Zevachim 26b

זבחים כ״ו ע״ב

Learn Zevachim 26b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Zevachim 26b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

שמואל's view that blood on the wrong part of the מזבח still brings כפרה, and the side discussion of an unfit person's placement and intent

Overview

The משנה ruled that blood put on the wrong part of the מזבח makes the קרבן פסול. שמואל explains that only the meat is forbidden: the owners already received כפרה, because the פסוק says blood 'on the מזבח' atones, and the word 'לכפר' limits this blood to כפרה alone. The גמרא infers that שמואל holds שלא במקומו כמקומו דמי. It challenges this from a משנה that requires a fit כהן to collect fresh blood after a wrong placement. It answers that the משנה is about an unfit person who placed the blood. The גמרא then asks why the offering is not דחוי, and the discussion turns to whether an unfit person's bad intent can ruin an offering. It concludes, following רבא, that his intent counts only during שחיטה and not from קבלה onward. Finally the גמרא begins a new objection from a ברייתא about intending to put blood above or below the red line, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (18)

1. Statementשמואל: The Meat Is Disqualified, but the Owners Are Atoned
2. ProofThe Source: Blood Reaching the Altar Atones
3. ChallengeThen the Meat Should Be Permitted Too
4. Resolution'To Atone': Only for Atonement
5. Statementשמואל Holds 'Wrong Place Counts as Right Place'
6. ChallengeA משנה: Wrong Placement Requires Redoing the Service
7. ChallengeWhy Redo It If the First Placement Counted?
8. RejectionThe Redo Can't Be Just to Permit the Meat
9. ResolutionThe משנה is talking about an unfit person placing the blood
10. ChallengeThen the offering should be permanently rejected
11. ProofA משנה shows that sprinkling by the unfit cannot be redone
12. RejectionThe reason is the bad intent, not דחוי
13. ChallengeThen intent during collecting should disqualify too
14. ChallengeAn unfit person's intent does not count at all
15. ResolutionThe inference is about slaughtering, not sprinkling
16. ChallengeIsn't this already stated in the משנה?
17. ResolutionThe new point: from collection onward, their intent doesn't count
18. ChallengeAn objection from a ברייתא about blood placed in the wrong spot