## Zevachim Daf 94a

###### Zevachim 94a:1
[Zevachim 94a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:1)

וְכׇל מִינֵי בְגָדִים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אֲשֶׁר עָלֶיהָ תְּכַבֵּס״. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מְרַבֶּה עוֹר מִשֶּׁהוּפְשַׁט? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בֶּגֶד״ – מָה בֶּגֶד דָּבָר הַמְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה, אַף כֹּל דָּבָר הַמְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and all types of garments** made of other materials in the requirement of laundering? **The verse states: “You shall launder that on which** it shall be sprinkled.” One **might** have thought **that I include** an animal’s **hide after it was flayed.** That **verse states: “Garment,”** to teach that **just as a garment is an item that is susceptible to ritual impurity** as is, **so too any** comparable **item that is** a ready utensil and therefore **susceptible to impurity** must be laundered. Accordingly, Rabbi Elazar holds that merely flaying a hide is insufficient to render it an item that must be laundered.


###### Zevachim 94a:2
[Zevachim 94a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:2)

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מַטְלֵית פְּחוּתָה מִשָּׁלֹשׁ אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ; מַאן דְּאָמַר רָאוּי – הָא נָמֵי רָאוּי, דְּאִי בָּעֵי חַשֵּׁיב עֲלֵיהּ. מַאן דְּאָמַר דָּבָר הַמְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה – הָא מִיהָא לָאו בַּת קַבּוֹלֵי טוּמְאָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the practical difference **between** the opinions of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Elazar? Is there an item that is fit to become ritually impure, but is not actually susceptible to impurity? **Abaye said: A patch** of cloth **less than three** by three fingerbreadths presents a practical difference **between** the two opinions. According to **the one who says** that any garment **fit** to become ritually impure must be laundered, **this** patch of cloth **is also fit** to become ritually impure, **as if** the owner **wants, he can intend it** for a specific use, as in patching his garment. According to **the one who says** that only **an object** already **susceptible to impurity** must be laundered, **this** patch, **in any event, is not** yet **susceptible to impurity**, so it does not require laundering.


###### Zevachim 94a:3
[Zevachim 94a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:3)

רָבָא אָמַר: בֶּגֶד שֶׁחִישֵּׁב עָלֶיהָ לְצוּרָה אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ; מַאן דְּאָמַר רָאוּי – הָא נָמֵי רָאוּי, דְּאִי בָּעֵי מְבַטֵּיל לֵיהּ לְמַחְשַׁבְתֵּיהּ. מַאן דְּאָמַר דָּבָר הַמְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה – הַשְׁתָּא מִיהָא לָאו בַּת קַבּוֹלֵי טוּמְאָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: A garment upon which** an individual initially **intended to** place **an image** constitutes a practical difference **between** the two opinions. Since the garment was initially intended to have an adornment, the garment is considered incomplete and not yet susceptible to impurity until the image is added. According to **the one who says** that any garment **fit** to become ritually impure requires laundering, **this** garment **is also fit** to become ritually impure, **as if** the owner **wants** to, **he can void his intention** to add the image, and the garment will be automatically susceptible to impurity. According to **the one who says** that only **an item** already **susceptible to impurity** requires laundering, **now, at least,** this garment **is not susceptible to impurity** and does not require laundering.


###### Zevachim 94a:4
[Zevachim 94a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:4)

רָבָא אָמַר: עוּצְבָּא דְּחַשֵּׁיב עֲלַהּ לְקַצְּעָהּ אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ; מַאן דְּאָמַר רָאוּי – הָא נָמֵי רְאוּיָה; מַאן דְּאָמַר דָּבָר הַמְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה – הָא לָאו מְקַבְּלָה טוּמְאָה עַד דִּמְקַצַּע לַהּ. וְהָתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא אוֹמֵר: עוּצְבָּא שֶׁחִשֵּׁב עָלֶיהָ לְקַצְּעָהּ – טְהוֹרָה עַד שֶׁיְּקַצְּעֶנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
According to a different version, **Rava said: An unfinished hide [*utzeva*] that one intended to trim** in a precise manner constitutes a practical difference **between** the two opinions. According to **the one who says** that any garment-like item **fit** to become ritually impure must be laundered, **this** hide must be laundered, since it **is also fit** to be susceptible to impurity if he voids his intention. According to **the one who says** that only **an item** already **susceptible to impurity** must be laundered, **this** hide does not require laundering since it **is not susceptible to impurity until he trims it.** This explanation may be corroborated, as **it is taught** in a *baraita*: **Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya says: An unfinished hide that** one **intended to trim is ritually pure until he trims it.**


###### Zevachim 94a:5
[Zevachim 94a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:5)

אֵין טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס כּוּ׳. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: יָכוֹל נִתַּז עַל מִקְצָת בֶּגֶד – יְהֵא כׇּל הַבֶּגֶד טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אֲשֶׁר יִזֶּה״ – לֹא אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ אֶלָּא מְקוֹם דָּם בִּלְבַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: A garment **requires laundering** only in the place that the blood was sprayed; but the entire garment does not require laundering. The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived? They are derived from a verse, **as the Sages taught:** The verse states: “And when any of its blood shall be sprinkled on a garment.” One **might** have thought that even if the blood **sprayed** only **on part of a garment, the entire garment should require laundering.** To counter this, **the** same **verse states:** “That on **which it shall be sprinkled.”** This is to be understood: **I told you** that laundering is required **only** in **the place** that the **blood** was sprayed.


###### Zevachim 94a:6
[Zevachim 94a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:6)

דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה [וְכוּ׳]. סְתָמָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna also teaches: A garment must be laundered only if it is **an item that is fit to become ritually impure,** and only if it is an item fit for laundering. The Gemara observes: Evidently, **the unattributed** portion of the mishna is taught **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda.** This statement is unlike the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, who holds that only an item that is presently susceptible to impurity requires laundering.


###### Zevachim 94a:7
[Zevachim 94a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:7)

רָאוּי לְכִיבּוּס. לְמַעוֹטֵי כְּלִי, דְּבַר גְּרִידָה הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna also teaches: Only an item **fit for laundering** must be laundered. The Gemara observes: This qualification serves **to exclude a vessel** from the requirement of laundering, **as it is suitable for scraping** blood off of it. Laundering is necessary only for material or fabric into which blood is absorbed.


###### Zevachim 94a:8
[Zevachim 94a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:8)

אֶחָד הַבֶּגֶד וְאֶחָד הַשַּׂק כּוּ׳. לְמֵימְרָא דְּעוֹר בַּר כִּיבּוּס הוּא?! וּרְמִינְהוּ: הָיְתָה עָלָיו לַשְׁלֶשֶׁת – מְקַנְּחָהּ בִּסְמַרְטוּט. הָיְתָה עַל שֶׁל עוֹר – נוֹתֵן עָלֶיהָ מַיִם עַד שֶׁתִּכְלֶה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to **the garment** mentioned explicitly in the Torah, **and the sackcloth,** and the hide, all of these must be laundered. Apparently, **that is to say that a hide,** i.e., leather, **is suitable for laundering. And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** between that assumption and a mishna that discusses laundering on Shabbat (*Shabbat* 142b): If **there were bird droppings [*lishleshet*] on** the cushion, one **wipes it with a** dry **rag,** but one may not rinse it with water because of the prohibition against laundering. If **it was on** a cushion **of leather, he applies water to it until** the filthy substance **dissolves.** Evidently, cleaning leather with water is not considered laundering.


###### Zevachim 94a:9
[Zevachim 94a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:9)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא רַבָּנַן הָא אֲחֵרִים. דְּתַנְיָא: הַבֶּגֶד וְהַשַּׂק – מְכַבְּסוֹ, הַכְּלִי וְהָעוֹר – מְגָרְרוֹ. אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: הַבֶּגֶד וְהַשַּׂק וְהָעוֹר – מְכַבְּסוֹ, וְהַכְּלִי – מְגָרְרוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said:** This contradiction is **not difficult. That** mishna in tractate *Shabbat* is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis,** and **this** mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **others. As it is taught** in a *baraita* about the blood of a sin offering: If blood sprays onto **a garment or** onto **sackcloth, he launders it;** but if it sprays onto a **vessel or** onto **leather, he scrapes it** off. **Others say:** If it sprays onto **a garment, or** onto **sackcloth, or** onto **leather, he launders it; but** if it sprays onto **a vessel, he scrapes it** off. According to this *baraita*, the Rabbis hold that laundering is not applicable to leather, and the opinion attributed to: Others say, holds that it is applicable.


###### Zevachim 94a:10
[Zevachim 94a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:10)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּאָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי: זִימְנִין סַגִּיאִין הֲוָה קָאֵימְנָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב, וְשַׁכְשֵׁיכִי לֵיהּ מְסָאנֵיהּ בְּמַיָּא? כְּמַאן – כְּרַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **In accordance with whose** opinion **is that which Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said: Many times I would stand before Rav** on Shabbat **and place water on his** leather **shoes,** which he did not consider laundering on Shabbat? **In accordance with whose** opinion is it? It is **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis** in this *baraita*.


###### Zevachim 94a:11
[Zevachim 94a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:11)

אָמַר רָבָא: וּמִי אִיכָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר, עוֹר לָאו בַּר כִּיבּוּס הוּא?! וְהָכְתִיב: ״וְהַבֶּגֶד אוֹ הַשְּׁתִי אוֹ הָעֵרֶב אוֹ כׇל כְּלִי הָעוֹר אֲשֶׁר תְּכַבֵּס״! אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: קְרָא וּמַתְנִיתִין – בְּרַכִּין, כִּי פְּלִיגִי – בְּקָשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava said: And is there anyone who says** that **leather is not suitable for laundering? But isn’t it written** with regard to leprosy: **“And the garment, or the warp, or the woof, or any article of leather that you shall wash”** (Leviticus 13:58)? **Rather, Rava said: The verse** that speaks of leprosy **and the mishna** that speaks of the sin offering are ruling **with regard to soft** leather, which is considered subject to laundering. In the *baraita*, **when** the Rabbis and the others **disagree,** it is **with regard to** an item that is made of **hard** leather; as the Rabbis hold that laundering does not apply to hard leather.


###### Zevachim 94a:12
[Zevachim 94a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:12)

וְהָאָמַר רַב חִיָּיא: זִימְנִין סַגִּיאִין הֲוָה קָאֵימְנָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב, וְשַׁכְשֵׁיכִי לֵיהּ מְסָאנֵיהּ בְּמַיָּא! בְּקָשִׁין, וּכְרַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges Rava’s explanation: **But didn’t Rav Ḥiyya** bar Ashi **say: Many times I would stand before Rav** on Shabbat **and place water on his** leather **shoes,** which he did not consider laundering on Shabbat? Since shoes are normally made of soft leather, according to Rava’s explanation, this should have constituted laundering on Shabbat. The Gemara resolves the difficulty: It was a case **of hard** leather shoes, **and** Rav acted **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** that laundering does not apply to hard leather.


###### Zevachim 94a:13
[Zevachim 94a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:13)

הֲדַר אָמַר רָבָא: לָאו מִילְּתָא הִיא דַּאֲמַרִי; נֵיקוּ נֵימָא לֵיהּ לִקְרָא דְּכִי כְתִיבָן בְּרַכִּין כְּתִיבָן?! מִי לָא עָסְקִינַן בִּכְלֵי אֶכְּסָלְגְיָא הַבָּאִים מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם, וְקָאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא נִיבְעֵי כִּיבּוּס?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava then said:** That **which I said,** that the verse about leprosy relates to soft leather, **is not correct. Shall we stand** and **say of the verse that when** leather articles **are written,** it is only **of soft** leather articles that the Torah **writes?** A verse cannot be constrained in such a manner. **Are we not** also **dealing with articles of hard leather [*aksilgiyya*] that come from overseas, and** yet **the Merciful One says** in the verse that **they require laundering?**


###### Zevachim 94a:14
[Zevachim 94a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94a:14)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: צָרַעַת – כֵּיוָן דְּמִגּוּפֵיהּ קָא פָרְחָה, מְחַלְחֲלָא לֵיהּ וּמְשַׁוְּיָא לַהּ רַךְ. אָמַר רָבָא: אִי קַשְׁיָא לִי, הָא קַשְׁיָא לִי:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said:** Although the verse also relates to hard leather, this does not mean that all opinions must agree that laundering is always applicable to hard leather. The hard leather in the verse is an exception, because in the case of **leprosy, since** leprosy **sprouts from** within the garment **itself, it loosens it and renders it soft** so that its halakhic status is that of soft leather. **Rava said:** Nevertheless, **if** something poses **a difficulty for me,** according to my opinion that everyone agrees that the *halakha* with regard to laundering applies to soft leather, **this** is what poses **a difficulty for me:**