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 32
ZEVACHIM 31-33 - 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) IF "PESULIM" SLAUGHTERED (cont.)
(a) If any of these Pesulim was Mekabel the blood (with
intention) Chutz li'Zmano or Chutz li'Mkomo (since his
Kabalah is always invalid, his intent does not Posel the
Korban), if Dam ha'Nefesh is still coming out, a Kosher
Kohen should Mekabel it (to Zorek it);
(b) If Kabalah was done properly (by a Kosher Kohen with the
right hand in a Kli Shares), then the blood was given to
a Pasul (or transferred to the left hand or put into a
Chulin vessel), it should be returned to a Kosher Kohen
(or the right hand or to a Kli Shares);
(c) If (after a proper Kabalah) the blood fell to the floor
and it was gathered, it is Kosher;
(d) If the blood was put on the wrong part of the Mizbe'ach,
i.e. on the ramp, or not over the Yesod, or if blood that
should be put above (or on the inner Mizbe'ach) was put
below (or on the outer Mizbe'ach), or vice-versa:
1. If Dam ha'Nefesh is still coming out, a Kosher Kohen
should Mekabel it.
(e) (Gemara) Inference: If a Pasul slaughtered, it is Kosher
b'Diavad - l'Chatchilah, it is forbidden.
(f) Contradiction (Beraisa): "V'Shochat" - a Zar may
1. A Zar, woman, slave or Tamei may slaughter even
(g) Answer: Really, Pesulim may slaughter l'Chatchilah;
2. Suggestion: Perhaps a Kohen must slaughter!
i. We learn from "V'Ata u'Vanecha...l'Chol Davar
ha'Mizbe'ach", this applies even to slaughter.
3. Rejection: "V'Shochat...V'Hikrivu (Benei Aharon)" -
from Kabalah and onwards, Kohanim must do the
i. This teaches that anyone may slaughter.
1. The Mishnah permitted this b'Diavad because one of
the Pesulim, a Tamei, may not slaughter
l'Chatchilah, lest he touch the meat.
(h) Inference: The Mishnah does permit the slaughter of a
(i) Version #1 Contradiction (Beraisa):
"V'Somach...v'Shochat" - just as only a Tahor can Somech,
only a Tahor can slaughter.
(j) Answer: That is only mid'Rabanan, mid'Oraisa a Tamei may
(k) Question: Presumably, Semichah requires a Tahor on
account of "Lifne Hash-m" (in the Mikdash);
1. (Tosfos - we cite Vayikra 1:3, written just before
Semichah; Rashi - we cite Vayikra 1:5, which teaches
that slaughter must be in the Mikdash; slaughter
must be (able to be done) Tekef (immediately) after
Semichah. Only a Tahor may be in the Mikdash.)
(l) Answer: A Tamei may stand outside the Mikdash and
slaughter (a Korban in the Mikdash) with a long knife.
2. Likewise, only a Tahor may (be in the Mikdash to)
(m) Question: Likewise, a Tamei may stand outside the Mikdash
and stick his hands in to Somech!
(n) Answer: The Tana holds that Bi'ah b'Miktzas (partial
entering) is like full Bi'ah (into the Mikdash, a Tamei
may not do this).
(o) Version #2 - Rav Chisda - (Beraisa):
"V'Samach...v'Shochat" - just as only a Tahor can
slaughter, only a Tahor can Somech.
(p) Question: A Tahor must slaughter because it says "Lifne
Hash-m" - the same applies to Semichah (Tosfos - since it
also says "Lifne Hash-m" regarding Semichah; Rashi -
since slaughter must be Tekef after Semichah)!
(q) Answer: A Tamei may stand outside and stick his hands in
2) PARTIAL ENTRY INTO THE MIKDASH
(r) Question: Likewise, a Tamei may stand outside and
slaughter with a long knife!
(s) Answer: The Tana is Shimon ha'Temani:
1. (Beraisa): "V'Shochat Es Ben ha'Bakar Lifne Hash-m"
- the Korban must be Lifne Hash-m, the slaughterer
need not be;
2. Shimon ha'Temani says, we read this as if it said
'Shochet...Lifne Hash-m', the slaughterer's hands
must be closer to the Heichal than the animal.
(a) (Ula): If a Tamei entered his hands into the Mikdash, he
is lashed - "B'Chol Kodesh Lo Siga (v'El ha'Mikdash Lo
Savo)" - the verse equates touching and entering:
1. Just as partial touching is like full touching,
Bi'ah b'Miktzas (partial entry) is like full Bi'ah.
(b) Question (R. Oshaya - Beraisa):If the eighth day of
Taharah of a Metzora fell on Erev Pesach, and he had an
emission of semen on that day and immersed:
1. Normally, a Tevul Yom (one who immersed and is not
fully Tahor until evening) may not enter the Ezras
Nashim - in this case, he may (to complete Taharas
Metzora, blood must be put on his ear, thumb and big
toe in the Azarah), to enable him to bring Korban
(c) Answer (Ula): Just the contrary, the Beraisa supports me!
2. An Ase which has Kares (failure to bring Korban
Pesach) overrides an Ase without Kares (that a
Tamei, even a Tevul Yom, must leave the Ezras
3. (R. Yochanan): Mid'Oraisa, there is not even an Ase
(for a Tevul Yom to leave)!
i. "Va'Ya'amod Yehoshafat...b'Veis Hash-m Lifne
4. Summation of question: If Bi'ah b'Miktzas is
considered Bi'ah, how can he enter his ear (and
finger...) - this is punishable by Kares, just like
(failure to bring) Korban Pesach!
ii. Question: Why is it called new?
iii. Answer: They made a new decree, that a Tvul Yom
may not enter Machaneh Leviyah.
1. Once the Torah permits Bi'ah b'Miktzas of a Metzora
(before his Taharah is complete), it permits Bi'ah
b'Miktzas of a Tevul Yom. (Tosfos - this must be the
reason, for the Beraisa permits only if he became a
Ba'al Keri on the eighth day, since he already (from
morning, before he saw Keri) was permitted to bring
his Korban and enter his ear; if he saw Keri the
night before, it is forbidden.)
(d) (Rav Yosef): Ula would say that if most of Benei Yisrael
were Zavim (only Tum'as Mes is permitted regarding Korban
Pesach), and they became Teme'ei Mesim, since Tum'as Mes
is permitted regarding Korban Pesach, also Tum'as Zivah.
(e) Objection (Abaye): The Torah never permitted Zivah - it
is unreasonable that because they became more Tamei, they
are now permitted!
1. Suggestion (Abaye): Perhaps you meant, if most of
Benei Yisrael were Teme'ei Mesim, and they became
Zavim, since Tum'as Mes is permitted regarding
Korban Pesach, also Tum'as Zivah.
(f) Question (Abaye): Still, these are different! A Metzora
is Hutar (totally permitted to partially enter the
Azarah, this is the only way to do the Mitzvah -
therefore, Bi'ah b'Miktzas of a Tevul Yom is also
2. Rav Yosef: That is correct.
1. Tum'as Mes is only Dechuyah (overridden to allow
Korban Pesach - we have no source to override other
(g) (Rava): We should say just the contrary!
1. A Metzora is Hutar, but we have no source to permit
partially entry of a Tevul Yom;
(h) Inference: Abaye and Rava both hold that Tum'ah is
2. The Torah was Docheh Tum'as Mes to allow Korban
Pesach - likewise, it is Docheh another Tum'ah