## Zevachim Daf 114b

###### Zevachim 114b:1
[Zevachim 114b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:1)

מִילְקֵי נָמֵי לִילְקֵי! אַלְּמָה אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: הַכָּתוּב נִתְּקוֹ לַעֲשֵׂה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**should also receive lashes** for sacrificing it, just as one would for violating other Torah prohibitions. **Why did Rabbi Zeira say** elsewhere that one who slaughters, inside the Temple courtyard, an offering whose time has not yet arrived does not receive lashes for having violated the prohibition of: “It shall not be accepted” (Leviticus 22:23), which is the general prohibition against sacrificing animals that are not fit to be sacrificed. Rabbi Zeira explains that he does not receive lashes because **the verse has transmuted** the negative precept **into** a prohibition that is stated as **a positive mitzva,** in the verse: “But from the eighth day forward it may be accepted” (Leviticus 22:27). There is no punishment of lashes for violating such a prohibition. Rabbi Yirmeya is asking that one should still receive lashes for having violated the prohibition of: “You shall not do.”


###### Zevachim 114b:2
[Zevachim 114b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:2)

הָנֵי מִילֵּי לְרַבָּנַן, לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הָכִי נָמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **That statement** of Rabbi Zeira applies only **according to** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who disagree with Rabbi Shimon in the mishna and hold that the verse that states: “You shall not do,” does not indicate that one who slaughters an animal whose time has not yet arrived is in violation of a prohibition. But **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon,** one would **indeed** receive lashes for slaughtering an animal whose time has not yet arrived inside the Temple.


###### Zevachim 114b:3
[Zevachim 114b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:3)

רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: פְּנִים דְּגִלְגָּל לְגַבֵּי שִׁילֹה – כְּחוּץ דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:** Rabbi Zeira’s statement is even in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who also holds that one would not receive lashes for slaughtering inside the Temple courtyard an offering whose time has not yet arrived. A prohibition cannot be derived from the prohibition stated with regard to the Tabernacle in Gilgal, since **inside** the Tabernacle **in Gilgal, in relation to** the Tabernacle in **Shiloh, is considered like outside,** and the prohibition: “You shall not do,” pertains only to sacrificing an offering whose time has not yet arrived outside the Temple courtyard.


###### Zevachim 114b:4
[Zevachim 114b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:4)

רַבָּה אָמַר: טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן – כִּדְתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: מִנַּיִן לַזּוֹבֵחַ פֶּסַח בְּבָמַת יָחִיד בִּשְׁעַת אִיסּוּר הַבָּמוֹת, שֶׁהוּא בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא תוּכַל לִזְבֹּחַ אֶת הַפָּסַח״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said: The reason of Rabbi Shimon** is not based upon: “You shall not do,” as Reish Lakish claims, but upon another verse. **As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon says: From where** is it derived **that one who slaughters** his **Paschal offering on a private altar at a time** when it is **prohibited** to sacrifice offerings on private **altars** violates **a prohibition? The verse states: “You may not sacrifice the Paschal offering** within any of your gates; but at the place that the Lord your God shall choose to cause His name to dwell in, there you shall sacrifice the Paschal offering” (Deuteronomy 16:5–6).


###### Zevachim 114b:5
[Zevachim 114b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:5)

יָכוֹל אַף בִּשְׁעַת הֶיתֵּר הַבָּמוֹת כֵּן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״בְּאַחַד שְׁעָרֶיךָ״ – לֹא אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ אֶלָּא בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁכׇּל יִשְׂרָאֵל נִכְנָסִין בְּשַׁעַר אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One **might** have thought that **even at a time** when it is **permitted** to sacrifice offerings on private **altars** this is **so.** Therefore, **the verse states: “Within any [*be’aḥad*] of your gates,”** which indicates that **I said** this prohibition **to you only when all of the Jewish people enter** the Temple **through one [*eḥad*] gate** in order to sacrifice their offerings. When there is no permanent communal altar, it is permitted to slaughter the Paschal offering on a private altar.


###### Zevachim 114b:6
[Zevachim 114b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:6)

אֵימַת? אִי נֵימָא אַחַר חֲצוֹת – כָּרֵת נָמֵי מִחַיַּיב! אֶלָּא לָאו קוֹדֶם חֲצוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba analyzes the *baraita*: **When** was this Paschal offering, for which one violates a prohibition for slaughtering it during a time when it is forbidden to sacrifice on private altars, slaughtered? **If we say** that it was **after midday** on the fourteenth of Nisan, which is the proper time for sacrificing the Paschal offering in the Temple, then one who sacrifices it then violates not only a prohibition, he should also **be deemed liable** to receive ***karet* as well,** as would anyone who slaughters a fit offering outside the Temple courtyard. **Rather, is it not** discussing one who slaughtered the Paschal offering on a private altar on the fourteenth of Nisan **before midday,** when its time had not yet arrived?


###### Zevachim 114b:7
[Zevachim 114b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:7)

לְעוֹלָם לְאַחַר חֲצוֹת, וּבִשְׁעַת הֶיתֵּר הַבָּמוֹת קָאֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects Rabba’s explanation: **Actually,** the Paschal offering may have been sacrificed on a private altar **after midday** of the fourteenth of Nisan, **and** it is **referring to a time** when it is **permitted** to sacrifice on private **altars,** i.e., the periods of Gilgal, Nov, and Gibeon. The verse teaches that although it was permitted to sacrifice voluntary vow offerings and gift offerings on a private altar, the Paschal offering may be sacrificed only on a great public altar.


###### Zevachim 114b:8
[Zevachim 114b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:8)

וְהָא בִּשְׁעַת אִיסּוּר הַבָּמוֹת קָאָמַר! אִיסּוּר בָּמָה לוֹ, הֶיתֵּר בָּמָה לַחֲבֵירוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But doesn’t** the *baraita* **state: At a time** when it is **prohibited** to sacrifice offerings on private **altars?** The Gemara responds: The *baraita* means that it is **prohibited for** one to sacrifice the Paschal offering on a private **altar,** but it is **permitted** to use a private **altar for another** offering, i.e., a voluntary vow offering or gift offering.


###### Zevachim 114b:9
[Zevachim 114b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:9)

מְחוּסַּר זְמַן כּוּ׳. וְהָנֵי בְּנֵי אֲשָׁמוֹת נִינְהוּ?! אָמַר זְעֵירִי: תְּנִי מְצוֹרָע בַּהֲדַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that with regard to an offering **whose time has not yet** arrived because it is premature for its owner, one who sacrifices it outside the Temple courtyard is exempt. This category includes a *zav*, a *zava*, and a woman after childbirth, any of whom sacrificed a sin offering or guilt offering outside the Temple courtyard during the days that they are counting toward purification. The Gemara asks: **And are these** individuals **subject to** the obligation to bring **guilt offerings? Ze’eiri said:** The text of the mishna should **teach: Leper, together with** the *zav*, *zava*, and woman after childbirth. A leper brings a guilt offering as part of his purification process.


###### Zevachim 114b:10
[Zevachim 114b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:10)

עוֹלוֹתֵיהֶן וְשַׁלְמֵיהֶן. וְהָנֵי בְּנֵי שְׁלָמִים נִינְהוּ?! אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: תְּנִי נָזִיר. דִּזְעֵירִי קַבְעוּהָ תַּנָּאֵי, דְּרַב שֵׁשֶׁת לָא קַבְעוּהָ תַּנָּאֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna also teaches that if those whose time has not yet arrived sacrifice **their burnt offerings or their peace offerings** outside the Temple courtyard, they are liable. The Gemara asks: **And are these** individuals **subject to** the obligation to bring **peace offerings? Rav Sheshet said: Teach** the case of **a Nazirite** as part of the list in the mishna. A nazirite brings a peace offering at the conclusion of his term of naziriteship. The Gemara notes that the addition **of Ze’eiri** to the text of the mishna, i.e., the case of a leper, was **fixed** by **the *tanna’im*** in the version of the mishna that they would teach, while the addition **of Rav Sheshet,** i.e., the case of a nazirite, was **not fixed** by **the *tanna’im*** in the mishna that they would teach.


###### Zevachim 114b:11
[Zevachim 114b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:11)

אָמַר רַבִּי חִלְקִיָּה (דְּבֵי) רַב טוֹבִי: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לִשְׁמוֹ; אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ – חַיָּיב, הוֹאִיל וְרָאוּי לְשֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ בִּפְנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if one whose days of purification are not complete, e.g., a leper, slaughters his guilt offering outside the courtyard, he is exempt, since the offering is not fit for sacrifice at that time. With regard to this, **Rabbi Ḥilkiya,** a Sage **from the school of Rav Tovi, says: They taught** this **only** with regard to one who slaughters a guilt offering outside the Temple courtyard **for its own sake. But** if he slaughtered it outside the Temple courtyard **not for its own sake** but for the sake of a different offering, he is **liable** for having sacrificed outside the courtyard. This is **because** it was **fit to** be sacrificed **not for its own sake inside** the Temple courtyard, as a guilt offering that was slaughtered not for its own sake is fit for sacrifice (see 2a).


###### Zevachim 114b:12
[Zevachim 114b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:12)

אִי הָכִי, לִשְׁמוֹ נָמֵי נִיחַיַּיב – הוֹאִיל וְרָאוּי לְשֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ בִּפְנִים! בָּעֵי עֲקִירָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so,** one who slaughtered the guilt offering **for its own sake should also be liable** for having slaughtered it outside the Temple courtyard, **since** it was **fit** to be slaughtered **not for its sake inside** the Temple courtyard. The Gemara answers: In order for a guilt offering that was slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard to be considered fit to be sacrificed inside it, it first **requires uprooting** of its status, i.e., the one who slaughters it should intend explicitly that it be a different sacrifice. If its status as a guilt offering has not been uprooted, it is not considered fit to be sacrificed inside.


###### Zevachim 114b:13
[Zevachim 114b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/114b:13)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב הוּנָא: וְכִי יֵשׁ לְךָ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ כָּשֵׁר לִשְׁמוֹ, וְכָשֵׁר שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna objects to** Rabbi Ḥilkiya’s statement that a guilt offering whose time has not yet arrived is fit to be sacrificed inside if it is slaughtered not for its own sake: **And is there anything that is not fit** if its action is performed **for its own sake, but is fit** if its action is performed **not for its sake?** The Gemara replies: **And** is there **not? But** there is