## Zevachim Daf 20a

###### Zevachim 20a:1
[Zevachim 20a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:1)

מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי – עֲבוֹדָה דִּמְעַכְּבָא כַּפָּרָה, אֲבָל עֲבוֹדָה דְּלָא מְעַכְּבָא כַּפָּרָה – לָא; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Lest you say** that **this matter,** sanctification of the hands and feet, applies only to **a rite that is indispensable** for effecting **atonement,** e.g., sprinkling the blood on the altar; **but a rite that is not indispensable** for effecting **atonement,** e.g., placing the fats and sacrificial portions of the offering on the altar, does **not** require prior sanctification of the hands and feet, therefore this verse **teaches us** that even such rites require sanctification of the hands and feet.


###### Zevachim 20a:2
[Zevachim 20a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:2)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: בָּעֵי אִילְפָא, לְדִבְרֵי הָאוֹמֵר אֵין לִינָה מוֹעֶלֶת בְּקִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם – מֵי כִיּוֹר מַהוּ שֶׁיִּפָּסְלוּ? מִי אָמְרִינַן: הָנֵי לְמַאי – לְקִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם, קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם גּוּפַיְיהוּ לָא פָּסֵיל בְּהוּ לִינָה; אוֹ דִלְמָא, כֵּיוָן דִּקְדוּשׁ לְהוּ בִּכְלֵי שָׁרֵת – מִיפַּסְלִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Ilfa raises a dilemma: According to the statement of** Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, **who says** that the disqualification of being **left overnight is not determinative with regard to sanctification of** the **hands and feet, what is** the *halakha* with regard to **the water** in the **Basin? Is it disqualified** by being left overnight? **Do we say: For what** purpose is **this** water? It is **for the sanctification of** the **hands and feet,** and since **sanctification of** the **hands and feet itself is not disqualified** by being **left overnight,** the *halakha* should be the same concerning the water. **Or perhaps, since** the water **is sanctified in a service vessel,** i.e., the Basin, **it is disqualified** by being left overnight, like all other items sanctified in service vessels.


###### Zevachim 20a:3
[Zevachim 20a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:3)

כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, הֲדַר פָּשֵׁיט אִילְפָא: כְּמַחְלוֹקֶת בָּזוֹ כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת בָּזוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: **Rabbi Yirmeya says** that **Rabbi Ami says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Ilfa then resolved** the dilemma: Just **as** there is **a dispute** between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, **with regard to that** issue, i.e., whether sanctification of the hands and feet is disqualified overnight, **so** too there is **a dispute** between the two **with regard to this** issue, i.e., the water in the Basin. Accordingly, Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds that the water is not disqualified by being left overnight.


###### Zevachim 20a:4
[Zevachim 20a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:4)

אָמַר לְפָנָיו רַבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר בִּיסְנָא: רַבִּי, אַתָּה אוֹמֵר כֵּן?! אֶלָּא הָכִי אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן [מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּאִילְפָא]: כִּיּוֹר שֶׁלֹּא שִׁקְּעוֹ מִבָּעֶרֶב – מְקַדֵּשׁ מִמֶּנּוּ לַעֲבוֹדַת לַיְלָה, וּלְמָחָר אֵינוֹ מְקַדֵּשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Ravin continued: **Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Bisna said before** Rabbi Yirmeya: **My teacher,** do **you say so? But this** is what **Rabbi Asi says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Ilfa:** With regard to **a Basin that they did not sink** into its pit **at night,** which would have prevented the water from being disqualified by being left overnight, a priest **sanctifies** his hands and feet **from it for the service of** that **night, and the next day he does not sanctify** his hands and feet from it.


###### Zevachim 20a:5
[Zevachim 20a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:5)

וְהָוֵינַן בַּהּ: לְמָחָר אֵינוֹ מְקַדֵּשׁ – דְּלָא צְרִיךְ לְקַדּוֹשֵׁי; אוֹ דִלְמָא, אִיפְּסַלוּ בְּלִינָה? וְלָא פְּשִׁיט לַן, וּמָר קָא פָשֵׁיט לֵיהּ מִיפְשָׁיט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And we discussed it:** When Ilfa said that **the next day he does not sanctify** his hands and feet from it, did he mean **that he does not require sanctification** the next day, since sanctification is not disqualified overnight? **Or perhaps** Ilfa meant that it is prohibited to sanctify one’s hands and feet from the Basin since the water **was disqualified by** being **left overnight? And** Rabbi Asi **did not resolve** the issue **for us. But** you, **Master, are resolving** the issue by claiming that Ilfa ruled explicitly with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon.


###### Zevachim 20a:6
[Zevachim 20a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:6)

תָּא שְׁמַע: בֶּן קָטִין עָשָׂה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר דַּד לַכִּיּוֹר, אַף הוּא עָשָׂה מוּכְנִי לַכִּיּוֹר שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיוּ מֵימָיו נִפְסָלִין בְּלִינָה. מַאי, לָאו רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא? לָא, רַבִּי הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara attempts to resolve the issue: **Come** and **hear** a proof from a mishna (*Yoma* 37a): The High Priest **ben Katin made twelve spigots for the Basin** so that several priests could sanctify their hands and feet at once. **He also made a mechanism [*mukhani*] for** sinking **the Basin** into water during the night so **that its water would not be disqualified by** being **left overnight. What, is it not** that this mishna **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon?** If so, he holds that water of the Basin is disqualified by being left overnight. The Gemara responds: **No, it is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi.


###### Zevachim 20a:7
[Zevachim 20a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:7)

וְהָא מִדְּרֵישָׁא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן – סֵיפָא נָמֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But from** the fact **that the first clause** of the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,** one should infer that **the latter clause is also** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon.**


###### Zevachim 20a:8
[Zevachim 20a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:8)

דְּקָתָנֵי רֵישָׁא: בָּא לוֹ אֵצֶל פָּרוֹ; וּפַר הָיָה עוֹמֵד בֵּין הָאוּלָם וּלְמִזְבֵּחַ, רֹאשׁוֹ לַדָּרוֹם וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב; וְהַכֹּהֵן עוֹמֵד בַּמִּזְרָח וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב. מַאן שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ דְּאָמַר בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ – צָפוֹן? רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **As the first clause teaches** (*Yoma* 35b): At one point during the Yom Kippur service, the High Priest would **come** and stand **next to his bull, and** his **bull was standing between the Entrance Hall and the altar** with **its head to the south and its face to the west. And the priest stands to the east** of the bull, **and his face** points **to the west.** This is where he would slaughter the bull. **Whom have you heard who says** that **between the Entrance Hall and the altar** is considered part of the **north** of the courtyard, where it is permitted to slaughter offerings of the most sacred order? It is **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon.**


###### Zevachim 20a:9
[Zevachim 20a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:9)

דְּתַנְיָא: אֵיזֶהוּ צָפוֹן? מִקִּיר מִזְבֵּחַ צְפוֹנִי וְעַד כּוֹתֶל עֲזָרָה צְפוֹנִי, וּכְנֶגֶד כׇּל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ כּוּלּוֹ צָפוֹן. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מוֹסִיף: אַף בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ. רַבִּי מוֹסִיף: אַף מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים וּמְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. אֲבָל מִן הַחֲלִיפוֹת וְלִפְנִים – הַכֹּל מוֹדִים שֶׁפָּסוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **What is** the **north?** It is the area **from the northern wall of the altar until the northern wall of the Temple courtyard. And opposite the entire altar** is considered the **north;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, adds even** the area **between the Entrance Hall and the altar** to the area that is considered north. **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **adds even** the areas to the north in **the place where the priests walk, and** the areas to the north in **the place where the Israelites walk. But all concede that** the area **from** the Chamber of **the Knives [*haḥalifot*] and inward,** which is an area to the side, is **unfit** for slaughtering offerings of the most sacred order, as it is not visible from the altar.


###### Zevachim 20a:10
[Zevachim 20a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:10)

וְתִסְבְּרָא?! רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא – וְלָא רַבִּי?! [הַשְׁתָּא רַבִּי] אַדְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה מוֹסֵיף, אַדְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן לָא מוֹסֵיף?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects the proof: **And** must **you understand** that the first clause of the mishna **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, and not** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi? **Now,** does **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **add** only **to** the statement **of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda,** but **not add to** the statement **of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon?** The area deemed north according to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, is included in the area deemed north by Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Accordingly, since the first clause of the mishna can also be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, perhaps the mishna offers no proof at all with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon.


###### Zevachim 20a:11
[Zevachim 20a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:11)

אֲנַן הָכִי קָאָמְרִינַן: אִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ רַבִּי הִיא, לוֹקְמַהּ בִּמְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי כֹהֲנִים וּבִמְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara reformulates its suggestion: **This is what we are saying: If it enters your mind** to say that the mishna **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, then **let him stand** the bull **in the place where the priests walk and in the place where the Israelites walk,** since Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that those areas are also considered north. Why is the bull placed specifically between the Entrance Hall and the altar?


###### Zevachim 20a:12
[Zevachim 20a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:12)

אֶלָּא מַאי, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא?! לוֹקְמַהּ מִקִּיר מִזְבֵּחַ צְפוֹנִי עַד כּוֹתֶל עֲזָרָה צְפוֹנִי! אֶלָּא מַאי אִית לָךְ לְמֵימַר – מִשּׁוּם חוּלְשָׁא דְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל; הָכָא נָמֵי, מִשּׁוּם חוּלְשָׁא דְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this: **Rather, what** shall you say? Will you say that the mishna **is** only in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon?** But if so, **let him stand** the bull anywhere **from the north wall of the altar to the north wall of the Temple courtyard,** as everyone agrees that this area is considered north. **Rather, what have you to say** to explain why the bull is positioned specifically between the Entrance Hall and the altar? It is **due to the weakness of** the **High Priest,** so that he need not exert himself and walk long distances on Yom Kippur. **Here too,** the mishna may be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and **due to the weakness of** the **High Priest** the bull is positioned there.


###### Zevachim 20a:13
[Zevachim 20a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:13)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: קִידֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו לִתְרוּמַת הַדֶּשֶׁן – לְמָחָר אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְקַדֵּשׁ, שֶׁכְּבָר קִידֵּשׁ מִתְּחִילַּת עֲבוֹדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** If a priest **sanctified his hands and feet** in preparation **for the removal of the ashes,** the first service performed every day in the Temple, which was performed before dawn, then **the next day,** i.e., after dawn, **he does not need to sanctify** them again, **as he already sanctified** them **at the beginning of** the day’s **service.**


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

לְמַאן? אִי לְרַבִּי, הָאָמַר: פָּסְלָה לִינָה! אִי לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, הָאָמַר: אֵין צָרִיךְ לְקַדֵּשׁ אֲפִילּוּ מִיכָּן וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **In accordance with whose** opinion is this statement? **If** it is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **doesn’t he say** that being **left overnight disqualifies** sanctification of the hands and feet? If so, one should be required to sanctify them again after dawn. And **if** it is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, doesn’t he say** that if the priest sanctified his hands and feet at the beginning of the service, **he does not need to sanctify** them again **even** if he continues to perform rites **for the next ten days?** Why, then, does Rabbi Yoḥanan state only that one who sanctified his hands and feet before the removal of the ashes is not required to do so after dawn?


###### Zevachim 20a:15
[Zevachim 20a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:15)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לְעוֹלָם לְרַבִּי; וְלִינָה – דְּרַבָּנַן הִיא, וּמוֹדֵי דְּמִקְּרוֹת הַגֶּבֶר וְעַד צַפְרָא לָא פָּסְלָה לִינָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye says: Actually,** the statement is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **and** the disqualification of sanctification of the hands and feet by being **left overnight is by rabbinic law. And** although the Sages mandate that a priest must sanctify his hands and feet every morning, **they concede that** during the period **from the rooster’s crow** before dawn **until morning,** being **left overnight does not disqualify** his sanctification. Therefore, one who sanctifies his hands and feet at the rooster’s crow may continue to perform rites after dawn.


###### Zevachim 20a:16
[Zevachim 20a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:16)

רָבָא אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן [הִיא, וְרָאָה רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּבָרָיו] בִּתְחִילַּת עֲבוֹדָה, וְלֹא בְּסוֹף עֲבוֹדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava says: Actually,** the statement **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. And Rabbi Yoḥanan saw the statement of** Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, as correct **with regard to the beginning of** the **service,** i.e., that a priest may serve during the day on the strength of sanctification performed before dawn. **But** he did **not** agree **with regard to the end of** the **service.** Rather, Rabbi Yoḥanan holds that if a priest sanctified his hands and feet before participating in the day’s final rites, he must sanctify them again the next morning. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, one who sanctified his hands and feet before sunrise must do so again afterward.


###### Zevachim 20a:17
[Zevachim 20a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/20a:17)

מֵיתִיבִי: רָאוּהוּ אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים שֶׁיָּרַד – וְהֵם רָצוּ וּבָאוּ, מִיהֲרוּ וְקִידְּשׁוּ יְדֵיהֶם וְרַגְלֵיהֶם מִן הַכִּיּוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a mishna (*Tamid* 28b) that describes the daily service: **His priestly brethren,** members of the patrilineal family, **saw that** the priest who removed the ashes **descended** from the altar with the coal pan in his hands, **and they ran and arrived** at the Basin. **They hurried and sanctified their hands and their feet** with water **from the Basin.**