POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Zevachim 12
ZEVACHIM 11-15 - Sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor.
Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and
prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.
1) THE PROPER TIME TO SLAUGHTER THE PESACH (cont.)
(a) Question: Regarding the Ketores, it says "Bein
ha'Arbayim" - will we say that it may be burned anytime
in the day?!
(b) Answer: The Torah equates the Ketores to the Menorah.
(c) Question: Also regarding Pesach it says "Tizbach Es
ha'Pesach *ba'Arev*" (this shows that it must be in the
(d) Answer: No, that teaches that Pesach is slaughtered after
1. (Beraisa): Since it says "Ba'Arev" and "Bein
ha'Arbayim" by Pesach, we slaughter it after the
afternoon Tamid, by which it only says "Bein
(e) Question: Can we say that Pesach may be slaughtered in
the morning, but if it is slaughtered in the afternoon,
it should not be slaughtered until after the Tamid!
(f) Answer: Yes (as we find regarding Musaf)!
1. (R. Yochanan): (The Musaf prayer applies the entire
day, but if one did not pray Musaf before the time
for Minchah arrived,) he should pray Minchah first.
(g) Objection #1: If "Bein ha'Arbayim" does not connote the
afternoon (and we must learn from other verses), why did
the Torah say "Bein ha'Arbayim" regarding the Menorah and
(h) Objection #2 (Beraisa - Rebbi): Ben Beseira could answer
R. Yehoshua 'Do not compare the morning of Erev Pesach to
the previous day, for no part of the previous day is
fitting to slaughter the Pesach, but part of Erev Pesach
1. According to R. Elazar, Ben Beseira says that all of
Erev Pesach is fitting!
(i) (R. Yochanan): Ben Beseira disqualifies a Pesach
slaughtered in the morning of Erev Pesach, whether
Lishmah or Lo Lishmah since part of the day is fitting.
(j) Question (R. Avahu): If so, how is Pesach ever Kosher
according to Ben Beseira?
1. If it was Hukdash in the morning of Erev Pesach, it
was Nidcheh from the start (it could not be offered
in a Kosher way, either Lishmah or Lo Lishmah; R.
Yochanan holds, such a Korban can never be offered);
(k) Answer #1 (R. Avahu): We must say that it was Hukdash in
the afternoon of Erev Pesach.
2. If it was Hukdash before Erev Pesach, it was fitting
(it was originally Kosher Lo Lishmah) and then
Nidcheh, it never becomes fitting again!
(l) Answer #2 (Abaye): We can even say that it was Hukdash in
the morning - since it will become fitting that same day,
it is considered fitting from the start.
(m) Answer #3 (Rav Papa): We can even say that it was Hukdash
the previous night - since it will become fitting (the
coming afternoon, which Halachah considers to be) the
same day, it is considered fitting from the start.
1. (Tana d'vei R. Yishmael): An animal on the night
before its eighth day (is considered fitting to be a
Korban, since it may be offered the coming day,
therefore it) may enter the pen to be tithed.
2. Contradiction (R. Aftoriki): It says "V'Hayah Shivas
Yamim Tachas Imo" - implying that on the night
before its eighth day it is fitting to be a Korban;
i. It also says "Umi'Yom ha'Shemini va'Hal'ah
Yeratzeh" - implying that the night before its
eighth day it is not fit!
3. Answer (R. Aftoriki): The night before it is fitting
to be Hukdash, it is not fitting to be offered until
the eighth day.
(a) R. Zeira: We may infer that R. Yochanan says that a
living animal can be Nidcheh!
(b) R. Avahu: That is correct!
1. (R. Yochanan): If one of two partners in an animal
was Makdish his half; he bought his partner's half,
and was Makdish that also, the animal is Kodesh, but
it cannot be offered; if one makes Temurah on it,
the Temurah has the same law as it does.
2. We learn three laws from this:
i. A living animal can be Nidcheh;
ii. Dichuy from the start is considered Dichuy (and
it can never be offered);
iii. Dichuy applies to monetary Kedushah (Rashi -
the animal can never be offered, even if it
becomes fitting; R. Chananel - when redeemed,
the money cannot be used for the purpose for
which it was Hukdash).
(c) (Ula citing R. Yochanan): If Reuven (unintentionally) ate
Chelev, was Makdish a Korban, became a Mumar (who cannot
bring a Korban) and repented, since the animal was once
Nidcheh, it can never be offered.
3) AN "OLAH" OFFERED "SHE'LO LISHMAH"
(d) (R. Yirmeyah citing R. Yochanan): If Reuven ate Chelev,
was Makdish a Korban, went crazy and regained sanity,
since the animal was once Nidcheh, it can never be
(e) He must teach both cases.
1. If he only taught the first case, one might have
thought that there it can never be offered, because
he actively was Docheh the Korban - but if he went
crazy, this happens by itself, he is like one who
goes to sleep (the Korban is not Nidcheh);
(f) Question (R. Yirmeyah): If Reuven ate Chelev, was Makdish
a Korban, and Beis Din (mistakenly) ruled that Chelev is
permitted and retracted, is the animal permanently
Nidcheh or not?
2. If he only taught the second case, one might have
thought that there it can never be offered, because
he cannot restore his sanity, but a Mumar can always
repent (so his Korban is not permanently Nidcheh).
(g) Answer (An elder): When R. Yochanan would teach about
Dichuy, this is the first case he would teach (Rashi -
because it is very Nidcheh; R. Tam - because it is not
Nidcheh so much, it is a Chidush that it can never be
(h) Question: What is the reason?
(i) Version #1 (Rashi) Answer: If Reuven became a Mumar or
insane, he was Nidcheh, but Chatas Chelev still applies;
when Beis Din permitted Chelev, Chatas Chelev is also
Nidcheh (one who follows a mistaken ruling of Beis Din
does not bring a Korban)!
(j) Version #2 (R. Tam) Answer: If Reuven became a Mumar or
insane, he and the Korban were Nidchim; when Beis Din
permitted Chelev, Reuven is Nidcheh (he is unsure whether
or not he should bring the Korban), the Korban is not (it
would be offered if not for the mistaken Hora'ah)!
(a) (Mishnah - Shimon Ben Azai): I heard from 72 elder...
(b) Question: Why does it say *elder* (singular)?
(c) Answer: To teach that all agreed like one about the law.
(d) (Mishnah): Ben Azai only added Olah (to the Korbanos that
are Pasul Lo Lishmah).
(e) Question (Rav Huna): Question: What is his reason?
(f) Answer #1 (Rav Huna): "Olah Hu" - if it is Lishmah it is
Kosher, if not it is Pasul.
1. Question: It also says "Hu" regarding Asham, Ben
Azai does not Posel Asham Lo Lishmah!
(g) Answer #2: Ben Azai learns from a Kal va'Chomer: Chatas
is not entirely burned on the Mizbeach, it is Pasul Lo
Lishmah - Olah is entirely burned on the Mizbeach, all
the more so it is Pasul Lo Lishmah!
2. Answer: That is said after burning the Eimurim
(Chelev) on the Mizbeach.
i. (Even if the Eimurim are not burned at all, the
Korban is Kosher - all the more so if they are
burned Lo Lishmah!)
3. Question: Also "Olah Hu" is said after burning the
4. Answer: Regarding Olah, it says "Hu" twice, one of
them teaches that it is Pasul Lo Lishmah.
5. Objection: It also says "Hu" twice regarding Asham!
1. Question: We cannot learn from Chatas, since it
(h) Answer #3: Ben Azai does not learn from Chatas and
Pesach, because both pertain to Kares;
2. Answer: Pesach proves that this is not the essential
reason - it does not atone, it is Pasul Lo Lishmah!
3. Question: You cannot learn from Pesach, because it
is offered at a fixed time of the year!
4. Answer: Chatas proves that this is not the essential
reason (there is no fixed time to offer it, it is
Pasul Lo Lishmah);
i. We learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah - Chatas and
Pesach are Kodshim, if Lo Lishmah they are
Pasul - the same applies to Olah.
5. Question: We cannot learn from Chatas and Pesach,
because both pertain to Kares!
6. Answer: Ben Azai does not consider that a question,
because they do not pertain to Kares the same way
(Chatas atones for Chayavei Kerisus, one who does
not offer Korban Pesach is Chayav Kares).
7. Question: Ben Azai should also learn Asham from the
Tzad ha'Shavah (of Pesach, Chatas and Olah)!
8. Answer: No, because all of those are brought for
Korbanos Tzibur, but Asham is not.
1. He received the law from the 72 Chachamim.
(i) Question: But Rav Huna said that he learns from a Kal
(j) Answer: He only said that to make the Talmidim
investigate whether there is a valid Kal va'Chomer.