Zevachim 46b

זבחים מ״ו ע״ב

Learn Zevachim 46b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Zevachim 46b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

רבי שמעון's view on טומאה for non-food items, the six intentions for slaughtering a קרבן, and slaughtering a חטאת for the sake of חולין

Overview

The גמרא finishes explaining why the תורה mentions כרת three times for eating קדשים while טמא, and shows that for רבי שמעון the third mention teaches about the inner חטאות. It then quotes רבי שמעון's ruling in the משנה, that there is liability for טומאה only on items normally eaten, and brings a dispute among two pairs of אמוראים about how far that argument reaches. There are two versions of this dispute, from רב טביומי and from רב כהנא. רבא decides that רבי שמעון and the רבנן argue both about impure items and about an impure person, and the גמרא explains that the word 'והבשר' only gives wood and frankincense a minor disqualification. A new משנה then lists the six intentions a קרבן is slaughtered for, and רבי יוסי says the קרבן is valid even with none of them in mind. רב explains these intentions from the words of the פסוק and rules that a חטאת slaughtered for the sake of חולין is valid. רבה challenges him from רבי יוסי, and אביי answers that such a קרבן is valid but does not bring atonement. Finally, רבי אלעזר separates slaughtering 'for the sake of' חולין, which is valid, from slaughtering 'as' חולין, which is disqualified, and begins to bring a supporting question from שמואל to רב הונא that continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (22)

1. ResponseThree mentions of כרת, three jobs
2. QuestionWhat does the third mention teach for רבי שמעון?
3. ResponseIt includes the inner חטאות
4. ResponseWhy the inner חטאות need a special source
5. StatementQuoting רבי שמעון's ruling in the משנה
6. StatementTwo pairs of אמוראים disagree
7. StatementFirst view: the dispute is only about impure meat
8. StatementSecond view: the dispute covers both cases, with a reason
9. Statementרב כהנא's different version of the dispute
10. Conclusionרבא: the 'both cases' view makes the most sense
11. ChallengeChallenge: the word 'and the flesh' includes wood and frankincense
12. ResolutionAnswer: the inclusion is only for disqualification
13. StatementThe משנה: six intentions for slaughtering a קרבן
14. Statementרבי יוסי: a קרבן is valid even with none of these intentions
15. Statementרב: what 'for the sake of an עולה' and 'for the sake of the fires' exclude
16. StatementThe word 'aroma' excludes limbs that were roasted first
17. StatementThe meaning of 'pleasing' and 'to ה''
18. StatementA חטאת slaughtered as an עולה is disqualified, but as חולין it is valid
19. Proofרבי אלעזר's source for רב: only holy things ruin holy things
20. Challengeרבה challenges רב from רבי יוסי's statement
21. Resolutionאביי: A חולין Thought Means Valid but No Atonement
22. Statementרבי אלעזר: 'For the Sake of' חולין vs. 'As' חולין