## Zevachim Daf 113b

###### Zevachim 113b:1
[Zevachim 113b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:1)

הָא אִיפְּנוֹ! נְהִי דְּאִיפַּנּוֹ מִירוּשָׁלַיִם, מִכּוּלַּהּ אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל לָא אִיפַּנּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
as **they were** already **removed.** One can respond: This *baraita* deals exclusively with Jerusalem. **Granted that** the bones of those who perished in the flood and at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar **were removed from Jerusalem,** but they **were not removed from all** of **Eretz Yisrael.** Therefore, outside Jerusalem, the red heifer may be slaughtered only in a place that has been inspected.


###### Zevachim 113b:2
[Zevachim 113b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:2)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אַיֵּה מֵתֵי מַבּוּל? אַיֵּה מֵתֵי נְבוּכַדְנֶאצַּר? מַאי, לָאו מִדְּהָנֵי הֲווֹ – הָנֵי נָמֵי הֲווֹ? מִידֵּי אִירְיָא?! הָא כִּדְאִיתֵיהּ וְהָא כִּדְאִיתֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** the discussion should be inverted, and **Reish Lakish raised an objection to Rabbi Yoḥanan,** who holds that the flood did not affect Eretz Yisrael, from that *baraita*, as Rabbi Yehoshua said: **Where are the dead of the flood,** and **where are** all of **the dead** killed by **Nebuchadnezzar?** Reish Lakish said: **What, is it not** possible to infer from this question that **since those** slaughtered by Nebuchadnezzar **were** in Eretz Yisrael, **those** who perished in the flood **were also** there? Rabbi Yoḥanan responds: **Are the cases comparable? This** is **as it is and that** is **as it is,** i.e., the dead of Nebuchadnezzar were indeed in Eretz Yisrael, but the dead of the flood were not, as there was no flood there.


###### Zevachim 113b:3
[Zevachim 113b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:3)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ: ״מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בֶּחָרָבָה מֵתוּ״ – בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי, דְּאָמֵינָא יָרַד מַבּוּל לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל – מִשּׁוּם הָכִי מֵתוּ. אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ, אַמַּאי מֵתוּ? מִשּׁוּם הַבְלָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Reish Lakish **raised an objection to** Rabbi Yoḥanan: With regard to the flood, it is stated: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, **whatsoever was on the dry land, died”** (Genesis 7:22). **Granted, according to my** opinion, **that I say** the **flood descended upon Eretz Yisrael, due to that** reason all living creatures on Earth **died,** even those in Eretz Yisrael. **But according to your** opinion that the flood did not descend on Eretz Yisrael, **why did they die** there? Rabbi Yoḥanan responds: They died **due to the heat** that accompanied the floodwaters, and that spread to Eretz Yisrael as well. Those corpses were then buried in known locations.


###### Zevachim 113b:4
[Zevachim 113b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:4)

כִּדְרַב חִסְדָּא, דְּאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: בְּרוֹתְחִין קִלְקְלוּ, וּבְרוֹתְחִין נִידּוֹנוּ; דִּכְתִיב הָכָא: ״וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ הַמָּיִם״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם: ״וַחֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ שָׁכָכָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes that this is **in accordance with** the statement **of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says:** The generation of the flood **sinned with boiling** heat, i.e., forbidden sexual intercourse, **and they were punished with** the **boiling** heat of the flood waters. **As it is written here,** with regard to the flood: “And God remembered Noah and every living creature and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God made a wind to pass over the earth **and the waters calmed [*vayashoku hamayim*]”** (Genesis 8:1); **and it is written there,** with regard to the execution of Haman: “So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai. **Then the king’s boiling anger was assuaged [*shakhakha*]”** (Esther 7:10). This latter verse indicates that a matter is assuaged from heat; similarly, the flood waters were hot.


###### Zevachim 113b:5
[Zevachim 113b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:5)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: ״מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בֶּחָרָבָה מֵתוּ״ – בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי, דְּאָמֵינָא לֹא יָרַד מַבּוּל לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל – מִשּׁוּם הָכִי הֲוַי חָרָבָה. אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ, מַאי חָרָבָה? חָרָבָה שֶׁהָיְתָה מֵעִיקָּרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** that this discussion should be inverted, and in fact **Rabbi Yoḥanan raised an objection to Reish Lakish** from that verse: It is stated that **“whatsoever was on the dry land, died”** (Genesis 7:22). **Granted, according to my** opinion, **that I say** that the **flood did not descend upon Eretz Yisrael, due to that** reason, **there was** an area of **dry land** even during the flood, and all living creatures there died from the heat. **But according to your** opinion that the flood did descend upon Eretz Yisrael, **what** is the meaning of **“dry land”?** There was no dry land anywhere. Reish Lakish responds: The verse is referring to **land that had been dry initially,** before the flood.


###### Zevachim 113b:6
[Zevachim 113b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:6)

וְאַמַּאי קָרֵי לֵיהּ חָרָבָה? כִּדְרַב חִסְדָּא. דְּאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: בְּדוֹר הַמַּבּוּל לֹא נִגְזְרָה גְּזֵרָה עַל דָּגִים שֶׁבַּיָּם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בֶּחָרָבָה מֵתוּ״ – וְלֹא דָּגִים שֶׁבַּיָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And why** does the Torah **call it “dry land”** during the flood? There was no dry land during the flood. It is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: During the generation of the flood no decree was decreed upon the fish in the sea, as it is stated: “Whatsoever was on the dry land, died”** (Genesis 7:22), i.e., only those creatures that had been on dry land, **but not** the **fish in the sea.**


###### Zevachim 113b:7
[Zevachim 113b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:7)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר לֹא יָרַד מַבּוּל לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל – הַיְינוּ דְּקָם רֵימָא הָתָם. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יָרַד, רֵימָא הֵיכָא קָם? אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: גּוּרִיּוֹת הִכְנִיסוּ בַּתֵּיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to the one who says the flood did not descend upon Eretz Yisrael,** i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, **this is** the explanation of the fact **that the *reima* remained there,** in Eretz Yisrael, and survived the flood. **But according to the one who says** the flood **descended** upon Eretz Yisrael, i.e., Reish Lakish, **how did the *reima* remain?** Given its large size, it clearly could not have fit into Noah’s ark. **Rabbi Yannai says:** They **brought** *reima* **cubs into the ark,** and they survived the flood.


###### Zevachim 113b:8
[Zevachim 113b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:8)

וְהָאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: לְדִידִי חֲזֵי לִי אוּרְזִילָא דְּרֵימָא (בַּת) [בַּר] יוֹמֵאּ, וְהָוֵי כְּהַר תָּבוֹר. וְהַר תָּבוֹר כַּמָּה הָוֵיא – אַרְבְּעִין פַּרְסֵי; מְשָׁכָא דְּצַוְּארֵיהּ – תְּלָתָא פַּרְסֵי, מַרְבַּעְתָּא דְּרֵישָׁא – פַּרְסָא וּפַלְגָא, רְמָא כַּבָּא וּסְכַר יַרְדְּנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say: I have seen a day-old offspring of the *reima*, and** it **was** as large **as Mount Tabor. And how** large **is Mount Tabor?** It is **forty parasangs.** And **the length of** the cub’s **neck** was **three parasangs,** and **the place where its head rests,** i.e., its neck, was **a parasang and a half. It cast feces, and** thereby **dammed up the Jordan** river. Even the cub would have been too large for the ark.


###### Zevachim 113b:9
[Zevachim 113b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:9)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רֹאשׁוֹ הִכְנִיסוּ לַתֵּיבָה. וְהָאָמַר מָר: מַרְבַּעְתָּא דְּרֵישָׁא פַּרְסָא וּפַלְגָא! אֶלָּא רֹאשׁ חוֹטְמוֹ הִכְנִיסוּ לַתֵּיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan says: They brought** only **the head of** the cub **into the ark,** while its body remained outside. The Gemara asks: **But doesn’t the Master,** i.e., Rabba bar bar Ḥana, **say** that the size of **the place where its head rests** was **a parasang and a half?** Consequently, even its head alone would not fit into the ark. **Rather, they brought the head,** i.e., edge, **of its nose into the ark,** so that it might breathe.


###### Zevachim 113b:10
[Zevachim 113b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:10)

וְהָא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא יָרַד מַבּוּל לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל! לְדִבְרֵי רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ קָאָמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara wonders why Rabbi Yoḥanan was compelled to give this answer: **But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say** that the **flood did not descend upon Eretz Yisrael?** According to his opinion, perhaps the *reima* survived by remaining there during the flood. The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yoḥanan **said** his answer **in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish.**


###### Zevachim 113b:11
[Zevachim 113b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:11)

וְהָא קָסָגְיָא תֵּיבָה! אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: קַרְנָיו קָשְׁרוּ בַּתֵּיבָה. וְהָאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אַנְשֵׁי דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל בְּרוֹתְחִין קִלְקְלוּ וּבְרוֹתְחִין נִידּוֹנוּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But the ark was moving** upon the water. How was it was possible to keep the nose of the *reima* in the ark? **Reish Lakish says: They tied its horns to the ark,** so that the *reima* would move with it. The Gemara asks: **But doesn’t Rav Ḥisda say** that **the people of the generation of the flood sinned with boiling** heat **and were punished with boiling** heat? How could the *reima* have survived the boiling water?


###### Zevachim 113b:12
[Zevachim 113b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:12)

וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, תֵּיבָה הֵיכִי סָגְיָא? וְעוֹד, עוֹג מֶלֶךְ הַבָּשָׁן הֵיכָא קָאֵי? אֶלָּא נֵס נַעֲשָׂה לָהֶם, שֶׁנִּצְטַנְּנוּ בְּצִידֵּי הַתֵּיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara replies: **And according to your reasoning,** that it was impossible to survive the boiling water, **how did** the **ark** itself **move?** It was covered with pitch, which melts in boiling water. **Moreover, how did Og, king of the Bashan** (see Numbers 21:33–35), who according to tradition was of the generation of the flood, **stand,** i.e., survive the boiling water? **Rather,** it must be that **a miracle was performed for them,** namely **that** the water **on the sides of the ark cooled,** allowing the ark, the *reima*, and Og to survive.


###### Zevachim 113b:13
[Zevachim 113b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:13)

וּלְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן [בֶּן לָקִישׁ] – נְהִי נָמֵי דְּיָרַד מַבּוּל לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל; וְהָא לָא פָּשׁ! דְּאָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ ״מְצוּלָה״? שֶׁכׇּל מֵתֵי מַבּוּל נִצְטַלְּלוּ שָׁם. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ ״שִׁנְעָר״? שֶׁכׇּל מֵתֵי מַבּוּל נִנְעֲרוּ שָׁם. אִי אֶפְשָׁר דְּלָא אִידְּבַקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But** even **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish,** that the flood descended upon Eretz Yisrael and the corpses of those who perished in the flood might impart impurity there, **though** the **flood did indeed descend upon Eretz Yisrael, no** trace of the dead **remains** there. **As Reish Lakish says: Why** is Babylonia **called Metzula** (see Isaiah 44:27)? It is **because all the dead of the flood,** throughout the world, **sank [*nitztalelu*] there. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Why is** Babylonia **called Shinar?** It is **because all the dead of the flood were deposited [*ninaru*] there.** Evidently, even Reish Lakish says that all who died in the flood, including those from Eretz Yisrael, sank in Babylonia. The Gemara responds: **It is impossible that** the corpses of some of those in Eretz Yisrael who perished in the flood **were not stuck** in the mud and remained there.


###### Zevachim 113b:14
[Zevachim 113b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:14)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ ״שִׁנְעָר״? שֶׁמְּנַעֶרֶת עֲשִׁירֶיהָ. וְהָא קָחָזֵינַן דְּהָווּ! תְּלָתָא דָּרֵי לָא מָשְׁכִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Having mentioned some explanations for the names of Babylonia, the Gemara adds: **Rabbi Abbahu says: Why is it called Shinar? Because it shakes [*shemena’eret*] its wealthy** people, i.e., they do not remain wealthy. The Gemara asks: **But we see that there are** wealthy people in Babylonia who remain wealthy. The Gemara responds: Their wealth **does not extend** for **three generations.**


###### Zevachim 113b:15
[Zevachim 113b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:15)

אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: כָּל הָאוֹכֵל מֵעֲפָרָהּ שֶׁל בָּבֶל – כְּאִילּוּ אוֹכֵל בְּשַׂר אֲבוֹתָיו. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: כָּל הָאוֹכֵל מֵעֲפָרָהּ שֶׁל בָּבֶל – כְּאִילּוּ אוֹכֵל בְּשַׂר אֲבוֹתָיו. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: כְּאִילּוּ אוֹכֵל שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the statement that the corpses of those who perished in the flood came to Babylonia, **Rabbi Ami says:** Concerning **anyone who eats the dust of Babylonia,** it is **as if he eats the flesh of his ancestors,** since there is a great deal of dust from the dead there. **This is also taught** in a *baraita*: Concerning **anyone who eats the dust of Babylonia,** it is **as if he eats the flesh of his ancestors. And some say:** It is **as if he eats repugnant creatures and crawling things,** which also died in the flood and were absorbed by the ground of Babylonia.


###### Zevachim 113b:16
[Zevachim 113b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:16)

שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if one sacrificed **the scapegoat** of Yom Kippur outside the Temple he is exempt from the prohibition against sacrificing outside, since the Torah states: “And to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting he did not bring it” (Leviticus 17:3–4), and the scapegoat is not fit to be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.


###### Zevachim 113b:17
[Zevachim 113b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:17)

וּרְמִינְהִי: אוֹ ״קׇרְבָּן״ – שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי אֲפִילּוּ קׇדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת שֶׁנִּקְרְאוּ קׇרְבָּן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַנַּקְרֵב אֶת קׇרְבַּן ה׳״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** from a *baraita*: The verse states: “To present it as an offering to the Lord” (Leviticus 17:4), and it is derived from the word “offering” that one who slaughters non-sacred animals inside the Temple is not liable. The *baraita* asks: **Or** perhaps from the word **“offering” I** would **derive** that the prohibition against slaughtering outside the Temple applies **even** to items **consecrated for Temple maintenance, as** they too **are called offerings, as it is stated** with regard to the spoils of the war against Midian: **“And we have brought the Lord’s offering,** what every man has gotten, of jewels of gold, armlets, and bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and girdles, to make atonement for our souls before the Lord” (Numbers 31:50). These were certainly not items consecrated for the altar.


###### Zevachim 113b:18
[Zevachim 113b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:18)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֹא הֱבִיאוֹ״ – מִי שֶׁרָאוּי לָבֹא בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד; יָצְאוּ קׇדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת – שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיִן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Therefore, **the verse states: “And to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting he did not bring it”** (Leviticus 17:4), which teaches that this *halakha* applies only to **that which is fit to come to** the entrance of the **Tent of Meeting,** i.e., is fit to be sacrificed. **Excluded** are items **consecrated for Temple maintenance, which are not fit** for sacrifice.


###### Zevachim 113b:19
[Zevachim 113b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:19)

אוֹצִיא אֶת אֵלּוּ – שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיִן; וְלֹא אוֹצִיא אֶת שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ – שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לָבֹא אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד! תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לַה׳״ – לְהוֹצִיא שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְיוּחָד לַה׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: Perhaps **I shall exclude these,** i.e., items consecrated for Temple maintenance, **which are not fit** to be sacrificed upon the altar, from the prohibition against slaughtering outside the Temple, **but I shall not exclude the scapegoat, which is fit to come to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.** Therefore, **the verse states:** “To present it as an offering **to the Lord,”** which serves **to exclude** from this prohibition **the scapegoat, which is not designated** as a sacrifice **to the Lord,** but is rather sent to Azazel. According to the *baraita*, the scapegoat is fit to be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.


###### Zevachim 113b:20
[Zevachim 113b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:20)

לָא קַשְׁיָא; כָּאן קוֹדֶם הַגְרָלָה, כָּאן לְאַחַר הַגְרָלָה. אַחַר הַגְרָלָה נָמֵי, הָאִיכָּא וִידּוּי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This is **not difficult. Here,** the *baraita* that states that the scapegoat is fit to be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting is referring to **before** the **lottery,** wherein the two goats of the Day of Atonement are brought into the Temple courtyard, and the High Priest draws lots to determine which is to be sacrificed to the Lord, and which is for Azazel. **There,** the mishna that states that the scapegoat is not fit to be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting is referring to **after** the **lottery,** at which point it is no longer fit for the Temple. The Gemara challenges: **After** the **lottery** it is **also** fit to be brought inside, as **there is** still an obligation for the High Priest to recite **confession** upon it in the Temple courtyard.


###### Zevachim 113b:21
[Zevachim 113b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:21)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב מַנִּי: לָא קַשְׁיָא; כָּאן קוֹדֶם וִידּוּי, כָּאן לְאַחַר וִידּוּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rav Mani said:** This is **not difficult,** as **here,** the *baraita* that states that the scapegoat may be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting is referring to **before** the **confession,** when it is still fit to enter the Temple. **There,** the mishna that states that it is not fit to be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting is referring to **after** the **confession,** at which point it is no longer fit to be brought inside.


###### Zevachim 113b:22
[Zevachim 113b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:22)

הָרוֹבֵעַ וְהַנִּרְבָּע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that with regard to **an animal that** actively **copulated with a person, or an animal that was the object of bestiality,** or another disqualified offering such as an animal that was designated for idol worship, or one that was worshipped: If one sacrificed it outside the Temple courtyard, he is exempt. This is because with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering outside, the Torah states: “He did not bring it, to present it as an offering to the Lord before the Tabernacle of the Lord” (Leviticus 17:4), which teaches that there is no liability for slaughtering outside the Temple courtyard an animal that is not fit to be sacrificed.


###### Zevachim 113b:23
[Zevachim 113b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/113b:23)

וְהָא נָמֵי תִּיפּוֹק לִי מִ״פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** with regard to **this too, derive from** the first part of that verse: **“To the entrance of the Tent of Meeting,”** that, as in the case of the red heifer and the scapegoat, if an animal is not fit to be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, one is not liable for slaughtering it outside.