## Zevachim Daf 38a

###### Zevachim 38a:1
[Zevachim 38a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:1)

הָתָם חַד קְרָא – כּוּלֵּיהּ לְגוּפֵיהּ, וְחַד – לִסְכָכָה; אֲתַאי הִלְכְתָא, וּגְרַעְתַּהּ לִשְׁלִישִׁית וְאוֹקֵימְתַּהּ אַטֶּפַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There, one** of the five indicated by the **verse is** needed **entirely for** the mitzva **itself,** i.e., to teach the basic *halakha* that one must dwell in a *sukka*. **And** another **one** of the five is needed **to** teach that a *sukka*, as is indicated by its name, must have **a covering [*sekhakha*].** Accordingly, there are three left, alluding to the requirement that a *sukka* must have three walls. The Gemara adds that **the *halakha*** transmitted to Moses from Sinai **comes and reduces the** size of the **third** wall, teaching that it need not be complete, **and sets** its minimum length **at** only **one handbreadth.**


###### Zevachim 38a:2
[Zevachim 38a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:2)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, ״וְטָמְאָה שְׁבֻעַיִם״ – ״שִׁבְעִים״; אַהֲנִי קְרָא וְאַהֲנַי מָסוֹרֶת – אַרְבְּעִים וּתְרֵין בָּעֲיָא לְמֵיתַב!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises yet another objection: **If that is so,** that both the vocalized and the consonantal texts are taken into account, consider the case of a woman who gives birth to a female child. Concerning this woman the verse states: “But if she bear a female child, **then she shall be impure two weeks [*shevu’ayim*],** as in her menstruation” (Leviticus 12:5). The way that the word is written allows it to be read as ***shivim*,** seventy. Why not say that **the vocalized text** of the Torah **is effective,** teaching us that the woman is ritually impure for fourteen days, **and the consonantal text is** also **effective,** teaching us that she is impure for seventy days, and, therefore, **she** should be **required to sit** in a state of ritual impurity for **forty-two** days, which is the halfway point between fourteen and seventy days?


###### Zevachim 38a:3
[Zevachim 38a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:3)

שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דִּכְתִיב ״כְּנִדָּתָהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There it is different,** and the consonantal text is disregarded entirely, **as it is written: “As in her menstruation,”** and a menstruating woman is impure for one week. Evidently, the verse is speaking in terms of weeks, and is not alluding to the number seventy at all.


###### Zevachim 38a:4
[Zevachim 38a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:4)

וְתַנָּא מַיְיתֵי לַהּ מֵהָכָא: ״וְכִפֶּר״ ״וְכִפֶּר״ ״וְכִפֶּר״ – מִפְּנֵי הַדִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara further analyzes the opinion of Beit Hillel that even in the case of a sin offering, if the priest placed the blood on the altar with one placement, he facilitated atonement. **And a *tanna* cites** proof **for this from here,** as it was taught in a *baraita*: The verse states with regard to the sin offering brought by a king: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement** for him” (Leviticus 4:26), and with regard to the goat brought as a sin offering by an ordinary person: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement** for him” (Leviticus 4:31), and with regard to the sheep brought as a sin offering by an ordinary person: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement** for him” (Leviticus 4:35). The repetition of this term is **due to a logical inference.**


###### Zevachim 38a:5
[Zevachim 38a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:5)

שֶׁיָּכוֹל וַהֲלֹא דִּין הוּא: נֶאֶמְרוּ דָּמִים לְמַטָּה, וְנֶאֶמְרוּ דָּמִים לְמַעְלָה; מָה מַתַּן דָּמִים הָאֲמוּרִים לְמַטָּה – שֶׁנְּתָנָן בְּמַתָּנָה אַחַת, כִּיפֵּר; אַף דָּמִים הָאֲמוּרִים לְמַעְלָה – שֶׁנְּתָנָן בְּמַתָּנָה אַחַת, כִּיפֵּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As** one **might** have thought to say: **Could this not** be derived through **logical inference** as follows: It **is stated** that **blood** is placed **below** the red line, **and** it **is stated** that **blood** is placed **above** the red line. **Just as** with regard to the **blood concerning** which it **is stated** that it is placed **below** the red line, **when** the priest **placed** it on the altar **with one placement he facilitated atonement, so too,** with regard to the **blood concerning** which it **is stated** that it is placed **above** the red line, **when** the priest **placed** it on the altar **with one placement he facilitated atonement.**


###### Zevachim 38a:6
[Zevachim 38a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:6)

אוֹ כְּלָךְ לְדֶרֶךְ זוֹ: נֶאֶמְרוּ דָּמִים בִּפְנִים, וְנֶאֶמְרוּ דָּמִים בַּחוּץ; מָה דָּמִים הָאֲמוּרִים בִּפְנִים – חִיסֵּר אַחַת מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת, לֹא עָשָׂה וְלֹא כְּלוּם; אַף דָּמִים הָאֲמוּרִין בַּחוּץ – חִיסֵּר אַחַת מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת, לֹא עָשָׂה וְלֹא כְלוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or** perhaps, **go this way,** turning away from the previous explanation and toward this explanation: It **is stated** that **blood** is presented **on** the **inner** altar, i.e., with regard to a sin offering of the community or of the High Priest; the blood of these offerings is sprinkled on the incense altar that is inside the Sanctuary. **And** it **is stated** that **blood** is presented **on** the **external** altar, i.e., with regard to the sin offering of an ordinary person, which is offered on the outer altar that is in the courtyard. **Just as** with regard to the **blood concerning** which it **is stated** that it is presented **on** the **inner** altar, if the priest **omitted one of the placements he has done nothing,** i.e., the offering is not valid, **so too,** with regard to the **blood concerning** which it **is stated** that it is presented **on** the **external** altar, if the priest **omitted one of the placements he has done nothing.**


###### Zevachim 38a:7
[Zevachim 38a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:7)

נִרְאֶה לְמִי דּוֹמֶה. דָּנִין חוּץ מִחוּץ, וְאֵין דָּנִין חוּץ מִבִּפְנִים; אוֹ כַּלֵּךְ לְדֶרֶךְ זוֹ – דָּנִין חַטָּאת וְאַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת, מֵחַטָּאת וְאַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת; וְאַל יוֹכִיחַ חוּץ – שֶׁאֵין חַטָּאת וְאַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes the two possibilities: **Let us see to which** of the two cases the blood of an animal sin offering is more **similar.** It can be claimed: We **derive** a *halakha* stated with regard to the **external** altar **from** a *halakha* stated with regard to the **external** altar, **but** we **do not derive** a *halakha* stated with regard to the **external** altar **from** a *halakha* stated with regard to the **inner** altar. **Or, go this way: We derive** a *halakha* stated with regard to **a sin offering** whose blood is to be placed on the **four corners** of the altar **from** a *halakha* stated with regard to **a sin offering** whose blood is to be placed on the **four corners** of the altar. **But** a sin offering consisting of a bird, **which is not a sin offering** whose blood is to be placed on the **four corners** of the altar, **cannot serve as proof** to the *halakha* concerning an animal sin offering, whose blood is to be placed on the four corners of the altar.


###### Zevachim 38a:8
[Zevachim 38a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:8)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְכִפֶּר״ ״וְכִפֶּר״ ״וְכִפֶּר״ (מִפְּנֵי הַדִּין); ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן אֶלָּא שָׁלֹשׁ, ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן אֶלָּא שְׁתַּיִם, ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן אֶלָּא אַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Since both of the above inferences are reasonable, neither can serve as the source of the *halakha*. Therefore, **the verse states: “And** the priest **shall make atonement,” “And** the priest **shall make atonement,” “And** the priest **shall make atonement,”** for a total of three times. The verses are interpreted as follows: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even if he placed only three** placements. Subsequently: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even if he placed only two** placements, and then: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even if he placed only one** placement. This interpretation is the source of Beit Hillel’s opinion.


###### Zevachim 38a:9
[Zevachim 38a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:9)

וְהַאי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְגוּפֵיהּ! אָמַר רָבָא: בַּר אַדָּא מָרִי אַסְבְּרַהּ לִי – אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְכִפֶּר... וְנִסְלַח״ – זוֹ הִיא כַּפָּרָה זוֹ הִיא סְלִיחָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But** each of these verses **is necessary for itself,** to teach that atonement is achieved for each of the sins through its respective sin offering. **Rava said: Bar Adda Mari explained** this matter **to me: The verse states** with regard to each of these sin offerings: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement…and he shall be forgiven”** (Leviticus 4:26, 31, 35). **This is atonement** and **this is forgiveness;** they are one and the same. Since it would have sufficed to say: “And he shall be forgiven,” the superfluous mentions of the phrase: “And the priest shall make atonement,” serve to teach that the priest facilitates atonement even if he has not performed all the placements.


###### Zevachim 38a:10
[Zevachim 38a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:10)

אֵימָא ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן אֶלָּא שָׁלֹשׁ לְמַעְלָה וְאַחַת לְמַטָּה, ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן אֶלָּא שְׁתַּיִם לְמַטָּה וּשְׁתַּיִם לְמַעְלָה, ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן לְמַעְלָה אֶלָּא לְמַטָּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: But even if these phrases are superfluous, do they necessarily indicate that a priest who omitted placements has nevertheless facilitated atonement? Why not **say** that these phrases serve to teach that if the priest placed all the placements he facilitated atonement even if the placements were placed in the wrong place? And expound the verses as follows: **“And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even if he placed** the blood on the altar with **only three** placements **above,** on the corners of the altar, **and one below,** on the lower portion of the altar; **“And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even if he placed** the blood with **only two** placements **above and two below; “And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even if he did not place** the blood **above** at all, **but** only **below.**


###### Zevachim 38a:11
[Zevachim 38a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:11)

אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר יִצְחָק: אִם כֵּן, בִּיטַּלְתָּ תּוֹרַת אַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת. וְאִי רַחֲמָנָא אָמַר, לִיבַּטְלוּן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Yitzḥak says: If so,** that the priest facilitates atonement even if he placed all the placements below, **you have abolished the requirement of four corners** that is stated with regard to the sin offering (see, e.g., Leviticus 4:34), as the four corners are on the upper portion of the altar. The Gemara is puzzled by Rav Adda bar Yitzḥak’s claim: **But if the Merciful One states** that this is so, **let** this requirement **be abolished.**


###### Zevachim 38a:12
[Zevachim 38a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:12)

אָמַר רָבָא: אֵיזֶהוּ דָּבָר שֶׁצָּרִיךְ שָׁלֹשׁ? הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵלּוּ קְרָנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
As Rav Adda bar Yitzḥak’s claim was rejected, **Rava said** there is a different reason why the previous claim cannot be accepted: **What is** the **item that requires three** repetitions of “and the priest shall make atonement,” i.e., to what are these verses referring? **You must say** that **these are** the **corners** of the altar. The Torah must teach that the priest facilitates atonement even if he did not place the blood on three of the four corners. But in order for the verses to teach that all four placements can be placed below, the phrase “and the priest shall make atonement” would have to be written four times.


###### Zevachim 38a:13
[Zevachim 38a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:13)

אֵימָא: ״וְכִפֶּר״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן אֶלָּא אַחַת לְמַעְלָה וְשָׁלֹשׁ לְמַטָּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks further: Even so, it is possible to interpret the three repetitions of the phrase “and the priest shall make atonement” as referring to the location of the placements, without abolishing the requirement of corners, as one can **say:** “And the priest shall make atonement,” even though he placed the blood on the altar with only three placements above and one below; “And the priest shall make atonement,” even though he placed the blood with only two placements above and two below; **“And** the priest **shall make atonement,” even though he placed** the blood with **only one** placement **above and three below.**


###### Zevachim 38a:14
[Zevachim 38a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:14)

לֹא מָצִינוּ דָּמִים שֶׁחֶצְיָין לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיָין לְמַטָּה. וְלָא?! וְהָתְנַן: הִזָּה מִמֶּנּוּ אַחַת לְמַעְלָה וְשֶׁבַע לְמַטָּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This entire line of inquiry can be rejected, as **we do not find** a case involving **blood, half of which** is placed **above** the red line **and half of which** is placed **below** it. One either places all the blood on the lower half of the altar, as in the case of most offerings, or all of it on the upper half of the altar, as in the case of sin offerings. The Gemara asks: **And** is there really **no** case of that sort? **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Yoma* 53b): The High Priest took the blood of the bull into the Holy of Holies and **sprinkled from** the blood **one** time **upward and** then **seven** times **downward?** Apparently, part of the blood of an offering can be sprinkled upward, toward the upper part of the Ark Cover, and part can be placed downward, toward the lower part of the Ark Cover.


###### Zevachim 38a:15
[Zevachim 38a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:15)

כְּמַצְלִיף. מַאי כְּמַצְלִיף? מַחְוֵי רַב יְהוּדָה: כִּמְנַגְּדָנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this: That is not a case where half the blood is sprinkled upward and half is sprinkled downward. Instead, that sprinkling was **like a *matzlif*.** The Gemara explains: **What** is the meaning of **like a *matzlif*? Rav Yehuda demonstrated** with his hand; it means **like one who whips.** One who whips another does not strike repeatedly in one place but directs one lash beneath the other.


###### Zevachim 38a:16
[Zevachim 38a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/38a:16)

הִזָּה עַל טׇהֳרוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further asks: And is there really no case of that sort? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (*Yoma* 58b) about the Yom Kippur service: After the High Priest sprinkled blood on the four corners of the incense altar, **he sprinkled** blood **seven times on *tohoro* of the altar.**