ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Zevachim 32
ZEVACHIM 31-33 - Sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor.
Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and
prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.
(a) The Tana of our Mishnah rules that, in a case where any of the above
Pesulim received the blood (even) with a Machshaves Chutz li'Zemano or Chutz
li'Mekomo - if there is still Dam ha'Nefesh in the animal's neck, a Kasher
Kohen should receive it ...
(b) ... because someone who is not fit to perform the Avodah does not render
it Pasul with a P'sul Machshavah (as we learned earlier).
(c) And in a case where ...
1. ... a Kasher Kohen received the blood and handed it to a Pasul, he
rules - that the latter should return it to a Kasher Kohen (we already
discussed this section of the Mishnah in the first Perek).
2. ... he received it with his right hand and took it into his left - he
should return it to his right hand.
3. ... he received it in a K'li Kodesh and poured it into a K'li Chol - he
should pour it back into the K'li Shareis.
4. ... the blood spilt from the K'li Shareis on to the floor and the Kohen
collected it (with a K'li Shareis) - it is Kasher.
(a) If the Pasul placed the blood ...
1. ... on the ramp, or on the south or east side of the Mizbe'ach where
there is no Yesod - a Kasher Kohen should collect the blood and place it on
the correct spot. And the same will apply to blood ...
(b) If this Tana holds that a Pasul can make Shirayim (give the blood a Din
of leftovers) then the Tana is teaching us that 'she'Lo bi'Mekomo La'av
ki'Mekomo Dami' (in which case the blood is not considered Shirayim).
Assuming he holds 'she'Lo bi'Mekomo ki'Mekomo Dami', then he will coming to
teach us - that a Pasul cannot make Shirayim.
2. ... that is normally placed below the Chut ha'Sikra, above it or
vice-versa, or ...
3. ... that should have gone inside the Heichal, outside, or vice-versa.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "ve'Atah u'Vanecha Itach Tishmeru es Avon Kehunaschem le'Chol D'var
ha'Mizbe'ach" - that the Kohanim are obligated to ensure that Zarim
(incorporating all Pesulim) do not perform the Avodah.
(b) A Zar may Shecht Kodshei Kodshim (bear in mind that the Pasuk is
referring to an Olah, which is Kodesh Kodshim).
2. ... "Ve'shachat es ben ha'Bakar Lifnei Hashem Ve'hikrivu B'nei Aharon
ha'Kohanim ... " - that it is only from the Kabalas ha'Dam and onwards that
a Zar is precluded, but not from the Shechitah ('Shechitah Kesheirah
(a) Even though the Torah permits a Zar to Shecht Kodshim Lechatchilah, our
Mishnah nevertheless uses the expression 'Kol ha'Pesulim she'Shachtu ... '
(Bedi'eved) - because of Teme'im, who are forbidden to Shecht Lechatchilah.
(b) The Beraisa learns from the juxtaposition of "Ve'samach" to
"Ve'shachat" - that just as Semichah may only be performed by someone who is
Tahor, so too Shechitah.
(c) The Shechitah is nevertheless Kasher Bedi'eved - because the prohibition
is only mi'de'Rabbanan (in case he touches the animal [and the Pasuk is only
an Asmachta, a support from a Pasuk, but not a real source]).
(a) We know that only a Tahor person can perform Semichah - because the
Torah writes "Lifnei Hashem" with regard to the Shechitah, meaning that the
animal must be standing in the Azarah during the Shechitah, and if the
Somech was Tamei, he would not be permitted to enter the Azarah to perform
(b) Neither is it possible for him to perform the Semichah outside, before
the animal is taken inside for Shechitah - because of the principle 'Teikef
li'Semichah Shechitah' (requiring the Shechitah to take place immediately
after the Semichah).
(c) Despite the fact that the Torah also writes "Lifnei Hashem" in
connection with Shechitah, a Tamei person is nevertheless allowed to Shecht
Lechatchilah min ha'Torah - by standing outside the Azarah and Shechting
with a long knife (which is not made of metal).
(d) A Tamei person cannot however, perform Semichah by standing outside the
Azarah and placing his hands inside the Azarah - because this Tana holds
'Bi'ah be'Miktzas Sh'mah Bi'ah' (a partial entry into the Azarah [even just
with his hands, though we will amend this later] is considered a full
(a) Rav Chisda inverts the Beraisa. According to him, the Tana learns that
Semichah can only be performed by Tehorim from Shechitah (where the Torah
writes "Lifnei Hashem"). The problem is - that we do not need to learn it
from Shechitah, since (based on the principle 'Teikef li'Semichah
Shechitah') it is as if "Lifnei Hashem" was written directly by Semichah.
(b) We answer that it would otherwise be possible to perform Semichah by
standing outside the Azarah and placing one's hands inside. To explain why
the Shochet could not also stand outside and Shecht with a long knife, we
establish this Beraisa like Shimon ha'Teimani, in a Beraisa, who learns from
the Pasuk "Ve'shachat es ben ha'Bakar Lifnei Hashem" - that the Shochet as
well as the animal must stand 'Lifnei Hashem'.
(c) The Tana Kama explains - that the animal needs to be Lifnei Hashem, but
not the Shochet.
(a) Ula Amar Resh Lakish learns from the Pasuk (in connection with someone
who is Tamei) "be'Chol Kodesh Lo Siga ve'el ha'Mikdash Lo Tavo" - that just
as touching Kodesh entails no more than touching with one limb, so too, does
entry into the Mikdash entail entering with only one limb.
(b) Rav Hoshaya queries Ula from a Beraisa, which discusses a Metzora whose
eighth day falls on Erev Pesach, and who sees Keri on that day. His problem
is - that he is now forbidden with an Asei to enter the Sha'ar Nikanor, for
the blood and the oil to be placed on his right thumb (rendering him unable
to bring the Korban Pesach).
(c) The Tana nevertheless allows him to enter after Tevilah (even though no
other T'vul-Yom may) - because the Asei of Pesach carries with it Kareis,
which overrides the Asei of a T'vul-Yom entering the Machaneh Leviyah, which
(a) Rebbi Yochanan disagrees with Resh Lakish. According to him - a
T'vul-Yom who enters the Har ha'Bayis (the Machaneh Leviyah) - does not even
transgress an Asei mi'd'Oraysa (because he holds 'T'vul Yom de'Zav La'av
ke'Zav Dami'), only an Asei mi'de'Rabbanan ...
(b) ... which he learns from the Pasuk "Va'ya'amod Yehoshafat ... Lifnei
ha'Chatzer ha'Chadashah" - implying that Yehoshafat had just issued a new
decree, forbidding a Tamei Meis to enter the Machaneh Leviyah.
(c) The problem with allowing a T'vul-Yom to place his hand in the Azarah
for the blood and the oil to be placed on his thumb is - that if, as Ula
Amar Resh Lakish learns, 'Bi'ah be'Miktzas Sh'mah Bi'ah', how can we allow
the T'vul-Yom to place his hands inside the Azarah, a sin which carries with
it a Chiyuv Kareis.
(a) Ula answered Rav Hoshaya 'mi'Tunach Sha'ani Metzora ... '. When he said
1. ... 'mi'Tunach', he meant - that the answer is inherent in the very case
that Rav Hoshaya cited, as we shall now see.
(b) And he goes on to explain - that since the Torah waives the Isur of
Tum'ah with regard to a Metzora, because he has no other method of becoming
Tahor, it will also waive the Isur of T'vul-Yom of a Zav (with a 'Migu').
2. ... 'Sha'ani Metzora', he meant that a Metzora himself is unique, in that
he is permitted to place his hands in the Azarah, even though he is still a
(a) Korbenos Tzibur may be brought be'Tum'ah, if the majority of the Tzibur
are Tamei Meis.
(b) Rav Yosef extrapolated from Ula that most of the Tzibur who are Zavin on
Erev Pesach and who then become Tamei Meis - will be permitted to bring the
Korban Pesach (and the Isur of Zivus will become permitted be'Tzibur
together with that of Tum'as Meis [with a 'Migu']).
(c) Abaye objected to that - on the grounds that a 'Migu' is only applicable
assuming that the Isur of Tum'as Meis was there first, when it will prevent
the Isur of Zivus from taking effect, but not to the extent that it can
remove the Isur of Zivus which preceded it.
(d) Abaye therefore amended the wording of Rav Yosef's initial statement to
read - that if most of the Tzibur who are Tamei-Meis on Erev Pesach and who
then become Zavin, they will be permitted to bring the Korban Pesach.
(e) Rav Yosef conceded that Abaye was right.
(a) Abaye still objects to Rav Yosef's comparison - inasmuch as Metzora has
a Din of 'Hutrah' (the Torah initially issued the Mitzvah together with the
concession), which is why the Heter can even encompass that of Keri too;
whereas Tum'as Meis is only 'Dechuyah' (permitted Bedi'eved), in which case,
it can override the Isur of Tum'ah only regarding itself, but not that of
Zivus that accompanies it.
(b) Rava thinks the opposite. According to him - if anything, the Heter of
Metzora would be confined to itself (and not extend to the Isur of Keri);
whereas Tum'as Meis, which is 'Dechuyah', will override itself and the Isur
of Zivus, too.
(c) Abaye and Rava agree however - that 'Tum'ah Dechuyah be'Tzibur' (and not