## Zevachim Daf 65b

###### Zevachim 65b:1
[Zevachim 65b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:1)

שִׁיסַּע וְלֹא הִבְדִּיל. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְשִׁסַּע״ – אֵין שִׁיסַּע אֶלָּא בַּיָּד, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַיְשַׁסְּעֵהוּ כְּשַׁסַּע הַגְּדִי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that after removing the crop and the feathers and innards that emerged with it, the priest **ripped** the bird lengthwise **and did not separate** the two halves of the bird. In this regard **the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“And he shall rend”** (Leviticus 1:17). The act of **rending is** performed **only by hand, and so too,** the verse **states** with regard to Samson: **“And he rent it as one would have rent a kid,** and he had nothing in his hand” (Judges 14:6).


###### Zevachim 65b:2
[Zevachim 65b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:2)

לֹא הֵסִיר אֶת הַמּוּרְאָה כּוּ׳. מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן; דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: שָׁמַעְתִּי שֶׁמַּבְדִּילִין בְּחַטַּאת הָעוֹף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if the priest **did not remove the crop,** or he changed any detail of the sacrificial rite after he squeezed out the blood, the offering is valid. If he separated the head from the body of a bird sin offering, it is disqualified. The Gemara says: **The mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, said: I heard that one may separate** the head from the body **of a bird sin offering.**


###### Zevachim 65b:3
[Zevachim 65b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:3)

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: מִיצּוּי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף מְעַכֵּב אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ. תַּנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר: מִיצּוּי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף מְעַכֵּב; וְכֵיוָן דְּמִצּוּי דָּם, קָעָבֵיד מַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה בְּחַטַּאת הָעוֹף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the reason for the difference **between them,** i.e., what is the basis of the disagreement? **Rav Ḥisda says:** The difference **between them** concerns the question of whether **squeezing out** the blood of **a bird sin offering** after its blood has been sprinkled is **indispensable. The first *tanna*,** whose opinion is cited in the mishna, **holds** that **squeezing out** the blood of **a bird sin offering** is **indispensable. And since squeezing out** the **blood** is indispensable, the priest will have to squeeze out the blood after separating the head from the body, and he will have **performed the rite of** a bird **burnt offering on a bird sin offering,** which disqualifies the offering (see 66a).


###### Zevachim 65b:4
[Zevachim 65b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:4)

וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן סָבַר: מִיצּוּי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף לֹא מְעַכֵּב, וּמְחַתֵּךְ בָּשָׂר בְּעָלְמָא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds** that **squeezing out** the blood of **a bird sin offering is not indispensable.** Consequently, if the priest would separate the bird’s head from its body, he would refrain from squeezing out the blood, in which case the rite is dissimilar to that of a bird burnt offering. **And** the separation of the head **is** considered as though the priest was **merely cutting flesh,** and the offering is valid.


###### Zevachim 65b:5
[Zevachim 65b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:5)

רָבָא אָמַר: שְׁהִיָּיה בְּסִימָן שֵׁנִי בְּעוֹלַת הָעוֹף מְעַכֵּב אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ. תַּנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר: שְׁהִיָּיה בְּסִימָן שֵׁנִי בְּעוֹלַת הָעוֹף – לֹא מְעַכֵּב; וְאַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁהִיָּיה, קָא עָבֵיד מַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה בְּחַטָּאת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava says** there is an alternative explanation of the dispute: It is possible that all agree that squeezing the blood of a bird sin offering is indispensable, and **there is** a difference **between them** with regard to whether **interrupting** the pinching before severing the **second *siman*,** i.e., the gullet or windpipe, one of the organs that must be cut in the ritual slaughter, **of a bird burnt offering disqualifies** the offering. **The first *tanna* holds** that **interrupting** the pinching before severing the **second *siman* of a bird burnt offering does not disqualify** the offering, **and** therefore, if the priest separates the head of a bird sin offering from its body, **even though he interrupted** the pinching before severing the second *siman*, **he has performed the rite of** a bird **burnt offering on** a bird **sin offering,** which disqualifies it.


###### Zevachim 65b:6
[Zevachim 65b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:6)

וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן סָבַר: מְעַכֵּב; וְכֵיוָן דִּשְׁהִיָּיה, מְחַתֵּךְ בָּשָׂר בְּעָלְמָא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds** that interrupting the pinching of a bird burnt offering **disqualifies** the offering. Therefore, in the case of a bird sin offering, **since** the priest **interrupted** the pinching before severing the second *siman*, even if he separates the head from the body **he is merely cutting flesh,** i.e., it is an insignificant act because he is not performing the rite of a burnt offering on a sin offering, and the offering is not disqualified.


###### Zevachim 65b:7
[Zevachim 65b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:7)

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: רוֹב בָּשָׂר מְעַכֵּב אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye says** there is a third explanation of the dispute between the *tanna’im*: It is possible that all agree that interrupting the pinching before severing the second *siman* disqualifies a bird burnt offering, and **there is** a difference **between them** with regard to whether cutting the **majority of** the **flesh** of the nape of a bird sin offering is **indispensable.**


###### Zevachim 65b:8
[Zevachim 65b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:8)

וּבִפְלוּגְתָּא דְּרַבִּי זֵירָא וְרַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק; חַד אָמַר: שְׁהִיָּיה בְּסִימָן שֵׁנִי בְּעוֹלַת הָעוֹף מְעַכֵּב אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ, וְחַד אָמַר: רוֹב בָּשָׂר מְעַכֵּב אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara points out: **And** Rava and Abaye disagree **with regard to** the issue that is the subject of **the dispute between Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak. One says** that the difference **between** the first *tanna* and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, concerns whether **interrupting** the pinching before severing the **second *siman* of a bird burnt offering disqualifies** the offering. **And one says** that the difference **between them** concerns whether cutting the **majority of** the **flesh** of the nape of a bird sin offering is **indispensable.**


###### Zevachim 65b:9
[Zevachim 65b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:9)

מִכְּלָל דְּבָעֵינַן דְּרוֹב בָּשָׂר בַּתְּחִילָּה?! אִין; וְהָתַנְיָא: כֵּיצַד מוֹלְקִין חַטַּאת הָעוֹף? חוֹתֵךְ שִׁדְרָה וּמַפְרֶקֶת בְּלֹא רוֹב בָּשָׂר, עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לַוֶּושֶׁט אוֹ לַקָּנֶה. הִגִּיעַ לַוֶּושֶׁט אוֹ לַקָּנֶה – חוֹתֵךְ סִימָן אֶחָד אוֹ רוּבּוֹ, וְרוֹב בָּשָׂר עִמּוֹ. וּבָעוֹלָה – שְׁנַיִם אוֹ רוֹב שְׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Since there is a dispute concerning whether cutting the majority of the flesh of the nape of a bird sin offering is indispensable, can it be deduced **by inference** that all agree **that we require** the priest to cut **the majority of the flesh *ab initio*?** The Gemara responds: **Yes; and** similarly it **was taught** in *baraita*: **How does one pinch** the nape of **a bird sin offering?** Using his thumbnail, the priest **cuts** the **spine and nape, without** cutting through the **majority of** the **flesh, until he reaches** either **the gullet or the windpipe.** Upon **reaching the gullet or the windpipe, he cuts one *siman*** entirely, **or** at least **the majority of it, and** he cuts **the majority of the flesh with it. And in** the case of a bird **burnt offering,** he cuts the **two** *simanim* **or the majority of the two** *simanim*.


###### Zevachim 65b:10
[Zevachim 65b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/65b:10)

אַמְרוּהָ קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, אָמַר: לָא שְׁמִיעַ לְהוּ הָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְיָקִים מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן פְּדָת מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן שַׁמּוּעַ? אוֹמֵר הָיָה רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: שָׁמַעְתִּי בְּחַטַּאת הָעוֹף שֶׁמַּבְדִּילִין. וּמַאי ״לֹא יַבְדִּיל״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that the Rabbis **said this** dispute between the *amora’im* concerning the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, **before Rabbi Yirmeya.** Rabbi Yirmeya **said: Have they not heard that which Rabbi Shimon ben Elyakim said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat, in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, used to say: I heard that one may** completely **separate** the head of **a bird sin offering** from its body. **And what** is the meaning of the verse that states: “But **shall not separate it”** (Leviticus 5:8)?