## Zevachim Daf 14b

###### Zevachim 14b:1
[Zevachim 14b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:1)

שִׁיכּוֹר, וּבַעַל מוּם; בְּקַבָּלָה בְּהוֹלָכָה בִּזְרִיקָה – פָּסוּל. וְכֵן יוֹשֵׁב, וְכֵן שְׂמֹאל! תְּיוּבְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**a drunk** priest, **or a blemished** priest performs the rites of **collection, conveying** or **sprinkling** the blood, the offering is **disqualified. And likewise,** it is disqualified if a priest performs any of these rites while **sitting. And** this is **likewise** the *halakha* if a priest performs any of these rites with his **left** hand. The Gemara concludes: This is **a conclusive refutation** of Rav Ḥisda’s ruling; if a non-priest conveys the blood, it is disqualified.


###### Zevachim 14b:2
[Zevachim 14b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:2)

וְהָא רַב חִסְדָּא קְרָא קָאָמַר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But didn’t Rav Ḥisda state a verse** as proof that the offering is not disqualified? The verse states that the priests sprinkled the blood after receiving it from non-priests.


###### Zevachim 14b:3
[Zevachim 14b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:3)

דְּעָבֵיד מַעֲשֶׂה אִצְטְבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The verse described a case **where** the non-priests **served as a bench [*itztaba*].** The priests would give the blood to the non-priests to hold it for them and would then take it and sprinkle the blood. The non-priests would not convey the blood to the altar.


###### Zevachim 14b:4
[Zevachim 14b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:4)

רַבָּה וְרַב יוֹסֵף דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: הוֹלָכָה בְּזָר – מַחְלוֹקֶת רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְרַבָּנַן; רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דְּאָמַר: עֲבוֹדָה שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לְבַטְּלָהּ, לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא – כְּשֵׁרָה בְּזָר. לְרַבָּנַן – פְּסוּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba and Rav Yosef both say** that the case of **a non-priest conveying** the blood is subject to **a dispute** between **Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis.** According to **Rabbi Shimon, who says** that **a dispensable rite is not** classified as a true **rite** and therefore does not disqualify the offering if performed with prohibited intent, the offering is **fit** even if the conveying of the blood is performed **by a non-priest. According to the Rabbis,** who hold that a dispensable rite is classified as a true rite, the conveying of the blood is **not valid** if performed by a non-priest.


###### Zevachim 14b:5
[Zevachim 14b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: וְהָא שְׁחִיטָה, דַּעֲבוֹדָה שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לְבַטְּלָהּ – וּכְשֵׁרָה בְּזָר! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שְׁחִיטָה לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: But** what about **slaughter, which is an indispensable rite, and** yet the offering is **fit** even if it is performed **by a non-priest? He said to** Abaye: **Slaughter,** though indispensable, **is not** classified as a sacrificial **rite** at all. Therefore it need not be performed by a priest.


###### Zevachim 14b:6
[Zevachim 14b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:6)

וְלָא?! וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר רַב: שְׁחִיטַת פָּרָה בְּזָר – פְּסוּלָה; וְאָמַר רַב עֲלַהּ: ״אֶלְעָזָר״ וְ״חוּקָּה״ כְּתִיב בַּהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And is it not? But doesn’t Rabbi Zeira say** that **Rav says:** If the **slaughter of** a red **heifer** is performed **by a non-priest,** it is **not valid? And Rav said about this** *halakha*: It is derived from the phrases: **“Elazar** the priest” (Numbers 19:3), **and: “Statute”** (Numbers 19:2), which **are written with regard to** the red heifer. The mention of Elazar indicates that slaughter must be performed by a priest, and the term “statute” indicates that one may not deviate from any of the details of the service as delineated in the verses. If one does, the heifer is disqualified.


###### Zevachim 14b:7
[Zevachim 14b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:7)

שָׁאנֵי פָּרָה, דְּקׇדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The red **heifer is different, as it is** not an offering; it has the sanctity of items **consecrated for Temple maintenance.** The *halakhot* that govern its service therefore differ from those of offerings proper.


###### Zevachim 14b:8
[Zevachim 14b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:8)

וְלָאו כָּל דְּכֵן הוּא – קׇדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת הָוְיָא עֲבוֹדָה, קׇדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** does **this not** prove the point **all the more?** If slaughtering an animal **consecrated for Temple maintenance is** tantamount to a sacrificial **rite,** can slaughtering **offerings,** which are sacrificed on the **altar, not be** considered a sacrificial **rite?**


###### Zevachim 14b:9
[Zevachim 14b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:9)

אָמַר רַב שִׁישָׁא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי: מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַמַּרְאוֹת נְגָעִים; דְּלָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא, וּבָעֲיָא כְּהוּנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said:** The slaughter of a red heifer is considered **just as it is in** the case of **shades of** leprous **marks, which** are deemed ritually pure or impure by a priest. Although this is **not** a sacrificial **rite,** it still **requires** a member of the **priesthood** to perform it. Therefore, the requirement that the red heifer be slaughtered by a priest does not prove that it is classified as a sacrificial rite.


###### Zevachim 14b:10
[Zevachim 14b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:10)

וַהֲרֵי הוֹלָכַת אֵבָרִים לַכֶּבֶשׁ, דַּעֲבוֹדָה שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לְבַטְּלָהּ הִיא – וּפְסוּלָה בְּזָר; דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִקְרִיב הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה״ – וְאָמַר מָר: זוֹ הוֹלָכַת אֵבָרִים לַכֶּבֶשׁ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further challenges the premise of Rabba and Rav Yosef that a dispensable rite can be performed by a non-priest: **But** what about **conveying** the **limbs** of the offering **to the ramp, which is a dispensable rite,** as the offering can be slaughtered next to the ramp? **And** nevertheless, if it is performed **by a non-priest,** the offering is **disqualified, as it is written: “And the priest shall sacrifice the whole, and make it smoke upon the altar”** (Leviticus 1:13); **and the Master says: This** is referring to **conveying** the **limbs to the ramp.**


###### Zevachim 14b:11
[Zevachim 14b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:11)

הֵיכָא דְּגַלִּי גַּלִּי, וְהֵיכָא דְּלָא גַּלִּי לָא גַּלִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: In a case **where** the verse explicitly **revealed** that a rite must be performed by a priest, it **revealed** it; **but** in a case **where** the Torah **did not reveal** it, it **did not reveal** it. With regard to conveying the blood, the Torah does not state explicitly that a priest is required.


###### Zevachim 14b:12
[Zevachim 14b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:12)

וְלָאו כָּל דְּכֵן הוּא? וּמָה הוֹלָכַת אֵבָרִים לַכֶּבֶשׁ, דְּלָא מְעַכְּבָא כַּפָּרָה – בָּעֲיָא כְּהוּנָּה; הוֹלָכַת דָּם, דִּמְעַכְּבָא כַּפָּרָה – [לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן] (מִיבַּעְיָא)?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But is it not all the more so** obvious? **Just as conveying the limbs to the ramp requires** that the conveyor be a member of the **priesthood,** even though it **does not prevent atonement** if not performed at all, since atonement was already effected by sprinkling the blood, **all the more so** is it **not** clear that concerning **conveying** the **blood** and sprinkling it on the altar, **where** the failure to convey it and sprinkle it on the altar **prevents atonement,** it must be that the conveyor be a member of the priesthood? This difficulty remains unresolved.


###### Zevachim 14b:13
[Zevachim 14b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:13)

אִיתְּמַר נָמֵי, אָמַר עוּלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: הוֹלָכָה בְּזָר פְּסוּלָה, אֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was also stated** that **Ulla says** that **Rabbi Elazar says:** In a case where **conveying** the blood is performed **by a non-priest,** the offering is **disqualified, even according to Rabbi Shimon.**


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

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הוֹלָכָה שֶׁלֹּא בָּרֶגֶל, שְׁמָהּ הוֹלָכָה אוֹ לֹא שְׁמָהּ הוֹלָכָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: Is **conveying** the blood **not by foot** but rather by passing it by hand to another priest **considered conveying, or is it not considered conveying?** Can the rite be performed in this manner?


###### Zevachim 14b:15
[Zevachim 14b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:15)

תָּא שְׁמַע: וְכֵן יוֹשֵׁב, וְכֵן שְׂמֹאל – פָּסוּל; הָא עוֹמֵד דּוּמְיָא דְּיוֹשֵׁב – כָּשֵׁר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** evidence from the *baraita*: **And likewise,** if the priest collected, conveyed, or sprinkled the blood while **sitting, and likewise,** if he performed any of these rites with his **left** hand, the offering is **disqualified.** Since only sitting is listed, one **consequently** infers that if the priest conveyed the blood while **standing** but in a manner **similar to sitting,** i.e., by outstretching his hand without walking, the offering is **fit.** Evidently, conveying the blood does not require walking.


###### Zevachim 14b:16
[Zevachim 14b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:16)

דִּלְמָא יוֹשֵׁב – דְּקָשָׁיֵיף מֵישָׁף, עוֹמֵד דּוּמְיָא דְּיוֹשֵׁב – דְּנָיֵיד פּוּרְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this inference: **Perhaps** when the *baraita* states: **Sitting,** it is referring to one who conveys the blood by moving toward the altar while sitting on the ground in such a manner **that he rubs** himself against the floor of the courtyard as he pulls himself forward. If so, the parallel case of **standing** in a manner **similar to sitting** is a case **where** the priest **moves** forward **a bit.** Perhaps if he does not move at all and merely outstretches his hand, the rite is not valid.


###### Zevachim 14b:17
[Zevachim 14b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:17)

תָּא שְׁמַע: שָׁחַט יִשְׂרָאֵל וְקִבֵּל הַכֹּהֵן, נְתָנוֹ לַחֲבֵירוֹ, וַחֲבֵרוֹ לַחֲבֵירוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from a mishna (*Pesaḥim* 64a): **An Israelite would slaughter** the Paschal offering, **and a priest would collect** the blood. The priests would be lined up from the place where the lamb was slaughtered until the altar. The priest who collected the blood would immediately **hand it to another** priest standing next to him, **and the other** priest would pass it **to another,** and so forth, until it would reach the altar. Evidently, the blood can be passed from hand to hand; it need not be conveyed by foot.


###### Zevachim 14b:18
[Zevachim 14b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:18)

הָתָם נָמֵי דְּנָיְידִי פּוּרְתָּא. וּמַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן? ״בְּרׇב עָם הַדְרַת מֶלֶךְ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There, too,** the priests **would move a bit** with their feet while passing the blood forward. The Gemara asks: **But what is** the mishna **teaching us** in this description, if not that the blood need not be conveyed by foot? The Gemara answers: It teaches that: **“In the multitude of people is the king’s glory”** (Proverbs 14:28). It honors God when the Temple service is performed by a multitude of priests.


###### Zevachim 14b:19
[Zevachim 14b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:19)

תָּא שְׁמַע: קִבֵּל הַכָּשֵׁר וְנָתַן לַפָּסוּל – יַחְזִיר לַכָּשֵׁר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** another resolution from a mishna (32a): If a priest who is **fit** for Temple service **collected** the blood in a vessel **and gave** it **to an unfit** individual standing next to the altar, that individual **should return** it **to the fit** priest, so that he may perform a complete act of conveying the blood to the altar. Evidently, the blood must be conveyed to the altar by foot. If conveying by hand were valid, another priest could simply take the blood from the unfit person and complete the conveying of the blood to the altar.


###### Zevachim 14b:20
[Zevachim 14b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:20)

אֵימָא: יַחְזוֹר הַכָּשֵׁר וִיקַבְּלָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this inference: **Say** that the wording of the mishna should be emended; instead of stating that the unfit person should return the vessel to the fit priest, it should state that **the fit** priest, even another priest, **should then receive it** from the unfit person. If so, the mishna proves nothing about conveying by hand.


###### Zevachim 14b:21
[Zevachim 14b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/14b:21)

אִיתְּמַר, אָמַר עוּלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הוֹלָכָה שֶׁלֹּא בָּרֶגֶל – לֹא שְׁמָהּ הוֹלָכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was stated: Ulla says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Conveying** the blood **not by foot is not considered conveying.**