Get the best of content every week!
Find answers to fascinating Jewish questions, enjoy holiday tips and guides, read real-life stories and more!

Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 8

Show content in:

Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 8


There is a stringency that applies with regard to an animal1 brought as a sin-offering that does not apply [even] to other sacrifices of the most sacred order. If blood from an animal brought as a sin-offering will spew from the container in which the blood was received2 onto a garment before [the blood] was sprinkled [on the altar],3 that garment is obligated to by washed with water4 in the Temple Courtyard, as [Leviticus 6:20] states: "If its blood is spewed on a garment, that which it has been spewed upon must be washed in a holy place."


חֹמֶר בְּחַטַּאת הַבְּהֵמָה מִשְּׁאָר קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים. שֶׁדַּם חַטַּאת הַבְּהֵמָה שֶׁנִּתַּז מִן הַכְּלִי שֶׁקִּבֵּל בּוֹ הַדָּם קֹדֶם הַזָּיָה עַל הַבֶּגֶד טָעוּן כִּבּוּס בְּמַיִם בָּעֲזָרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כ) "וַאֲשֶׁר יִזֶּה מִדָּמָהּ עַל הַבֶּגֶד אֲשֶׁר יִזֶּה עָלֶיהָ תְּכַבֵּס בְּמָקוֹם קָדשׁ":


A garment made from wool or linen,5 a soft hide,6 or a garment from goat's hair7 is required to be washed. A firm hide, however, is considered as wood8 and one should scrape the blood from it.

[The above applies to] the blood of sin-offerings that are eaten or those which are burnt,9 but not to sin-offerings from fowl, as implied by [ibid.:18]: "the sin-offering will be slaughtered," i.e., the Torah is speaking about [an offering] that is slaughtered and not one that is killed by melikah.10


אֶחָד הַבֶּגֶד וְאֶחָד הָעוֹר הָרַךְ וְאֶחָד הַשַּׂק טְעוּנִין כִּבּוּס. אֲבָל הָעוֹר הַקָּשֶׁה הֲרֵי הוּא כְּעֵץ וְגוֹרֵד הַדָּם מֵעָלָיו. וְאֶחָד דַּם חַטָּאת הַנֶּאֱכֶלֶת אוֹ דַּם חַטָּאת הַנִּשְׂרֶפֶת אֲבָל לֹא דַּם חַטַּאת הָעוֹף. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו יח) "תִּשָּׁחֵט הַחַטָּאת" בְּנִשְׁחֶטֶת הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר לֹא בְּנִמְלֶקֶת:


When a sin-offering was disqualified, its blood need not be washed [from garments]. This applies whether there was a time when it could have been acceptable or there was never a time when it could have been acceptable.

What is meant by [an offering] that had a time when it could have been acceptable? One which was left overnight, that became impure, or that was taken outside of the Temple Courtyard.11 What is meant by [an offering] that never had a time when it could have been acceptable? One that was disqualified because of [the manner in which] it was slaughtered12 or the manner in which its blood was sprinkled.


חַטָּאת שֶׁנִּפְסְלָה אֵין דָּמָהּ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכּשֶׁר בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכּשֶׁר. אֵי זוֹ הִיא שֶׁהָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכּשֶׁר. שֶׁלָּנָה וְשֶׁנִּטְמֵאת וְשֶׁיָּצָאת חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה. וְאֵי זוֹ הִיא שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכּשֶׁר. שֶׁנִּפְסְלָה בִּשְׁחִיטָה אוֹ בִּזְרִיקַת הַדָּם:


Only the place where the blood [was absorbed] must be washed.13 [The above applies provided the garment or] utensil14 is susceptible to contract ritual impurity and is fit to be washed. If, however, the blood spews on a wooden utensil or a metal utensil, it need not be washed because it is not fit to be washed. Instead, one should merely scrape the blood off.


אֵין טָעוּן כִּבּוּס אֶלָּא מְקוֹם הַדָּם בִּלְבַד. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה עַל כְּלִי שֶׁרָאוּי לְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה וְרָאוּי לְכִבּוּס. אֲבָל אִם נִתַּז עַל כְּלִי עֵץ אוֹ כְּלִי מַתֶּכֶת אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס לְפִי שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיִין לְכִבּוּס אֶלָּא גּוֹרְדָן בִּלְבַד:


If [the blood] spewed onto the skin of a fish, it is not necessary to wash it, for [the skin of a fish] is not susceptible to ritual impurity.15 If it was spewed onto the hide of an animal that was not skinned, it need not be washed. If, however, [the hide] was skinned [from the animal], it must be washed. Even though it is not susceptible to ritual impurity in its present state,16 it will be susceptible to ritual impurity after it has been treated.


נִתַּז עַל עוֹר הַדָּג אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס לְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה. אֲבָל אִם נִתַּז עַל עוֹר בְּהֵמָה. עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֻפְשַׁט אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. אַחַר שֶׁהֻפְשַׁט טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה עַתָּה הֲרֵי הוּא רָאוּי לְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה לְאַחַר שֶׁיִּתְעַבֵּד:


If blood spewed from [the animal's] neck onto a garment, it sputtered from the corner of the altar [to a garment],17 or the blood spilled to the floor [of the Temple Courtyard],18 it was gathered and then it spewed on to a garment, there is no requirement that [the garment] be washed, as [the prooftext] states: "If its blood is spewed...."19 [Implied is that the requirement] was stated only with regard to blood that was received in a sacred utensil and is fit to be sprinkled [on the altar], [because it is] of sufficient measure [to be sprinkled].20


נִתַּז מִן הַצַּוָּאר עַל הַבֶּגֶד אוֹ מֵעַל קֶרֶן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אוֹ שֶׁנִּשְׁפָּךְ הַדָּם עַל הָרִצְפָּה וַאֲסָפוֹ וְנִתַּז מִמֶּנּוּ עַל הַבֶּגֶד אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כ) "וַאֲשֶׁר יִזֶּה מִדָּמָהּ". לֹא אָמַרְתִּי אֶלָּא בְּדָם שֶׁנִּתְקַבֵּל בִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת וְרָאוּי לְהַזָּיָה וְיֵשׁ בּוֹ כְּדֵי הַזָּיָה:


If the four presentations of blood21 were made and then some of the remainder of the blood spewed from the container onto a garment, it need not be washed even though the remainder of the blood was not yet poured out on the base [of the altar].22 Similar principles apply with regard to the sin-offerings that are burnt.23


נָתַן אַרְבַּע הַמַּתָּנוֹת וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתַּז מִן הַכּוֹס עַל הַבֶּגֶד מִשְּׁיָרֵי הַדָּם אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא זָרַק הַשְּׁיָרִים עַל הַיְסוֹד. וְכֵן בְּחַטָּאוֹת הַנִּשְׂרָפוֹת:


[If the blood of a sin-offering] sputtered from [a priest's] finger after he performed its sprinkling with his hand, [the garment onto which it sputtered] need not be washed, because the remainder of the blood on his finger is not acceptable for sprinkling.24


נִתַּז מֵאֶצְבָּעוֹ אַחַר שֶׁיָּצָאת הַזָּיָה מִיָּדוֹ אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס שֶׁשְּׁיָרֵי הַדָּם שֶׁבָּאֶצְבַּע פְּסוּלִין לְהַזָּיָה:


If [the blood] spewed from one garment to another, the second garment need not be washed.25 If [blood] spewed on an impure garment, it need not be washed.26

If blood from a sin-offering sputtered onto a garment and then ordinary blood27 sputtered onto the blood from the sin-offering, it must be washed.28 If, however, ordinary blood - or even blood from a burnt-offering - sputtered onto a garment and then blood from a sin-offering sputtered on to it, it is not required to be washed, because [the blood from the sin-offering] is not absorbed in [the garment].29


נִתַּז מִן הַבֶּגֶד לְבֶגֶד שֵׁנִי אֵין הַבֶּגֶד הַשֵּׁנִי טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. נִתַּז עַל בֶּגֶד טָמֵא אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. נִתַּז דַּם הַחַטָּאת עַל הַבֶּגֶד וְנִתַּז עַל דַּם הַחַטָּאת דַּם חֻלִּין טָעוּן כִּבּוּס. אֲבָל אִם נִתַּז דַּם הַחֻלִּין תְּחִלָּה (אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ דַּם עוֹלָה) וְנִתַּז עָלָיו דַּם הַחַטָּאת אֵינוֹ טָעוּן כִּבּוּס שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נִבְלַע בּוֹ:


When the place [stained by] the blood is washed, it should be washed very thoroughly with water until no trace [of the blood] remains. All of the seven detergents30 that are used [to determine whether] a stain is blood or not31 should be used to [wash away] the blood of a sin-offering with the exception of urine, for urine should not be brought into the Temple.32


כְּשֶׁמְּכַבְּסִין אֶת מְקוֹם הַדָּם מְכַבְּסִין אוֹתוֹ בְּמַיִם יָפֶה יָפֶה עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִשָּׁאֵר לוֹ רשֶׁם. וְכָל שִׁבְעַת הַסַּמְמָנִים שֶׁמַּעֲבִירִין עַל הַכֶּתֶם מַעֲבִירִין עַל דַּם חַטָּאת. חוּץ מִמֵּי רַגְלַיִם שֶׁאֵין מַכְנִיסִין מֵי רַגְלַיִם לַמִּקְדָּשׁ:


An earthernware vessel in which a sin-offering that is to be eaten33 was cooked must be broken34 in the Temple Courtyard. A metal vessel in which [a sin-offering] was cooked must be cleansed35 and rinsed in water36 in the Temple Courtyard, as [Leviticus 6:21] states: "An earthenware vessel in which it is cooked shall be broken."

Although this verse does not state "in a holy place,"37 the same laws that apply to washing [a garment] apply. Just as the washing must be performed in a sacred place, so too, the breaking of an earthenware vessel and the cleansing and the rinsing of a metal utensil must be performed in a holy place. [These laws apply equally to] a utensil in which [the sin-offering] was cooked and one into which it was poured while it was boiling.38


כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלָה בּוֹ הַחַטָּאת הַנֶּאֱכֶלֶת טָעוּן שְׁבִירָה בָּעֲזָרָה. וּכְלִי מַתָּכוֹת שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלָה בּוֹ טָעוּן מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה בְּמַיִם בָּעֲזָרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כא) "וּכְלִי חֶרֶס אֲשֶׁר תְּבֻשַּׁל בּוֹ יִשָּׁבֵר". אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר כָּאן (ויקרא ז ו) (ויקרא טז כד) "בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ" הֲרֵי דִּינָן כְּדִין הַכִּבּוּס. מָה כִּבּוּס הַבֶּגֶד בַּקֹּדֶשׁ אַף שְׁבִירַת כְּלִי חֶרֶס וּשְׁטִיפַת כְּלִי מַתָּכוֹת וּמְרִיקָתוֹ בַּקֹּדֶשׁ. וְאֶחָד כְּלִי שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל בּוֹ אוֹ כְּלִי שֶׁהֶעֱרָה לְתוֹכוֹ רוֹתֵחַ:


"Cleansing" is performed with hot water and "rinsing" with cold water.39 The prooftext mentions "water," [excluding] wine, wine mixed with water, or other liquids. The thorough cleansing and rinsing [of the vessel] should resemble the thorough cleansing and rinsing of a cup.40

A spit and a grill [used to cook the meat of a sin-offering] must be purged41 in water that is heated by fire and then washed [in cold water].42


מְרִיקָה בְּחַמִּין וּשְׁטִיפָה בְּצוֹנֵן. בְּמַיִם לֹא בְּיַיִן וְלֹא בְּמֶזֶג וְלֹא בִּשְׁאָר מַשְׁקִין. וְהַמְּרִיקָה וְהַשְּׁטִיפָה כִּמְרִיקַת הַכּוֹס וּשְׁטִיפָתוֹ. וְהַשִּׁפּוּד וְהָאַסְכָּלָה מַגְעִילָן בְּמַיִם חַמִּים עַל גַּבֵּי הָאֵשׁ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מְדִיחָן:


When does the above apply? When one cooked [sacrificial meat] in these utensils after their blood was sprinkled as required by law. If, however, he cooked in [these utensils] before the sprinkling [of the blood]43 or he cooked meat from sin-offerings that were to be burnt in such utensils,44 it is not necessary that they be washed thoroughly and rinsed.45

If one cooked [the meat of a sin-offering] in [only] a portion of a utensil, the entire utensil must be washed thoroughly and rinsed.46


בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל בָּהֶן אַחַר שֶׁנִּזְרַק דָּמָהּ כְּהִלְכָתוֹ. אֲבָל אִם בִּשֵּׁל קֹדֶם זְרִיקָה אוֹ שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל בָּהּ בְּשַׂר חַטָּאת הַנִּשְׂרֶפֶת אֵינוֹ טָעוּן מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה. בִּשֵּׁל בְּמִקְצָת הַכְּלִי כֻּלּוֹ טָעוּן מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה:


There is an unresolved doubt [concerning the ruling] when meat [from a sacrificial offering] was roasted in the space of an earthenware oven:47 Must [the oven] be destroyed48 since [the meat] was cooked inside of it49 or need it not be destroyed, since it did not touch it?50 [The above] does not apply only with regard to a sin-offering. Instead, all utensils that were used for [meat] from sacrificial offerings with hot water,51 whether sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity or sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity, are required to be washed thoroughly and rinsed after52 the time for eating from them.53 Similarly, a spit and a grill should be purged after eating [from the sacrifice which they were used to cook].

They should not be left until one desires to eat from them a second time.54 Instead, when the time for eating from them is completed, one should purge the grill and the spit and wash thoroughly and rinse the utensil whether it be a metal utensil or an earthenware utensil.55 [There is] one exception: [the meat from] a sin-offering. An earthenware utensil [in which it was cooked] must be broken. [Nevertheless,] one may cook [in a utensil] and do so a second and third time immediately, whether using a metal utensil or an earthenware utensil. [The requirement to] wash it thoroughly and rinse it [applies only] at the conclusion of the time permitted to partake [from these sacrificial foods].


צָלָה הַבָּשָׂר [בַּאֲוִיר] תַּנּוּר שֶׁל חֶרֶס יֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר סָפֵק אִם יִשָּׁבֵר הוֹאִיל וְנִתְבַּשְּׁלָה בּוֹ אוֹ לֹא יִשָּׁבֵר הוֹאִיל וְלֹא נָגְעָה בּוֹ. וְלֹא בְּחַטָּאת בִּלְבַד אֶלָּא כָּל הַכֵּלִים שֶׁמִּשְׁתַּמְּשִׁין בָּהֶן בְּקָדָשִׁים עַל יְדֵי חַמִּין בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים בֵּין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים טְעוּנִין מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה עֵקֶב אֲכִילָה. וְכֵן הַשִּׁפּוּד וְהָאַסְכָּלָה מַגְעִילָן עֵקֶב אֲכִילָה. וְאֵינוֹ מְנִיחָן עַד זְמַן אֲכִילָה שְׁנִיָּה. אֶלָּא כְּשֶׁיַּשְׁלִים לֶאֱכל יַגְעִיל הַשִּׁפּוּד וְהָאַסְכָּלָה וִימָרֵק וְיִּשְׁטֹף הַכְּלִי בֵּין כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת בֵּין כְּלֵי חֶרֶס חוּץ מִן הַחַטָּאת שֶׁשּׁוֹבֵר בָּהּ כְּלֵי חֶרֶס. וּמְבַשֵּׁל וְשׁוֹנֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּשׁ מִיָּד בֵּין בִּכְלֵי מַתָּכוֹת בֵּין בִּכְלֵי חֶרֶס וּמְמָרֵק וְשׁוֹטֵף עַד סוֹף אֲכִילָה:


Utensils made from animal turds,56 stone, or earth57 are not required to be thoroughly washed and rinsed even [when the meat of] a sin-offering was cooked in them. All that is necessary is that they be cleansed.58

With regard to a sin-offering, [Leviticus 6:20] states: "Anything that will touch its meat will become sanctified,"59 i.e., it will be of the same status. If it has been disqualified, anything that touches it is also disqualified. If it is kosher, anything that touches it should be eaten according to the laws that apply to it, with the same degree of holiness.60


כְּלֵי גְּלָלִים וּכְלֵי אֲבָנִים וּכְלֵי אֲדָמָה אֵינָן טְעוּנִין מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה אֲפִלּוּ בְּחַטָּאת אֶלָּא הֲדָחָה בִּלְבַד. נֶאֱמַר בְּחַטָּאת (ויקרא ו כ) "כּל אֲשֶׁר יִגַּע בִּבְשָׂרָהּ יִקְדָּשׁ" לִהְיוֹת כָּמוֹהָ. אִם פְּסוּלָה הִיא הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהּ פָּסוּל וְאִם כְּשֵׁרָה הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהּ יֹאכַל כָּמוֹהָ וּבִקְדֻשָּׁתָהּ:


When does the above apply? When [the flavor of the meat of a sacrificial offering] was absorbed by it. If, however, it merely touched it, but its flavor was not absorbed, it does not cause it to become sanctified.61 The above applies both to a sin-offering and any other sacrificial offering, whether sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity or sacrifices of a severe degree of sanctity, as [implied by Leviticus 7:37]: "This is the law for the burnt-offering, the meal-offering...."62


בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁנִּבְלְעָה בּוֹ. אֲבָל נְגִיעָה בְּלֹא הַבְלָעָה אֵינָהּ מְקֻדֶּשֶׁת. וְאֶחָד הַחַטָּאת וְאֶחָד שְׁאָר קָדָשִׁים בֵּין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים בֵּין חֲמוּרִים שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ז לז) "זֹאת הַתּוֹרָה לָעלָה וְלַמִּנְחָה":


If the meat [of a sacrificial offering] touched a cake63 and [its flavor] was absorbed in a portion of it, [the cake] does not become sanctified in its entirety. Instead, one should cut off the portion in which it was absorbed.64


נָגַע בְּשָׂרָהּ בְּרָקִיק וְנִבְלַע בְּמִקְצָתוֹ לֹא נִתְקַדֵּשׁ כֻּלּוֹ אֶלָּא חוֹתֵךְ מְקוֹם הַבֶּלַע:


[The following laws apply to] a utensil in which sacrificial food and ordinary food were cooked together or sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity were cooked together with sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity. If there is a sufficient amount [of the sacrificial food] to impart its flavor,65 the entire mixture must be eaten according to the laws governing the food of the most severe category. The utensil must be thoroughly washed and rinsed according to the laws governing the food of the most severe category.66 If it did not impart its flavor to them, the foods of the more lenient category need not be eaten according to the laws governing the food of the most severe category and they are not governed by their laws at all. The utensil [in which the mixture was cooked], however, must be thoroughly washed and rinsed.67


כְּלִי שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל בּוֹ קָדָשִׁים וְחֻלִּין אוֹ קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וְקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים. אִם יֵשׁ בָּהֶן בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם הֲרֵי הַכּל נֶאֱכָל כֶּחָמוּר שֶׁבָּהֶן. וְטָעוּן הַכְּלִי מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה וְהַכּל כֶּחָמוּר שֶׁבָּהֶן לְכָל דָּבָר. וְאִם לֹא נָתַן טַעַם זֶה בָּזֶה אֵין הַקַּלִּין נֶאֱכָלִין כַּחֲמוּרִים וְאֵינָן כְּמוֹתָן לְכָל דָּבָר. אֲבָל הַכְּלִי טָעוּן מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה:


When the blood of a sin-offering sputtered on a garment and then that garment was taken out of the Temple Courtyard, it should be returned to the Temple Courtyard and washed there.

What should be done if [the garment] became impure outside the Temple Courtyard?68 It should be torn69 so that it will become pure.70 He should then bring it into [the Temple Courtyard] and wash it there. He must leave intact a portion of the garment the size of a handkerchief, for [the relevant verse]71 speaks of a "garment," i.e., a garment must be washed.72 Even though [the remnants of the garment] are impure due to Rabbinic decree,73 because of the remnant the size of a handkerchief, since the majority of it is torn, it is ritually pure according to Scriptural Law and it is permitted to bring it into the Sanctuary to wash out the blood.74


בֶּגֶד שֶׁנִּתַּז עָלָיו דַּם הַחַטָּאת וְיָצָא חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה מַחְזִירוֹ לָעֲזָרָה וּמְכַבְּסוֹ שָׁם. נִטְמָא חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה כֵּיצַד יַעֲשֶׂה. קוֹרְעוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטְהַר וּמַכְנִיסוֹ וּמְכַבְּסוֹ בִּפְנִים. וְצָרִיךְ לְהָנִיחַ בּוֹ שָׁלֵם כְּדֵי מַעֲפֹרֶת לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כ) "בֶּגֶד" צָרִיךְ לְכַבֵּס בֶּגֶד. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם מִפְּנֵי כְּדֵי הַמַּעֲפֹרֶת שֶׁנִּשְׁאֲרָה בּוֹ כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּקְרַע רֻבּוֹ טָהוֹר מִן הַתּוֹרָה וּמֻתָּר לְהַכְנִיסוֹ לַמִּקְדָּשׁ לְכַבֵּס הַדָּם:


What should be done when blood from a sin-offering sputtered on [the High Priest's] cloak,75 it was taken out [of the Temple Courtyard], and became impure? [The difficulty is that] one who tears it is liable for lashes, as we explained. He should bring it into [the Temple Courtyard] less than three fingerbreadths at a time76 and wash it in [the Temple Courtyard]. After all the blood has been washed off it little by little, it should be immersed [in a mikveh]77 outside [the Temple Courtyard].


מְעִיל שֶׁנִּתַּז עָלָיו דַּם חַטָּאת וְיָצָא וְנִטְמָא לַחוּץ כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה וַהֲרֵי הַקּוֹרֵעַ אוֹתוֹ לוֹקֶה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. מַכְנִיסוֹ פָּחוֹת פָּחוֹת מִשָּׁלֹשׁ אֶצְבָּעוֹת וּמְכַבְּסוֹ בִּפְנִים. וְאַחַר שֶׁיִּתְכַּבֵּס כָּל הַדָּם מְעַט מְעַט מַטְבִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בַּחוּץ:


When an earthen-ware utensil in which a sin-offering78 was cooked was taken out of the [Temple] Courtyard, it should be brought back in and broken there.79 If it became impure outside the Temple Courtyard, it should be perforated to the extent that a small root [could protrude through it] so that it will be ritually pure,80 and then bring it back inside [the Temple Courtyard] and break it there. If it is broken with a larger hole, it should not be broken in [the Temple Courtyard], because only utensils are broken there.81

Similarly, when a metal utensil in which [sin-offerings] were cooked was taken out of the [Temple] Courtyard, it should be brought back in and thoroughly washed and rinsed there. If it became impure when it was taken out, its [bottom] should be opened82 until it becomes pure83 and then it should be brought back inside [the Temple Courtyard] [The metal] should then be flattened so that the opening becomes closed as is the form of utensils.84 Afterwards, it should be thoroughly washed and rinsed in the Temple Courtyard, as [Leviticus 6:21] states: "If [it was cooked] in a copper utensil, [it should be thoroughly washed and rinsed with water]." [Implied is that] only "utensils" are thoroughly washed in the Temple Courtyard.


כְּלִי חֶרֶס שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל בּוֹ הַחַטָּאת וְיָצָא מַכְנִיסוֹ וְשׁוֹבְרוֹ בִּפְנִים. נִטְמָא בַּחוּץ נוֹקְבוֹ בִּכְדֵי שֹׁרֶשׁ קָטָן כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטְהַר וּמַכְנִיסוֹ וְשׁוֹבְרוֹ בִּפְנִים. וְאִם נִקְּבוֹ נֶקֶב גָּדוֹל מִזֶּה אֵינוֹ שׁוֹבְרוֹ בִּפְנִים שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינוֹ כְּלִי וְאֵין שׁוֹבְרִין בִּפְנִים אֶלָּא כֵּלִים. וְכֵן כְּלִי מַתָּכוֹת שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל בּוֹ וְיָצָא חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה מַכְנִיסוֹ וּמוֹרְקוֹ וְשׁוֹטְפוֹ בִּפְנִים. נִטְמָא כְּשֶׁיָּצָא פּוֹחֲתוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּטְהַר וּמַכְנִיסוֹ בִּפְנִים וְחוֹזֵר וּמְרַדְּדוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּסָּתֵם הַפְּחָת וְיַחְזֹר כְּתַבְנִית הַכֵּלִים. וְאַחַר כָּךְ מוֹרְקוֹ וְשׁוֹטְפוֹ בָּעֲזָרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ו כא) "וְאִם בִּכְלִי נְחשֶׁת" וְגוֹ' אֵין מוֹרְקִין בִּפְנִים אֶלָּא כֵּלִים:

Test Yourself on This Chapter


But not a fowl (Halachah 2).


If, however, it spewed forth from the animal at the time of slaughter, spluttered from the blood sprinkled to the altar, or spilled to the floor and was collected from there, these laws do not apply (Halachah 6).


Similarly, once the blood was sprinkled this stringency does not apply (Halachah 7).


See Halachah 10.


This is the meaning of the term beged (Rashi, Zevachim 93b).


See Halachah 5.


Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 27:1).


See Halachah 4.


See Chapter 1, Halachot 15-16.


Although melikah is equivalent to ritual slaughter in certain contexts, since the verse specifies "slaughter," it is excluded in this instance (Radbaz).


I.e., in all these instances, the ritual slaughter and the sprinkling were performed in an appropriate manner and thus the meat could have been consumed in an acceptable manner.


See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 15:1 which mentions several ways in which ritual slaughter can be disqualified.


And not the entire garment (Zevachim 93b).


I.e., this requirement applies not only to garments, but also other objects made from these materials.


See Hilchot Keilim 1:3-4; 10:1. Zevachim 93b states that only an article that is susceptible to ritual impurity must be washed.


For it is not considered as a k'li, a useful article, in its present state.


Since it has already been sprinkled on the altar, these laws no longer apply to it (Zevachim 92b).


Without first being received in a sacred utensil. In such an instance, it is not fit to be sprinkled on the altar (Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 1:25). If, however, it was first received in a sacred utensil and then spilled, it is fit to be sprinkled on the altar. Hence, if it spewed onto a garment, the garment must be washed.


The same Hebrew root haza'ah is used both for the sprinkling of the blood on the altar and the spewing of the blood on a garment, leading to the inference stated by the Rambam.


Our translation is based on the gloss of the Radbaz.


As prescribed in Chapter 5, Halachah 7.


Because pouring out the remainder of the blood is not an essential element of the sacrifice.


I.e., once the priest has completed the sprinkling of their blood that is required as explained in Chapter 5, Halachot 12-18, the remaining blood does not require that it be washed.


As evident from Chapter 5, Halachah 8.


Zevachim 92b compares this to the situation described in Halachah 6 when blood was spilled onto the floor and then sputtered onto a garment.


For it is considered as if the blood became impure beforehand and thus would have been unacceptable for sprinkling. Zevachim 93a associates this situation with the question whether water set aside to be used for the sprinkling of the ashes of the red heifer that became impure can be purified or not. Based on that discussion, Rav Yosef Corcus suggests that there is a printing error in the text of the Mishneh Torah and the ruling is that the garment must be washed. This conclusion is supported by the Rambam's ruling in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 1:36 which states that blood from consecrated animals can never contract ritual impurity.


I.e., blood from an animal that was not consecrated. As evident from the following clause, seemingly, the same law would apply with regard to blood from a burnt offering. Indeed, Zevachim 98a-b states this explicitly.


For the blood from the sin-offering is absorbed into it and is not washed away by the other blood.


For it had already absorbed the other blood.


The saliva of a person who has not eaten, beans that have been chewed, urine that has become sour, marsh mallow, natron, glasswort, and soapwort. [The names of these detergents were taken from Rav Kappach's translation of the Arabic terms used in the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 9:6).]


If the stain is removed when these seven detergents are applied to it, we conclude that it was blood. If it is not removed, we assume that it is paint or another type of dye.


For it is not respectful to bring such a substance into a place where the Divine Presence is overtly revealed.

The commentaries have noted that Zevachim 95a (the source for this halachah) mentions that urine was brought into the Temple, except that it was first mixed with the saliva so that it was not taken in as an independent entity.


As opposed to those which are burnt.


The rationale is that the flavor of the meat of the sin-offering can never be totally purged from an earthenware vessel.


In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 11:8), the Rambam defines this term as meaning "thoroughly washing a utensil until everything attached to it is removed."


There the Rambam interprets this as meaning "pouring water over the utensil without scraping the filth off by hand." The Radbaz elaborates on the difference between the Rambam's approach (who appears to require only the thorough cleaning of the vessels) and that of Rashi who interprets Zevachim 95b as requiring that these utensils must be purged in the same manner as one purges non-kosher food from a vessel into which it was absorbed.

According to this conception of the Rambam's approach, the problem is not that the fat absorbed in the utensil becomes notar, "sacrificial food that remained overnight," and must be destroyed. Instead, the question involves merely the thorough cleaning of the utensil. This interpretation is borne out by the continuation of the Rambam's statements in his Commentary to the Mishnah where he speaks about the issue of notar with regard to the food attached to the utensil, but does not mention the food absorbed within it.


As does the preceding verse which mentions washing the blood from a garment.


Since the stew including the meat of the sin-offering was boiling while it was poured into the vessel, it is considered as if it was cooked there.


This represents the Rambam's version of Zevachim, loc. cit. There are, however, other versions of that Mishnah.


In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam writes that the intent of this comparison is to imply that the container must be washed until there is no trace of the previous substance, as one would a cup from which he would drink.


To remove the fat absorbed in the container (ibid.).


In the above source, the Rambam explains that this purging follows the same process in which non-kosher food is purged from cooking utensils. Significantly, however, when he mentions the process of purging non-kosher cooking utensils (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 17:3-4), he does not mention the need to rinse them in cold water although he does mention that requirement in Hilchot Chametz UMatzah 5:23.


This would disqualify the sacrifice.


See Halachah 11.


The Radbaz questions this ruling, because seemingly, the fat absorbed in the utensil, becomes notar, "sacrificial food that remained overnight," and it must be destroyed. He offers three possible resolutions:

a) the Rambam is speaking about an instance when the utensil was used on the same day. Hence, the problem does not arise.

b) the issue does not concern notar at all, as explained in the notes to Halachah 12.

c) since the absorbed fat is more than a day old when it becomes notar, its flavor is impaired (notain taam lifgam). Hence, since the prohibition against the absorbed food is merely a Rabbinic safeguard, our Sages did not apply it in this instance, because the situation involves the Temple service.


The Radbaz uses this law as a further support for his idea that the fat need not be purged from the utensil. For the concept that cooked food which is absorbed in part of a utensil is considered as if it were absorbed in the entire utensil is an established principle.


Similar laws apply with regard to sacrifices cooked in a metal oven, except that the question involves the requirement to be thoroughly washed and rinsed.


As required by Halachah 11.


For the Torah mentions the necessity of washing out or destroying the utensil after sacrificial meat was cooked in it. It does not state that for the requirement to apply, the flavor of the meat must be absorbed in the utensil.


I.e., the above question is discussed by Zevachim 95b and is left unresolved by our Sages.


I.e., sacrificial meat was either cooked in it or poured in it while warm [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 11:8)].


Our translation is based on the glosses of the Ra'avad and the Kessef Mishneh.


In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam quotes Zevachim, loc. cit., explaining that this concept is derived as follows. Leviticus 6:21-22 states: "All of the priestly males shall partake of it" and directly afterwards states: "and it shall be washed thoroughly and rinsed in water," implying that the two activities should be performed in direct sequence.


I.e., beyond the time when it is permitted to eat from them.


The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, stating that there is no point in washing an earthenware utensil thoroughly. Even if one does so, the taste of the sacrificial offering will remain absorbed within it. The Rambam's understanding is that the Torah only required that an earthenware utensil be broken when it was used for cooking a sin-offering, if it was used for cooking other sacrifices, there is no obligation. This difference of opinion relates to a question of greater scope: the difference of opinion mentioned above whether it is necessary to purge the utensils from the food absorbed in them or not.


In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 10:1), the Rambam mentions that there are some who interpret the Hebrew term as referring to utensils made from marble. He, however, favors the translation given above.


This refers to utensils made from earth that were not fired in a kiln and hence, are not governed by the laws applying to earthenware utensils.


The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh explain that since the Torah does not make any specifications with regard to such utensils (as it does with regard to earthenware and metal utensils), there is no obligation with regard to them. He does not mention wood utensils, because wood utensils do not resemble earthenware and metal.


See Chapter 10, Halachah 12, which states that at the outset, a sin-offering should not be eaten together with other sacrifices.


I.e., it can only be eaten in the Temple Courtyard by males of the priestly family on the day the sacrifice was offered and on the following night.


Zevachim 97a, et al, derives this concept from the fact that the term the prooftext uses for "its meat," bibisarah, literally means "in its meat." Implied is the flavor must be absorbed into the meat of the other food.


Zevachim 98b interprets this verse as teaching that there is a fundamental commonality to all the sacrificial offerings.


A soft, spongy wafer [see the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Challah 1:4)].


And only that portion becomes sanctified.


Unless there is a priest who can distinguish whether the taste was imparted or not, we assume that if the food in the more lenient category is 60 times the amount of the food in the more severe category, the taste of the more severe type of food has not been imparted. Otherwise, we must be stringent (Zevachim 97a).


Similarly, if an earthenware vessel was used to cook meat from a sin-offering, according to the Rambam, it must be broken. According to Rashi and others, this applies whenever sacrificial offerings are cooked in an earthenware utensil (Radbaz).


I.e., when meat from sacrifices of the most severe degree of sanctity is cooked together with a larger quantity of meat from sacrifices of lesser sanctity, the utensils need not be purged at the time the commandment to partake of the sacrifices of the most severe degree of sanctity is concluded, because that meat is considered insignificant, due to the majority of the other meat. Nevertheless, when the time to partake of the sacrifices of the lesser degree of holiness is concluded, the utensils must be thoroughly washed and rinsed (ibid.). When sacrificial meat is cooked together with ordinary meat, even if its taste is not recognizable, we require that the utensils be thoroughly washed and rinsed, because of the stringencies involving sacrificial food (Radbaz).


And thus it would not be permitted to return it to the Temple Courtyard in its present state [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 11:6)].


This refers to both ordinary garments and priestly garments with the exception of the cloak. Although it is forbidden to tear priestly garments with a destructive intent (Hilchot K'lei Hamikdash 9:3), tearing it for this purpose is not considered as tearing it with a destructive intent.


As stated in Hilchot Kelim 23:11, when the majority of an impure garment is torn, the remnants are considered as ritually pure.


Anything smaller than a handkerchief could not be justifiably called a garment.


And thus one might think that they should not be brought into the Temple Courtyard.


I.e., our Sages did not enforce their decree in this instance, because doing so would lead to the nullification of a Scriptural obligation.


Concerning which there is an explicit prohibition not to tear it (Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash, loc. cit.). Hence the advice given in the previous halachah is not relevant.


A portion of cloth less than three fingerbreadths wide is not considered as a garment. Hence, the laws of ritual impurity do not apply to it. Although in this instance, the cloak is intact and hence, is larger than this measure, since there is no alternative, this provision is allowed.


To purify it.


The Radbaz maintains that this law applies to the meat of a sin-offering, but not the meat of other offerings.


Zevachim 94b explains that this concept is derived from the laws governing the washing of a garment mentioned in Halachah 19.


Zevachim 95a explains that "a utensil" must be able to contain liquids and if has a hole, it is no longer fit for such a purpose. Thus once the utensil has been broken, it is ritually pure. (This represents the Scriptural Law. With regard to Rabbinic Law, see Hilchot Keilim 19:2.)


And if it is broken to a greater extent, it is not considered as a utensil at all and therefore should not be brought into the Temple Courtyard.

Why was a utensil broken to the extent that a root could project through it allowed to be brought into the Temple Courtyard? Since our Sages considered it a utensil in certain contexts, they allowed it to be considered a utensil so that the obligation to break utensils in the Temple Courtyard could be fulfilled.


With a large hole (see Hilchot Keilim 11:1-2).


Because it is no longer fit to be served as a utensil.


Hilchot Keilim 12:1 states that when a metal utensil that had regained ritual purity, because it had been opened, becomes closed again, it reverts to being ritually impure. This, however, is a Rabbinic safeguard and our Sages did not uphold their decree in this instance so that the practice of purging the utensils could be fulfilled.

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah