Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Zevachim 8:12 - 9:1

The Mishnah Yomi for Tuesday, August 12, 2025 is Zevachim 8:12 - 9:1

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Zevachim Perek 8 Mishnah 12

זבחים פרק ח׳ משנה י"ב

12
In the case of a sin offering whose blood placement is on the external altar whose blood the priest collected in two cups, if one of them left the Temple courtyard and was thereby disqualified, the cup that remained inside the courtyard is fit to be presented. If one of the cups entered inside the Sanctuary and was thereby disqualified, Rabbi Yosei HaGelili deems the blood in the cup that remained outside the Sanctuary, in the courtyard, fit to be presented, and the Rabbis deem it disqualified from being presented. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili said in support of his opinion: The halakha is that if one slaughters an offering with the intent that its blood be presented outside of the Temple courtyard, the offering is disqualified, but if his intention was that the blood be presented inside the Sanctuary, the offering is not disqualified. Just as in a case where part of the blood reached a place where the intent to present the blood there disqualifies the offering, i.e., outside the Temple courtyard, and yet when some of the blood is taken there it does not render the status of the remaining blood disqualified like that of blood that leaves the courtyard, so too, in a case where part of the blood reached a place where the intent to present the blood there does not disqualify the offering, i.e., inside the Sanctuary, is it not logical that we will not deem the status of the remaining blood like that of blood that entered the Sanctuary? The mishna continues: If all of the blood of a sin offering whose blood placement is on the external altar entered the Sanctuary to atone through sprinkling, despite the fact that the priest did not actually sprinkle the blood to atone, the offering is disqualified; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Shimon says: The offering is disqualified only when he atones and sprinkles the blood in the Sanctuary. Rabbi Yehuda says: If he took the blood into the Sanctuary unwittingly, the blood remains fit to be presented. With regard to all the blood disqualified for presentation that was placed on the altar, the frontplate effects acceptance only for offerings sacrificed that are ritually impure. Although it is written with regard to the frontplate worn on the forehead of the High Priest: “And it shall be upon Aaron’s forehead, and Aaron shall bear the iniquity committed in the sacred matters” (Exodus 28:38), this does not apply to all disqualifications of offerings. This is because the frontplate effects acceptance for offerings sacri-ficed that are ritually impure but does not effect acceptance for offerings that leave the courtyard.
חַטָּאת שֶׁקִּבֵּל דָּמָהּ בִּשְׁנֵי כוֹסוֹת, יָצָא אַחַד מֵהֶן לַחוּץ, הַפְּנִימִי כָּשֵׁר. נִכְנַס אַחַד מֵהֶן לִפְנִים, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי מַכְשִׁיר בַּחִיצוֹן, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, מָה אִם בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁהַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בַּחוּץ, לֹא עָשָׂה אֶת הַמְשׁוֹאָר כַּיוֹצֵא, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין הַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בִּפְנִים, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא נַעֲשֶׂה אֶת הַמְשׁוֹאָר כַּנִּכְנָס. נִכְנַס לְכַפֵּר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא כִפֵּר, פָּסוּל, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיְּכַפֵּר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם הִכְנִיס שׁוֹגֵג, כָּשֵׁר. כָּל הַדָּמִים הַפְּסוּלִין שֶׁנִּתְּנוּ עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, לֹא הִרְצָה הַצִּיץ אֶלָּא עַל הַטָּמֵא, שֶׁהַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל הַטָּמֵא, וְאֵינוֹ מְרַצֶּה עַל הַיּוֹצֵא:
י"ב

יצא אחד מהן לחוץ – outside of the Temple courtyard.

הפנימי כשר – and he gives from it his gifts and the sacrifice is kosher/fit.

וחכמים פוסלין – as it is written (Leviticus 6:23): “[But no sin offering may be eaten] from which any blood is brought [into the Tent of Meeting for expiation in the sanctuary],” and even part of its blood, it is invalid, for it is not written, “its blood.”

ומה אם במקום שהמחשבה פוסלת בחוץ (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 2, Mishnah 2 and the beginning of this Mishnah) – meaning to say, that just as the outside [of the Temple courtyard], which is a place where the intention invalidates it, if he intended to perform the ritual slaughter on the condition to sprinkle its blood outside [the Temple courtyard], it is invalidated.

לא עשה – regarding removing part of the blood outside that which is that what remains inside like it goes forth, as you said that the inner [sprinkling] was kosher.

מקום שאין המחשבה פוסלת – that is to say the hall containing the golden altar which is a place where intention does not render [the rite] invalid, that if he ritually slaughtered in order to give the pieces [of the sacrifice] outside, inside it is kosher/fit, does it not follow, etc. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi Haglili. And especially regarding the blood in which we stated that if he went outside of the Temple courtyard or entered inside to sprinkle from it in the hall containing the golden altar, it was invalidated, but the flesh/meat of Holy Things, assuming that if he went outside [the Temple courtyard], it was invalidated and consuming it is prohibited, as it is written (Exodus 22:30): “[You shall be holy people to Me:] you must not eat flesh torn by beasts in the field; [you shall cast it to the dogs],” meat that went outside its compartment/partition , that is, the Holiest of the Holy Things outside of the Temple courtyard and the Lesser Holy Things outside of the city, it becomes as if it is flesh in the field, and it is considered “torn” and you cannot consume it. Nevertheless, if he entered inside into the midst of the hall containing the golden altar, it is not invalidated because of this and its consumption is permitted, as Scripture states (Leviticus 6:23): “[But no purification offering may be eaten] from which any blood is brought [into the Tent of Meeting for expiation in the sanctuary],” from its blood, but not from its flesh [which is permitted].

עד שיכפר – in the hall containing the golden altar.

ר' יהודה אומר כו' – And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

ואין הציץ מרצה על היוצא – and even though that they (i.e., the blood) went up, they did not go down, but regarding effecting acceptance however, it does not effect, as it is written regarding the frontlet (Exodus 28:38): “[It shall be on Aaron’s forehead,] that Aaron may take away any sin arising from the holy things [that the Israelites consecrate, from any of their sacred donations,]” and in the Torah portion of Emor it is written (Leviticus 22:3): “If any man among your offspring, while in a state of impurity, partakes of any sacred donation that the Israelite people may consecrate to the LORD, [that person shall be cut off from before Me],” just as the Holy Things mentioned further on, the Biblical verse speaks of their defilement, so also the sin of the Holy Things that is mentioned regarding the frontlet, the Biblical verse speaks with regard to defilement.

יצא אחד מהן לחוץ. חוץ לעזרה:

הפנימי כשר. ונותן ממנו מתנותיו והקרבן כשר:

וחכמים פוסלין. דכתיב (ויקרא ו׳) אשר יובא מדמה, ואפילו מקצת דמה, פסול. מדלא כתיב את דמה:

ומה אם במקום שהמחשבה פוסלת בחוץ. כלומר, ומה חוץ, שהוא מקום שהמחשבה פוסלת בו שאם חישב בשחיטה על מנת לזרוק דמה לחוץ, פסולה:

לא עשה. אצל מוציא מקצת דמה לחוץ את המשוייר בפנים כיוצא, כדאמריתו הפנימי כשר.

מקום שאין המחשבה פוסלת בפנים. כלומר היכל שהוא מקום שאין מחשבה פוסלת בו. שאם שחט על מנת ליתן את הנתנים בחוץ בפנים כשר, אינו דין כו׳. ואין הלכה כר׳ יוסי הגלילי. ודוקא בדם הוא דאמרינן דאם יצא חוץ לעזרה או נכנס בפנים להזות ממנו בהיכל נפסל. אבל בשר קדשים נהי דאם יצא לחוץ נפסל ואסור באכילה, דכתיב (שמות כ״ב:ל׳) ובשר בשדה טריפה, בשר שיצא חוץ למחיצתו, דהיינו קדשי קדשים חוץ לעזרה וקדשים קלים מחוץ לעיר, נעשה כאילו הוא בשר בשדה והרי הוא טריפה ולא תאכלו. מכל מקום אם נכנס לפנים אל תוך ההיכל לא נפסל בשביל כן ומותר באכילה, דאמר קרא אשר יובא מדמה לא תאכל, מדמה ולא מבשרה:

עד שיכפר. בהיכל:

ר׳ יהודה אומר כו׳. והלכה כר״י:

ואין הציץ מרצה על היוצא. ואע״ג דפסולים שעלו לא ירדו, ארצויי מיהא לא ארצו, דכתיב בציץ (שם כ״ח) ונשא אהרן את עון הקדשים, ובפרשת אמור כתיב כל איש אשר יקרב מכל זרעכם אל הקדשים וגו׳ וטומאתו עליו, מה קדשים האמורים להלן בטומאה הכתוב מדבר, אף עון קדשים האמורים בציץ בטומאה הכתוב מדבר:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Zevachim Perek 9 Mishnah 1

זבחים פרק ט׳ משנה א׳

1
Certain unfit items, once they have been placed on the altar, are nevertheless sacrificed. The mishna teaches: The altar sanctifies only items that are suited to it. The tanna’im disagree as to the definition of suited for the altar. Rabbi Yehoshua says: Any item that is suited to be consumed by the fire on the altar, e.g., burnt offerings and the sacrificial portions of other offerings, which are burned on the altar, if it ascended upon the altar, even if it is disqualified from being sacrificed ab initio, it shall not descend. Since it was sanctified by its ascent upon the altar, it is sacrificed upon it, as it is stated: “It is the burnt offering on the pyre upon the altar” (Leviticus 6:2), from which it is derived: Just as with regard to a burnt offering, which is suited to be consumed by the fire on the altar, if it ascended it shall not descend, so too, with regard to any item that is suited to be consumed by the fire on the altar, if it ascended it shall not descend. Rabban Gamliel says: With regard to any item that is suited to ascend upon the altar, even if it is not typically consumed, if it ascended, it shall not descend, even if it is disqualified from being sacrificed ab initio, as it is stated: “It is the burnt offering on the pyre upon the altar,” from which it is derived: Just as with regard to a burnt offering, which is fit for the altar, if it ascended it shall not descend, so too, any item that is fit for the altar, if it ascended it shall not descend. The mishna comments: The difference between the statement of Rabban Gamliel and the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua is only with regard to disqualified blood and disqualified libations, which are not consumed by the fire but do ascend upon the altar, as Rabban Gamliel says: They shall not descend, as they are fit to ascend upon the altar, and Rabbi Yehoshua says: They shall descend, as they are not burned on the altar. Rabbi Shimon says: Whether the offering was fit and the accompanying libations were unfit, e.g., if they became ritually impure or they were brought outside their designated area, or whether the libations were fit and the offering was unfit, rendering the accompanying libations unfit as well, and even if both this and that were unfit, the offering shall not descend, as it was sanctified by the altar, but the libations shall descend.
הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מְקַדֵּשׁ אֶת הָרָאוּי לוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, כָּל הָרָאוּי לָאִשִּׁים, אִם עָלָה לֹא יֵרֵד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו), הִוא הָעֹלָה עַל מוֹקְדָה עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. מָה עוֹלָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לָאִשִּׁים, אִם עָלְתָה לֹא תֵרֵד, אַף כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לָאִשִּׁים, אִם עָלָה לֹא יֵרֵד. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, כָּל הָרָאוּי לַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אִם עָלָה לֹא יֵרֵד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, הִוא הָעֹלָה עַל מוֹקְדָה עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. מַה עוֹלָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לַמִּזְבֵּחַ אִם עָלְתָה לֹא תֵרֵד, אַף כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לַמִּזְבֵּחַ אִם עָלָה לֹא יֵרֵד. אֵין בֵּין דִּבְרֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶלָּא הַדָּם וְהַנְּסָכִים, שֶׁרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר לֹא יֵרְדוּ, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר יֵרֵדוּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הַזֶּבַח כָּשֵׁר וְהַנְּסָכִים פְּסוּלִים, הַנְּסָכִים כְּשֵׁרִין וְהַזֶּבַח פָּסוּל, אֲפִלּוּ זֶה וָזֶה פְּסוּלִין, הַזֶּבַח לֹא יֵרֵד, וְהַנְּסָכִים יֵרֵדוּ:
א׳

המזבח מקדש את הראוי לו – but the Tannaim dispute in their explanation of our Mishnah what it is that is appropriate to it.

ר' יהושע אומר כל הראוי לשאים – to be burned on the fire, even though it was invalidated, if it went up to the altar, the altar sanctified it and it became its food, and if it went up, it should not come down. But a thing that is not appropriate for the fire, as, for example, disqualified/unfit blood and disqualified libations, if they went up, they may be taken down.

היא העולה על מוקדה – something that is for the hearth where the fire is maintained and it went up, it is its status/condition and should not come down, it, implies that it will be in its status/condition.

רבן גמליאל אומר כל הראוי למזבח – and even the blood and its libations that were invalidated, if they were brought up, they should not come down. But there is nothing to exclude other than that thing which was not decided ever as to its appropriate portion of the altar, as for example, the handfuls of he meal-offering which the priest takes to be put on the altar (i.e., Leviticus 6:8) that were not sanctified in a utensil after the taking of a fistful of the meal-offering, for even though that the entire meal-offering was sanctified in a utensil, this is not clearly the portion of On-High (i.e., God), for the meal-offering is not entirely offered. And with a fistful of the meal-offering without the offering of the utensil, this is not sifted/selected for the altar, and it is not sanctified even if it was brought up on to the altar.

אלא הדם והנסכים – that are appropriate for the altar, but are not appropriate for the altar-fires.

ר"ש אומר הזבח כשר והנסכים פסולים – Rabbi Shimon holds like Rabbi Yehoshua regarding the libations of the sacrifice, and that the blood and the libations that come on their own like Rabban Gamaliel, and it is not derived from the hearth where the fire is maintained (Leviticus 6:2 – על מוקדה) but rather from a Biblical verse (Exodus 29:37): “whatever touches the altar shall become consecrated.” And it is written after It (Exodus 29:38,42): “Now this is what you shall offer upon the altar: two yearling lambs each day, regularly...a regular burnt offering throughout the generations,” the altar does not sanctify anything other than what is similar to a burnt-offering, just as a burnt-offering that comes on account of itself, so everything that comes on account of itself, excluding libations that come on account of the animal offering. Therefore, whether the animal offering is kosher and the libations are invalid, as for example, that left or were defiled, or whether the animal offering was invalid and the libations were kosher/fit, for since they come on its account, they are invalidated with tit and the law of being sanctified is nullified from them.

ואפילו זה וזה פסולים הזבח לא ירד – from its sanctity.

והנכסים ירדו – since they don’t come on account of themselves, they are not similar to the burnt-offering for the altar does not sanctify them. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

המזבח מקדש את הראוי לו. ופליגי תנאי בפירושא דמתניתין מאי ניהו הראוי לו:

ר׳ יהושע אומר כל הראוי לאשים. להשרף על גבי האש, אע״פ שנפסל, אם עלה למזבח קדשו המזבח ונעשה לחמו, ואם עלה לא ירד. אבל דבר שאין ראוי לאש, כגון דם פסול ונסכים פסולים, אפילו אם עלו ירדו:

היא העולה על מוקדה. דבר שהוא למוקד ועלה, הרי הוא בהוייתו ולא ירד. היא, משמע בהוייתה תהא:

רבן גמליאל אומר כל הראוי למזבח. ואפילו דם ונסכים שנפסלו, אם עלו לא ירדו. ואין לך למעט אלא דבר שלא הוברר לחלקו של מזבח מעולם, כגון קמצים שלא קדשו בכלי אחר קמיצה, דאע״ג דהמנחה כולה קדשה בכלי אין זה חלק גבוה ברור, שאין המנחה קריבה כולה. ובקמיצה בלא מתן כלי, אין זה מבורר למזבח, ואינו מתקדש אפילו עלה על גבי המזבח:

אלא הדם והנסכים. שהם ראוים למזבח ואינם ראויים לאשים:

ר״ש אומר הזבח כשר והנסכים פסולים. ר׳ שמעון סבירא ליה בנסכים של זבח כרבי יהושע, ובדם ובנסכים הבאים בפני עצמן כרבן גמליאל. ולא ממוקדה יליף, אלא מקרא דכתיב (שמות כ״ט:ל״ח) כל הנוגע במזבח יקדש, וכתיב בתריה וזה אשר תעשה על המזבח כבשים בני שנה תמימים שנים ליום עולה, אין המזבח מקדש אלא דומיא דעולה, מה עולה הבאה בגלל עצמה, אף כל הבאים בגלל עצמן, יצאו נסכים הבאים בגלל הזבח. הלכך בין שהזבח כשר והנסכים פסולים כגון שיצאו או נטמאו, בין שהזבח פסול והנסכים כשרים, דהואיל והן באים בגללו נפסלים עמו ובטלה תורת הקדש מהן:

ואפילו זה וזה פסולים הזבח לא ירד. שהמזבח מקדשו:

והנסכים ירדו. כיון שאין באים בגלל עצמן אינן דומיא דעולה ואין מזבח מקדשן. והלכה כר׳ יהושע:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us