Gemara Clarity

Zevachim 92a

זבחים צ״ב ע״א

Learn Zevachim 92a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Zevachim 92a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

שמואל's view on extinguishing coals, burning impure libations, and which חטאות require laundering of blood-splashed garments

Overview

The amud opens by finishing a challenge about שמואל. He allows putting out a metal coal on שבת but not a wood coal, so how can he follow רבי שמעון? The גמרא answers that he follows רבי שמעון on דבר שאין מתכוין, but follows רבי יהודה on מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה. Next, רב הונא rules that impure libations are burned on their own woodpile inside the Temple, based on 'בקדש באש תשרף'. A ברייתא supports him, and שמואל wanted to announce this ruling in front of ten people. Then פרק כל התדיר ends, and a new משנה teaches that blood of any valid חטאת, eaten or inner, that splashes on a garment requires כיבוס, while blood of a disqualified חטאת does not. The גמרא asks why a bird חטאת is left out. It works through the words of the פסוק: 'תשחט' (shall be slaughtered), ״תורת״ (the law of), which includes, and ״זאת״ (this), which excludes. The amud ends as the גמרא begins explaining why the inner animal חטאות are the ones included, since they are more like the eaten חטאות. That list continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

אֲבָל לֹא גַּחֶלֶת שֶׁל עֵץ.

but not a coal of wood.

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ

And if it enters your mind

כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן סְבִירָא לֵיהּ,

that he holds like Rabbi Shimon,

אֲפִילּוּ גַּחֶלֶת שֶׁל עֵץ נָמֵי!

then even a wood coal too [should be allowed]!

The steps (16)

  1. ChallengeWhy can't a wood coal be put out too?
  2. Resolutionשמואל follows רבי שמעון on one rule and רבי יהודה on another
  3. StatementImpure libations are burned on their own woodpile
  4. ProofA ברייתא supports רב הונא
  5. Statementשמואל wants to announce the ruling publicly
  6. ConclusionHadran — Closing פרק כל התדיר
  7. StatementBlood of every kind of sin offering on a garment must be laundered
  8. StatementBlood of a disqualified sin offering does not require laundering
  9. ChallengeIf all sin offerings share one law, why is a bird sin offering excluded?
  10. ResolutionThe word 'shall be slaughtered' limits the law to slaughtered offerings
  11. ChallengeMaybe the verse only covers sin offerings that are eaten
  12. ResolutionThe word 'law of' includes the inner sin offerings
  13. ChallengeThen the bird sin offering should be included too
  14. ResolutionThe word 'this' leaves out the bird sin offering
  15. ChallengeWhy include the inner offerings and not the bird?
  16. ResolutionInner animal sin offerings are more similar to eaten ones