## Zevachim Daf 94b

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

כָּרִים וּכְסָתוֹת – דְּרַכִּין נִינְהוּ, וּתְנַן: הָיְתָה שֶׁל עוֹר נוֹתֵן עָלֶיהָ מַיִם עַד שֶׁתִּכְלֶה! אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: כֹּל כִּיבּוּס דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כִּיסְכּוּס, לָא שְׁמֵיהּ כִּיבּוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Cushions and blankets that are** of **soft** leather, and for which the *halakha* with regard to laundering should be relevant, **and** yet **we learned** about them in the mishna (*Shabbat* 142b): If the filth **was** on a cushion **of leather, he applies water to it until** the filth **dissolves,** which indicates that the *halakha* with regard to laundering is not applicable even to soft leather. **Rather, Rava said:** With regard to **any laundering that does not include rubbing,** it **is not considered laundering.** Consequently, one may apply water to a soft leather cushion, but soft leather remains subject to laundering, so long as there is rubbing.


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

וְהָא דְּאָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי: זִימְנִין סַגִּיאִין הֲוָה קָאֵימְנָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב, וְשַׁכְשֵׁיכִי לֵיהּ מְסָאנֵיהּ בְּמַיָּא; שִׁכְשׁוּךְ אִין, אֲבָל כִּבּוּס לָא – אִי בְּרַכִּין וּכְדִבְרֵי הַכֹּל, אִי בְּקָשִׁין וְכַאֲחֵרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And that** statement **that Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said: Many times I would stand before Rav** on Shabbat **and place water on his** leather **shoes,** may be explained accordingly. With regard to **placing** water on leather, **yes,** that is permitted, **but** with regard to **laundering,** which includes rubbing, it is **not** permitted. This may be explained as follows: **If** Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi spoke **of soft** leather shoes, then **all agree** that only placing water is permitted. And **if** Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi spoke **of hard** leather shoes, the distinction between placing and rubbing **accords with** the opinion of **the others,** who hold that the requirement of laundering sprayed blood applies even to hard leather.


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

אִי הָכִי, בֶּגֶד נָמֵי! בֶּגֶד – שְׁרִיָּיתוֹ זֶהוּ כִּיבּוּסוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If that is so,** that placing water upon something is not considered laundering so long as one does not also rub the item, then with regard to a non-leather **garment as well,** one should be allowed to place water upon it on Shabbat. Why does the cited mishna state that one may wipe it only with a dry rag? The Gemara answers: With regard to **a garment, its soaking is its laundering,** and merely placing water on it is forbidden.


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

רָבָא לְטַעְמֵיהּ – דְּאָמַר רָבָא: זָרַק סוּדָר לְמַיִם – חַיָּיב. זָרַק פִּשְׁתָּן לְמַיִם – חַיָּיב. בִּשְׁלָמָא סוּדָר – עָבֵיד כִּיבּוּס; אֶלָּא זֶרַע פִּשְׁתָּן מַאי טַעְמָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **Rava** conforms **to his** standard line of **reasoning; as Rava says:** If one **cast a cloth into water** on Shabbat, he is **liable** for laundering on Shabbat, as it is made of fabric like any garment; and if **one cast flax** seeds **into water,** he too is **liable.** The Gemara analyzes this statement: **Granted,** if he casts **a cloth** into water, he **performs laundering; but** with regard to **flaxseed, what is the reason** that one may not cast it into water on Shabbat?


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

וְכִי תֵּימָא מִשּׁוּם דְּמִקַדַּח – אִי הָכִי, חִיטֵּי וּשְׂעָרֵי נָמֵי! הָנָךְ אִית לְהוּ רִירֵי. אִי הָכִי, שְׁלָחִים נָמֵי! הָתָם קָעָבֵיד לִישָׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that it is prohibited **because it sprouts** in the water and constitutes the prohibited act of planting, **if so,** with regard to **wheat and barley,** it should **also** be forbidden to place them into water. The Gemara explains: Casting the flax into the water is not prohibited because of planting but because **these** flax seeds **have discharges** when soaked. **If so,** with regard to **hides,** it should **also** be prohibited to place them into water, because they too produce discharges in water. The Gemara answers: **There,** with regard to flaxseed, it is prohibited because it **effects kneading,** as the discharges cause the seeds to combine together, which is not true of hides.


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

דָּרֵשׁ רָבָא: מוּתָּר לְכַבֵּס מִנְעָל בְּשַׁבָּת. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְרָבָא, וְהָא אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי: זִימְנִין סַגִּיאִין הֲוָה קָאֵימְנָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב, וְשַׁכְשֵׁיכִי לֵיהּ מְסָאנֵי בְּמַיָּא; שִׁכְשׁוּךְ אִין, אֲבָל כִּיבּוּס לָא! הֲדַר אוֹקֵי רָבָא אָמוֹרָא עֲלֵיהּ וּדְרַשׁ: דְּבָרִים שֶׁאָמַרְתִּי לִפְנֵיכֶם – טָעוּת הֵם בְּיָדִי; בְּרַם כָּךְ אָמְרוּ: שִׁכְשׁוּךְ מוּתָּר, כִּיבּוּס אָסוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Rava taught** in public: It is **permitted to launder a shoe on Shabbat. Rav Pappa said to Rava: But didn’t Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi say: Many times I would stand before Rav** on Shabbat **and place water on his** leather **shoes?** Evidently, **placing** water upon leather, **yes,** that is permitted, **but laundering,** which includes rubbing, is **not** permitted. **Rava went back and placed an interpreter before him** so that he could tell the public that he had been wrong, **and taught** in public: The **statements that I said before you** earlier **are my error. Truly,** the Sages **said like this: Placing** water upon shoes is **permitted,** but **laundering** them is **prohibited.**


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

הַכִּיבּוּס בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ כּוּ׳. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״תְּכַבֵּס בְּמָקוֹם קָדֹשׁ״. שְׁבִירַת כְּלִי חֶרֶס מִנַּיִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר תְּבֻשַּׁל בּוֹ יִשָּׁבֵר״. מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה בִּכְלִי נְחֹשֶׁת מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאִם בִּכְלִי נְחֹשֶׁת בֻּשָּׁלָה, וּמֹרַק וְשֻׁטַּף בַּמָּיִם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **The laundering** must be performed **in a sacred place,** and the breaking of an earthenware vessel must be performed in a sacred place, and the scouring and rinsing of a copper vessel must be performed in a sacred place. **From where are these matters** derived? **As the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: Concerning a garment on which blood was sprayed, the verse states: **“You shall launder** that on which it shall be sprinkled **in a sacred place”** (Leviticus 6:20). **From where** is the *halakha* with regard to **the breaking of an earthenware vessel** in which a sin offering was cooked derived? **The** subsequent **verse states: “And the earthenware vessel in which it is cooked shall be broken”** (Leviticus 6:21). **From where** is the *halakha* with regard to the **scouring and rinsing of a copper vessel** in which a sin offering was cooked derived? **The verse states** immediately thereafter: **“And if it be cooked in a copper vessel, it shall be scoured, and rinsed in water.”**


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

זֶה חוֹמֶר בְּחַטָּאת כּוּ׳. וְתוּ לֵיכָּא?! וְהָאִיכָּא שֶׁנִּכְנַס דָּמָהּ לִפְנַי וְלִפְנִים! בְּחַטָּאוֹת הַחִיצוֹנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to **this** matter, **a stringency** applies **to a sin offering** more than it applies to offerings of the most sacred order. The Gemara asks: **And are there no more** *halakhot* specific to a sin offering? **But there is** this *halakha*: **That its blood enters the innermost sanctum** to be sprinkled. The Gemara answers: The mishna is dealing **with external sin offerings,** and this *halakha* applies only to internal sin offerings.


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

שֶׁאִם נִכְנַס דָּמָהּ (לִפְנַי וְ)לִפְנִים – פְּסוּלָה! כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, דְּאָמַר: כׇּל דָּמִים שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ לַהֵיכָל לְכַפֵּר – פְּסוּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: But there is the stricture **that if its blood enters into** the Sanctuary it becomes **disqualified.** The Gemara explains: This mishna is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva, who says: Every** offering’s **blood,** not only that of a sin offering, **that enters the Sanctuary to atone** becomes **disqualified;** therefore, this is not a *halakha* specific to a sin offering.


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

שֶׁכֵּן מְכַפְּרִין עַל חַיָּיבֵי כָרֵיתוֹת! בְּחַטָּאת דִּשְׁמִיעַת הַקּוֹל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: But there is the *halakha* **that** external sin offerings **atone for those who are liable to** receive excision, ***karet*,** through unintentional sins. The Gemara explains: The mishna includes an offering that does not have that *halakha*, as its principles also apply **to a sin offering** brought **for hearing the voice,** i.e., for falsely taking an oath that one is unable to testify in another’s case. This transgression is not punishable by *karet*.


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

שֶׁכֵּן טְעוּנָה אַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת! כְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, דְּאָמַר: כׇּל דָּמִים טְעוּנִין אַרְבַּע מַתָּנוֹת עַל אַרְבַּע קְרָנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: But there is the stricture **that** the blood of a sin offering **requires four placements** on the altar, unlike other offerings of the most sacred order. The Gemara explains: This mishna is composed **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael, who says** that **all blood** of offerings **requires four placements,** one **upon** each of the **four corners** of the altar; accordingly, this is not a *halakha* limited to the sin offering.


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

וְלִיטַעְמָיךְ, הָאִיכָּא קֶרֶן! הָאִיכָּא אֶצְבַּע! הָאִיכָּא חוּדָּהּ! אֶלָּא חַד מִתְּרֵי תְּלָתָא חוּמְרֵי נָקֵט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** even **according to your reasoning,** can it be said that there is only one *halakha* that applies to a sin offering but does not apply to other offerings? **Isn’t there** the requirement to place a sin offering’s **blood** on the **corner** at the top of the altar? **Isn’t there** the requirement that a priest place a sin offering’s blood on the altar with his **finger? Isn’t there** the requirement to place it on **the edge of** the altar? Therefore, it should not be assumed that this is the only *halakha* unique to a sin offering, but **rather** that the mishna simply **cited one of two** or **three stringencies.**


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

**מַתְנִי׳** בֶּגֶד שֶׁיָּצָא חוּץ לַקְּלָעִים – נִכְנָס וּמְכַבְּסוֹ בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ. נִטְמָא חוּץ לַקְּלָעִים – קוֹרְעוֹ, נִכְנָס וּמְכַבְּסוֹ בִּמְקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ. כְּלִי חֶרֶס שֶׁיָּצָא חוּץ לַקְּלָעִים – נִכְנָס וְשׁוֹבְרוֹ בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ. נִטְמָא חוּץ לַקְּלָעִים – נוֹקְבוֹ, וְנִכְנָס וְשׁוֹבְרוֹ בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **a garment** upon which the blood of a sin offering was sprayed **that went outside the curtains,** i.e., the Temple courtyard, before being laundered, the garment **reenters** the courtyard **and** one **launders it in a sacred place.** If the garment **became ritually impure outside the curtains,** one **tears** the garment in order to render it ritually pure, **enters** the courtyard with it, **and launders it in a sacred place.** With regard to **an earthenware vessel** in which a sin offering was cooked **that went outside the curtains,** the vessel **reenters** the courtyard **and** one **breaks it in a sacred place.** If the vessel **became ritually impure outside the curtains,** one **punctures** the vessel to render it ritually pure, **and** one **enters** the courtyard with it **and breaks it in a sacred place.**


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

כְּלִי נְחֹשֶׁת שֶׁיָּצָא חוּץ לַקְּלָעִים – נִכְנָס וּמוֹרְקוֹ וְשׁוֹטְפוֹ בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ. נִטְמָא חוּץ לַקְּלָעִים – פּוֹחֲתוֹ, וְנִכְנָס וּמוֹרְקוֹ וְשׁוֹטְפוֹ בְּמָקוֹם קָדוֹשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **a copper vessel** in which a sin offering was cooked **that went outside the curtains,** the vessel **reenters** the courtyard, **and** one **scours it and rinses it in a sacred place.** If the vessel **became ritually impure outside the curtains, one breaks** the vessel by boring a large hole in it to render it ritually pure **and enters** the courtyard with it **and scours and rinses it in a sacred place.**


###### Zevachim 94b:15
[Zevachim 94b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94b:15)

**גְּמָ׳** מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רָבִינָא: קוֹרְעוֹ?! ״בֶּגֶד״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, וְלָאו בֶּגֶד הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches: If the garment became ritually impure outside the curtains, one tears the garment in order to render it ritually pure, enters the courtyard with it, and launders it in a sacred place. **Ravina objects to this:** How can the mishna say that **one tears it? The Merciful One states** in the Torah that one must launder **“a garment”** (Leviticus 6:20), **and** once this article is torn, **this is no** longer **a garment,** but only a scrap of cloth.


###### Zevachim 94b:16
[Zevachim 94b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/94b:16)

דִּמְשַׁיַּיר בֵּיהּ כְּדֵי מַעְפּוֹרֶת. אִינִי?! וְהָאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא שִׁיֵּיר בָּהּ כְּדֵי מַעְפּוֹרֶת, אֲבָל שִׁיֵּיר בָּהּ כְּדֵי מַעְפּוֹרֶת – חִבּוּר הָוֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The mishna describes a scenario **when he leaves** untorn a fragment **of** the garment that is size **enough for a small cloth. Is that so?** If he leaves such a portion intact, is he still permitted to bring the garment back into the courtyard? **But doesn’t Rav Huna say:** The Sages **taught** that an impure garment, most of which has been torn, loses its impurity **only when** one **did not leave of it enough for a small cloth, but if he left enough of it** untorn **for a small cloth, it is** considered **a joining** of the pieces, and the garment remains ritually impure. Accordingly, leaving a piece that size would not serve any purpose with regard to ritual impurity.