Zevachim 34a

זבחים ל״ד ע״א

Learn Zevachim 34a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Zevachim 34a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

A טמא eating קדשים before זריקה, טמא meat and wood and frankincense, and whether offering a non-kosher or wild animal on the מזבח violates a command

Overview

The גמרא finishes ריש לקיש's היקש: just as a טמא entering the מקדש gets כרת, 'בכל קדש לא תגע' must refer to eating קדשים, not touching them. It then asks how ריש לקיש can use this פסוק, since he already needs it to give מלקות to a טמא who ate before זריקה. The answer is that the extra word 'כל' teaches both laws. אביי and רבא then agree that the dispute about eating before זריקה concerns a טמא person, but they differ about טמא meat. אביי says all agree there are מלקות, because 'והבשר' includes even wood and frankincense. רבא says all agree there are none, and he explains that wood and frankincense count only once sanctified in a כלי, as a משנה teaches. Next comes a new מחלוקת about offering a בהמה טמאה on the מזבח, which turns on whether a לאו הבא מכלל עשה carries מלקות. After רבי ירמיה's challenge, רבי יעקב moves the dispute to offering a חיה. רבא then challenges ריש לקיש with a ברייתא that uses the parable of a student told to bring 'only wheat'. That ברייתא continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (23)

1. ProofFinishing the comparison between holy food and the Temple
2. ConclusionIt cannot mean touching, so it must mean eating
3. ChallengeChallenge: the verse is needed for eating before the sprinkling
4. StatementThe dispute about eating before the sprinkling
5. Proofריש לקיש's source: the verse makes no time distinction
6. Proofרבי יוחנן's source: the warning applies only after sprinkling
7. ResolutionThe word 'every' teaches both laws
8. StatementReturning to the dispute itself
9. Statementאביי limits the dispute to an impure person
10. Proofאביי's source: even wood and frankincense are included
11. Statementרבא: with impure meat, everyone agrees there are no lashes
12. ChallengeChallenge to רבא from wood and frankincense
13. ResolutionWood and frankincense count only once sanctified in a vessel
14. ProofA משנה shows when liability for eating while impure begins
15. StatementOffering a non-kosher animal on the altar: lashes or not?
16. StatementThe reasoning: lashes for a prohibition implied by a positive command?
17. Challengeרבי ירמיה: an implied prohibition counts only as a positive command
18. Resolutionרבי יעקב moves the dispute from non-kosher animals to kosher wild animals
19. StatementThe reasoning behind each side about a wild animal
20. Challengeרבא challenges ריש לקיש from a ברייתא that excludes wild animals
21. QuestionThe ברייתא considers whether a wild animal is valid if already brought
22. ResponseThe Torah repeats 'cattle and flock' to exclude a wild animal
23. ResponseThe student told to bring only wheat