Mishnah.org Logo
Perek 13

Mishnayos Zevachim Perek 13 Mishnah 8

זבחים פרק י"ג משנה ח׳

8
With regard to a sin offering where one collected its blood in one cup, if he first placed its blood on an altar outside the courtyard and then placed the remaining blood on the altar inside the courtyard, or if he first placed its blood on the altar inside the courtyard and then placed the remaining blood on an altar outside the courtyard, in both cases he is liable for placing the blood outside the courtyard, as the blood in its entirety is fit to be placed on the altar inside the courtyard. If one collected its blood in two cups and placed the blood from both of them on the altar inside the courtyard he is exempt as he acted appropriately. If he placed the blood from both of them on an altar outside the courtyard, he is liable, as both are fit to be placed inside. If he first placed the blood from one cup inside and then placed the blood from the other one outside, he is exempt. By using the blood of the first cup to perform the mitzva of placing the blood on the altar, he thereby rendered the blood in the second cup unfit to be placed on the altar; therefore, there is no liability for placing it on an altar outside. If he first placed the blood from one cup outside and then placed the blood from the other one inside, he is liable for the external placement as that blood was fit to be placed inside, and the internal placement atones for the transgression for which the sin offering was brought. To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a case where one separated an animal for his sin offering and it was lost, and he separated another animal in its place, and thereafter, the first animal was found. In that case, both of them stand before him and he must sacrifice one as his sin offering. If he slaughtered both of them inside the courtyard, he is exempt. If he slaughtered both of them outside the courtyard, he is liable, as each was fit to be slaughtered in the courtyard. If he first slaughtered one inside and then slaughtered the other one outside he is exempt from liability for slaughtering the second, as he has already fulfilled his obligation with the first, thereby rendering the second one unfit for sacrifice. If he first slaughtered one outside and then slaughtered the other one inside he is liable for slaughtering the external animal outside the courtyard, as it was fit to be slaughtered inside, and the internal animal atones for the transgression for which the sin offering was brought. The mishna adds: In a case where one slaughtered both inside the courtyard, just as placing the blood of the first animal exempts one who consumes its meat from liability for misuse of consecrated property, so too, it exempts one who consumes the meat of its counterpart, the second animal, from liability.
הַחַטָּאת שֶׁקִּבֵּל דָּמָהּ בְּכוֹס אֶחָד, נָתַן בַּחוּץ וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בִּפְנִים, בִּפְנִים וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בַּחוּץ, חַיָּב, שֶׁכֻּלּוֹ רָאוּי לָבֹא בִפְנִים. קִבֵּל דָּמָהּ בִּשְׁנֵי כוֹסוֹת, נָתַן שְׁנֵיהֶם בִּפְנִים, פָּטוּר. שְׁנֵיהֶן בַּחוּץ, חַיָּב. אֶחָד בִּפְנִים וְאֶחָד בַּחוּץ, פָּטוּר. אֶחָד בַּחוּץ וְאֶחָד בִּפְנִים, חַיָּב עַל הַחִיצוֹן, וְהַפְּנִימִי מְכַפֵּר. לְמַה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה, לְמַפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן עוֹמְדוֹת. שָׁחַט שְׁתֵּיהֶן בִּפְנִים, פָּטוּר. שָׁחַט שְׁתֵּיהֶן בַּחוּץ, חַיָּב. אַחַת בִּפְנִים וְאַחַת בַּחוּץ, פָּטוּר. אַחַת בַּחוּץ וְאַחַת בִּפְנִים, חַיָּב עַל הַחִיצוֹנָה, וְהַפְּנִימִית מְכַפֶּרֶת. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁדָּמָהּ פּוֹטֵר אֶת בְּשָׂרָהּ, כָּךְ הוּא פוֹטֵר אֶת בְּשַׂר חֲבֶרְתָּהּ:
ח׳

נתן בחוץ וחזר ונתן בפני חייב – it is a simple matter, and because of the concluding clause [of the Mishnah], it brought it, if he [first] placed it outside [the Temple courtyard] and then in return placed it inside [the Temple courtyard], he does not place outside [the Temple courtyard] anything other than the residue of the blood, he is liable. But our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Nehemiah who holds that the residue is indispensable/invalidates an act by omission. But it is not the Halakha.

שניהן בחוץ חייב – the first, if he didn’t have any knowledge of it in the meantime [by fact that he sprinkled the blood from two cups from outside the Temple courtyard], he is liable for two [violations].

אחד בפנים – and afterwards, the second [sprinkling] was done outside, he is exempt. For even according to Rabbi Nehemiah who held that one cup removes its fellow consecrated cup from its purpose to be spilled a cubit, therefore, even that is not residue.

הפנימי מכפר – to make the animal sacrifice fit. For the blood that is sprinkled outside [the Temple courtyard] first did not make what had remained something similar to it.

שתיהן בחוץ חייב – on each of them, for at the time of the ritual slaughter, each one was appropriate [to be offered] inside [the Temple courtyard].

אחת בפנים – and the second afterwards outside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt, for this is a sin-offering where its owners had been expiated , but for death it (i.e., the second one) goes and is not accepted inside [the Temple courtyard].

חייב על החיצונה – for it is appropriate [only] inside [the Temple courtyard] and he offers up whichever of them that he wishes.

כשם שדמה פוטר את כשרה – from [the law of] religious sacrilege, [for the sprinkling/tossing of the blood removes the meat of the Holy of Holies from religious sacrilege that gave it] a time of permission for the Kohanim [to consume it].

כך הוא פוטר את בשר חברתה (so it renders the meat of its fellow free) – and even though it is invalidated [and it refers to when I slaughter both of them inside the Temple courtyard]. And it comes to ell us here that where both of them are placed, and someone comes first and sprinkles the blood of the first one, he renders the meat of its fellow free because of the sin-offering through which its owners were expiated, for we hold that the sin-offerings left to die we don’t benefit from nor commit religious sacrilege.

נתן בחוץ וחזר ונתן בפנים חייב. מלתא דפשיטא היא, ומשום סיפא נקט לה, נתן בפנים וחזר ונתן בחוץ שאינו נותן בחוץ אלא שיירי הדם, חייב. ומתניתין כרבי נחמיה דסבר שיריים מעכבים. ואינה הלכה:

שניהן בחוץ חייב. אחת. ואם היתה לו ידיעה בינתיים, חייב שתים:

אחד בפנים. ואח״כ השני בחוץ, פטור. ואפילו לרבי נחמיה דסבר כוס אחד עושה את חבירו דחוי להיות נשפך לאמה, הלכך אפילו שיריים לא הוי:

והפנימי מכפר. להכשיר הזבח. שהדם הנזרק תחלה בחוץ לא עשה המשויר כיוצא בו:

שתיהן בחוץ חייב. על כל אחת ואחת. דבשעת שחיטה כל אחת היתה ראויה בפנים:

אחת בפנים. והשניה אחר כן בחוץ, פטור. דהויא לה חטאת שנתכפרו בעליה, ולמיתה אזלה ואינה מתקבלת בפנים:

חייב על החיצונה. דהא חזיא לפנים דאיזה מהן שירצה יקריבה:

כשם שדמה פוטר את בשרה. מן המעילה, [דזריקת דם מוציאה בשר קודש קדשים מן המעילה דיהבה בה] שעת היתר לכהנים:

כך הוא פוטר את בשר חברתה. ואע״פ שפסולה [ואשחט שניהם בפנים קאי]. ואשמועינן הכא דהיכא דמונחות שתיהן וקדם וזרק את דם האחת, פטר את חברתה מן המעילה משום חטאת שנתכפרו בעליה, דקיימא לן החטאות המתות לא נהנין ולא מועלין: