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 104
ZEVACHIM 104 (24 Elul 5763) - Today's Daf has been dedicated by Nachi Brown
in honor of the Bar Mitzvah of his son Shachar.
|
1) CONDITIONS FOR "ZERIKAH"
(a) Question: What is the argument of Rebbi and R. Elazar?
(b) Answer (Beraisa - Rebbi): Blood is Meratzeh for flayed
skin;
1. When skin is attached to the meat, whether a Pesul
occurred before or after Zerikah, the same law
applies to the skin and the meat.
(c) R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon says, blood is not Meratzeh for
flayed skin;
1. When it is attached to the meat:
i. If a Pesul occurred before Zerikah, the same
law applies to the skin and the meat;
ii. If a Pesul occurred after Zerikah, since the
meat was once permitted, Kohanim receive the
skin.
(d) Suggestion: These Tana'im argue like R. Eliezer and R.
Yehoshua:
1. (Beraisa - R. Yehoshua): "V'Asisa Olosecha *ha'Basar
veha'Dam*" - Zerikas Dam and Haktarah of the meat
must both be done, one cannot be done without the
other (e.g. if one of them became lost or Pasul);
2. R. Eliezer says, Zerikah can be done even without
Haktarah of the meat - "V'Dam Zevachecha Yishpoch".
3. Question: What does he learn from "V'Asisa Olosecha
ha'Basar veha'Dam"?
4. Answer: Just like blood is thrown, also meat - this
teaches that there was a gap between the ramp and
the Mizbe'ach.
5. Suggestion: Rebbi holds like R. Eliezer (Zerikah is
Meratzeh even without meat, it permits skin), and R.
Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon holds like R. Yehoshua
(Zerikah is only for the sake of meat).
(e) Rejection: Granted, we cannot say that R. Elazar holds
like R. Eliezer, he must hold like R. Yehoshua;
1. However, Rebbi could hold like R. Eliezer, or even
like R. Yehoshua!
2. Version #1 (Rashi): R. Yehoshua expounded that
Zerikah must permit meat, he was not more stringent
than the Torah to cause a loss to Kohanim;
i. If Zerikah was done (improperly, when it will
not permit meat), he admits that Kohanim
receive the skin, just like he admits that the
owner fulfilled his obligation!
3. Version #2 (Tosfos): R. Yehoshua decreed not to do
Zerikah when the meat became Pasul, on account of
when it was lost - this decree causes a loss to the
owner, not to Kohanim;
i. If Zerikah was done (improperly), he does not
decree that Kohanim not receive the skin, just
like he does not decree that the owner did not
fulfill his obligation! (End of Version #2)
ii. (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): If the meat became
Tamei or Pasul, or left the Azarah, we throw
the blood;
iii. R. Yehoshua says, we do not throw it;
iv. R. Yehoshua admits, if Zerikah was done, the
owner fulfilled his obligation.
2) THE SKIN OF A "KORBAN PASUL"
(a) (Mishnah - R. Chanina Segan ha'Kohanim): (I never saw a
skin taken to Beis ha'Sereifah.)
(b) Question: Surely, he saw Parim ha'Nisrafim and Se'irim
ha'Nisrafim (e.g. of Yom Kipur!)
(c) Answer: He means, 'I never saw a skin taken to Beis
ha'Sereifah on account of a Pesul.'
(d) Question: Whenever a Pesul occurs before flaying and
before Zerikah, all agree that the skin is burned!
(Surely, many thousands (perhaps millions) of Korbanos
were slaughtered in R. Chanina's presence, and some were
found to be Treifah!)
(e) Answer: He means, 'I never saw a *flayed* skin taken to
Beis ha'Sereifah.'
(f) Question: According to R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon, if a
Pesul occurred after flaying and before Zerikah, the skin
is burned!
(g) Answer #1: R. Chanina holds like Rebbi.
(h) Answer #2: He can even hold like R. Elazar - all agree
that l'Chatchilah, we do not flay before Zerikah.
(i) Question: If a Korban was found to be Treifah in the
intestines, surely it was Pasul before flaying and before
Zerikah!
(j) Answer: He holds that in such a case, since the Pesul was
not known before Zerikah, it is Meratzeh (so Kohanim
receive the skin.)
(k) Support (Mishnah - R. Akiva): From R. Chanina we learn
that (even) if a Bechor was found to be Treifah after
flaying, Kohanim receive the skin.
(l) Question: Since R. Chanina says this regarding all
Kodshim, why does R. Akiva specify Bechor?
(m) Answer: He teaches that the same applies to a Bechor
Ba'al Mum slaughtered and flayed outside the Mikdash
(even though the meat must be burned, the Kohen keeps the
skin, the law is like a Treifah found in the Mikdash
after Zerikah and flaying.)
(n) (R. Chiya bar Aba): The Halachah follows R. Akiva.
(o) Even R. Akiva only teaches about when a Mumcheh (expert)
saw the Mum and permitted slaughtering it - if not, the
skin is burned.
(p) The Halachah is like Chachamim (the meat is buried, the
skin is burned - Rashi deletes this from the text, but
Tosfos and the Rambam do not )
3) BURNING THE "PARIM" AND "SE'IRIM" THAT ARE BURNED
(a) (Mishnah): When Parim ha'Nisrafim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim
are burned properly, they are burned in Beis ha'Deshen
(outside of all three Machanos), and they are Metamei the
clothes of those engaged in burning them;
(b) When they are burned on account of a Pesul, they are
burned in Beis ha'Birah (this will be explained), and
they are not Metamei Begadim.
104b---------------------------------------104b
(c) If the animal was being carried out on poles, when the
people in front have left the Azarah but not the people
in back, those in front are Metamei Begadim, those in
back are not Metamei Begadim until they themselves leave;
(d) When all have left, all are Metamei Begadim.
(e) R. Shimon says, they are not Metamei Begadim until the
majority of the animal catches fire.
(f) Those engaged in burning after the meat melted are not
Metamei Begadim. (Bartenura, Rambam - this clause is also
R. Shimon, Chachamim argue (106A).)
(g) (Gemara) Question: What is Beis ha'Birah?
(h) Answer #1 (Rabah bar bar Chanah): It is a place in Har
ha'Bayis called 'Birah' (building).
(i) Answer #2 (Reish Lakish): All of Har ha'Bayis is called
Birah - "Ha'Birah Asher Hachinosi".
(j) (Rav Nachman): There are three Batei ha'Deshen:
1. A big one is in the Azarah, to burn Pasul Kodshei
Kodoshim and Eimurim of Kodshim Kalim, and Parim and
Se'irim ha'Nisrafim that became Pasul before
Zerikah;
2. Another is in Har ha'Bayis, for Parim and Se'irim
ha'Nisrafim that became Pasul after Zerikah;
3. The third is outside all three Machanos,
l'Chatchilah, Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim are
burned there.
(k) (Levi - Beraisa): There are three Batei ha'Deshen:
1. A big one is in the Azarah for Pasul Kodshei
Kodoshim and Eimurim of Kodshim Kalim, and Parim and
Se'irim ha'Nisrafim that became Pasul before *or
after* Zerikah;
2. Another is in Har ha'Bayis for Parim and Se'irim
ha'Nisrafim that became Pasul while being taken out
to be burned;
3. The third is outside all three Machanos, for Kosher
Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim.
4) WHAT IS POSEL THE "PARIM" AND "SE'IRIM" THAT ARE BURNED?
(a) Question (R. Yirmeyah): Does Linah disqualify Parim and
Se'irim ha'Nisrafim?
1. Perhaps Linah only applies to meat that is consumed
(by people or the Mizbe'ach), but these are burned
outside;
2. Or, perhaps this makes no difference!
(b) Answer #1 (Rava): Abaye asked this, and I answered from
the following:
1. (Beraisa): (R. Shimon and Chachamim argue about one
who was Mefagel in the Eimurim of Parim ha'Nisrafim,
but) both agree that if one was Mefagel in the meat,
this does not take effect (because the meat is not
eaten).
2. Suggestion: Just like intent does not take effect on
the meat, also Linah.
(c) Rejection: No, perhaps intent does not take effect, but
Linah does.
(d) Answer #2 (Beraisa): Me'ilah applies to Parim and Se'irim
ha'Nisrafim from the time they are Hukdeshu;
1. After slaughter, they have full Kedushas Mizbe'ach,
they become Teme'im if touched by a Tevul Yom or
Mechushar Kipurim, Linah disqualifies them.
2. Suggestion: Linah of the meat disqualifies them!
(e) Rejection: No, the Beraisa discusses Linah of the
Eimurim.
1. Question: The Seifa says, Me'ilah applies to them
even in Beis ha'Deshen, until the meat is melted.
i. Since the end of the Beraisa discusses the
meat, also the beginning!
2. Answer: No, the Seifa discusses the meat, the Reisha
discusses the Eimurim.
(f) Answer #3: Levi taught, one Beis ha'Deshen is in Har
ha'Bayis for Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim that became
Pasul while being taken out.
1. Suggestion: They became Pasul through Linah!
(g) Rejection: No, they became Pasul through Tum'ah or
Yetzi'ah (leaving the Azarah before Zerikah).
(h) Question (R. Elazar): Does Yetzi'ah Posel Parim and
Se'irim ha'Nisrafim?
1. Question: What is his question? (They must leave the
Azarah, this is not a Pesul!)
2. Answer (R. Yirmeyah bar Aba): He asks according to
Reish Lakish, who is Posel Yotzei (meat of Kodshim
Kalim that left the Azarah before Zerikah), even
though it will be permitted to take the meat out
later:
i. Perhaps Reish Lakish is Posel there, for there
is never an obligation to take it out, but he
would Machshir here, for (later) the Parim must
be taken out;
ii. Or, perhaps he is Posel whenever something
leaves prematurely.
(i) Answer: Levi taught, one Beis ha'Deshen is in Har
ha'Bayis for Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim that became
Pasul while being taken out.
1. Suggestion: They became Pasul through Yetzi'ah!
(j) Rejection: No, they became Pasul through Tum'ah or Linah.
(k) Question (R. Elazar): If the minority of a limb of Parim
and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim came out, and this helps comprise
a majority of the animal, what is the law? (Tosfos - if
it became Pasul, do we burn it in the Azarah, like an
animal that never left? Rashi - is it Metamei Begadim?
(Rashi later explains like Tosfos, but Chok Noson deletes
this 'retraction' from Rashi); Rambam - if this was
before Zerikah, is it Pasul for leaving the Azarah too
early?)
1. Do we view it as if this limb did not leave at all
(so a majority did not leave), or does the part that
left join to make a majority?
(l) Rejection: That would be obvious, the fact that the
majority of this limb is inside does not prevail over the
fact that the majority of the animal left!
(m) Correction: Rather, he asked, if the majority of a limb
came out, and this helps comprise exactly half of the
animal - do we view it as if the entire limb came out (so
a majority has left)?
Next daf
|