meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Zevachim/English/Sefaria Community Translation.txt"}
text: Mishnah Zevachim
  משנה זבחים
  Sefaria Community Translation
  
  
  Mishnah Zevachim
  
  
  
  
  
  All offerings which are not offered for their own sake are valid, but they have not fulfilled the obligations of [their] owners.  [This is true] except for the Passover offering and the  <i>Chattat</i> [an offering brought to expiate sin]. The Passover offering [is invalid if not slaughtered for its own sake] at its appropriate time, and the <i>Chattat</i> [is invalid if not slaughtered for its own sake] at any time.  Rabbi Eliezer says: Even the <i>Asham</i> [an offering brought to alleviate guilt]. The Passover offering [is invalid if not slaughtered for its own sake] at its appropriate time, and the <i>Chattat</i> and the <i>Asham</i> [are invalid if not slaughtered for their own sake] at any time.  Rabbi Eliezer said: The <i>Chattat</i> comes [to atone] for sin and the <i>Asham</i> comes [to atone] for sin.  Just as the <i>Chattat</i> that is not [offered] for its own sake is invalid, so too the <i>Asham</i> that is not [offered] for its own sake is invalid.
  Yose ben Choni says: Those [animals] which are slaughtered for the sake of a Passover offering and for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i> are invalid. Shimon Achi Azariah says: if they were slaughtered for the sake of a higher-level offering they are valid; for the sake of a lower-level offering they are invalid. How so? <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] that were slaughtered for the sake of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem] are invalid. <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> that were slaughtered for the sake of <i>Kodshai Kodashim </i> are valid.  The <i>Bechor</i> [first-born offering] or a <i>Ma'aser</i> [animal tithe] that were slaughtered for the sake of a <i>Shelamim</i> [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar] are valid. And <i>Shelamim</i> that were slaughtered for the sake of a <i>Bechor</i> or for the sake of <i>Ma'aser</i> are invalid.
  [If] a Passover offering was slaughtered in the morning of the fourteenth [of Nisan, but not for its own sake, Rabbi Yehoshua deems it valid, as if it had been slaughtered on the thirteenth [of Nisan]. Ben Beteira invalidates it, as if it had been slaughtered in the afternoon. Shimon ben Azzai said: I received a tradition from the mouths of seventy-two elders on the day they appointed Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah as [head of the] academy, that all offerings that are eaten which were not slaughtered for their own sake are valid, but they have not fulfilled the obligations of [their] owners. [This is true] except for the Passover offering and the <i>Chattat</i>. And Ben Azzai did not add [to this tradition] except [to include] the burnt-offering, but the sages did not agree with him.
  [If] the Passover offering and the <i>Chattat</i> were not slaughtered for their own sake, [or if the priest] did not collect [the blood from these sacrifices] for its own sake, or did not carry [the blood to the altar] for its own sake, or did not sprinkle [the blood] for its own sake; or [if he performed these acts both] for their own sake and not for their own sake; or [both] not for their own sake and for their own sake - they are invalid. How can it be both for their own sake and not for their own sake? [The priest acted] for the sake of a Passover offering and for the sake a <i>Shelamim</i>. [A priest acting] not for its own sake and for its own sake [would be if he acted] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i> and for the sake of a Passover offering. For an offering can be invalidated through four things: through slaughtering, and through collecting [the blood], and through carrying [the blood to the altar], and through dashing [the blood on the altar]. Rabbi Shimon validates carrying [regardless of intent], for Rabbi Shimon used to say: It is impossible [to offer a sacrifice] without slaughtering, and without collecting [the blood], and without dashing [the blood], but it is possible [to offer a sacrifice] without carrying [blood] - one slaughters at the side of the altar and dashes [it from where he stands]. Rabbi Eliezer says: [If] one carries [blood] in a case where he needs to carry it, [improper] thought invalidates [the offering]; [if] he carries it in a case where he does not need to carry, [improper] thought does not invalidate [the offering].
  
  
  
  All offerings whose blood was collected by a non-priest, [or] by an <i>Onen</i> [a person whose close relative has died but has not yet been buried], [or] by a <i>Tevul Yom</i> [a person who has immersed that day for purification but who must wait for night-fall to be fully pure], [or] by a person who lacks [priestly] garments, [or] by a <i>Mechusar Kippurim</i> [one who has purified himself via immersion but still needs to bring a sacrifice before eating from offerings], [or] by a person with unwashed hands and feet, [or] by an uncircumcised person, [or] by an impure person, [or] by a person who is sitting, [or] by one who is standing on vessels, [or] on an animal, [or] on his friend's feet - these [offerings] are invalid. If one collected [the blood] with his left [hand], he has invalidated [the offering]. Rabbi Shimon deems it valid. [If the blood] spilled on the floor and he [a priest] collected it, it is invalid. If he sprinkled it [the blood] on the ramp, [or at a spot] not next to the base [of the altar], [or] if he sprinkled [blood] that should be sprinkled below [the altar's midpoint] above [it], [or if he sprinkled blood] that should be sprinkled above the altar's midpoint] below [it], or [if he sprinkled blood] that should be [sprinkled] inside [the Temple on the inner altar, on the] outside [altar], or [if he sprinkled blood] that should be [sprinkled on the] outside [altar] on the inside [altar], it is invalid but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i> [excision at the hands of Heaven].
  One who slaughters the offering [with the intention] of sprinkeling its blood outside [the Temple courtyard], or [with the intention of sprinkeling] some of its blood outside, [or with the intention of] burning its designated parts outside, or [with the intention of burning] some of its designated parts outside; [or with the intention of] eating its meat outside, or [with the intention of eating] an olive's bulk of its meat outside, or [with the intention of] eating an olive's bulk of the skin of the fatty tail outside - it [the offering] is invalid but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i>. [If one slaughters with the intention of] sprinkeling its blood the next day, or [with the intention of sprinkeling] some of its blood the next day; [or with the intention of] burning its designated parts the next day, or [with the intention of burning] some of its designated parts the next day; [or with the intention of] eating its meat the next day, or [with the intention of eating] an olive's bulk of its meat the next day, or [with the intention of eating] an olive's bulk from the skin of the fatty tail the next day - it [the offering] is [defined as] <i>Piggul</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest, while offering it, to consume it after its permitted time] and it makes him subject to <i>Karet</i>. 
  This is the general rule: [If] anyone slaughters [the offering], or collects [its blood], or carries [the blood to the altar], or sprinkles ashes [the blood on the altar with the intention] of eating something that is usually eaten, [or with the intention] of burning something that is usually burned, outside its [proper] place - it [the offering] is invalid but it does not warrant <i>Karet</i>. [If the offering is made with the intention of acting] after its time, it is <i>Piggul</i> and it does warrant <i>Karet</i>.  This is only if he properly offered that which enables an offering to fulfill its purpose [the blood].
  How is the [blood] brought properly? If one slaughtered [the animal] in silence [with no wrongful intention], collected [the blood], and carried [it to the altar] and dashed [it on the altar, with the intention of acting] after its proper time; or if one slaughtered it [with the intention of acting] after its proper time, collected [the blood], and carried [it to the altar] and dashed [it] in silence [with no wrongful intention]; or if one slaughtered, collected, and carried, and dashed [with the intention of acting] after its proper time - this is [what is meant regarding] one who offers the [blood] properly. How is the [blood] not brought properly? If one slaughtered it [with the intention of acting] outside of its proper place, collected [the blood], and carried, and dashed [it on the altar, with the intention of acting] after its proper time; or if one slaughtered [with the intention of acting] after its proper time, collected, and carried, and sprinkled [the blood, with the intention of acting] outside its proper place; or if one slaughtered, collected, and carried, and dashed [it with the intention of acting] outside its proper place; [or if it was] a Passover offering or a <i>Chattat</i> [an offering brought to expiate sin] which were not slaughtered for their own sake, [and blood was] collected, and carried, and sprinkled [with the intention of acting] after its proper time; or if one slaughtered [with the intention of acting] after its proper time, collected, and carried, and sprinkled [the blood but] not for their own sake; or if one slaughtered, collected [the blood], and carried, and sprinkled [it on the altar] but not for their own sake - this is [what is meant by] not offering the [blood] properly. 
  If [one had the intention] to eat an olive's bulk [of the meat] outside [of the Temple courtyard] and an olive's bulk [of the meat] the next day; [or to eat] an olive's bulk [of the meat] the next day and an olive's bulk [of the meat] outside [of the Temple courtyard]; [or to eat] half an olive's bulk  [of meat] outside and half an olive's bulk [of meat] the next day; [or to eat] half an olive's bulk [of the meat] the next day and half an olive's bulk [of the meat] outside, the sacrifice is invalid but it does not subject him to <i>Karet</i>.  Rabbi Yehudah said: This is the general rule - if the [unlawful] intention [regarding] time preceded the [unlawful] intention [regarding] place, it is <i>Piggul</i> and it renders one subject to <i>Karet</i>.  But if the [unlawful] intention [regarding] place preceded the [unlawful] intention [regarding] time, it [the sacrifice] is invalid, but it does not subject one to <i>Karet</i>.  The Sages say: in both cases it is invalid but it does not subject one to <i>Karet</i>.  [If one intended] to eat half an olive's bulk and to burn half an olive's bulk, the offering is valid because eating and burning do not combine. 
  
  
  
  If people who are ineligible [to serve in the Temple] slaughtered [an offering], their slaughtering is valid, since slaughtering is valid if performed by non-priests, by women, by slaves, and by impure individuals.  This is so even for <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] provided that impure individuals do not touch the meat.  Therefore, these [people] invalidate [offerings] through [unlawful] thought. [If such ineligible] people collected the blood [with the intention of acting] after its proper time or outside its proper place, an eligible person should return and collect [blood] if there is still life blood [in the animal].
  [If] an eligible person collected the blood and gave it to an ineligible person, he [the latter] should return it to the eligible person.  [If] he collected the blood with his right hand and transferred it to his left hand, he should return it to his right hand. [If] he collected it in a consecrated vessel and then transferred it to a non-consecrated vessel - he should return it to the consecrated vessel.  [If the blood] spilled from the vessel on the floor and he gathered it - it is valid.  [If] he sprinkled the blood on the ramp, [or] at a spot not next to the base [of the altar], [or] if he sprinkled [blood] that should be sprinkled below [the altar's midpoint] above [it], [or if he sprinkled blood] that should be sprinkled above the altar's midpoint] below [it], or [if he dashed blood] that should be [sprinkled] inside [the Temple on the inner altar, on the] outside [altar], or [if he sprinkled blood] that should be [sprinkled on the] outside [altar] on the inside [altar], an eligible person should return and collect [blood] if there is still life blood [in the animal].
  If one slaughters an offering [with the intention] of eating something that is not usually eaten, or of burning something [on the altar] that which is not usually burned [on the altar] - it is valid.  Rabbi Eliezer invalidates it. [If one slaughters an offering with the intention] of eating something that is usually eaten or of burning something that is usually burned - [if it was] less than a olive's bulk, it is valid.  [If he intended] to eat half an olive's bulk and to burn half an olive's bulk - it is valid because eating and burning are not combined. 
  If one slaughters an offering in order to eat an olive's bulk from the skin, or from the sauce [of the meat], or from the spices [used in cooking the meat], or from the pieces of meat stuck to the skin, or from the bones, or from the sinews, or from the hooves, or from the horns, after its time or outside of its proper place - the offering is valid and one is not liable for <i>Piggul</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest, while offering it, to consume it outside its permitted time], or for <i>Notar</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to being unconsumed past the permitted time], or for rendering it impure. 
  One who slaughters a consecrated animal in order to eat [its] fetus or [its] placenta outside [the Temple courtyard], does not render it <i>Piggul</i>. One who pierces [a form of slaughtering birds] turtle-doves inside [the Temple courtyard] in order to eat their eggs outside [of its place] does not commit <i>Piggul</i> thereby.  Milk of consecrated animals and the eggs of turtle-doves do not make one liable for <i>Piggul</i>, or for <i>Notar</i>, or for rendering it impure.  
  [If] one slaughtered it [the offering] with the intention of leaving its blood or its designated parts for the next day, or [with the intention of] taking them outside [of the Temple courtyard] - Rabbi Yehudah deems it invalid, but the Sages deem it valid.  [If] one slaughtered it with the intention to put [the blood] on the ramp, [or at a spot] not next to the base [of the altar], [or] to sprinkle [blood] that should be sprinkled below [the altar's midpoint] above [it], [or to szprinkle blood] that should be sprinkled above the altar's midpoint] below [it], or [to sprinkle blood] that should be [sprinkled] inside [the Temple on the inner altar, on the] outside [altar], or [to sprinkle blood] that should be [sprinkled on the] outside [altar] on the inside [altar], [or with the intention] that impure people should eat it, or that impure people should sacrifice it, [or with the intention] that uncircumcised people should eat it, or that uncircumcised people should sacrifice it, [or with the intention] of breaking the bones of the Passover offering, or of eating it raw, or of mixing its blood with the blood of invalid offerings - it is valid because thoughts only invalidate [an offering if one had the intention of acting] after its time or outside of its proper place, or [if procedures for a] Passover-offering or a <i>Chattat</i> [an offering brought to expiate sin] were not done for their own sake.
  
  
  
  Beit Shammai say: [Regarding] all offerings [whose blood] is sprinkled on the outer altar, if it has only been applied once it atones, and [in the case of] a <i>Chattat</i> [an offering brought to expiate sin], two applications [atone].  Beit Hillel say: Even a <i>Chattat</i> that had just one application atones.  Therefore, if one sprinkled the first [application] properly, but the second one after its time - it atones. If the first [application] was sprinkled after its time, and the second [application was done] outside its place, it is <i>Piggul</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest, while offering it, to consume it outside its permitted time] and it subjects him to <i>Karet</i>[excision at the hands of Heaven]. 
  [Regarding] all offerings [whose blood should be] sprinkled on the inner altar - it does not atone if one of the applications is lacking.  Therefore, if one sprinkled all [the applications] as required save one [which was sprinkled] improperly - it [the sacrifice] is invalid but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i>. 
  The following things cannot render one liable for <i>Piggul</i>: the <i>Kometz</i> [a handful of the meal offering which the priest takes to put on the altar], and the frankincense [which is placed on a meal offering], and the <i>Ketoret</i> [holy incense offered twice a day on the golden altar inside the Temple], and the priests' meal-offering, and the meal-offering of an anointed priest, and the libation-offering [wine and flour offerings brought with sacrifices], and the blood, and libations brought on their own - [these are] the words of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: even those [libations] that come with the animal [sacrifices are not subject to <i>Piggul</i>].  [Regarding] a <i>Log</i> [a biblical unit of liquid measurement] of oil that a <i>Metzora</i> [one rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease.  Upon recovery and purification he must bring offerings] [brings], Rabbi Shimon says it cannot render one liable for <i>Piggul</i>; but Rabbi Meir says it can render one liable for <i>Piggul</i> since the blood of a <i>Asham</i> [an offering brought to alleviate guilt] [functions as] the <i>Matir</i> [that which enables a sacrifice to fulfill its purpose] for it [the oil], and anything which has <i>Matirim</i>, whether [permitting the item] for people or for the altar, can render one liable for <i>Piggul</i>.
  [With regard to] the <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt] its blood permits its meat [to be burned] on the altar, and its hide [to be given] to the priests.  [With regard to] the <i>Olah</i> of a bird its blood permits its meat [to be burned] on the altar. [With regard to] the <i>Chattat</i> of a bird its blood permits its meat [to be given] to the priests. [With regard to the] bulls which are burned and [the] goats which are burned their blood permits the designated parts to be offered. Rabbi Shimon says: [The blood of] any [sacrifice] which is not [sprinkled] on the outer altar like [that of] the <i>Shelamim</i> [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar] cannot render one liable to <i>Piggul</i>. 
  Sacrifices brought by gentiles cannot render one liable for <i>Piggul</i>, [or for] <i>Notar</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to being unconsumed past the permitted time], or for rendering it impure. One who slaughters these outside [the Temple courtyard] is exempt - [these are] the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose deems one liable.  Things which do not render one liable for <i>Piggul</i> [can still] render one liable for <i>Notar</i>, [or] for rendering it impure, except for blood. Rabbi Shimon says: [This applies] to an item that is usually eaten, but [regarding items] like the wood, or the frankincense, or the <i>Ketoret</i>, these cannot render one liable for rendering them impure.     
  Each offering is offered for six objectives: For the sake of the offering, for the sake of the one who brings the offering, for the sake of God, for the sake of [burning parts of it in] the [altar] fires, for the sake of the smell [of the offering as it burns], for the sake of the aroma [for God].  And [with regard to] the <i>Chattat</i> and the <i>Asham</i>, [these are also brought] for the sake of the sin [for which they atone].  Rabbi Yose said: Even if an individual did not have one of these [objectives] in mind the sacrifice is still valid, because it is a stipulation of the court that [only] the intentions of the one performing the service matter [rather than those of the owner].  
  
  
  
  What are the locations of the sacrifices?  <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] are slaughtered on the north [side of the altar].  [The] bull and [the] goat of Yom Kippur are slaughtered on the north [side of the altar] and their blood is collected in a consecrated vessel on the north [side of the altar]. Their blood requires sprinkling between the staves [of the ark] and on the curtain [separating the main shrine from the Holy of Holies chamber] and on the golden [incense] altar. [The omission] of one of these applications invalidates [the offering].  He [a priest] poured out the remainder of the blood on the western base of the outer altar.  If he did not [pour it out], that does not invalidate [the offering].
  The bulls and the goats which are burned are slaughtered on the north [side of the altar] and their blood is collected in a consecrated vessel on the north [side of the altar].  Their blood requires sprinkling on the curtain and on the golden altar.  [The omission] of one of these applications invalidates [the offering]. He poured out the remainder of the blood on the western base of the outer altar.  If he did not [pour it out], that does not invalidate [the offering]. Both of these [offerings] are burned in the place of the ashes [outside of the city]. 
  [Concerning] the communal and individual <i>chata'ot</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin] - These are the communal <i>chata'ot</i>: The New Moon goats  and those of holidays. These are slaughtered on the north [side of the altar] and their blood is collected in a consecrated vessel on the north [side of the altar]. Their blood requires four applications - [one] on [each of] the four corners [of the altar].  How [was this done]?  The priest ascended the ramp and turned onto the ledge [encircling the altar] and came to the southeast corner, [he then walked to] the northeast corner, [then to] the northwest corner, [then to] the southwest corner. The remainder of the blood was poured out on the southern base [of the altar]. These [the meat from these sacrifices] were eaten within the curtains [of the Temple courtyard; these were later replaced with walls] by male priests, prepared in any manner, during that day and [subsequent] night until midnight. 
  The <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt], [which is within the category of] <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i>, is slaughtered on the north [side of the altar] and its blood is collected in a consecrated vessel on the north [side of the altar].  Its blood requires two applications which [amount to] four [when the blood is applied to a corner it touches two sides of the altar simultaneously]. [The<i>Olah</i>] must be skinned, dismembered, and completely [burned] in [the altar] fires.
  [Concerning] <i>Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur</i> [<i>Shelamim</i> offering brought by/on behalf of all Israel – specifically, the two sheep brought along with the leavened grain-offering on Shavu’ot] and <i>Ashamot</i> [offerings brought to alleviate guilt], these are the <i>Ashamot</i>: The <i>Asham</i> for robbery, the <i>Asham</i> for misuse of consecrated property, the <i>Asham</i> for [having relations with] a <i>Shifchah Charufah</i> [a non-Jewish female slave partially freed, and betrothed to a Jewish slave], the <i>Asham</i> of the <i>Nazir</i> [a person who swears abstention from all grape products like wine, from cutting his hair, and avoidance of corpse impurity], the [purification] <i>Asham</i> of the <i>Metzora</i> [one rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease.  Upon recovery and purification he must bring offerings], and the uncertain <i>Asham</i> [brought upon possible commission of a sin].  These [offerings] are slaughtered on the north [side of the altar], and their blood is collected in a consecrated vessel on the north [side of the altar]. Their blood requires two applications, which [amount to] four, and they are eaten within the curtains [of the Temple courtyard] by male priests, prepared in any manner, during that day and [subsequent] night until midnight.
  The <i>Todah</i> [thanksgiving-offering] and ram of the <i>Nazir</i> [are sacrifices within the category of] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem]. They are slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard, and their blood requires two applications, which [amount to] four, and they are eaten throughout the city [of Jerusalem], by anyone, prepared in any manner, during that day and [subsequent] night until midnight.  The same rules apply to their [the sacrifices'] portions [given to the priests, and their loaves - also given to the priests], except that these portions are eaten by the priests, their wives, their children and their slaves.  
  The <i>Shelamim</i> [is a sacrifice within the category of] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i>. They are slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard. Their blood requires two applications which [amount to] four, and they are eaten throughout the city [of Jerusalem], by anyone, prepared in any manner, over two days and an [intervening]  night. The same rules apply to their [the sacrifices'] portions [given to the priests, and their loaves - also given to the priests], except that these portions are eaten by the priests, their wives, their children and their slaves.  
  The <i>Bechor</i> [first-born offering], the <i>Ma'aser</i> [animal tithe], and the Passover offering [are sacrifices within the category of] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i>. They are slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard, and their blood requires one application as long as it is applied at a spot next to the base [of the altar].  These differ with regard to their consumption: the <i>Bechor</i> is eaten by the priests, but the <i>Ma'aser</i> is eaten by anyone. They are [both] eaten throughout the city [of Jerusalem] (by anyone) prepared in any manner, for two days and an [intervening] night. The Passover offering is only eaten at night, and only until midnight. It is only eaten by those assigned to it, and it is only eaten roasted. 
  
  
  
  [If] <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] were slaughtered on top of the altar, Rabbi Yose says: It is as though they were slaughtered in the north [of the Temple courtyard]. Rabbi Yose bar Yehudah says: From the middle [of the top surface] of the altar northwards, [it is] like [they were slaughtered] in the north, from the middle [of the top surface] of the altar southwards, [it is] like [they were slaughtered] in the south. The grain-offerings had fistfuls removed [from them] anywhere in the Temple courtyard. They were eaten within the curtains, by male priests, prepared in any manner, [and eaten] that day and [subsequent] night until midnight. 
  The <i>Chattat</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin] of a bird was performed at the southwest corner [of the altar].  It is valid [if done] any place, but that was its [proper] place. That corner served [as the location for] three services below [the altar's midpoint] and it served [as the location for] three services above [the altar's midpoint]. [Performed at this corner] below [the midpoint were]: The <i>Chattat</i> of the bird, the presentation [of grain-offerings], and [the pouring out of] the remainders [of sacrificial] blood. [Performed at this corner] above [the midpoint were]: [The pouring of] the wine libation, [the pouring of the] water libation, and [the procedure of] the <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt] of a bird when there were too many [sacrifices being brought] at the east [corner of the altar]. 
  All who ascend the altar, ascend on the right side, and circle [the altar] and descend on the left side, except those who ascend for these [previously mentioned] three services.  They would ascend, and descend by retracing their steps.
  How was the <i>Chattat</i> of a bird performed? He [the priest] would pierce its head at the back of its neck, but would not separate [its head from its body]. He would sprinkle its blood on the altar wall. The remainder of the blood was drained out on the base [of the altar]. Nothing [was placed] on the altar except its blood, everything [else] went to the priests. 
  How was the <i>Olah</i> of a bird performed? He [the priest] ascended the ramp, and turned to the surrounding ledge, and came to the southeast corner.  He pierced its head at the back of its neck, and separated [the head from the body], and drained out its blood on altar wall.  He took the head and pressed the spot where it was removed to the altar, saturated it with salt, and threw it onto the fires. He took the body and removed the crop, and the feathers, and the entrails that were emerging, and threw them onto the place of ashes. He cleaved [the body], but did not separate [the halves]; if he did separate them, it is [still] valid. He saturated it with salt, and threw it onto the [altar] fires. 
  If he [the priest] did not remove the crop, or the feathers, or the emerging entrails, or did not saturate it with salt, if he deviated from the proper procedure after the blood had been drained out, it is valid.  If he separated the [head of the] <i>Chattat</i> [from the body], or if he did not sever the [head of the] <i>Olah</i>, it is invalid.  If he drained the blood of the head, but not the blood of the body, it is invalid. If one drained the blood of the body, but not the blood of the head, it is valid. 
  [If] he [the priest] pierced the head of a <i>Chattat</i> of a bird but not for its own sake, if he drained out its blood not for its own sake, or [he did it] for its own sake but also for the sake of something else, or for the sake of something else but also for its own sake, it is invalid. The <i>Olah</i> of a bird is valid [in such circumstances] except that it does not fulfill its owners' obligation. [With] both a <i>Chattat</i> of a bird and an <i>Olah</i> of a bird where he pierced [the neck] or drained out the blood [with the intention] of eating what is usually eaten [or] to burn what is usually burned, outside of its proper place, it is invalid but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i> [excision at the hands of Heaven]. [If one intended to act] after the proper time, it is <i>Piggul</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest, while offering it, to consume it outside its permitted time]; and he is liable for <i>Karet</i> provided that the <i>Matir</i> [that which enables a sacrifice to fulfill its purpose] was offered properly.  How does one offer the <i>Matir</i> properly?  If one pierced the neck in silence [with no unlawful intention] but drained the blood [with the intention of acting] after its proper time; or if one pierced it [with the intention of acting] after its proper time but drained the blood in silence [with no unlawful intentions]; or if one pierced it and drained the blood [with the intention of acting] after its proper time - this is [what is meant by] offering the <i>Matir</i> properly.  How does one not offer the <i>Matir</i> properly?  If one pierced [the neck with the intention of acting] outside of its proper place and drained the blood [with the intention of acting] after its proper time; or if he pierced [the neck with the intention of acting] after its proper time and drained its blood [with the intention of acting] outside its proper place; or if he pierced it and drained the blood [with the intention of acting] outside the proper place. [If] he [the priest] pierced the head of an <i>Olah</i> of a bird but not for its own sake, and drained its blood [with the intention of acting] after the proper time; or if he pierced it [with the intention of acting] after the proper time and drained the blood but not for its own sake; or he pierced it and drained the blood but not for its own sake - this is [what is meant by] not offering the <i>Matir</i> properly.  [If one intends on] eating an olive's bulk outside its proper place and an olive's bulk the next day, or [he intends on eating] an olive's bulk the next day and an olive's bulk outside its proper place; or half an olive bulk's worth outside its proper place and half an olive's bulk the next day; or half an olive's bulk the next day and half an olive's bulk outside its proper place - it is invalid, but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i>.  Rabbi Yehudah said: This is the general rule: If [unlawful] intention of time precedes [unlawful] intention of place, it [the offering] is <i>Piggul</i> and it subjects him to <i>Karet</i>; but if the [unlawful] intention of place precedes [unlawful] intention of time it is invalid but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i>.  And the Sages say: In both cases it is invalid but he is not subject to <i>Karet</i>.  [If one intends] on eating half an olive's bulk and burning half an olive's bulk it is [nevertheless] valid, because eating and burning do not combine.  
  
  
  
  [If the procedure for] a <i>Chattat</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin] of a bird was performed [correctly] below [the  altar's midpoint] according to the procedure of a <i>Chattat</i> for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is valid.  [If the] procedure for a <i>Chattat</i> [was performed but] for the sake of an <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt], [or if the] procedure [was performed] according to that of an <i>Olah</i> [but] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, [or if the] procedure [was performed] according to that of an <i>Olah</i> [and] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is invalid.  [If the blood] was applied above [the altar's midpoint] according to either procedure, it is invalid.
  [If the procedure for] an <i>Olah</i> of a bird was performed [correctly] above [the  altar's midpoint] according to the procedure of a burnt-offering for the sake of an <i>Olah</i>, it is valid.  [If the] procedure for an <i>Olah</i> [was performed but] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is valid but it has not fulfilled its owner's obligation. [If the] procedure [was performed] according to that of a <i>Chattat</i> [but] for the sake of an <i>Olah</i>, [or if the] procedure [was performed] according to that of a <i>Chattat</i> [and] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is invalid.  [If the blood] was applied below [the altar's midpoint] according to either procedure, it is invalid.         
  None of these [cases listed above] render one impure through swallowing [as is the case with the ingestion of impure kosher birds], but they are subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [misuse of consecrated property], with the exception of the <i>Chattat</i> of a bird [whose blood was] applied below [the altar's midpoint], following the procedure of a <i>Chattat</i> and for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>.
  [Regarding] the <i>Olah</i> of a bird whose blood was applied below [the altar's midpoint], following the procedure of a<i>Chattat</i> and for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i> - Rabbi Eliezer says it is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>. Rabbi Yehoshua says it is not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>. Rabbi Eliezer said: If a <i>Chattat</i> which does not subject one to <i>Me'ilah</i> [when performed] for its own sake, [yet] does subject one to <i>Me'ilah</i> if [performed] for the sake of something else, is it not logical that an <i>Olah</i> which does subject one to <i>Me'ilah</i> [when performed] for its own sake, should [certainly make one] subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [when performed] for the sake of something else?  Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No, you refer to a <i>Chattat</i> which was [performed] for the sake of an <i>Olah</i> [and is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>] because he changed its objective to something which is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>; will you say [the same] for an <i>Olah</i> where he changed his objective to a <i>Chattat</i> [considering] he has changed the objective to something not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>?  Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Consider,<i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] that were slaughtered on the south [side of the altar and] that were slaughtered for the sake of sacrifices of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem] - these prove the point, because he changed their objective to something that is not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> and yet one is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> over them. Thus you should not be surprised [with regard to] a <i>Chattat</i> [where] even though one has changed its objective to something that does not make one subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>, one can still be subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [over it].  Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No, you refer to <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> that were slaughtered on the south [side of the altar] and were slaughtered for the sake of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i>, and that he changed their objective to something that comprises both forbidden and permitted things; would you say the same thing regarding a <i>Olah</i> whose objective was changed to something that is entirely permitted?
  If one ֹpierced [the neck of a bird] with his left hand, or [did it] at night, [or] if he slaughtered non-consecrated animals inside the Temple courtyard, [or] consecrated animals outside the Temple courtyard - these do not render a person impure through swallowing [as is the case with the ingestion of impure kosher birds].  If one severed [the head] with a knife, [or] if one pierced [the neck] of a non-consecrated [bird] inside the Temple courtyard, [or that of] a consecrated [bird] outside the Temple courtyard, [or the necks of] turtle-doves that are not yet old enough [to be sacrificed, or those of] pigeons that are too old [to be sacrificed, or that of a bird] whose wing has dried out, or who has a blind eye, or whose leg was cut off - these render a person impure through swallowing.  This is the general rule: Anything that was made invalid inside the Temple courtyard does not render a person impure through swallowing. If it was not made invalid inside the Temple courtyard [but outside], it does render a person impure through swallowing. [In all cases where] ineligible people pierce [birds' necks], their piercings are invalid, but [the birds] do not render a person impure through swallowing.   
  If one pierced [a bird's neck] and it was found to be a <i>Terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], Rabbi Meir says: It does not render a person impure through swallowing.  Rabbi Yehudah says: It does render a person impure through swallowing.  Said Rabbi Meir: If the slaughtering of an animal [which if it were a] <i>Nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] would transmit impurity via touch and carrying, [nevertheless] loses its ability to transmit impurity [if it were a] <i>Terefah</i>, then a bird [which if it were a] <i>Nevelah</i> would not transmit impurity through touch or carrying, should certainly [cause] a <i>Terefah</i>, if slaughtered, to lose its ability to transmit impurity. Just like we find that slaughtering [a bird] permits it to be eaten, and removes the ability of a <i>Terefah</i> to transmit impurity, so too piercing [a bird's neck] permits it to be eaten [should] remove the ability of a <i>Terefah</i> to transmit impurity. Rabbi Yose says: It is sufficient [to compare a <i>Terefah</i> bird] to a <i>neveilah</i> animal [such that] slaughtering removes its ability to transmit impurity, but piercing [its neck] does not. 
  
  
  
  Any offerings which became mixed up with <i>chata'ot</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin][designated to] die, or with an ox [designated to be] stoned, even if it be one among ten thousand - they all must die. If they became mixed up with an ox that was used to commit a sin, or [with an ox] which killed a person based on [the testimony of] a single witness, or based on [the testimony of] the owners, or with an ox that had relations with a woman, or with whom a man had relations, or with an ox designated for idolatry, or which was worshiped, or with an ox that was used to pay a prostitute, or which was exchanged for a dog, or with a mixed breed, or with a <i>Terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], or with an animal born through Caesarean section - these are [all] set to graze until they become blemished, and then they are sold. And one brings [a new animal] equal in value to the most valuable among them, for the same type of sacrifice.  If [a sacrifice] became mixed up with unblemished non-consecrated animals, the non-consecrated animals are sold to those requiring that type of sacrifice.  
  [If] consecrated animals [became mixed up] with [other] consecrated animals of the same type, this one is offered for one of the individuals and that one is offered for one of the individuals. [If] consecrated animals [became mixed up] with [other] consecrated animals of a different type - they graze until they become blemished, and then they are sold. And one brings [new animals] equal in value to the most valuable among them for each of the two types, and suffers the difference in value from his own holdings.  If they [the animals] became mixed up with a <i>Bechor</i> [first-born offering] or a <i>Ma'aser</i> [animal tithe] - they must graze until they become blemished, and then they are eaten according to [the rules governing] a <i>Bechor</i> or a <i>Ma'aser</i>.  All types [of animals designated for sacrifice] can become mixed up, except for the <i>Chatat</i>  and the <i>Asham</i> [offerings brought to alleviate guilt].
  [If] an <i>Asham</i> became mixed up with a <i>Shelamim</i> [offerings whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the <i>Kohanim</i> and the fire on the altar], they are left to graze until they become blemished.  Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them are slaughtered on the north [side of the altar] and they are eaten according to [the rules governing] the more stringent of the two.  They [the Sages] said to him: We do not cause consecrated animals to become invalid.  If pieces of meat became mixed up with other pieces of meat, the meat of the sacrifices of <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] with the meat of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem], [or those] which are eaten over one day with those which are eaten over two days - [all] are eaten according to [the rules governing] the more stringent of the two.  
  [If] the limbs of a <i>Chatat</i> became mixed up with the limbs of an <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt], Rabbi Eliezer says: One places them on top [of the altar], and I consider the meat of the <i>Chattat</i> on top [of the altar] as if it were wood.  The Sages say: Once they loses their form they are brought out to the place of ashes.
  [If] limbs [became mixed up] with the limbs of blemished animals, Rabbi Eliezer says: If one of their heads was offered, all of the heads may be offered; if one of their legs was offered, all of the legs may be offered. And the Sages say: Even if all but one of them was offered, the remaining one is taken out to the place of ashes. 
  [If] blood became mixed with water: if it [still] has the appearance of blood, it is valid.  If it [blood] became mixed with wine, we view it as if it were water. If it [blood] became mixed with the blood of [another] animal, or with the blood of a [wild kosher] animal, we view it as if it were water.  Rabbi Yehudah says: Blood does not nullify blood. 
  [If blood] was mixed with blood of invalid sacrifices, it is poured out in the drain. [If it was mixed] with the animal's final blood [that emerges following its slaughter], it is poured out in the drain.  Rabbi Eliezer deems it valid.  If [the priest] did not consult and applied the blood [mixture] it is valid. 
  [If] the blood of valid sacrifices [became mixed] with the blood of blemished sacrifices, it is poured out in the drain.  [If] a cup [became mixed up with] cups of [these other types of blood], Rabbi Eliezer says: If one of the cups of blood was applied, all the cups [of blood] can be applied. And the Sages say, even if all but one [cup] was offered, the last one is poured out in the drain. 
  [If] blood [that should be] applied below [the altar's midpoint] became mixed with blood [that should be] applied above [the altar's midpoint], Rabbi Eliezer says: They should all be applied above, and I consider the blood that should be applied below as if it were water; and then he should repeat a [second] application below.  And the Sages say they must be poured out into the drain.  But if [the priest] did not consult and applied the blood [mixture] it is valid.
  [If] blood that [requires] one application became mixed with [other] blood that [also requires] one application, they [should apply] one application. [If] blood that [requires] four applications [became mixed with blood that requires] four applications, they [should apply] four applications. [If] blood that [requires] four [applications became mixed] with [blood] that [requires] one, Rabbi Eliezer says: They [should apply] four applications.  Rabbi Yehoshua says: They [should apply] one application.  Rabbi Eliezer said to him [that by doing so] one violates [the commandment of] "Do not detract [from the Torah's commandments]".  Rabbi Yehoshua said to him [that by following his approach] one violates [the commandment of] "Do not add [to the Torah's commandments]". Rabbi Eliezer said to him: "Do not add" only applies if it is by itself.  Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: "Do not detract" [too] only applies if it is by itself. And Rabbi Yehoshua further said: When you apply [extra] you actively violate "Do not add"; [but] when you do not apply, you violate "Do not detract" but you do it passively. 
  [If] blood [that should be] applied [on the] inside [incense altar] became mixed with blood [that should be] applied [on the] outside [main altar], it [the mixture] must be poured out into the drain. If he applied them [on the] outside [altar] and then returned and applied them on the inside [altar] it is valid.  [If he applied them on the] inside [altar] and then returned and applied them on the outside [altar], Rabbi Akiva invalidates it, but the Sages deem that valid.  For Rabbi Akiva was wont to say: All blood that enters the Sanctuary for atonement becomes invalid, but the Sages say this only applies to [that of] the sin-offering. Rabbi Eliezer says: Also the <i>Asham</i> as it states, "Like the <i>Chattat</i>, so is the <i>Asham</i>" (Leviticus 7:7). 
  [If] the blood of a <i>Chattat</i> was collected in two cups, [and] one of them left [was taken] out [of the Temple courtyard], the one [remaining] inside is valid.  If one [of them] entered inside [the Sanctuary], Rabbi Yose HaGlilli deems valid the one [remaining] outside, but the Sages deem it invalid.  Rabbi Yose HaGlilli said: If in a case where [unlawful] thoughts [about acting] outside invalidate, we do not consider the remainder like the one went out, then certainly in a case where [unlawful] thoughts [about acting] inside does not invalidate, we should not consider the remainder like the one that went in.  If it entered the Sanctuary to atone even though it did not atone, it is invalid, these are the words of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Shimon says, [it is not invalid] unless it atones.  Rabbi Yehudah says: If it accidentally entered [the Sanctuary] it is valid.  The forehead plate [worn by the high priest] does not atone for invalid blood that was dashed on the altar, except for impure [cases], since the forehead plate atones for impure [cases] but not for blood that leaves [the Temple courtyard]. 
  
  
  
  The altar sanctifies that which is fit for it.  Rabbi Yehoshua says: Anything that is fit for the fire - if it went up on the [altar], it does not come down, as it says (Leviticus 6:2) "It is the <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt] on the fire on the altar" - just as a <i>Olah</i> which is fit for the fire - if it went up [on the altar] it does not come down, so too anything fit for the fire - if it went up, it does not come down.  Rabban Gamliel says: Anything fit for the altar - if it went up, it does not come down, as it says, "It is the <i>Olah</i> on the fire on the altar ."  Just as the <i>Olah</i> which is fit for the altar - if it went up, it does not come down, so too anything which is fit for the altar - if it went up, it does not come down. The only [practical] differences between the positions of Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua are the blood and the [accompanying] libations, regarding which Rabban Gamliel says do not come down, but Rabbi Yehoshua says do come down.  Rabbi Shimon says: [If] the sacrifice is valid but the libations are invalid, [or if] the libations are valid but the sacrifice is invalid, [or] even [if] both are invalid, the sacrifice does not come down, but the libations do come down. 
  The following [are items] which if went up [to the altar], do not come down.  [A sacrificial item] that was left overnight [and then taken up on the altar], or was impure [and then taken up], or went out [of the Temple courtyard], or was slaughtered [with the intention of acting] outside its proper place or after its time, or if ineligible people received its blood or dashed its blood.  Rabbi Yehudah says: [If] it was  slaughtered at night, [or] its blood was spilled, or [if] its blood left the [confines of the] curtains [of the Tabernacle, later - walls of the Temple] - if it went up [to the altar], it comes down.  Rabbi Shimon says: It does not come down, for Rabbi Shimon was wont to say: Any sacrifice that became invalid inside the Temple [precincts] - the Temple accepts it; if it did not become invalid inside the Temple [precincts, but outside them] - the Temple does not accept it.  
  The following are [cases where a sacrifice] did not become invalid inside the Temple [precincts but outside them]: [An animal] that had relations with a woman, or with whom a man had relations, or that was designated for idolatry, or which was worshiped, or that was used to pay a prostitute, or which was exchanged [for a dog], or which was a mixed breed, or which was a <i>Terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], or which was born through Caesarean section, or which was blemished.  Rabbi Akiva deems valid blemished offerings. Rabbi Chanina Segan HaKohanim says: My father would remove blemished offerings from the top of the altar. 
  Just as [items that] went up [to the altar] do not come down, so too if they came down, they do not go [back] up.  And all of these [that] went up alive to the top of the altar [must] come down.  An <i>Olah</i> that went up to the top of the altar alive must come down; [but] if it was slaughtered on top of the altar, it is skinned and dismembered in its place. 
  And the following are [items] that come down [even] if they went up [to the top of the altar]: The flesh of <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely], and the flesh of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem], the remainder of the <i>Omer</i> [the special barley offering offered on the sixteenth of Nisan which permits grain harvested in the last year to be eaten], <i>Shtei HaLechem</i> [two leavened loaves of wheat brought as offerings on Shavuot which permitted using the new grain for holy offerings], <i>Lechem HaPanim</i> [twelve specially shaped unleavened loaves offered each Shabbat on the golden table in the Temple],  leftover portions of meal-offerings, and the <i>Ketoret</i> [holy incense offered twice a day on the golden altar inside the Temple]. The wool from the heads of sheep, the hair from the beards of goats, and the bones, and the sinews, and the horns, and the hooves - these, while attached are brought up as it says, (Leviticus 1:9) "And the priest shall make all of it burn on the altar." Once they have been removed they are not brought up, as it says, (Deuteronomy 12:27) "And you shall make your <i>Olot</i> the flesh and the blood."
  And all of the [aforementioned] which were discharged from [atop] the altar [due to the fires] are not returned [to it]. Similarly, a coal that was discharged from [atop] the altar [is not returned]. Limbs that were discharged from the altar are returned [if they fell off] before midnight, and one [is subject to] <i>Me'ilah</i> [misuse of consecrated property, for using] them. [If they fell off] after midnight they are not returned and one is not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [for using them].
  Just as the altar sanctifies that which is fitting for it, so too the ramp [leading up the altar] sanctifies. Just as the altar and the ramp sanctify those items that are fitting for them, so too do the utensils sanctify. A vessel for liquid sanctifies liquids, and a vessel for dry measure sanctifies solids. A vessel for liquid cannot sanctify solids, and a vessel for dry measure cannot sanctify liquids. [If] consecrated vessels become perforated, they [still] sanctify if they [can] serve the function they did when they were whole; if [they] cannot [serve that function], they do not sanctify. And all [utensils] only sanctify within the Temple [precincts].
  
  
  
  Anything that is [offered] more frequently than something else, precedes it [when both are offered].  The <i>Tamid</i> [communal burnt-offering brought twice daily in the Temple, once at dawn and once in the late afternoon] precede the <i>Musaf</i> offerings [additional sacrifices brought on Shabbat and holidays]; the <i>Musaf</i> offerings of Shabbat precede the <i>Musaf</i> offerings of <i>Rosh Chodesh</i> [the first day of the new month on which special prayers and sacrifices offered]; the <i>Musaf</i> offerings of <i>Rosh Chodesh</i> precede the <i>Musaf</i> offerings of <i>Rosh HaShanah</i> [the New Year's festival], as it says: "You shall offer these in addition to the <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt] of the morning, which is for a continual <i>Olah</i>" (Numbers 28:23).
  Anything that is holier than something else precedes it [when both are offered].  The blood of a <i>Chattat</i> [an offering brought to expiate sin] precedes that of an <i>Olah</i> because it achieves atonement; but the limbs of an <i>Olah</i> precede the designated portions of a <i>Chattat</i> because they are entirely burnt on the fires.  A <i>Chattat</i> precedes an <i>Asham</i> [offerings brought to alleviate guilt] because its blood is dashed on the four corners and on the base [of the altar].  An <i>Asham</i> precedes a <i>Todah</i> [thanksgiving-offering] and the ram of a <i>Nazir</i> [a person who swears abstention from all grape products like wine, from cutting his hair, and avoidance of corpse impurity] because it is a type of <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely]. A <i>Todah</i> or the ram of a <i>Nazir</i> precede a <i>Shelamim</i> [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar] because they [the first two] are eaten over one day and require [an accompanying] bread [offering].  A <i>Shelamim</i> precedes a <i>Bechor</i> [first-born offering] because it requires a four-fold application [of blood], and the laying of hands, and libations, and the waving of the breast and thigh.
  A <i>Bechor</i> precedes a <i>Ma'aser</i> [animal tithe] because its sanctity [begins] in the womb, and it is eaten by priests. A <i>Ma'aser</i> precedes bird-offerings, since it is a [slaughtered] sacrifice and it includes sacred parts [namely] its blood and its designated portions [burnt on the altar].
  The bird-offerings precede grain-offerings because they are a type of blood-offering. The <i>Chattat</i> of flour precedes the voluntary meal-offering because it comes [to atone] for a sin.  The <i>Chattat</i> of a bird precedes the <i>Olah</i> of a bird, as does the consecration [of the sin-offering of a bird precede that of an <i>Olah</i>].  
  All the <i>chata'ot</i> in the Torah precede the <i>Ashamim</i> except the <i>Asham</i> of the <i>Metzora</i> [one rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease.  Upon recovery and purification he must bring offerings] since it comes to permit [him to eat sacrificial meat]. All the <i>Ashamim</i> in the Torah must be two year old [rams] and be [two] silver shekels in value, except the <i>Asham</i> of a <i>Nazir</i> and that of a <i>Metzora</i>, since those are one year old and need not be [two] silver shekels in value.
  Just as there is order with regard to the offering [of the sacrifices] so is there order with regard to eating [of the sacrifices].  [If one had] a <i>Shelamim</i> of yesterday and a <i>Shelamim</i> of today, [the one] from yesterday takes precedence. [If one had]  a <i>Shelamim</i> of yesterday and a <i>Chattat</i> or a <i>Asham</i> of today, the [one] from yesterday takes precedence.  These are the words of Rabbi Meir, but the Sages say the <i>Chattat</i> takes precedence because it is a type of <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i>. 
  And with regard to all of them the priests can eat them [prepared] in any manner: They can eat them roasted, stewed, or cooked.  And they may [cook them] with non-sacred spices or spices of <i>Terumah</i> [a portion of a crop given to a Kohen which becomes holy upon separation and can only be consumed by Kohanim or their households].  These are the words of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Meir says they may not add spices of <i>Terumah</i> [to the meat] so as to not cause the <i>Terumah</i> to become invalidated. 
  Rabbi Shimon said: If you see oil being distributed in the Temple court, you need not ask what it is - it is the remainder from the wafers of the Israelites' meal-offerings, or a [remainder of] a <i>Log</i> [a biblical unit of liquid measurement] of oil from a <i>Metzora</i>. If you see oil that is poured upon the fires, you do not need to ask what it is - it is the remainder of the wafers from the priests' meal-offerings, or the meal-offering of the anointed high priest. [This is because] individuals cannot donate oil [just by itself]. Rabbi Tarfon says: [Individuals can] donate oil [just by itself].
  
  
  
  [If] the blood of a <i>Chatat</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin] splattered onto clothing, [the clothing] requires washing. Even though the verse speaks only about <i>chata'ot</i> that are eaten, as it says (Leviticus 6:19) "It shall be eaten in a holy place", [nevertheless] both [blood from sacrifices] which are eaten and [blood from sacrifices] which [have their blood] sprinkled inside the Sanctuary require washing, as it says (Leviticus 6:18) "The law of the <i>Chatat</i>" - one law [governs] all <i>chata'ot</i>. 
  [Splattered] blood of an invalid <i>Chatat</i> does not require washing regardless of whether the <i>Chatat</i> had a moment when it was valid, or if it never had such a moment.  What is [the case of a <i>Chatat</i>] that had a moment of validity?  One that was left over-night, [or] that became impure, or that left the [Temple courtyard].  And what is [the case of a <i>Chatat</i>] that never had a moment of validity?  [One] that was slaughtered [with the intention of acting] after its proper time or outside its proper place, or if ineligible people collected its blood or dashed its blood [against the altar].
  [If] blood splattered from the neck onto clothing, it does not require washing. [If it splattered] off the corner [of the altar] or off the base [of the altar], it does not require washing.  If it spilled on the floor and he [the priest] gathered it, it does not require washing.  Blood only requires washing if it was collected in a vessel and was valid for dashing [against the altar].  [If] it splattered onto the hide before [the latter] was removed [from the animal] it does not require washing; [if it splattered] after it was removed it does require washing - [these are] the words of Rabbi Yehudah; Rabbi Eliezer says: Even after it was removed it does not require washing. Only the spot where blood [was splattered] requires washing.  [Only] something subject to impurity [must be washed]; [only] something that can be washed [need be washed].  
  Clothing, sackcloth and hides require washing in a holy place [the Temple courtyard]. The breaking of an earthenware vessel [must be done] in a holy place. The scouring and rinsing of a copper vessel [must be done] in a holy place. This is the stringency of the <i>Chatat</i> over other sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.
  [If] a garment went outside the curtains [the Temple precincts], it is brought in and washed in a holy place. If it became impure outside the curtains, one should tear it, and bring it inside, and wash it in a holy place. [If] an earthenware vessel went outside the curtains, one brings it in and breaks it in a holy place. [If] it became impure outside the curtains, one pierces it, and brings it inside, and breaks it in a holy place.
  [If] a copper vessel went outside the curtains, one brings it in, and scours it and rinses it in a holy place. If it became impure outside the curtains, one punctures it, and brings it in, and scours it and rinses it in a holy place. 
  Both a vessel in which one cooked and one into which was poured a boiling liquid require scouring and rinsing.  Both [vessels used to cook] <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] and [those used to cook] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem] require scouring and rinsing; Rabbi Shimon says: [Vessels used to cook] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> do not need scouring and rinsing. Rabbi Tarfon says: If one cooked in [a vessel] at the start of a festival, he may cook in it during the entire festival; but the Sages say: [He may only cook in it] during the time [allotted for] eating [the sacrifice's meat]. [Regarding] scouring and rinsing:  Scouring is like scouring [the inside] of a cup, and rinsing is like rinsing [the outside] of a cup; scouring [is performed] with hot water and rinsing [is performed] with cold water.  The spit and the grill are scalded with hot water. 
  [If] one cooked both sacred things and non-sacred things [in one vessel], or [cooked in one vessel] both <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> and <i>Kodashim Kalim</i>, if there is enough [meat] to impart flavor, the less stringent [meat] must be eaten following the [rules governing] the more stringent [meat], and [the vessels] do not require scouring and rinsing and [the mixture] does not render invalid through contact.  [If] a wafer touched another wafer, or a piece of meat touched another piece of meat, neither the whole wafer nor the whole piece of meat become prohibited, rather just the place of absorption does. 
  
  
  
  A <i>Tevul Yom</i> [a person who has immersed that day for purification but who must wait for night-fall to be fully pure], and a <i>Mechusar Kippurim</i> [one who has purified himself via immersion but still needs to bring a sacrifice before eating from offerings], do not receive [portions of] the sacrifices that are eaten that evening.  An <i>Onen</i> [a person whose close relative has died but has not yet been buried] may touch [sacrifices] but may not offer [them] and does not receive portions to eat that evening. Blemished priests do receive portions and may eat [sacrificial meat regardless of] whether their blemishes are permanent or are temporary. However, [blemished priests] may not officiate [in offering sacrifices].  Anyone who is unfit to perform the [Temple] service does not receive [a portion] of meat to eat, and whoever does not receive [a portion] of meat does not receive [a portion] of the hides. [If a priest] was impure at the moment the blood was dashed [on the altar], he does not receive [a portion] of the meat even if he became pure by the time the fats were burned, as it says (Leviticus 7:33) "He among the sons of Aharon who offers the blood of the <i>Shelamim</i> [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar] and the fat receives the right thigh for a portion."
  [If] the altar did not receive the rights to the flesh [of a sacrifice], the priests do not receive its hide, as it says (Leviticus 7:8) "Any man's <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt]" - [it must be] an <i>Olah</i> that was brought for a man. [If] an <i>Olah</i> was not slaughtered for its own sake, its hide [is given] to the priests even though it does not fulfill its owner's [obligation]. The hides of both an <i>Olah</i> [brought by] a man and an <i>Olah</i>[brought by] a woman [are given] to the priests. 
  The hides of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem] [are given] to its owners, but the hides of <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity.  They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] [are given] to the priests.  [This can be shown through] a <i>Kal Vachomer</i> [<i>a fortiori</i> reasoning]: If [priests], who do not have rights to meat from an <i>Olah</i>, do have rights to its hide, is it not logical that they should have rights to the hides of [other] sacrifices of <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [considering] that  they do have rights to their meat?  [And] the altar cannot prove [otherwise] because it never [receives] any hide.  
  [If] a sacrifice became invalid before it was skinned, its hide is not [given] to the priests; [if it became invalid] after it was skinned, its hide is [given] to the priests.  Rabbi Chanina Segan HaKohanim said: In my life I never saw a hide [be taken] out [of the Temple precincts] to be burned.  Rabbi Akiva said: From his statement we learn that [if] one skins a <i>Bechor</i> [first-born offering] which was [then] found to be a <i>Terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], the priests should still benefit from its hide.  And the Sages say: [The statement of] "we never saw" is no proof; rather [the hide] goes out to the place of burning. 
  The bulls that are burned [entirely] and the goats that are burned [entirely] - when they are burned properly, are burned in the place of ashes [outside Jerusalem], and they render clothing [worn by the one who burns them] impure.  If these [offerings] are not burned properly [but became invalid], they are burned on the Temple Mount and do not render clothing impure. 
  They would carry the [bulls and goats] out on poles.  Once the first ones [the men in front] pass the walls of the courtyard and the rear ones have not [yet] passed [the walls of the courtyard], the clothes of first ones become impure, but the clothes of the rear ones do not become impure until they have left.  Once both sets have left, the clothing of both sets becomes impure.  Rabbi Shimon says: Their clothes only become impure once the fire has burned most of the [offerings'] flesh. [Once] the flesh is charred, the clothing of someone [else] who burns [the flesh] does not become impure.  
  
  
  
  One who slaughters and offers up [a sacrifice] outside [the Temple courtyard] is liable for the slaughtering and is liable for the offering up; Rabbi Yose HaGlili says: [If] he slaughtered it inside [the Temple courtyard] but offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard] he is liable; but [if] he slaughtered it outside and offered it up outside, he is exempt because he merely offered something that was invalid.  They said to him: Even if he slaughtered it inside and offered it up outside, once he takes it out, he has invalidated it. 
  An impure person who ate either pure or impure sacrificial meat is liable; Rabbi Yose HaGlili says: An impure person who ate pure sacrificial meat is liable, and an impure person who ate impure sacrificial meat is exempt because he merely ate something that was impure.  They said to him: [If so,] even someone impure who ate pure sacrificial meat [should be exempt], because once he touches it, he has made it impure. And a pure person who ate impure sacrificial meat is exempt, because one is only liable when he himself is impure. 
  A stringency [applies] with slaughtering [outside the Temple courtyard compared to] offering up [outside the Temple courtyard], and a stringency [applies] to offering up [outside the Temple courtyard compared to] slaughtering [outside the Temple courtyard].  A stringency [with regard to] slaughtering is that [if] one slaughters for [the sake of] a person [rather than for God] he is liable, but [if] he offers up a sacrifice to a person he is exempt.  A stringency [with regard to] offering up is that [if] two people held the knife and slaughtered [the animal] they are exempt, but if they [both] held a limb and offered it up they are liable.  If they offered up [an offering] and went back and offered up [an offering] they are liable for every offering, [these are] the words of Rabbi Shimon; Rabbi Yose says: They are only liable once, and they are only liable once they offer it up to the top of an altar.  Rabbi Shimon says: He is liable even if he offers it up on a rock or a stone. 
  One is liable for offering [sacrifices] outside [the Temple courtyard] regardless if they are valid sacrifices or invalid sacrifices which became disqualified inside the holy [area].  One is liable for offering outside [the Temple courtyard] an olive's bulk of an <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt] or its designated portions.  One is liable for offering outside [the Temple courtyard] an olive's bulk of the <i>Kometz</i> [a handful of the meal-offering which the priest takes to put on the altar], or the frankincense, or the <i>Ketoret</i> [holy incense offered twice a day on the golden altar inside the Temple], or the priestly meal-offering, or the meal-offering of the anointed [high] priest, or the meal-offering of the libations; Rabbi Elazar exempts him unless he offers the entirety [of one of these items].  And [with regard to] all of these - if one offered them inside [the Temple courtyard], but left out an olive's bulk, and offered that outside [the Temple], he is liable.  And [with regard to] all of these, [if] they were missing the smallest amount, one is exempt for offering them outside [the Temple courtyard].  
  One who offers sacrifices and their designated portions outside [the Temple courtyard] is liable.  One who offers outside a meal-offering from which the <i>Kometz</i> was not taken, is exempt.  [If] one took the <i>Kometz</i> and returned that <i>Kometz</i> to [the meal-offering] and then offered it outside [the Temple], he is liable. 
  [If] one offered outside [the Temple courtyard] either the <i>Kometz</i>, or the frankincense, he is liable; Rabbi Elazar exempts him unless he offers the second one [that is, both of them].  If he offered one inside and one outside, he is liable. If he offered outside one of the two bowls of frankincense [from the <i>Lechem HaPanim</i> [twelve specially shaped unleavened loaves offered each Shabbat on the golden table in the Temple]], he is liable. Rabbi Elazar exempts him unless he offers the second one.  If he offered one inside and one outside, he is liable.  One who dashes some of the blood outside is liable.  Rabbi Elazar says: Even one who pours the water libation of the festival outside is liable. Rabbi Nechemia says: If one offered the remainder of the blood outside he is liable. 
  One who pierced [the neck of a sacrificial] bird inside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside, is liable.  If he pierced it outside and offered it up outside, he is exempt.  One who slaughters a bird inside and offers it up outside is exempt; one who slaughters it outside and offers it up outside is liable.  What emerges is that which makes it valid inside, exempts when done outside; that which makes it valid outside exempts when done inside.  Rabbi Shimon says: Anything for which one would be liable outside, one is liable for [if done] similarly inside [and then] offered outside, except for the case where it was slaughtered inside and offered up outside. 
  [If] one received the blood  of a <i>Chattat</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin] in one cup, [whereupon] he sprinkled it outside [the Temple courtyard] and then sprinkled it again inside [against the altar wall], [or] if he [sprinkled it] inside and then sprinkled it again outside, he is liable because all of it was fit to be offered inside.  If one received the blood in two cups and sprinkled both of them inside, he is exempt.  If he sprinkled both of them outside, he is liable. [If he sprinkled] one inside and one outside, he is exempt.  [If he sprinkled] one outside and one inside, he is liable for outside one, but the inside one [achieves] atonement.  To what can this be compared?  To one who set aside a <i>Chattat</i>, [whereupon] it was lost, then he set aside another one in its stead, and then the first one was found, and both are standing there.  [If] he slaughters both of them inside he is exempt; if he slaughters both of them outside he is liable. [If he slaughters] one inside and one outside he is exempt; one outside and one inside he is liable for the outside one, but the inside one [achieves] atonement.  Just as its blood exempts its meat, so too it exempts the meat of the other one.     
  
  
  
  [If] a red heifer was burned outside of its specific spot [on the Mount of Olives], and similarly [if] the [special] goat sent away [to the desert wilderness outside of Jerusalem on Yom Kippur] was offered outside [the Temple precincts], [these acts] do not make one liable, as it says (Leviticus 17:4) "And to the opening of the Tabernacle he did not bring it" [if] something is not fit to be brought to the door of the Tabernacle, one is not liable [for offering it outside]. 
  [If] one offered outside [the Temple precincts] an animal that had relations with a woman, or with whom a man had relations, or that was designated for idolatry, or which was worshiped, or that was used to pay a prostitute, or which was exchanged for a dog, or was a mixed breed, or was a <i>Terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it will die within one year], or an animal born through Caesarean section, he is exempt as it says (Leviticus 17:4) "Before the  Tabernacle", one is not liable for anything which is not fit to be brought in the Tabernacle.  [If one offered outside] blemished animals he is exempt, regardless of whether they had a permanent blemish or a temporary blemish.  Rabbi Shimon says: One is exempt [for offering outside] permanently blemished animals, but he violates a negative commandment [by offering outside an animal with] a temporary blemish.  One is exempt for offering outside turtle-doves that are not yet old enough [to be sacrificed] or pigeons that are too old [to be sacrificed]. Rabbi Shimon says: One is exempt for pigeons that are too old, but he violates a negative commandment [by offering outside] turtle-doves that are not yet old enough. One is exempt [for offering outside] an animal and its young [on the same day], or for [offering an animal] which is not old enough [being not yet eight days old].  Rabbi Shimon says: These are [violations] of negative commandments, for Rabbi Shimon was wont to say: One [violates] a negative commandment for anything which may be brought after a certain time, but one [is not punished with] <i>Karet</i> [excision at the hands of Heaven]; but the Sages say, anything for which one is not subject to <i>Karet</i>, one [also is not considered to have violated] a negative commandment.  
  "Before its time" [can refer to] either an animal [which is too young] or its owner [who brings the sacrifice too soon].  What [are cases where] the owner [acts] before his time? A <i>Zav</i> [a man suffering from gonorrhea], or a <i>Zavah</i> [a woman with a menstrual-type flow occurring at a time other than her normal period], or a woman who has given birth, or a <i>Metzora</i> [one rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease.  Upon recovery and purification he must bring offerings], who offer their <i>chata'ot</i> [offerings generally brought to expiate sin] or their <i>Ashamim</i> [offerings generally brought to alleviate guilt] [too early] outside [the Temple], are exempt. But [if they offer] their <i>Olot</i> [offerings that are entirely burnt] or their <i>Shelamim</i> [offerings whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar] outside [the Temple precincts] they are liable. One who offers up meat from a <i>Chatat</i>, [or] meat from an <i>Asham</i>, [or] meat from a <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity; they may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely], [or] meat from a <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity; they may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem], or if [he offered] the remainder of the <i>Omer</i> [the special barley offering offered on the sixteenth of  Nisan which permits grain harvested in the last year to be eaten], or the <i>Shtei HaLechem</i> [two leavened loaves of wheat brought as offerings on Shavuot which permitted using the new grain for holy offerings], or the <i>Lechem HaPanim</i> [twelve specially shaped unleavened loaves offered each Shabbat on the golden table in the Temple], or the remainders of the meal-offerings, [or] one who pours [oil onto a meal-offering], [or] one who mixes [the flour with the oil], [or] one who breaks [the meal-offering into pieces], [or] one who salts [an offering], [or] one who waves [an offering], [or] one who [brings the meal-offering to the altar], [or] one who arranges the table [with the <i>Lechem HaPanim</i>], or one who prepares the candles [of the <i>Menorah</i> - the Temple candelabrum], or one who takes the handful [of flour from a meal-offering], or one who receives the blood outside [the Temple precincts], is exempt.  He is not liable due to his not belonging to the priestly class, nor due to his impurity, nor due to his lack of [priestly] garments, nor because he has [not] washed [his] hands or feet. 
  Before the Tabernacle was constructed, the <i>Bamot</i> [personal altars, permitted only during certain periods of Jewish history, and then, only for certain types of offerings] were permitted, and the services were performed by the first-borns.  Once the Tabernacle was constructed, the <i>Bamot</i> were forbidden, and the services were performed by the <i>Kohanim</i> [the priestly caste, a subgroup of the tribe of Levi, uniquely responsible for maintaining and carrying out the sacrificial services in the Temple].  <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> were eaten within the [Tabernacle] curtains, and <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [were eaten] anywhere in the camp of Israel.  
  Once they [the nation] came to Gilgal, the <i>Bamot</i> were permitted.  <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> were eaten within the curtains, [and] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [were eaten] anywhere. 
  When they came to Shiloh, <i>Bamot</i> were forbidden. [The Tabernacle there] had no [fixed] roof, but was a structure of stone [walls] beneath, and curtains above them. It was [considered] "the Resting Place" (of Devarim 12:9). <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> were eaten within the curtains, [and] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> and <i>Ma'aser Sheni</i> [the second tithe of produce which must be taken to Jerusalem and consumed there, were eaten] anywhere within sight [of Shiloh]. 
  When they came to Nov and to Giv'on, the <i>Bamot</i> were permitted. <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> were eaten within the curtains, [and] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> were eaten in any Israelite city.
  When they came to Jerusalem, the <i>Bamot</i> were forbidden, and they were never permitted again.  It was [considered] "the Inheritance" (of Devarim 12:9). <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> were eaten within the curtains [which were walls in the Temple], [and] <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> and <i>Ma'aser Sheni</i> [were eaten] within the walls [of Jerusalem].
  [Individuals] who consecrated sacrifices when the <i>Bamot</i> were forbidden, and [who] offered these sacrifices outside [the Tabernacle] when the <i>Bamot</i> were forbidden, violated a positive commandment and a negative commandment, and were subject <i>Karet</i> because of them.  If [individuals] consecrated them when the <i>Bamot</i> were permitted, and sacrificed these when the <i>Bamot</i> were prohibited, they [thereby] violated a positive commandment and a negative commandment, but they were not subject to <i>Karet</i> because of them.  If [individuals] consecrated them when the <i>Bamot</i> were prohibited, and sacrificed these when the <i>Bamot</i> were permitted, they [thereby] violated a positive commandment, but not a negative commandment.
  These are the sacrifices that must be sacrificed in the Tabernacle[even when the <i>Bamot</i> were permitted]: Sacrifices consecrated [specifically] for the Tabernacle. Communal sacrifices were sacrificed at the Tabernacle, and personal sacrifices [could be offered] at the <i>Bamot</i>. Personal sacrifices that were consecrated [specifically] for the Tabernacle, [had to be] sacrificed at the Tabernacle, and if [the individual] sacrificed them at a <i>Bamah</i>, he is exempt. What differentiates a personal <i>Bamah</i> from a communal <i>Bamah</i>?  Laying the hands [on the animal], and slaughtering it in the north [of the altar], and dashing [the blood] around [the altar, on the corners], and waving [certain sacrifices], and bringing [the meal-offering]. Rabbi Yehudah says: The meal-offering cannot [be brought at a <i>Bamah</i>], nor are <i>Kohanim</i> [necessary there], nor are priestly garments, nor are service vessels, nor is the pleasing aroma, nor is a dividing blood line [the red marking on the altar indicating where blood should be dashed], nor is washing the hands and feet [necessary there]. But [the Tabernacle and the <i>Bamot</i>] are similar with regard to time, and <i>Notar</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to being unconsumed past the permitted time], and impurity.