Zevachim 53b

תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמְרִים: זֶה וָזֶה יְסוֹד מַעֲרָבִי. וְסִימָנֵיךְ: מָשְׁכוּ גַּבְרֵי לְגַבְרָא.

The school of Rabbi Yishmael, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai, says: Both this and that, i.e., the blood of an inner sin offering and that of an external sin offering, were poured at the western base of the altar. According to this version, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai agrees with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael. The Gemara comments: And your mnemonic to remember this change in opinion is: The men pulled the man. In this case, the numerous students of Rabbi Yishmael claim that Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai agrees with their teacher.

מַתְנִי' הָעוֹלָה קׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים, שְׁחִיטָתָהּ בַּצָּפוֹן, וְקִיבּוּל דָּמָהּ בִּכְלֵי שָׁרֵת בַּצָּפוֹן, וְדָמָהּ טָעוּן שְׁתֵּי מַתָּנוֹת שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע, וּטְעוּנָה הֶפְשֵׁט וְנִיתּוּחַ, וְכָלִיל לָאִשִּׁים.

MISHNA: The burnt offering is an offering of the most sacred order. Its slaughter is in the north of the Temple courtyard and the collection of its blood in a service vessel is in the north, and its blood requires two placements that are four, and it requires flaying of its carcass and the cutting of the sacrificial animal into pieces, and it is consumed in its entirety, with the exception of its hide, by the fire of the altar.

גְּמָ׳ עוֹלָה מַאי טַעְמָא תָּנֵי לֵיהּ קׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים? מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא כְּתִיב בַּהּ ״(לַה׳) קׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים הִיא״.

GEMARA: What is the reason that the tanna taught that a burnt offering is an offering of the most sacred order, when the mishna earlier (52b) did not mention that a sin offering is of the most sacred order? The Gemara answers: It is because in the Torah it is not written explicitly with regard to the burnt offering: It is most sacred, as it states concerning the sin offering and the guilt offering in a verse concerning a meal offering: “It shall not be baked with leaven. I have given it as their portion of My offerings made by fire; it is most sacred, as the sin offering, and as the guilt offering” (Leviticus 6:10). Consequently, the tanna explicitly states that a burnt offering is likewise of the most sacred order.

וְדָמָהּ טָעוּן שְׁתֵּי מַתָּנוֹת. הֵיכִי עָבֵיד? אָמַר רַב: נוֹתֵן וְחוֹזֵר וְנוֹתֵן. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: מַתָּנָה אַחַת כְּמִין גַּמָּא נוֹתֵן.

The mishna teaches: And its blood requires two placements that are four. How does the priest perform the placements? Rav says: He places the blood on one side of the corner of the altar, and places it again on the other side of the corner of the altar. He repeats this on the diagonally opposite corner, so that he places on two corners but on all four sides of the altar. And Shmuel says: He places one placement on each of the two diagonally opposite corners, so that each placement is similar to the shape of the Greek letter gamma, which is bent at a right angle.

כְּתַנָּאֵי – יָכוֹל יִזְרְקֶנּוּ זְרִיקָה אַחַת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״סָבִיב״. אִי סָבִיב, יָכוֹל יַקִּיפֶנּוּ כְּחוּט? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְזָרְקוּ״. הָא כֵּיצַד? כְּמִין גַּמָּא – וְדָמָהּ טָעוּן שְׁתֵּי מַתָּנוֹת שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע.

The Gemara comments: This dispute between Rav and Shmuel is like a dispute between tanna’im : One might have thought that a priest should sprinkle one sprinkling with the blood of a burnt offering. To counter this possibility, the verse states: “And sprinkle the blood around against the altar that is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting” (Leviticus 1:5). If the blood must be sprinkled around the altar, one might have thought that he should circumscribe the altar as one would do with a thread, and sprinkle the blood all around. To counter this possibility, the verse states: “Shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood around against the altar” (Leviticus 1:5), and one cannot have the blood circumscribe the altar as a thread would without directly applying it with a finger. How can these verses be reconciled? He applies the blood in a shape that is similar to that of the Greek letter gamma, and its blood requires two sprinklings that are four. This opinion accords with the opinion of Shmuel.

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״סָבִיב״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן ״סָבִיב״; מָה לְהַלָּן – פִּיסּוּק וְאַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת, אַף כָּאן – פִּיסּוּק וְאַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת.

The baraita continues: Rabbi Yishmael says: It is stated here: “Shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood around against the altar” (Leviticus 1:5), and it is stated there, with regard to the sin offering sacrificed at the inauguration of the Tabernacle: “And when it was slain, Moses took the blood, and put it upon the corners of the altar around with his finger” (Leviticus 8:15). Just as there, with regard to the sin offering, the blood was placed discretely and with four placements, one on each corner, so too here, with regard to a burnt offering, it must be placed discretely and with four placements. This opinion accords with the opinion of Rav.

אִי – מָה לְהַלָּן אַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת עַל אַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת, אַף כָּאן אַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת עַל אַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת?! אָמַרְתָּ: עוֹלָה טְעוּנָה יְסוֹד; וְקֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית דְּרוֹמִית לֹא הָיָה לָהּ יְסוֹד.

If these offerings are compared to each other, why not say that just as there, the blood of the sin offering must have four placements on the four corners, so too here, the blood of the burnt offering requires four placements on the four corners? You said that a burnt offering requires that the blood be placed on a part of the altar that has a base, and the southeast corner of the altar had no base beneath it. Therefore, the blood had to be placed on the northeast corner and the southwest corner.

מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה בְּחֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל טוֹרֵף. דְּאָמַר רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק: מִזְבֵּחַ אוֹכֵל בְּחֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל יְהוּדָה אַמָּה.

The Gemara asks: What is the reason that there was no base on the southeast corner of the altar? Rabbi Elazar says: Because it was not in the portion of land of the one who tears, i.e., the tribe of Benjamin, as he is described in the following manner: “Benjamin is a wolf that tears apart; in the morning he devours the prey, and in the evening he divides the spoil” (Genesis 49:27). As Rav Shmuel, son of Rav Yitzḥak, says: The altar would consume, i.e., occupy, one cubit of the portion of Judah. The part of the altar in Judah’s portion was the southeast corner of the base, and therefore there was no base on that corner.

אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בַּר חָמָא אָמַר רַבִּי חָמָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: רְצוּעָה הָיְתָה יוֹצְאָה מֵחֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל יְהוּדָה וְנִכְנֶסֶת בְּחֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל בִּנְיָמִין, וְהָיָה בִּנְיָמִין הַצַּדִּיק מִצְטַעֵר עָלֶיהָ בְּכׇל יוֹם לְנוֹטְלָהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר:

Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama says that Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: A strip of land emerged from the portion of Judah and entered into the portion of Benjamin, and the southeast corner of the base was on that strip. And the tribe of Benjamin the righteous would agonize over it every day, desiring to take it into its portion, due to its unique sanctity. As it is stated in Moses’ blessing to the tribe of Benjamin: