## Zevachim Daf 95a

###### Zevachim 95a:1
[Zevachim 95a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:1)

מִדְּרַבָּנַן הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that Rav Huna’s statement means that **it is** ritually impure **by rabbinic law,** since the Sages decreed the small cloth impure lest one fail to tear a garment enough to render it truly pure. By Torah law, this small cloth is torn enough to be ritually pure, so that one may bring it back into the Temple courtyard to launder it.


###### Zevachim 95a:2
[Zevachim 95a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:2)

כְּלִי חֶרֶס שֶׁיָּצָא כּוּ׳. ״כְּלִי״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, וְלֹא כְּלִי הוּא! שֶׁנִּיקַּב בְּשׁוֹרֶשׁ קָטָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to **an earthenware vessel** in which a sin offering was cooked **that went outside** the curtains and became ritually impure outside the curtains, one punctures the vessel to render it ritually pure, brings the vessel back into the courtyard, and breaks it there. The Gemara asks: Why is there a need to break the earthenware vessel after puncturing it? **The Merciful One states:** “The earthenware **vessel…**shall be broken” (Leviticus 6:21), **and,** once it is punctured, **it is not a vessel.** The Gemara explains: **When it is punctured** with a hole only the size **of a small root,** the earthenware vessel is purified from the ritual impurity it contracted, but it remains a vessel for other purposes, such as holding fruit.


###### Zevachim 95a:3
[Zevachim 95a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:3)

כְּלִי נְחֹשֶׁת [כּוּ׳]. פּוֹחֲתוֹ [וְכוּ׳]. וְהָא לָאו כְּלִי הוּא! דְּרָצֵיף [לֵיהּ] מִרְצָיף (הוּא).

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: With regard to **a copper vessel** in which a sin offering was cooked that went outside the curtains and became ritually impure outside the curtains, **one breaks** the vessel by boring a large hole in it to render it ritually pure, brings the vessel back into the courtyard, and scours and rinses it there. The Gemara asks: Why should the copper vessel be scoured and rinsed? After all, once the hole is bored, **this is not a vessel** anymore. The Gemara explains: **When he hammers** it and refashions it into a vessel, he must scour and rinse it.


###### Zevachim 95a:4
[Zevachim 95a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:4)

אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מְעִיל שֶׁנִּיטְמָא – מַכְנִיסוֹ בְּפָחוֹת מִשָּׁלֹשׁ עַל שָׁלֹשׁ וּמְכַבְּסוֹ, מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא יִקָּרֵעַ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ Earlier (94b–95a), the Gemara discusses a garment upon which the blood of a sin offering has sprayed; if it has contracted ritual impurity outside of the Temple courtyard, it must be torn before it is brought back into the courtyard to be laundered. **Reish Lakish says:** If the **robe** of the High Priest upon which the blood of a sin offering has sprayed **has contracted ritual impurity** outside of the Temple courtyard, one does not tear it; rather, **he brings it in** to the courtyard gradually, in portions **less than** the measure of a garment susceptible to impurity, which is **three by three** fingerbreadths, **and** he **launders it** section by section as the robe crosses the threshold. The ritually impure robe must be brought into the courtyard in this manner **because it is stated** with regard to the High Priest’s robe: **“It shall not be torn”** (Exodus 28:32).


###### Zevachim 95a:5
[Zevachim 95a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:5)

מוֹתֵיב רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: הֶעָבִין וְהָרַכִּים, אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם שָׁלֹשׁ עַל שָׁלֹשׁ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Ahava raises an objection** based upon a mishna (*Kelim* 28:8): **The** particularly **thick** garments **and the soft** garments **are not subject to** the standard measure of **three by three** fingerbreadths, with regard to determining their susceptibility to becoming ritually impure. Because of their particular qualities, such garments are useful only when they are larger and are not considered significant items when they measure three by three. Since the High Priest’s robe is a thick garment, why must one bring it into the courtyard only in portions of less than three by three?


###### Zevachim 95a:6
[Zevachim 95a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:6)

אַגַּב אֲבִיהֶן חֲשִׁיבִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: With regard to the whole robe of the High Priest, which is a garment of particular significance, even the small portions of the robe **are significant due to their source** garment, and are susceptible to impurity in portions measuring three by three fingerbreadths.


###### Zevachim 95a:7
[Zevachim 95a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/95a:7)

וְהָא בָּעֵי שִׁבְעַת סַמְמָנִין, דְּאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: דַּם חַטָּאת וּמַרְאוֹת נְגָעִים, צְרִיכִין שִׁבְעַת סַמְמָנִין; וְתַנְיָא: אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵין מַכְנִיסִין מֵי רַגְלַיִם לַמִּקְדָּשׁ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks a fundamental question with regard to the procedure for laundering a garment upon which the blood of a sin offering has sprayed: **But isn’t** it so that laundering **requires seven** abrasive **substances? As Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says: Blood of a sin offering** that has sprayed on a garment, **and shades of** leprous **marks** on garments, which are subject to laundering (see Leviticus 13:54), **require** the **seven** abrasive **substances** used as laundering agents; and these substances include urine (*Nidda* 61b). **And it is taught** in a *baraita*: **But urine is not brought into the Temple,** because it is inappropriate for the Temple, although urine is theoretically suitable for use in the preparation of the incense spices. Accordingly, how is a garment laundered in the Temple?