Rabbi,

who holds that they made designs of flowers, buds, and lattices around the altar,

and

likewise

the surrounding ledge, according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda,

which, according to him, was a deep groove in the altar of Moses [whereas in Solomon’s altar the surrounding ledge was the place on which the priests walked],

are these also indispensable?

For “the altar” is written with regard to them,

as it is written: “And you shall place it

[the grating]

beneath the ledge of the altar, below.” And it was taught: Which is the ledge

mentioned in the verse?

Rabbi says: This is the laver; Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: This is the surrounding ledge. 61

And we answer:

Yes,

the laver according to Rabbi and the surrounding ledge according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, are indispensable for the altar’s fitness. Proof of this is from

what was taught: On that day

when a Sadducee priest poured the water libation over his feet and all the people pelted him with their etrogim,

a corner

of the

altar

was damaged by the etrogim they threw at it.

They brought a block of salt and sealed it,

the damaged place in the altar, and they did so

not because the altar was fit

for

the service

while it was still damaged,

but

out of respect, so that

a damaged altar would not be seen, for any altar that lacks

one of these four features, namely:

a corner,

or

a ramp,

or

a foundation,

or

squareness, is invalid 62.

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: The surrounding ledge also

is indispensable , because “the altar” is written with regard to it. Likewise, according to Rabbi, who interprets the “ledge” concerning which “the altar” is written as referring to the laver, we learn that it is indispensable.

The Sages taught: Which is the “ledge”

mentioned in the verse?

Between one corner and another, the place where the priests walked,

which was

one cubit wide!

It might have been thought that the area between one corner and another, which was one cubit wide, was also the place where the priests walked, and that this area was lower, with a slight raised edge around it at the lip of the altar so that the priests walking there would not slip.

And we are astonished: Can this interpretation be correct?

Did the priests actually walk between one corner and another?

When they reached a corner of the altar, the corner would prevent them from going around the altar.

Rather, say

that the beraita means that the area between one corner and another was one cubit wide,

and

also

the place where the priests walked

was

one cubit

additional; this is the “ledge” mentioned in the verse.

And we object: Can we interpret this as the ledge mentioned in the verse,

when it is written

that they placed the copper grating

“beneath its ledge, below, reaching halfway up”?

Apparently, the ledge was on the wall of the altar, and not at its top. For if it had been at the top of the altar, how could the verse call the grating placed around the altar wall “beneath its ledge”?

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: There were two

ledges:

one for decoration,

a small protrusion that encircled the altar wall for decorative purposes, beneath which they placed the copper grating;

and one

at the top of the altar, which was a deep groove

for the priests,

so that they would have a railing

so that they would not slip—and as was explained in the beraita that we learned.

We learned in a beraita:

The measure of

the length, the measure of the width, and the measure of the height

of the altar

do not invalidate it.

Rav Mani said:

This statement, that the dimensions do not invalidate the altar, applies

provided that one does not reduce it

below

the dimensions of Moses’ altar. And what

was the size of Moses’ altar?

Rav Yosef said: One cubit!

They laughed at him

because of Rav Yosef: The verse is explicitly written:

“Five cubits in length and five cubits in width; the altar shall be square.”

Abaye said to Rav Yosef

:

Perhaps the Master is referring to the place of the pyre,

which was one cubit on Moses’ altar? One must subtract from the five cubits one cubit for the corners on each side, and one cubit on each side for the place where the priests walked inside the corners; only one cubit remained for the place of the pyre.

He said to him

Rav Yosef, to Abaye:

Master, since you are a great man, you know what I mean

for this is what I intended!

He applied to them

regarding those who laughed at his words

the descendants of Keturah

who are descendants of Abraham, but not like the offspring of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—for they do not understand halakha.