Zevachim 62b — the Talmud in English

The sons of Rabbi Tarfon’s sister were sitting before Rabbi Tarfon, and they were saying nothing,

and Rabbi Tarfon wanted them to speak, and therefore

he began and said

to them an ordinary statement, something untrue, in order to open their mouths:

“And Abraham continued and took a wife, and her name was Yohani.” They said to him,

to Rabbi Tarfon: “But this is not the wording of the verse; rather, ‘and her name was

Keturah,’ is written. Read,”

Rabbi Tarfon

upon them: “The sons of Keturah,”

who do not know how to speak in halakhic matters.

Rabbi Avin bar Huna said that Rabbi Hama bar Gurya said:

Two pieces of wood were arranged at the head of the pyre twice a day—together with the daily offering of the morning and with the daily offering between the evenings.

The pieces of wood that Moses made

in the Tabernacle were

one cubit long, one cubit wide, and their thickness was like the scraper of a heaped se’a 66 ,

and they made the pieces of wood with precision, so that the wood would not protrude beyond the pyre and prevent the priests from going around the altar.

Rabbi Yirmeya said:

The length and width of the wood were not a complete cubit, but rather

with a truncated cubit

—that is, a short one [from the language of “one whose arm is cut off”]—because the place of the pyre on the altar in the Tabernacle was only one cubit by one cubit, and therefore they had to shorten them from the measure of a cubit.

Rav Yosef said,

to raise a difficulty against Rabbi Yirmeya’s words: Why does he need to explain that the cubit was deficient? It is possible to explain that the cubit was complete, but that they made it with precision, so that the wood would not protrude beyond the pyre and prevent the priests from going around the altar.

And is this not what is taught

as derived from what is written in the verse,

“upon the wood that is upon the fire that is upon the altar,”

that we derive concerning the wood of the pyre

that no wood may protrude from the altar at all?

And we hear from the words of the beraita that they were careful, on the altar that Moses made, that the wood should not protrude from the pyre—and this means that they made it with precision; and it implies that the pieces were not less than, and shorter than, a cubit?!

We learned there

in tractate Middot:

The ramp

of the altar

was on the south of the altar, thirty-two

cubits long

by sixteen

cubits wide.

From where are these matters

that the ramp of the altar stood on the south of the altar?

Rav Huna said:

From what

the verse says: “And he shall slaughter it on the side of the altar northward,”

we derive

that the side

of the ramp

shall be in the north and its face

of the ramp

in the south,

like a person lying on the ground, whose thigh is on one side and whose face is on the other side.

And

say

that this is the interpretation of the verse: like a person sitting upright, whose head and thigh are in the same direction, so that both

the thigh is in the north and

also

his face is in the north;

and from where do we know that the ramp of the altar stood in the south?

Rava said: He placed a person on his face

when the verse compared the altar’s “side” to a person lying on the ground, whose head is in one direction and whose feet are in another direction.

Abaye said to him

to Rava: From where do you have grounds to interpret the verse in this way, comparing it to a person lying on the ground?

On the contrary, set up and place a person

so that we can interpret that the verse is speaking of a person sitting upright, whose feet and head are in one direction.

He said to him,

Rava:

“Square

shall the altar

be,”

is written, and it implies that the verse compared the altar to a person lying down.

And we raise an objection to Rava: But

this “square”

that the verse says

is needed

to derive from it

that it is squared with a square

—that the altar should be square and not round, and not in order to compare it to a person lying squarely on the ground?!

And we answer Rava:

Is “squared” written?

But “square” is written, and we can interpret that the intention of the verse is to teach us this matter, that the altar was compared to a person lying down.

And we raise an objection:

And according to your reasoning,

Rava,

is “lying down” written?

But “square” is written.

Rather,

we conclude that since

“square” is written

in the verse,

which implies this,

that it should be square and not round,

and implies this,

that the verse compared it to a person lying down, therefore we derive both from this verse: both this halakha, that the altar should be square, and the halakha taught in the Mishna, that the ramp of the altar stood in the south, opposite the north.

Now, this halakha that we learned, that the ramp of the altar should stand in the south, and Rav Huna derives it from a verse—

and the tanna

of the beraita

brings it

for this halakha

from here, as it is taught: Rabbi Judah says:

From what is written in the verse concerning the ramp,

“And its ascent [

that is, the ramp by which they ascend to the altar]

shall face east,” [

that is, the ramp stood in a place where one ascending it would turn toward the east, which is called “east”] we derive that the ramp stood in the south, for

all turns that you make shall be only toward the right, toward the east,

and one standing in the south, when he turns to the right, turns toward the east.

And we raise an objection: From where does Rabbi Judah have grounds to interpret that the ramp of the altar stood in the south? The verse does not say that the turning is by way of the right; we derive only that its turning from the ramp should be toward the east.

And say

that the intention of the verse is that the ramp stood in the north and that he would turn

by way of the left toward the east?

And we answer:

It does not enter your mind

that the turning should be by way of the left, for we derive from another verse that all turns that you make shall be only by way of the right toward the east,

as Rami bar Yehezkel taught: “The Sea that Solomon made

like a large basin, resembling a sea, where the priests would wash in order to become purified from their impurity, and it is written in the verse that the Sea was

‘standing upon twelve oxen, [

resembling oxen]

three [

figures of oxen]

facing [

with their faces]

northward, and three facing westward, and three facing southward, and three facing eastward.’”

And from the fact that the verse counts and proceeds by way of the right, we derive that

all turns that you make shall be only by way of the right toward the east!

For when a person turns his face toward a particular place and circles around it with his face directed toward that place, if he circles from north to west, he necessarily turns his feet to the right!

And perhaps you will say:

That

verse that was said concerning the Sea that Solomon made

is needed for itself,

to teach you how the Sea was positioned. And from where do you learn from it how one turns in the Temple?

If so, “facing, facing”

which the verse repeated concerning the Sea that Solomon made,

why do I need it?

Rather, it is to teach you concerning all the services in the Temple: that all turns that you make shall be only by way of the right!

Rabbi Shimon ben Yosei ben Lakonia asked Rabbi Yosei:

But

was Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai saying—

there is empty space between the ramp and the altar

so that the ramp was not connected to the altar, and also did not stand immediately beside it, but there was empty space between them?!

He said to him,

Rabbi Yosei to Rabbi Shimon ben Yosei:

And you,

who ask me whether Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai held this, do

you yourself not

indeed

say so? For it has already been stated: “And you shall offer your burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood,”

and from there we derive an analogy linking flesh to blood:

Just as blood

comes to the altar

by throwing, so too the flesh

its bringing up to the altar is

by throwing,

that is, the ramp was slightly distant from the altar, and they had to throw the flesh onto the altar when they came to burn it.

He said to him,

Rabbi Shimon ben Yosei to Rabbi Yosei: I too hold that there is an analogy between flesh and blood, that both are by throwing. Rather,

I say

that it is not necessary to derive from this analogy that the ramp did not stand adjacent to the altar; rather, for me the analogy comes to say:

The priest stands

at the

side of

the place of the

pyre,

at the top of the altar,

and throws

the flesh, for it is a scriptural decree that this is how the service of burning shall be performed.

He said to him,

Rabbi Yosei to Rabbi Shimon: As for the fact that it is necessary to throw the flesh of the burnt offering, a verse was not needed to inform us of this, for it is impossible to do otherwise: it is impossible to approach the place where the fire is burning and place the flesh of the burnt offering there, for

when he throws

the flesh for burning,

does he throw it onto a burning pyre, or does he throw it onto a pyre that is not burning?

You must say: He throws it onto a burning pyre

the flesh,

and there, it is because it is impossible

that he is necessarily required to distance himself slightly from the place of the pyre and throw the flesh there. And since a verse was not needed to inform us concerning the throwing of the flesh, it necessarily follows that the verse comes to inform us that there was empty space intervening between the ramp and the altar, and the verse required him to throw from the ramp onto the pyre!

Rav Pappa said:

It is not possible to interpret that he stands at the side of the pyre and throws the flesh, for we derive an analogy concerning the flesh

as [

like]

blood:

Just as empty ground-space separates the blood,

for the one throwing stands on the ground near the altar, with ground-space intervening, and throws the blood from the vessel,

so too the flesh

is so; we derive from the analogy to blood that it is necessary that

empty ground-space separate it

specifically between the place from which it is thrown and the place where it is burned. It is not sufficient that he throw the flesh; rather, there must be an interval of empty ground-space. Therefore, the one burning stood upon the ramp, and the ramp was distant from the altar, and through this the halakha of throwing over empty ground-space was fulfilled.

Rav Judah said: Two small ramps project

there were

from the

large

ramp, from which one turns—

one

toward the foundation and

one turns

toward the ledge!

The one by which one turns to the ledge projected from the eastern side of the ramp, toward the right, and stood diagonally until it reached the ledge. And that ramp by which one turned to the foundation projected from the western side of the ramp, in order to pour upon it the remnants of the blood of a sin offering, which are poured onto the foundation. [They required a special ramp for pouring the remnants because they were concerned that the service of pouring might be delayed and the blood might coagulate—Shita Mekubetzet, letter 12.]

And they were separated

the two ramps

from the altar

by a small measure of

a hairsbreadth, because it is stated

concerning the altar

“around,”

and if they had stood beside it connected to it, it would have been impossible to encircle the altar with a thread around it.

Rabbi Abbahu said:

The reason that the ramps were separated slightly from the altar is because it is stated concerning the altar that it should be

“square”

in its construction; and if the ramps had been connected to it, its construction would not have been square.

And both

verses were needed, both

to write “around,” and

also

it was necessary to write “square.” For if the Merciful One had written “around,” I would have said that

the altar is valid when it is

round and circular,

without corners, for it is possible to encircle it; therefore

the Merciful One wrote “square.” And if the Merciful One had written “square”

and “around” had not been written,

I would have said that

it is valid when the altar is

long and narrow,

for it is still called “square,” since it has four corners, even though its length is greater than its width; therefore

the Merciful One wrote “around”

to teach us that all the sides around the altar must be equal.

We learned there

in tractate Middot:

The ramp and the altar,

their measures together, were

sixty-two

cubits.

And we are astonished:

These

ramp and altar

were sixty-four

cubits

were,

for the length of the ramp was thirty-two cubits, and so too the length of the altar.

And we answer:

It turns out

that the head of the ramp

overlapped

the altar by two cubits, which were incorporated into it:

one cubit over the foundation and one cubit over the ledge.