Zevachim 111b

זבחים קי״א ע״ב

Learn Zevachim 111b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Zevachim 111b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Bird offerings killed and offered outside the עזרה, which case רבי שמעון is arguing about, and a new משנה on placing the blood of a חטאת, from one cup or two, outside.

Overview

This amud finishes the משנה about bird offerings (עוף) that are killed and then offered up outside the עזרה. The proper way to kill a bird קרבן inside is מליקה (pinching), while שחיטה inside ruins it; slaughtering it outside and offering it outside, though, makes one חייב. The משנה sums up these rules, and רבי שמעון adds a general rule with one exception. The גמרא first fixes the word 'הכשירו' to 'חיובו', since שחיטה of a bird is not its preparation. It then asks which ruling רבי שמעון is arguing with and tests the cases of the משנה against his exact wording, rejecting each one. זעירי says the argument is about slaughtering an animal at night, and רבא says it is about collecting blood in a non-sacred vessel. Finally, a ברייתא shows that רבי שמעון makes pinching outside liable, so the גמרא reads his words as referring to the pinching case. A new משנה then teaches when placing the blood of a חטאת outside brings liability, with one cup or two. It compares this to a person who has two animals set aside for one חטאת.

Opening lines

The steps (25)

1. StatementSlaughtering a bird outside and offering it outside
2. ConclusionThe משנה sums up the bird rules
3. Statementרבי שמעון's general rule and its one exception
4. ChallengeThe גמרא questions the word 'preparation'
5. ResolutionFix the wording to 'its liability'
6. QuestionWhich clause is רבי שמעון responding to?
7. ResponseFirst try: he argues on the first clause and says pinching outside is also liable
8. RejectionRejected: his wording would have started from the inside case
9. ResponseSecond try: he argues on the first clause and says pinching inside is also exempt
10. RejectionRejected: his wording would have said 'not liable'
11. ResponseThird try: he argues on the last clause and says slaughtering outside is exempt
12. RejectionRejected again: his wording would have said 'not liable'
13. ResponseMaybe רבי שמעון extends liability for slaughtering a bird inside
14. Rejectionרבי שמעון himself exempts a bird slaughtered inside
15. Responseזעירי: the argument is about slaughtering an animal at night
16. Responseרבי שמעון's words reread on זעירי's approach
17. Responseרבא: the argument is about collecting blood in a non-sacred vessel
18. ResponseReading רבי שמעון's statement on רבא's approach
19. ProofA ברייתא about pinching a bird's neck
20. Resolutionרבי שמעון is reacting to the pinching case
21. Statementמשנה: blood of a חטאת collected in one cup
22. Statementמשנה: blood of a חטאת collected in two cups
23. StatementSetting up a comparison: two animals for one חטאת
24. StatementThe four outcomes for slaughtering the two animals
25. StatementOne animal's blood exempts the partner's meat too