## Zevachim Daf 70b

###### Zevachim 70b:1
[Zevachim 70b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:1)

כְּשֶׁבָּא בְּדֶרֶךְ זוֹ – הִיא בִּטְהוֹרָה, וּכְשֶׁבָּא בְּדֶרֶךְ זוֹ – הִיא בִּטְמֵאָה; תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״טְרֵפָה״ – מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּמִינָהּ טְרֵיפָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When one approaches** the matter **this** first **way,** the *halakha* that forbidden fat is pure **applies** specifically **to kosher** animals, but **when one approaches** the matter **that** second **way,** the *halakha* **applies** specifically **to non-kosher** animals. To decide the matter, **the verse states:** “The fat of **a *tereifa*** may be used for any other service” (Leviticus 7:24), indicating that only the forbidden fat of **those** animals **to whose species** the *halakha* of ***tereifa* applies,** i.e., kosher animals, is ritually pure. The status of *tereifa* is immaterial to a non-kosher animal as its consumption is prohibited in any event.


###### Zevachim 70b:2
[Zevachim 70b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:2)

אוֹצִיא אֶת הַטְּמֵאָה – שֶׁאֵין בְּמִינָהּ טְרֵיפָה, וְלֹא אוֹצִיא אֶת הַחַיָּה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּמִינָהּ טְרֵיפָה! תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאָכֹל לֹא תֹאכְלוּהוּ״ – מִי שֶׁחֶלְבָּהּ אָסוּר וּבְשָׂרָהּ מוּתָּר, יָצָא חַיָּה שֶׁחֶלְבָּהּ וּבְשָׂרָהּ מוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* concludes: One might still assume that **I will exclude** from this *halakha* only the forbidden fat of a carcass of **a non-kosher** animal, **as** the *halakha* of ***tereifa* does not apply to its species, but I will not exclude** the fat of a carcass of **an undomesticated** kosher **animal, as** the *halakha* of ***tereifa* applies to its species.** Therefore, **the verse states** in conclusion: **“But you shall in no way eat of it,”** indicating that the reference is only to animals **whose fat** is **forbidden** for consumption if slaughtered **but whose meat** is **permitted,** i.e., kosher domesticated animals. **Excluded** are kosher **undomesticated animals, whose fat and meat** are both **permitted** for consumption.


###### Zevachim 70b:3
[Zevachim 70b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:3)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יַעֲקֹב בַּר אַבָּא לְרָבָא: אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה – נִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה הוּא דִּמְטַמְּאָה, נִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לָא מְטַמְּאָה?! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כַּמָּה סָבֵי שַׁבֵּישְׁתּוּ בַּהּ! סֵיפָא אֲתָאן לְנִבְלַת עוֹף טָמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ya’akov bar Abba said to Rava: If that is so,** it appears from the *baraita* that **the carcass of a kosher animal imparts impurity,** but **the carcass of a non-kosher animal does not impart impurity.** Rava **said to him: How many elders have you caused to err in** the interpretation of this *baraita*? In **the latter clause we come to** discuss only **the carcass of a non-kosher bird,** which does not impart impurity. By contrast, carcasses of non-kosher animals are impure.


###### Zevachim 70b:4
[Zevachim 70b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:4)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא טִיהֵר רַבִּי מֵאִיר אֶלָּא בִּתְמִימִין, אֲבָל בְּבַעֲלֵי מוּמִין לָא. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ בְּבַעֲלֵי מוּמִין. אִיתְּמַר נָמֵי, אָמַר רַב בִּיבִי אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מְטַהֵר הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר בְּבַעֲלֵי מוּמִין, וַאֲפִילּוּ בַּאֲוָוזִין וְתַרְנְגוֹלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ In the mishna, Rabbi Meir states that a bird offering whose nape was pinched and was found to be a *tereifa* does not impart impurity as would a carcass. **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Meir deemed pure only unblemished** birds whose napes were pinched, as they are fit to be sacrificed, **but** he did **not** deem pure **blemished** birds, which are not fit to be sacrificed. **And Rabbi Elazar says:** Rabbi Meir deemed **even blemished** birds pure and did not distinguish between the two. **It was also stated** that **Rav Beivai says** that **Rabbi Elazar says: Rabbi Meir would deem pure blemished** birds, **and** this was his opinion **even** concerning **geese and chickens,** species that may not be brought as offerings and as such are never supposed to be pinched.


###### Zevachim 70b:5
[Zevachim 70b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:5)

בָּעֵי רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: עָרַף עֵז, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yirmeya raises a dilemma:** According to Rabbi Elazar’s understanding of Rabbi Meir’s opinion, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to one who **broke the neck of a goat?** Does the impurity of animal carcasses apply? The breaking of the neck is considered the proper procedure in certain cases, as the Torah commands that a heifer’s neck be broken if a murdered body is found between two cities and the identity of the murderer is unknown (see Deuteronomy 21:4).


###### Zevachim 70b:6
[Zevachim 70b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:6)

אֲוָוזִין וְתַרְנְגוֹלִין טַעְמָא מַאי – דְּמִינָא דְּעוֹפוֹת נִינְהוּ, אֲבָל עֵז לָאו מִינָא דְּעֶגְלָה נִינְהוּ; אוֹ דִילְמָא מִינָא דִּבְהֵמָה הוּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One could claim: **What is the reason** that **geese and chickens** are pure if their napes are pinched? It is **because they are species of birds** and the napes of some birds are pinched; **but a goat is not** of the same **species** as **a heifer,** as goats are considered small livestock whereas cattle are large livestock. **Or perhaps** one could claim: Since a goat **is** still **a species of domesticated animal,** it is similar enough to a heifer that the breaking of its neck prevents it from imparting impurity as a carcass.


###### Zevachim 70b:7
[Zevachim 70b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:7)

יָתֵיב רַב דִּימִי וְקָאָמַר לַהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: מִכְּלָל דְּעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה טְהוֹרָה הִיא?! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין, אָמְרִי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי: כַּפָּרָה כְּתִיב בָּהּ כְּקָדָשִׁים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Dimi was sitting and saying this *halakha*,** i.e., this dilemma. **Abaye said to him: By inference** from this dilemma, it seems that you assume that **a heifer whose neck is broken is** itself **pure** and does not impart impurity as would a carcass. Rav Dimi **said to him: Indeed,** as the Sages **of the school of Rabbi Yannai say:** Since the language of **atonement is written with regard to** the heifer whose neck is broken, in the verse: “Forgive, Lord, Your people Israel” (Deuteronomy 21:8), just **as** atonement is written with regard to **sacrificial** animals, the breaking of the heifer’s neck is equivalent to the pinching of the nape of a bird offering, and breaking its neck prevents the heifer from imparting ritual impurity.


###### Zevachim 70b:8
[Zevachim 70b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:8)

מֵתִיב רַב נָתָן אֲבוּהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא (בַּר נָתָן): ״וְאָכֹל לֹא תֹאכְלוּהוּ״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא חֵלֶב שֶׁאָסוּר בַּאֲכִילָה וּמוּתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה; חֵלֶב שֶׁל שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל וְעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה – מִנַּיִן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Natan, father of Rav Huna bar Natan, raises an objection** based on a *baraita* concerning the purity of the forbidden fat of a kosher animal, mentioned in the verse: “And the fat of a carcass, and the fat of a *tereifa*, may be used for any other service; **but you shall in no way eat of it”** (Leviticus 7:24). **I have** derived from the verse **only** that forbidden **fat that** is **forbidden for consumption but from which** deriving **benefit** is **permitted** is pure. **From where** is it derived that this *halakha* also applies to the forbidden **fat of an ox that is stoned** by the court **or** the forbidden fat of **a heifer whose neck is broken,** from both of which one is prohibited from deriving benefit?


###### Zevachim 70b:9
[Zevachim 70b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:9)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״כׇּל חֵלֶב״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The verse states:** “You shall eat **no fat** nor blood” (Leviticus 3:17). The generalization “no fat” indicates that the same *halakhot* apply to the forbidden fats of all domesticated kosher animals, including those from which one is prohibited from deriving benefit.


###### Zevachim 70b:10
[Zevachim 70b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:10)

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה טְהוֹרָה הִיא – הִיא טְהוֹרָה וְחֶלְבָּהּ טָמֵא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Natan concludes his objection: **And if it enters your mind** that the meat of **a heifer whose neck is broken is pure,** why must the verse teach that its forbidden fat is pure? Could one entertain the possibility that its meat **is pure but its** forbidden **fat** is **impure?**


###### Zevachim 70b:11
[Zevachim 70b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:11)

הֵיכָא דַּעֲרַף מִיעְרָף – לָא אִיצְטְרִיכָא לֵיהּ; כִּי אִיצְטְרִיכָא, הֵיכָא דְּשַׁחְטַהּ מִישְׁחָט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: The derivation in the *baraita* **was not necessary for** a case **where one broke the neck** of the heifer. **It was necessary** for the verse to teach that the forbidden fat is pure even in a case **where one slaughtered** a heifer whose neck was designated to be broken.


###### Zevachim 70b:12
[Zevachim 70b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:12)

וְתֵיהָנִי לֵיהּ שְׁחִיטָה לְטַהֲרָהּ מִידֵּי נְבֵלָה! לָא צְרִיכָא, שֶׁמֵּתָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** the **slaughter** itself **should be effective in purifying** the forbidden fat, as slaughter prevents an animal **from** assuming the impure status of **a carcass,** and the derivation is still superfluous. The Gemara responds: **No,** it is **necessary** to teach that the forbidden fat of a heifer **that died** before its neck could be broken is pure even though the heifer itself assumes that status of a carcass.


###### Zevachim 70b:13
[Zevachim 70b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:13)

מִכְּלָל דְּמֵחַיִּים אֲסוּרָה? אִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: גְּבוּל שָׁמַעְתִּי וְשָׁכַחְתִּי, וְנָסְבִין חַבְרַיָּיא לְמֵימַר: יְרִידָתָהּ לְנַחַל אֵיתָן הִיא אוֹסַרְתָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If the *baraita* is referring only to a heifer that died before its neck could be broken, and it describes benefitting from it as being prohibited, **by inference,** is it **prohibited** to derive benefit from the heifer **while** it is still **alive?** The Gemara responds: **Indeed,** as **Rabbi Yannai says: I heard** the **boundary,** i.e., stage, beyond which it is forbidden, **but I have forgotten** what it is, **and** yet the members of **the group** of scholars **were inclined to say** that **its descent to a hard valley** (see Deuteronomy 21:4), where its neck was broken, is the action that **renders it forbidden.**


###### Zevachim 70b:14
[Zevachim 70b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:14)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ חַטַּאת הָעוֹף**


###### Zevachim 70b:15
[Zevachim 70b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/70b:15)

מַתְנִי׳ **כׇּל הַזְּבָחִים שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ** בְּחַטָּאוֹת הַמֵּתוֹת אוֹ בְּשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, אֲפִילּוּ אַחַת בְּרִיבּוֹא – יָמוּתוּ כּוּלָּן. נִתְעָרְבוּ בְּשׁוֹר שֶׁנֶּעֶבְדָה בּוֹ עֲבֵירָה, אוֹ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **All the offerings that were intermingled with** animals from which deriving benefit is forbidden, e.g., **sin offerings** left to **die, or with an ox that** was sentenced to be **stoned, even** if the ratio is **one in ten thousand,** deriving benefit from them all is prohibited and **they all must die.** If the offerings **were intermingled with** animals whose sacrifice is forbidden but deriving benefit from them is not, the *halakha* is different. Examples of this are **an ox with which a transgression was performed,** which disqualifies it from being sacrificed as an offering, **or**