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 65
ZEVACHIM 64-65 - sponsored by Harav Ari Bergmann of Lawrence, N.Y., out of
love for the Torah and for those who study it.
1) "PESUL" AND "PIGUL" OF "KORBANOS HA'OF" (cont.)
(a) In the following cases it is Pasul, there is no Kares:
2) OFFERING THE "OLAS HA'OF"
1. He intended to eat a k'Zayis (of the meat) Chutz
li'Mkomo and a k'Zayis Chutz li'Zmano, or (first he
intended for) a k'Zayis Chutz li'Zmano and a k'Zayis
Chutz li'Mkomo, or half a k'Zayis Chutz li'Mkomo and
a half a k'Zayis Chutz li'Zmano, in either order.
(b) R. Yehudah (argues and) says, the general rule is - if
the first intent was Chutz li'Zmano, it is Pigul, there
is Kares; if the first intent was Chutz li'Mkomo, it is
Pasul, there is no Kares;
(c) Chachamim say, in both cases it is Pasul, there is no
(d) If he intended to eat half a k'Zayis (Chutz li'Zmano or
Chutz li'Mkomo), and Lehaktir half a k'Zayis (with such
intent), it is Kosher, for intent for eating and Haktarah
do not join.
(a) (Gemara - Beraisa) Suggestion: "V'Hikriv Min ha'Torim O
Min Benei ha'Yonah" - perhaps one who brings birds must
bring at least two (because the plural forms are used)!
3) OFFERING THE "OLAS HA'OF" (cont.)
(b) Rejection: "V'Hikrivo" - he can bring even one.
(c) "Ha'Kohen" - this teaches that a Kohen must do Melikah.
1. A Kal va'Chomer would have permitted a Zar!
Regarding animals (of Kodshei Kodoshim), slaughter
must be in the north, yet a Zar may slaughter -
regarding birds, Melikah need not be in the north,
all the more a Zar should be Kosher for Melikah!
(d) Suggestion: A Kal va'Chomer should teach that a vessel is
used for Melikah! A Kohen is not required for slaughter,
yet a Kli (e.g. knife) is required - a Kohen is required
for Melikah, all the more so a Kli should be required!
2. "Ha'Kohen" requires a Kohen.
(e) Rejection: "Ha'Kohen...u'Malak";
1. R. Akiva says, we know that a Zar may not ascend the
Mizbe'ach for Melikah, therefore "ha'Kohen" is
extra, to teach that Melikah is done with (the
fingernail of) the Kohen himself.
(f) Suggestion: Perhaps Melikah may be done above or below!
(g) Rejection: "U'Malak...v'Hiktir" - just as Haktarah is on
top of the Mizbe'ach, also Melikah.
(h) "U'Malak" - Mul the Oref.
(i) Suggestion: Perhaps it is from the (front of the) neck!
(j) Answer: It says "U'Malak", like it says regarding Chatas
ha'Of - just like there it is Mul the Oref, also here.
(k) Suggestion: Just like he is not Mavdil in Chatas ha'Of,
also in Olas ha'Of!
(l) Rejection: "U'Malak...v'Hiktir" - just as the head and
body are separate during Haktarah, they are separate as a
result of Melikah.
(m) Question: What is the source that the head and body are
(n) Answer: "V'Hiktir Oso" - this refers to burning the body,
so "V'Hiktir ha'Mizbechah" refers to burning the head.
(o) "V'Nimtza Damo" - all of its blood; "El Kir ha'Mizbe'ach"
- on the wall of the Mizbe'ach; not on the wall of the
ramp or Heichal;
1. Mitzuy is above (on the top half of the wall).
(p) Question: A Kal va'Chomer teaches that it should be
1. Regarding animals, (blood of) a Chatas is offered
above, an Olah is offered below - regarding birds, a
Chatas is offered below, all the more so an Olah
should be offered below!
(q) Answer: "U'Malak...v'Hiktir...V'Nimtza Damo";
1. Question: Surely, he does not squeeze out the blood
2. Answer: Rather, this teaches that just like Haktarah
is on top of the Mizbe'ach, also Mitzuy;
i. He ascends the ramp, turns to the Sovev, and
comes to the southeast corner; he is Molek Mul
the Oref, he is Mavdil, and does Mitzuy against
the wall of the Mizbe'ach.
ii. If he did Mitzuy below his feet (i.e. the
Sovev), even an Amah below, it is Kosher (for
this is above Chut ha'Sikra);
iii. R. Nechemyah and R. Eliezer ben Yakov say, it
must be done on top of the Mizbe'ach.
iv. Question: What do they argue about?
v. Answer (Abaye and Rava): The first Tana permits
making a Ma'arachah on the Sovev (to burn Olas
ha'Of, therefore, Mitzuy may be just below
this), R. Nechemyah and R. Eliezer forbid this.
(a) (Mishnah): He takes the body...
(b) (Beraisa): "V'Hesir Es *Mur'aso* b'Notzasah" - this
refers to the crop.
(c) Suggestion: Perhaps he cuts with a knife and removes it
(so extra skin will not come with it)!
(d) Rejection: "B'Notzasah" - he takes the (surrounding skin
with) feathers with it.
(e) Aba Yosi ben Chanan says, he takes it and the gizzard
(f) (Beraisa - Tana d'vei R. Yishmael): "B'Notzasah" - he
takes only its (surrounding skin and) feathers, he cuts
with a knife (so extra skin will not come with it).
(g) (Mishnah): He tears the wings, but does not tear them off
4) "HAVDALAH" IN THE "CHATAS HA'OF"
(h) (Beraisa): "V'Shisa" - this refers to tearing with his
1. Support: "Vay'Shas'ehu k'Shasa ha'Gedi".
(a) (Mishnah): If he did not remove the crop...(if he was
Mavdil in Chatas ha'Of, it is Pasul).
(b) Our Mishnah is unlike R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon.
1. (Beraisa - R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon): I heard that
the Kohen is Mavdil in Melikah of Chatas ha'Of.
(c) Question: What do they argue about?
(d) Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): They argue whether or not Mitzuy
of Chatas ha'Of is Me'akev (all agree that Chatas ha'Of
offered like Olas ha'Of is Pasul):
1. Our Tana holds that it is Me'akev - therefore, if he
is Mavdil Chatas ha'Of, this is like Avodas Olas
ha'Of (Rashi - since also Mitzuy must be done, like
Olas ha'Of; Tosfos - since Mitzuy is Me'akev,
everything done before it is part of the Avodah);
(e) Answer #2 (Rava): They argue whether or not a pause in
between cutting the two Simanim of Olas ha'Of is Posel:
2. R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon holds that Mitzuy is not
Me'akev, so Havdalah is nothing more than cutting
meat (Rashi - he will not do Mitzuy, so this is
unlike Olas ha'Of; Tosfos - the Hakravah ends with
Haza'ah, Havdalah afterwards is meaningless - but
R. Elazar agrees that Havdalah before Haza'ah is
1. Our Tana holds that it is not Me'akev - therefore,
Havdalah in Chatas ha'Of is like Avodas Olas ha'Of
(even though he must pause in between to cut the
majority of the flesh (of the neck));
(f) Answer #3 (Abaye): (All agree that a pause in between the
Simanim of Olas ha'Of is Posel -) they argue whether or
not cutting the majority of the flesh in Chatas ha'Of is
Me'akev, as R. Zeira and Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak
2. R. Elazar holds that it is Me'akev - therefore,
Havdalah in Chatas ha'Of is unlike Avodas Olas ha'Of
(in which the Simanim must be cut without pausing in
1. Our Tana says that it is not Me'akev, therefore,
Havdalah (without pausing in between) is like Olas
(g) Suggestion: They argue whether or not it is Me'akev, but
all agree that l'Chatchilah one must cut the majority of
the flesh in Chatas ha'Of!
2. R. Elazar says that it is Me'akev, therefore, since
he must pause in between the Simanim to cut the
flesh, it is unlike Olas ha'Of.
(h) Affirmation: Yes!
1. (Beraisa): In Melikah of a Chatas, one cuts the
spine and neckbone without cutting most of the
flesh. When he reaches the Kaneh or Veshet, he cuts
one Siman or its majority, and most of the flesh
(i) R. Yirmeyah heard the above discussion.
2. In an Olah, he cuts both Simanim or the majority of
(j) R. Yirmeyah: But R. Shimon ben Elyakim said that R.
Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon heard that we may Mavdil in Chatas
ha'Of (even before Haza'ah) - "Lo Yavdil" means, he need