פירוש על זבחים 13:6
Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim
הקומץ והלבונה – of the free-will meal offering. Both of them (i.e., the fistful of the meal offering and the frankincense) permit the residue for consumption, therefore Rabbi Eleazar exempts for he requires the burning on the altar everything that is permitted.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Zevachim
As for the fistful and the frankincense, if one offered one of them [without the other] outside [the Temple], he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: he is exempt unless he offers the second too. [If one offered] one inside and the other outside, he is liable. In order for the non-sacrificed parts of the minhah (meal) offering to be eaten, the fistful of the minhah and the frankincense must both be burned on the altar (see Leviticus 2:2-3). If one offers one of these outside of the Temple, he is still liable, according to the first opinion, even though he didn’t offer the other one. Rabbi Elazar says that he is exempt until he offers both the fistful and the frankincense, because one is not effective without the other. This matches his opinion in mishnah four. Rabbi Elazar agrees with the sages that if he offers one of them inside and then the other outside, he is liable. This is similar to the case in mishnah four where he offered most of a certain type of sacrifice inside the Temple, but left over an olive’s worth which he offered outside the Temple. Since this completes the offering, all agree that he is liable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim
אחד בפנים – first and afterwards the second outside, he is liable, for this completed it, and through it everything was dependent.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Zevachim
As for the two dishes of frankincense, if one offered one of them outside, he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: he is exempt unless he offers the second too. [If one offered] one inside and the other outside, he is liable. Burning the two dishes of frankincense allows the priests to eat the showbread. Both dishes must be burned. Again, the first opinion holds that if he offers one of them outside the Temple he is liable, whereas Rabbi Elazar holds that he is not liable unless he offers both. As above, if he offers one inside the Temple and the other outside, Rabbi Elazar agrees that he is liable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim
שני בזיכי לבונה – permits the [twelve] shewbread [loaves].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Zevachim
If one sprinkles part of the blood outside, he is liable. Every sprinkling of the blood is considered its own separate entity. Therefore, if one offers even one sprinkling of blood outside the Temple, he is liable, even if he didn’t perform the requisite two or four sprinklings. In this case Rabbi Elazar would agree.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim
מי החג – that were filled for the sake of the water libations on the holiday of Sukkot, if he offered up the libation outside, he is liable for he (i.e., Rabbi Eleazar) holds that the water libations on the Festival [of Sukkot] is according to the Torah, therefore, he is liable by making the offering outside, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eleazar in this entire Mishnah and the water libation on the Festival [of Sukkot] is not from the Torah, but rather it is a usage dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai (i.e., a traditional interpretation of a written law).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Zevachim
Rabbi Elazar says: also one who makes a libation of the water of the Festival [of Sukkot] on the festival, outside is liable. On Sukkot there is a water libation. If one performs this water libation outside the Temple he is liable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Zevachim
שירי הדם שהקריבן בחוץ חייב (of sin-offerings of the inner altar) – we are speaking of the residue of the blood of the inside, and he (i.e., Rabbi Nehemiah) holds that the residue of the blood prevent them, therefore, it is an act of Divine service that one is liable for outside [the Temple courtyard], but with the residue of the blood of the outer altar, Rabbi Nehemiah agrees that there are no other than for the Mitzvah, but not to be indispensable, therefore, he who sprinkles them outside is certainly exempt. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Nehemiah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Zevachim
Rabbi Nehemiah says: if one offered the residue of the blood outside, he is liable. The remainder of the blood after some of it has been sprinkled is poured onto the base of the altar. If one offers this blood outside the Temple, he is liable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy