Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) AN "AVODAH" DONE WITH IMPROPER INTENT FOR A LATER "AVODAH"

(a) (R. Yochanan): If a Korban was slaughtered Lishmah with intent to do Zerikah Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul;
(b) (Reish Lakish): It is Kosher.

1. R. Yochanan says that it is Pasul - we consider it as if this Avodah (slaughter) was done with the (Lo Lishmah) intent for the later Avodah (Zerikah); i. We learn from Pigul (if one of the four Avodos was done with intent to eat the meat, do Zerikah, or burn the Eimurim after the proper time, the Korban is Pasul, as if this Avodah was done improperly).
2. Reish Lakish says that it is Kosher - intent for a later Avodah does not affect this Avodah;

i. We do not learn from Pigul.

(c) R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argued similarly elsewhere.

1. (R. Yochanan): If a person slaughtered a (Chulin) animal in order to pour the blood or burn the Chelev to idolatry, the animal is forbidden;

i. He holds that since he later intends to serve idolatry with this animal, we consider the current Avodah (slaughter) to be l'Shem idolatry;
ii. We learn from Avodah in the Mikdash (Pigul) to Chulin outside the Mikdash.

2. (Reish Lakish): The animal is permitted;

i. We do not consider the current Avodah to be l'Shem idolatry, because we do not learn from Avodah in the Mikdash to outside the Mikdash.

(d) We must teach the argument in both cases.

1. If we only taught regarding idolatry, one might have thought that Reish Lakish agrees regarding Lo Lishmah, it applies in the Mikdash, we learn from Pigul in the Mikdash;
2. If we only taught regarding Lo Lishmah, one might have thought that R. Yochanan agrees regarding idolatry, it applies outside the Mikdash, we do not learn from Pigul in the Mikdash.

(e) (R. Yirmeyah): Presumably R. Yochanan is correct!

1. Regarding Pigul: if a person says 'I (will) slaughter after the allotted time' (but slaughters in the proper time, his intent is meaningless), it is Kosher - but if he slaughters with intent to do Zerikah after the proper time, the Korban is Pasul;
2. Regarding Lo Lishmah, if a person slaughters Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul - all the more so, if he slaughters with intent to do Zerikah Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul!

(f) Objection (Rava bar Ahila'i): You cannot learn from Pigul (it is more stringent), one who eats it is Chayav Kares!
(g) (Rava bar Ahila'i): We can support R. Yochanan from a case resembling Pigul (but without Kares).

1. If a person says 'I slaughter outside the proper place' (but slaughters in the proper place), it is Kosher - but if he slaughters with intent to do Zerikah outside the proper place, the Korban is Pasul;
2. Regarding Lo Lishmah, if a person slaughters Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul - all the more so, if he slaughters with intent to do Zerikah Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul!

(h) Objection (Rav Ashi): You cannot learn from intent for the wrong place, that totally disqualifies all Zevachim, but Lo Lishmah only (totally) disqualifies Chatas and Pesach!
(i) (Rav Ashi): We can support R. Yochanan from Shinuy Ba'alim.

1. If a person says 'I slaughter l'Shem Ploni', it is Kosher - but if he slaughters with intent to do Zerikah l'Shem Ploni, the Korban is Pasul;
2. Regarding Shinuy Kodesh, if a person slaughters l'Shem a different Zevach, it is Pasul - all the more so, if he slaughters with intent to do Zerikah l'Shem a different Zevach!

(j) (R. Ila): Presumably Reish Lakish is correct!

1. There was no need for the Torah to teach that Zerikah Lo Lishmah is Posel a Korban, we could have learned from a Tzad ha'Shavah of slaughtering and Kabalah;
2. The Torah taught about Lo Lishmah in Zerikah to teach that we do not consider the current Avodah as if it was done with the intent for the later Avodah.

(k) Question (Rav Papa): Perhaps the Torah wrote it to teach that we *do* consider the current Avodah as if it was done with the intent for the later Avodah!
(l) Answer: Without a verse we would know this from the Kal va'Chomer of Rav Ashi.

1. R. Yochanan argues with this reasoning - he says that we cannot learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah of slaughtering and Kabalah, because both of them must be done in the north half of the Azarah (regarding Kodshei Kodoshim), and they apply to inner Chata'os, these stringencies do not apply to Zerikah.
2. R. Ila learns from the Tzad ha'Shavah, because the extra verse is written regarding Shelamim (Kodshim Kalim), the above stringencies do not apply to Shelamim.

(m) (Rav Nachman): If a Korban was slaughtered Lishmah with intent to do Zerikah Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul;
(n) (Rabah): It is Kosher.
(o) Rabah later retracted and agreed with Rav Nachman, on account of the Kal va'Chomer of Rav Ashi.

(a) (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): Also Asham (is Pasul if slaughtered Lo Lishmah).
(b) (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): Chatas and Asham both come for transgression - just as Chatas Lo Lishmah is (totally) Pasul, also Asham.

1. R. Yehoshua: You cannot learn from Chatas, for its blood is put on the top of the Mizbeach (but an Asham's blood is thrown on the bottom half of the Mizbeach)!
2. R. Eliezer: Pesach proves that this is not the essential reason - its blood is thrown on the bottom half of the Mizbeach, and Pesach Lo Lishmah is Pasul!
3. R. Yehoshua: You cannot learn from Pesach, because it is offered at a fixed time of the year.
4. R. Eliezer: Chatas proves that this is not the essential reason (there is no fixed time to offer it, it is Pasul Lo Lishmah)!
5. R. Yehoshua: Again I say, you cannot learn from Chatas (for its blood is put on the top of the Mizbeach)!

6. R. Eliezer: I can learn from verses:

i. We learn from "Chatas Hi" and "Pesach Hu" that Lo Lishmah disqualifies Chatas and Pesach - we learn similarly from "Asham Hu"!

7. R. Yehoshua: No - regarding Chatas and Pesach, it says "Hi" and "Hu" regarding slaughter, teaching that these are Kosher only if slaughtered Lishmah;

i. Regarding Asham, it only says "Hu" after the Eimurim are burned - this cannot teach that it is Pasul if the Eimurim are burned Lo Lishmah, even if they are not burned at all, the Korban is Kosher!

8. R. Eliezer: It says "Ka'Chatas ka'Asham" - just as Chatas Lo Lishmah is Pasul, also Asham.

(c) Question: R. Yehoshua said 'Again I say, you cannot learn from Chatas' - why can't R. Eliezer learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah of Chatas and Pesach?
(d) Answer: Both pertain to Kares (Chatas atones for Chayavei Kerisus, one who does not offer Korban Pesach is liable to Kares), we cannot learn to Asham which does not pertain to Kares.
(e) Question: R. Yehoshua said 'You cannot learn from Chatas, for its blood is put on the top of the Mizbeach';

1. Why didn't he say that we cannot learn from Chatas, because the blood of (inner) Chata'os is brought in the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim?

(f) Answer #1: R. Eliezer learns from outer Chata'os.
(g) Question: Why didn't he say that we cannot learn from outer Chata'os, because if their blood enters the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim, they are Pasul?
(h) Answer: R. Eliezer says that the same applies to Asham.
(i) Question: Why didn't he say that we cannot learn from Chatas, because it atones for Chayavei Kerisus?
(j) Answer #1: R. Eliezer learns from the Chatas brought for Shevu'as ha'Edus (which is not Kares).
(k) Question: Why didn't he say that we cannot learn from Chatas, because its blood is thrown four times?
(l) Answer #1: R. Eliezer holds like R. Yishmael, who says that Asham also requires four Zerikos.
(m) Objection: Even so, blood of Chata'os is put with the finger, it is put either on the Keranos (top corners of the Mizbeach) or on the edge, and these do not apply to Asham!
(n) Answer #2 (To questions (e), (i) and (k)): R. Yehoshua could have asked other questions, he only asked one.

(a) Question: R. Yehoshua said 'You cannot learn from Chatas, for its blood is put on the top of the Mizbeach' - why didn't R. Eliezer answer that also an Asham's blood is put on the top of the Mizbeach (because the Torah equates it to Chatas)?
(b) Answer #1 (Abaye): A Kal va'Chomer teaches that an Asham's blood is not put on the top of the Mizbeach.

1. An Olah is entirely burned on the Mizbeach, yet its blood is put on the bottom of the Mizbeach - an Asham is (less Kodesh, it is) not entirely burned, all the more so its blood is put on the bottom of the Mizbeach!
2. Question: But an Olah does not atone, we cannot learn to an Asham which atones!
3. Answer: Chatas ha'Of (a bird) proves that this is not the reason (it atones, yet its blood is put on the bottom of the Mizbeach)!
4. Question: We cannot learn from Chatas ha'Of, for it is not a Zevach (it is not slaughtered, Melikah is done instead)!
5. Answer: Olah proves that this is not the reason (it is a Zevach, its blood is put on the bottom);

i. Conclusion: Each has its own stringency; the Tzad ha'Shavah of them is that they are Kodshei Kodoshim and their blood is put on the bottom - the same applies to Asham.

(c) Objection (Rava of Parzakiya): We cannot learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah, because there is no minimal price of an Olah or Chatas ha'Of, but one must pay at least two Shekalim for an Asham!
(d) Answer #2 (Rava of Parzakiya): R. Eliezer learns from "Ha'Kohen ha'Mechatei *Osah*" - a Chatas' blood goes above, not blood of any other Korban.
(e) Question: If so, we should likewise expound "V'Shachat *Osah* l'Chatas" - a Chatas Lo Lishmah is Pasul, but not any other Korban!
(f) Answer: We cannot expound that "Osah" thusly, for (verses prove that) Pesach Lo Lishmah is Pasul.
(g) Question: Likewise, the other "Osah" cannot teach that blood of all other Korbanos does not go above, for blood of Olas ha'Of goes above!
(h) Answer #1: It teaches that Chatas is the only *Zevach* (i.e. animal Korban) whose blood goes above.
(i) Answer #2: R. Eliezer holds like R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon, who says that the blood of Olas ha'Of is not put in the same place as that of Chatas.

1. (Beraisa): Blood that should be thrown on the bottom (part of the Mizbeach) must be thrown on the Chut ha'Sikra (a red string separating the top and bottom halves of the Mizbe'ach) or below, blood that should be thrown on top must be thrown on the Chut ha'Sikra or above;
2. R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon says, that applies to Olas ha'Of, but the blood of Chatas Behemah must be put on the Keranos.