THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
ZEVACHIM 82-83 - These Dafim have been sponsored by Dr. and Mrs. Shalom
Kelman of Baltimore, Maryland, USA. May Hashem bless them with a year filled
with Torah and Nachas!
1) A KORBAN WHOSE BLOOD WAS UNNECESSARILY TAKEN INTO THE "HEICHAL"
OPINIONS: The Mishnah discusses an argument between the Chachamim and Rebbi
Yosi ha'Glili regarding the blood of a Korban that was brought into the
Heichal before the Zerikah was performed on the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon. The
Chachamim maintain that such a Korban is Pasul, and even the blood that
remains in the Azarah (that was not brought into the Heichal) may no longer
be used for the Zerikah. Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili maintains that the remaining
blood may be used. According to the Chachamim, what are we supposed to do
with the Korban that is Pasul?
(a) RASHI in Pesachim (23b, DH Im Eino Inyan) learns from the context of
Moshe Rabeinu's statement to the sons of Aharon that such a Korban is burned
immediately. When Moshe Rabeinu saw that a Chatas had been burned, he said,
"Hen Lo Huva Es Damah El ha'Kodesh" -- "behold, its blood was not brought
into the sanctuary" (Vayikra 10:18). This implies that if some of its blood
*had* been brought into the sanctuary (i.e. the Heichal), then he would have
agreed with their action of burning the Chatas immediately.
(b) TOSFOS in Pesachim (DH d'Ha) quotes RABEINU SHLOMO of Troy who says that
this is not true. Once we see that the sons of Aharon burned the Chatas
without letting it first stay overnight (when it would become Pasul because
of Linah as well), we already see that they did not do what would normally
be done to a Chatas whose blood was sprinkled. The Mishnah in Pesachim (82b)
states that if a Korban is Pasul because of a Pesul she'b'Gufo (an intrinsic
invalidating factor), it must be burned immediately. If there is a Pesul
b'Dam uv'Ba'alim (an external invalidating factor, involving the blood or
the owner of the Korban), the Chatas should first be left overnight and then
be burned. Since the case of our Mishnah is a case involving a Pesul due to
the blood being brought into the Heichal, it follows that the Chatas should
be left overnight and only afterwards be burned. Rabeinu Shmuel says that
Moshe made his comment with regard to the *eating* of the Chatas. The
inference from his words that the blood was not brought into the sanctuary
is that if the blood would have been brought there, then he would have
understood why they did not *eat* it.
How does Rashi reconcile his explanation that the Korban that is Pasul is
immediately burned with the Mishnah in Pesachim (82b) cited by Tosfos?
The KEHILOS YAKOV (Pesachim #15) answers by first explaining the Mishnah's
statement which differentiates between a Pesul she'b'Gufo and a Pesul b'Dam
uv'Ba'alim. A Korban that has a Pesul she'b'Gufo, an intrinsic invalidating
factor, can obviously be burned right away, since it will not become any
more Pasul by being left overnight. Rashi explains later in Pesachim (73b,
DH Te'ubar Tzuraso) that a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim requires Ibur Tzurah
(being left overnight) because its present Pesul is not so stringent, and
thus we may not deface Kodshim by burning them for having such a Pesul.
Instead, we wait until the Korban becomes Pasul with a Pesul she'b'Gufo, whi
ch the Torah tells us to burn.
The Kehilos Yakov analyzes this further. There is nothing wrong with the
meat of a Korban when the Korban's blood (that was supposed to be used for
Zerikah) was spilled or taken out of the Azarah. That is, the meat itself is
not Pasul. The only problem is that there is no Zerikah to make the Korban a
valid Korban and to permit its meat. The same is true with regard to a Pesul
b'Ba'alim, such as when the owner of a Korban Pesach becomes Tamei before
the Zerikah of the blood. The meat itself is fine, but the Korban is not
valid because the Zerikah cannot be performed due to the fact that the owner
has become Tamei.
However, Rashi infers from the Mishnah here in Zevachim that the Pesul of a
Korban when its blood is brought unnecessarily into the Heichal is a Pesul
*she'b'Gufo*, unlike other Pesulim involving blood. This is because the
Chachamim maintain that even when there is a another pitcher of blood from
the animal with which the Zerikah can be performed, the Korban is still
Pasul. It must be that bringing the blood into the Heichal is unlike any
other Pesul involving the blood, and the disqualified Korban, therefore, is
At first glance, this logic seems inconsistent with the words of the Gemara
later in Pesachim (83a). The Gemara there says that Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili
holds like the opinion (unlike the Mishnah quoted above) that says that even
a Korban which is disqualified because of a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim is burned
immediately. How does the Gemara prove this? Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili says, as
Rashi here says, that Moshe's statement implies that a Chatas whose blood
was taken into the Heichal would normally be burned. The Gemara is almost
explicitly in saying that this is an example of a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim,
and not a Pesul she'b'Gufo, as the Kehilos Yakov explains. However, upon
closer examination, we find that there is no question at all. The Gemara is
discussing the opinion of Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili, who obviously maintains that
this case is a case of a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim, for he says in our Mishnah
that a second cup of blood which remained in the Azarah *would* be valid for
Zerikah! According to the Rabanan, however, this case remains a case of a
Pesul she'b'Gufo. The Kehilos Yakov later notes that the OR SAME'ACH
(Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 2:16) derives this logic from the words of the
Tosfos, on the other hand, must hold that as long as no action was done
directly to the meat to make it Pasul, than the meat will always be
considered as having a Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim. It is also possible that
Tosfos understands the Gemara in Pesachim (83a) to be teaching that our case
is definitely one of Pesul b'Dam uv'Ba'alim, even according to the Rabanan.
2) THE NEED FOR THE VERSE OF "MI'DAMAH"
QUESTION: The Gemara discusses the possibility that if meat from a Korban
was brought into the Heichal, it should become Pasul. If blood that is taken
outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash does not cause the rest of the blood of that
Korban to become disqualified with regard to Zerikah, and meat that goes out
of the Beis ha'Mikdash becomes Pasul as well, then when blood goes into the
Heichal and *does* cause the rest of the blood to become Pasul (showing that
entering the Heichal is a more severe infraction than exiting the Beis
ha'Mikdash), certainly the meat that goes into the Heichal should become
Pasul as well! The Gemara answers that this is not true. The verse states,
"mi'Damah" (Vayikra 6:23) and "Damah" (Vayikra 10:18). This teaches that
only blood that is supposed to remain in the Azarah that enters the Heichal
becomes Pasul and causes the Korban to become Pasul, unlike meat that enters
the Heichal, which itself remains Kosher. RASHI (DH Damah) explains that one
of the times where "Damah" is stated is extra, thus teaching that only blood
becomes Pasul upon entering the Heichal, and not meat.
TOSFOS (DH Damah) has difficulty with this Gemara. The verse which tells us
that blood that enters the Heichal disqualifies a Korban reads, "Asher Yuva
mi'Damah El Ohel Mo'ed l'Chaper" -- "which is brought from its blood into
the Ohel Mo'ed (Heichal) to atone" (Vayikra 6:23). This shows clearly that
the problem exists only when the blood is brought *to atone* (i.e. to
perform Zerikah), but not when it is brought into the Heichal for a purpose
that has nothing to do with atonement. Since meat has nothing to do with the
atonement provided by the Korban, why would we think that meat would be
included in this Halachah?
(a) The TZON KODASHIM refutes the logic of the question. It is indeed
possible that the Torah says "l'Chaper" with regard to blood in order to say
that blood -- the importance of which is based on the fact that it is used
to do Zerikah and cause the atonement of the Korban -- must be brought into
the Heichal for that purpose in order to disqualify the Korban. A Pesul
caused by bringing meat into the Heichal would be learned from the Gemara's
Kal v'Chomer from blood. It would not be necessary to bring the meat into
the Heichal with intention to attain atonement. This is why we need the
extra verse of "Damah" in order to exclude meat from this Halachah.
(b) Alternatively, the Tzon Kodashim suggests that the answer lies in the
words of the Gemara in Pesachim (59b). The Gemara there quotes the verse,
"v'Achlu Osam Asher Kupar Bahem" -- "And they shall eat those things with
which the atonement was made..." (Shemos 29:33). The Gemara quotes a Beraisa
which derives from this verse that the Kohanim eat the meat of the Korban,
and the owners of the Korbanos attain atonement. Although the Zerikah is the
main Avodah that atones for the owners of Korbanos, this Gemara teaches us
that the Kohen's eating is also called an atonement by the Torah. Based on
this, the Tzon Kodashim writes, it is understandable that the Gemara would
think that meat is also called "l'Chaper," such as when the Kohanim would
bring it into the Heichal in order to eat it there, and thereby provide a
degree of atonement for the owners (see 63a).
(c) The MITZPEH EISAN answers that when the Gemara suggests that meat should
also become Pasul, it is not referring to meat alone. Rather, it is
referring to a case in which the blood from the Shechitah is still clinging
to the neck of the animal. The Gemara is telling us that blood that enters
the Heichal when it is still part of the meat can still be used for Zerikah.
Even though the blood should fall under the category of "l'Chaper" if it is
brought there for the purpose of performing Zerikah, it is nevertheless not
Pasul, because in its present form it is considered part of the meat and it
is not yet considered a separate entity of blood. (See Mitzpeh Eisan for a
This answer has strong support in the Gemara later (92b), which seems to
state explicitly that if blood is on the neck of the animal and is brought
into the Heichal, it is not considered Pasul.
The CHAZON YECHEZKEL says that this answer is alluded to by the RAMBAM
(Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 2:17) as well. The Rambam says that if a
person brings *the Chatas itself* into the Heichal, it remains valid, as the
verse says, "Asher Yuva *mi'Damah*" (Vayikra 6:23), implying that bringing
the blood into the Heichal causes the Korban to become disqualified, but not
bringing the meat into the Heichal. The Chazon Yechezkel explains that the
Rambam's usage of the words "the Chatas itself" (and not "meat from the
Korban") implies that this case is similar to the case mentioned in the
Gemara later (92b), in which the entire Korban was brought into the Heichal
in order to perform the Kabalas ha'Dam and the Zerikah there. The Gemara,
therefore, must tell us that although the animal is brought "l'Chaper,"
because it is considered meat at this stage even the blood is not yet Pasul.