Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Zevachim, 118

1) MAY A WOMAN OFFER KORBANOS ON A "BAMAH"

OPINIONS: The Gemara quotes the verse which teaches that a Zar (non-Kohen) is permitted to offer a Korban on a Bamas Yachid, a private Bamah (when Bamos are permitted). The verse says, "And the Kohen will sprinkle the blood on the Mizbe'ach of Hashem [at the opening of the Ohel Mo'ed]" (Vayikra 17:6), which implies that only a Korban offered on the Mizbe'ach of Hashem at the opening of the Ohel Mo'ed requires a Kohen, as opposed to a Korban offered on a Bamah. RASHI (DH Zar) adds that the Toras Kohanim explicitly states that even an Eved may offer a Korban on a Bamah. Does this also imply that a woman may offer a Korban on a Bamah?

(a) The Yerushalmi in Megilah (1:11) quotes a Beraisa that states that both men and women may offer Korbanos on a Bamah. This is also stated clearly by the Tosefta in Zevachim (13:8). The Tosefta says, "A person may make a Bamah at the opening of his yard and at the opening of his garden, and he may offer upon it [Korbanos;] also his son, daughter, servant, and maidservant." (See CHAZON YECHEZKEL there, who says that the Halachah in the Tosefta applies only when the Bamah is built in the person's yard or garden, as the Tosefta mentions. This also seems to be the intention of our Gemara earlier (117a) that says that a person builds a Bamah "on the top of his roof.") The MISHNEH L'MELECH (Hilchos Korban Pesach, end of 1:3) cites this opinion in the name of the MAHARIMAT based on TOSFOS in Kidushin (36a). The OR SAME'ACH (Hilchos Chagigah 1:1) mentions as a matter of fact that women may offer Korbanos on Bamos.

(b) However, the Yerushalmi quotes Rebbi Yochanan who says that the Beraisa's text should read that only a man may offer a Korban on a Bamah. The PENEI MOSHE and KORBAN HA'EDAH explain that Rebbi Yochanan maintains that a woman may not offer a Korban on a Bamah. His source for this is the verse cited by our Gemara earlier, "Each man, all that is correct in his eyes" (Devarim 12:8). This implies that the Torah admonishes men not to offer Korbanos on Bamos when doing so would be a forbidden practice. The Torah does not admonish *women* in such a manner, because they never were allowed to offer Korbanos on a Bamah at any time.

The KEREN ORAH (117a) argues that this is probably not Rebbi Yochanan's intention. Although he proposes that Rebbi Yochanan also might exclude women from the verse in Devarim, he does not understand why women should be any different than Nochrim, who are permitted to offer Korbanos on a Bamah. Additionally, the Tosefta states unequivocally that woman may offer Korbanos on a Bamah. He suggests that Rebbi Yochanan in the Yerushalmi in Megilah is being *more lenient* for women. The Beraisa states that both men and women may offer their Korbanos on a Bamah, meaning that they may bring only Korbanos of Nedarim and Nedavos on a Bamah, but not their obligatory Korbanos (Chovos). Rebbi Yochanan argues that the Beraisa does not say this with regard to women, meaning that women may offer even their Chovos on a Bamah. This is because Rebbi Yochanan learns the same type of Gezeiras ha'Kasuv from the verse in Devarim, but in reverse. The Gemara earlier (117b) derives from this verse that only "Yesharos" (Nedarim and Nedavos) may be offered, as opposed to Chovos. Since this verse applies only to an "Ish" (man), Rebbi Yochanan argues that the Beraisa is not limiting a woman to only Nedarim and Nedavos, since the Torah never said that she may not bring Chovos. (Y. Montrose)

118b

OPINIONS: The Mishnah states that during the time when the Mishkan stood in Shilo, it was permitted to eat Kodshim Kalim even outside of Shilo, as long as one could see Shilo from where he was eating the Kodshim. The Gemara lists a number of opinions concerning the source for this Halachah. The exact manner in which each opinion derives this Halachah, however, is not clear. How does each opinion derive from the verse that it is permitted to eat Kodshim Kalim within view of Shilo?

(a) Rebbi Oshiya (118a) says that we know this from the verse, "Guard yourself lest you offer your Olos in any place that you see" (Devarim 12:13). This shows us that one may not offer Korbanos in any place from which he can see the Mishkan, but he *may* eat the Korbanos in such a place. The Gemara asks that perhaps the verse means that although one may not offer Korbanos in places from which one can see the Mishkan, one may perform the Shechitah in such a place. The Gemara answers that this is learned from a different verse -- "But only in the place which Hashem shall choose... there you shall offer your burnt offerings, and there you shall do [all that I command you]" (Devarim 12:14), which compares offering with slaughtering, teaching that just as the offering of a Korban may not be done in a certain place, so, too, the slaughtering of a Korban may not be performed in that place.

(b) Rebbi Avdimi says that we learn this from the verse, "And the border spread east until Ta'anas Shilo" (Yehoshua 16:6, see RASHI DH v'Lo). The MAHARSHA explains that Rebbi Avdimi understands that the word "Ta'anas" is extra, since we never find that Shilo is called "Ta'anas." Rebbi Avdimi explains that the name "Ta'anas Shilo" refers to the fact that it was a place where one could easily see Shilo, and it would remind people of the fact that they could no longer eat Korbanos in Shilo. This is why it was called "Ta'anas," meaning the place of "groaning" because of the loss of Shilo (see Rashi DH Ta'anas).

(c) Rebbi Avahu learns this from the verse, "Ben Poras Yosef, Ben Poras Alei Ayin" (Bereishis 49:22; see Rashi on the verse). The verse is telling us that Yosef, who did not want to derive pleasure from something that was not his (i.e. the wife of Potifar), should merit to have Kodshim eaten as far as one can see Shilo. Rashi (DH Ben Poras) explains that Shilo was in the portion of Yosef, and through his merit the Jewish people were able to eat Kodshim Kalim during the time of the Mishkan in Shilo at any place from which they could see Shilo.

The Maharsha comments that Rebbi Avahu's teaching is based primarily on the second part of the verse, "Benos Tzu'adah Alei Shur." He explains that Rebbi Avahu reads the last words of the first verse, "Alei Ayin," together with the last part of this verse. He understands that because of his "Alei Ayin," referring to Yosef's act of removing his eye from gazing at the wife of Potifar, he merited that "Benos," referring to the other Shevatim, "Tzu'adah" -- were "able to walk" with their Kodshim Kalim, "Alei Shur" -- as far as they could see the Mishkan ("Shur" refers to sight, as in Bamidbar 24:17). The Midrash (Bamidbar Rabah 14:7) explicitly states that this Halachah is derived from the words "Alei Shur," which the CHIDUSHEI HA'RASHASH on the Midrash translates like the Maharsha (unlike the YEDEI MOSHE there, who understands that "Shur" means wall, meaning that Korbanos could be eaten outside of the wall of Shilo).

(d) Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina says that this is derived from the verse "u'Retzon Shochni Seneh" -- "and appeasement dwelling in the bush" (Devarim 33:16). The verse is telling us that Yosef, who did not want to derive pleasure from something that was not his (i.e. the wife of Potifar), merits to eat among those who hated him. How does this teach us that during the time of the Mishkan in Shilo, it is permitted to eat Kodshim Kalim as long as one could see Shilo?

Rashi (DH u'Retzon and DH Bein) explains the verse according to Rebbi Yosi as follows. Through his "Ratzon," Yosef's desire not to derive pleasure from something that was not his, Yosef merited to have the Kodshim eaten during Shilo (which was in his part of Eretz Yisrael) be eaten even among those who hated him (the areas of the other tribes). It seems that Rashi derives the idea of "those who hated him" from the language of "Seneh," which is similar to the word "Sin'ah," hatred (see Shabbos 89b). However, the role of the word "Shochni" is unclear. The YAD BINYAMIN suggests that "Shochni Seneh" means that the Korbanos could be eaten in the *dwellings* of those who hated him.

The Maharsha explains that each word refers to a different concept, splitting up the words "Shochni" and "Seneh." He explains that through Yosef's Ratzon (as stated above), he merited that the Korbanos of "Shochni," meaning the Mishkan which dwelled in his portion of Eretz Yisrael, were even able to be eaten in the territory of those who previously hated him ("Seneh").

The EIZEHU MEKOMAN has difficulty with the last three teachings. He asks that none of them seem to have any relevance to the topic of Bamos, and they might easily refer to other things. He suggests that the last three Amora'im agree that the main reference to this Halachah is the first teaching of Rebbi Oshiya. These Amora'im are merely revealing other places where a further proof to this concept could be understood from the words of the verses. (Y. Montrose)