Zevachim 116
Summary
- The daf analyzes the beraita about the pre-Mishkan era: *bamot* are permitted, *avodah* is by *bechorot*, any species and sexes may be brought, even with blemishes, but only טהורין אבל לא טמאים, and all are offered as an *olah*. The Gemara derives the eligibility of species from Noach, excludes *mechusar eiver* and *tereifah* for *bnei Noach* via verses, and explains the role of “*lechayot zera*” versus “*itcha*.” Tosafot probe whether both exclusions can be learned simultaneously, address Noach’s possible *tereifah* status, Rabbeinu Tam distinguishes human and animal *tereifah*, the Rambam separates *tereifah* regimes for homicide and kashrut, and the Brisker Rav analyzes which regime defines *korban* invalidity. The sugya explains טהורין אבל לא טמאים before Sinai and how Noach identified them, determines whether only *olot* were brought and if *bnei Noach* could offer *shelamim*, addresses the mechanics of gentile offerings and kohanim’s agency, records what Yitro heard that led him to come, notes Rachav’s testimony about the terror after the Sea, and concludes with contemporary gentile offerings, the Ifra Hormiz episode with “new materials,” and harmonizes David’s purchase prices from Aravnah.
- The beraita states: עד שלא הוקם המשכן הבמות מותרות, עבודה בבכורות, והכל כשרין להקריב: בהמה חיה ועוף זכרים ונקבות תמימים ובעלי מומין, טהורין אבל לא טמאים, והכל קרבו עולות. Rav Huna derives from ויבן נח מזבח לה' ויקח מכל הבהמה הטהורה ומכל העוף הטהור that Noach brought *behemah* and *of*, and that “*behemah*” there includes *chayah*. The beraita’s allowance of males, females, and בעלי מומין excludes only *mechusar eiver*.
- R. Elazar derives the prohibition of *mechusar eiver* for *bnei Noach* from מכל החי מכל בשר, read as “בהמה שחיין ראשי איבריה שלה.” The Gemara asks if perhaps the verse excludes a *tereifah*; it answers that a *tereifah* is excluded from *lechayot zera* if one holds *tereifah einah yoledet*. For the view that *tereifah yoledet*, the exclusion comes from אתך—“*itcha*,” i.e., animals “דומה לך,” just as Noach is not a *tereifah*, so too the animals are not *tereifah*.
- The Gemara rejects the claim that Noach himself may have been a *tereifah* by invoking תמים כתיב ביה; if תמים signifies moral status, צדיק כתיב ביה covers that, leaving תמים as physical completeness. The Gemara concludes that “*itcha*” cannot mean “bring *tereifah* like you,” and reserves *lechayot zera* to teach that the animals were for propagation rather than mere companionship, excluding even a זקן or סריס from the initial thought.
- Tosafot ask why not learn both exclusions (of *mechusar eiver* and *tereifah*) from the phrase, as in Chullin regarding שתי צפורים חיות; they answer that by Noach, בעלי מומין are כשרים, so it is more reasonable to reserve the exclusion for *tereifah*. Tosafot ask how Noach could be a *tereifah* if he lived long after; they answer via the view טריפה חיה, and Rabbeinu Tam distinguishes human and animal *tereifah* משום דאדם אית ליה מזלא, despite a challenge from the use of Iyov in טריפות דבהמה. The Rambam rules that “*tereifah*” in homicide (Hilchot Rotzeach 2:8) depends on physicians, while dietary *tereifah* (Hilchot Shechita 10:13) follows the enumerated טריפות of Chazal, and the Brisker Rav asks whether *tereifah* invalidity for a *korban* follows the dietary regime or the homicide regime, adducing a proof from Menachot 6 that ties *tereifah* in *korbanot* to that which is permitted to Israel.
- The Gemara explains טהורין אבל לא טמאים as מאותן שלא נעבדה בהן עבירה, e.g., not used for bestiality or idolatry. Rav Chisda says they tested animals before the Teivah: what the Teivah accepted was “טהור,” and what it rejected was “טמא,” while R. Abbahu cites והבאים זכר ונקבה—הבאים מאליהן, with numbers indicating status. Rashi on Chumash says הטהורה means העתידה להיות טהורה לישראל, מלמד שלמד נח תורה, and the Maharsha explains that Noach thus understood the divine designation behind the phenomena the Gemara describes.
- The Gemara amends “והכל קרבו עולות” to mean that for *bnei Noach* only *olot* are offered, while Israel can bring *shelamim*. One view learns that *bnei Noach* did bring *shelamim* from והבל הביא גם הוא מבכורות צאנו ומחלביהן, identifying “חלב” as *shelamim*-type service; the opposing view reads מחלביהן as “choicest” and excludes *shelamim* for *bnei Noach* from עורי צפון ובואי תימן. Moshe’s request גם אתה תתן בידינו זבחים ועולות is read as זבחים לאכילה ועולות להקרבה, and ויקח יתרו חותן משה עולה וזבחים proves nothing for pre-Sinai if one holds Yitro came after Sinai, while the pre-Sinai view aligns with the opinion that *bnei Noach* brought *shelamim*.
- The Acharonim ask how a non-Jew’s *korban* is slaughtered given שאין שליחות לעובד כוכבים and פסול לשחיטה, and how to resolve the doubt whether kohanim are שלוחי דידן or שלוחי דרחמנא from the fact they perform for a *ben Noach*. Some answer that the rule requiring the owner or his agent to slaughter applies only to a *korban Yisrael* where the offerer is the בעלים—either due to כפרה or rights of consumption—whereas a non-Jew, once he is מקדיש, has no remaining בעלות; the Pnei Yehoshua adds that only by קרבנות ישראל does the Torah say ושחט. Tosafot in Kiddushin 23 state that kohanim are certainly שלוחי דרחמנא; the question is only whether they are also שלוחי דידן.
- R. Yehoshua says Yitro heard מלחמת עמלק, R. Elazar haModa’i says מתן תורה, and R. Elazar says קריאת ים סוף, supported by ויהי כשמוע כל מלכי האמורי and Rachav’s report. The Matan Torah view includes the narrative: a קול goes from one end of the world to the other; the kings tremble and consult Balaam, wonder about a new מבול, are reassured that Hakadosh Baruch Hu will not destroy all flesh, and are told of the treasured Torah “גנוזה … תתקע״ד דורות,” leading to ה' עוז לעמו יתן and ה' יברך את עמו בשלום.
- Rachav tells the spies “ולא קמה עוד רוח באיש,” meaning דאפילו אברי נמי לא אקשו, and she knows this because אין לך כל שר ונגיד שלא בא אל רחב הזונה. The Gemara states she was 10 at the Exodus, was מזנה for 40 years in the wilderness period, then converted at 50, and requested forgiveness בשכר חבל חלון ופשתים; Chazal also state that Yehoshua married Rachav.
- A beraita states: דבר אל בני ישראל—בני ישראל מצווין על שחוטי חוץ ואין עובדי כוכבים מצווין על שחוטי חוץ; therefore each gentile may build a במה and offer what he wishes. Rav Yaakov bar Acha in the name of Rav Asi forbids aiding them in practice, while Rava permits instructing them; Ifra Hormiz sent a *korban* to Rava “לשם שמים,” and he directed that it be brought with brand-new wood and new fire, following R. Elazar ben Shamua that, like a מזבח unused by a layperson, so too the wood should be unused. The challenge from ויתן דוד לארנן … שש מאות versus ויקן דוד … חמשים is resolved as fifty from each tribe totaling six hundred, or that בקר ועצים ומקום מזבח are fifty and the whole house is six hundred; “מוריגים” are identified as a threshing implement (מיטה של טורבל; עזא דכרכסא), and Rava maintains they were new. The silver–gold discrepancy is resolved as גבה כסף במשקל שש מאות זהב, and Rabbeinu Tam cites a Midrash equating fifty gold to six hundred silver, answering coinage differences.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions