Mishnayos Zevachim Perek 8 Mishnah 12
Change text layout:
זבחים פרק ח׳ משנה י"ב
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:
Bartenura
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:
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.