## Zevachim Daf 68b

###### Zevachim 68b:1
[Zevachim 68b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:1)

תּוֹרִין שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּן, וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה שֶׁעָבַר זְמַנָּן; שֶׁיָּבְשָׁה גַּפָּהּ, שֶׁנִּסְמֵית עֵינָהּ וְשֶׁנִּקְטְעָה רַגְלָהּ – מְטַמֵּא בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
or if he pinched **doves whose time** of fitness for sacrifice **has not** yet **arrived,** as they are too young to be sacrificed; **or if he** pinched **pigeons whose time** of fitness **has passed,** as they are too old; or if he pinched the nape of a fledgling **whose wing was withered,** or **whose eye was blinded, or whose leg was severed;** in all these cases, although the bird’s nape was pinched, **it renders** one who swallows it **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat.**


###### Zevachim 68b:2
[Zevachim 68b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:2)

זֶה הַכְּלָל: כֹּל שֶׁפְּסוּלוֹ בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ – אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה; לֹא הָיָה פְּסוּלוֹ בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ – מְטַמֵּא בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**This is the principle:** The meat of **any** bird that was initially fit for sacrifice and **whose disqualification** occurred in the course of the service **in the sacred** Temple courtyard **does not render** one who swallows it **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat.** The meat of any bird **whose disqualification did not occur in the sacred** area, but rather was disqualified before the service began, **renders** one **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat.**


###### Zevachim 68b:3
[Zevachim 68b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:3)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב: שְׂמֹאל וְלַיְלָה – אֵין מְטַמְּאִין בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה, זָר וְסַכִּין – מְטַמְּאִין בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav says:** Pinching with the thumbnail of the **left** hand **and** pinching at **night do not** cause the offering’s meat to **render** one who swallows it **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat** as would the carcass of an unslaughtered bird; but pinching by **a non-priest and** pinching, i.e., cutting from the nape of the neck, with **a knife** rather than the fingernail do cause the meat to **render** one **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat.**


###### Zevachim 68b:4
[Zevachim 68b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:4)

מַאי שְׁנָא שְׂמֹאל – דְּאִית לֵיהּ הֶכְשֵׁירָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, וְלַיְלָה – אִית לֵיהּ הֶכְשֵׁירָה בְּאֵיבָרִים וּפְדָרִים; זָר נָמֵי – אִית לֵיהּ הֶכְשֵׁירָה בִּשְׁחִיטָה! שְׁחִיטָה לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **What is different** about the first two cases that prevents the bird from assuming the status of a carcass? Temple service with the **left** hand **has** an instance of **validity** during the service **on Yom Kippur,** when the High Priest enters the Holy of Holies holding the spoon of incense in his left hand. **And** Temple service at **night has** an instance of **validity in** the burning of **limbs and fats** of offerings on the altar, which may be burned throughout the night. But **a non-priest also has** an instance of **validity in** the **slaughter** of animal offerings. Why then does Rav rule that pinching by a non-priest renders the bird a carcass? The Gemara answers: **Slaughter is not** considered a full-fledged sacrificial **rite,** and therefore it cannot be compared to pinching.


###### Zevachim 68b:5
[Zevachim 68b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:5)

וְלָא?! וְהָא אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: שְׁחִיטַת פָּרָה בְּזָר – פְּסוּלָה; וּמַחְוֵי רַב עֲלַהּ: אֶלְעָזָר וְ״חוּקָּה״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** is it **not** a full-fledged rite? **But doesn’t Rabbi Zeira say** that **the slaughter of** a red **heifer by a non-priest is not valid,** which indicates that it is a full-fledged rite? **And Rav showed** a source in the Torah **for** this *halakha*: The verses concerning the red heifer mention both **Elazar** the priest as performing the slaughter **and** the word **“statute,”** which is mentioned in the verse: “This is the statute of the law” (Numbers 19:2), teaching that Elazar’s involvement was halakhically required.


###### Zevachim 68b:6
[Zevachim 68b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:6)

שָׁאנֵי פָּרָה, דְּקׇדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The red **heifer is different, as it** has the halakhic status of an item **consecrated for Temple maintenance** rather than for sacrifice on the altar. Therefore, its slaughter cannot teach the *halakha* concerning an actual offering.


###### Zevachim 68b:7
[Zevachim 68b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:7)

וְלָא כֹּל דְּכֵן הוּא: קׇדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת בָּעוּ כְּהוּנָּה, קׇדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ מִיבַּעְיָא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** can **it not** be inferred ***a fortiori*** that slaughter is a sacrificial rite? If animals that have the status of items **consecrated for Temple maintenance,** which are of lesser sanctity, **require** slaughter by the **priesthood, is** it **necessary** to say that the slaughter of animals **consecrated for** sacrifice on the **altar,** which are of greater sanctity, is a sacrificial rite that should require a priest? Apparently, the fact that non-priests may slaughter offerings proves that certain sacrificial rites apply to them.


###### Zevachim 68b:8
[Zevachim 68b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:8)

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 does not constitute Temple service at all, and therefore it cannot be compared to the slaughter of an offering. The *halakha* is **just as it is with regard to** the examination of the **shades of** leprous **marks, which** does **not** constitute Temple **service but requires** a declaration of purity or impurity by the **priesthood.**


###### Zevachim 68b:9
[Zevachim 68b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:9)

וְנֵילַף מִבָּמָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But let us derive from** the *halakha* of a private **altar,** which was a valid medium for sacrificing offerings before the Temple was built, where non-priests were permitted to pinch the napes of bird offerings, that there is a circumstance in which pinching by non-priests is valid. Why then does the bird assume the status of a carcass when the pinching is performed by a non-priest?


###### Zevachim 68b:10
[Zevachim 68b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:10)

מִבָּמָה לָא יָלֵיף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **One cannot derive** the *halakhot* of the Temple service **from** the *halakhot* of a private **altar,** which was considered non-sacred by comparison.


###### Zevachim 68b:11
[Zevachim 68b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:11)

וְלָא?! וְהָתַנְיָא: מִנַּיִן לַיּוֹצֵא שֶׁאִם עָלָה לֹא יֵרֵד – שֶׁהֲרֵי יוֹצֵא כָּשֵׁר בְּבָמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** can one **not** derive the *halakhot* of the Temple service from the *halakhot* of a private altar? **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **From where** is it derived **with regard to** an item, e.g., the limbs of an offering, which **emerged** from the Temple courtyard and was thereby rendered unfit for sacrifice upon the altar, **that if** it nevertheless **ascended** upon the altar **it shall not descend?** It is derived from the fact **that** an item that **emerged is valid** for sacrifice **on** a private **altar.** This indicates that one can learn from the *halakhot* of a private altar with regard to the Temple service.


###### Zevachim 68b:12
[Zevachim 68b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:12)

תָּנָא אַ״זֹּאת תּוֹרַת הָעוֹלָה״ סְמִיךְ לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The ***tanna*** of that *baraita* **relies on** the verse: **“This is the law of the burnt offering [*ha’ola*]”** (Leviticus 6:2), from which it is derived that any item that ascends [*ola*] upon the altar shall not descend from it, even if it was disqualified. In other words, the verse is the actual source for the *halakha* of the *baraita*, whereas the case of a private altar is cited merely in support of this ruling.


###### Zevachim 68b:13
[Zevachim 68b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:13)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: זָר אֵין מְטַמֵּא אַבֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה, סַכִּין מְטַמֵּא אַבֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Until this point the Gemara has discussed the opinion of Rav, who holds that the pinching of a non-priest renders the bird a carcass with regard to ritual impurity. **But Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** If **a non-priest** pinched the nape of a bird offering, the meat **does not render** one who swallows it **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat;** but if a priest pinched it, i.e., cut it from the nape of the neck, with **a knife,** the meat **renders** one **ritually impure** when it is **in the throat.**


###### Zevachim 68b:14
[Zevachim 68b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:14)

תְּנַן: כׇּל הַפְּסוּלִין שֶׁמָּלְקוּ – מְלִיקָתָן פְּסוּלָה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, ״כֹּל״ – לְאֵיתוֹיֵי זָר. אֶלָּא לְרַב, ״כׇּל״ – לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara brings proof for the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan from that which **we learned** in the mishna: If **any** of those **disqualified** for Temple service **pinched** the nape of a bird offering, **their pinching is not valid,** but the meat does not render one who swallows it ritually impure when it is in the throat. **Granted, according to Rabbi Yoḥanan,** the word: **Any,** is written **to add** that even the pinching of **a non-priest** does not render the bird a carcass. **But according to Rav,** who holds that it does render the bird a carcass, **what is added** by the word: **Any?**


###### Zevachim 68b:15
[Zevachim 68b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:15)

(לָאו) לְאֵיתוֹיֵי שְׂמֹאל וְלַיְלָה. שְׂמֹאל וְלַיְלָה בְּהֶדְיָא קָתָנֵי! תָּנֵי וַהֲדַר מְפָרֵשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It is written **to add** pinching with the **left** hand **or** pinching at **night.** The Gemara challenges: The word: Any, is unnecessary with regard to teaching the cases of pinching with the **left** hand **and** pinching at **night,** as **they are taught** in the mishna **explicitly.** The Gemara answers: According to Rav, the word: Any, is not meant to add a specific case. Rather the mishna **teaches** the principle **and then explains** using specific examples.


###### Zevachim 68b:16
[Zevachim 68b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/68b:16)

תָּא שְׁמַע: זֶה הַכְּלָל – כֹּל שֶׁהָיָה פְּסוּלוֹ בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ, אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים אַבֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, ״כֹּל״ לְאֵיתוֹיֵי זָר. אֶלָּא לְרַב, לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** proof from the continuation of the mishna: **This is the principle:** The meat of **any** bird **whose disqualification occurred** during the course of the service **in the sacred** Temple courtyard **does not render** the **garments** of one who swallows it **ritually impure** when the meat is **in the throat. Granted, according to Rabbi Yoḥanan,** the word: **Any,** is written **to add** that even the pinching of **a non-priest** does not render the bird a carcass. **But according to Rav,** who holds that it does render the bird a carcass, **what is added** by the word: Any?