(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Zevachim 94

ZEVACHIM 94 - (14 Elul) - This Daf has been dedicated in honor of the Yahrzeit of Yisrael (son of Chazkel and Miryam) Rosenbaum by his son and daughter and families, and in memory of Sheina Basha (daughter of Yakov and Dora) Zuckerman, who passed away on 10 Elul, by her children and sons in law.



(a) A flayed skin is more fit to become Tamei than one that is not - because it is ready to be used as a K'li with Machshavah alone, whereas one that is still attached, requires an act to complete it.

(b) S'tam Beged comprises wool or linen.

(c) Rebbi Elazar learns from ...

1. ... "Asher Alehah Techabes" - that even materials made of hemp or of different kinds of silks are included in the Din of Kibus.
2. ... "Beged" - comes to preclude skin even after it has been flayed, because it is not subject to Tum'ah immediately.
(a) Rebbi Elazar disagrees with Rebbi Yehudah - with regard to a skin that has been flayed, which he precludes from Kibus, seeing as it still requires Machshavah.

(b) His source for that is "Beged" (which he learns from the "Beged" in Shemini [in connection with Sheratzim]) which is subject to Tum'ah immediately.

(c) Rebbi Yehudah's source is - a Beged of less than three Etzba'os (finger-breadths), which is not subject to Tum'ah without the owner's Machshavah.

(a) This is Abaye's explanation. Rava establishes the Machlokes even by a Beged that is more than three Etzba'os by three Etzba'os - if he had a Machshavah to sew a pattern on to it, making it 'Ra'uy' according to Rebbi Yehudah, because he can negate it with a second Machshavah, thereby canceling the first one.

(b) Rava will reconcile this with the Halachah that one Machshavah cannot negate another - by confining that to where the first Machshavah renders it Ra'uy Lekabel Tum'ah (but not where it merely prevents Tum'ah from taking effect).

(c) Alternatively, Rava establishes the Machlokes by an Utzva - a large rug (usually made of leather, but sometimes made of wool) which is fit to use either to lie on or to eat on.

(d) What determines whether it is subject to Tum'ah or not is - if one's intention to use it as it is, without shaping it, or not.

(a) And Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon argue - in a case where the owner had in mind to cut it (which renders it 'Ra'uy Lekabel Tum'ah', should he reconsider and decide to use it as it is.

(b) We support this with a statement by Rebbi Shimon ben Menasyah in a Beraisa, who said - that an Utzva that the owner specifically intended to cut - remains Tahor until the owner actually cuts it (or at least negates his first Machshavah).

(c) We learned in our Mishnah that only a Beged that is Ra'uy Lekabel Tum'ah (implying that it lacks Machshavah) requires Kibus - a S'tam Mishnah like Rebbi Yehudah.

(d) When the Tana adds 've'Ra'uy le'Kibus, he is coming to preclude - vessels that are too hard to wash.

(a) The Mishmah in Shabbos permits the removal of spit or Tzo'ah from a cloth cushion using a (dry) rag - whereas he permits removing it from a leather cushion even with water (implying that it is not subject to washing).

(b) Abaye initially resolves this contradiction - by establishing the Beraisa according to Acherim, and our Mishnah, according to the Rabbanan.

(c) The source for this is a Beraisa, where the Tana Kama requires Beged and Sak to be washed, and a vessel and leather to be scraped. Acherim - simply moves leather to join Beged and Sak.

(d) When Rav Chiya bar Ashi testified that he would often wash Rav's shoes on Shabbos with water, he held like the Rabbanan.

(a) Rava asks from the Pasuk in Tazri'a "ve'ha'Beged O ha'Shesi ... O Kol K'li Or Asher Techabes". He therefore establishes ...
1. ... the Pasuk and our Mishnah - by soft leather, and ...
2. ... the Machlokes between Acherim and the Rabbanan - by hard leather.
(b) And Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi - speaks by hard leather, according to the Rabbanan.

(c) Rava retracted from this explanation - because he felt that it was presumptous to establish the Pasuk however one wants, when who says that it is not speaking even by a 'Kli Achsalgaya', which is hard boiled leather.

(d) So he restricts the Beged Or in the Pasuk to Tzara'as (exclusively), which incorporates hard leather, but which the plague (seeing as it is internal), turns soften (and which in turn, explains why washing it is not pointless).




(a) The problem Rava has with the Mishnah in Shabbos 'Haysah shel Or, Nosen Alehah Mayim ad she'Tichlah' is - that seeing as people generally tend to make their cushions soft, how can the Tana permit washing the dirt off a leather cushion with water on Shabbos?

(b) So he explains - that (as far as leather is concerned) Kibus without rubbing the spot that is being washed is not called 'Kibus'.

(c) Rav Chiya bar Ashi testified 'Sachsichi Me'sa'anei de'Rav' - meaning that he washed the dirt off Rav's shoes.

(d) He was not permitted to make Kiskus - because Rav's shoes were made of soft leather, or if they were made of hard leather, because he held like Acherim.

(a) Even though there is no Kibus without Kiskus, the Mishnah in Shabbos does not permit washing the dirt off the cloth cushion by pouring water on it - because with regard to material, we hold 'Sheriyaso Zehu Kibuso' (even just soaking cloth in water is considered Kibus).

(b) Rava follows his reasoning elsewhere, where he said that if someone throws ...

1. ... a 'Sudar' into water - he is Chayav.
2. ... flax-seeds into water - he is Chayav, too.
(a) In the latter case, Rava cannot be referring to the Melachah of sowing seeds - because then, why does he mention flax, and not wheat and barley.

(b) Flax seeds - exude a substance that causes them to stick together in water, that wheat and barley seeds do not.

(c) What forces us to retract from the suggestion that the Chiyuv is because of gluing them together (a Toldah of sewing) - is the fact that, in that case, one ought to be Chayav for placing skins that have not yet been tanned in water (which stick together too).

(d) In fact, one contravenes - kneading (which is not applicable to skins).

(a) When Rava Darshened 'Mutar Lechabes Man'al be'Shabbos', he meant - to permit placing a shoe in water and rubbing the dirt off it.

(b) Rav Papa objected - on the basis of Rav Chiya bar Ashi, who permitted 'Sichsichi' but not Kiskusi (which is Kibus).

(c) He raised it - after the Meturgeman (the translator) had already presented it to the people.

(d) Rava immediately asked the translator to announce that he had erred, and to rectify the mistake.

(a) The Beraisa learns that garments that absorbed the blood of the Chatas must be washed in the Azarah - from the Pasuk in Tzav "va'Asher Yizeh mi'Damah al ha'Beged ... Techabes be'Makom Kadosh".

(b) The Tana learns from the "Vav" in ...

1. ... "*u*'K'li Cheres Asher Tevushal Bo Yishaver" - that the earthenware pots in which the Chatas was cooked must be broken in the Azarah too.
2. ... "*ve*'Im bi'Ch'li Nechoshes Bushalah u'Morak ve'Shutaf ba'Mayim" - that metal pots must be Kashered and washed there as well.
(c) The Mishnah concludes 'Zeh Chomer be'Chatas mi'Kodshei Kodshim'. We initially explain the Tana's omission in the Mishnah of the Chumra ...
1. ... that the blood of Chata'os Chitzoniyos is taken into the Heichal, it becomes Pasul (but not of other Kodshei Kodshim) - because the Tana holds like Rebbi Akiva, who declares Pasul the blood of *all* Kodshei Kodshim that enters the Heichal.
2. ... that Chata'os atone for Chayvei K'riysus - because they also atone for Shemi'as Kol, which is not a Chiyuv Kareis.
3. ... that Chata'os require four Matanos on the four Keranos, as opposed to the Shetayim she'Hein Arba of other Korbanos - because he holds like Rebbi Yishmael, who maintains that *all Korbanos* require four Matanos.
(d) The three Chumros that definitely pertain to Chatas exclusively are - Keren, Etzba and Chudah shel Keren ...

(e) ... and the reason that the Tana not insert them is - because the Tana is concerned with the one particular Chumra (and not with the others), and that also explains the omission with regard to the previous Chumros.

(a) According to our Mishnah, a garment on which blood of a Chatas is squirted, or an earthenware or copper vessel in which a Chatas is cooked, and which is subsequently taken outside the Azarah - must be returned to the Azarah, where it is washed, broken or Kashered (respectively).

(b) If, in addition, Tum'ah occurred to the ...

1. ... garment - one tears it before returning it to the Azarah and washing it.
2. ... the earthenware vessel - one makes a small hole in it before returning it ... .
3. ... the copper vessel - one makes a large hole before returning it ... .
(c) This is necessary - because it is forbidden to bring a Tamei vessel into the Azarah.
(a) Seeing as the Torah prescribes washing the "Beged", it is not possible to tear the Tamei garment completely, so when tearing it one is careful that enough of the garment remains intact that it can still be used as an apron.

(b) We reconcile this with Rav Huna, who maintains that if enough of a Tamei garment remains intact to make an apron, it retains its Tum'ah - by establishing that as de'Rabbanan, who waived their decree here, to enable the Kohanim to fulfill the Mitzvah of washing the 'Beged' in a Makom Kadosh.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,