## Zevachim Daf 98b

###### Zevachim 98b:1
[Zevachim 98b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:1)

דַּם חַטָּאת לְמַטָּה וְדַם עוֹלָה לְמַעְלָה, טָעוּן כִּיבּוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
when the **blood of a sin offering is below and** the **blood of a burnt offering is above,** in a case in which the blood of a burnt offering is sprayed as a second layer on top of the blood of a sin offering that has already been sprayed and absorbed into a garment, the garment **requires laundering.**


###### Zevachim 98b:2
[Zevachim 98b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:2)

בָּעֵי רָבָא: דַּם עוֹלָה לְמַטָּה וְדַם חַטָּאת לְמַעְלָה, מַהוּ? מִשּׁוּם נוֹגֵעַ הוּא – וְהָא נוֹגֵעַ; אוֹ דִלְמָא מִשּׁוּם בָּלוּעַ הוּא – וְהָא לָא בָּלַע (הוּא)? הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ, דְּאֵין טְעוּנִין כִּיבּוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava asks:** When the **blood of a burnt offering is below and** the **blood of a sin offering is above, what is** the *halakha*? **Is** one required to launder a garment to remove the blood of a sin offering **because** the blood **touches** his garment, **and** in this case, **this** blood **is touching** the garment? **Or perhaps is** one required to launder it **because of** the **absorption** of the blood into the garment, **and,** in this case, since the garment has already absorbed the other blood, **this** garment **did not absorb** the blood? Rava **then resolves** his dilemma, ruling **that** such garments **do not require laundering.**


###### Zevachim 98b:3
[Zevachim 98b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:3)

אָמַר רָבָא: פְּשִׁיטָא לִי, דָּם עַל בִּגְדּוֹ – חוֹצֵץ, וְאִם טַבָּח הוּא – אֵינוֹ חוֹצֵץ. רְבָב עַל בִּגְדּוֹ – חוֹצֵץ, וְאִם מוֹכֵר רְבָב הוּא – אֵינוֹ חוֹצֵץ. בָּעֵי רָבָא: דָּם וּרְבָב עַל בִּגְדּוֹ, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ In a similar manner, with regard to the immersion of a garment that has become impure, **Rava said:** It is **obvious to me** that if there is **blood on** one’s **garment,** it **interposes** between the water of immersion and the garment, such that the immersion is ineffective. **But if he is a butcher,** used to having blood on his garments, a bloodstain **does not interpose,** and the immersion is effective, since a substance is not considered an interposition if the one immersing is not particular about it. Similarly, if there is a stain of **fat [*revav*] on one’s garment,** it **interposes. But if he is a fat seller,** such a stain **does not interpose. Rava asks:** If there is both **blood and fat on** one’s **garment** when he immerses it, **what is** the *halakha*?


###### Zevachim 98b:4
[Zevachim 98b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:4)

אִם טַבָּח הוּא, תִּיפּוֹק לִי מִשּׁוּם רְבָב! וְאִי מוֹכֵר רְבָב הוּא, תִּיפּוֹק לִי מִשּׁוּם דָּם! לָא צְרִיכָא, דְּעָבֵיד הָא וְהָא. אַחֲדָא לָא קָפֵיד, אַתַּרְתֵּי קָפֵיד; אוֹ דִּלְמָא אַתַּרְתֵּי נָמֵי לָא קָפֵיד? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges the question: **If he is a butcher, let me derive** that the stain interposes **due to** the **fat** that he is not used to having on his garments; **and** conversely, **if he is a fat seller, let me derive** that the stain interposes **due to** the stain of **blood** that he is not used to having on his garments. The Gemara explains: **No,** this question is not superfluous; it is **necessary** with regard to a person **who works** both as **this,** a butcher, **and** as **that,** a fat seller. In such a case, the question is: Is it that **he is not particular with regard to one** stain, but **he is particular with regard to two** stains, so that the immersion is ineffective? **Or, perhaps,** is it that he is **not particular** even with regard **to two** stains, as neither is unusual for him? The Gemara provides no answer, and the question **shall stand** unresolved.


###### Zevachim 98b:5
[Zevachim 98b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:5)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ דַּם חַטָּאת**


###### Zevachim 98b:6
[Zevachim 98b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:6)

מַתְנִי׳ **טְבוּל יוֹם** וּמְחוּסַּר כִּיפּוּרִים – אֵינָן חוֹלְקִין בַּקֳּדָשִׁים לֶאֱכוֹל לָעֶרֶב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** A priest who was ritually impure **who immersed that day** and is waiting for nightfall for the purification process to be completed, **and** a priest **who has not yet** brought **an atonement** offering to complete the purification process, e.g., a *zav* and a leper who did not bring their requisite atonement offerings, who are not yet permitted to partake of sacrificial meat, **do not receive a share of sacrificial** meat along with the other members of the patrilineal priestly family serving in the Temple that day, in order **to partake** of it **in the evening** after the offerings were sacrificed, even though after nightfall he would be permitted to partake of the offerings.


###### Zevachim 98b:7
[Zevachim 98b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:7)

אוֹנֵן – (אֵינוֹ) נוֹגֵעַ וְאֵינוֹ מַקְרִיב, וְאֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק לֶאֱכוֹל לָעֶרֶב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A priest who is **an acute mourner,** i.e., if one of his relatives for whom he is obligated to mourn died that day, is permitted to **touch** sacrificial meat, as he is not ritually impure. **But he may not sacrifice** offerings, **and he does not receive a share** of sacrificial meat in order **to partake** of it **in the evening.**


###### Zevachim 98b:8
[Zevachim 98b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:8)

בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, בֵּין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין עוֹבְרִין בֵּין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין קְבוּעִין – חוֹלְקִין וְאוֹכְלִין, אֲבָל לֹא מַקְרִיבִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Blemished** priests, **whether** they are **temporarily blemished** or **whether** they are **permanently blemished, receive a share and partake** of the offerings with their priestly brethren, **but do not sacrifice** the offerings.


###### Zevachim 98b:9
[Zevachim 98b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:9)

כֹּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לַעֲבוֹדָה – אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק בַּבָּשָׂר. וְכֹל שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בַּבָּשָׂר – אֵין לוֹ בָּעוֹרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The principle is: **Any** priest **who is unfit for the service** that specific day **does not receive a share of the** sacrificial **meat, and anyone who has no** share **of the meat has no** share **in the hides** of the animals, to which the priests are entitled as well.


###### Zevachim 98b:10
[Zevachim 98b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/98b:10)

אֲפִילּוּ טָמֵא בִּשְׁעַת זְרִיקַת דָּמִים, וְטָהוֹר בִּשְׁעַת הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים – אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק בַּבָּשָׂר; שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הַמַּקְרִיב אֶת דַּם הַשְּׁלָמִים [וְאֶת הַחֵלֶב מִבְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן] – לוֹ (יִהְיֶה) [תִהְיֶה שׁוֹק הַיָּמִין לְמָנָה]״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Even** if the priest was **ritually impure** only **at the time of the sprinkling of the blood** of the offering **and** he was **pure at the time of the burning of** the **fats** of that offering, he still **does not receive a share of the meat, as it is stated: “He that sacrifices the blood of the peace offerings and the fat, from among the sons of Aaron, shall have the right thigh for a portion”** (Leviticus 7:33). One who cannot sprinkle the blood does not receive a share in the meat.