## Zevachim Daf 19a

###### Zevachim 19a:1
[Zevachim 19a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:1)

כְּנֶגֶד אַצִּילֵי יְדֵיהֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**at the level of their elbows.**


###### Zevachim 19a:2
[Zevachim 19a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:2)

אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי, אָמַר לִי הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן: זִימְנָא חֲדָא הֲוָה קָאֵימְנָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּאִיזְגַּדַּר מַלְכָּא וַהֲוָה מִדְּלֵי לִי הֶמְיָינַאי, וְתַיְתְיֵיהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ, וַאֲמַר לִי: ״מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ״ כְּתִיב בְּכוּ. כִּי אֲתַאי קַמֵּיהּ דְּאַמֵּימָר, אֲמַר לִי: אִקַּיַּים בְּךָ ״וְהָיוּ מְלָכִים אֹמְנַיִךְ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi says: Huna bar Natan said to me: Once, I was standing before Izgadar, king** of Persia, **and my belt was raised** above its appropriate height, **and he lowered it** into place **and said to me: “A kingdom of priests, and a holy nation”** (Exodus 19:6), **is written about you;** therefore, you should always look dignified. **When I came before Ameimar** and recounted this incident, **he said to me: With regard to you,** God’s promise to Israel: **“And kings shall be your foster fathers”** (Isaiah 49:23), **was fulfilled.**


###### Zevachim 19a:3
[Zevachim 19a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:3)

תְּנַן הָתָם: כֹּהֵן שֶׁלָּקָה בְּאֶצְבָּעוֹ – כּוֹרֵךְ עָלֶיהָ גֶּמִי בְּמִקְדָּשׁ, אֲבָל לֹא בַּמְּדִינָה. וְאִם לְהוֹצִיא מִמֶּנָּה דָּם – כָּאן וְכָאן אָסוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to the priestly vestments, **we learned** in a mishna **elsewhere** (*Eiruvin* 103b): **A priest who was injured on his finger** on Shabbat may temporarily **wrap it with a reed** so that his wound is not visible while he is serving in the Temple. This leniency applies **in the Temple, but not in** the rest of **the country,** as the reed also heals the wound, and medical treatment is prohibited on Shabbat by rabbinic decree. **But if** his intention is **to draw blood from** the wound, **it is prohibited** both **here and there.**


###### Zevachim 19a:4
[Zevachim 19a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:4)

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא גֶּמִי, אֲבָל צִילְצוֹל קָטָן – הָוֵי יִתּוּר בְּגָדִים. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: לֹא אָמְרוּ יִתּוּר בְּגָדִים אֶלָּא בִּמְקוֹם בְּגָדִים, אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם בְּגָדִים – לָא הָוֵי יִתּוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, says: They taught only** that **a reed** is permitted. **But a small sash [*tziltzul*]** as a bandage **is** considered **an extra garment** and is therefore forbidden, since it is prohibited for a priest to add to the priestly vestments prescribed by the Torah. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: They said** that wearing **extra garments** is prohibited **only** if the extra garment is worn **in a place** on the priest’s body where the requisite **vestments** are worn. **But** if the sash is **in a place** on his body where the **vestments** are **not** worn, e.g., on his hand, it **is not** considered **an extra** garment.


###### Zevachim 19a:5
[Zevachim 19a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:5)

וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם חֲצִיצָה! בִּשְׂמֹאל. אִי נָמֵי, שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם עֲבוֹדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **And let** Rabbi Yoḥanan **derive** that a sash is prohibited **because** it acts as **an interposition** between the priest’s hand and the sacred vessel he grips, which disqualifies the service. The Gemara rejects this: Rabbi Yoḥanan is referring to a case where the wound is **on** the priest’s **left** hand. Since the entire service is performed exclusively with his right hand, a bandage on his left hand is not an interposition. **Alternatively,** the wound is on the priest’s right hand, but **not in a place** used for the **service,** such that the bandage does not interpose between his hand and the sacred vessel.


###### Zevachim 19a:6
[Zevachim 19a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:6)

וּפְלִיגָא דְּרָבָא – דְּאָמַר רָבָא אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: בִּמְקוֹם בְּגָדִים – אֲפִילּוּ נִימָא אַחַת חוֹצֶצֶת. שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם בְּגָדִים – שָׁלֹשׁ עַל שָׁלֹשׁ חוֹצְצוֹת, פָּחוֹת מִכָּאן אֵינָן חוֹצְצוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** Rabbi Yoḥanan **disagrees** with the opinion **of Rava, as Rava says** that **Rav Ḥisda says: In a place** on the priest’s body where the **vestments** are worn, **even one** extra **thread interposes** and is prohibited, whereas **in a place** on his body where the **vestments** are **not** worn, if the fabric is **three** fingerbreadths **by three** fingerbreadths **it interposes,** but if it is **less than that it does not interpose.**


###### Zevachim 19a:7
[Zevachim 19a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:7)

אַדְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן – וַדַּאי פְּלִיגָא; אַדְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא מִי לֵימָא דִּפְלִיגָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: Rava **certainly disagrees with** the opinion **of Rabbi Yoḥanan,** who holds that fabric of any size that is in a place on his body where the vestments are not worn is not considered an interposition. **Shall we say** that **he** also **disagrees with** the opinion **of Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya,** who deems any sash an interposition, even one smaller than three by three fingerbreadths?


###### Zevachim 19a:8
[Zevachim 19a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:8)

שָׁאנֵי צִילְצוֹל קָטָן, דַּחֲשִׁיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: Even according to Rava, **a small sash is different, as it is significant,** and it is therefore considered a garment even if it is less than three by three fingerbreadths.


###### Zevachim 19a:9
[Zevachim 19a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:9)

לִישָּׁנָא אַחֲרִינָא אָמְרִי לַהּ, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא גֶּמִי, אֲבָל צִילְצוֹל קָטָן – חוֹצֵץ. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: לֹא אָמְרוּ חֲצִיצָה בְּפָחוֹת מִשָּׁלֹשׁ עַל שָׁלֹשׁ – אֶלָּא בִּמְקוֹם בְּגָדִים, אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם בְּגָדִים – שָׁלֹשׁ עַל שָׁלֹשׁ חוֹצְצוֹת, פָּחוֹת מִיכֵּן אֵינָהּ חוֹצֶצֶת. וְהַיְינוּ דְּרָבָא אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Some say** that there is **another version** of the dispute: **Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, says** that **they taught only** that **a reed** is permitted, **but a small sash interposes. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: They said** that an item acts as **an interposition when** it is **less than three by three** fingerbreadths **only in a place** on the priest’s body where the **vestments** are worn. **But in a place** on his body where the **vestments** are **not** worn, the following distinction applies: If the fabric is **three** fingerbreadths **by three** fingerbreadths, **it interposes,** but if it is **less than this, it does not interpose. And this is** the same ruling **that Rava** says that **Rav Ḥisda says.**


###### Zevachim 19a:10
[Zevachim 19a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:10)

לֵימָא פְּלִיגָא אַדְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא? שָׁאנֵי צִילְצוֹל קָטָן, דַּחֲשִׁיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that Rava **disagrees with** the opinion **of Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya,** who deems any sash an interposition, even one smaller than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths. The Gemara rejects this: This is not necessarily so, as **a small sash is different, since it is significant.** It is therefore like a vestment, even if it is smaller than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths.


###### Zevachim 19a:11
[Zevachim 19a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:11)

וּלְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן – מַאי אִירְיָא גֶּמִי? לַשְׁמְעִינַן צִילְצוֹל קָטָן! מִילְּתָא אַגַּב אוֹרְחֵיהּ קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן, דְּגֶמִי מַסֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a question: **And according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan, why** does the mishna teach the *halakha* **specifically** with regard to **a reed? Let** the mishna **teach us** that a priest may wrap his wounded finger with **a small sash,** since this would teach the greater novelty that although a sash is significant, it does not constitute an interposition. The Gemara responds: **It teaches us a matter in passing, that a reed heals.**


###### Zevachim 19a:12
[Zevachim 19a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:12)

בָּעֵי רָבָא: נִכְנְסָה לוֹ רוּחַ בְּבִגְדוֹ, מַהוּ? ״עַל בְּשָׂרוֹ״ בָּעֵינַן – וְהָא לֵיכָּא; אוֹ דִלְמָא דֶּרֶךְ לְבִישָׁה בְּכָךְ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava raises a dilemma:** If a gust of **wind entered** the priest’s **vestment,** raising it slightly off his body, **what is** the *halakha*? Do **we require** that the vestment be: **“Upon his body”** (Leviticus 6:3), in a literal sense, **and this** is **not** the case when the wind raises his vestment? **Or perhaps** the service is valid because **this** is the normal **manner of wearing** clothes.


###### Zevachim 19a:13
[Zevachim 19a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:13)

כִּינָּה – מַהוּ שֶׁתָּחוֹץ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to **a louse** found under the priest’s vestments? **Does it interpose** between the vestments and his body, disqualifying the service?


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

מֵתָה לָא תִּבְּעֵי לָךְ, דְּוַדַּאי חָיְיצָא; חַיָּה מַאי? מִי אָמְרִינַן: כֵּיוָן (דאתא) [דְּאָתְיָא] וְאָזְלָא – רְבִיתָא הִיא וְלָא חָיְיצָא; אוֹ דִלְמָא, כֵּיוָן דְּקָפֵיד עֲלַהּ – חָיְיצָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies: **Do not raise a dilemma** with regard to **a dead** louse, **as** it **certainly interposes,** like any other item. Rather, **what** is the *halakha* with regard to **a live** louse? **Do we say** that **since it comes and goes,** i.e., it moves around on his body, **it is** like **a growth and does not interpose? Or perhaps, since he objects to its** presence, **it interposes?**


###### Zevachim 19a:15
[Zevachim 19a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:15)

עָפָר – מַהוּ שֶׁיָּחוֹץ? עָפָר וַדַּאי חָיֵיץ! אֶלָּא אֲבַק עָפָר מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to **dirt** found under the priest’s vestments? **Does it interpose?** The Gemara objects: But **dirt certainly interposes.** The Gemara clarifies: **Rather,** the question is: **What is** the *halakha* with regard to **dust of dirt,** i.e., a minute amount of dust?


###### Zevachim 19a:16
[Zevachim 19a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:16)

בֵּית הַשֶּׁחִי – מַהוּ שֶׁיָּחוֹץ? ״עַל בְּשָׂרוֹ״ בָּעֵינַן – וְהָא לֵיכָּא; אוֹ דִּלְמָא דֶּרֶךְ לְבִישָׁה בְּכָךְ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to the gap between the underarm of the vestment and the priest’s **armpit? Does it interpose?** Do **we require** that the vestment is **“upon his body”** in a literal sense, **and this** is **not** the case? **Or perhaps** the service is valid since **this** is the normal **manner of wearing** clothes.


###### Zevachim 19a:17
[Zevachim 19a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:17)

הִכְנִיס יָדוֹ לְתוֹךְ חֵיקוֹ, מַהוּ? גּוּפוֹ מִי חָיֵיץ, אוֹ לָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, if the priest **inserted his hand into** his vestments and touched **his chest, what is** the *halakha*? **Does his body interpose or not?**


###### Zevachim 19a:18
[Zevachim 19a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:18)

נִימָא – מַהוּ שֶׁתָּחוֹץ? נִימָא וַדַּאי חָיְיצָא! אֶלָּא נִימָא מְדוּלְדֶּלֶת מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to **a thread [*nima*]? Does it interpose?** The Gemara interjects: But **a thread certainly interposes. Rather,** the question is: **What is** the *halakha* with regard to **a thread** that **hangs** off the vestment itself and will soon fall off? Is such a thread considered as though it has already detached from the vestment, in which case it interposes?


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

בָּעֵי מָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי: יָצָא שְׂעָרוֹ בְּבִגְדוֹ, מַהוּ? שְׂעָרוֹ כְּגוּפוֹ דָּמֵי, אוֹ לָאו כְּגוּפוֹ דָּמֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Mar bar Rav Ashi raises a dilemma:** If **his hair emerged** from his head and extended **into his vestment** and separated it from his skin, **what is** the *halakha*? **Is his hair considered like his body,** in which case it does not interpose, **or is it not considered like his body?**


###### Zevachim 19a:20
[Zevachim 19a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:20)

בָּעֵי רַבִּי זֵירָא: תְּפִילִּין – מַהוּ שֶׁיָּחוֹצּוּ? אַלִּיבָּא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לַיְלָה לָאו זְמַן תְּפִילִּין הוּא – לָא תִּבְעֵי לָךְ; כֵּיוָן דְּלַיְלָה חָיְיצִי, יוֹם נָמֵי חָיְיצִי. כִּי תִּיבְּעֵי לָךְ – לְמַאן דְּאָמַר לַיְלָה זְמַן תְּפִילִּין; מַאי? מִצְוָה דְגוּפֵיהּ – חָיֵיץ אוֹ לָא חָיֵיץ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira raises a dilemma: What is** the *halakha* with regard to **phylacteries? Do they interpose?** The Gemara clarifies: **According to** the opinion **of one who says** that **night is not** an appropriate **time** to don **phylacteries, do not raise the dilemma. Since they interpose** at **night, they also interpose** during the **day.** Rather, **when you raise the dilemma,** do so **according to the one who says** that **night is** an appropriate **time** to don **phylacteries.** According to this opinion, **what** is the *halakha*? **Does a mitzva** that one fulfills **with his body interpose, or does it not interpose?**


###### Zevachim 19a:21
[Zevachim 19a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:21)

אִיגַּלְגַּל מִילְּתָא, וּמְטָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: תַּלְמוּד עָרוּךְ הוּא בְּיָדֵינוּ: תְּפִילִּין חוֹצְצוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This **matter circulated and** eventually **came before Rabbi Ami,** who **said to him: It is a settled tradition in our possession** that **phylacteries interpose.**


###### Zevachim 19a:22
[Zevachim 19a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:22)

מֵיתִיבִי: כֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲבוֹדָתָן ולְוִיִּם בְּדוּכָנָן וְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּמַעֲמָדָן – פְּטוּרִין מִן הַתְּפִלָּה וּמִן הַתְּפִילִּין. מַאי, לָאו אִם הִנִּיחָן אֵינָן חוֹצְצוֹת? לָא, אִם הִנִּיחָן חוֹצְצוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: **Priests in their service; and Levites on their platform** in the Temple, where they recite songs; **and Israelites at their watches,** where they observe the sacrifice of the daily offering, **are** all **exempt from prayer and from** donning **phylacteries. What, is it not** that the term: Exempt, indicates that **if they donned** phylacteries anyway, **they do not interpose?** Apparently, priests may wear phylacteries while performing the Temple service. The Gemara responds: **No, if they donned** phylacteries, **they interpose.**


###### Zevachim 19a:23
[Zevachim 19a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:23)

אִי הָכִי, ״פְּטוּרִים״?! ״אֲסוּרִים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! כֵּיוָן דְּאִיכָּא לְוִיִּם וְיִשְׂרָאֵל – דְּלָא מַתְנוּ לֵיהּ ״אָסוּר״, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי תְּנָא ״פְּטוּרִין״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so,** why does the *baraita* use the word: **Exempt? It should have** used the word: **Prohibited,** since wearing phylacteries disqualifies the priests’ service. The Gemara responds: **Since there are** also **Levites and Israelites** mentioned in the *baraita*, **concerning whom** the *baraita* could **not teach** the word: **Prohibited,** as it is permitted for them to don phylacteries, **due to that** reason the *baraita* **taught** the word: **Exempt,** which is applicable to all.


###### Zevachim 19a:24
[Zevachim 19a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:24)

וְהָתַנְיָא: אִם הִנִּיחָן אֵינָן חוֹצְצוֹת! לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא דְּיָד, הָא דְּרֹאשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **If** a priest **donned** phylacteries **they do not interpose?** The Gemara responds: That is **not difficult. This** *baraita*, which teaches that phylacteries interpose is referring to the phylacteries **of the hand,** whereas **that** *baraita*, which teaches that they do not is referring to the phylacteries **of the head.**


###### Zevachim 19a:25
[Zevachim 19a:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:25)

מַאי שְׁנָא דְּיָד, דִּכְתִיב: ״יִלְבַּשׁ עַל בְּשָׂרוֹ״ – שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא דָּבָר חוֹצֵץ בֵּינוֹ לִבְשָׂרוֹ; דְּרֹאשׁ נָמֵי, כְּתִיב: ״וְשַׂמְתָּ הַמִּצְנֶפֶת עַל רֹאשׁוֹ״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is different** about the phylacteries **of the hand** that only they interpose? The verse indicates the difference, **as it is written** with regard to the vestments covering the body: **“Shall he put upon his body”** (Leviticus 6:3), indicating **that nothing may interpose between** the vestment **and his body.** The Gemara challenges: But there is **also** a verse **written with regard to the head: “And you shall set the mitre upon his head”** (Exodus 29:6), indicating that there must be no interposition between the mitre and the head. If so, the phylacteries of the head should be considered an interposition as well.


###### Zevachim 19a:26
[Zevachim 19a:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/19a:26)

תָּנָא: שְׂעָרוֹ הָיָה נִרְאֶה בֵּין צִיץ לְמִצְנֶפֶת,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: The Sages **taught: The hair of** the High Priest **was visible between the frontplate and the mitre.** The frontplate was set on the forehead, below the hairline, while the mitre was set above it;