Zevachim Daf 61 זבחים דַף 61

On the previous Daf, Abaye said that even קדשים קלים may not be eaten when the מזבח is damaged. Rebbe Yirmiyah sought to disprove this from a contradiction between Baraisos: one says that when the משכן was dismantled and the מזבחות removed for journeys, kodashim meat became פסול. The other says that kodashim may be eaten בשני מקומות – in two places, which presumably means both while the משכן was standing and while they traveled!? This contradiction apparently proves that in contrast to קדשי קדשים, קדשים קלים may be eaten without a מזבח!? Ravina answers that the two Baraisos reflect a machlokes Tannaim. Alternatively, the “two places” of the second Baraisa refer to two situations, to permit eating kodashim both while the משכן is fully standing, and לאחר שיפרקו הלוים את המשכן – after the Leviim dismantled the Mishkan but the מזבח is still in place. Although one might think the meat should be disqualified as יוצא – having left [the עזרה], since it was dismantled, the passuk says ונסע אהל מועד – the Tent of Meeting shall journey, implying that even while traveling, it is still called the אהל מועד.

Rav Huna said in Rav’s name: מזבח של שילה של אבנים היה – the מזבח in Shiloh was made of stones, as Rebbe Elazar ben Yaakov darshened: the Torah mentions “stones” three times regarding a מזבח, alluding to three מזבחות made of stone: in שילה, in נב and גבעון, and in the Beis Hamikdash. This is challenged from a Baraisa teaching: לא נסתלקה מעל מזבח הנחושת אלא בימי שלמה – the fire which descended from Heaven did not depart from the Copper Mizbeiach until the days of Shlomo, when the fire went instead onto Shlomo’s מזבח, and the fire which descended in Shlomo’s time did not depart until Menashe removed it. If the מזבח in שילה was of stones, then the Heavenly fire left Moshe’s מזבח centuries before Shlomo’s מזבח was built!? The Gemara first answers that this question is a machlokes Tannaim. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak answers that the Baraisa only means לא נסתלקה לבטלה – [the Heavenly fire] did not depart completely [from the מזבח]. The Rabbis explained this means that Moshe’s מזבח would send sparks and flames to the מזבח of שילה. Rav Pappa says: אושפיזא הוה נקט – [the fire] acted as a guest, alternating between being on Moshe’s מזבח and שילה’s מזבח.

A Mishnah states that when the second Beis Hamikdash was built, four amos were added on the south and west sides. Rav Yosef explains why: משום דלא ספק – because it was otherwise not enough for all the korbanos. Abaye asked, if the original מזבח was sufficient during the first Beis Hamikdash, when the population was far greater, why did it not suffice during the second Beis Hamikdash? Rav Yosef answered: התם אש של שמים מסייעתן – there, during the first Beis Hamikdash, a Heavenly fire aided them, but did not in the second Beis Hamikdash. Bar Kappara explained differently: שיתין הוסיפו – they added to the מזבח to incorporate the shissin, the two holes in the ground into which ניסוך היין and ניסוך המים were poured. During the first Beis Hamikdash, they understood "מזבח אדמה" to imply אטום באדמה – enclosed of earth, without holes. Eventually, they held שתיה כאכילה – the מזבח’s “drinking” should be like its “eating”: just as the מזבח “consumes” korbanos placed on the fire, its “drinks” should also be poured into the מזבח itself. On the next Daf, Rav Yosef quotes a Baraisa teaching that in the second Beis Hamikdash, they darshened a passuk to teach that the מזבח could be built up to sixty amos long.