Zevachim 16a
זבחים ט״ז ע״א
Learn Zevachim 16a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.
Open Zevachim 16a in Gemara Clarity
Topic
How we know that a זר, and an אונן, ruin the עבודה: logical proofs and sources from פסוקים
Overview
The גמרא wants to prove that a זר who does the sacrificial service ruins it (חילל). It first tries a קל וחומר from a בעל מום. When that is knocked down, it builds a הצד השוה from a בעל מום and a טמא, and then from a בעל מום and an אונן. Each time it answers attacks along the way, including one about serving on a במה, which רב סמא pushes back on. רב משרשיא offers a different proof, a קל וחומר from a כהן who served sitting. The גמרא defends it, and also shows from 'לפני ה׳' that a sitting כהן is fit on a במה. Then the גמרא turns to the אונן and brings two פסוקים as sources: one from the כהן גדול who does not leave the מקדש, and רבי אלעזר's from אהרן's answer 'הן הקריבו'. It explains why each side does not use the other's פסוק. The amud ends as the school of רבי ישמעאל begins a קל וחומר from a בעל מום, which continues on the next amud.
Opening lines
זָר, שֶׁאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל –
A non-priest, who does not eat,
אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁאִם עָבַד חִילֵּל?!
is it not logical that if he served, he desecrated the service?!
מָה לְבַעַל מוּם –
What about a blemished priest?
שֶׁכֵּן עָשָׂה בּוֹ קָרֵב כְּמַקְרִיב!
He is special, since with him the Torah made the offering like the one who offers it!
The steps (31)
- ProofFinishing the logical argument from a blemished priest
- RejectionThe blemished priest has a special strictness
- ResolutionThe impure priest shows the strictness doesn't matter
- RejectionThe impure priest has his own strictness
- ResolutionThe blemished priest shows that strictness doesn't matter
- ConclusionCombining both cases: what they share applies to a non-priest
- QuestionHow do we know a non-priest is forbidden to serve?
- ResponseThe source is 'a non-priest shall not come near you'
- RejectionBlemished and impure priests were also banned from a private altar
- ResolutionUse a mourner instead of an impure priest
- RejectionA mourner is forbidden to eat second tithe
- ResolutionA blemished priest proves it
- ConclusionThe argument goes back around: a non-priest ruins the service
- ChallengeChallenging the common element: neither was allowed at a במה
- Rejectionרב סמא: who says the אונן was forbidden at a במה?
- Statementרב משרשיא: a קל וחומר from a כהן who served sitting
- ChallengeA sitting person cannot testify
- ResolutionLearn from a sitting תלמיד חכם
- ChallengeThe category of sitting is still disqualified
- ResolutionA general category cannot refute
- ResolutionEven so, learn from יושב plus one of the others
- QuestionWhere do we know a sitting כהן is fit on a private altar?
- ResponseStanding is required only before ה׳, not on a private altar
- QuestionWhere do we know an אונן disqualifies the service?
- ResponseLearning from the כהן גדול who does not leave the מקדש
- Statementרבי אלעזר learns it from אהרן's answer to משה
- QuestionWhy didn't רבי אלעזר use the first פסוק?
- ResponseThe first source is only an inference
- QuestionWhy doesn't the other view learn from 'הֵן הִקְרִיבוּ'?
- ResponseThe other view holds the קרבן was burned because of טומאה
- StatementThe school of רבי ישמעאל starts a קל וחומר from a בעל מום