json/Mishnah/Rishonim on Mishnah/Bartenura/Seder Kodashim/Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim/English/Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020.json

{
    "language": "en",
    "title": "Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim",
    "versionSource": "sefaria.org",
    "versionTitle": "Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020",
    "versionNotes": "",
    "shortVersionTitle": "Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020",
    "actualLanguage": "en",
    "languageFamilyName": "english",
    "isBaseText": false,
    "isSource": false,
    "direction": "ltr",
    "heTitle": "ברטנורא על משנה זבחים",
    "categories": [
        "Mishnah",
        "Rishonim on Mishnah",
        "Bartenura",
        "Seder Kodashim"
    ],
    "text": [
        [
            [
                "כל הזבחים שנזבחו שלא לשמן – as for example, that it was slaughtered as a burnt offering for the sake of a peace-offering.",
                "כשרים – and he will sprinkle their blood and offer sacrifices on the altar for their sake. For through their holiness they exist and it is forbidden to change them.",
                "אלא שלא עלו לבעלים לשם חובה (they do not go to the owner’s credit in fulfillment of an obligation) – and one must another for his obligation or fo his vow and slaughter it for its sake. For Scripture stated (Deuteronomy 23:24): “You must fulfill what has cross your lips and perform what you have voluntarily vowed to the LORD your God, [having made the promise with your own mouth];” if it is a voluntary [gift], it is now a vow, and if it is vow, it is not a voluntary [gift], but rather, this is what he said: if according to what you have vowed you have performed, that it was slaughtered for the sake of a vow and for the sake of the owners, it will be a votive offering, and the owner has fulfilled the obligation of his vow. But if not, that the sacrifice was slaughtered for the sake of the owners, it will be a free-will offering, meaning to say, that it is fit, as if he brought it as a free-will offering. But, he did not fulfill his vow, for it did not count for the owners for the sake of an obligation. And especially the sacrifice of an individual which has owners, but communal sacrifices that were not offered for their sake, they counted for the community for the sake of the obligation, for the slaughter decides the purpose for what they are appropriate for him. And especially when he slaughtered them explicitly not for their sake, then we say that they did not count for the owners for he sake of an obligation, But if he merely slaughtered them, they counted for the owners for an obligation.",
                "חוץ מן הפסח – for regarding the Passover offering, it is written (Deuteronomy 16:1): “and offer a Passover sacrifice [to the LORD your God],” util all your actions will be for the sake of the Passover sacrifice, and further I is written (Exodus 12:1וחטא7): “and you shall say, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice [to the LORD’],”that the sacrifice will be for the sake of the Passover offering, and these two Biblical verses, one to invalidate if it was done not for the sake of the Passover offering, and one to invalidate if it was not done for the sake of its owners.",
                "וחטאת – for regarding the sin-offering, there are two Biblical verses written, it is written (Leviticus 4:33): “and It shall be slaughtered as a purification offering,” that the slaughtering should be for the sake of a sin-offering, and it is written (Leviticus 4:25): “The priest shall take [with his finger] some of the blood of the purification offering [and put it on the horns of the altar of burnt offering],” until the reception of the blood and its sprinkling will be for the sake of the sin-offering, (Leviticus 4:31): “Thus the priest shall make expiation for him,[and he shall be forgiven],” for him, but not on his colleague, which is identical to that it will be for the sake of the owners. “For the sin of which he is guilty” (Leviticus 4:28, 35), that it will be for the sake of that sin. And it (i.e., the Torah) didn’t say to us that a sin-offering that is not for its own sake is invalid, but rather, that when he slaughtered it for the sake of other Holy Things, but if he he slaughtered it for non-sacred things it is appropriate/fit, but it does not count for the owners for the sake of the obligation, as it is written (Leviticus 22:15): “But [the priests] must not all ow the Israelites to profane the sacred donations,” Holy Things profane holy things, but non-sacred things do not profane holy things.",
                "הפסח בזמנו – is invalid when it is not for its sake all the time of its being slaughtered, which means from the middle of the day on the Eve of Passover until the evening. But prior to that and after that, we hold that the Passover offering on the other days of the year is a peace-offering. And all of its laws are like that of peace-offerings.",
                "אף השא – as the reason will be explained further one, the sin-offering comes [as atonement for] a sin, etc. as it is written ((Leviticus 7:7): “The reparation offering is like the purification offering.” But the Rabbis hold it is a sin-offering, which is witten concerning it as an exclusion, which is invalid. But the guilt offering, that doesn’t have an exclusion written concerning I is fit. But if you waya that regarding the guilt offering it is written that it is “a reparation offering” (Leviticus 7:5). But, it is not stated other than after the offering of those portions of the sacrifice on the altar, abut if he comes to exclude that which is not for its own sake that it is invalid, prior to the offering of the parts of the sacrifice on the altar, it should have been written [in the Torah]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer."
            ],
            [
                "הנשחטים לשם פסח – all of the rest of the sacrifices which were offered on the fourteenth of Nisan for the sake of the Passover offering are invalid. And similarly, that were offered for the sake of a sin-offering at aall times are invalid. For just as they are invalid for the sake of others. But he disputes the first Teacher of our Mishnah who sated ((see the beginning of Mishnah 1 of this chapter): “All of the sacrifices that were offered not fortheir sake are valid. But he said, as long as they are not slaughtered for the sake of the Passover offering nor for the sake of the sin-offering.",
                "שמעון אחי עזריה—he is called thus, on account that Azariah engaged in practical matters and would provide for the needs of his brother Shimon who was engaged with Torah, and between them, they made a condition that part of the reward for the study by Shimon would go to Azariah.",
                "שחטן – for the rest of the sacrifices.",
                "לשם גבוה מהן – as will be explained further on. They are fit.",
                "שלם נמוך המן – for the sake of a sacrifice which is less from them in holiness.",
                "פסולים – as it is written (Leviticus 22:15): “But [the priests] must not allow the Israelites to profane the sacred donations that they set aside for the LORD,” what is higher than them are not degraded/desecrated; that which is lower than them, they degrade/desecrate them. But the Halalkha is not either according to Rabbi Yossi ben Honi nor like Shimon the brother of Azariah.",
                "בכור ומעשר – [the tithing of cattle. Which are lower than peace-offerings, for the peace offering require the giving of four (i.e., two gifts of blood on the altar which are four,, which are one in the northeastern corner and one in the southwestern corner. And it is found that the blood is spread around the four directions of the altar -see Tractate Zevakhim Chapter 10, Mishnah 2), and placing of the hands and libations, and the waving of the breast and the shoulder. But this is not the case with the firstling and the tithe, whose blood requires only one gift, and there is no laying of the hands nor libations that are practiced with them, nor the waving of the breast and shoulder."
            ],
            [
                "רבי יהושע מכשזיר – for he considers it like the Passover offering [that is slaughtered] on the rest of the days of the year, since its time is not until twilight/",
                "בן בתירא פוסל – since for part of the day is appropriate, it is for him like the Passover offering at its appropriate time. And the Halakha is according to Ben Beteira.",
                "שבעים ושתים זקן – to inform you that they sat in one academy/Yeshiva and all of them taught/ruled as one person; therefore it teaches זקן/elder (in the singular) and it does not teach זקנים/elders (in the plural).",
                "כל הזבחים הנאכלים – but not the burnt offering.",
                "ולא הוסיף בן עזאי – {Ben Azzai] did not add to the words of the Sages to invalide other than the Passover offering and the sin-offering, other than the burnt offering."
            ],
            [
                "קבל והלך וזרק – either or is taught. When he slaughtered it not for their own sake, or received he blood in a bowl out of which the sprinkling is done, or he brought the blood to the [golden] altar, or sprinkled/cast it. Each of these four [acts] of Divine service that he did not for their sake, with regard to the Passover offering or with the sin-offering, he has invalidated. But with the rest of the offerings, they did not count for the owners for the sake of their obligation, even if he did one of these four [acts] of Divine service for their own skae and not for their own sake together, whether he advanced the thought for their own sake to the thought not for their own sake, whether that he advanced the thought not for their own sake to the thought for their own sake, in every matter, it is invalid.",
                "אבל אפשר שלא בהלוך – therefore, it is not considered to become ineligible. But the Sages state, that evefn though it is possible without conveying [the blood], one’s thought invalidates it. For Divine service which is possible to nullify is called Divine service, and conveying the blood is Divine Service, which is invalid with a foreigner (i.e., a non-Kohen), as it is written (Leviticus 1:5: “[The bull] shall be slaughtered [before the LORD;] and Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall offer [the blood against all sides of the altar which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting],” from reception and onwards is the command of the priesthood.",
                "המהלך במקום שהוא צריך להוליך – this conveying, thought invalids it. How so? They received it [the blood] outside there from the altar and brought it inside, that they came close to the side of the altar. This is the conveying that needs to be done, and the thought/intention invalidates it. If they received it inside near the altar and brought it outside, that is a conveying that is unnecessary and thought/intention does not invalidate it. If he then went back and brought it inside, this is the conveying that is needed. But the Halakha is not according to either Rabbi Eleazar nor according to Rabbi Shimon."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "כל הזבחים שקבל דמן זר – who is not a Kohen, it is disqualified. As it is written (Leviticus 22:2): “[Instruct Aaron and his sons] to be scrupulous about the sacred donations that the Israelite people consecrate to Me, lest they profane [My holy name, Mine the LORD’s],” teaches about the foreigner (i.e., non-Kohen) who transgressed, who profaned the Holy Things.",
                "אונן – a person who sustained a loss of one of the relatives that he is obligated to mourn over them, all the day of the death is called Onen/a mourner before the burial of a kinsman, and he is forbidden to eat Holy Things, but if he served (nevertheless) and profaned . Except for the High Priest who offers sacrifices as a mourner prior to the burial of a kinsman [one is normally obligated to mourn for].",
                "וטבול יום – that his purification is not completed until [after] sunset, as it is written (Leviticus 22:7): “As soon as the sun sets, he shall be pure, [and afterward he may eat of the sacred donations, for they are his food].”",
                "ומחוסר בגדים – a common priest who served with less than four [sets of] garments. And a High Priest who served with less than eight [sets of garments] and because he is lacking priestly garments (which renders the offerings he sacrifices unit, and he is punishable by death at the hands of Heaven – see Exodus 29:9 and Tractate Zevakhim 17b) is disqualified, and similarly someone wearing an excess of priestly garments is disqualified. And similarly, if there was something that interposes between the priest’s undercoat/כתונת and the undergarments/drawers, he is disqualified, for the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 6:7): “[The priest shall dress in linen raiment,] with linen breeches next to his body,” so that there will be nothing that interposes between the clothing to his skin, but he does don/wear the phylacteries of the head because they are placed on his hair which are visible between the front plate/ציץ (worn by the High Priest across his forehead which is made of gold, extending from one ear to the other – see Exodus 28:36-38) and the priest’s turban/מצנפת.",
                "ומחוסר כפורים (lacking atonement – who must bring a sacrifice to complete it) – as for example, the man or woman with a flux (i.e., זב וזבה ), the leper and the woman who gave birth that completed their purification but had [yet] brought their sacrifices. And we find that the All-Merciful wrote regarding a woman who gave birth (Leviticus 12:8): “The priest shall make expiation on her behalf, and she shall be pure,” it follows that until here, she is impure. And the same law applies to all of the ret of those who are impure who require a sacrifice, that they [remain] in their state of impurity until they bring their atonement as regards partaking of Holy Things and to come to the Sanctuary.",
                "ושלא רחוץ ידים ורגלים – because it is stated regarding the sanctification of the hands and feet that it is a law for all times, and it is stated regarding the raiment of the priesthood as a law for all times, just as concerning the raiment of the priesthood, if he served lacking priestly garments (see Exodus 29:9: “And gird both Aaron and his sons with sashes. And so they shall have priesthood as their right for all time.”), it is disqualified, even if he served without washing his hands and feet, he is disqualified. And the other of sanctifying his hands and feet: He doesn’t stand nor does he sit, but he reclines, and he places his right hand on top of his right foot and his left hand on top of his left foot, and rubs his feet with his hands when he is sanctifying [himself]. But he is not permitted to sanctify [himself] in the basin (i.e., laver for the priests in the Temple court) itself, but rather from the water that comes out from it, as it is stated (Exodus 30:19): “And let Aaron and his sons wash their hands and feet [in water drawn] from it,” but not in it, and all of the waters are fit for sanctification, and even if they are not fresh waters.",
                "וערל – if he served, he is disqualified, as it is written in Ezekiel (44:9): “Let no alien, uncircumcised in spirit and flesh, [enter My sanctuary],” an analogy of words in close proximity is made between ערל/uncircumcised and בן – נכר/alien, just as an alien if he served is disqualified, so too is the case of the uncircumcised.",
                "יושב – as it is written (Deuteronomy 18:5): “[For the LORD your God has chosen him and his descendants, out of all of your tribes], to be in attendance/לעמוד לשרת (literally, “to stand to serve”) [in the name of the LORD for all time],” that there should not be service other than while standing.",
                "עומד על גבי כלים – since the floor of the Temple courtyard sanctifies, and the sacred vessels sanctify the thing that comes in contact with them, jus as sacred vessels require that thee is nothing that interposes between it and sacred vessels, even the floor, there should not be a thing that interposes between it and the floor. And needless to say utensils that are not a kind of flesh/meat definitely interpose, bu even the animal which is a kind of meat/flesh, and needless to say, the animal which is not a kind of human being, but rather even the feet of his colleague which are a kind of human being interposes.",
                "קבל בשמאלו פסל – as it is written (Leviticus 4:25): “The priest shall take with his finger some of the blood of the purification offering and put it [on the horns of the altar of burnt offering],” which teaches that he the reception of the blood nor the putting it [on the horns of the altar of burnt offering] should be other than with the right [hand], for it is derived from the [law of the] leper, as it is written concerning it (Leviticus 14:16): “And the priest shall dip his right finger [in the oil that is in the palm of his left hand and sprinkle some of he oil with his finger seven times before the LORD].”",
                "ור\"ש מכשיר – he holds that this Biblical verse is expounded in back of him and not in front of/before him, therefore, the finger of “and put it” (Leviticus 4:25) as it is written refers to in back of him, and not as “[the priest] shall take” (ibid.,) which is written in front of him. But the Rabbis hold that this Biblical verse is expounded [both] in front of him/before him and in back of him, for when it is written, “with his finger,” it refers to both, to the taking that is before him/in front of him and to the putting which is in back of him. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.",
                "נשפך על הרצפה – for the blood was not received in a vessel.",
                "ואספו – as it is written (Leviticus 16:14): “He shall take some of the blood of the bull [and sprinkle it with his finger over the cover on the east side],” what is “from some of the blood of the bull?” If you might think , and even from part of the blood, but it is written (Leviticus 4:18): “and all the rest of he blood he shall pour out [at the base of the altar of burnt offering],” so we see that he receives all of the blood, but rather it is called, that he takes blood from the bull, from the bull he will receive it, but not from the ground. For they deduct one letter from this word and add it to another word and expound upon it.",
                "נתנו על הכבש שלא כנגד היסוד פסול – but nevertheless the owners have been expiated/forgiven, but the meat is not eaten. For the All-Merciful stated regarding the blood (Leviticus 17:11): “and I have assigned it to you for making expiation for your lives upon the altar,” since the blood arrived to he altar, the owners were expiated/forgiven.",
                "נתן את הנתנים למטה – from the red line/חוט הסיקרא (a line painted in red encircling the Temple altar at precisely half its height. This marking was necessary because the blood of animal sin-offerings and birds brought as burnt offerings was sprinkled on the upper portion of the altar, above the red line, whereas the blood of all other sacrifices was sprinkled on the lower portion, below the red line), which encircled the altar in the middle. And the blood which was placed in the five upper cubits which are above from the red line are called “placed above” and those that were placed in the five lower cubits which are below from the red line are called “placed below.”",
                "הניתנים בפנים – that their bloods required sprinkling on the golden altar.",
                "בחוץ – on the outer altar.",
                "פסול – and they are forbidden for consumption.",
                "ואין בו כרת – a person who eats from the meat of the Holy Things that whose blood was disqualified in these disqualified things, but he is not punished with extirpation."
            ],
            [
                "השוחט את הזבח – peace-offerings or other [sacrifices] that are consumed.",
                "כזית מעור האליה – but it comes to tell us that the skin of the fat tail is not like the fat tail itself, for he considers to eat something which is normally eaten, and therefore it is invalid, for if it is like the fat tail, one has in mind the undue intention in the performance of a sacrificial ceremony to eat something which is generally to be offered as incense (i.e., burned) and it is was not invalid, as is taught in the Mishnah (see Mishnah 3 of this chapter) shortly further on, to eat something which is usually eaten or to offer as incense something offered as incense (i.e., entrails) it is invalid.",
                "ואינו ענוש כרת – rhe person who eats it, and even outside, and he is not published with extirpation.",
                "ולאכול את בשרו למחר – but one cannot establish it for peace-offerings, but rather for the thanksgiving offering and the sin-offering, for whereas regarding peace offerings, it is its appropriate time. But to cast its blood or to burn its sacrificial portions, even for a peace-offering, it would be on the morrow outside its appropriate time.",
                "פגול וחייבים עליו כרת – the person who eats it and even, at its appropriate time, he punished with extirpation."
            ],
            [
                "השוחט והמקבל והמהלך והזורק – if when he is engaged in one of these four acts of Divine service, he had in mind the undue intention in the performance of a sacrificial ceremony regarding the sacrifice to eat from it something that is usually eaten, which is the flesh, or to burn something which is usually burned, which is the portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar, outside of its [natural] place, the meat is forbidden for eating, but the person who consumes it is not punished with extirpation. But if he had in mind the undue intention in the performance of the sacrificial ceremony to eat it outside of its appropriate time, the sacrifice is an offering disqualified by improper intention, and the person who eats it, even within its appropriate time frame is punished with extirpation, as it is written (Leviticus 7:18): “If any of the flesh of his sacrifice of well-being is eaten on the third day, it shall not be acceptable; it shall not count for him who offered it. It is an offensive thing, [and the person who eats of it shall bear his guilt],” the verse speaks of someone who had in mind the undue intention in the performance of the sacrificial ceremony to eat from his offering on the third day. Or, it doesn’t speak other than of someone who consumes from his sacrifice on the third day, you state, after he has been pronounced fit, he went back and became unfit, with astonishment. And furthermore, [the Biblical verse] says, “it shall not count for him” for in his intention he is disqualified, but he is not disqualified on the third day. But since it states in the Biblical verse “if any [of the flesh of his sacrifice of well-being] is eaten, we expound that the written Torah is speaking of two [acts of] eating, one, the eating by a human, which is the meat, and the other, the consumption by the altar, which is the portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar, and on both of them, it (i.e., the Biblical verse of Leviticus 7:18) states: “it shall not count for him who offered it. It is an offensive thing.”",
                "ובלבד שיקרב המתיר – the blood [is sprinkled or tossed] in accord with its requirement.",
                "כמצותו (is offered in accord with its requirement) – [as if it was kosher/fit] so that there would be no other disqualification in it. But if there was in it another disqualification of an undue intention in the performance of the sacrificial ceremony, he is released from the offering disqualified for improper intention. As will be explained further on (see Mishnah 4 of this chapter). For regarding פיגול/an undue intention in the performance of the sacrificial ceremony, it is written (see Leviticus 7:18): \"לא ירצה\"/”it is not acceptable,” as it is written regarding something fit/acceptable, to state to you that just as acceptability of a sacrifice that is fit/kosher, so too the acceptability of a sacrifice due to improper intention. Just as the acceptability of a sacrifice that is fit/kosher is not call acceptability of a sacrifice other than through the sprinkling/tossing of the blood, which is the end of the four permissible acts of a Divine Service, so too improper intention which is not fixed, and it always standing in a state of being suspended until he sprinkles/tosses the blood which is the end of all of that which makes the sacrifice fit for eating or for the altar."
            ],
            [
                "בשתיקה – without an intention that renders it invalid.",
                "הפסח והחטאת ששחטן שלא לשמן – they are removed from being offered with improper intention. But the rest of the sacrifices (especially peace-offerings) there is not [the category] of not for its own sake to remove them from improper intention, for they are valid when not offered for their own sake."
            ],
            [
                "לאכול בזית בחוץ וכזית למחר – this is the same thing that they said, but the first clause [of the Mishnah] speaks about two actions: that he slaughtered it on the condition of eating an olive’s bulk outside [its appropriate place, and he received it on account to eat an olive’s bulk on the morrow [outside of its appropriate time]. But here, [we are speaking] of one action, that he slaughtered it on the condition of eating an olive’s bulk on the morrow [not at the appropriate time] and an olive’s bulk outside [not in its appropriate place].",
                "ר' יהודה אומר– He disputes our entire Mishnah. He does not hold that the intention of other things that are forbidden remove one from an improper intention, unless it his invalid behavior preceded his improper intention. And he also disputes regarding the issue of one action, for he holds by the first language used. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.",
                "לאכול כחצי זית ולהקטיר כחצי זית – but both o them are outside of the proper time or outside of the proper place.",
                "כשר שאין אכילה והקטרה מצטרפין – to make it invalid. For here there lacks an appropriate measure (regarding the place it was offered) and there it lacks an appropriate measure (regarding the time it was offered)."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "כל הפסולין ששחטו שחיטתן כשרה – and the same law applies (regarding the list provided in Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 2, Mishnah 1 of those who are ineligible to partake of the Temple Service) even ab initio, they may perform the slaughtering [of the sacrifice] as it is written (Leviticus 1:5): “The bull shall be slaughtered before the LORD; and Aaron’s sons, the priests shall offer the blood, [dashing the blood against all sides of the altar which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting],” from receiving the blood onward is the command of the priesthood, teaching regarding that the slaughtering [of the sacrifice] is appropriate for a non-Kohen and those who are ineligible, and it (i.e., the Mishnah) does not teach that they slaughtered it implying that de-facto it is fine but not ab-initio, but only because they are ritually impure, for a person who is ritually impure ab-initio cannot slaughter, as a decree lest he come in contact with the flesh/meat. But an impure person who slaughtered Holy Things and fit individuals are not found [together], other than with a long knife, as for example, when he stands outside the Temple courtyard and slaughters the animal that is within the Temple courtyard, for that is slaughtering of Holy Things (i.e., animals) in the Temple courtyard, but an impure person cannot enter into the Temple courtyard. But if he was defiled by an unclean reptile, that he doesn’t defile the knife, for he is not a primary source of ritual impurity. Or someone who is defied by contact with the dead who defiles the knife to become the primary source of ritual impurity in a similar manner, and the knife defiles the meat.",
                "לפיכך הן פוסלים – the sacrifice through [improper] intention. Since they are appropriate for this [particular] Divine Service, their intention is [an inappropriate] intention and it invalidates.",
                "וכולן – those that are invalidated.",
                "שקבלו את הדם – on the condition to consume and/or to offer it up outside its appropriate time framework or outside its appropriate location.",
                "אם יש דם הנפש – still in the animal, an appropriate/fit person should go back to the Divine Service and receive [the blood] and toss/sprinkle it, and the offering will be fit/kosher. For the intention of these do not invalidate them in the reception, because they are not fit for it. For the [inappropriate] intention does not invalidate other than someone who is appropriate/fit for Divine Service, and for the appropriate thing, and in the appropriate place to perform Divine Service, as it is written (Leviticus 7:18): “it shall not count for him who offered it,” for the verse speaks about someone who is fit for offering it."
            ],
            [
                "יחזיר לכשר – and he will not find fault in what that he gave to the invalid individual.",
                "נתנו – that which was invalid.",
                "על גבי הכבש שלא כנגד היסוד – this is placement that is not in its [appropriate] place. Or that he placed that (i.e., the blood) which should be placed below [the red line] above It, the fit/kosher individual should return and receive it. And it is necessary to tell us about all of them, for it has a remedy in its return. For if it (i.e., the Mishnah) had only taught only the first clause I might think that these that were appropriate for the Divine Service of the community such as an impure person who is worthy ab-initio for the community, therefore, regarding the individual, there is a remedy through a return, but the left [hand] which is not appropriate for the Divine Service of the community, I might say that he does not have a remedy in returning it. But if we only taught the case of someone who used his left-hand, I might think that the person using his left [hand] has a remedy in returning it, for it has acceptance on Yom Kippur, for the High Priest takes the coal-pan in his right hand and the censer in is left hand. But an unconsecrated utensil, I might so not [at all]. But if he had mentioned only the unconsecrated utensil, because it is appropriate to sanctify it, but these other cases [mentioned in the Mishnah], I would say not, so it is necessary [to mention them all] (see the Gemara, Tracate Zevakhim 26b)."
            ],
            [
                "לאכול דבר שאין דרכו לאכול – outside of its [appropriate] time period or outside of its [appropriate] place.",
                "ור' אליעזר פוסל – But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer."
            ],
            [
                "קיפה (jelly, sediments of boiled meat) – spices/seasoning and very fine [portions of meat] that are in rim at the bottom of the vessel.",
                "אלל (fatty substance, offal of meat) – the remnants of the meat that are attached to the skin at the time of flaying [of the sacrifice]. Another explanation: the sinew of the neck that is hard and is not appropriate for consumption, that we call KAPILO in the foreign language.",
                "הקרנים והטלפים – and even what is in them close to the flesh that we cut/sever them, blood comes out from it, is not considered like flesh/meat.",
                "ואין חייבין עליהם משופ פיגול – if the sacrifice was disqualified by improper intention/פיגול, that he intended to eat its meat outside of the appropriate time, but ate from these, he is exempt.",
                "וטמא – if he ate from one of these while in bodily impurity from a kosher sacrifice, he is not liable because of eating Holy Things while in an impure bodily state."
            ],
            [
                "השוחט את המוקדשין – whenever that it (i.e., the Mishnah) uses this language, it speaks of females.",
                "שליל (embryo) – that is in her womb",
                "שליא (after-birth, placenta) – the skin that covers the fetus, this intention does not invalidate the sacrifice. For the embryo and the placenta are not the body of the sacrifice [in the strictest sense] (see Tractate Temurah 31b).",
                "לא פיגל – this is what he said: A person who slaughters the [female] consecrated animal to eat the fetus or the placenta outside of its [appropriate] place, did not make it invalid. And if he intended to eat from them outside of its [appropriate] time, did not make a sacrifice rejectable through improper mental disposal (see Leviticus 19:7).",
                "חלב המוקדשין וביצי תורין אין חייבין עליהן משום פיגול – if he had an inappropriate intention with a sacrifice and consumed from the milk that was in its breasts, he is not liable for it because of an inappropriate intention, for it is not the main part of the sacrifice."
            ],
            [
                "להניח את דמו או את אמוריו למחר – not that he would offer them up as incense on the morrow, for this intention is outside of its [appropriate] time and is it an offering completely disqualified by improper intention, but rather, on the condition that he would leave over everything for the morrow and not offer them up as incense.",
                "ר' יהודה פוסל – since he would invalidate it by taking it outside and by leaving I, he would invalidate it also by the intention of removing it outside and leaving it, and just as if he left them for the morrow it is invalid, that the blood is invalidated with the setting of the sun, so also if he intended regarding them to leave them for the morrow, he has invalidated it.",
                "וחכמים מכשירין – since he did not intend either to offer up incense nor to sprinkle/toss [the blood] nor to consume it outside of its [appropriate] time. And similarly, if he did not intend neither to offer up nor to toss nor to consume it outside of its [appropriate] place, he did not invalidate it. And the Halakha is according to the Sages. But surely, Rabbi Yehuda did not invalidate by intention of tossing blood that should be tossed below [the red line] by tossing them above, for since, if he did this, he invalidated it, because Rabbi Yehuda holds that a person who intends to toss the blood on the Altar, even if it is not in its [appropriate] place, it is as if he intended to toss it in is [appropriate] place, as long has he did not intend to toss it outside of the Temple courtyard."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "בית שמאי אומרים כל הניתנין על מזבח החיצון – there are those from them that require four gifts. And there are those from them that require two [gifts] which are four [gifts]. And are [those] that require one gift as is taught in the Mishnah in the other chapter (i.e., the next chapter, Mishnayot 3-8). But now that it said that for all of them that he did not give anything other than one gift, de facto, he has expiated, as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:27): “and of your other sacrifices, the blood shall be poured out [on the altar of the LORD your God],” one pouring is implied, for it is not written “all around,” that would imply two gifts which are four.",
                "ובחטאת שתי מתנות – three portions wee stated regarding the outer sin offerings in Leviticus, one with the male goat of the chieftain (Leviticus 4:22-26), and two concerning the sin offerings/purification offering of the individual (Leviticus 4:27-35), one with a female lamb (Leviticus 4:32 and following) and one with a female goat (Leviticus 4:28 and following). With two of them, it is written as (Leviticus 4:30,34), the word\"קרנת [מזבח]\" /”horns [of the altar] is written defectively, and one of them (Leviticus 4:7 – “The priest shall put some of the blood on the horns of the altar/קרנות המזבח of aromatic incense,” it is written in full. But the School of Shammai has the tradition of the traditional reading of Scripture (vowels) which must guide us/אם למקרא (as opposed to that of אם למסורת/he traditional Scripture text (without vowels) is authoritative in Biblical interpretation), there are hence, six, but there are only four on the altar [itself], and the two extra were not said other than that Scripture taught them to invalidate an act by omission, but the School of Hillel holds that regarding these of the traditional reading of the vowels/אם למקרא – that implies six and the others are of the אם למסורת –which it implies, four therefore is one more than the traditional Scripture text (without vowels) and one less than from the traditional reading of Scripture, and that would make five, four for the Mitzvah and one to invalidate an act by omission, but if he gave one gift, he has made expiation.",
                "לפיכך – the sin-offering and all of the offerings, according to the School of Hillel, and according to the School of Shammai all of the other offerings outside of the sin-offering, if he placed the first in the proper manner (i.e., in silence) but the second with the intention of eating the flesh outside of its appropriate time, he has atoned, and the sacrifice is fit to be offered through the first gift, for the second does not permit the flesh, as it was permitted through the first gift. Therefore, it is not disregarded.",
                "נתן את הראשונה חוץ לזמנה וכו' פיגול וחייבין עליו כרת – for the intention is not outside of its place and the second removes it from being an offering disqualified by improper intention, it was established with the first [sacrifice] when all who were permitted to it offered it up."
            ],
            [
                "אם חסר אחת מכל המתנות לא כפר – for regarding the bull for the whole community of Israel [that had erred] that the mater escapes the notice of the congregation it is written (Leviticus 4:20): “He shall do with this bull just as is done with the [priest’s] bull of purification offering; he shall do the same with it,” and this is a verse that is not necessary, for all of his Divine Services are explained in it, but rather it comes to multiply the warning of the sprinklings that are in it. And it means this, and he did for him as I have written for you his Divine Services, and he repeated them to invalidate by an act of omission for if he left out of one of the gifts he did not atone.",
                "לפיכך (אם נתנן כולן כתקנן) – for since all of them permit, this one does not permit without that one, and this one does not invalidate without that one.",
                "ואחת שלא כתקנה – with an intention outside of its [appropriate] time.",
                "פסול – for it was not permitted with the first [sprinklings].",
                "ואין בו כרת – for we don’t have an improper intention that disqualifies with a half that permits."
            ],
            [
                "אלו דברים שאין חייבים עליהם – [not liable on them] for extirpation when consuming them because of offerings disqualified by improper intentions.",
                "הקומץ (Kohen taking a fistful of the meal-offering to be placed on the altar) -if he took a fistful on the condition to eat its remnants the next day (see Tractate Menahot, Chapter 2, Mishnah 1), and the meal-offering became rejectable that it is not consumed other than during [that] day and the night [following], the person who eats the fistful [of meal-offering] is not [liable] for extirpation, for the inappropriate intention does not occur other than upon a thing that has (a sacrificial object) which requires another act to make it permissible, for we derive offerings disqualified by inappropriate intention from peace-offering as it is written (Leviticus 7:18): “If any of the flesh of his sacrifice of well-being (i.e., peace-offering) [is eaten on the third day; it shall not be acceptable; it shall not count for him who offered it. It is an offensive thing/פגול יהיה, and the person who eats it shall bear his guilt].” Just as peace-offerings/sacrifices of well-being are particular in that they require an act to make it permissible whether for man or for the altar, for the blood permits those portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar, and the portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar permit the meat to man, and they are liable upon them because of an offering disqualified due to inappropriate intention, excluding all of those that are counted in our Mishnah, which do not have any action that makes it permissible for them than they themselves which permit for others, the person who eats from them is not liable because an offering made with an inappropriate intention.",
                "והלבונה (frankincense) – there is nothing else that makes it permissible, but rather it permits the meal-offering, like the fistful of meal-offering.",
                "מנחת נדבת כהנים (free-will meal-offering of the priests) – all of which is burnt entirely (see Leviticus 6:16: “So, too, every grain offering offering of a priest shall be a whole offering: it shall not be eaten.”) and is not grabbed from. Therefore, there is nothing else that permits it.",
                "מנחת כהן משיח – that is the cakes of the High Priest which is offered each day, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening (see Leviticus 6:13: “This is the offering that Aaron and his sons shall offer on the occasion of his anointment: a tenth of ephah of choice flour as a regular grain offering, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening.”).",
                "ומנחת נכסים – we do not have the tradition because they (Rabbi Meir and the Sages further on in our Mishnah) dispute this. And there is a division between it coming with the sacrifice to it coming on its own.",
                "והדם – which permits it.",
                "והנסכים הבאים בפני עצמן – as for example, when he made a free-will meal offering [accompanying] the drink-offering/libation without a sacrifice, as we state in Menahot (see Menahot 15b), a person makes a freewill donation of a meal offering [accompanying a drink-offering/libation on its own. Alternatively, he brought it for the sacrifice, but that he brought his sacrifice today and his libations on the morrow, for the Master stated (Numbers 29:37): “the grain offerings and libations [for the bull, the ram, and the lambs, in he quantities prescribed],” even on the morrow, but if he brought them with his sacrifice and he was disqualified by an improper intention with the sacrifice, the libations were also disqualified by improper intention.",
                "וחכמים אומרים אף הבאים עם הבהמה – for since he can offer up the libations on the morrow, it is found that hat he sacrifice [itself] permits them, and the Halakha is according to the Sages.",
                "לוג שמן של מצורע – its remnants are consumed.",
                "אין חייבין עליו משום פגול – if his guilt offering was disqualified due to an improper intention, the LOG was not disqualified due to an improper intention. But even though that the LOG is dependent upon the guilt-offering, as it is written (Leviticus 14:17): “[Some of the oil left in his palm shall be put by the priest on the ridge of the right ear of he one being purified, on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot -] over the blood of the reparation/guilt-offering,” for if he did not place from the blood of the reparation offering first, the placement of the oil is not worth anything, nevertheless since a person brings his reparation offering now and his LOG (of oil) within ten days, it is found that the reparation offering does not permit it, and since it has nothing that permits it, they are not liable for inappropriate intention.",
                "ור\"מ אומר – the LOG [of oil) that comes with the sacrifice on that day, one is liable for it because of an inappropriate intention if he had an inappropriate intention with the reparation offering. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.",
                "בין לאדם בין למזבח – whether this or that."
            ],
            [
                "העולה דמה מתיר את בשרה למזבח – as it is written (Leviticus 1:6): “dashing the blood [against all sides of the altar which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting],” and afterwards (Leviticus 1:8): “[And Aaron’s sons, the priests] shall lay out the sections.”",
                "ואת עורה לכהנים – as it is written (Leviticus 7:8): “[So, too, the priest who offers a man’s burnt offering shall keep] the skin of the burnt offering that he offered,” it is not other than after the tossing/sprinkling [of the blood].",
                "חטאת העוף – which is eaten by the Kohanim. We derive it from what is written (Leviticus 16:16): “whatever their sins,” to conclude the sin-offering of fowl so that you would not say that it died on its own.",
                "פרים הנשרפים – the bull of the anointed priest and the bull for an unwitting communal sin [as a result of an errant Halakhic decision handed down by the Great Sanhedrin] (Talmud Tractate Horayot 2a and Chapter 1, Mishnah 5) and the bull of Yom Kippur.",
                "ושעירים הנשרפים – the goat of Yom Kippur and the goats of the idolaters. All of these require the blood being sprinkled inside, and their portions of the offerings consumed upon the altar offered on the altar of the burnt-offering and the rest of the meat is burned in the place of the ashes [outside of Jerusalem where the ashes from the altar were deposited; the Yom Kippur goat and other public sin-offerings that were not eaten were burned there], But since their blood permits their portions of the offerings consumed upon the altar to be offered up, if he had an inappropriate intention with them, and ate the portions of the offerings that were to be consumed upon the altar, he is liable for them because it was an offering disqualified by improper intention.",
                "כל שאינו על מזבח החיצון כשלמים – an offering disqualified by improper intention, with regard to peace-offerings it is written. Just as peace-offerings are unique in that the blood is given on the outer altar, so also anything where their blood is given on the outer altar, to exclude the bulls that are burned and the goats that are burned where their blood requires sprinkling/tossing and the giving of their blood inside. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon."
            ],
            [
                "קדשי נכרים – that the heathens make vows of votive offerings and free-will offerings like an Israelites as it is written in the [Torah] portion of Emor (Leviticus 22:18): “When any man of the house of Israel [or of the strangers in Israel] presents a burnt-offering as his offering for any of the votive or any of the freewill offerings [that they offer to the LORD],” and we expound the word איש/a person, what does the inference teach us when it says איש איש/when any man? To include the non-Jews who make vows of votive offerings and free-will-offerings like an Israelite.",
                "אין חייבין משום פגול נותר וטמא – for the offering disqualified by improper intention is derived by an analogy from that of a remnant (see Talmud Zevakhim 45a), through [the words] \"עון\" \"עון\"/”iniquity,” “iniquity,” (see Leviticus 22:18: “or to incur guilt requiring a penalty payment,” and Numbers 18:1: “You and your sons and the ancestral house under your charge shall bear any guilt connected with the sanctuary; you and your sons alone shall bear any guilt connected with your priesthood.”) and remnant is derived from ritually impure in an analogy of \"חלול\" \"חלול\"/desecrated, desecrated, (see Leviticus 22:2: “Instruct Aaron and his sons to be scrupulous about the sacred donations that the Israelite people consecrate to Me, lest they profane/יחללו My holy name.” and Leviticus 22:15: “But [the priests] must not allow the Israelites to profane/ולא יחללו the sacred donations that they set aside for the LORD,) but regarding the impure, it is written (Leviticus 22:2): “Instruct Aaron and his sons to be scrupulous about the sacred donations that the Israelites consecrate to me,” but not the holy things of the heathens. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.",
                "דברים שאין חייבין עליהן משום פגול – as for example, the taking of a fistful of the meal-offering and the incense and everything that is taught in our Mishnah (see Chapter 4, Mishnah 3).",
                "חייבין משום טומאה – a person who eats them while in bodily impurity is liable for extirpation.",
                "חוץ מן הדם – that the Biblical verse excluded it as it is written (Leviticus 17:11): “[for the life of the flesh is in the blood,] and I have assigned it to you [for making expiation for your lives upon the altar; it is the blood, as life, that effects expiation],” yours will be like the rest of unconsecrated meat, and not like Holy Thing. And further it is written (Leviticus 17:11): “for making expiation for your lives upon the altar,” for expiation I have given it, but not for sacrilege. Therefore, he is not liable for it not because of impurity and not because of remnant and not because of improper intention, but rather because of merely consuming blood.",
                "בדבר שדרכן להאכל – that it is the manner of human beings to consume them, and even though it is from that which is offered as incense, as for example, the taking of a fistful of meal-offering and the meal-offering of the priests and things similar to it, but the frankincense and the wood and the incense, we are not obligated for them because of ritual impurity. But the Rabbis argued with this and strengthened it for ritual impurity, from Scripture, as it is written (Leviticus 7:19): “Flesh that touches anything impure shall not be eaten; [it shall be consumed in fire,” and the extra word of הבשר/the flesh [in the verse quoted above]: “As for other flesh, only he who is pure may eat such flesh,” includes the wood and the frankincense. But the Halakha is according to the Sages, for the wood and the frankincense also have reason to be ritually impure. But wood does not cause impurity other than the wood of a sacrifice alone, for if something ritually impure touched it, it is prohibited to burn them upon the altar."
            ],
            [
                "לשם זבח – to exclude the change in holiness, as for example, for the sake of another sacrifice.",
                "לשם זובח – to exclude the change in owners as we derived above at the beginning of the first chapter (i.e., Mishnah 1) from (Deuteronomy 23:24): “You must fulfill what has crossed your lips and performed what you have voluntarily vowed to the LORD our God, etc.”",
                "לשם אשים – to exclude if he slaughtered it on the condition to make of it roasted pieces on the coals.",
                "לשם ריח – to exclude if he roasted them first outside of the pile of wood on the altar in the Temple, for furthermore, this does not causes its scent to rise.",
                "לשם הנחת ריח – please to the Holy One, Blessed be He who said and we fulfill his will. And all of these we derive them from as it is written (Leviticus 1:9): “a gift of pleasing odor.”",
                "לשם חטא – for the sake of his sin that he brings it upon it.",
                "אף מי שלא היה בלבו לשם אחד מכל אלו – but rather that he merely slaughtered it, it is fit/appropriate.",
                "שהוא תנאי ב\"ד – that he should merely slaughter it, but not state its purpose, perhaps he will come to state that it was not for that sake.",
                "שאין המחשבה הולכת אלא אחר העובד – Therefore, if he would say that it was not for their sake, even though the owners stated that it was for their sake, it is not anything, for the matter does not depend upon them, as it is written (Leviticus 7:18): “it shall not count for him who offered it,”. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yossi."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "איזהו מקומן של זבחים קדשי קדשים – burnt offerings, sin offerings and guilt offerings.",
                "שחיטתן בצפון – a burnt offering is explicitly written regarding it (Leviticus 1:11 though the verse is not exactly the same as the one suggested by the commentary \"ושחט אתו\" vs. \"ושחט אותה\"): “It shall be slaughtered before the LORD on the north side of the altar.” The sin offering – it is written concerning it (Leviticus 6:18): “the sin offering shall be slaughtered before the LORD, at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughtered.” The Guilt offering, it is written concerning it (Leviticus 7:2): “The guilt offering shall be slaughtered at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughtered.”",
                "שחיטתן בצפון – for it did not teach here, “and the receipt of its blood [in the vessels dedicated to the Temple service] in the north, even though in all of them, the receipt of their blood is in the north at the place of slaughtering. But because there is the guilt offering of the leper that the Kohen would receive part of his blood in his palm as it is written (Leviticus 14:14): “The priest shall take some of the blood of the guilt offering, and the priest shall put it [on the ridge of the right ear of him who is being cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot].” Just as the putting by the Kohen himself with his finger, even the taking of by the Kohen on his own. Because of this, it (i.e., the",
                "Mishnah) did not write [concerning] the receipt of the blood, because the receiving of the blood is not equivalent.",
                "פר ושעיר של יום הכפורים – even though it is written [in the Torah] regarding a burnt-offering [that is offered (after being slaughtered) in the north, the Tanna/teacher [of the Mishnah] advanced that of sin-offerings in the first clause [of the Mishnah], since it comes from an exposition [of the Biblical text], it is more beloved to him. But innermost sin-offerings since one brings their blood in the innermost Holy of Holies, it is beloved to him, and they advance them to the rest of the sin-offerings. But they also, their slaughtering is in the north, as it is written (Leviticus 4:29): “And the purification offering shall be slaughtered at the place of the burnt offering,” but it is an additional verse, for behold it is written (Leviticus 6:18): “the purification offering shall be slaughtered before the LORD at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughter,” but that is the creation of a class,( i.e., a conclusion, by analogy, from a case explicitly stated in Biblical law on all similar cases not specified in detail) for all the sin-offerings that they will be required in the north.",
                "וקבול דמן בכלי שרת (in vessels dedicated to the Temple service) – as it is written in the burnt offering of Sinai (Exodus 24:6): “[Moses took on part of the blood] and pu it in basins, [and he other part of the blood he dashed against the altar.],’ and from it, we learned that all of the sacrifices require a utensil.",
                "הזיה על בין הבדין – he stands between the two bars projecting from the Ark and sprinkles once above and seven [times] below corresponding to the thickness of the cover of the Holy Ark, and they would not touch it.",
                "ועל הפרוכת – as it is written (Leviticus 16:16): “and he shall do the same for the Tent of Meeting,”[which abides with them in the midst of their impurity].”",
                "ועל מזבח הזהב – as it is written (Leviticus 16:18): “he shall go out to the altar [that is before the LORD and purge it].” In the Order of the Divine Service of Yom Kippur in the Torah portion of Ahare Mot.",
                "מתנה אחת מעכבת – as we have stated in the chapter “Bet Shammai” (Chapter 4 of Tractate Zevakhim) [36b], that regarding the bull offered for an unwitting communal sin, it is written (Leviticus 4:20): “He shall do with this bull just as is done with then [priest’s] bull of purification offering; he shall do the same with it,” and it is an extraneous Biblical verse, which [if improperly done] impairs, if he is missing one of the gifts, he did not attain atonement. And we expound upon (Leviticus 4:20): “He shall do with this bull” – this is the bull of Yom Kippur, and with it also, one gift impairs, like the bull offered for an unwitting communal sin.",
                "אם לא נתן – the remnants of the blood to the base of the [golden] altar, he did not impair atonement, for after the sprinkling and giving of the blood in the Holy of Holies, it is written (Leviticus 16:20): “When he has finished purging the Shrine,” which implies that they had already completed all of the atonements entirely."
            ],
            [
                "פרים הנשרפים – the bull offered for an unwitting communal sin and the bullock of the anointed High Priest, which are not consumed by Kohanim but are burned outside of Jerusalem.",
                "ושעירים הנשרפים – the goats of idolatry, which are juxtaposed/compared to the bull offered of an unwitting communal sin for all of their (i.e., the Rabbis’) words.",
                "הזיה על הפרוכת – seven sprinklings on the curtain. But between the boards [of the altar] there is no sprinkling written [in the Torah] concerning them like there is for the bullock of Yom Kippur, as it is written concerning it (Leviticus 16:14): “[He shall take some of the blood of the bull] and sprinkle it with his finger over the cover [on the east side].”",
                "אלו ואלו – of Yom Kippur and the rest of [the sacrifices] that are burned [entirely].",
                "נשרפים בבית הדשן – to the place where they remove from there the ashes of the outer altar, as it is written concerning it (Leviticus 6:4): “and carry the ashes outside the camp.” And regarding the burned bullocks, it is written (Leviticus 4:12): “it shall be burned on the ash heap.”"
            ],
            [
                "אלו הן חטאות הצבור – that we must mention them, for the inner [altar’s sacrifices] were already taught.",
                "שעירי ראשי חדשים ושל מועדות – for they are on the outer altar.",
                "שחיטתן בצפון – for we have learned them through a creation of a class (i.e., a conclusion, by analogy, from a case explicitly stated in Biblical law on all similar cases not specified in detail) for all sin-offerings which are required in the north.",
                "עלה בכבש ופנה לסובב – because its blood is placed on the horns [of the altar] and with a finger, he (i.e.., the Kohen), need to stand on top of the SOBEB (i.e., a sort of gallery surrounding the altar for the priest to walk on). But with all of he other blood which are on the lower parts from the incisors and below, he stands on the floor near the horn of the altar and sprinkles from the utensil, and any place where it reaches the [lower[ altar is appropriate/fit.",
                "ובא לו לקרן דרומית מזרחית – upon which he approaches first, for we hold (Tractate Yoma 15b): All the turns that you make (in the Temple) must be towards the right, to the east, and he comes to that horn/corner and goes and surrounds the SOBEB gallery the right side and his face is towards the altar from the south to the east and from the east to the north and from the north to the west, which is the path to the right. And a cubit by a cubit at the height of the cubit is given at the top of the altar in each and every corner that is in it, which is called, “horn.”",
                "על יסוד דרומית – that we derive its descent from the inclined plane leading to the altar with the outer sin-offerings and remnants of the blood in his hand, from his departure from the palace/Holy (i.e., the hall containing the golden altar) and the inner remnants [of blood] in his hand, just as his departure from the hall containing the golden altar he would place remnants of the blood that is near him, which is he western side of the base of the altar/YESOD, as it is written (Leviticus 4:7): “[and all the rest of the bull’s blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt offering,] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting,” which means to the western side which is near the palace (i.e., the hall containing the golden altar), even his descent from the inclined plane leading to the altar he places the remnants [of the blood] that are near him, meaning, the southern base of the altar adjacent to the inclined plane leading to the altar, that the inclined plane is in the south.",
                "לפנים מן הקלעים – because in the Mishkan/Tabernacle, there were curtains surrounding the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting, and regarding the sin-offering it is written (Leviticus 6:19): “it shall be eaten in the sacred precinct, in the enclosure of the Tent of Meeting.” And in the Temple (i.e., the permanent house, as opposed to the Tabernacle), the wall of the Temple cout wss in place of the curtains.",
                "לזכרי כהונה – regarding the sin-offerings and the gult offering and the meal offering, it is written (Leviticus 6;22): “Only the males in the priestly line may eat of it: [it is most holy].”",
                "בכל מכל – because it was necessary to teach regarding to the Passover offering which is not eaten other than roasted (see Mishnah 8 of this chapter), it teaches here “in any manner of cooking food.”",
                "ליום ולילה – as it is written (Leviticus 7:15): “And the flesh of his thanksgiving sacrifice of well-being shall be eaten on the day that is offered,” ‘it shall be eaten” – we learned [from it” that the thanksgiving offering is eaten over one day. From where do we learn about the sin-offering and the guilt offering? The inference teaches us (Leviticus 7:15): “[And the flesh of his thanksgiving] sacrifice [of well -being shall be eaten on the day that it is offered;].”",
                "עד חצות – the Sages made a fence for the Torah [in order] to keep a person from sin. For here, the Biblical verse (Leviticus 7:15) is stated: “none of it shall be set aside until morning.”"
            ],
            [
                "העולה קדשי קדשים – [The burnt offering] is the Most Holy Things, and becomes disqualified if it leaves [outside of the Temple courtyard] and with a person wo immersed himself on that day (but if he is a priest, is remains prohibited for that day to eat Terumah/heave offering until nightfall), and someone lacking atonement (i.e., such as a person with a flux, a healed leper, who must bring an offering to complete their purification process) and those who commit an act of sacrilege, but because it is not written in Scripture that it is the Most Holy Things like with regard to the sin-offering and the guilt offering. The Tanna/teacher comes to teach us here that this is also of the Most Holy Things like the sin-offering and the guilt offering, for it is equivalent to them in the place of their slaughter and the recption of their blood.",
                "שתי מתנות – in the northeastern corner/horn, and in the southwestern corner/horn which opposite forms a diagonal line/diameter, and the reason is because om the southeastern corner/horn, there was no base of the altar because it was not in the portion of Benjamin when Jacob prophesied about him (Genesis 49:27): “[Benjamin is a ravenous wolf;] In the morning he consumes the foe, [And in the evening he divides the spoil],” in his inheritance the Temple will be built, the thing that is sanctified for blood will not be other than in the portion of Benjamin, and that corner/horn, was not in his portion, for the Altar was taking effect in the portion of Judah, one cubit towards the east and one cubit in the south, all the length of the east and the south in the thickness of a cubit, but there wasn’t a cubit in the east throughout all of the east, for when it would reach the north eastern corner/horn, it would end within a cubit of the corner/horn. And similarly, regarding the ending of the southern cubit, it did not go throughout all of the south, for when it would reach the southwestern corner/horn, it would end a cubit, near the corner. It is found that the base of the altar exists for three corners/horns. Therefore, he would begin at the northeastern corner/horn, for since the southwestern corner/horn lacks a base to the altar because it was not in the portion of the prey which Jacob prophesied about. But the burnt offering requires at first the giving of the blood corresponding to the base of the altar. Therefore, it requires these two as we have stated. We require two gifts which are four, in order that the giving of the blood is on the four directions of the Altar, as it is written (Leviticus 1:5): “dashing the blood against all sides of the altar,” for if he sprinkled it, he could sprinkle it in one casting, the inference teaching us, “all sides/all around,” and it is impossible to surround it with one casting. And if it is all around, it is possible to float it like a string, the inference teaching us, “dashing/casting” and there is no dashing/casting, other than from afar, and like a string, it is impossible to surround it other than with a finger. How so? He gives two acts of placing which are [divided at the corners into] four.",
                "וטעונה הפשט ונתוח – as it is written (Leviticus 1:6): “The burnt offering shall be flayed and cut up into sections.”",
                "וכליל לאשים – all of it is burnt on the fire."
            ],
            [
                "זבחי שלמי צבור – the sheep for Atzeret/Shavuot.",
                "אשם גזילות – that are stated for the oath of deposit.",
                "שאם מעילות – who benefits from that which is dedicated to Temple property.",
                "אשם שפחה חרופה – he who comes into [sexual elations] with a slave woman who is half a slave and half a free woman who is designated to a Hebrew slave who is permitted to a maidservant and someone who is a free woman.",
                "אשם נזיר – who became defiled [by contact] with the dead, as it is written concerning hm (Numbers 6:12): “And rededicate to the LORD his erm as nazirite.”",
                "אשם תלןי – doubtfully inadvertently sinned in a manner where one is liable for extirpation for sinning willfully, and it is doubtfulif he didn’t sin inadvertently. But it is written in Leviticus (5:17-18) regarding the guilt-offering for misuse of sacred property.",
                "אשם ודאי – we do not read this [in the Mishnah], for all of these are definite guilt-offerings, except for the uncertain guilt-offering.",
                "שתי מתנות שהן ארבע – that regarding the guilt offering it is also written (Leviticus 7:2) “The reparation offering shall be slaughtered at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughtered, and the blood shall be dashed on all sides of the altar.” It is written זריקה/dashing/casting and סביב/on all sides.",
                "ונאכלין לפנים מן הקלעים – as it is written with regard to the reparation/guilt offering (Numbers 18:10): “You shall partake of them as most sacred donations.” But Scripture juxtaposed the peace-offerings/sacrifices of well-being of the community to the sin offering, as it is written (Leviticus 23:19): “You shall also offer one he-goat as a purification offering and two yearling lambs as a sacrifice of well-being,” to inform you that their law is like that of a sin-offering, which are not consumed other than inside fom the curtain and only by males of the priesthood. But they do not require four gifts like a sin offering, for there isn’t among all of the sacrifices that which requires four gifts other than only the sin-offering."
            ],
            [
                "התודה ואיל נזיר קדשים קלים – and one does not commit sacrilege through them.",
                "שחיטתן בכל מקום – they don’t require slaughter in the north (as their law is like offerings of well-being/peace offerings).",
                "ונאכלים בכל העיר – that concerning the sin offering, it is written (Leviticus 10:13): “You shall eat it in the sacred precinct [inasmuch as it is your due and that of your children from the LORD’s gifts,” but peace-offerings/offerings of well-being are not consumed other than in a pure place, which is throughout the city [of Jerusalem] which is a pure place from lepers entering therein.",
                "לכל אדם – for foreigners (non-Kohanim).",
                "ליום ולילה – regarding the offering of gratitude/thanksgiving, it is written (Leviticus 7:15): “[And the flesh of his thanksgiving sacrifice of well-being] shall be eaten on the day that it is offered; none of it shall be set aside until morning.” And it is taught in a Baraita (Tractate Zevakhim 36b), it is taught (Leviticus 7:15: “his thanksgiving sacrifice of well-being” – to include the Nazirite’s offering of well-being.",
                "המורם מהם – the breast and the shoulder that he gave from them to the Kohen like the rest of the offerings of well-being/peace offerings, for Scripture thanksgiving and offerings of well-being are compared through analogy, as it is written (Leviticus 7:1-2): “This is the ritual of the sacrifice of well-being,…if he offers it for thanksgiving, etc.” But the four loaves are from its four species as it is written (Leviticus 7:24): “one of each kind as a gift [to the LORD; it shall go to] the priest who dashes [the blood of the offering of well-being,, and that which is raised up from them from the ram of the Nazirite, the boiled shoulder (see Numbers 6:19), and the breast and the foreleg and the loaf of unleavened bread and one wafer.",
                "כיוצא בהן – that are consumed throughout the city for day and nighttime.",
                "לכהנים לנשיהם – as it is written (Leviticus 10:14): “But the breast of elevation offering…you may eat in any pure place, [for they have been assigned as a due] to you, and your children [from the Israelites’ sacrifices of well-being].”"
            ],
            [
                "שחיטתן בכל מקום בעזרה – three portions were stated in the slaughtering of the [sacrifice of] well-being; one with the offspring of cattle, and one with sheep and one with a goat. In the first, it is written (Leviticus 3:2): “and slaughter it at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting,” and in the two after it, it is written (Leviticus 3:8): “It shall be slaughtered before the Tent of Meeting,” to make fit all the directions that are in the Temple courtyard, for the word לפני/before implies all that is before the Palace/ Hall, containing the golden altar.",
                "לשני ימים ולילה אחד – for such is written regarding the offering of well-being (Leviticus 7:17): “What is then left of the flesh of the sacrifice shall be consumed in fire on the third day.”"
            ],
            [
                "והמעשר – the tithing of cattle.",
                "ודמן טעון מתנה אחת – as it is not written with them (i.e., the first born offering, the tithe and the Passover sacrifice), the word סביב/surrounding , is not written with them, but rather, (Numbers 18:17): “you shall dash their blood against the altar,” regarding the first born [sacrifice]. But we derive these (i.e., the tithes and the Passover offering) from there, for it is not written [in Scripture], “and its blood,” but rather, “their blood” (ibid.).",
                "כנגד היסוד – in a place where the base of the altar/YESOD is underneath, to exclude the southeast [corner] where the base of the altar is not there, as we have stated. But the offering of the firstling and the tithe and the Passover sacrifices require the base of the altar, as we derive by analogy from burnt offering/עולה through זריקה/casting, as It is written (Leviticus 4:7): “[and all the test of the bull’s blood he shall pour out] at the base of the altar of the burnt offering.’",
                "שינה באכילתן – one from the other. Even though they compare them through the giving of blood.",
                "הבכור נאכל לכהנים – as it is written (Numbers 18:18): “But their meat shall be yours: [it shall be yours like the breast of elevation offering and like the right thigh].”",
                "והמעשר לכל אדם – that we did not find throughout the Torah that the Kohanim would have a part in it.",
                "ונאכלין בכל העיר – as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:6): ‘And there you are to bring your burnt offerings and other sacrifices, your tithes…,” And it is taught in a Baraita that Scripture speaks of two [kinds of] tithes, one for the tithe of cattle, and one is the tithe of grain. And it is written in that Biblical verse, “and the firstlings of your herds and flocks.” But because it did not establish for them a separation, we learn from it that the tithe and the firstling are consumed throughout the city [of Jerusalem].",
                "לשני ימים ולילה אחד – for regarding the firstling it states (in the Torah – Numbers 18:18): “But their meat shall be yours: it shall be yours like the breast of elevation offering [and like the right thigh], Scripture made a comparison [which rests on Biblical intimation by analogy] to the breast and the foreleg. Just as the breast and foreleg of the offering of well-being [is consumed] for two days and one night, so too the firstling for two days and one night, and the tithe is like the firstling.",
                "למנוייו – to those who were assigned to the funds of its being taken, as it is written (Exodus 12:4): “you shall contribute [for the lamb] according to what each household will eat.”"
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "קדשי קדשים כאילו נשחטו בצפון – as it is written (Exodus 20:21): “[Make for me an altar of earth] and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well-being (i.e., peace-offerings),” all of it is fit/appropriate for a burnt offering and all of it is fit for peace-offerings/sacrifices of well-being, but even though the burnt-offering is required in the north.",
                "מחצי המזבח ולצפון כצפון (from the midpoint [above] the altar to the north is deemed equivalent to the north)- for it implies that one-half of it is for your burnt-offerings and one-half of it is for your sacrifices of well-being. But if you were to think that all of it is for the burnt-offering, it is fit/appropriate, now that all of it is for the burnt-offering you stated that it is fit/appropriate, [or] all of it for sacrifices of well-being/peace-offerings, it requires that their slaughtering is in every place. And the other one (i.e., the burnt-offering), requires, you might think, that regarding the burnt-offering its place is pressed, that it would not be acceptable in other directions, but sometimes when the burnt-offerings are many and the place [for offering] is narrow for them, therefore, the top of the altar was made fit but sacrifices of well-being/peace-offerings where the place [for offering] is not pressed, the top of the altar was not made fit [for these sacrifices], it comes to tell us that this is incorrect. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yosi.",
                "היו נקמצות בכל מקום – and they don’t require being in the north, for Scripture did not establish a place for taking a fistful of the meal offering.",
                "לפנים מן הקלעים לזכרי כהונה – as it is written (Numbers 18:9): “[This shall be yours from the most holy sacrifices, the gifts:] every such gift that they render to Me as most holy sacrifices, namely, every grain offering, [purification offering, and reparation offering of theirs, shall belong to you and your sons],” and adjoining it (verse 10): “You shall partake of them in as most sacred donations: only males may eat them.”",
                "ליום ולילה עד חצות – we derive it from the meal-offering of the thanksgiving breads."
            ],
            [
                "חטאת העוף היתה נעשית בקן מערבית דרומית 0 because that the meal-offering of a sinner is called a sin-offering, as it is written regarding the meal-offering of a sinner (Leviticus 5:11): “he shall not add oil to it or lay frankincense on it, for it is a purification (i.e., sin) offering.” And it implies also that a sin-offering is called a meal-offering, for a sin-offering turns into a meal-offering for the poorest of the poor, and the meal-offering we found that it requires offering in the southwestern corner, as it is written (Leviticus 6:7): “[And this is the ritual of the grain offering:] Aaron’s sons shall present it before the LORD, in front of the altar,” which direction is it that is “before the LORD” and” in front of the altar?” It would say that this is the southwestern direction, for “before the LORD” is westward, and the “front of the altar” is the south, for there was the inclined plane leading to the altar, and just as the meal-offering requires bringing near in the southwestern corner, even the sin-offering of fowl, its Divine service is in the southwestern corner. And the sprinkling of its blood is the essence of its Divine service.",
                "מכל מקום היתה כשרה – for the pinching of the bird’s head.",
                "אלא זה היה מקומה – for the sprinkling of its blood. And such is how they explain it in the Gemara (see Talmud Zevakhim 63b).",
                "מלמטה – below the red line (i.e., a line painted in red encircling the Temple altar at precisely half its height – because the blood of animal sin-offerings and birds brought as burnt-offerings were sprinkled on the upper portion of the altar, above the red line, whereas the blood of all other sacrifices was sprinkled on the lower portion, below the red line).",
                "הגשות – [bring near] of meal offerings (see Tractate Menahot, Chapter 5, Mishnah 5) prior to their taking a fistful of the meal offerings, as it is written (Leviticus 2:6): “[When you present to the LORD a grain offering that is made in any of these ways, it shall be brought to the priest] who shall take it up to the altar.”",
                "ושיירי הדם (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 3) – of the outer sin offerings, he would pour [the remnants of the blood] to the southern foundation, as we derived in the chapter [five of Tractate Zevakhim, Mishnah 3 – Talmud Zevakhim 53a].",
                "ניסוך המים – on the holiday of Sukkot (see Tractate Sukkah, Chapter 4, Mishnah 9).",
                "והיין – on each day, for there were the pits by the side of the altar into which the remainder of the libations were poured (see also Tractate Meilah, Chapter 3, Mishnah 3 and Talmud Meilah 11a) and it was not possible to offer libations other than there.",
                "ועולת העוף כשהיא רבה במזרח – for he essence of its place was in the southeastern corner, because it was close to the place of the ashes to throw there its crop (of the bird) and its feathers, as it is written (Leviticus 1:16): “[He shall remove its crop with its contents,[ and cast it into the place of the ashes, [at the east side of the altar].” But when it is abundant there, that there are many Kohanim in that corner engaged with burnt-offerings, but there isn’t space for this to stand on the surrounding ledge (i.e., five cubits above the altar’s base, six cubits from the ground. It was one cubit wide on all sides surrounding the altar.) for the burnt-offering of fowl was done above, when he came to the southwestern corner, where even it was close to the place of the ashes more than the other two corners, for the place of the ashes was near the ramp in the eastern side of the ramp and to the south of the altar."
            ],
            [
                "ומקיפים דרך שמאל – cause to go around the Altar for the needs of the Divine Service. Such as for example to bringing of the blood of the sin-offerings and for the arrangement of the pile of wood on the altar or to turn over the limbs with a hook/curved pin. And the descend on the western side of the ramp which is on the left of those who ascend to the altar in their coming up.",
                "חוץ מן העולה לג' דברים אלו – that are done in the southwestern corner, which are libation of the water, and the wine and the burnt-offering of the fowl, and when he goes up to the altar, he turns to the surrounding ledge to the left in that corner and when he goes back the same way (see Tractate Zevahim 63b) on the path that he came up. With the libation of the water and wine, lest it be affected by smoke in the smoke of the altar while he is turning to the right and surrounding to the left and they will cause them to lose their taste and their fragrance, but we require (Numbers 28:31): “see that they are without blemish-with their libations,” that their libations will be pure. And the burnt-offering of the fowl also lest it be affected by the smoke and it dies."
            ],
            [
                "היה מולק את ראשה (pinch the bird’s neck with the finger nail) – he would hold its two wings with his two fingers the span from the little finger to the thumb of a spread hand and a fistful of the meal-offering in his left hand, and the bird on the side of his hand and the face of the bird to the side of the back of his hand, that the neck would be above, and he stretches/extends its neck of the throat on the width of his two fingers, the index finger and the arm and he pinches with his finger nail. And this is one of the hardest forms of Divine service that is in the Temple.",
                "ואינו מבדיל – [and he doesn’t separate] the head from the body, but rather severs the spinal column and the nape and most of its flesh is with it until he reaches the gullet or the windpipe and takes one organ alone and pinches the bird’s neck with his finger nail, as it is written (Leviticus 5:8) “[He shall bring them to the priest, who shall offer first the one for the purification offering, pinching its head at the nape] without severing it.” (see Talmud Zevakhim 65b)",
                "ומזה מדמה – he holds the bird/fowl and sprinkles. For he does not sprinkle neither with a utensil or with a finger, but with the body of the bird/fowl.",
                "היה מתמצה (drains/empties out) – that he offers up the place in the bird’s neck to the altar and presses it on the wall and the blood drains out and goes down to the base [of the altar]. For regarding the sin-offering of the fowl/bird, it is written (Leviticus 5:9): “He shall sprinkle some of the blood of the purification offering on the side of the altar and what remains of the blood shall be drained out at the base of the altar,” Which wall do the remnants belong to and he drains out the blood to the base of the altar? I would say that this is the lowest wall, that is from the red line and below, for if it was the upper wall, that is from the red line and above, sometimes it (i.e., the blood) would drain out to the surrounding ledge, for since he would make it above the surrounding ledge that the red line is below the surrounding ledge by a cubit."
            ],
            [
                "עלה בכבש – since the burnt-offering of the fowl is done above, for it is not written [in Scripture] regarding the burnt-offering of the fowl/bird is in the base of the altar, but rather, only the sin-offering of the fowl/bird. But with the cattle it is the opposite, for the sin-offering of cattle is performed above [the red line] as it is written regarding it (Leviticus 4:18): “[Some of the blood he shall put] on the horns of the altar [which is before the LORD in the Tent of Meeting],” and the burnt offering of the cattle is below [the red line], as it is written (Leviticus 4:18): “ [and all the rest of the blood he shall pour out] at the base of the altar of burnt offering, [which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting],” [Scripture] assigned the base [of the altar] to the burnt-offering.",
                "בא לו לקרן דרומית מזרחית – because it is close to the place of the ashes where they cast the crop of the birds and the down-covered skin [with the entrails that go along with it].",
                "ממול ערפה – opposite one who sees its neck. And it is the back of the neck. But even though it doesn’t say regarding a burnt-offering, “opposite the neck,” we learned from it, opposite the neck from the sin-offering.",
                "ומבדיל – he severs two organs, from what is written in the sin-offering of the fowl/bird (Leviticus 1:17): “[The priest shall tear it open by its wings,] without severing it, [and turn it into smoke on the altar,” we learned that with the burnt-offering of a fowl/bird, he severs it.",
                "והקיף בית מליקתו למזבח – he offers it up and presses the place in the bird’s neck to the wall of the altar in order that the blood will drain out.",
                "ספגו במלח – the language of drawn water and taking, like absorbing/receiving the forty [i.e., thirty-nine] lashes. Even here, he places upon it salt in order that the head will stretch and receive the salt. Another explanation: the word \"ספגו\" with a letter ג' is like סופק with a letter ק' (i.e., to supply an opportunity, to be sufficient) , the language of (Numbers 24:10): “[Engraged at Balaam,] Balak struck his hands together.”",
                "מוראה – the bird’s crop.",
                "נוצה – he cuts through it like a sort of aperture and takes all the skin and the feathers/down (i.e., plumage) that is opposite the bird’s crop with the crop and casts it off.",
                "שסע – [tears open] the bird between the wings but he does not sever it."
            ],
            [
                "הבדיל בחטאת – that he pinched the bird’s neck with his finger nail two organs with the sin-offering.",
                "או לא הבדיל בעולה – that he pinched with it one organ.",
                "פסול – for every kind of difference prior to the [Divine] service with the blood is invalid.",
                "ולא מיצה דם הגוף פסולה – for the essence of the blood is in the body, where it is found."
            ],
            [
                "חטאת העוף שמלקה שלא לשמה – pinching of the neck of the fowl in place of the slaughtering for cattle, and the draining of the blood of the fowl in place of the sprinkling of the blood of the cattle. For the intention that invalidates the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood in cattle invalidates the pinching of the neck of the bird and in the draining of the blood in a fowl/bird. But there is no receiving and bringing [of blood] in the fowl/bird.",
                "עולת העוף כשרה – as it is taught in the Mishnah at the beginning of the first chapter [of Tractate Zevakhim, Mishnah 1]: “All of the animal offerings which were slaughtered not for their own sake are valid [so that the blood is tossed and the entrails burned, etc.] , but they do not go to the owner’s credit in fulfillment of an obligation, except for the Passover offering and the sin-offering.”",
                "לאכול דבר שדרכו לאכול – the sin-offering of the fowl/bird.",
                "להקטיר דבר שדרכו להקטיר – the burnt-offering of the fowl/bird.",
                "שלא לשמה – we don’t remove a burnt-offering from improper intention, because it is fit/acceptable when it is not for its own sake. And all of our Mishnah is explained above in chapter two, [Mishnah four]."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "חטאת העוף שעשאה למטה – from the red line according to the Halakha that it is performed below, as we have stated in [Mishnah 4] in our chapter above (i.e., Chapter 6).",
                "כמעשה חטאת – with sprinkling/tossing [of the blood] and draining [of the blood].",
                "ולשם חטאת – even though that he changed in the order/arrangement of the pinching of the head of the bird in such a manner that he pinched the bird’s neck with a finger nail and severed it, but with a sin-offering, it is stated (Leviticus 5:8): \"לא יבדיל\" / “[pinching its head at the nape] without severing it.”",
                "כשרה – because it was done below [the red line] and in the rest of the acts of Divine service it was performed in accordance with the Halakha (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 6, Mishnah 2).",
                "כמעשה חטאת לשם עולה וכו' פסולה – for a sin-offering not performed for its own sake is invalidated.",
                "כמעשה כולם – that is to say, like the rites/actions of one of all of them that are mentioned here, and even according to the rite of the sin-offering for the sake of/for the name of the sin-offering, because it was performed above [the red line], it is invalid."
            ],
            [
                "עולת העוף שעשאה למעלה – in accordance with the Halakha that it was performed above [the red line].",
                "כמעשה עולה לשם עולה – even though he changed in the arrangement of the pinching of its head, that it would not be severed (see Leviticus 1:12: “The priest shall tear it open by its wings, לא יבדיל/without severing it, and turn it into smoke on the altar, upon the wood that is on the fire. It is a burnt offering, a gift, of pleasing odor to the LORD,” versus Leviticus 5:9 for the sin-offering: “He shall bring them to the priest, who shall offer first the one for the purification/sin-offering, pinching its head at the nape without severing it/ולא יבדיל), for according to the law, he should have severed it, even so, it is valid.",
                "כמעשה עולה לשם חטאת כשרה – for all of the animal offerings that were offered up not for their own sake but rather that they did not go to the credit of its owns, except for the Passover offering and the sin-offering.",
                "עשאה למטה כמעשה כולן – according to the rites of one of all of them, and even like the rite of the burnt-offering for the sake of/in the name of a burnt-offering.",
                "פסולה – [it is invalid] because he prepared it below [the red line]."
            ],
            [
                "וכולן אינן מטמאות בבית הבליעה (and all of them – which are invalid – do not impart uncleanness to the esophagus/gullet) – even though they were invalidated, their pinching of the bird’s head purifies them from having ritual impurity imparted by an un-slaughtered carcass, and they don’t become ritually impure in the gullet/esophagus according to the law of the un-slaughtered carcass of a pure bird for a person who consumes it, even though he did not touch it, as for example, that his fellow inserted it in his esophagus, it becomes ritually defiled in a more serious manner to defile the clothing that is upon him, but these, even though that their pinching of the bird’s head does not permit them for eating because of the defilement that occurred to them, nevertheless, it purifies them and removes them from being an un-slaughtered carcass.",
                "ומועלין בהן – he who derives a penny’s worth of benefit from them brings a sacrifice of sacrilege according to the law of all who derive benefit from that which is dedicated to the Temple. And even a sin-offering, because it was defiled and there was no time period of permissibility to the Kohanim, he did not depart from religious sacrilege.",
                "חוץ מחטאת העוף שעשאה למטה כמעשה חטאת לשם חטאת – which is fit/valid and there is a period of permissibility for the Kohanim, and furthermore, there is no religious sacrilege involved even for a non-Kohen (literally: “a foreigner”)."
            ],
            [
                "ר' אליעזר אומר מועלים בה – for it is a burnt-offering, and who removed it from its religious sacrilege? For there wasn’t any permitted time for it.",
                "רבי יהושע אומר אין מועלים בה – for since he changed its name and its action and its place for the sake/name of the sin-offering, it became a sin-offering.",
                "ומה חטאת העוף שאין מועלים בה – when he slaughtered it for its sake/name, for it is consumed by the Kohanim.",
                "שינה את שמה – it was disqualified and it does not come to be included in that which is permissible.",
                "מועלים בה – for Rabbi Yehoshua himself did not dispute this.",
                "לדבר שיש בו מעילה – for the sake/name of a burnt-offering.",
                "ששחטן בדרום – for the name/sake of a peace-offering will prove it (see also Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 1 - as this sacrifice is supposed to be offered in the north).",
                "ששינה שמן ומעשיהן לדבר שאין בו מעילה – for the Lesser Holy Things do not have religious sacrilege other than with their portions of the offerings that are consumed on the altar.",
                "ומועלים בהן – because they were disqualified with the change of their place and their sprinkling/tossing of the blood did not remove them from religious sacrilege.",
                "איסור והיתר – the Lesser Holy Things there is religious sacrilege with the portions of their offerings that are consumed on the altar, but not with their flesh because of religious sacrilege.",
                "בדבר שכולו היתר – with the sin-offering of birds which has no side of religious sacrilege. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua."
            ],
            [
                "מלק בשמאל – that his pinching of the bird’s head is invalid. For every place where it states, “finger”/אצבע and “priesthood”/כהונה it is none other than the right [hand].",
                "או בלילה – for there is pinching of the bird’s head at night, for the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 7:38): “[with which the LORD charged Moses on Mount Sinai,] when He commanded [by day] (not included in the new Jewish Publication Society translation but found explicitly in the Hebrew ) /ביום צותו [that the Israelites present their offerings to the LORD, in the wilderness of Sinai].”",
                "אינן מטמאין – for since they are disqualified in Holy Things and even their pinching of the bird’s head that if they went up, but did not descend (see also, Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 9, Mishnah 2, that the pinching of the bird’s head purifies them).",
                "שחט חולין בפנים וקדשים בחוץ אין מטמאין בבית הבליעה – and even though they are forbidden to be consumed.",
                "מלק בסכין – it is not the [proper] pinching of the bird’s head (i.e., neck), and it is not [proper] ritual slaughter, for the pinching of the bird’s neck is with the fingernail by the Kohen himself.",
                "מלק חולין בפנים – for the pinching of the bird’s head (i.e., neck) does not belong with unconsecrated [birds] but rather with [birds] that are sanctified inside [at the altar], and the person who pinches the bird’s neck with the fingernail for a profane purpose in any place, or Holy Things outside [the altar], it is as if he perforates (i.e., kills by stabbing) or mutilates it, and this pinching of the bird’s head does not remove it from being a carrion (i.e., an animal that has died a natural death, not slaughtered according to the ritual rules).",
                "תורין שלא הגיעו זמנן – large turtle doves, which are kosher/fit, small ones are invalid. Pigeons – small ones are kosher/fit, large ones are invalid.",
                "ושיבש גפה – that it is missing a limb, it is invalid, even with birds. For we hold that there is no unblemished condition or male sex with regard to birds, these words, as for example regarding a withered spot in the eye/cataract that their blemishes are not recognized, but that which is missing a limb, (Malachi 1:8): “Just offer it to your governor.”",
                "מטמא בבית הבליעה – that their pinching of the head has no effect at all, for even if they went up, they descended.",
                "כל שאין פסולן בקודש – that it became invalid before they came to the Temple courtyard. And everything where its becoming invalid did not happen in the Holy area, we state further on in the Chapter [Nine], “The altar sanctifies that which is appropriate to it”/\"המזבח מקדש\" (see Mishnah 5), “And what are those things which, if they have gone up, should go down.” But those things that were invalidated in the Holy Areas, as for example, the Holy Things that were appropriate but they were invalidated in their Divine Service, they don’t defile, for the pinching of the bird’s head was beneficial to them for if they went up, they would not come down (see Mishnah 2 of that chapter).",
                "כל הפסולים – as for example, a “foreigner,” (i.e., non-Kohen), and someone prior to the burial of a kinsman, a person who immersed himself on that day and someone lacking atonement (i.e., a woman after childbirth, a person suffering a flux, a healed leper, etc.) – all of those that are taught at the beginning of chapter 2 [of Tractate Zevakhim].",
                "ואינן מטמאות בבית הבליעה – for even though their pinching of the bird’s neck does not permit Holy Things to be eaten, nevertheless, it removes them from being considered an un-slaughtered animal carcass."
            ],
            [
                "אינה מטמאה בבית הבליעה – that the pinching of the bird’s head purifies it from being considered an un-slaughtered animal carcass.",
                "ר' יהודה אומר מטמאה בבית הבליעה – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that the ritual slaughtering of an unconsecrated bird does not have any effect nor the pinching of the bird’s neck which is a Holy Thing that is deemed torn in a bird to remove it from being considered an un-slaughtered animal carcass.",
                "אינו דין שתהא שחיטה כו' – and since you derived that ritual slaughter purifies the bird with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months (i.e., an animal torn apart by a beast of prey or afflicted with a severe organic disease or congenital defect) with regard to an unconsecrated bird from an a fortiori inference, we derive the pinching of a bird’s head of Holy Things from it through an analogy based upon an induction (i.e., what do we find with regard to – with regard to similar cases…? Analogy based upon one verse or analogy based upon two verses), just as we found through proper slaughter, etc., even the pinching of a bird’s neck that makes it appropriate for eating, it will purify its being viewed as having a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months from its defilement.",
                "רבי יוסי אומר דיה כו' – since we don’t find explicitly that ritual slaughter removes it from being a bird with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months, other than through an a fortiori inference from the condition that will cause an animal to die within twelve months (i.e., an animal torn apart by a beast of prey or afflicted with a severe organic disease or congenital defect), it comes to learn, it is sufficient that it will be like an animal with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months whose ritual slaughter will purify it from being considered as torn apart or afflicted with a congenital defect or a severe organic disease and not through the pinching of its neck, that it is sufficient that the law which is derived by conclusion ad majus to be as strict as the law from which it is derived (i.e., you cannot go beyond the latter). And there are three arguments in the manner: Rabbi Meir holds that both ritual slaughter and pinching the neck of the bird remove it from being considered having a condition that will cause the animal to die within twelve months. But Rabbi Yehuda holds that whether one performs ritual slaughter or the pinching of the neck of the bird, it will not affect the fact of the animal having a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months to remove it from being considered an un-slaughtered carcass. But Rabbi Yossi holds that ritual slaughtering is effective; pinching of the bird’s neck is not effective. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yossi."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "כל שזבחים שנתערבו בחטאות המתות – this is what he said: all the animal offerings that were mixed up with sin-offerings left to die or with the ox to be stoned.",
                "אפילו אחת בריבוי ימותו כולן – for since they had become mixed up with that from which are forbidden to derive benefit, there is no remedy to redeem them that we say that they should graze until they become unfit. And they are not abrogated through a majority, for they are considered living creatures and are not nullified. And sin-offerings left to die are five in number, and they are these: the offspring of a sin-offering, an animal substituted for a sin-offering, a sin-offering whose owners have died, a sin-offering whose owners have already gained atonement through another offering and a sin-offering of sheep or goats that is more than a year old. These five sin-offerings we place them in a closed place until they die on their own, and they are called “sin-offerings left to die.”",
                "בשור שנעבדה בו עבירה – that it (i.e., the ox) was disqualified for offering as a sacrifice. As for example, that it put a person to death on the testimony of a single witness who is not prohibited to a commoner, because it is not stoned other than through two witnesses.",
                "או על פי הבעלים – that its owners came to the Jewish court and admitted that it had put a person to death, that it would be exempted from stoning that they admit to a fine, it would be exempt. But to On-High, it would be prohibited, for we hold (Leviticus 1:2): “[When any of you presents an offering of cattle to the LORD, he shall choose his offering from the herd] or from the flock/ומן הצאן,” to exclude that [ox] which gores.",
                "ברובע ונרבע – by the testimony of one witness, or by the owners, or prior to the completion of the court case, or that [animal] which killed someone or the ox which had a sexual relation with a human being (i.e., a non-Jew) or an ox with which a non-Jewish person had sexual relations, which is forbidden to the All-High, but not to the commoner.",
                "מוקצה – that he had separated for a sacrifice to idolatry and was also worshipped, both of them are permitted to a commoner.",
                "באתנן ומחיר – all of these are unconsecrated animals, and one animal sacrifice is mixed with them, all of them should sent out to pasture. For it is impossible to ritually slaughter one of them without a blemish, lest that this one is the animal offering. For the person who ritually slaughters Holy Things outside [the Temple courtyard] is liable for extirpation. But to sell them for the needs of burnt offerings is impossible, for they are invalidated.",
                "ויביא בדמי היפה שבהן מאותו המין – if it was a sin-offering, [let him purchase] another sin-offering; if it was burnt-offering, [let him purchase] another burnt-offering. And he should the monies according to the measurement of the worth of the best of them and state: “Every place which is animal offering will be redeemed by these monies.”",
                "נתערב – one animal offering in many unconsecrated fit/kosher animals.",
                "ימכרו החולין – all of them.",
                "לצריכי אותו המין – that the one animal offering was mixed in with them, and it was found that all of them are Holy Things from one species but it is not known who are the owners of each and every one, for the first animal offering – the name of its owners was upon it, but it is not known which it is. And the remedy, that each of one of them should be offered as a sacrifice in the name of someone and he should state that he will offer each of them as a sacrifice, behold this one is in the name of its owners."
            ],
            [
                "מין במינו – a sin-offering with a sin-offering, a burnt-offering with a burnt-offering, a peace-offering with a peace-offering, but they belong to many owners.",
                "זה יקריב כל אחד לשם מי שהוא – and he doesn’t mention the name of person. These words concern the sacrifice of women that don’t require the placing of hands on the head of an offering, as it is written )Leviticus 1:2,4) “Speak to the Israelite people, [and say unto them]…He shall lay his hand [upon the head of the burnt offering],” Israelite men place their hands on the head of an offering, but women of the Israelite people do not place their hands on the head of an offering (see also Talmud Eruvin 96b, Talmud Hagigah 16b and Kiddushin 36a), but not on a sacrifice of men that require placing of their hands on their head of the offering.",
                "מין כשאינו מניו ירעו – for it is impossible to offer it up as a sacrifice, for they are divided in the giving of monies or their burning [of the fats and limbs] or their consumption.",
                "ויפסיד המותר מביתו (let him lose [make up] the added difference from his own property) – for if one sold for two and the other sold for one, he has to bring from every species for two, since it is not known from which species it is that which was sold for two, and it is found that he loses one from his own property.",
                "נתערבו בבכור ובמעשר – [if they were mixed up with a firstling or the tithe] of cattle. For they don’t have redemption that its holiness will be redeemed on their monetary value and they (i.e., the animals) will leave to become unconsecrated, but rather, they are consumed with their blemishes, the firstling is consumed by the Kohanim and the tithe by its owners.",
                "כולן ירעו עד שיסתאבו – when a blemish befalls them. And he will say, every place where the animal offering becomes redeemed for these monies. And they are permitted to eat them, as long as that they eat them according to the law of the firstling and the tithe, that we will not sell them in shops/a mercantile fair and they will not weigh them with a measure of capacity/Litra. And from the monies of the animal offering, he will offer up his species of the offering.",
                "הכל יכולים להתערב – that is to say if they were combined, there is a doubt in their mixture.",
                "חוץ מן החטאת עם האשם – for the sin-offering is never a ram, and the guilt-offering is not anything but a ram. But if it they are the guilt-offerings of a leper or of a Nazirite, they come from lambs, nevertheless, they are male, but the sin-offering does not come other than from a female. But the sin-offering and the burnt-offering combine, such as the goat of the chieftain with the goat of the free-will burnt-offering. And all the more so, the sin-offering and the peace-offering, for all are offered as peace-offerings, whether male or whether female. And similarly, the ram of the free-will burnt-offering with a guilt-offering."
            ],
            [
                "אשם שנתערב בשלמים (see previous Mishnah where this subject is discussed) – for the giving of the blood of the guilt-offering and the peace-offering is similar (i.e., in the north – see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 3).",
                "שניהם ישחטו בצפון – but peace-offerings are ritually slaughtered in every place and one is able also to slaughter them in the om the north in the place when he slaughters the guilt-offering.",
                "כחמור שבהן – inside from the enclosures in the Temple courtyard for male Kohanim during eh day and at night. But not like the Lesser Peace-Offerings that are consumed throughout the city for all people for two days and one night (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 8). And the owner of the peace-offerings fulfilled his vow, for peace-offerings are sacrificed for their own sake, each person offers it for the sake of someone.",
                "אין מביאין קדשים לבית הפסול – that he diminishes the consumption of peace-offerings whether concerning those who eats them or whether the time of their consumption and brings them to residue/remnant. But rather, they should let them graze until they become unfit/blemished and then they should be sold as we stated regarding Holy Things with Holy Things where it is one type mixed with another type, and he should bring with the proceeds of the best of them [of that kind]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.",
                "חתיכות בחתיכות – if pieces [of meat] of the Holy of Holies were mixed with a piece [of meat] of Lesser Holy Things or a piece [of meat] of Lesser Holy Things that are consumed on one day as for example, the peace-offerings of thanksgiving with pieces [of meat] of Lesser Holy Things that are consumed for two days and one night, which are the rest of the peace-offerings, in this, the Sages agree with Rabbi Shimon that they should consume in accordance with the rules of the more stringent of them, for what else should he do?"
            ],
            [
                "אברי חטאת – whose flesh/meat is consumed by the Kohanim.",
                "שנתערבו באברי עולה – that is entirely burned up.",
                "יתן למעלן – he should place the limbs of the entire mixture on the wood. And the reason of Rabbi Eliezer is as Scripture states (Leviticus 2:11): “for no leaven or honey may be turned into smoke as a gift to the LORD,” and this is the logical implication of the Biblical verse (ibid.,): “for no leaven or honey may be turned into smoke,” and you should not turn into smoke anything that from which is a fire-offering to God, which is the residue of the sacrifice. “You may bring them to the LORD as an offering of choice products” (Leviticus 2:12), from the leaven and honey to God, the two loaves from the leaven and the honey from the First Fruits from the fruit of the trees which are figs and dates. [And the words], “upon the altar” (ibid.), we expound it, whether it is the leaven or the honey or whether it is the residue, for a pleasing odor [to God] you do not offer them up, but you do offer them up for the sake of wood, and this is what is stated, “and I regard the meat of the sin-offering [which is] on top [of the fires] as if it were wood.”",
                "וחכמים אומרים תעובר צורתן – that is to say, he should leave them until they become disqualified and they would go out to the place of burning [as remnant] like the rest of the consecrated animals that are disqualified, and he doesn’t offer them up on the altar, for he has transgressed because of all that from it were to be burnt-offerings (Leviticus 2:11): “for no heaven or honey may be turned into smoke as a gift to the LORD,” – which he violated not turning it into smoke, but the sin-offering and the portions of the offering placed upon the altar are offered as burnt-offerings, the flesh comes under the ban against not turning it into smoke. And the Halakha is according to the Sages."
            ],
            [
                "אברים באברי בעלי מומים – kosher/fit limbs that were mixed with one limb of a blemished beast, and a Kohen comes and he doesn’t know of their mixture and he offered one of the heads, he should offer all of the heads ab initio, for we assign the prohibited one with that which was offered, but all of these are kosher. And in the Gemara (Tractate Zevakhim 77b) it explains that Rabbi Eliezer did not permit other than to offer them in twos [but not singly], for certainly one from those pairs is permitted and this sacrifice was to be offered because of that one that is permissible. But if it is because that one where there is doubtful prohibition, there would be a doubt with that which was offered first before he changed his mind. But “one by one” lest he didn’t give that sacrifice to be made even according to Rabbi Eliezer, for perhaps this one was forbidden.",
                "חוץ מאחד – except for one pair. And this is explained in the Gemara, that with one pair alone [of heads or legs], Rabbi Eliezer admits that this sacrifice was not given to be offered, as we have stated."
            ],
            [
                "אם יש בו מראה דם כשר – and these words [apply] when the water fell in to the blood of Holy Things [and it has the appearance of blood - which can be sprinkled on the altar]. But if the blood of Holy Things fell into water, we state, each drop is nullified as it falls (Talmud Zevakhim 78a), and even if it has the appearance of blood, it is invalid.",
                "נתערב ביין – which is red.",
                "רואין אותו כאילו הוא מים – but if this blood is recognized in those of the water, it is kosher/fit.",
                "בדם בהמה – [the blood of an animal] that is unconsecrated.",
                "רואין אותו – the blood of an unconsecrated [animal] as if it is water, and if it had the appearance of the reddish color of kosher blood that is recognized by them, it is kosher, and even though the disqualified blood is greater than it by a lot.",
                "אין דם מבטל דם – according to Rabbi Yehuda, one type mixed with the same type is not annulled, and even a drop within a large vessel. Even though if the blood was water, the kosher blood is not recognized in them, and even so, it is kosher/fit for sprinkling. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "נתערב בדם הפסולים – as for example in blood that was ritually slaughtered outside of its proper time.",
                "ישפך לאמה – to the river-arm/sewer that passes in the Temple courtyard and goes down to the Kidron ravine/river-bed. And we don’t state that we view it as if it is water, but if the kosher blood is recognized in them, he would sprinkle it, for we make the decree that perhaps he would come to make fit blood that is disqualified in their eyes. And similarly, the last blood that is oozing out of a vein. For from the Torah, the last blood that is oozing out of a vein is not appropriate for atonement. As it is written (Leviticus 17:11): “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have assigned it to you for making expiation for your lives upon the altar.” The life blood that leaves through it atones, but when the soul doesn’t leave, it does not atone. And we make the decree on the life blood that was mixed with the last blood that is oozing out of a vein, for perhaps it comes to be made to be fit through the sprinkling of the last blood that is oozing out of a vein in his eyes.",
                "רבי אליעזר מכשיר – ab initio with the last blood that is oozing out of a vein that was mixed with the blood of the soul. For he holds that the last blood that is oozing out of a vein of an animal is found to be greater than the life blood, therefore, why do we make a decree, it is to for him like when the blood of an unconsecrated animal is mixed with the blood of Holy Things, that we don’t decree anything regarding it. For when it is mixed with disqualified blood, which is a matter that is frequent, Rabbi Eliezer does not dispute. But the first Tanna/teacher holds that sometimes when the last blood that is oozing out of a vein is greater than the life blood. Therefore, he decreed where it was not greater, on account of the where it is greater. But however, where the Kohen took counsel with the Jewish court if he should give this mixture or if not, and he gave of his own accord, the first Tanna/teacher admits that it is kosher/appropriate, for it is mere decree and de facto it is kosher. But if he came to change his mind, we tell him that to pour it into the sewer because of the decree. And the Halakha is according to the Sages."
            ],
            [
                "דם תמימים שנתערב בדם בעלי מומין ישפך לאמה – and in this, Rabbi Eliezer does not dispute, for he transgressed through their sprinkling because of (Leviticus 22:20): “You shall not offer any that has a defect.”",
                "נתער בכוס שבכוסות – a cup of blood of an animal with a blemish with cups of kosher blood, and it is not known which cup of blood is that of a blemished animal.",
                "ר' אליעזר אומר אם קרב אחד מהם כו' – in the manner that they disputed with the limbs [of kosher animals] and the limbs of animals with blemishes (see Mishnah 5 of this chapter), so they also disputed with regard to cups, as it is explained above. And it is necessary to dispute on both of them, for if we were to teach [only] regarding limbs, it is in this that Rabbi Eliezer states that they should be offered because their expiation is effected with the kosher [blood], that is, with the sprinkling of their blood which is the essence of the atonement, but regarding a cup [of one kind of blood] that was mixed with cups [of another kind of blood], that the essence of expiation is through deterioration, I would say, no. so both are necessary."
            ],
            [
                "הנתנין למטה – from the red line. As, for example, blood of the burnt-offering and the guilt-offering and the peace-offering and the firstling and the Passover offering and the tithe [which are offered below the red line], that were mixed up with the blood of the sin-offering which was sprinkled above [the red line].",
                "רבי אליעזר אומר יתן למעלה – gifts of sin-offerings. But even though that the blood of the lower sacrifices (i.e., sprinkled below the red line) ae mixed with it. For since he doesn’t intend to place/sprinkle the lower ones above, I see them as if they are water. And because it is a Mitzvah to advance the upper ones over the lower ones, for all of the sin-offerings precede the burnt-offerings, therefore, he sprinkles above first and afterward the lower ones, and in sprinkling the lower ones, it will count for him the spilling of the residue of the sin-offering and beginning of the gifts of the burnt-offering.",
                "ישפכו לאמה – they don’t accept “seeing” (i.e., as in viewing the blood from the sacrifices sprinkled below the red line as water).",
                "ואם לא נמלך ונתן כשר – for he sprinkled from it above. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer."
            ],
            [
                "הניתנין במתנה אחת – In the Gemara (Tractate Zevakhim 81a) as for example, cup of the blood of a firstling that was mixed in a cup of the blood of a tithe.",
                "ינתנו מתנה אחת – from each cup individual cup he gives one gift [of sprinkling] from this cup and another gift [of sprinkling] from that cup.",
                "מתן ארבע במתן ארבע – as, for example, the blood of a burnt-offering with the blood of a peace-offering or the blood of a guilt-offering, for both of them require two gifts which are four and both of them are [sprinkled] below [the red line].",
                "מתן ארבע במתן אחד = as, for example, the [blood of] a burnt-offering with [the blood of] a firstling that both of them are [sprinkled] below [the red line].",
                "רא\"א ינתנו במתן ארבע – and I see the extra gifts that are sprinkled from the blood of the firstling as if they are water, and this is not [a violation of] “do not add” (i.e., Deuteronomy 13:1: “[Be careful to observe only that which I enjoin upon you:] neither add to it [nor take away from it.”].",
                "במתנה אחת so that he will not transgress on “do not add” (see above, Deuteronomy 13:1), but regarding the burnt-offering, he has fulfilled it, for all that are given/sprinkled on the outer altar when they are given/sprinkled in one gift, atones.",
                "ולא עשית מעשה בידך – and it is not similar to someone doing an action, to sitting and not doing and the prohibition comes of its own accord. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua."
            ],
            [
                "הניתנין בפנים כו' ישפכו לאמה – for we don’t say, “we see,” (see Mishnah 9 of this chapter) and it is prohibited to change these because of the fitness/acceptability of those. But Rabbi Eliezer who held that we state, “we see,” does not dispute here. For how should we proceed? Let us sprinkle outside and then afterwards inside, for just as it is a commandment to have the upper parts [of the red line] precede the lower parts, so it is a Mitzvah to have that which is offered inside precede that which is offered outside, for the inside is crucial. Let us sprinkle inside and afterwards sprinkle outside, since there is [the blood] of a sin-offering and a guilt-offering, for if it their blood was mixed with the inner blood, one is not able to state that he should give/sprinkle inside and afterwards, give/sprinkle outside, because it invalidates [the blood sprinkled outside, it was not decided with him (i.e., he could not state it absolutely). But if you would say that we should invalidate the [blood sprinkled] for the outside [sacrifices] in order to validate the [blood sprinkled] for the inner sacrifices, Rabbi Eliezer doe not state that we would invalidate them with our hands, and it is better to wait until sunset so that they will be invalidated of their own accord and they would be poured into the sewer.",
                "נתן בחוץ – a Kohen who did not consult [with the Jewish court] and gave/sprinkled from this mixture outside [the altar], it is kosher/fit.",
                "רבי עקיבא פוסל החיצון – for all the outer blood that entered inside [the altar] were invalidated.",
                "וחכמים מכשירין – for all of the sacrifices except for the outside sin-offering that is invalidated because of (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; any such shall be consumed in fire].” And the Halakha is according to the Sages."
            ],
            [
                "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."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "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."
            ],
            [
                "הלן – whether blood or the portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar that stayed overnight outside of the altar.",
                "ר' יהודה אומר שנשחטה בלילה וכו' אם עלתה תרד – as it is written (Leviticus 6:2): “This is the ritual of the burnt offering: The burnt offering itself [shall remain where it is burned upon the altar all night until morning],” there are here three exclusions: it (i.e., the verse) excluded something slaughtered at night, and that its blood was poured, and that its blood left outside of the curtains, that if it went up, it should be brought down.",
                "ר' שמעון אומר לא תרד – for he expounds (Leviticus 6:2): “This is the ritual of the burnt offering” - one Torah for all of those that go up, that if they went up, they should not go down [for its invalidity took place in the sanctuary]. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "מכשיר בבעלי מומין – that if they went up, they should not come down, and especially withered spots in the eye and things similar to them Rabbi Akiva declared valid, for since they are valid/fit ab initio in birds. But not lacking a limb that invalidates birds.",
                "דוחה היה אבא את בעלי מומין – if they went up, he would reject them, as if doing a thing with the back of the hand (i.e., in a manner different from the usual way of doing it), but he would not bring them down in public in a disgraceful manner. And in this, he disagrees with the first Tanna/teacher [of our Mishnah) who stated that they should come down. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Hanina ben Antiginos [the adjutant High Priest]."
            ],
            [
                "כשם שאם עלו לא ירדו – all of these are invalid as it is taught in the Mishnah regarding them that they should not go down.",
                "",
                "וכולם שעלו חיים בראש המזבח (see Mishnah 2 of this chapter) – Rabbi Akiva stated this that he declares valid in the case of animals that are blemished. And he agrees that if they went up while living on the top of the altar, they should come down, for the altar does not sanctify animals with a blemish while living.",
                "עולה שעלתה חיה לראש המזבח תרד – we are speaking of a kosher burnt-offering, and it is the words of all. But the Mishnah did not take this usage other than because of the concluding clause [of the Mishnah], to teach you that the top of the altar ןדan appropriate place for flaying it and dissecting/dividing it where he transgressed and slaughtered it at the top of the altar."
            ],
            [
                "ואלו אם עלו ירדו – and even if they are kosher and ritually pure. Because the altar is not connected with them at all.",
                "בשר קדשי קדשים – that for eating they exist and not for the altar.",
                "והקטורת – it is not appropriate for the outer altar.",
                "הצמר שבראשי כבשים – we have the reading. But the first clause of the gate is the last, for these bones and sinews that are taught [in this Mishnah], and it is one law for them. The wool that is at the top of sheep, is of a burnt-offering. That the head is not included in the flaying and is offered [in sacrifice] with its hide, and this is what we state regarding the ritual slaughtering of unconsecrated animals [Tractate Hullin 27b], from where do we learn to include the head which was already cut off in the slaughter, that it is not included the flaying, it exists within the burning on the altar, the inference teaches us (Leviticus 1:8): “[and Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall lay out the sections,] with the head [and the suet, on the wood that is on the fire upon the altar].” And there is wool at the height of the head of the sheep near its neck, and similar the hair that is in the beard of the he-goat/wether at the time that they are attached, all of them are burnt-offerings."
            ],
            [
                "וכולם – whether invalid that came up as it is taught in the Mishnah (see Mishnah 4 of this chapter) that they don’t go down, whether bones or sinews that were brought up attached and the fire consumed them.",
                "ופקעו מעל המזבח – to the ground. ISKALTIR in the foreign tongue.",
                "לא יחזיר – there is no need to return [them].",
                "וכן גחלת שפקעה – there is no need to return [it].",
                "אברים שפקעו כו' – if they have substance, that their flesh is recognized, even after midnight also he should return [them], for they don’t have half-burned pieces/things attacked by fire that bounded off the altar. And if they don’t have substance, that were all burned and became burning coal, even before they became hard on account of the fire that had power over all of them and hey were burned and did not become charcoal but rather like dry wood from inside them.",
                "קודם לחצות ולאחר חצות – We derive it from Scripture as it is written (Leviticus 6:2): “[The burnt offering itself shall remain where it is burned upon the altar] all night until morning, [while the fire on the altar is kept going on it],” from implying that since it states, “all night/כל הלילה“I don’ know that it is until the morning, but rather, grant morning to the very break of the night, that it is not needed to be any longer on the hearth where the fire is maintained , and which addition morning is on the break of night that doesn’t need to be any longer on the hearth where the fire is maintained? This is midnight, for the break of the night is the crack of dawn (i.e., “dawn’s early light”).",
                "ומועלין בהן – for they are yet part of the altar.",
                "ואין מועלין בהן – because they were half-burned pieces/things attacked by fire that bounded off the altar, they are a thing that it’s command was performed and we don’t commit with it religious sacrilege."
            ],
            [
                "הכבש מקדש – as it is written (Exodus 40:10): “Then anoint the altar [of burnt offering and all its utensils to consecrate the altar, so that the altar shall be most holy].”[The word] \"את\" – [from the phrase: \"ומשחת את המזבח\"] [comes] to include the ramp.",
                "הכלים מקדשים – that regarding the utensils it is also written (Exodus 30:29): “whatever touches them shall be consecrated.”",
                "כלי הלח – dishes and the bowls for the blood and wine and the oil [out of which the sprinkling is done].",
                "מדות היבש – two measurements of dry were there – the Issaron (one-tenth of an Ephah) and the half-Issaron (also known as “Omer”).",
                "שהיו עושין והן שלימים – that they would do as when they were whole. But however, all of the sacred vessels that were perforated or broken, we don’t repair their broken parts but we make them anew. And similarly, a knife that became defective, we don’t sharpen it to remove the defect. And the clothing of the priesthood that became dirty we don’t wash them, but make new ones and place those for the needs of the wicks of the candelabrum/Menorah and the Rejoicing of the Water Drawing [during Sukkot]. Why all so much? Because there is no poverty in a place of wealth. But an altar that was defective is invalid. And any notch that invalidates a knife of ritual slaughtering invalidates the altar. And all the time that the altar is defective, all of the Holy Things that are ritually slaughtered in the Temple courtyard are all invalidated, as it is written (Exodus 20:21): “[Make for Me an altar of earth] and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well-being,” and it is impossible to state this Scriptural verse as it implies, for the ritual slaughter of Holy Things [takes place] in the Temple courtyard and not on the altar, other than upon it, that is to say, whenever it is complete/whole, you sacrifice but you do not sacrifice when it is defective. And all of the Holy Things that are found in the Temple courtyard at the time that the altar is defective, even though they were ritually slaughtered in a fit manner, all of them are invalid. And even the residue of the meal-offerings are not consumed, as it is written (Leviticus 10:12): “[Moses spoke to Aaron and to his remaining sons, Eleazar and Ithamar: take the grain that is left over from the LORD’s gifts] and eat it unleavened beside the altar,” on the basis of a tradition we learned that at the time that the altar is whole/complete and not at the time when it is defective."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "כל התדיר מחבירו קודם את חבירו – as it is written (Numbers 28:23): “[You shall present these] in addition to the morning portion of the regular burnt-offering.” Since it is written, “in addition to the morning portion,” it implies that it was already done, from it we hear/learn that the daily offerings precede the additional/Musaf offerings; “of the regular burnt offering,” why do I need this? It is obvious that the burnt offering of the morning is the regular daily burnt offering, but rather, that it suspended for you the reason of its preceding [the Musaf offering] through its frequency in order that you will learn the rest of the frequent things that should precede. For since this is its essence, it was not necessary to explain it."
            ],
            [
                "דם חטאת קודם לדם עולה – if both are slaughtered and are ready to be sprinkled.",
                "שהוא מרצה – it atones for those liable for [sins punishable by] extirpation that require great winning favor.",
                "אברי עולה קודמין – in their burning on the altar/rising up in smoke.",
                "לאימורי חטאת – if the blood of both were sprinkled.",
                "מפני שהן כליל – and there is a side of an extension of scope of this for the Altar.",
                "על ארבע קרנות – and the guilt-offering is two gifts which are four, but not on the horns [of the Altar].",
                "ועל היסוד – the pouring of he remainders . And with the guilt-offering, we did not find that it is stated regarding it.",
                "מתן ארבע – two gifts which are four, but the first-born does not require other than one gift, and it does not require laying of the hands or libations and nor either the waving of the breast and foreleg/shoulder."
            ],
            [
                "ונאכל לכהנים – but the tithe [of cattle], the Kohanim have no part in, but all of it is consumed by its owners.",
                "מפני שהוא מין זבח – slaughtering by a knife. But birds are through pinching a bird’s head, But slaughtering are [more] important.",
                "ויש בו קדשי קדשים – and even though the sacrifice of a bird is all Holy of Holies, or a sin-offering or a burnt offering, sacrifices [of the tithe of cattle] have to divide for the Most High (i.e., God) two things, its blood and those portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar, which is not the case for the sin-offering of a bird, for the altar only has its blood, and since it (i.e., the tithing of cattle) comes before the sin-offering of birds, all the more so to the burnt offering of a bird, for the sin-offering of a bird precedes that of a burnt-offering of a bird, as will be explained further on (i.e., in the next Mishnah)."
            ],
            [
                "שהן מיני דמים (they produce blood for atonement) – and [different] kinds of blood their atonement is great.",
                "חטאת העוף קודמת לעולת העוף – as it is written (Leviticus 5:8): “[He shall bring them to the priest,] who shall offer first the one for the purification offering (i.e., sin-offering), [pinching its head at the nape without severing it],” he built an analogy based upon induction/בנין אב for all sin-offerings that precedes a burnt offering whether for cattle or for birds (see Tractate Zevakhim 90a).",
                "וכן להקדשה – when he dedicates its nest, which is two doves or two pigeons, he calls first for the sin-offering."
            ],
            [
                "קודמות לאשמות – if he was liable for a sin-offering and a guilt-offering and brings them the sin-offering precedes, as it is taught in the Mishnah (Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 10, Mishnah 2): “that its blood is placed on the four on the four corners [of an altar] and on the foundation.”",
                "מפני שהוא בא להכשיר – [because it renders fit] the leper to Holy Things and to enter into the Sanctuary, therefore, it is of importance/value regarding him, that his spiritual purity is dependent upon it.",
                "ובאים בכסף שקלים – as it is written (Leviticus 5:15): “[When a person commits a trespass, being unwittingly remiss about any of the LORD’s sacred tings, he shall bring as his penalty to the LORD a ram without blemish from the flock;] convertible into payment in silver by the sanctuary weight, [as a reparation/guilt offering],” as a guilt-offering for misuse of consecrated articles (i.e., restoring its value to the Temple, pay an additional fifth, and bringing this offering) and it brings an uncertain guilt-offering (i.e., brought by one who is uncertain as to whether he committed a sin that required a sin-offering).and a guilt-offering for robbery (i.e., when he denies that he owes someone money, takes a false oath to support his claim, and later admits his guilt. To atone for his misdeed, he returns the money, pays the wronged party an additional fifth of the sum, and sacrifices this offering) as an analogy [with the words]\"ערכך\" \"ערכך\" (see Leviticus 5:15: “convertible/כערכך into payment in silver by the sanctuary weight” and Leviticus 5:18): “”He shall bring to the priest a ram without blemish from the flock, or the equivalent/בערכך, as a reparation – i.e., guilt – offering.”) and the guilt-offering for a handmaiden designated to become the wife of one selected by her master/שפחה חרופה we derive [in an analogy] by \"איל\" \"איל\" (i.e., the ram of reparation offering – as in Leviticus 19:21: “But he must bring to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, as his reparation offering to the LORD a ram/איל of reparation offering” and Leviticus 5:15: “he shall bring as his penalty to the LORD a ram/איל without blemish from the flock.”).",
                "חוץ מאשם נזיר ואשם מצורע – as it is written concerning them (Numbers 7:14): “[As his offering to the LORD he shall present:] one male lamb in its first year, without blemish, for a burnt offering; one ewe lamb in its first year, without blemish, for a purification offering; one ram without blemish for an offering of well-being.” For since a ram of two years of age is for two Sela, a lamb one year old is not for two Sela."
            ],
            [
                "כך הם קודמים לאכילה – it refers to all of them as they are consumed, such as the sin-offering is consumed prior to the guilt-offering and the thanksgiving offering [is consumed] prior to the peace offering.",
                "שלמים – of the sacrifice of last night.",
                "וחכמים אומרים כו' – And the Halakha is according to the Sages. And that which is more frequent and that which is holier, such as the blood of the burnt-offering of the daily offering and the blood of a sin-offering which endure, this is more frequent and this is more holy than it, for we state that the blood of a sin-offering precedes the blood of a burnt offering because it is procures pardon. But a thing that is raised [as a question] in the Gemara (Tractate Zevakhim 90b-91a) but is not deduced (i.e., in a “conflict” between that which is more frequent/תדיר and that which is more sacred/מקודש, which takes precedence?). And it appears that what is more “frequent” takes precedence."
            ],
            [
                "ובכולן – with all that is consumed.",
                "רשאין הכנים לשנות באכילתן – such as to eat them roasted, cooked or seethed, for regarding the gifts of the priesthood it is written (Numbers 18:8): “[the LORD spoke further to Aaron: I hereby give you charge of My gifts, all the sacred donations of the Israelites;] I grant them to you and to your sons as a perquisite, a due for all time,” for greatness, in the manner that the kings/royalty eat roasted, seethed and/or cooked and with refreshments and spices.",
                "שלא יביא את התרומה לידי פסול – since the spices that absorbed the flavor of the Holy Things, if they would become remnants/left-overs (i.e., past the time when they should be consumed, they would be an explicit prohibition because of the flavor of the Holy Things that were absorbed in them."
            ],
            [
                "שהוא מתחלק – [distributed] for the consumption by the Kohanim.",
                "מותר רקיקי מנחת ישראל – the meal-offering of something baked from which comes loaves and wafers. Loaves that are kneaded with oil and wafers that are rubbed with oil, and Rabbi Shimon said in Tractate Menahot [75a] like the [Greek] letter KI (the Greek KAF – which is an “X”), and the rest of the oil is consumed by the Kohanim.",
                "מותר רקיקי מנחת כהנים – for the meal offering of the Kohanim is completely burned, the oil that floats on top of it and the remnant that is not absorbed in it, they burn it separately.",
                "ומותר מנחת כהן המשיח – for its oil is greater, three LOG for a tenth of an Ephah, and since it is baked first, its oil is not absorbed in its broken pieces and the remnant/remainder needs to be offered up separately.",
                "שאין מתנדבים שמן – therefore, it should not occur to you that the oil is distributed or that which is offered up as incense is a free-will offering.",
                "ר' טרפון אומר מתנדבים שמן – separately. And not less than a LOG, and it is burned separately. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Tarfon. And similarly, the Halakah is that they offer wine as a free-will offering separately, and they do not offer less than three LOG, and they toss/sprinkle it on top of the altar fires and it is burned there. But even though he puts out the fire of the pile of wood on the altar of the Temple, and the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 6:6): “[A perpetual fire shall be kept burning on the altar,] not to go out,” since he does not intend to put it out, it is permitted, for we hold like Rabbi Shimon that a thig that is not intended is permitted, and it is not an inevitable consequence. For it is possible that the fire will be large and strong and will prevail over the wine and not be put out."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "דם חטאת. טעון כבוס – as it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “…and if any of its blood is splattered upon a garment, you shall wash the bespattered part in the sacred precinct.”",
                "שנאמר במקום קדוש תאכל – it is written in regard to that matter.",
                "ואחד הפנימית – that their blood requires sprinkling inside [in the inner area] which are not consumed.",
                "שנאמר תורה אחת לכל החטאות – it is written [in the Torah – Leviticus 6:19] at the beginning of that matter.",
                "תורה אחת לכל החטאות – and specifically the sin offering of cattle. But the blood of sin-offering of a bird [that splatters on the clothing of the officiating priest] does not require washing, for in that matter, it is written (Leviticus 6:17): “[This is the ritual of the purification/sin-offering: the purification offering shall be slaughtered before the LORD] at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughtered,” excluding the sin-offering of the bird which is not slaughtered."
            ],
            [
                "אין דמה טעון כבוס – as it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “and if any of its blood is splattered [upon a garment],” from blood that is fit, but not blood that is invalid.",
                "שעת הכושר – for tossing/sprinkling.",
                "שלנה – that its blood remained overnight.",
                "ושקבלו פסולין – this is our reading. But we don’t read, “and when they tossed/sprinkled [its blood], for even an appropriate sin-offering whose blood was splattered on the clothing after the sprinkling of the blood idoes not require washing, as we have stated, “and if any of [its blood] is splattered,” (Leviticus 6:20), excluding that which that had already been splattered."
            ],
            [
                "נתז מן הצואר –[from the neck] of the animal on the clothing, it does not require washing. As it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “and if its any of [its blood] is splattered,” I didn’t say other than that that whichis appropriate for sprinkling (i.e., was received in a pot).",
                "מן הקרן – [from the horn] of the altar.",
                "ומן היסוד [from the foundation] – from the remnants that are appropriate to be spilled on the foundation, and even though they were not yet spilled, for after the giving of the blood is performed, the remanans do not require washing, as it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “[you shall wash] the besplattered part,” except fro that which already had been splattered of its blood.",
                "אלא הדם שנתקבל בכלי – what is the reason that this is stated? For what reason that if it (i.e., the blood) is spilled on the floor and collected that it does not require washing but rather [only] the blood that was received in a utensil.",
                "וראוי להזאה – to exclude receiving less than what is needed for sprinkling in this vessel, and less than what [is needed] for sprinkling in that [other] vessel but afterwards he mixed them, they are not holy and do not require washing.",
                "עד שלא הופשט אין טעון כבוס (before it is flayed, it does not require washing) – as it is written (Leviticus 7:20): “[and if any of its blood is splattered] upon a garment,” just as a piece of clothing is susceptible to receiving ritual impurity, for one does not have a small piece of clothing whose name is “clothing” that is not susceptible to receive ritual impurity if he thought of it as a utensil as it was, even all that are susceptible to receive ritual impurity, and from when it is flayed, it is susceptible of receiving ritual impurity, if he thought of it to make it a covering of the chariot or to cover with it the bed and he doesn’t require the trimming of the ends of the skin.",
                "אף משהופשט (even from when the hide is taken off) – all the while that it was not mended to be a utensil.",
                "אין טיון כבוס – that we require something that is susceptible to ritual impurity, that is not missing even intention/thought.",
                "אלא מקום הדם – and not the entire garment.",
                "וראוי לקבל טומאה – and even though it is lacking intention. And asl long it would not be lacking work. But the anonymous section is according to Rabbi Yehuda, and such is the Halakha.",
                "וראוי לכבוס – to exclude a wooden utensil. For even though it is susceptible to receive ritual impurity, it is not appropriate for washing, it is a mere scraping thing, and is not something washable."
            ],
            [
                "במקום קדוש – in the Temple courtyard.",
                "ושבירת כלי חרס במקום קדשו – for after it is written (Leviticus 7:20): “you shall wash the bespattered part in the sacred precinct,” it is written (Leviticus 7:21): “An earthen vessel in which it was boiled shall be broken,” and an analogy is made between the breaking of an earthen vessel to washing: just as washing is done in a holy place, so the breaking of the earthen vessel is done in a holy place.",
                "זה חומר – this refers to washing."
            ],
            [
                "בגד – that blood of a sin-offering was splattered on it and he went outside of the curtains/partitions of the Temple.",
                "נטמא חוץ לקלעים – after he went out. But it is impossible to bring ritual defilement into the Temple courtyard.",
                "קורעו – in its majority. And he is pure from ritual defilement.",
                "ונכנס ומכבסו במקום קדוש – and even though the cloth that was defiled and he tore the majority of it, he still remains in his defilement according to the Rabbis until there doesn’t remain in its connection in order to be the width of a scarf hanging around the head and hanging down over the neck. Here it is permissible to bring it into the Temple courtyard in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of washing, since from the Torah, when most of it is torn, it is pure.",
                "נוקבו – [makes a hole in it] to purify it from its defilement. And especially a hole that is lik the measurement of a small root, that through this it is pure from its defilement and it still is a utensil and fulfills the Mitzvah of breaking in the Temple, but if he made a large perforation, and it departed from being considered a utensil, it can no longer enter [the Temple] and one breaks it, for the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 7:21): “An earthen vessel in which it was boiled shall be broken,’ at the time of breaking it will be a utensil, but this [object] at the time of breaking is not a utensil."
            ],
            [
                "פוחתו (hollows it out) – for a metal utensil is not pure from its defilement with an mere incision, but rather with a large incision. But however, after it is hollowed out, they strike it with a mallet and fasten it in order that the name of a utensil is upon it. For at the time of scouring, it must be a utensil."
            ],
            [
                "ואחד שעירה לתוכו רותח – since it is written (Leviticus 6:21 – the printed text lists the wrong chapter): “An earthen vessel in which it was boiled shall be broken,” that it is brought near it shall be broken, but it is not written: “if it is in an engraved vessel in which it was boiled it shall be broken,” for purposes of exegetical interpretation, if it was absorbed in it, nevertheless, it shall be broken.",
                "קדשים קלים אינן טעונין מריקה ושטיפה – Rabbi Shimon admits that they require the cleansing of an impure vessel by means of using boiling water, for behold the flavor of that which was absorbed became a remnant and its expunging after a while in a state of permission if he doesn’t cleanse the impure vessel by means of using boiling water. But with regard to the law of scouring and rinsing is what Rabbi Shimon excludes from scouring and rinsing for Lesser Holy Things, for scouring and rinsing of The Holiest Things requires that it will be in water and not wine nor in a mixture of wine and water, but if he boiled partially a utensil, it requires scouring and rinsing of the entire utensil, and it requires scouring in hot water and rinsing in cold water. Whereas with lesser Holy Things according to Rabbi Shimon, they cleanse the impure vessel even in wine and even in a mixture of hot wine and water, and he is not strict other than to rinse the prohibited [substance] that is absorbed, and there is no need to rinse other than the place of the cooking alone, and after the cleansing of the impure vessel, there is no need for rinsing in cold water, for of these are the decrees of the Biblical verse regarding a sin-offering and the Holy of Holies, but not of Lesser Holy things. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon. But especially regarding heave-offering we exclude it from all of these thigs that we mentioned as it is written (Leviticus 6:22): “Only the males in the priest line may eat of it,” and it is taught in a Baraitha, it, except for heave-offering which does not have the law of scouring and rinsing like the Holy Things. But the Lesser Holy Things are equal to the Holy of Holies in all the laws of scouring and rinsing. But regarding the explanation of scouring and rinsing, the Tannaim disagreed in the Baraitha: there is one [opinion] that states that scouring and cleansing of impure vessels is done in hot water and rinsing is done in cold water. And there is one [opinion] that states that scouring and rinsing, both of them are done in cold water after the cleansing of impure vessels in hot water, as it is taught in the Mishnah shortly nearby (i.e., at the conclusion of our Mishnah), but that scouring is like scouring of a cup and rinsing is like the rinsing of the cup, that the one is from the outside and the other is from the inside, that is to say, rinsing is done from the outside and scouring is done from the inside. But the Halakha is according to the words of the one who states that scouring is done with hot water and rinsing is done with cold water.",
                "יבשל בו את כל הרגל – without scouring and rinsing, but at the end, he should scour and rinse, because on each day, he does the cleansing of impure vessels for his fellow,, for since the peace-offerings are many on the Festival, none of their absorption becomes [forbidden] remnant, for the time of the peace-offerings are two days, and when he cooks in it the peace-offerings nowadays, and returns and cooks in it peace-offerings for the morrow from peace-offerings that were slaughtered on the day after, it expunges what it absorbed yesterday and absorbs from the latter [sacrifices], it is found that he doesn’t come to [violation] of remnant.",
                "וחכמים אומרים עד זמן אכילה – so that there will not be between the end of the cooking to the beginning of the scouring and rinsing other than the time of eating alone, and not more that this, as it says (Leviticus 6:21): “[the vessel] shall be scoured and rinsed with water,” and it is written (Leviticus 6:22): “Only the males in the priestly line shall eat of it,” but why did Scripture place these verses next to teach other? To inform you that we delay only the time for eating and afterwards we perform scouring and rinsing immediately on the same day. And the Halakah is according to the Sages.",
                "האסכלה (lattice-work of a fire place, grille, grating) – GRADILA in the foreign tongue. And it is made like a kind of net-work/mat and we roast upon it something roasted.",
                "מגעילן – in hot water."
            ],
            [
                "הרי הרלים נאכלין כחמורים ואינן טעונין מריקה – Our Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: if they were [sufficient] to impart a flavor, then the [rule of which is] less stringent are eaten with the more stringent in accord with the more stringent rule [applying to the Most Holy Things], inside of the curtains for the day and the night and they require souring and rinsing and are disqualified through contact. But our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Shimon who stated that the Lesser Holy Things do not require scouring and rinsing, therefore, when they did not impart the flavor of the Holy of Holies in the Lesser Holy Things, they do not require scouring and rinsing.",
                "רקיק – a disqualified/unfit [wafer] that came in contact with a fit wafer, and the fit absorbed from the disqualified [only the place which absorbed that which is forbidden – is cut off; the rest is permitted]."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "טבול יום – he (i.e., a Kohen) who has immersed [in a ritual bath] and came out but his sunset has yet occurred (i.e., see the rationale provided by the Bartenura commentary in Tractate Berakhot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1 for defining when the Shema is recited in the evening).",
                "ומחוסר כפורים – such as person with a flux or a leper or a woman who gave birth who immersed [in a ritual bath] and their [respective] sunsets had arrived but they had not brought their atonement [sacrifices].",
                "אינן חולקין בקדשים – since it is not appropriate for them to be eating [until they bring their sacrifices on the morrow], they do not divide [the food] for the evening when they become pure, as it is written (Leviticus 6:19): “The priest who offers it as a sin offering shall eat of it,” the Kohen that is appropriate for purification shares it, he who is not appropriate for purification does not share it. But it is impossible to state that a Kohen who is not appropriate for purification at the time of the offering does not eat, for there is a minor that is not appropriate for purification who consumes it, but by force, he should eat it, as the Biblical verse states, he should divide it in order to be able to eat from it, it is stated, for the Biblical verse excludes it from division in the language of seating, we learn from it that a Kohen who is appropriate for eating can divide it, but one who is not qualified for eating does not divide it. Therefore, those with blemishes divide it, even though they are not appropriate for purification, they are appropriate for eating, as it is written (Leviticus 21:22): “He may eat of the food of his God, of the most holy as well as the holy” (though as we learn in the previous verse, if the Kohen has a defect, he shall not be qualified to offer up the food of his God).",
                "אונן נוגע – and he who immersed [in a ritual bath] but he whose mind was not diverted from his immersion all the while that he is a mourning a kinsman prior to burial. For if he diverted his mind and then touched it, even after he immersed [in a ritual bath], he has invalidated it.",
                "וכל שאינו ראוי לעבודה אינו חולק בבשר – except for those who have blemishes for even though that they are not qualified for Temple service, they divide/share the meat, for we extend the scope of he Biblical verse explicitly, as it is written (Leviticus 21:22): “He may eat of the food of his God, of the most holy as well as of the holy,” and it is written (Leviticus 6:11): “Only the males among Aaron’s descendants may eat of it,” to include those with defects for the sharing of the food, if for eating, it is already stated, “he may eat….as well as of the holy.”",
                "וטהור בשעת הקטר חלבים – which is all night long (see the end of Tractate Berakhot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1). As for example, that he immersed and was purified with the setting of the sun.",
                "אינו חולק – for a Kohen does not share in the Holy Things until he is pure from the time of the sprinkling of the blood until the time of the burning of the fat, but if he became ritually impure between one and the other, he does not share in the Holy Things."
            ],
            [
                "כל של זכה המזבח בבשרה – such as that something making it (i.e., the meat) invalid occurred before sprinkling/tossing [of the blood], that there wasn’t a period of permissibility for the altar.",
                "עורה לכהנים – for since the altar acquired its meat, for it was kosher/fit (see Chapter 1, Mishnah 1).",
                "ואחד עולת אשה – as is it written (Leviticus 7:8): “So, too, the priest who offers a man’s burnt offering [shall keep the skin of the burnt offering that is offered],” I don’t have anything other than \"עולת איש\"/a man’s offering, from where do I learn about the burnt offering of a woman and/or that of slaves? The inference teaches us: \"עולת עור\"/the skin of the burnt offering: to use the additional word for the purpose of intimating something not otherwise included/widening the scope of a law. If so, why is it stated [in the Biblical verse]: \"עולת איש\"/a man’s offering? Excluding a person who decides by drawing lots to devote his burnt offering for the maintenance of the Temple that the hide is holy."
            ],
            [
                "עורות קדשים קלים לבעלים – as it is written (Leviticus 7:8): “shall keep the skin/עור העולה of the burnt offering [that is offered],”just as the burnt offering of the Most Holy Things, so also all of the Most Holy Things.",
                "עורות קדשי קדשים – the sin-offerings and guilt-offerings go to the Kohanim as the reason is explained further on.",
                "אין המזבח יוכיח – that is to say, you don’t have to state that the Altar will prove that it acquired the meat of the burnt-offering but did not acquire the hide and even you should no be amazed regarding the Holiest of Holy Things for even though the Kohanim acquired their meat, that they would not acquire their hides. This is not a proof, for the altar does not have the hide in any case. But regarding the Kohanim, we have found that they did acquire the hide of the burnt-offering as an a fortiori derivation that they would acquire the hides of the Holiest of the Holy Things."
            ],
            [
                "אין עורותיהן לכהנים – but rather they are burned with their hides.",
                "לא ראיתי עור יוצא לבית השריפה – after it was flayed, if it was found to be an animal with a condition that would cause it to die within twelve months (i.e., it was found to have been torn by another animal or with a congenital defect or afflicted with a severe organ disease, even though that this disqualification was in it prior to the flaying, but it was not recognized until after it was flayed.",
                "שהמפשיט את הבכור ונמצא טריפה – Rabbi Akiba comes to tell us that even if it was a firstling with a blemish/physical defect that was ritually slaughtered in the country on its blemish, and the Biblical verse did not permit it other than through eating, as it is written (Deuteronomy 15:21-22): [“But if it has a defect, lameness or blindness, any serious defect, you shall not sacrifice it to the LORD your God.] Eat it in your settlements, [the impure among you no less than the pure, just like the gazelle and the deer],” but if it died, its hide is forbidden and it requires burial, and it comes to teach us that where its being afflicted with a severe organ disease/congenital defect/torn by another animal was not recognized until after it was flayed, its ritual slaughter is permitted and its hide is flayed, as if its blood was sprinkled/tossed in the Temple.",
                "יאותו הכהנים בעורו – [the priests may make use of its hide] and it is not burned.",
                "אין לא ראיתי ראיה – for perhaps it did not happen during his life that he would find [the animal’s] severe organ disease/congenital defect/torn by another animal until after it was flaying, and if it happened, and he burned it, he didn’t see it.",
                "אלא יצא לבית השריפה – since but prior to the flaying he came. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiba regarding a firstling with a blemish/physical defect when a specialist permitted it. But not if a specialist did not permit it. But the Halakha is according to the Sages regarding a pure firstling, that the flesh [requires] burial and hide [requires] burning."
            ],
            [
                "פרים הנשרפין – the bull of the anointed priest [brought as a sin-offering] and the bull for an unwitting communal sin [because of an active unwitting transgression committed by the Jewish people, as a result of an erroneous Halakhic decision handed down by the Great Sanhedrin], and the bullock of Yom Kippur [which is brought by the High Priest for himself, his family and all the members of the Priesthood].",
                "ושעירים הנשרפים – the goat of Yom Kippur and the goats as a sin-offering for idolatry.",
                "נשרפין בבית הדשן – outside of the three camps . But in the cemetery, outside of Jerusalem, as it is written regarding them (Leviticus 4:21): “[He shall carry the bull] outside the camp [and burn it as he burned the first bull,” that is to say, outside of three camps.",
                "מטמאין בגדים – to those engaged with them. As is it written (Leviticus 16:28): “He who burned them shall wash his clothes [and bathe his body in water].” And every place where it states, “shall wash his clothes/יכבס בגדיו,” not only the clothes that he was wearing require washing, but also every piece of clothing that he touches while he is attached to the impurity is ritually defiled and requires washing.",
                "שלא כמצותן – such as that they became defiled and required burning like the rest of the consecrated animals that were disqualified.",
                "בבית הבירה – sometimes in the Temple courtyard and sometimes on the Temple Mount. How so? If a disqualification occurred to them prior to their leaving from the Temple courtyard whether prior to the sprinkling/tossing [of the blood] or after, they are burned in the place of ashes that is in the Temple courtyard. If a disqualification occurred to them after their departure from the Temple courtyard, they are burned in the place of ashes that is on the Temple Mount, and that is the Temple."
            ],
            [
                "היו סובלין אותן – those that were burned in accord with their requirements, they would carry them on poles to remove them to the place where they are burned.",
                "הראשונים – the people that carry the poles, those at one head go out first, and the latter ones at the head of the second group didn’t go out [from the Temple courtyard].",
                "ניתך הבשר – when their burning came a conclusion, the one who assist/accompany them does not again return from defiling clothing, but before this, all those who assist/accompany at the time of the burning, defile their clothing, as it is written (Leviticus 16:28): “He who burned them shall wash his clothes, [and bathe his body in water; after that he may re-enter the camp],” at the time of the burning. The one who assists/accompanies after they became ashes defiles his clothing, the inference teaches us: \"אותם\"/them - those defile their clothing, when they became ashes, he does not defile his clothing. But the bulls that are burned and the goats that are burned themselves do not defile people or the clothing that touch them, but the person engaged with their burning is ritually impure from the decree of the Biblical verse. According to the Rabbis, once those who carry them on poles have gone out, and according to the words of Rabbi Shimon, when fire goes out on most of them (see Talmud Zevakhim 106a). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "השוחט –[He who ritually slaughters] Holy Things outside [of the Temple courtyard] and offered them up outside [the Temple courtyard]. In one act of forgetfulness [inadvertently]. He is liable [for a sin-offering] for the ritual slaughtering and he is liable [for a sin-offering] on the offering up, for they are two essential parts of the sin for both of them are written [in the Torah] (Leviticus 17:3): “[if anyone of the house of Israel] אשר ישחט/slaughters [an ox or sheep of goat in the camp, or does so outside the camp],” and (Leviticus 17:8): “[If anyone of the house of Israel or of the strangers who reside among them] אשר – יעלה /offers [a burnt offering or a sacrifice].”",
                "כיון שהוציאו פסלו –[because he took it outside, he has invalidated it] but nevertheless, he is liable. And the same law applies to the individual who slaughters it outside [the Temple courtyard] and offers it up outside [the Temple courtyard]. And Rabbi Yossi Haglili said to you, just as the person who slaughters it inside [the Temple courtyard] and offered up outside [the Temple courtyard] for he had a period of time when it was fit for use, shall you say to the person who slaughters it outside [the Temple courtyard] and offers it up outside [the Temple courtyard] that he didn’t have a period of time when it was fit for use? But the Halakah is not according to Rabbi Yossi Haglili."
            ],
            [
                "טמא שאכל כו' – because Rabbi Yossi Haglili and the Rabbis disagree on both of them and these two disputes are similar to each other, they taught them [in the Mishnah] together.",
                "רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר וכו' – when the body became ritually defiled and afterwards the meat became ritually defiled, no one disagrees that he is liable for extirpation. What they do dispute is when the meat [first] becomes ritually defiled and afterwards the body becomes defiled. The Rabbis have an inclusive prohibition (i.e., an exception to the principle that one prohibition does not take effect upon another; the second prohibition takes effect if it is a more comprehensive prohibition), for since the prohibition of the Levitical uncleanness of the body occurs upon it, it also prohibits the pure meat that was permitted from the outside, it also occurs even on the ritually impure meat, and even though it was continually prohibited, in order to make him liable even because of the Levitical uncleanness of the body. But Rabbi Yossi Haglili does not hold that one prohibition can take a legal hold where another prohibition already exists (i.e., you can punish, or impose sacrificial expiation only for the first one) with a comprehensive prohibition, and the prohibition of ritual defilement of the body does not occur on the prohibition of the ritual defilement of the meat. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi Haglili.",
                "והטהור שאכל טמא פטור – from extirpation. But he endures forty [minus one] lashes because of (Leviticus 7:19): “Flesh that touches anything impure shall not be eaten; [it shall be consumed in fire. As for other flesh, only he who is pure may eat such flesh].”",
                "שאינו חייב אלא על טומאת הגוף – as it is written (Leviticus 7:20): “ [But the person who], in a state of impurity, [eats flesh from the LOD’s sacrifice of well-being,] that person shall be cut off from his kin,” This verse is speaking of Levitical uncleanness of the body."
            ],
            [
                "שהשוחט להדיוט כו' - a person who ritually slaughters Holy Things outside [the Temple courtyard] for consumption by an ordinary person [as opposed to for God alone], is liable.",
                "המעלה בחוץ – for the needs of an ordinary person, is exempt because of offering it up outside [the Temple courtyard]. For regarding ritual slaughter, it is written (Leviticus 17:4): “[And does not bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting to present it as an offering to the LORD, before the LORD’s Tabernacle,] bloodguilt shall be imputed to that man, [he has shed blood; that man shall be cut off from among his people],” even a person who does ritual slaughter for a person. And regarding offering it up, it is written (Leviticus 17:9): “[and does not bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting] to offer it to the LORD, [that person shall be cut off from his people],” he is not liable when he offers it up outside [the Temple courtyard] until he should intend it to be for God.",
                "ושחטו פטורים – as it is written (Leviticus 17:4): “ דם יחשב לאיש ההוא/bloodguilt shall be imputed to that man – האיש ההוא\" ,” one person and not two.",
                "והעלוהו חייבין – as it is written (Leviticus 17:8): “[Say to them further:] If anyone/איש איש of the house of Israel ]or of the strangers who reside among them[ אשר יעלה/offers a burnt offering or sacrifice,” for the inference does not teach us \"איש איש\"/if anyone – other than to include two who took hold of a limb and offered it up, that they are liable.",
                "העלה – and it became known to him.",
                "וחזר והעלה – from the same animal itself, he is liable [for a sin offering] for each and every time.",
                "עד שיעלה לראש המזבח – as it is written (Genesis 8:20): “Then Noah built an altar to the LORD [and, taking of every pure animal and of every pure bird, he offered burnt offerings on the altar],” so we see even the temporary altar of an individual that is outside is not offering up without an altar.",
                "אפילו העלה על הסלע – as it is written (Leviticus 17:6): “that the priest may dash the blood against the altar of the LORD at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting [to offer it to the LORD, that person shall be cut off from his people],” but not at the altar of a temporary personal altar. And it is written in the portion of one offering outside [the Temple courtyard]. But the Halakha is according is according to Rabbi Yossi."
            ],
            [
                "שהיה פסולן בקדש – as for example (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 9, Mishnah 2), a sacrifice kept overnight or goes forth [from its proper bounds or it was slaughtered [with the intention to burn the sacrificial parts or to eat the flesh] outside of its proper time or outside of its proper place, since inside , if they were inside [the Temple courtyard], if it went up, it should not go down, we call it that that has been accepted inside but he is liable for it outside, as it is written (Leviticus 17:9): “[And does not bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting] to offer it to the LORD/לעשות אתו לה', [that person shall be cut off from his people],”all that is offered/done for God, we are liable for outside [of the Temple courtyard], but all that is not offered/done for God, we are not liable for it outside [the Temple courtyard].",
                "המעלה כזין מן העולה ומאימורין – half an olive’s bulk from this (i.e., the burnt offering) and half an olive’s bulk from that (i.e., the sacrificial parts offered on the altar).",
                "חייב – for all of it is a sacrifice burned entirely.",
                "הלבונה – of the meal-offering of the free-will offering.",
                "והקטורת – of each day, half of it in the morning and half of it at twilight.",
                "ומנחת כהנים – a sacrifice which is burned entirely and appropriate for offering up like a fistful of the meal-offering of an Israelite. But the remnants of the meal-offering of an Israelite are not liable on their being brought up outside [the Temple courtyard].",
                "מנחת כהן משיח – one-tenth of an Ephah which he brings on each day.",
                "כזית – which is the measurement of the incense.",
                "עד שיקריב את כולו – because he (i.e., Rabbi Eliezer) holds that all which make the sacrifice permissible for enjoyment invalidate that which is lacking/wanting, and all the time that all of them were not offered the incense does not fulfill their owners’ spiritual obligation. But according to the Rabbis, these also is their burning on the altar/rising in smoke with an olive’s bulk, where all of it exists and they were not lacking prior to the burning on the altar.",
                "ושייר מהן וכו' חייב – for behold through this the burning on the altar/letting rise in smoke is completed/",
                "שחסרו כל שהן – prior to the burning on the altar through loss or burning, they were invalidated by their missing parts, as it is written (Leviticus 2:3): “And the remainder of the grain offering [shall be for Aaron and his sons, a most holy portion from the LORD’s gifts],” except for that which was missing, or that a handful was missing prior to the burning on the altar."
            ],
            [
                "המקריב קדשים ואימוריהן – that he sacrificed the meat and those [unsevered] portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar attached to it, he is liable because of the portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar. But we don’t say that the meat interposes between the portions of the sacrifice offered on the altar and the fire, and that what he intended to be inside is not offering on the altar, for he All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 1:8): “[And Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall lay out the sections, with the head and the suet,] on the wood that is on the fire,” and the person who offers it outside [the Temple courtyard] would not be liable. We did not say this because something that is one type mixed with something of the same type does not interpose.",
                "מנחה שלא נקמצה – is not appropriate inside. Therefore, the person who offers it up outside is exempt.",
                "קמצה וחזר קומצה לתוכה. והקריבה בחוץ חייב – and in a similar manner to it inside, it is fit/appropriate, as it is taught in [the chapter] “He who takes a handful of meal-offering/הקומץ את המנחה” (i.e., Tractate Menahot, Chapter 3, Mishnah 3): “[If] the handful was mixed up with residue, or with the residue of his fellow, he should not offer it up/נתערב קומצה בשיריה לא יקטיר,” but if he did offer it up, it is acceptable."
            ],
            [
                "הקומץ והלבונה – of the free-will meal offering. Both of them (i.e., the fistful of the meal offering and the frankincense) permit the residue for consumption, therefore Rabbi Eleazar exempts for he requires the burning on the altar everything that is permitted.",
                "אחד בפנים – first and afterwards the second outside, he is liable, for this completed it, and through it everything was dependent.",
                "שני בזיכי לבונה – permits the [twelve] shewbread [loaves].",
                "מי החג – that were filled for the sake of the water libations on the holiday of Sukkot, if he offered up the libation outside, he is liable for he (i.e., Rabbi Eleazar) holds that the water libations on the Festival [of Sukkot] is according to the Torah, therefore, he is liable by making the offering outside, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eleazar in this entire Mishnah and the water libation on the Festival [of Sukkot] is not from the Torah, but rather it is a usage dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai (i.e., a traditional interpretation of a written law).",
                "שירי הדם שהקריבן בחוץ חייב (of sin-offerings of the inner altar) – we are speaking of the residue of the blood of the inside, and he (i.e., Rabbi Nehemiah) holds that the residue of the blood prevent them, therefore, it is an act of Divine service that one is liable for outside [the Temple courtyard], but with the residue of the blood of the outer altar, Rabbi Nehemiah agrees that there are no other than for the Mitzvah, but not to be indispensable, therefore, he who sprinkles them outside is certainly exempt. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Nehemiah."
            ],
            [
                "מלק בחוץ – it is an un-slaughtered animal carcass, for there is no pinching of the head other than inside [the Temple courtyard], therefore he exempt on his offering/bringing it up on the altar outside, and if you should say, but aren’t all that are offered up outside are disqualified through their being taken outside, and similar a person who performs a ritual slaughter outside [of the Temple courtyard] is invalid and they are liable on its being offered on the altar, there the All-Merciful includes it but regarding the matter of the rest of invalid things, we require that it is accepted inside.",
                "שחט בחוץ והעלה בחוץ חייב – even on the bringing up/offering on the altar. For all who are liable on its ritual slaughter outside [of the Temple courtyard] if he went back in and he or someone else brought them up/offered them, he is liable [on the ritual slaughter and on offering it up].",
                "נמצא דרך הכשרו בפנים – In the Gemara it states (i.e., Tractate Zevakhim 111b, that it teaches that the manner of his liability by performing it inside [i.e., the Temple courtyard] exempts him outside [the Temple courtyard], and the manner of his liability by performing it outside, exempts him inside [the Temple courtyard. As for example, if he slaughtered the bird/fowl inside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt. If he slaughtered it outside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard], he is liable. If he pinched the head [of the bird] inside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside, he is liable. If he pinched the head [of the bird] outside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up inside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt. It is found, that the place where he is made liable on his offering it up, if the first Divine service was performed in side, as for example with the pinching of the head that was done inside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt for his offering it up, if the pinching of the head was done outside [the Temple courtyard]. But a person who becomes liable on his offering up, if the first Divine service was performed outside, like with the ritual slaughtering, he is exempted inside, if the animal was slaughtered inside and offered up outside.",
                "רבי שמעון אומר כו' – the matter of the first Tanna/teacher is deficient and should be read as follows: And similarly, a person who slaughters an animal at night inside [the Temple courtyard] and offers it up outside [the Temple courtyard] is exempt, that it is not accepted inside, as it is written (Leviticus 19:6): “It shall be eaten on the day you sacrifice/ביום זבחכם,” but not at night, and it is found that the animal offering is invalid, and therefore he is not liable for his offering it up But if he did not slaughter outside [the Temple courtyard] at night but offered it up outside at night, he is liable, because since the ritual slaughter was at night outside the Temple courtyard, it was kosher/fit, therefore, he is liable for two things – on the ritual slaughter and on the offering up. But Rabbi Shimon disputes this and states: “Any act for which they are liable [when it is done] outside, for the like act are they liable [when it is done] inside and when one offered it up outside, except for him who slaughters inside and offers up [the bird offering] outside.” כל שחייבין עליו בחוץ חייבין על כיוצא בו בפנים שהעלהו בחוץ – that is to say, just as when the person who performs the ritual slaughter outside at night and the one who offers it up outside is liable, so also if he performed the ritual slaughter inside at night and offered it up outside, he is liable for the offering up [of the sacrifice], except for one who slaughters the bird/fowl inside and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard] that he is exempt even though that if he performed the ritual slaughter and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard], he is liable. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon."
            ],
            [
                "נתן בחוץ וחזר ונתן בפני חייב – it is a simple matter, and because of the concluding clause [of the Mishnah], it brought it, if he [first] placed it outside [the Temple courtyard] and then in return placed it inside [the Temple courtyard], he does not place outside [the Temple courtyard] anything other than the residue of the blood, he is liable. But our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Nehemiah who holds that the residue is indispensable/invalidates an act by omission. But it is not the Halakha.",
                "שניהן בחוץ חייב – the first, if he didn’t have any knowledge of it in the meantime [by fact that he sprinkled the blood from two cups from outside the Temple courtyard], he is liable for two [violations].",
                "אחד בפנים – and afterwards, the second [sprinkling] was done outside, he is exempt. For even according to Rabbi Nehemiah who held that one cup removes its fellow consecrated cup from its purpose to be spilled a cubit, therefore, even that is not residue.",
                "הפנימי מכפר – to make the animal sacrifice fit. For the blood that is sprinkled outside [the Temple courtyard] first did not make what had remained something similar to it.",
                "שתיהן בחוץ חייב – on each of them, for at the time of the ritual slaughter, each one was appropriate [to be offered] inside [the Temple courtyard].",
                "אחת בפנים – and the second afterwards outside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt, for this is a sin-offering where its owners had been expiated , but for death it (i.e., the second one) goes and is not accepted inside [the Temple courtyard].",
                "חייב על החיצונה – for it is appropriate [only] inside [the Temple courtyard] and he offers up whichever of them that he wishes.",
                "כשם שדמה פוטר את כשרה – from [the law of] religious sacrilege, [for the sprinkling/tossing of the blood removes the meat of the Holy of Holies from religious sacrilege that gave it] a time of permission for the Kohanim [to consume it].",
                "כך הוא פוטר את בשר חברתה (so it renders the meat of its fellow free) – and even though it is invalidated [and it refers to when I slaughter both of them inside the Temple courtyard]. And it comes to ell us here that where both of them are placed, and someone comes first and sprinkles the blood of the first one, he renders the meat of its fellow free because of the sin-offering through which its owners were expiated, for we hold that the sin-offerings left to die we don’t benefit from nor commit religious sacrilege."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "פרת חטאת – the red heifer. It is stated there (Numbers 19:9): “[A man who is pure shall gather up the ashes of the cow and deposit them outside the camp in a pure place…]. It is for purification.”",
                "חוץ מגתה (outside of its marked-off space – the phrase also appears in Tractate Parah, Chapter 4, Mishnah 2) – the pile of wood on the altar in the Temple that are arranged like a vat (i.e., marked off space) that they make for it in the place that they slaughter it on the Mount of Olives opposite the entrance of the Temple (i.e., the Hall containing the golden altar). But if he slaughtered it outside of that place, it is invalid. But he is not liable for it because one can slaughter Holy Things outside [the Temple], for the All-Merciful exempted him since it is written (Leviticus 17:4): “and does not bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting [to present it as an offering to the LORD, before the LORD’s Tabernacle, bloodguilt shall be imputed to that man: he has shed blood; that man shall be cut off from among his people.],” but since Scripture was strict to punish him that he did not bring it [to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting], one learns from it that while standing to bring it in [to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting] is what Scripture is speaking about.",
                "כל שאינו ראוי לבוא – etc. that will not offer a sacrifice in the future."
            ],
            [
                "בלא תעשה – since they are worthy to come [before the altar of God] at another time, they do not suffer extirpation, but rather it is a mere negative commandment of (Deuteronomy 12:8): “You shall not act at all as we now act here, [every man as he pleases.”",
                "תורים שלא הגיע זמנן – [as it is taught in the Mishnah (note: but it is NOT a Mishnah, but rather a Baraita; the Mishnah is found in Tractate Hullin, Chapter 1, Mishnah 5 on 22a) of Tractate Hullin (22b): when their plumage is glittering, they are kosher, but before this they are invalid], for we require large turtle-doves and not small ones.",
                "ובני יונה שעבר זמנן – small pigeons and not large ones, and they are invalid from the incipient stage of brightening plumage and onward (see Tractate Hullin, Chapter 1, Mishnah 5).",
                "בלא תעשה – since for they are worthy after the time [for the offering of he sacrifice] there is for them a negative commandment to slaughtered them outside [the Temple courtyard].",
                "אותו ואת בנו – that he slaughtered one of them (either the parent-bird or the offspring) and he came to offer up the second on the second day, but it is prohibited because of (Leviticus 22:28): “[However, no animal from the herd or from the flock] shall be slaughtered on the same day with its young.”",
                "מחוסר זמן (an offering that cannot be offered because the time for it be offered has not yet arrived (i.e., for an animal not yet eight days old, or a peace-offering is offered before the Temple gates were opened.) – whether it is because it is lacking time in its body that it was not seven days with its mother, or whether the owners are lacking time, as will be explained further (see the next Mishnah). And it is necessary to teach the dispute between Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis in all of these [three segments of the Mishnah], for it if (i.e., the Mishnah) only mentioned to us regarding animals with a blemish, in that, the Rabbis state because they are repulsive, but turtle-doves and pigeons are not repulsive. I would say that they agree [on this] with Rabbi Shimon. But if it (i.e., the Mishnah) mentioned only turtle-doves and pigeons, because they were not appropriate/eligible and superseded, I would say that Rabbi Shimon agrees with the Rabbis. But if it (i.e., the Mishnah) teaches these two, because of the invalid (i.e., intrinsic) nature of its body, but the parent animal and its offspring which is invalid eternally (i.e., as a result of an accident of time), they would bring them, I would say that the Rabbis agree with Rabbi Shimon, hence it is necessary, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon (see Tractate Zevakhim 114a)."
            ],
            [
                "הזב והזבה – whose sacrifices were offered outside, within the days of their counting [of seven days] (see Leviticus 15:13-15 for the ZAV and 28-30 for the ZAVAH)",
                "והיולדת – (Leviticus 12:6): “On the completion [of her period of purification, for either son or daughter].”",
                "פטורין – they are not accepted, neither for an obligatory offering nor for a free-will offering.",
                "ואשמן – in the Gemara (Tractate Zevakhim 114b) an objection is raised: a ZAB (i.e., a man with a flux) and a ZAVAH (i.e., a woman with a flux) and a woman in childbirth are these subject to guilt-offerings? And it responds (in the name of Ze’iri): Include a leper among them (i.e., a guilt-offering is mentioned only in connection with the leper, who is also enumerated), that the leper brings a guilt-offering.",
                "עולותיהן ושלמיהן – In the Gemara (Tractate Zevakhim 114b): And are these subject to peace-offerings? And the Gemara responds [in the words of Zei’ri]: The Tannaim [explicitly] included it (i.e., Nazirites), for a Nazirite brings a peace-offering.",
                "בחוץ חייבין – for they are accepted inside as a free-will offering for their own sakes after they sacrificed their sin-offerings and the leper his guilt-offering.",
                "מבשר חטאת מבשר אשם כו' - for all of these are consumed by the Kohanim and are not offered on the altar, for the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 17:8): “[If anyone of the House of Israel or of strangers who reside among them] offers a burnt offering or a sacrifice,” just as a burnt-offering which is offered on the altar, so also everything is offered on the altar.",
                "מבשר קדשי קדשים – the lambs for Atzeret/Shavuot which are the peace-offerings for the community and they have the law of the Highest Holy Things (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 5).",
                "היוצק – [the person who pours] the oil on the meal offering.",
                "הבולל. הפותת – the person who mixes the meal offering in oil. And who breaks the meal-offering cakes into pieces.",
                "המניף. המגיש – who waves the meal offering that requires waving And who brings it near outside. The meal-offering requires bringing it near inside in the southwestern corner [of the altar], as it is written (Leviticus 2:8): “[When you present to the LORD a grain offering, etc….it shall be brought to the priest who shall take it up to the altar.”",
                "המסדר – the shewbread on the table.",
                "פטור – for Scripture states (Leviticus 17:8): “[If anyone of the house of Israel or of the strangers who reside among them] offers a burnt-offering or a sacrifice,” just as bringing it up/offering is the conclusion of the Divine Service, so also anything which is the conclusion of the Divine Service, excluding those [actions] where none of them is the conclusion of the Divine Service.",
                "אין חייבין עליו משום זרות – if a non-Kohen (i.e., literally, “foreigner”) performed one of these actions of Divine Service, as for example, mixing he meal offering in oil or breaking the meal-offering cake into pieces, etc. and similarly, someone who is ritually impure, or someone who is lacking the appropriate clothing, or someone whose hands and feet are not washed, is not liable for death even though he invalidated that thing in which was engaged in Divine Service."
            ],
            [
                "והעבודה בבכורות – as it is written (Exodus 24:5): “He designated some of the young men among the Israelites, [and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed bulls and offerings of well-being to the LORD], these are the first-born that the Divine Service was upon them.",
                "משהוקם המשכן נאסרו הבמות – as it is written (Leviticus 17:4): “and does not bring it (i.e., ox, sheep or goat in the camp) to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting [to present it as an offering to the LORD,” it follows that the prohibition depends upon the Tent of Meeting. But particularly for the Israelite, the improvised altars were forbidden, but heathens are permitted to offer up [sacrifices] to Heaven in any place, and even at this time. But it is prohibited for an Israelite to be their agents to offer up [sacrifices] or to assist them. But to instruct them in the order of the offering of sacrifices is permitted."
            ],
            [
                "באו לגלגל – there wasn’t a Temple there, but rather just the curtains/tent-cloth of the Tabernacle of the wilderness.",
                "הותרו הבמות – for the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 17:3-4): [if anyone of the house of Israel] slaughters [an ox or sheep or goat] in the camp,…and does not bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting,” excluding Gilgal, where there was [no longer] a camp there, for the camps were abolished and the people began to be scattered throughout the Land [of Canaan/Israel]. And for this reason, also, lesser Holy Things are eaten in any place, for there wasn’t there a camp like there was in the wilderness."
            ],
            [
                "באו לשילה נאסרו הבמות – as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:9): “because you have not yet come to the allotted haven,” it follows that when they would come to the מנוחה/the haven,” the improvised altars would be prohibited. But this “haven” is Shiloh, where there was there a haven/rest, where they did not travel from one place to another like in the wilderness (i.e., during the forty-years of wandering).",
                "בית של אבנים מלמטה ויריעות מלמעלה – as it is written (I Samuel 1:24): “she (i.e., Hannah) brought him (i.e., Samuel) to the House of the LORD at Shiloh,” so we see that it was a “house”, and it is written (Psalm 78:60): “He forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, [the tent He had set among men,]” so we see that it was of curtains, teaching that there was no ceiling, but rather a house of stones from below and curtains from above.",
                "ומעשר שני בכל הרואה – but above, it (i.e., the Mishnah in Mishnayot 4-5 of this chapter) does not teach about the Second Tithe, because all fourteen years that they were in Gilgal, they (i.e., the Israelites) were not obligated in the tithes until they conquered and divided up [the land]. And [the words] בכל הרואה/within sight of [Shiloh] , that is in every place where they see Shiloh from there, as Scripture states (Deuteronomy 12:13): “Take care not to sacrifice your burnt offerings in any place you like” (in Hebrew – בכל – מקום אשר תראה ). In every place that you can see, you don’t bring them up, but you do eat [of them] in every place you can see."
            ],
            [
                "באו לנוב ולגבעון – when Shiloh was destroyed at the end of three-hundred and seventy years minus one (i.e., 369 years), when the Sanctuary was there, and the Ark was taken in the days of Eli [the priest, at the time when Samuel had been serving him], they came to Nob [for thirteen years], but Nob was destroyed during the days of [King] Saul (see First Samuel, Chapter 22, verses 17-19) and they came to Givon. And all the days of Nob and Givon were fifty-seven years, and all that time, the Bamot/platforms/improvised altars (i.e., name of legitimate altars prior to, and of the illegitimate after, the establishment of a century sanctuary - at Shiloh – and of the Temple at Jerusalem) were permitted, for the All-Merciful stated regarding the prohibition of the improvised altars (Deuteronomy 12:9): “Because you have not yet come to the allotted haven/אל – המנוחה ואל – הנחלה [that the LORD your God is giving you].” מנוחה – is Shiloh, נחלה – is Jerusalem, but Scripture did not did not divide them other in order to provide a permission for improvised altars whether in this or that period.",
                "קדשי קלים בכל ערי ישראל – and the same law applies to the Second Time, for Scripture made an analogy between them, as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:17): “You may not partake in your settlements of the tithes of your new grain [or wine or oil, of the firstlings of your herds and flocks,] or any of the votive offerings that you vow.” At the time when the lesser Holy Things require being brought to the Place (i.e., the Sanctuary), at the time when the lesser Holy Things [are brought] throughout the cities of Israel, even the Second Tithe is within all the cities of Israel (after the conquest and the division of the Land."
            ],
            [
                "והיא היתה נחלה – that is stated in the Torah (Deuteronomy 12:9): “because you have not yet come to the allotted haven,” that implies that when they would come to the “allotted haven,” the improvised altars would be prohibited."
            ],
            [
                "הרי אלו בעשה – (Deuteronomy 12:11): “then you must bring everything [that I command you to the site where the LORD our God will choose to establish His name] your burnt-offerings [and other sacrifices, your tithes and contributions, and all the choice votive offerings that you vow to the LORD].,” that implies [there] but not at the temporary altars, and the prohibition is inferred from a positive commandment is a positive commandment [and its law is like a positive commandment]. Alternatively, the positive commandment of (Leviticus 17:5): “that they may bring them before the LORD, [to the priest, at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and offer them as sacrifices of well-being to the LORD],” and the negative commandment of (Deuteronomy 12:13): “Take care not to sacrifice your burnt offerings [in any place that you like],” and “every place”/\"כל מקום\" that is stated [in this verse], [the words]\"השמר\"/ “take care,” \"פן\"/not and \"אל\" /”do not” is not anything other than a negative commandment.",
                "ואין חייבין עליהם כרת – because he dedicated them at the time when the temporary altars were permitted, that the person offering the sacrifice outside [the Temple courtyard] is not liable for extirpation other than on a sacrifice that if he offered it outside at the time he dedicated it, he would be liable similar to the wilderness, for extirpation is written regarding thoses who slaughtered it outside [of the Tabernacle], it is written (Leviticus 17:7): “[and that they offer their sacrifices no more to the goat-demons after whom they stray.] This shall be to them a law for all time, [throughout the ages,” “that shall be to them,” but not another to them.",
                "הקדישן בשעת איסור הבמות – from that time, we call them: (Leviticus 17:5): “that they may bring them before the LORD,” but since he waited until he was not able to fulfill it, the positive command was nullified through him, but there is no negative command nor extirpation, for the warning and the punishment at the time of the offering is written, but surely the temporary altars were permitted."
            ],
            [
                "ואלו קדשים קרבין במשכן – as for example at the time that Gilgal, Nov and Givon was where the Tabernacle was and the improvised altars were permitted. These Holy Things needed to be offered in the Tabernacle but not at an improvised altar.",
                "קדשים – those undefined/not explicitly stated things were sanctified for the Tabernacle, and what were they – the community sacrifices.",
                "קרבנות יחיד – that were undefined for the improvised altars.",
                "קרבנות יחיד שהוקדשו למשכן – that he specified at the time of their sanctification on the conidition to offer them to the Tabernacle.",
                "ואם הקריבן בבמה פטור – from warning and from punishment, for the improvised altars were permitted. But however, it is prohibited to change, as it is written (Deuteronomy 23:24): “You must fulfill what has crossed your lips [and perform what you have voluntarily vowed to the LORD your God, having made the promise with your own mouth].”",
                "במות צבור – Gilgal and Nob and Givon.",
                "סמיכה – as it is written (Leviticus 1:2-3): “[for acceptance in his behalf] before the LORD. He shall lay his hand [upon the head of the burnt offering],” for there os no laying of his hand on an improvised altar.",
                "שחיטת צפון – as it is written (Leviticus 1:11): “[It shall be slaughtered] before the LORD on the north side of the altar,” but there is no “north side” in an improvised altar.",
                "ומתן סביב – two gifts which are four, as it is written regarding them (Exodus 29:20): “and dash the rest of the blood against every side of the altar round about,” but not on an improvised altar.",
                "תנופה – as it is written ((Leviticus 7:30; 10:15; 14:12 and other places) “as an elevation offering before the LORD,” and there is no waving on an improvised altar.",
                "והגישה – as it is written (Leviticus 2:8): “[it shall be brought to the priest] who shall take it up to the altar,” and there is no bringing it with an improvised altar.",
                "מנחה בבמה – for Scripture states (Leviticus 17:5): “This is in order that the Israelites may bring the sacrifices which they have been making in the open – that they may bring them before the LORD, to the priest, at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and offer them as sacrifices of well-being to the LORD,” that sacrifices are brought on an improvised altar but not meal-offerings.",
                "כיהון – as it is written (Leviticus 17:6): “that the priest may dash the blood against the altar of the LORD,” the altar requires a Kohen but an improvised altar does not require a Kohen.",
                "ובגדי שרת – for since there is no need for a Kohen, there is no place for wearing garments of ministry, that regarding the wearing garments of ministry it is written (Exodus 29:30): “[He among his sons] who becomes priest [in his stead, who enters the Tent of Meeting to officiate within the sanctuary,] shall wear them seven days.”",
                "וכלי שרת – and regarding the utensils of ministry, it is written (Exodus 28:43): [They shall be worn by Aaron and his sons when they enter the Tent of Meeting or when they approach the altar] to officiate in the sanctuary,”and not an an improvised altar.",
                "וריח ניחוח – limbs that had been roasted and offered on the altar, they don’t have with them “of pleasing odor to the LORD”, and specifically on the altar, as it is written (Leviticus 1:13): “It is burnt offering, a gift, of pleasing odor to the LORD.,” but on an improvised altar, even if he roasted them and offered them on the altar there is nothing in this.",
                "ומחיצת דמים – the red line to distinguish between the lower blood and the upper blod, but there is no red line in the improvised altar, as it is written (Exodus 27:5):”[Set the mesh below, under the ledge of the altar,] so that it extends to the middle of the altar,” but not in an improvised altar.",
                "רחוץ ידים ורגלים – as it is written (Exodus 30:20): “When they enter the Tent of Meeting they wash with water,” but not in an improvised altar.",
                "הזמן – if he intended regarding the sacrifice to consume it outside of I ts appropriate time.",
                "והטמא – even though the foreigner (i.e., non-Kohen) is fit to offer it on an improvised altar, an impure person does not offer on an improvised altar."
            ]
        ]
    ],
    "sectionNames": [
        "Chapter",
        "Mishnah",
        "Comment"
    ]
}