Zevachim 59

Hook

We stand at a crossroads, acutely aware of the deep fissures in the foundations of our common life. Across our towns and nations, a silent lament rises from those whose cries for justice seem to echo in an empty chamber. We see countless acts of kindness, courage, and advocacy – individual offerings poured out with devotion and hope. Yet, often, these offerings appear to be swallowed by vast, indifferent structures, yielding little lasting change. The weight of systemic injustice, be it in economic disparity, racial bias, environmental degradation, or unequal access to basic human needs, can lead to a profound disillusionment. It feels as if the very place where we are meant to bring our offerings, the "altar" of our collective conscience and legal frameworks, is damaged.

When the mechanism meant to facilitate sacred acts is itself broken, what becomes of the sincerity of our efforts? This isn't just about individual failures; it's about the integrity of the vessel through which we seek to connect, to heal, to uplift. The cost of this systemic damage is immense: a creeping apathy, despair that erodes the will to act, and burnout among the most dedicated advocates. It's a spiritual crisis, hindering our collective capacity for true justice and compassion, leaving us to wonder if our prayers and actions can ever truly ascend. Yet, ancient texts, born from a meticulous concern for sacred space and proper service, offer us not only a diagnosis but also a powerful vision for healing. They challenge us to look beyond the surface of our individual acts and confront the integrity of the systems we build and inhabit.

Text Snapshot

Our journey into Zevachim 59 brings us into the heart of the Temple service, a realm seemingly far removed from modern concerns. Yet, within its intricate debates about altars and offerings, we uncover profound metaphors for the infrastructure of justice and compassion in our own world.

The Damaged Altar: When Systems Fail

The Gemara records Rav's potent declaration: "an altar that was damaged, all sacrificial animals that were slaughtered there are disqualified." He notes a verse as the source, which Rav Kahana later identifies from Rabbi Yishmael son of Rabbi Yosei, linking it to Exodus 20:21: "An altar of earth you shall make for Me... when it is complete [shalem], but not when it is lacking." This principle is starkly extended by Rabbi Yochanan, who asserts that even living animals designated as offerings are permanently disqualified if the altar is in a damaged state. The prophetic echo here is unmistakable: When the core mechanism of service – our "altar" for justice – is broken, compromised, or incomplete, the acts performed through it, however well-intentioned, are rendered invalid. Our "sacrifices" for a better world, our efforts towards equity and healing, can be "disqualified" not by our lack of devotion, but by the fundamental flaw in the system itself. This challenges us to look beyond individual acts of charity or advocacy and squarely address the integrity of the structures that are meant to facilitate justice.

The Altar "Too Small" and Sanctifying the Courtyard: Expanding Our Capacity

The text then shifts to a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei regarding King Solomon's Temple inauguration. Rabbi Yehuda interprets I Kings 8:64 literally: "because the copper altar that was before the Lord was too small to receive" all the offerings, Solomon therefore "sanctified the middle of the court" to serve as an additional place for sacrifices. Rabbi Yosei counters, arguing that "too small" is a euphemism for Moses's altar being "disqualified." This debate continues into the very dimensions of the altars, with different interpretations of "square" from Exodus and Ezekiel leading to vastly different calculations of size and capacity. This section illuminates a critical dilemma: Is our "altar" for justice fundamentally broken (disqualified), or is it merely insufficient in scale (too small) for the vast needs of our time? Rabbi Yehuda's view offers a powerful message: when the existing, formal "altar" cannot contain the scope of sacred work, we are called to sanctify other spaces. We must broaden our understanding of where justice can be enacted, empowering the "middle of the court"—the broader community, informal networks, and less traditional spaces—to become vessels for sacred action.

The Vacant North and Meticulous Placement: Intentional Design for Unobstructed Justice

Earlier in the Gemara, Rabbi Yosei HaGelili meticulously deduces the placement of the Basin in the Temple courtyard, ensuring it did not interpose between the altar and the Sanctuary. His reasoning, ultimately, is rooted in Leviticus 1:11: "northward [tzafona]," which he interprets to mean "that the north section of the Temple courtyard must be vacant of all vessels." Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov takes this even further, arguing the north must be vacant "even of the altar." This meticulous attention to placement and the concept of a "vacant north" serves as a profound metaphor for the intentional design of our justice systems. What are we allowing to interpose between our highest ideals and their practical manifestation? Are there "vessels" of bureaucracy, prejudice, or self-interest that obstruct the clear path for justice? The imperative for a "vacant north" suggests a need for clarity, an unobstructed pathway, and spaces reserved for the purest expression of divine will, ensuring that our efforts are not inadvertently blocked or diluted by ill-placed elements. It calls for a careful, ethical architecture of our collective endeavors.

Halakhic Counterweight

The bedrock of our inquiry into justice and compassion, as illuminated by the text, lies in the principle articulated in Exodus 20:21 regarding the altar: "An altar of earth you shall make for Me, and you shall slaughter upon it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings... when it is complete [shalem], but not when it is lacking." (Sefaria: Exodus 20:21). This is the core halakhic anchor, the concrete legal foundation upon which our understanding of systemic integrity must rest.

The term "shalem" (שלם) is far richer than a mere physical descriptor. It means complete, whole, sound, perfect, intact, and unimpaired. It denotes a state of wholeness that is not simply about absence of damage, but about fitness for purpose, a state of being fully functional and capable of fulfilling its sacred role without compromise. When the text states "when it is complete, but not when it is lacking," it establishes a non-negotiable prerequisite for valid service. An altar that is "lacking" (חסר – chaser) is not merely inefficient; it is fundamentally disqualified from its purpose. The offerings brought upon it, no matter how sincere the intent of the offerer, are deemed invalid. (Sefaria: Zevachim 59a:11 and Rashi's commentary Rashi on Zevachim 59a:11:1).

This halakhic imperative, rooted in the meticulous performance of ritual, offers a profound ethical lesson for our pursuit of justice with compassion. The "altar" in our contemporary context can be understood as any system, institution, or framework designed to uphold justice, distribute resources equitably, or offer support to those in need. This includes our legal systems, educational institutions, healthcare infrastructure, social service agencies, and even the public discourse that shapes our communal values.

If these "altars" are "lacking" – if they are compromised by systemic bias, corruption, inequitable access, historical injustices, or simply by being structurally incapable of meeting the needs they purport to address – then our individual and collective "offerings" within them are similarly compromised. A legal system riddled with procedural injustice, a healthcare system inaccessible to the poor, an educational system failing marginalized communities – these are "damaged altars." Even the most dedicated judges, compassionate doctors, or committed teachers operating within such systems will find their efforts diminished, their "sacrifices" partially "disqualified."

The halakha demands systemic integrity as a prerequisite for sacred action. It is not enough to simply perform acts of compassion; the structure through which that compassion flows must itself be "shalem." This means that addressing systemic flaws is not an optional add-on to justice work; it is the foundational requirement. We are called not merely to patch up holes, but to ensure the fundamental wholeness and fitness of purpose of our collective "altars." This principle compels us to be rigorous in our assessment of existing systems, to challenge their deficiencies, and to commit to their repair or transformation, recognizing that the validity of our most sacred aspirations for a just and compassionate world depends on it.

Strategy

The wisdom gleaned from Zevachim 59 calls us to a two-fold strategy: first, to diligently diagnose and repair the "damaged altars" within our immediate communities, ensuring their integrity; and second, to thoughtfully "sanctify the courtyard," broadening our understanding of where and how justice can be enacted when traditional structures are insufficient or irredeemable. This requires a blend of local, focused effort and a sustainable, expansive vision.

Move 1: Local Repair & Reimagination – Diagnosing and Addressing the "Damaged Altar"

Our first move is to turn our gaze inward, towards the "altars" of justice and compassion within our own localities. These are the institutions, policies, and practices that directly impact our neighbors and ourselves. The prophetic call here is to become diligent diagnosticians, recognizing that a damaged altar disqualifies our offerings, meaning that even our most earnest efforts may be rendered ineffective if the underlying system is flawed.

Identify Local "Altars":

Begin by identifying the tangible "altars" in your community. These are not abstract concepts, but concrete manifestations of justice and care.

• Local Court Systems: Small claims courts, family courts, public defender offices, local police departments.
• Educational Institutions: Public schools, community colleges, adult literacy programs.
• Healthcare Access Points: Community clinics, public hospitals, mental health services.
• Social Safety Nets: Food banks, homeless shelters, housing authorities, welfare offices.
• Community Spaces for Dialogue: Local government meetings, community centers, interfaith councils.

Assess for "Damage":

How do we know if these "altars" are "damaged" or "lacking" (חסר)? The Gemara provides a powerful lens: a system is damaged if it consistently disqualifies the "offerings" (the efforts, needs, and rights) of those it is meant to serve. This requires humility and a willingness to listen to lived experience.

• Symptoms of a Damaged Altar:

  • Disproportionate Outcomes: Certain demographics (racial, economic, geographic) consistently experience worse outcomes (e.g., higher incarceration rates, lower educational attainment, poorer health indicators) despite equal initial needs or efforts.
  • Lack of Access: Bureaucratic hurdles, language barriers, transportation issues, or digital divides prevent vulnerable populations from accessing services meant for them.
  • Erosion of Public Trust: A significant portion of the community, especially marginalized groups, does not trust the institution to act fairly or in their best interest.
  • Burnout and Moral Injury: Staff and volunteers within the institution experience high rates of burnout, cynicism, or moral injury, feeling that their work is ineffective or even perpetuates harm.
  • Procedural Injustice: Processes are opaque, arbitrary, disrespectful, or do not offer meaningful avenues for redress.
  • Bureaucratic Inertia: The system is resistant to feedback, slow to adapt, or prioritizes its own perpetuation over its stated mission.

• Diagnosis Tools (Grounded Listening and Data):

  • Community Listening Sessions: Create safe spaces for those directly impacted by the "altar" to share their experiences and grievances. Prioritize voices from the margins.
  • Data Analysis: Work with local researchers, universities, or advocacy groups to collect and analyze relevant data. Track who benefits, who suffers, where resources are allocated, and identify patterns of inequity.
  • Direct Observation and "Mystery Shopping": Observe how services are delivered, or even anonymously interact with the system to experience its strengths and weaknesses firsthand.
  • Engage Whistleblowers and Front-Line Staff: Often, those working within the system have the clearest view of its damage. Create confidential avenues for them to share insights.

Local Repair Actions (Small Scale, High Impact):

Once damage is identified, the focus shifts to repair. This is not about tearing down everything, but about targeted, practical interventions that restore integrity.

• Advocacy for Procedural Justice:
  • Example: If local court processes are confusing, advocate for clear, multi-language guides, accessible legal aid resources, and training for court staff on trauma-informed communication.
  • Action: Partner with legal aid organizations to offer "know your rights" workshops. Lobby local city councils for funding for community navigators who can help residents interact with complex systems.
• Capacity Building for Alternative Pathways:
  • Example: If traditional dispute resolution mechanisms are inaccessible or punitive, support local restorative justice programs or community mediation centers that offer non-adversarial approaches.
  • Action: Volunteer time or fundraise for local organizations building these alternatives. Help connect individuals in need to these services.
• Direct Service with Systemic Awareness:
  • Example: A food bank not only provides food but also collects anonymous data on why people are food insecure, identifying systemic issues like low wages, lack of affordable housing, or gaps in social benefits.
  • Action: If you volunteer in direct service, reflect on the root causes of the needs you see. Document patterns. Share insights (anonymously if necessary) with local policymakers or advocacy groups.
• Targeted Policy Adjustments:
  • Example: If school disciplinary policies disproportionately affect students of color, advocate for changes to a restorative justice model or for increased funding for counselors instead of school resource officers.
  • Action: Join parent-teacher associations, school board meetings, or local advocacy groups to propose specific, data-backed policy changes.

Tradeoffs of Local Repair:

• Slow Progress and Resistance: Repairing established "altars" often means confronting entrenched interests, bureaucratic inertia, and the discomfort of change. Progress can be agonizingly slow and frustrating.
• Risk of Co-optation: Small-scale efforts can sometimes be absorbed or diluted by the larger, damaged system, losing their transformative potential.
• Emotional Labor: This work demands immense patience, resilience, and the capacity to navigate conflict and disappointment. It can lead to burnout if not managed with self-care and community support.
• Limited Scope: Local repair, while vital, may not address root causes that are regional, national, or global in scope.

Move 2: Broadening the Sacred Space – Sanctifying the "Courtyard" for Enduring Justice

Our second move recognizes that some "altars" may be beyond repair, or simply insufficient for the magnitude of contemporary challenges. Here, Rabbi Yehuda's insight becomes our guide: when the designated altar is "too small," we must "sanctify the middle of the court." This means expanding our understanding of where and how sacred work—the pursuit of justice and compassion—can happen, moving beyond traditional, formal institutions to empower broader community spaces and alternative models. This move is about building resilient, inclusive, and enduring structures for justice.

Beyond the "Altar": Defining the "Courtyard":

The "courtyard" represents the vast, often untapped, potential of our collective life outside of official structures.

• Informal Networks: Mutual aid groups, community watch programs, neighborhood support systems.
• Inter-organizational Collaborations: Coalitions of non-profits, faith-based organizations, grassroots movements, and academic institutions.
• New Models of Collective Care: Community land trusts, worker cooperatives, alternative currencies, democratically controlled resources.
• Public Discourse and Cultural Narratives: Media, arts, education, and civic dialogue that shape shared values.

Strategies for "Sanctification" (Building New Sacred Spaces):

• Coalition Building and Shared Vision:
  • Example: Diverse groups (environmentalists, labor unions, racial justice advocates) come together to advocate for a "just transition" away from fossil fuels, recognizing their interconnected struggles.
  • Action: Actively seek out and build relationships with groups and individuals outside your immediate sphere. Invest in shared learning, visioning, and strategic planning. Identify common ground and shared goals that transcend individual mandates.
• Policy Advocacy for Structural Change (Mid-to-Long Term):
  • Example: Working not just to get a single person released from prison, but to reform sentencing laws, end cash bail, or invest in community-based alternatives to incarceration.
  • Action: Support and participate in campaigns for legislative or policy changes that address root causes of injustice. This might involve voter engagement, lobbying elected officials, or participating in public demonstrations. Focus on policies that create new, more equitable structures or dismantle harmful ones.
• Developing and Scaling Alternative Systems:
  • Example: Instead of solely relying on the existing housing market, support or establish community land trusts that remove land from the speculative market to provide permanently affordable housing.
  • Action: Research and invest in community-led initiatives that operate outside or in parallel to traditional systems. This could include democratic workplaces, mutual aid networks that pool resources, or community-owned energy projects. These are the "new altars" being built in the "courtyard."
• Cultivating a Culture of Justice and Empathy:
  • Example: Funding and supporting artists, educators, and journalists who create narratives that challenge stereotypes, foster empathy, and expose systemic injustice, shifting public consciousness.
  • Action: Engage in public education campaigns, support media literacy initiatives, and participate in or facilitate intergroup dialogues that build understanding and bridge divides. Recognize that changing hearts and minds is as crucial as changing laws.

Tradeoffs of Sanctifying the "Courtyard":

• Long-Term Investment and Uncertainty: Building new systems and shifting cultural norms requires significant, sustained effort over many years, with no guarantee of immediate success. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
• Navigating Complexity and Power Dynamics: Coalition building and policy advocacy involve navigating diverse interests, managing internal conflicts, and challenging powerful, entrenched systems that benefit from the status quo.
• Risk of Utopianism or Fragmentation: Grand visions can sometimes lead to paralysis or, conversely, to fragmentation if groups cannot find common ground. There's a delicate balance between idealism and pragmatism.
• Resource Intensiveness: These larger-scale efforts often require substantial financial, human, and organizational resources that can be difficult to secure.

In both moves, the underlying humility is crucial. We are not the sole architects of justice, but stewards of a sacred calling. We acknowledge the complexity, the setbacks, and our own limitations. Yet, we are empowered by the vision that through diligent repair and bold expansion, we can ensure that our "offerings" of justice and compassion are not disqualified, but ascend and bring healing to the world.

Measure

How do we know when our "altars" are becoming "shalem"—whole and fit for purpose—or when our "courtyards" are truly sanctified, effectively expanding the sacred space for justice? The measure of "done" in the pursuit of justice is not a static endpoint, a perfect utopia achieved, but rather a dynamic, continuous movement towards greater wholeness, equity, and compassion within our systems and communities. It is about building enduring capacity for justice and reducing the conditions that perpetuate suffering. Our metric must therefore focus on systemic health, not just isolated acts.

Here is a metric for accountability, designed to assess progress on both repairing damaged altars and sanctifying the broader courtyard:

The "Shalem" Index: A Holistic Measure of Systemic Justice and Compassion

This index evaluates the degree to which our justice-seeking "altars" and "courtyards" exhibit equitable access and outcomes, foster trust and participation, demonstrate resilience and adaptability, reduce moral injury, and reflect a shift in resource allocation towards preventative and restorative practices.

1. Equitable Access and Outcomes (Justice with Compassion in Practice):

   • What it measures: The measurable reduction of disparities in access to justice, resources, and opportunities across all demographic groups (racial, ethnic, economic, gender, ability, geographic). It asks: Are the most vulnerable and marginalized experiencing tangible, sustained improvements in their quality of life, safety, and empowerment? Are the benefits of societal progress distributed more evenly?
   • Indicators:
     • Disparity Reduction: A measurable decrease in outcome gaps (e.g., incarceration rates, school suspension rates, health outcomes, housing insecurity, income gaps) between different demographic groups within a defined community or system (e.g., a city's youth justice system, a state's healthcare access).
     • Universal Access: An increase in the percentage of individuals from previously underserved communities who successfully access and benefit from essential services (e.g., legal aid, mental health support, quality education, clean water, healthy food). This includes tracking ease of navigation, language accessibility, and cultural competence of services.
     • Resource Distribution: Evidence of a more equitable distribution of public and private resources towards communities and initiatives that address historical disadvantages and systemic inequities.
   • Why it matters: This directly addresses the "disqualification" of offerings. If offerings (efforts for justice) are truly valid, they should yield equitable results for all, especially those historically denied justice. It is the tangible manifestation of compassion in action.

2. Trust and Meaningful Participation (The Sanctified Courtyard in Action):

   • What it measures: The extent to which marginalized communities and the broader public trust the institutions meant to serve justice, and their active, meaningful participation in shaping those institutions and their surrounding "courtyard." It asks: Do people feel heard, respected, and empowered to influence decisions that affect their lives?
   • Indicators:
     • Public Trust Metrics: An increase in positive public perception and reported trust in local justice-serving institutions (e.g., police, courts, social services), particularly among groups who have historically experienced distrust. (This requires regular, anonymous community surveys.)
     • Participatory Governance: A measurable increase in the representation and active engagement of marginalized community members in decision-making bodies (e.g., school boards, city councils, police oversight committees, non-profit boards).
     • Community-Led Initiatives: The proliferation and sustainability of community-led initiatives and mutual aid networks that address needs and build resilience from the ground up, indicating a shift in power and agency.
     • Feedback Loops: The establishment and demonstrable use of effective feedback mechanisms that solicit input from the public and incorporate it into policy and practice.
   • Why it matters: A damaged altar alienates its congregants. A sanctified courtyard invites all to participate. Trust and participation are essential for the legitimacy and effectiveness of any justice system, indicating that the "altar" is not just physically intact, but relationally whole and inclusive.

3. Resilience and Adaptability of Systems (Enduring Wholeness):

   • What it measures: The capacity of justice systems and community networks to anticipate, respond effectively to, and learn from new challenges, shocks, and changing societal needs. It asks: Can our collective "altars" and "courtyards" evolve, self-correct, and maintain their integrity in the face of unforeseen pressures?
   • Indicators:
     • Crisis Response Equity: Demonstrable improvements in how a system responds to crises (e.g., natural disasters, economic downturns, public health emergencies) to ensure equitable outcomes and support for the most vulnerable.
     • Learning and Iteration: Evidence of institutional learning, policy adjustments based on evidence and community feedback, and a willingness to dismantle ineffective or harmful practices.
     • Cross-Sector Collaboration: The strength and frequency of collaboration between different sectors (government, non-profit, business, community groups) to address complex social problems, reflecting a healthy, interconnected "courtyard."
     • Preventative Investment: A measurable shift of resources towards preventative measures and early intervention strategies that address root causes of injustice, rather than solely reactive or punitive responses.
   • Why it matters: A "shalem" altar is not brittle; it is robust and capable of sustained service. This measure ensures that our efforts are not just fixing present problems but building long-term capacity for a just and compassionate future.

4. Reduction of Moral Injury and Burnout (Integrity for the Servants):

   • What it measures: The well-being and sense of efficacy among those who work within or advocate for justice-serving systems. It asks: Are the "priests" and "levites" of our current age—the social workers, advocates, teachers, healthcare providers, and community organizers—experiencing less moral injury and burnout, indicating that their efforts are having meaningful impact within functional systems?
   • Indicators:
     • Workforce Retention & Satisfaction: Increased retention rates and reported job satisfaction among public service workers and non-profit staff in justice-related fields, coupled with a decrease in reported moral injury.
     • Advocate Efficacy: Survey data from community advocates and grassroots leaders indicating a greater sense of efficacy and impact in their work, rather than feeling constantly thwarted by systemic barriers.
     • Support Structures: The presence and utilization of institutional and community-based support structures for those engaged in justice work (e.g., mental health services, peer support networks, fair compensation).
   • Why it matters: The health of the system is reflected in the health of those who serve it. If the altar is truly "shalem," it will sustain and uplift those who bring offerings, rather than draining or traumatizing them.

"Done" is a Direction, Not a Destination: It is crucial to understand that "done" does not mean reaching a perfect, static state of justice. Justice is an ongoing process, a continuous aspiration. The "Shalem Index" measures our progress in building and maintaining systems that are more just, more compassionate, and more resilient. It is a commitment to perpetual improvement, to constantly tending to our "altars" and expanding our "courtyards," ensuring that the sacred work of healing the world can continue to ascend, whole and unblemished. We are not seeking an end, but an enduring capacity for goodness.

Takeaway + Citations

The ancient wisdom of Zevachim 59 offers us a profound lens through which to examine our contemporary struggles for justice and compassion. It compels us to move beyond individual acts of goodwill and confront the integrity of the very systems through which we seek to bring healing to the world. We learn that a "damaged altar" disqualifies even our sincerest offerings (Zevachim 59a:10, 59a:11), urging us to meticulously diagnose and repair systemic flaws that render our efforts ineffective. The principle of "shalem" (complete, whole) from Exodus 20:21 (Sefaria: Exodus 20:21) becomes our halakhic anchor, a non-negotiable standard for the foundational structures of justice.

Furthermore, when an existing "altar" proves "too small" for the vast needs of our time (Zevachim 59a:13, 59a:14), we are called to boldly "sanctify the middle of the court" (I Kings 8:64, Sefaria: 1_Kings.8.64), expanding our understanding of where and how sacred work can be done. This is a mandate to build broader, more inclusive, and resilient "courtyards" of justice in our communities, utilizing informal networks and alternative systems when traditional institutions falter. Finally, the meticulous attention to placement and the need for a "vacant north" (Zevachim 59a:8, 59a:9; Leviticus 1:11, Sefaria: Leviticus.1.11) remind us to design our systems with intentionality, removing any "vessels" of bias or obstruction that might stand between our highest ideals and their equitable manifestation.

Our path forward, therefore, is one of prophetic discernment and practical action: identify the damaged "altars" in our midst, advocate for their repair, and simultaneously cultivate new "sacred spaces" where justice and compassion can flourish unimpeded. The measure of our success lies not in achieving a static perfection, but in the continuous movement towards systems that are more equitable, trustworthy, resilient, and ultimately, "shalem"—whole, complete, and fit for the sacred work of healing our fragmented world.

Citations:

• Exodus 20:21. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.20.21?lang=bi&aliyot=0&p2=Exodus.20.21&lang2=bi
• I Kings 8:64. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/I_Kings.8.64?lang=bi&aliyot=0&p2=I_Kings.8.64&lang2=bi
• Leviticus 1:11. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.1.11?lang=bi&aliyot=0&p2=Leviticus.1.11&lang2=bi
• Rashi on Zevachim 59a:1:1. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Zevachim.59a.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Rashi on Zevachim 59a:1:2. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Zevachim.59a.1.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Rashi on Zevachim 59a:10:1. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Zevachim.59a.10.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Rashi on Zevachim 59a:11:1. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Zevachim.59a.11.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Zevachim 59a:1. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Zevachim.59a.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Zevachim 59a:10. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Zevachim.59a.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Tosafot on Zevachim 59a:11:1. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Tosafot_on_Zevachim.59a.11.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Zevachim 59a. Sefaria.org. https://www.sefaria.org/Zevachim.59a?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en