(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 38

ZEVACHIM 36-40 - Dedicated to the leaders and participants in the Dafyomi shiurim at the Young Israel of New Rochelle, by Andy & Nancy Neff


(a) From where does the Tana of another Beraisa initially learn a 'Binyan Av' that one Matanah will suffice Bedieved by a Chatas Chitzonah?

(b) On the other hand, from where might we learn a 'Binyan Av' that all four Matanos are required?

(c) On what basis would it be preferable to learn Chatas Chitzonah from ...

  1. ... le'Matah mi'Chut ha'Sikra?
  2. ... a Chatas Penimi?
(d) How do we know that "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech" (the source of Matanah Achas Bedieved by other Korbanos), does not extend to Chata'os too?
(a) What does the Tana therefore learn from the three times "Ve'chiper" written by a Chatas Chitzonah (by the Sa'ir Nasi, and the Kisbah and Se'irah of a Yachid)?

(b) Rav Ada Mari explained to Rava why these words are not all needed for the intrinsic Halachah of Kaparah in each of the three cases.
What did he tell him?

(c) We still query the D'rashah, on the grounds that maybe we ought to learn from the first "ve'Chiper" that even three Matanos above the Chut ha'Sikra and one below will suffice, from the second, two above and two below, and from the third, even all below and none above. The problem with this suggestion is - that this would mean negating the whole concept of 'K'ranos' (which is synonymous with Matanos above the Chut ha'Sikra).

(d) And how do we then refute Rav Ada bar Yitzchak answer, that if the Torah indicates that Bedieved, no K'ranos are needed, so be it? What do we learn from the fact that Torah writes three times "Ve'chiper", and not four?

(a) Still, we persist, perhaps Bedieved, the Chatas requires one Matanah above the Chut ha'Sikra and three below it.
How do we reject this suggestion as well?

(b) How do we reconcile this statement with the Mishnah in Yoma (regarding the blood of the Par on Yom Kipur) 'Hizah Mimenu Achas Lema'alah, ve'Sheva le'Matah'?

(c) Rav Yehudah demonstrated 'ke'Matzlif' 'ki'Menagdana'.
What does this mean?

(d) Why then, does the Tana say 'le'Ma'alah' and 'le'Matah'?

(a) We also learned in the Mishnah there (in connection with the blood of the Par of Yom Kipur) 'Hizah al Taharo shel Mizbe'ach Sheva Pe'amim'. Assuming that 'Taharo' is from the same root as 'Tihara Yoma' (mid-day), what Kashya does this pose on the current theory?

(b) So how does Rava bar Shilo explain 'Tihara', based on the Pasuk in Mishpatim "u'che'Etzem ha'Shamayim la'Tohar"?

(c) How do we then reconcile the current theory with the fact that although the blood of the Chatas ...

  1. ... Chitzonah was sprinkled above the Chut ha'Sikra, the Shirayim was poured on to the Yesod (which is below it)?
  2. ... Penimi was sprinkled on the K'ranos of the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi, yet the blood was poured on to the Yesod of the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon (according to those who hold that it was crucial to the Avodah)?
Answers to questions



(a) What does Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov mean when he states in a Beraisa that two Matanos of a Chatas (and one of other Korbanos), according to Beis- Shamai ...
  1. ... are Matir?
  2. ... are Mefagel?
(b) What equivalent ruling does he issue according to Beis-Hillel?

(c) What did Rav Oshaya mean when he asked why the Machlokes does not appear in Iduyos? Why ought it to?

(d) What did Rava answer him?

(a) On what grounds did Rebbi Yochanan rule that the last three Matanos of a Chatas ...
  1. ... may not be performed at night-time?
  2. ... may be performed after the owner's death?
(b) What did he say about someone who performs them outside the Azarah?

(c) Rav Papa lists the first and third Halachah of Rebbi Yochanan among the things that give the last three Matanos the status of the first one.
What does he say about Zarus, K'li Shareis, Keren, Etzba, Kibus Begadim and Shirayim?

(d) 'Shirayim' means that if the Kohen received the blood in four cups, and sprinkled on one Keren from each Kos, the remainder must be poured on to the Yesod (as we learned earlier).
What does Rav Papa mean by 'Kibus'?

(a) Rav Papa also includes Rebbi Yochanan's Din of 'Ba'os le'Achar Miysah' in his list of those things that render the last three Matanos like Shirayim.
What does he mean when he includes in this list ...
  1. ... 'Lo Sharya'?
  2. ... 'Lo Mefagla'?
  3. ... 'Lo Ayla le'Gava'i'?
(b) Rav Papa proves his ruling by Kibus Begadim from a Mishnah in Perek Dam Chatas.
What distinction does the Tana draw there between blood that squirted straight from the animal's neck and blood that splashed from the Keren or the Yesod, on to the Kohen's shirt?

(c) What does Rav Papa extrapolate from 'min ha'Keren, Eino Ta'un Kibus Begadim', as a source for his ruling?

(d) How do we initially refute Rav Papa's proof from 'min ha'Yesod Eino Ta'un Kibus Begadim'? What is wrong with making the same inference there?

(a) We answer this Kashya by establishing the Beraisa like Rebbi Nechemyah (see Tosfos DH 'Ha Mani').
What does Rebbi Nechemyah say in a Mishnah in 'ha'Shochet u'Ma'aleh' with regard to 'Sheyarei ha'Dam she'Hikrivan ba'Chutz'?

(b) How does this answer the Kashya on Rav Papa?

(c) How do we refute this answer?

(d) What do we mean by 'Midi de'Havi a'Eivarim u'Pedarim'?

(a) We reject this refutation however, on the basis of another Beraisa. What does the Tana say there about blood that needs to be poured on to the Yesod regarding Kibus, Machshavah an Ma'aleh ba'Chutz?

(b) In which case is the Tana lenient in all three regards?

(c) How do we know that the author of this Beraisa is Rebbi Nechemyah?

(d) What does this prove?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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