(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 26

ZEVACHIM 26-30 - Dedicated to the leaders and participants in the Dafyomi shiurim at the Young Israel of New Rochelle, by Andy & Nancy Neff


(a) What does Rebbi Ami Amar Rebbi Elazar say about a case where an animal is inside the Azarah and its foot is outside, if someone first ...
  1. ... cuts its foot and then Shechts it?
  2. ... first Shechts it and then cuts its foot? Why is that?
(b) What is the problem with Rebbi Elazar's first statement?

(c) So we amend Rebbi Ami Amar Rebbi Elazar's statement to - 'Chatach ve'Achar-Kach Kibel Kesheirah ... '.
Why is that too, a problem?

(d) Rav Chisda Amar Avimi therefore establishes 'Chatach' to mean that he cuts the flesh up to the bone.
How does that answer the Kashya?

(a) 'Kibeil ve'Achar-Kach Chatach Pesulah'.
What reason do we initially give for this?

(b) What does this teach us about the blood that is absorbed in the limbs of the body?

(c) How do we reject this proof? If it is not because of the blood that the animal becomes forbidden, then why is it forbidden?

(d) Then why is 'Chatach ve'Achar-Kach Kibel, Kasher?

(a) Why is there no proof from Rebbi Elazar that the flesh of Kodshim Kalim that left the Azarah before the Zerikah is Pasul because of Yotzei?

(b) Why might they in fact, not be Pasul?

(a) The Shechitah and Kabalas ha'Dam of Kodshei Kodshim must take place on the north side of the Azarah. What does the Beraisa say about someone who stands in the south of the Azarah and ...
  1. ... Shechts Kodshei Kodshim that are standing in the north?
  2. ... receives the blood of the same animal?
  3. ... leans over until his head and most of him is in the north?
(b) Why the difference between someone who Shechts standing in the south and a Kohen who receives the blood standing in the south?

(c) The Beraisa rules that if after the Shechitah, an animal of Kodshei Kodshim that (is Mefarches and) runs into the south of the Azarah and back, it is Kasher.
Why is that?

(d) Then why does the Tana need to add that it ran back?

(a) What do we learn with regard to Kodshim Kalim from the Pasuk ...
  1. ... in Vayikra "u'Shechato Pesach Ohel Mo'ed"?
  2. ... in Re'ei "La'amod Lifnei Hashem Le'shorso"?
(b) The Din regarding the Shechitah and the Kabalas ha'Dam of Kodshei Kodshim that we just discussed pertains to Kodshim Kalim, too. What will be the Din if after the Shechitah, an animal of Kodshim Kalim (is Mefarches and) runs out of the Azarah and back?

(c) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Ki Sisa "be'Vo'am el Ohel Mo'ed"?
Which Chumra does this create by Kodshim Kalim over Kodshei Kodshim?

(d) On what grounds do we refute the proof from here that the flesh of Kodshim Kalim that leaves the Azarah before the Zerikah is Pasul because of Yotzei?

(a) Shmuel's father was testing his son.
What did Shmuel reply, when his father asked him what the Din will be if the Kodshim Kalim animal that is to be Shechted is ...
  1. ... standing inside the Azarah, but its hind-legs are outside?
  2. ... suspended above the floor of the Azarah?
(b) Having corrected his son, based on the Pasuk in Pinchas "ve'Shachat Oso al Yerech ha'Mizbe'ach (precluding the air from being a location of Shechitah), why did he then object to his next answer, invalidating the Shechitah if it was the Shochet who was suspended?

(c) And on what grounds did he object to his ruling that ...

  1. ... if a suspended Kohen performed Kabalah, it is Kasher, too?
  2. ... if a Kohen performed Kabalas ha'Dam from the neck of a suspended Korban, it is Pasul for the same reason?
(a) Abaye maintains that by Kodshei Kodshim, all the above cases are Pasul except for where the suspended Shochet Shechted the Korban, whereas by Kodshim Kalim they are all Kasher except for where he received the blood. In which case does he then disagree with Shmuel's father? Why is that?

(b) On what grounds does Rava disagree with him?

(c) What distinction does Rava make between Kodshei Kodshim and Kodshim Kalim?

(d) If Rava holds like Shmuel's father, how come the latter did not mention this distinction?

(a) What did Rebbi Yirmiyah mean when he asked Rebbi Zeira what the Din will be if the Shochet of Kodshim Kalim is standing inside the Azarah, but his 'Tzitzis' is outside?

(b) Rebbi Zeira answered by citing two Pesukim "Ve'hevi'um la'Hashem" (Acharei-Mos) and "be'Vo'am el Ohel Mo'ed" (Ki Sisa).
What did he prove with that?

Answers to questions



(a) What does our Mishnah say with regard to a case where the Kohen places the blood ...
  1. ... on the ramp, or on the Mizbe'ach, but on the south-eastern corner where there is no Yesod?
  2. ... which should have been placed below the Chut ha'Sikra (dividing the top half of the Mizbe'ach from the lower half), above it, or vice-versa?
(b) What is the third case on this list discussed by the Tana?

(c) How does Shmuel qualify the Din 'Pasul' in our Mishnah?

(d) How does he learn this from the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "va'Ani Nesativ Lachem al ha'Mizbe'ach Le'chaper"?

(a) What does "Le'chaper" come to preclude?

(b) What principle does Shmuel teach us?

(c) And what do we learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafesh, ve'ha'Basar Tochel"?

(a) The Mishnah in the next Perek learns with regard to the case in our Mishnah, that if there is any Dam ha'Nefesh left, a Kasher person should receive it.
What problem does this pose on Shmuel?

(b) On what grounds do we refute the suggestion that it is necessary to receive the blood and sprinkle it, to allow the Basar to be eaten?

(c) How do we establish that Mishnah in order to justify the need to receive the rest of the blood?

(a) What do we mean when we ask on this answer 'Ve'lehavi Dichuy'?

(b) How do we infer this from the Mishnah there 've'Chulan she'Kiblu Chutz li'Zemano ... Im Yesh Dam ha'Nefesh, Yachzor ha'Kasher Vi'yekabel'?

(c) How do we refute this proof? If it is not Pasul because of Dichuy, why is it Pasul?

(d) On this we ask two Kashyos: one, that P'sul Machshavah should apply no less to Kabalah than it does to Zerikah. The other, is based on a statement of Rava.
What did Rava say with regard to P'sul Machshavah? To whom, by what and where does it invalidate the Korban?

(e) What do these three things come to exclude?

(a) So we change the inference in the Mishnah (ve'Chulan she'Kiblo Chutz li'Zemano) from 'Zarko, Lo' to 'Shachto, Lo'.
How does that solve the Kashya from Dichuy?

(b) Then why would there be no Takanah if the Shechitah was performed by Pesulim with P'sul Machshavah?

(c) Having learned another Mishnah there 'Lefichach Hein Poslin be'Machshavah', why do we need the current Mishnah?

(d) Why indeed, is the P'sul Machshavah of a Pasul not effective after the Shechitah?

(a) What does the Beraisa say about a Kasher Kohen who performed an earlier Avodah with the intention of sprinkling the blood below the Chut ha'Sikra instead of above, or vice-versa, in the right time?

(b) What does the Tana say if in the same case, the Kohen then performed the next Avodah with the intention of eating it ...

  1. ... Chutz li'Mekomo?
  2. ... Chutz li'Zemano?
(c) And what does the Tana say if he ...
  1. ... performed the first Avodah with the intention of placing the blood in the wrong place *on the next day*?
  2. ... then performed the second Avodah, having in mind to place the blood either Chutz li'Zemano or Chutz li'Mekomo?
(d) The author of this Beraisa is Rebbi Yehudah.
What does Rebbi Yehudah hold regarding 'Hinu'ach'?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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