The mishna describes the slaughtering of the daily tamid sacrifice through sprinkling of the blood, flaying the hide, cutting its body into parts and the procession of priests carrying it to the ramp of the altar.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Tamid 31
לֹא הָיָה שׁוֹבֵר בּוֹ אֶת הָרֶגֶל, אֶלָּא נוֹקְבוֹ מִתּוֹךְ עַרְקוּבּוֹ, וְתוֹלֶה בּוֹ.
When the priest flayed the hide of the daily offering after its slaughter, he would not break the animal’s leg in the typical manner of flaying an animal; rather, he punctures the leg from within each knee of the hind leg and suspends the animal by placing these holes on two hooks, in order to flay the animal’s hide.
הָיָה מַפְשִׁיט וְיוֹרֵד עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לֶחָזֶה. הִגִּיעַ לֶחָזֶה, חָתַךְ אֶת הָרֹאשׁ, וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בּוֹ. חָתַךְ אֶת הַכְּרָעַיִם, וּנְתָנָן לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהֶן. מֵרַק אֶת הַהֶפְשֵׁט. קָרַע אֶת הַלֵּב וְהוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ.
The priest began flaying from the top of the inverted animal, descending until he would reach the hide of the breast. Once he reached the breast, he severed the lamb’s head and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. Next he severed the four legs below the knee and gave them to the priest who won the right to take them up to the ramp. He completed the flaying of the remaining hide from the breast down, and then the priest cut the heart and drained its blood.
חָתַךְ אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וּנְתָנָן לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהֶן. עָלָה לָרֶגֶל הַיְמָנִית, חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, וּשְׁתֵּי בֵּיצִים עִמָּהּ. קְרָעוֹ, וְנִמְצָא כּוּלּוֹ גָּלוּי לְפָנָיו.
Next the priest severed the remaining upper parts of the forelegs and gave them to the priest who won the right to take them up to the ramp. Afterward he moved up to the remaining upper part of the right hind leg, severed it, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp; and the animal’s two testicles were cut along with the right leg, leaving the animal suspended by its left hind leg. Then the priest tore open the animal’s midsection, resulting in the innards of the entire animal being exposed before him.
נָטַל אֶת הַפֶּדֶר, וּנְתָנוֹ עַל בֵּית שְׁחִיטַת הָרֹאשׁ מִלְּמַעְלָה. נָטַל אֶת הַקְּרָבַיִים, וּנְתָנָן לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהֶן, לַהֲדִיחָן. וְהַכָּרֵס מְדִיחִין אוֹתָהּ בְּבֵית הַמְּדִיחִין. וּמְדִיחִין אוֹתָהּ כׇּל צׇרְכָּהּ, וְהַקְּרָבַיִים מְדִיחִין אוֹתָן שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים בְּמִעוּטָן, עַל שׁוּלְחָנוֹת שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ שֶׁבֵּין הָעַמּוּדִים.
He took the fats and placed them on the place of slaughter on the animal’s head above it, to conceal the place where it was severed while the priest would take the head to the altar. Then the priest took the innards and gave them to the priest who won the right to take them up to the ramp, in order to rinse them first. And with regard to the stomach, in which there is a significant amount of waste, the priests would rinse it in the rinsing site located in the south of the courtyard, east of the Gate of the Water, and they rinsed it as much it required. And with regard to the innards, the priests would rinse them three times at a minimum, on the marble tables that were positioned between the pillars in the slaughterhouse.
נָטַל אֶת הַסַּכִּין, וְהִפְרִישׁ אֶת הָרֵיאָה מִן הַכָּבֵד, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד מִן הַכָּבֵד, וְלֹא הָיָה מְזִיזָהּ מִמְּקוֹמָהּ. נוֹקַב אֶת הֶחָזֶה, וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה.
The priest then took the knife and separated the lung from the liver, and the finger-like protrusion from the lower edge of the liver, also known as the lobe of the liver, from the liver. And he would not move any one of the organs from its place. He would leave the lung attached to the neck, the lobe attached to the haunch, and the liver attached to the right flank. The priest would puncture around the breast, separating it from the flanks and the ribs, and he gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp.
עָלָה לַדּוֹפֶן הַיְּמָנִית, הָיָה חוֹתֵךְ וְיוֹרֵד עַד הַשִּׁדְרָה, וְלֹא הָיָה נוֹגֵעַ בַּשִּׁדְרָה, עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לְבֵין שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת דַּקּוֹת. חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, וְהַכָּבֵד תְּלוּיָה בָּהּ.
He then moved up to the right flank and would cut it and separate it from the animal’s body. And he would continue to cut, descending until he would reach the spinal column, and the priest would not touch the spinal column, leaving the spine intact and attached to the left flank. He would continue cutting until he reached the space between the two narrow ribs near the neck, leaving them in place. The priest cut the right flank, separating it from the body of the animal, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. And the liver was suspended from it.
בָּא לוֹ לַגֵּרָה, הִנִּיחַ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת מִכָּאן, וּשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת מִכָּאן. חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, הַקָּנֶה וְהַלֵּב וְהָרֵיאָה תְּלוּיִם בָּהּ.
The priest then came to the cud. He left attached to it, in their entirety, the two narrow ribs from here, the right side, and the two narrow ribs from there, the left side. He cut the cud and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp; and the windpipe, the heart, and the lung were suspended from it.
בָּא לוֹ לַדּוֹפֶן הַשְּׂמָאלִית, הִנִּיחַ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת דַּקּוֹת מִלְּמַעְלָן, וּשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת דַּקּוֹת מִלְּמַטָּן, וְכָךְ הָיָה מַנִּיחַ בַּחֲבֶירְתָּהּ. נִמְצָא מַנִּיחַ שְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם מִלְּמַעְלָן, שְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם מִלְּמַטָּן.
He came to cut the left flank of the body and left attached to it two narrow ribs above, near the haunch, as the animal was suspended upside down, and two narrow ribs below, near the cud. And he also did that with its counterpart, the right flank, resulting in two narrow ribs in each flank above and two narrow ribs in each flank below.
חֲתָכָהּ וְנָתְנָה לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, וְהַשִּׁדְרָה עִמָּהּ, וְהַטְּחוֹל תָּלוּי בָּהּ, וְהִיא הָיְתָה גְּדוֹלָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁל יָמִין קוֹרִין גְּדוֹלָה – שֶׁהַכָּבֵד תְּלוּיָה בָּהּ. בָּא לוֹ לָעוֹקֶץ, חֲתָכוֹ, וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בּוֹ. הָאַלְיָה, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד, וּשְׁתֵּי כְּלָיוֹת עִמּוֹ. נָטַל אֶת הָרֶגֶל הַשְּׂמָאלִית, חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ. נִמְצְאוּ כּוּלָּן עוֹמְדִים בְּשׁוּרָה, וְהָאֵבָרִים בְּיָדָם.
He cut the left flank and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp, and the spinal column was with it, and the spleen was suspended from it. And the left flank was greater, i.e., the larger of the two, because it included the spine, but they referred to the right flank as the greater one, as in addition to the flank itself, the liver was suspended from it. He came to the haunch, cut it, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. And the tail, and the finger-like protrusion of the liver, and the two kidneys were with it. He took the remaining upper part of the left hind leg, cut it, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. This resulted in all of the nine priests who won the rights to take the limbs up to the ramp standing in line, and the limbs were in their hands.
הָרִאשׁוֹן – בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרֶגֶל. הָרֹאשׁ בִּימִינוֹ, וְחוֹטְמוֹ כְּלַפֵּי זְרוֹעוֹ, קַרְנָיו בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, בֵּית שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מִלְּמַעְלָן, וְהַפֶּדֶר נָתוּן עָלֶיהָ. הָרֶגֶל שֶׁל יָמִין בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הַשֵּׁנִי – בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם, שֶׁל יָמִין בִּימִינוֹ, וְשֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ.
The first priest stood with the head and with the right hind leg of the animal. Since it was more significant, the head was in his right hand, and its nose was turned toward the priest’s arm. Its horns were between his fingers, and the place of its slaughter was above, and the fats were placed upon it, to conceal the bloody place of slaughter. The right hind leg was in his left hand, and the outer side of the leg, from which its hide was flayed, rather than the side on which the incision was made, was facing out. The second priest stood with the two forelegs. He held the right foreleg in his right hand and the left foreleg in his left hand, and the outer side of the leg, from which its hide was flayed, was facing out.
הַשְּׁלִישִׁי – בָּעוֹקֶץ וּבָרֶגֶל. הָעוֹקֶץ בִּימִינוֹ, וְהָאַלְיָה מְדוּלְדֶּלֶת בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד וּשְׁתֵּי כְּלָיוֹת עִמּוֹ. הָרֶגֶל שֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הָרְבִיעִי – בֶּחָזֶה וּבַגֵּרָה. הֶחָזֶה בִּימִינוֹ וְהַגֵּרָה בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וְצַלְעוֹתָיו בֵּין שְׁנֵי אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו. הַחֲמִישִׁי – בִּשְׁתֵּי דְּפָנוֹת, שֶׁל יָמִין בִּימִינוֹ, וְשֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הַשִּׁשִּׁי – בַּקְּרָבַיִם הַנְּתוּנִים בְּבָזֵךְ, וּכְרָעַיִם עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן מִלְּמַעְלָה.
The third priest stood with the haunch and the left hind leg. He held the haunch in his right hand, and the tail was hanging between his fingers, and the finger-like protrusion of the liver and the two kidneys were with it. He held the left hind leg in his left hand, and the outer side of the leg, from which its hide was flayed, was facing out. The fourth priest stood with the breast and with the cud, with the breast in his right hand and the cud in his left hand, and its two ribs were attached to the cud between his two fingers. The fifth priest stood with the two flanks; the right flank was in his right hand and the left flank in his left hand, and the outer side was facing out. The sixth priest stood with the innards, which were placed in a vessel, and the lower legs were placed atop them from above.
הַשְּׁבִיעִי – בַּסּוֹלֶת. הַשְּׁמִינִי – בַּחֲבִיתִּים. הַתְּשִׁיעִי – בַּיַּיִן. הָלְכוּ וּנְתָנוּם מֵחֲצִי כֶּבֶשׁ וּלְמַטָּה, בְּמַעֲרָבוֹ. וּמְלָחוּם, וְיָרְדוּ וּבָאוּ לָהֶן לְלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית לִקְרוֹת אֶת שְׁמַע.
The seventh priest stood with the fine flour of the meal offering that accompanies the daily offering. The eighth priest stood with the griddle-cake offering sacrificed daily by the High Priest, half in the morning and half in the evening. The ninth priest stood with the wine for the libations that accompany the daily offering. The nine priests went and placed the items they were carrying on the area from halfway up the ramp and below, in the lower portion of the ramp, on the west side of the ramp, and they salted the limbs and the meal offering. And they descended and came to the Chamber of Hewn Stone to recite the morning Shema and the other texts that they would recite, as explained at the beginning of the next chapter.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנָא: יָד וָרֶגֶל, כַּעֲקֵידַת יִצְחָק בֶּן אַבְרָהָם.
GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the priests would bind the lamb for the daily offering. With regard to this procedure, the Sages taught in a baraita: The animal’s foreleg and hind leg are bound together, as in the binding of Isaac, son of Abraham.
לֹא הָיוּ כּוֹפְתִין אֶת הַטָּלֶה. מַאי טַעְמָא? רַב הוּנָא וְרַב חִסְדָּא, חַד אָמַר: מִשּׁוּם בִּזְיוֹן קֳדָשִׁים. וְחַד אָמַר: מִשּׁוּם דִּמְהַלֵּךְ בְּחוּקֵּי הָעַמִּים.
The mishna teaches that the priests would not tie the lamb by fastening all four of its legs together. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: This is a matter of dispute between Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda. One of these Sages said: The animal is not tied because this would constitute degradation of sacred items; and the other one said that the animal is not tied because that method is the one adopted in pagan worship, and is therefore considered to be walking in the statutes of the nations, and the verse states: “You shall not walk in their statutes” (Leviticus 18:3).
מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵינַיְיהוּ דְּכַפְתֵיהּ בְּשִׁירָאֵי. אִי נָמֵי, בְּהוּצָא דְּדַהֲבָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between these opinions? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where one ties the animal with silk [beshira’ei], which would be considered to be treating the offering in the manner of the nations, but it is not degrading. Alternatively, these opinions differ with regard to a case where the animal is tied with a thread of gold. As in the case of the silk, tying the animal with gold would be considered to be treating the offering in the manner of the nations, but it is not a degradation.
תְּנַן הָתָם: שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שׁוּלְחָנוֹת הָיוּ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. שְׁמוֹנָה שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ בְּבֵית הַמִּטְבָּחַיִים, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶם מְדִיחִין אֶת הַקְּרָבַיִם.
§ The mishna teaches that the innards were rinsed on marble tables in the slaughterhouse in the Temple. With regard to these tables, we learned in a mishna elsewhere (Shekalim 17b) that there were thirteen tables in the Temple. Eight of them were fashioned from marble and were located in the slaughterhouse, north of the altar, where the priests would slaughter the offerings of the most sacred order. Upon these tables they would wash the innards of the offerings, as the cool marble preserved the freshness of the meat.
שְׁנַיִם בַּמַּעֲרָב שֶׁל כֶּבֶשׁ, אֶחָד שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ וְאֶחָד שֶׁל כֶּסֶף. עַל שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ נוֹתְנִין אֶת הָאֵבָרִים, וְעַל שֶׁל כֶּסֶף כְּלֵי שָׁרֵת.
There were two more tables on the western side of the ramp, south of the altar, one of marble and one of silver. On the table of marble the priests would place the limbs before they would bring them up to the altar. And on the table of silver they would place the ninety-three service vessels brought out from the Chamber of Vessels each morning for the services of that day.
וּבָאוּלָם שְׁנַיִם מִבִּפְנִים עַל פֶּתַח הַבַּיִת, אֶחָד שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְאֶחָד שֶׁל זָהָב. עַל שֶׁל כֶּסֶף נוֹתְנִין לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים בִּכְנִיסָתוֹ, וְעַל שֶׁל זָהָב בִּיצִיאָתוֹ.
The mishna continues: And in the Entrance Hall there were two tables on its inside, near the opening to the Temple, one of silver and one of gold. On the table of silver the priests would place the shewbread before its entrance to the Sanctuary, after it was baked on Shabbat eve. And on the table of gold they would place the old shewbread upon its exit from the Sanctuary, to be divided among the priests.
שֶׁמַּעֲלִין בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין. וְאֶחָד שֶׁל זָהָב בִּפְנִים, שֶׁעָלָיו לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים תָּמִיד.
The shewbread was not placed on a silver table upon its exit from the Sanctuary, as one promotes in matters of sanctity and one does not demote. Since in the interim the shewbread had been placed on the golden Table for the shewbread inside the Sanctuary, upon its removal it was not placed on anything other than a golden table. And lastly, there was one table of gold inside the Sanctuary. This was the Table for the shewbread, upon which the shewbread always rested (see Exodus 25:23–30).
מִכְּדֵי אֵין עֲנִיּוּת בִּמְקוֹם עֲשִׁירוּת, אַמַּאי עָבְדִי דְּשַׁיִשׁ? נַיעְבְּדוּ דְּכֶסֶף, נַיעְבְּדוּ דְּזָהָב! אָמַר רַב חִינָּנָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אַסִּי, וְרַבִּי אַסִּי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַרְתִּיחַ.
The Gemara asks: Since there is a principle that there may be no poverty in a place of wealth, i.e., the Temple must always be run in a lavish manner, why did they fashion any tables of marble? Let them fashion all the tables of silver, due to the grandeur of the Temple, or let them fashion them all of gold. Rav Ḥinnana says in the name of Rabbi Asi, and Rabbi Asi says in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak: Gold and silver tables are unfit for the sacrificial limbs because metal scalds. Unlike marble, metal can become very hot in the sun, and this might cause the sacrificial limbs to deteriorate.
שֶׁל שַׁחַר הָיָה נִשְׁחָט עַל קֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם״, כְּנֶגֶד הַיּוֹם.
§ The mishna teaches that the daily offering of the morning was slaughtered at the northwest corner of the altar, in the first ring of the second row from the south, which is called the second ring, whereas the daily offering of the afternoon was slaughtered at the northeast corner of the altar, at the second ring. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Ḥisda said: As the verse states, with regard to the daily offering: “This is the offering made by fire that you shall bring to the Lord: Lambs of the first year without blemish, two by day, for a continual burnt offering” (Numbers 28:3). The phrase “two by day” indicates that the lamb must be slaughtered opposite the light of the day. Since Eretz Yisrael is north of the equator, the sun is always in the southern part of the sky. The first ring, then, is always in the long shadow of the altar, and only the second ring falls under direct sunlight.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: ״שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם״ – כְּנֶגֶד הַיּוֹם. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר נֶגֶד הַיּוֹם, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא חוֹבַת הַיּוֹם? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״אֶת הַכֶּבֶשׂ אֶחָד תַּעֲשֶׂה בַבֹּקֶר וְאֵת הַכֶּבֶשׂ הַשֵּׁנִי תַּעֲשֶׂה בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם״ – הֲרֵי חוֹבַת הַיּוֹם אָמוּר, הָא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם״ – נֶגֶד הַיּוֹם.
This is also taught in a baraita, that the phrase “two by day” teaches that the lamb must be slaughtered opposite the light of the day. The baraita asks: Do you say that this means opposite the light of the day, or does it only mean that two lambs must be sacrificed for the obligation of each day? The baraita answers that when the verse states: “One lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning, and the other lamb you shall sacrifice in the afternoon” (Numbers 28:4), the obligation of each day is thereby stated explicitly. How, then, do I realize the meaning of “two by day”? This teaches that the lamb must be slaughtered opposite the light of the day.
הָא כֵיצַד? תָּמִיד שֶׁל שַׁחַר – הָיָה נִשְׁחָט עַל קֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, עַל טַבַּעַת שְׁנִיָּה, וְשֶׁל בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם – הָיָה נִשְׁחָט עַל קֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מִזְרָחִית, עַל טַבַּעַת שְׁנִיָּה.
The baraita concludes: How so, i.e., how can this principle be applied to both the morning and the afternoon offerings? The daily offering of the morning was slaughtered opposite the northwest corner of the altar, on the second ring, across from the sun, which rises in the east. And the daily offering of the afternoon was slaughtered opposite the northeast corner of the altar, on the fourth ring of the second row, also called the second ring, again across from the sun, which is located in the west in the afternoon.
עֲשָׂרָה דְּבָרִים שָׁאַל אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרוֹס מוֹקְדוֹן אֶת זִקְנֵי הַנֶּגֶב, אָמַר לָהֶן:
§ With regard to the position of the sun, the Gemara relates that Alexander of Macedon asked the Elders of the Negev about ten matters. He said to them:
Follow
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
A Daf Of Their Own –Defining Your Identity
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
10.05.2025 | י״ג בתשרי תשפ״ו
ערל לב- דף משלהן
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
10.04.2025 | י״ב בתשרי תשפ״ו
Din & Daf: The Kohen Gadol’s New Clothes: Yom Kippur as Renewal
Dr. Elana Stein Hain
09.30.2025 | ח׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevachim Daf 8-14 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time
Dr. Tamara Spitz
09.29.2025 | ז׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
A Daf Of Their Own –The Kohen’s Garments
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
09.28.2025 | ו׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
בגדי כהונה- דף משלהן
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
09.27.2025 | ה׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevachim Daf 2-7 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time
Dr. Tamara Spitz
09.25.2025 | ג׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
Din & Daf: How Should We Understand the Central Role of Blood in the World of Korbanot?
Dr. Elana Stein Hain
09.21.2025 | כ״ח באלול תשפ״ה
A Daf Of Their Own –Intent and Action
חמוטל שובל, Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
09.21.2025 | כ״ח באלול תשפ״ה
כוונה ומעשה בקורבנות- דף משלהן
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
09.20.2025 | כ״ז באלול תשפ״ה
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!
Rochel Cheifetz
Riverdale, NY, United States
I started learning daf yomi at the beginning of this cycle. As the pandemic evolved, it’s been so helpful to me to have this discipline every morning to listen to the daf podcast after I’ve read the daf; learning about the relationships between the rabbis and the ways they were constructing our Jewish religion after the destruction of the Temple. I’m grateful to be on this journey!
Mona Fishbane
Teaneck NJ, United States
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
Meira Shapiro
NJ, United States
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Rebecca Stulberg
Ottawa, Canada
I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.
Jenifer Nech
Houston, United States
I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.
Deborah Dickson
Ra’anana, Israel
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Patti Evans
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Ive been learning Gmara since 5th grade and always loved it. Have always wanted to do Daf Yomi and now with Michelle Farber’s online classes it made it much easier to do! Really enjoying the experience thank you!!
Lisa Lawrence
Neve Daniel, Israel
It happened without intent (so am I yotzei?!) – I watched the women’s siyum live and was so moved by it that the next morning, I tuned in to Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur, and here I am, still learning every day, over 2 years later. Some days it all goes over my head, but others I grasp onto an idea or a story, and I ‘get it’ and that’s the best feeling in the world. So proud to be a Hadran learner.
Jeanne Yael Klempner
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
I started learning Daf Yomi to fill what I saw as a large gap in my Jewish education. I also hope to inspire my three daughters to ensure that they do not allow the same Talmud-sized gap to form in their own educations. I am so proud to be a part of the Hadran community, and I have loved learning so many of the stories and halachot that we have seen so far. I look forward to continuing!
Dora Chana Haar
Oceanside NY, United States
I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Wendy Rozov
Phoenix, AZ, United States
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Sharon Mink
Haifa, Israel
“I got my job through the NY Times” was an ad campaign when I was growing up. I can headline “I got my daily Daf shiur and Hadran through the NY Times”. I read the January 4, 2020 feature on Reb. Michelle Farber and Hadran and I have been participating ever since. Thanks NY Times & Hadran!
Deborah Aschheim
New York, United States
I was exposed to Talmud in high school, but I was truly inspired after my daughter and I decided to attend the Women’s Siyum Shas in 2020. We knew that this was a historic moment. We were blown away, overcome with emotion at the euphoria of the revolution. Right then, I knew I would continue. My commitment deepened with the every-morning Virtual Beit Midrash on Zoom with R. Michelle.
Adina Hagege
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
I began learning with Rabbanit Michelle’s wonderful Talmud Skills class on Pesachim, which really enriched my Pesach seder, and I have been learning Daf Yomi off and on over the past year. Because I’m relatively new at this, there is a “chiddush” for me every time I learn, and the knowledge and insights of the group members add so much to my experience. I feel very lucky to be a part of this.
Julie Landau
Karmiel, Israel
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
Meira Shapiro
NJ, United States
I started at the beginning of this cycle. No 1 reason, but here’s 5.
In 2019 I read about the upcoming siyum hashas.
There was a sermon at shul about how anyone can learn Talmud.
Talmud references come up when I am studying. I wanted to know more.
Yentl was on telly. Not a great movie but it’s about studying Talmud.
I went to the Hadran website: A new cycle is starting. I’m gonna do this
Denise Neapolitan
Cambridge, United Kingdom
Last cycle, I listened to parts of various מסכתות. When the הדרן סיום was advertised, I listened to Michelle on נידה. I knew that בע”ה with the next cycle I was in (ב”נ). As I entered the סיום (early), I saw the signs and was overcome with emotion. I was randomly seated in the front row, and I cried many times that night. My choice to learn דף יומי was affirmed. It is one of the best I have made!
Miriam Tannenbaum
אפרת, Israel
After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.
Madeline Cohen
London, United Kingdom
I attended the Siyum so that I could tell my granddaughter that I had been there. Then I decided to listen on Spotify and after the siyum of Brachot, Covid and zoom began. It gave structure to my day. I learn with people from all over the world who are now my friends – yet most of us have never met. I can’t imagine life without it. Thank you Rabbanit Michelle.
Emma Rinberg
Raanana, Israel
Tamid 31
לֹא הָיָה שׁוֹבֵר בּוֹ אֶת הָרֶגֶל, אֶלָּא נוֹקְבוֹ מִתּוֹךְ עַרְקוּבּוֹ, וְתוֹלֶה בּוֹ.
When the priest flayed the hide of the daily offering after its slaughter, he would not break the animal’s leg in the typical manner of flaying an animal; rather, he punctures the leg from within each knee of the hind leg and suspends the animal by placing these holes on two hooks, in order to flay the animal’s hide.
הָיָה מַפְשִׁיט וְיוֹרֵד עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לֶחָזֶה. הִגִּיעַ לֶחָזֶה, חָתַךְ אֶת הָרֹאשׁ, וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בּוֹ. חָתַךְ אֶת הַכְּרָעַיִם, וּנְתָנָן לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהֶן. מֵרַק אֶת הַהֶפְשֵׁט. קָרַע אֶת הַלֵּב וְהוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ.
The priest began flaying from the top of the inverted animal, descending until he would reach the hide of the breast. Once he reached the breast, he severed the lamb’s head and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. Next he severed the four legs below the knee and gave them to the priest who won the right to take them up to the ramp. He completed the flaying of the remaining hide from the breast down, and then the priest cut the heart and drained its blood.
חָתַךְ אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וּנְתָנָן לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהֶן. עָלָה לָרֶגֶל הַיְמָנִית, חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, וּשְׁתֵּי בֵּיצִים עִמָּהּ. קְרָעוֹ, וְנִמְצָא כּוּלּוֹ גָּלוּי לְפָנָיו.
Next the priest severed the remaining upper parts of the forelegs and gave them to the priest who won the right to take them up to the ramp. Afterward he moved up to the remaining upper part of the right hind leg, severed it, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp; and the animal’s two testicles were cut along with the right leg, leaving the animal suspended by its left hind leg. Then the priest tore open the animal’s midsection, resulting in the innards of the entire animal being exposed before him.
נָטַל אֶת הַפֶּדֶר, וּנְתָנוֹ עַל בֵּית שְׁחִיטַת הָרֹאשׁ מִלְּמַעְלָה. נָטַל אֶת הַקְּרָבַיִים, וּנְתָנָן לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהֶן, לַהֲדִיחָן. וְהַכָּרֵס מְדִיחִין אוֹתָהּ בְּבֵית הַמְּדִיחִין. וּמְדִיחִין אוֹתָהּ כׇּל צׇרְכָּהּ, וְהַקְּרָבַיִים מְדִיחִין אוֹתָן שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים בְּמִעוּטָן, עַל שׁוּלְחָנוֹת שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ שֶׁבֵּין הָעַמּוּדִים.
He took the fats and placed them on the place of slaughter on the animal’s head above it, to conceal the place where it was severed while the priest would take the head to the altar. Then the priest took the innards and gave them to the priest who won the right to take them up to the ramp, in order to rinse them first. And with regard to the stomach, in which there is a significant amount of waste, the priests would rinse it in the rinsing site located in the south of the courtyard, east of the Gate of the Water, and they rinsed it as much it required. And with regard to the innards, the priests would rinse them three times at a minimum, on the marble tables that were positioned between the pillars in the slaughterhouse.
נָטַל אֶת הַסַּכִּין, וְהִפְרִישׁ אֶת הָרֵיאָה מִן הַכָּבֵד, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד מִן הַכָּבֵד, וְלֹא הָיָה מְזִיזָהּ מִמְּקוֹמָהּ. נוֹקַב אֶת הֶחָזֶה, וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה.
The priest then took the knife and separated the lung from the liver, and the finger-like protrusion from the lower edge of the liver, also known as the lobe of the liver, from the liver. And he would not move any one of the organs from its place. He would leave the lung attached to the neck, the lobe attached to the haunch, and the liver attached to the right flank. The priest would puncture around the breast, separating it from the flanks and the ribs, and he gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp.
עָלָה לַדּוֹפֶן הַיְּמָנִית, הָיָה חוֹתֵךְ וְיוֹרֵד עַד הַשִּׁדְרָה, וְלֹא הָיָה נוֹגֵעַ בַּשִּׁדְרָה, עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לְבֵין שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת דַּקּוֹת. חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, וְהַכָּבֵד תְּלוּיָה בָּהּ.
He then moved up to the right flank and would cut it and separate it from the animal’s body. And he would continue to cut, descending until he would reach the spinal column, and the priest would not touch the spinal column, leaving the spine intact and attached to the left flank. He would continue cutting until he reached the space between the two narrow ribs near the neck, leaving them in place. The priest cut the right flank, separating it from the body of the animal, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. And the liver was suspended from it.
בָּא לוֹ לַגֵּרָה, הִנִּיחַ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת מִכָּאן, וּשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת מִכָּאן. חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, הַקָּנֶה וְהַלֵּב וְהָרֵיאָה תְּלוּיִם בָּהּ.
The priest then came to the cud. He left attached to it, in their entirety, the two narrow ribs from here, the right side, and the two narrow ribs from there, the left side. He cut the cud and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp; and the windpipe, the heart, and the lung were suspended from it.
בָּא לוֹ לַדּוֹפֶן הַשְּׂמָאלִית, הִנִּיחַ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת דַּקּוֹת מִלְּמַעְלָן, וּשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת דַּקּוֹת מִלְּמַטָּן, וְכָךְ הָיָה מַנִּיחַ בַּחֲבֶירְתָּהּ. נִמְצָא מַנִּיחַ שְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם מִלְּמַעְלָן, שְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם מִלְּמַטָּן.
He came to cut the left flank of the body and left attached to it two narrow ribs above, near the haunch, as the animal was suspended upside down, and two narrow ribs below, near the cud. And he also did that with its counterpart, the right flank, resulting in two narrow ribs in each flank above and two narrow ribs in each flank below.
חֲתָכָהּ וְנָתְנָה לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ, וְהַשִּׁדְרָה עִמָּהּ, וְהַטְּחוֹל תָּלוּי בָּהּ, וְהִיא הָיְתָה גְּדוֹלָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁל יָמִין קוֹרִין גְּדוֹלָה – שֶׁהַכָּבֵד תְּלוּיָה בָּהּ. בָּא לוֹ לָעוֹקֶץ, חֲתָכוֹ, וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בּוֹ. הָאַלְיָה, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד, וּשְׁתֵּי כְּלָיוֹת עִמּוֹ. נָטַל אֶת הָרֶגֶל הַשְּׂמָאלִית, חֲתָכָהּ, וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָּהּ. נִמְצְאוּ כּוּלָּן עוֹמְדִים בְּשׁוּרָה, וְהָאֵבָרִים בְּיָדָם.
He cut the left flank and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp, and the spinal column was with it, and the spleen was suspended from it. And the left flank was greater, i.e., the larger of the two, because it included the spine, but they referred to the right flank as the greater one, as in addition to the flank itself, the liver was suspended from it. He came to the haunch, cut it, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. And the tail, and the finger-like protrusion of the liver, and the two kidneys were with it. He took the remaining upper part of the left hind leg, cut it, and gave it to the priest who won the right to take it up to the ramp. This resulted in all of the nine priests who won the rights to take the limbs up to the ramp standing in line, and the limbs were in their hands.
הָרִאשׁוֹן – בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרֶגֶל. הָרֹאשׁ בִּימִינוֹ, וְחוֹטְמוֹ כְּלַפֵּי זְרוֹעוֹ, קַרְנָיו בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, בֵּית שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מִלְּמַעְלָן, וְהַפֶּדֶר נָתוּן עָלֶיהָ. הָרֶגֶל שֶׁל יָמִין בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הַשֵּׁנִי – בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם, שֶׁל יָמִין בִּימִינוֹ, וְשֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ.
The first priest stood with the head and with the right hind leg of the animal. Since it was more significant, the head was in his right hand, and its nose was turned toward the priest’s arm. Its horns were between his fingers, and the place of its slaughter was above, and the fats were placed upon it, to conceal the bloody place of slaughter. The right hind leg was in his left hand, and the outer side of the leg, from which its hide was flayed, rather than the side on which the incision was made, was facing out. The second priest stood with the two forelegs. He held the right foreleg in his right hand and the left foreleg in his left hand, and the outer side of the leg, from which its hide was flayed, was facing out.
הַשְּׁלִישִׁי – בָּעוֹקֶץ וּבָרֶגֶל. הָעוֹקֶץ בִּימִינוֹ, וְהָאַלְיָה מְדוּלְדֶּלֶת בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד וּשְׁתֵּי כְּלָיוֹת עִמּוֹ. הָרֶגֶל שֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הָרְבִיעִי – בֶּחָזֶה וּבַגֵּרָה. הֶחָזֶה בִּימִינוֹ וְהַגֵּרָה בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וְצַלְעוֹתָיו בֵּין שְׁנֵי אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו. הַחֲמִישִׁי – בִּשְׁתֵּי דְּפָנוֹת, שֶׁל יָמִין בִּימִינוֹ, וְשֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הַשִּׁשִּׁי – בַּקְּרָבַיִם הַנְּתוּנִים בְּבָזֵךְ, וּכְרָעַיִם עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן מִלְּמַעְלָה.
The third priest stood with the haunch and the left hind leg. He held the haunch in his right hand, and the tail was hanging between his fingers, and the finger-like protrusion of the liver and the two kidneys were with it. He held the left hind leg in his left hand, and the outer side of the leg, from which its hide was flayed, was facing out. The fourth priest stood with the breast and with the cud, with the breast in his right hand and the cud in his left hand, and its two ribs were attached to the cud between his two fingers. The fifth priest stood with the two flanks; the right flank was in his right hand and the left flank in his left hand, and the outer side was facing out. The sixth priest stood with the innards, which were placed in a vessel, and the lower legs were placed atop them from above.
הַשְּׁבִיעִי – בַּסּוֹלֶת. הַשְּׁמִינִי – בַּחֲבִיתִּים. הַתְּשִׁיעִי – בַּיַּיִן. הָלְכוּ וּנְתָנוּם מֵחֲצִי כֶּבֶשׁ וּלְמַטָּה, בְּמַעֲרָבוֹ. וּמְלָחוּם, וְיָרְדוּ וּבָאוּ לָהֶן לְלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית לִקְרוֹת אֶת שְׁמַע.
The seventh priest stood with the fine flour of the meal offering that accompanies the daily offering. The eighth priest stood with the griddle-cake offering sacrificed daily by the High Priest, half in the morning and half in the evening. The ninth priest stood with the wine for the libations that accompany the daily offering. The nine priests went and placed the items they were carrying on the area from halfway up the ramp and below, in the lower portion of the ramp, on the west side of the ramp, and they salted the limbs and the meal offering. And they descended and came to the Chamber of Hewn Stone to recite the morning Shema and the other texts that they would recite, as explained at the beginning of the next chapter.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנָא: יָד וָרֶגֶל, כַּעֲקֵידַת יִצְחָק בֶּן אַבְרָהָם.
GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the priests would bind the lamb for the daily offering. With regard to this procedure, the Sages taught in a baraita: The animal’s foreleg and hind leg are bound together, as in the binding of Isaac, son of Abraham.
לֹא הָיוּ כּוֹפְתִין אֶת הַטָּלֶה. מַאי טַעְמָא? רַב הוּנָא וְרַב חִסְדָּא, חַד אָמַר: מִשּׁוּם בִּזְיוֹן קֳדָשִׁים. וְחַד אָמַר: מִשּׁוּם דִּמְהַלֵּךְ בְּחוּקֵּי הָעַמִּים.
The mishna teaches that the priests would not tie the lamb by fastening all four of its legs together. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: This is a matter of dispute between Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda. One of these Sages said: The animal is not tied because this would constitute degradation of sacred items; and the other one said that the animal is not tied because that method is the one adopted in pagan worship, and is therefore considered to be walking in the statutes of the nations, and the verse states: “You shall not walk in their statutes” (Leviticus 18:3).
מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵינַיְיהוּ דְּכַפְתֵיהּ בְּשִׁירָאֵי. אִי נָמֵי, בְּהוּצָא דְּדַהֲבָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between these opinions? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where one ties the animal with silk [beshira’ei], which would be considered to be treating the offering in the manner of the nations, but it is not degrading. Alternatively, these opinions differ with regard to a case where the animal is tied with a thread of gold. As in the case of the silk, tying the animal with gold would be considered to be treating the offering in the manner of the nations, but it is not a degradation.
תְּנַן הָתָם: שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שׁוּלְחָנוֹת הָיוּ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. שְׁמוֹנָה שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ בְּבֵית הַמִּטְבָּחַיִים, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶם מְדִיחִין אֶת הַקְּרָבַיִם.
§ The mishna teaches that the innards were rinsed on marble tables in the slaughterhouse in the Temple. With regard to these tables, we learned in a mishna elsewhere (Shekalim 17b) that there were thirteen tables in the Temple. Eight of them were fashioned from marble and were located in the slaughterhouse, north of the altar, where the priests would slaughter the offerings of the most sacred order. Upon these tables they would wash the innards of the offerings, as the cool marble preserved the freshness of the meat.
שְׁנַיִם בַּמַּעֲרָב שֶׁל כֶּבֶשׁ, אֶחָד שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ וְאֶחָד שֶׁל כֶּסֶף. עַל שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ נוֹתְנִין אֶת הָאֵבָרִים, וְעַל שֶׁל כֶּסֶף כְּלֵי שָׁרֵת.
There were two more tables on the western side of the ramp, south of the altar, one of marble and one of silver. On the table of marble the priests would place the limbs before they would bring them up to the altar. And on the table of silver they would place the ninety-three service vessels brought out from the Chamber of Vessels each morning for the services of that day.
וּבָאוּלָם שְׁנַיִם מִבִּפְנִים עַל פֶּתַח הַבַּיִת, אֶחָד שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְאֶחָד שֶׁל זָהָב. עַל שֶׁל כֶּסֶף נוֹתְנִין לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים בִּכְנִיסָתוֹ, וְעַל שֶׁל זָהָב בִּיצִיאָתוֹ.
The mishna continues: And in the Entrance Hall there were two tables on its inside, near the opening to the Temple, one of silver and one of gold. On the table of silver the priests would place the shewbread before its entrance to the Sanctuary, after it was baked on Shabbat eve. And on the table of gold they would place the old shewbread upon its exit from the Sanctuary, to be divided among the priests.
שֶׁמַּעֲלִין בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין. וְאֶחָד שֶׁל זָהָב בִּפְנִים, שֶׁעָלָיו לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים תָּמִיד.
The shewbread was not placed on a silver table upon its exit from the Sanctuary, as one promotes in matters of sanctity and one does not demote. Since in the interim the shewbread had been placed on the golden Table for the shewbread inside the Sanctuary, upon its removal it was not placed on anything other than a golden table. And lastly, there was one table of gold inside the Sanctuary. This was the Table for the shewbread, upon which the shewbread always rested (see Exodus 25:23–30).
מִכְּדֵי אֵין עֲנִיּוּת בִּמְקוֹם עֲשִׁירוּת, אַמַּאי עָבְדִי דְּשַׁיִשׁ? נַיעְבְּדוּ דְּכֶסֶף, נַיעְבְּדוּ דְּזָהָב! אָמַר רַב חִינָּנָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אַסִּי, וְרַבִּי אַסִּי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַרְתִּיחַ.
The Gemara asks: Since there is a principle that there may be no poverty in a place of wealth, i.e., the Temple must always be run in a lavish manner, why did they fashion any tables of marble? Let them fashion all the tables of silver, due to the grandeur of the Temple, or let them fashion them all of gold. Rav Ḥinnana says in the name of Rabbi Asi, and Rabbi Asi says in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak: Gold and silver tables are unfit for the sacrificial limbs because metal scalds. Unlike marble, metal can become very hot in the sun, and this might cause the sacrificial limbs to deteriorate.
שֶׁל שַׁחַר הָיָה נִשְׁחָט עַל קֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם״, כְּנֶגֶד הַיּוֹם.
§ The mishna teaches that the daily offering of the morning was slaughtered at the northwest corner of the altar, in the first ring of the second row from the south, which is called the second ring, whereas the daily offering of the afternoon was slaughtered at the northeast corner of the altar, at the second ring. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Ḥisda said: As the verse states, with regard to the daily offering: “This is the offering made by fire that you shall bring to the Lord: Lambs of the first year without blemish, two by day, for a continual burnt offering” (Numbers 28:3). The phrase “two by day” indicates that the lamb must be slaughtered opposite the light of the day. Since Eretz Yisrael is north of the equator, the sun is always in the southern part of the sky. The first ring, then, is always in the long shadow of the altar, and only the second ring falls under direct sunlight.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: ״שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם״ – כְּנֶגֶד הַיּוֹם. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר נֶגֶד הַיּוֹם, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא חוֹבַת הַיּוֹם? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״אֶת הַכֶּבֶשׂ אֶחָד תַּעֲשֶׂה בַבֹּקֶר וְאֵת הַכֶּבֶשׂ הַשֵּׁנִי תַּעֲשֶׂה בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם״ – הֲרֵי חוֹבַת הַיּוֹם אָמוּר, הָא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״שְׁנַיִם לַיּוֹם״ – נֶגֶד הַיּוֹם.
This is also taught in a baraita, that the phrase “two by day” teaches that the lamb must be slaughtered opposite the light of the day. The baraita asks: Do you say that this means opposite the light of the day, or does it only mean that two lambs must be sacrificed for the obligation of each day? The baraita answers that when the verse states: “One lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning, and the other lamb you shall sacrifice in the afternoon” (Numbers 28:4), the obligation of each day is thereby stated explicitly. How, then, do I realize the meaning of “two by day”? This teaches that the lamb must be slaughtered opposite the light of the day.
הָא כֵיצַד? תָּמִיד שֶׁל שַׁחַר – הָיָה נִשְׁחָט עַל קֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, עַל טַבַּעַת שְׁנִיָּה, וְשֶׁל בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם – הָיָה נִשְׁחָט עַל קֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מִזְרָחִית, עַל טַבַּעַת שְׁנִיָּה.
The baraita concludes: How so, i.e., how can this principle be applied to both the morning and the afternoon offerings? The daily offering of the morning was slaughtered opposite the northwest corner of the altar, on the second ring, across from the sun, which rises in the east. And the daily offering of the afternoon was slaughtered opposite the northeast corner of the altar, on the fourth ring of the second row, also called the second ring, again across from the sun, which is located in the west in the afternoon.
עֲשָׂרָה דְּבָרִים שָׁאַל אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרוֹס מוֹקְדוֹן אֶת זִקְנֵי הַנֶּגֶב, אָמַר לָהֶן:
§ With regard to the position of the sun, the Gemara relates that Alexander of Macedon asked the Elders of the Negev about ten matters. He said to them:
Follow
