Zvachim Daf 26 - throwing blood on the ramp
Sacrifices Page Ko - throwing blood on the ramp
Deputy On Ko. Review of various cases of blood shot out of place. Simplicity Mishnah, blood shot out of place invalidates the victim. However, the Gemara re Samuel meat victim did not eat, but the sacrifice itself atoned for his cow, and its owner is exempt offering of information. Samuel precise from the Bible, the mere touch of blood at the altar to atone for the owner, even if it's the feel out of place.
The first case mentioned in the Mishnah is throwing blood on the ramp than the altar, where the altar itself. Add (Ko:, DH should Shmuel) extend to discuss whether this event also included the countries of Samuel. At first, set add-ons that:
"Anytanen on top of the ramp - Alma ... I'm all out of place Dlau Modo fees in place."
However, end quote Add Ahgiah"ah words, which states:
"We'll see Edal Carhin Nemi ramp fees in place."
Indeed, the Rambam (Laws of sculptural Ahmukedshin, Chapter II went Y.) clearly ruled that blood thrown on the ramp atoned for its owner, in the words of Samuel.
Similarly, the question underlying the dispute concerns the relationship between Schedule ramp and the altar. According to the second view, the ramp is an integral part of the altar, throwing blood on him excused. According to the first opinion, the ramp is not part of the altar, and disposal it is not excused.
Clarify things, we look into the issue further, here are the sixth chapter (page SB Page A). Baraita there engaged in size and shape of the altar, and states:
"Our Rabbis taught: Karen scoring Maachbin square foundation, religion took you learned you learned stature select Maachbin not."
Baraita reviewed various details concerning the shape of the altar, and in between those that inhibit those who do not delay. The ramp is one of the first part of baraita, and therefore inhibits reality. In other words, the altar without a ramp is not an altar. Ostensibly, this setting appropriate supplement the second view, which considers an integral part of the ramp from the altar.
Rashi interpreted the same issue:
"Spelling ramp" to the altar ", and the ramp is the face of the altar that come his way there"
That is, to know Rashi Legend has explicitly - "Do the altar" - underscoring the obligation to install a ramp to the altar.
Now, the last comment (see, for example, innovations Ahgree"aza Brisk on Maimonides, Laws of the Temple Chapter went YH) that these things Rashi contradict what he himself wrote in his commentary on the Torah. Remember the late affair "Jethro" prohibited degrees turn up on the altar. Case "donation", in a hearing in the altar, Rashi wrote:
"We have already heard the case of" the altar of earth will do me "and not exceeding degrees, I do not own ramp degrees but scored some - we learned that he had scored."
Rashi's words here indicate that the source of the obligation to install a ramp to the altar is the same verses late affair "Jethro."
These things last difficulty a double. First, they are, as stated, contrary According to Rashi sacrificed. Second, verses the case of "Jethro" prohibited degrees up on the altar and expand the footsteps, but not mentioned there must install the lamb?
I have no clear answer to these questions. But the crux of the matter, it seems that the gap between the words of Rashi concerns two issues for discussion in the Addendum. According to Rashi sacrificed position, scored an explicit obligation to install an independent duty Torah, and as part of the altar. Rashi on the Torah guess, probably, the ramp is not part of the altar. The Torah commands that get degrees on the altar, and to avoid this prohibition, has no choice but to install a ramp. However, the ramp should not be considered an essential part of building the altar.
Rabbi Avihud Schwartz