## Zevachim Daf 9a

###### Zevachim 9a:1
[Zevachim 9a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:1)

דּוֹחִין קָדָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱכָלִים אֵצֶל קָדָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱכָלִין, וְאֵין דּוֹחִין קָדָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱכָלִין אֵצֶל קָדָשִׁים שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱכָלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Offerings that are eaten,** in this case the Paschal offering, **are diverted** when slaughtered not for their sake **to** serve as other types of **offerings that are eaten,** such as peace offerings. **But offerings that are eaten are not diverted to** serve as **offerings that are not eaten,** such as burnt offerings.


###### Zevachim 9a:2
[Zevachim 9a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:2)

אַטּוּ חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם מִי לָא מִיתְאַכְלִי?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Is that to say** that **a sin offering and a guilt offering are not eaten?** Why does a Paschal offering receive the status of a peace offering and not that of a sin offering or a guilt offering, which are eaten by the priests?


###### Zevachim 9a:3
[Zevachim 9a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:3)

אֶלָּא דּוֹחִין קָדָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱכָלִין לְכׇל אָדָם אֵצֶל קָדָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱכָלִין לְכׇל אָדָם, וְאֵין דּוֹחִין קָדָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱכָלִין לְכׇל אָדָם אֵצֶל קָדָשִׁים שֶׁאֵין נֶאֱכָלִין לְכׇל אָדָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the answer should be emended: **Offerings that are eaten by every** Jewish **person are diverted to** serve as **offerings eaten by every** Jewish **person,** i.e., peace offerings. **But offerings eaten by every** Jewish **person are not diverted to** serve as **offerings not eaten by every** Jewish **person,** i.e., sin offerings and guilt offerings, which are eaten only by priests.


###### Zevachim 9a:4
[Zevachim 9a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:4)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי אָבִין אָמַר: דּוֹחִין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים אֵצֶל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים, וְאֵין דּוֹחִין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים אֵצֶל קׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Avin, says** that there is a different answer: **Offerings of lesser sanctity are diverted to** serve as **offerings of lesser sanctity,** i.e., peace offerings. **But offerings of lesser sanctity are not diverted to** serve as **offerings of the most sacred order,** i.e., burnt offerings, sin offerings, or guilt offerings.


###### Zevachim 9a:5
[Zevachim 9a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:5)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי (סַבְרִיוּ) [סַבְרִין], אֵימָא: שַׁחְטֵיהּ לְשֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂר – לֶיהֱוֵי מַעֲשֵׂר! לְמַאי הִילְכְתָא? דְּלָא לִיבְעֵי נְסָכִים, וּלְמִלְקֵא עֲלֵיהּ (בְּלֹא יִמָּכֵר) בְּ״לֹא יִגָּאֵל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Savriyu, objects to this** answer: If so, **say** that if one **slaughtered** a Paschal offering **for the sake of** the animal **tithe, let it be** rendered animal **tithe,** which, like a Paschal offering, is an offering of lesser sanctity. The Gemara adds: **For what *halakha*** does it matter, practically speaking, that a Paschal offering has been rendered an animal tithe rather than a peace offering? It matters **because** if it is rendered an animal tithe, **it should not require libations. And** furthermore, if one sells it, he **should be flogged for** transgressing the prohibition: **“It shall not be redeemed”** (Leviticus 27:33), which applies to the animal tithe even after its slaughter.


###### Zevachim 9a:6
[Zevachim 9a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:6)

אָמַר קְרָא: ״הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה קֹדֶשׁ״ – זֶה מַעֲשֵׂר, וְאֵין אַחֵר מַעֲשֵׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **The verse states** with regard to the animal tithe: **“The tenth shall be sacred”** (Leviticus 27:32). The definite article indicates that **this,** the tenth animal, is the **tithe, but another** animal slaughtered for its sake is **not a tithe.**


###### Zevachim 9a:7
[Zevachim 9a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:7)

אֵימָא: שַׁחְטֵיהּ לְשֵׁם בְּכוֹר – לֶיהֱוֵי כִּבְכוֹר! לְמַאי הִילְכְתָא? דְּלָא לִיבְעֵי נְסָכִים, אִי נָמֵי דְּלִיתְּבֵיהּ לְכֹהֲנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: Still, **say** that if one **slaughtered** a Paschal offering **for the sake of a firstborn** animal, **let it be** rendered **like a firstborn.** The Gemara adds: **For what *halakha*** does it matter, practically speaking, that it has been rendered a firstborn rather than a peace offering? It matters **because** if it is rendered a firstborn, **it should not require libations. Also,** this means **that one should give it to the priests.**


###### Zevachim 9a:8
[Zevachim 9a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:8)

בְּכוֹר נָמֵי, ״עֲבָרָה״–״עֲבָרָה״ מִמַּעֲשֵׂר גָּמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: With regard to **a firstborn too,** the verse states: “That you shall set apart [*veha’avarta*] unto the Lord all that opens the womb” (Exodus 13:12). Since with regard to the animal tithe it is stated: “Whatever passes [*ya’avor*] under the rod, the tenth shall be holy” (Leviticus 27:32), it is **derived** by verbal analogy between the **passing [*avara*]** stated with regard to a firstborn and the **passing [*avara*]** stated with regard to the animal **tithe** that a Paschal offering cannot become a firstborn either.


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

וְאֵימָא: שַׁחְטֵיהּ לְשֵׁם תְּמוּרָה – לֶיהֱוֵי תְּמוּרָה! לְמַאי הִילְכְתָא? לְמִלְקֵא עֲלֵיהּ, אִי נָמֵי לְמֵיקַם עֲלֵיהּ בְּ״לֹא יִמָּכֵר וְלֹא יִגָּאֵל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But say** that if one **slaughtered** a Paschal offering **for the sake of a substitute, let it be** rendered **a substitute.** The Gemara adds: **For what *halakha*** does it matter, practically speaking, that it has been rendered a substitute rather than a peace offering? The one who slaughtered it **should be flogged for** transgressing the prohibition of effecting substitution. **Also,** its sale **should be determined to** violate the prohibition: **“It shall not be sold or redeemed”** (Leviticus 27:28).


###### Zevachim 9a:10
[Zevachim 9a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:10)

אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ״ – זוֹ תְּמוּרָה, וְאֵין אַחֵר תְּמוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, says:** It is derived from that which **the verse states** with regard to substitution: **“Then both it and that for which it is changed** shall be sacred” (Leviticus 27:33). The verse teaches that only **it,** the animal substituted, is **a substitute, but another** animal is **not a substitute.**


###### Zevachim 9a:11
[Zevachim 9a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:11)

וְאֵימָא: שַׁחְטֵיהּ לְשֵׁם תּוֹדָה – לֶיהֱוֵי כִּי תוֹדָה! לְמַאי הִילְכְתָא? לְהַטְעִינוֹ לֶחֶם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But say** that if one **slaughtered** a Paschal offering **for the sake of a thanks offering, let it be** rendered **like a thanks offering.** The Gemara adds: **For what *halakha*** does it practically matter that it has been rendered a thanks offering rather than a peace offering? If so, **it should require** a meal offering of forty loaves of **bread.**


###### Zevachim 9a:12
[Zevachim 9a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:12)

מִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דְּפֶסַח גּוּפֵיהּ לָא בָּעֵי לֶחֶם, וּמוֹתָרוֹ בָּעֵי לֶחֶם?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Is there anything,** i.e., any situation, comparable to this suggestion **that a Paschal offering itself does not require bread, but its leftover,** an animal consecrated as a Paschal offering but ultimately not sacrificed on Passover eve, **requires bread** when slaughtered not for its sake? Such a suggestion is implausible.


###### Zevachim 9a:13
[Zevachim 9a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:13)

אִי הָכִי, הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי – מִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דְּפֶסַח גּוּפֵיהּ לָא בָּעֵי נְסָכִים, וּמוֹתָרוֹ בָּעֵי נְסָכִים?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so, now** that a leftover Paschal offering slaughtered for the sake of a peace offering becomes a peace offering, this objection can **also** be raised: **Is there anything** comparable to the suggestion **that a Paschal offering itself does not require libations, but its leftover requires libations** as a peace offering?


###### Zevachim 9a:14
[Zevachim 9a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:14)

אֲנַן הָכִי קָאָמְרִינַן: מִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דְּמוֹתַר תּוֹדָה עַצְמָהּ – לָא בָּעֵי לֶחֶם, וְאִילּוּ מוֹתָר דְּאָתְיָא לְהוּ מֵעָלְמָא – בָּעֲיָא לֶחֶם?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains its answer: **This** is what **we are saying: Is there anything** comparable to the suggestion **that the leftover of a thanks offering itself does not require bread, but** the **leftover** of an offering **from** some **other** category **requires bread?**


###### Zevachim 9a:15
[Zevachim 9a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:15)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב [יֵימַר] בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב הִילֵּל: וּמִמַּאי דִּבְמוֹתַר פֶּסַח כְּתִיב? דִּילְמָא בְּמוֹתַר אָשָׁם כְּתִיב!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It was taught that the verse: “And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the Lord is of the flock” (Leviticus 3:6), teaches that a Paschal offering sacrificed not on Passover eve is rendered a peace offering if sacrificed not for its sake. **Rav Yeimar, son of Rav Hillel, objects to this: But from where** is it derived **that** this verse **is written with regard to a leftover Paschal offering? Perhaps it is written with regard to a leftover guilt offering;** a guilt offering is also brought only from the flock.


###### Zevachim 9a:16
[Zevachim 9a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:16)

אָמַר רָבָא, אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְאִם מִן הַצֹּאן קׇרְבָּנוֹ לְזֶבַח שְׁלָמִים״ – דָּבָר הַשָּׁוֶה בְּכׇל הַצֹּאן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava says: The verse states: “And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings** unto the Lord **is of [*min*] the flock,”** where the term “*min*” indicates **that is** brought **equally from all** species of the **flock,** i.e., from both sheep and goats. A guilt offering, by contrast, is brought only from rams, i.e., male sheep.


###### Zevachim 9a:17
[Zevachim 9a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:17)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבִּי אָבִין בַּר חִיָּיא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי אָבִין בַּר כָּהֲנָא: בְּכֹל אֲתַר אַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ ״מִן״ – לְהוֹצִיא, וְכָאן ״מִן״ – לְרַבּוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Avin bar Ḥiyya, and some say Rabbi Avin bar Kahana, objects to this: You say everywhere** that the word **“*min*”** is stated **to exclude** items, **but here** you claim that the word **“*min*”** is stated **to include** all species of the flock? You should say the opposite: The verse indicates an offering that is brought only from some species of the flock, i.e., a guilt offering.


###### Zevachim 9a:18
[Zevachim 9a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:18)

אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי: הָכָא נָמֵי ״מִן״ לְהוֹצִיא – דְּלָא אָתֵי בֶּן שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, וְלָא אָתֵי בִּנְקֵיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Mani says: Here too,** the word **“*min*”** is stated **to exclude** certain categories of the flock, **as** a Paschal offering **is not brought** from an animal that is **in its second year, and is not brought from** the **female** animals of the flock.


###### Zevachim 9a:19
[Zevachim 9a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:19)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב חָנָא בַּגְדָּתָאָה: וּמִי מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ דְּכִי כְּתִיב הַאי – בְּמוֹתַר פֶּסַח כְּתִיב?! וְהָא מִדִּכְתִיב ״אִם כֶּשֶׂב״, ״אִם עֵז״ – מִכְּלָל דְּלָאו בְּמוֹתַר פֶּסַח כְּתִיב!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites another objection. **Rav Ḥana of Baghdad objects to this: How can you say that when this** verse **is written, it is written with regard to a leftover Paschal offering? But from** that **which is written** in the subsequent verses: **“If** he brings **a lamb”** (Leviticus 3:7), and **“if** his offering is **a goat”** (Leviticus 3:12), one learns **by inference that** the passage is **not written with regard to a leftover Paschal offering;** the Torah states elsewhere, in Exodus 12:5, that a Paschal offering is brought from both lambs and goats, and it is unnecessary to teach this again in Leviticus.


###### Zevachim 9a:20
[Zevachim 9a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:20)

הָהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״כֶּבֶשׂ״ – לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַפֶּסַח לְאַלְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Those** verses **are necessary for that which is taught** in a *baraita*: The word **“lamb”** is written **to include the Paschal offering in** the requirement that the **tail** be offered on the altar, which is written subsequently with regard to a peace offering (Leviticus 3:9), since this *halakha* is not mentioned in the verses concerning the Paschal offering.


###### Zevachim 9a:21
[Zevachim 9a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:21)

כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: ״אִם כֶּבֶשׂ״ – לְרַבּוֹת פֶּסַח שֶׁעִיבְּרָה שְׁנָתָהּ; וּשְׁלָמִים הַבָּאִים מֵחֲמַת פֶּסַח – לְכׇל מִצְוַת שְׁלָמִים, שֶׁיִּטָּעֲנוּ סְמִיכָה וּנְסָכִים וּתְנוּפַת חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק. כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: ״אִם עֵז״ – הִפְסִיק הָעִנְיָן, לִימֵּד עַל הָעֵז שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה אַלְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **When** the verse **states: “If** he brings **a lamb,”** it is **to include in all the mitzvot of peace offerings a Paschal offering whose** first **year has passed** and is therefore too old to be sacrificed as a Paschal offering, **and peace offerings brought due to a Paschal offering.** Specifically, this indicates **that they require placing hands** on the head of the offering, **libations, and the waving of** the **breast and thigh. And when** the verse **states:** “And **if** his offering is a **goat,” it interrupted the** previous **matter** and **taught that the** sacrificing of **a goat does not require** that the **tail** be burned on the altar.


###### Zevachim 9a:22
[Zevachim 9a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:22)

וְהָא – מֵהָכָא נָפְקָא?! מִדַּאֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל נָפְקָא, דְּאָמַר אֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: ״וְאִם מִן הַצֹּאן קׇרְבָּנוֹ לְזֶבַח שְׁלָמִים״ – דָּבָר הַבָּא מִן הַצֹּאן יְהֵא לְזֶבַח שְׁלָמִים!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But is it derived from here** that a Paschal offering that is too old to be sacrificed as a Paschal offering is sacrificed as a peace offering? **It is derived from** the verse **that Shmuel’s father** cites, **as Shmuel’s father says:** The verse: **“And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings** unto the Lord **is of the flock”** (Leviticus 3:6), teaches that an offering **that is brought** only **from the flock,** i.e., the Paschal offering, **will be a sacrifice of peace offerings.**


###### Zevachim 9a:23
[Zevachim 9a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:23)

וְאַכַּתִּי מִדְּרַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ נָפְקָא! דְּאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: מִנַּיִן לְמוֹתַר פֶּסַח שֶׁקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְזָבַחְתָּ פֶּסַח לַה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ צֹאן וּבָקָר״. וַהֲלֹא אֵין פֶּסַח בָּא אֶלָּא מִן הַכְּבָשִׂים וּמִן הָעִזִּים! אֶלָּא מִכָּאן לְמוֹתַר הַפֶּסַח שֶׁיְּהֵא לְדָבָר הַבָּא מִן הַצֹּאן וּמִן הַבָּקָר; וּמַאי נִיהוּ – שְׁלָמִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **But** even without the *baraita*, Shmuel’s father’s statement is **still** superfluous, as that *halakha* is **derived from that which Rav Naḥman** says that **Rabba bar Avuh says. As Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says: From where** is it derived **that a leftover Paschal offering is sacrificed as a peace offering? As it is stated: “And you shall sacrifice the Passover offering unto the Lord, your God, of the flock and the herd”** (Deuteronomy 16:2). Why is the herd mentioned? **But isn’t a Paschal offering brought only from the lambs and from the goats? Rather,** it is derived **from here that a leftover Paschal offering should be** sacrificed as an offering **brought** both **from the flock and from the herd. And what is that?** It is **a peace offering.**


###### Zevachim 9a:24
[Zevachim 9a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/9a:24)

אֶלָּא תְּלָתָא קְרָאֵי כְּתִיבִי,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** none of these derivations are superfluous, as **three verses are written** that teach the *halakha* that a Paschal offering that is sacrificed not on Passover eve is sacrificed as a peace offering.