Komentarz do Zewachim 11:10

דם חטאת. טעון כבוס – as it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “…and if any of its blood is splattered upon a garment, you shall wash the bespattered part in the sacred precinct.”

Introduction In connection with a hatat, Leviticus 6:20 states, “Anything that touches its flesh shall become holy; and if any of its blood is spattered upon a garment, you shall wash the bespattered part in the holy place.” This chapter deals with various details that stem from this verse. Our mishnah deals with the second half of the verse.

שנאמר במקום קדוש תאכל – it is written in regard to that matter.

If the blood of a hatat spurted on to a garment, it must be washed. As the second half of verse 20 states, if blood from a hatat splatters onto a piece of clothing, the piece of clothing must be washed.

ואחד הפנימית – that their blood requires sprinkling inside [in the inner area] which are not consumed.

Though scripture speaks only of [hatats] which are eaten, for it is said, “In the holy place shall it be eaten,” (Leviticus 6:19), yet both those which may be eaten and the inner [sacrifices] necessitate washing, for it is said, “[This is] the law of the hatat” (Leviticus 6:18), there is one law for all hatats. The mishnah clarifies that verse 20 speaks about all hatats, both those that are eaten by the priests and those that are offered inside the Sanctuary on the golden altar and are not eaten (see 5:1-2). Although verse 19 seems to refer only to hatats that are eaten, since verse 18 refers to all hatats, the rules that are in verse 20 are understood as referring to all hatats as well.

שנאמר תורה אחת לכל החטאות – it is written [in the Torah – Leviticus 6:19] at the beginning of that matter.

תורה אחת לכל החטאות – and specifically the sin offering of cattle. But the blood of sin-offering of a bird [that splatters on the clothing of the officiating priest] does not require washing, for in that matter, it is written (Leviticus 6:17): “[This is the ritual of the purification/sin-offering: the purification offering shall be slaughtered before the LORD] at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughtered,” excluding the sin-offering of the bird which is not slaughtered.

אין דמה טעון כבוס – as it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “and if any of its blood is splattered [upon a garment],” from blood that is fit, but not blood that is invalid.

Introduction This mishnah teaches that when Leviticus 6:20 states, “And if any of its [the hatat] blood is spattered upon a garment, you shall wash the bespattered part in the holy place,” it is only referring to a valid hatat, and not to a disqualified one.

שעת הכושר – for tossing/sprinkling.

The blood of a disqualified hatat does not necessitate washing, whether it had a period of fitness or did not have a period of fitness. If the blood came from a disqualified hatat, then the garment does not require ritual cleansing (I might advise one to wash it before wearing it again, but that’s not the type of washing referred to here). This applies whether or not the hatat was once valid and then became disqualified (“had a period of fitness”) or whether it was disqualified from the minute it was sacrificed (“did not have a period of fitness”). The mishnah now explains these two categories.

שלנה – that its blood remained overnight.

Which had a period of fitness? One [whose blood] was kept overnight, or was defiled, or was taken out [of the Temple courtyard]. There are three cases where the hatat “had a period of fitness”. First it was sacrificed properly and then: 1) its blood was kept overnight in the Temple courtyard; 2) It was defiled for instance its flesh was defiled before the blood was sprinkled; 3) The blood was taken out of the Temple courtyard before it was sprinkled on the altar. For more information on these categories see 9:2.

ושקבלו פסולין – this is our reading. But we don’t read, “and when they tossed/sprinkled [its blood], for even an appropriate sin-offering whose blood was splattered on the clothing after the sprinkling of the blood idoes not require washing, as we have stated, “and if any of [its blood] is splattered,” (Leviticus 6:20), excluding that which that had already been splattered.

Which did not have a period of fitness? One which was slaughtered [with the intention of eating it] after the appropriate time or outside the appropriate bounds; or whose blood was received by unfit persons, and sprinkled by them. If the hatat was slaughtered improperly, for instance with the wrong intention, or its blood was received and/or sprinkled by a person not qualified to do so (see 2:1), then the blood never had a period of fitness.

נתז מן הצואר –[from the neck] of the animal on the clothing, it does not require washing. As it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “and if its any of [its blood] is splattered,” I didn’t say other than that that whichis appropriate for sprinkling (i.e., was received in a pot).

If [blood] spurted [direct] from the [animal's] throat onto a garment, it does not require washing.
From the horn or from the base [of the altar], it does not require washing.
If it spilled out on to the floor [of the Temple] and [the priest] collected it, [and then it splattered onto a garment] it does not require washing.
Only blood which was received in a vessel and is fit for sprinkling requires washing.
If [the blood] spurted on to the hide, before it was flayed, it does not require washing.
[If it spurted] after it was flayed, it requires washing, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Elazar says: even [if it spurted on the skin] after it was flayed [it does not require washing].
Only the place of the blood requires washing.
And whatever is eligible to contract uncleanness,
And whatever is fit for washing.
Sections one-four: In section four the general rule that explains the first three sections of the mishnah is stated. The blood which if spilled on a garment requires the garment to be washed is only blood that was in a vessel and was fit for being sprinkled on the altar. In other words, totally valid blood, ready to be spilled onto the altar, contaminates the garment, because that’s not where the blood is supposed to be. But if the blood was not valid blood in a vessel, the garment need not be ritually washed.
The mishnah lists three such possibilities.
1) Blood which splatters directly from the neck of the animal onto the garment. Since it is not in a vessel, the blood doesn’t contaminate the garment.
2) If the blood was already spilled on the horn or the base of the altar, and then it gets on the garment, the blood doesn’t contaminate. This blood has already fulfilled its purpose and therefore it no longer contaminates.
3) If it had spilled onto the floor of the Temple, it can no longer be sprinkled onto the altar. Since it is no longer eligible for the altar, it doesn’t contaminate.
Section five: Before the hide is flayed from the animal, it is not a “garment” and not even in a state from which it can become a garment. Therefore, if blood spills on it, it is not contaminated.
Section six: According to Rabbi Judah, once it has been flayed, the hide is close enough to a garment, that it can become contaminated by the hatat blood. Even though a hide usually cannot become impure until it has been processed, if one should decide to use it as a garment in its current state, it would become susceptible to impurity. [We will learn more about this when we learn Seder Toharot]. Therefore, Rabbi Judah says it does require washing.
Rabbi Elazar says that since it is not at this moment susceptible to impurity, it does not require washing.
Section seven: The entire garment does not require washing, just the point that came into contact with blood.
Section eight: Only a garment that is susceptible to impurity must be washed. This would seem to exclude a piece of cloth so small that it can no longer become impure.
Section nine: Finally, if the garment cannot be washed, for instance a garment made of wood (I know, sounds weird), then it doesn’t require washing. The Torah only requires that washables be washed.

מן הקרן – [from the horn] of the altar.

ומן היסוד [from the foundation] – from the remnants that are appropriate to be spilled on the foundation, and even though they were not yet spilled, for after the giving of the blood is performed, the remanans do not require washing, as it is written (Leviticus 6:20): “[you shall wash] the besplattered part,” except fro that which already had been splattered of its blood.

אלא הדם שנתקבל בכלי – what is the reason that this is stated? For what reason that if it (i.e., the blood) is spilled on the floor and collected that it does not require washing but rather [only] the blood that was received in a utensil.

וראוי להזאה – to exclude receiving less than what is needed for sprinkling in this vessel, and less than what [is needed] for sprinkling in that [other] vessel but afterwards he mixed them, they are not holy and do not require washing.

עד שלא הופשט אין טעון כבוס (before it is flayed, it does not require washing) – as it is written (Leviticus 7:20): “[and if any of its blood is splattered] upon a garment,” just as a piece of clothing is susceptible to receiving ritual impurity, for one does not have a small piece of clothing whose name is “clothing” that is not susceptible to receive ritual impurity if he thought of it as a utensil as it was, even all that are susceptible to receive ritual impurity, and from when it is flayed, it is susceptible of receiving ritual impurity, if he thought of it to make it a covering of the chariot or to cover with it the bed and he doesn’t require the trimming of the ends of the skin.

אף משהופשט (even from when the hide is taken off) – all the while that it was not mended to be a utensil.

אין טיון כבוס – that we require something that is susceptible to ritual impurity, that is not missing even intention/thought.

אלא מקום הדם – and not the entire garment.

וראוי לקבל טומאה – and even though it is lacking intention. And asl long it would not be lacking work. But the anonymous section is according to Rabbi Yehuda, and such is the Halakha.

וראוי לכבוס – to exclude a wooden utensil. For even though it is susceptible to receive ritual impurity, it is not appropriate for washing, it is a mere scraping thing, and is not something washable.

במקום קדוש – in the Temple courtyard.

Whether a garment, a sack, or a hide, it requires washing in a holy place. No matter the material of the garment, whether it be normal cloth, probably made of wool or linen, or coarse sack-cloth or a hide, it must be washed in the holy place, which means in the Temple courtyard. This is stated explicitly in Leviticus 6:20.

ושבירת כלי חרס במקום קדשו – for after it is written (Leviticus 7:20): “you shall wash the bespattered part in the sacred precinct,” it is written (Leviticus 7:21): “An earthen vessel in which it was boiled shall be broken,” and an analogy is made between the breaking of an earthen vessel to washing: just as washing is done in a holy place, so the breaking of the earthen vessel is done in a holy place.

The breaking of an earthen vessel must be in a holy place. Leviticus 6:21 states, “An earthen vessel in which it [the hatat] was boiled shall be broken.” The mishnah teaches that just as the washing of the garment must be in the Temple courtyard, so too the breaking of the copper vessel must be done there. In both cases the hatat contaminates, and therefore the contamination must be cleansed.

זה חומר – this refers to washing.

And the scouring and rinsing of a copper vessel must be in a holy place. The continuation of the verse states, “If it was boiled in a copper vessel, [the vessel] shall be scoured and rinsed with water.” This too must be done in the Temple courtyard.

In this the hatat is more stringent than [other] sacrifices of higher sanctity. In this regard, the laws concerning the hatat are more stringent than the laws concerning other sacrifices, even most holy ones. In cases involving other sacrifices, the garment can be washed, the earthen vessel can be broken and the copper vessel can be rinsed and scoured in places other than the Temple courtyard.

בגד – that blood of a sin-offering was splattered on it and he went outside of the curtains/partitions of the Temple.

Introduction This mishnah continues to deal with washing a garment or breaking an earthen vessel in the holy place in order to cleanse it from contamination from the hatat.

נטמא חוץ לקלעים – after he went out. But it is impossible to bring ritual defilement into the Temple courtyard.

If a garment was carried outside the curtains [of the Tabernacle], it must re-enter, and is washed it in the holy place. If the garment which was splattered with the hatat blood is brought out of Temple confines (the Mishnah always uses the term “curtains” which refers to the Tabernacle, even though it clearly means the walls of the Temple), it must be brought back into the Temple and washed there.

קורעו – in its majority. And he is pure from ritual defilement.

If it was defiled outside the curtains, one must tear it, then it re-enters, and is washed in the holy place. If it is defiled outside the Temple, it cannot be brought back into the Temple because it is prohibited to bring defilement into the Temple. Therefore, he should tear it, and thereby make it no longer susceptible to impurity. Once garments are torn and thereby no longer are “garments” they are pure. Then he can bring it back into the Temple and wash it there.

ונכנס ומכבסו במקום קדוש – and even though the cloth that was defiled and he tore the majority of it, he still remains in his defilement according to the Rabbis until there doesn’t remain in its connection in order to be the width of a scarf hanging around the head and hanging down over the neck. Here it is permissible to bring it into the Temple courtyard in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of washing, since from the Torah, when most of it is torn, it is pure.

If an earthen vessel was carried outside the hangings, it re-enters and is broken in a holy place. Similarly, with regard to the earthen vessel. If it is brought out of the Temple, he should bring it back in and break it inside the Temple.

נוקבו – [makes a hole in it] to purify it from its defilement. And especially a hole that is lik the measurement of a small root, that through this it is pure from its defilement and it still is a utensil and fulfills the Mitzvah of breaking in the Temple, but if he made a large perforation, and it departed from being considered a utensil, it can no longer enter [the Temple] and one breaks it, for the All-Merciful stated (Leviticus 7:21): “An earthen vessel in which it was boiled shall be broken,’ at the time of breaking it will be a utensil, but this [object] at the time of breaking is not a utensil.

If it was defiled outside the curtains, a hole is made in it, then it re-enters and is broken in a holy place. And if it becomes impure outside the Temple, he puts a hole in it. This makes it pure because a vessel with a hole in it is no longer usable as a vessel and it thereby becomes pure. Then he can bring it back in and break it inside the Temple.

פוחתו (hollows it out) – for a metal utensil is not pure from its defilement with an mere incision, but rather with a large incision. But however, after it is hollowed out, they strike it with a mallet and fasten it in order that the name of a utensil is upon it. For at the time of scouring, it must be a utensil.

If a copper vessel was carried outside the hangings, it re-enters and is scoured and rinsed in a holy place.
If it was defiled outside the hangings, it must be broken through, then it re-enters and is scoured and rinsed in a holy place.
This mishnah teaches the exact same law as was found in yesterday’s mishnah, except that today’s mishnah refers to a copper vessel. Since the law is the same, I refer the reader to yesterday’s mishnah for more commentary.
Section two: In order to purify the copper vessel, he must make a large hole in it, for metal vessels become pure only if large holes are put into them.

ואחד שעירה לתוכו רותח – since it is written (Leviticus 6:21 – the printed text lists the wrong chapter): “An earthen vessel in which it was boiled shall be broken,” that it is brought near it shall be broken, but it is not written: “if it is in an engraved vessel in which it was boiled it shall be broken,” for purposes of exegetical interpretation, if it was absorbed in it, nevertheless, it shall be broken.

Introduction The earthen vessel is broken and the copper vessel scoured and rinsed if sacrifices were cooked in them. Our mishnah continues to deal with this law. We should note that again a mishnah concerning sacrificial law later becomes halakhically significant by being applied to other areas. The laws concerning cleansing the vessel in which a sacrifice is cooked are eventually used as a source for laws for how vessels are “kashered.”

קדשים קלים אינן טעונין מריקה ושטיפה – Rabbi Shimon admits that they require the cleansing of an impure vessel by means of using boiling water, for behold the flavor of that which was absorbed became a remnant and its expunging after a while in a state of permission if he doesn’t cleanse the impure vessel by means of using boiling water. But with regard to the law of scouring and rinsing is what Rabbi Shimon excludes from scouring and rinsing for Lesser Holy Things, for scouring and rinsing of The Holiest Things requires that it will be in water and not wine nor in a mixture of wine and water, but if he boiled partially a utensil, it requires scouring and rinsing of the entire utensil, and it requires scouring in hot water and rinsing in cold water. Whereas with lesser Holy Things according to Rabbi Shimon, they cleanse the impure vessel even in wine and even in a mixture of hot wine and water, and he is not strict other than to rinse the prohibited [substance] that is absorbed, and there is no need to rinse other than the place of the cooking alone, and after the cleansing of the impure vessel, there is no need for rinsing in cold water, for of these are the decrees of the Biblical verse regarding a sin-offering and the Holy of Holies, but not of Lesser Holy things. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon. But especially regarding heave-offering we exclude it from all of these thigs that we mentioned as it is written (Leviticus 6:22): “Only the males in the priest line may eat of it,” and it is taught in a Baraitha, it, except for heave-offering which does not have the law of scouring and rinsing like the Holy Things. But the Lesser Holy Things are equal to the Holy of Holies in all the laws of scouring and rinsing. But regarding the explanation of scouring and rinsing, the Tannaim disagreed in the Baraitha: there is one [opinion] that states that scouring and cleansing of impure vessels is done in hot water and rinsing is done in cold water. And there is one [opinion] that states that scouring and rinsing, both of them are done in cold water after the cleansing of impure vessels in hot water, as it is taught in the Mishnah shortly nearby (i.e., at the conclusion of our Mishnah), but that scouring is like scouring of a cup and rinsing is like the rinsing of the cup, that the one is from the outside and the other is from the inside, that is to say, rinsing is done from the outside and scouring is done from the inside. But the Halakha is according to the words of the one who states that scouring is done with hot water and rinsing is done with cold water.

Whether one boiled in it or poured boiling [sacrificial flesh] into it, whether most sacred sacrifices or lesser sacrifices, [the pot] requires scouring and rinsing. Rabbi Shimon says: lesser sacrifices do not require scouring and rinsing. The earthen vessel must be broken and the copper vessel scoured and rinsed whether they were used to boil a sacrifice or whether a boiled sacrifice was poured into them. The important thing is that since the sacrifice was hot when it was in the vessel, the vessel absorbed some of the taste of the sacrifice and it must subsequently be cleansed. This remains a normative law in kashrut – vessels absorb the taste of that which is cooked in them only if the food is hot. The verses from Leviticus 6 refer only to the hatat. Nevertheless, the rabbis extend these laws to other sacrifices. Just as the taste of the hatat needs to be removed from the vessels, so too does the taste of other sacrifices. The first opinion holds that this is true for most holy sacrifices, like the hatat and the asham, and for less holy sacrifices like the shelamim and todah. Rabbi Shimon says that if the vessel was used to cook a less holy sacrifice, it need not be scoured and rinsed.

יבשל בו את כל הרגל – without scouring and rinsing, but at the end, he should scour and rinse, because on each day, he does the cleansing of impure vessels for his fellow,, for since the peace-offerings are many on the Festival, none of their absorption becomes [forbidden] remnant, for the time of the peace-offerings are two days, and when he cooks in it the peace-offerings nowadays, and returns and cooks in it peace-offerings for the morrow from peace-offerings that were slaughtered on the day after, it expunges what it absorbed yesterday and absorbs from the latter [sacrifices], it is found that he doesn’t come to [violation] of remnant.

Rabbi Tarfon says: if one boiled [sacrifices in a pot] at the beginning of a festival, he can boil in it during the whole festival. But the sages say: until the time of eating, scouring and rinsing. Rabbi Tarfon says that if a vessel was used to cook a sacrifice at the beginning of a seven day festival (Sukkot or Pesah), one can continue to use that vessel throughout the entire festival without scouring and rinsing it. Since the vessel will be in continuous use due to the large number of sacrifices offered during the festival, each time it is used the vessel will discharge the taste of the previous sacrifice cooked in it, and thereby the taste of that sacrifice will never become “remnant,” sacrifice left over past the time when it must be eaten. The other rabbis hold that the vessel must be scoured and rinsed before the time in which any sacrifice that was in it had to be eaten. For instance, if a hatat is put into the vessel, then the vessel must be scoured and rinsed by midnight, for that is when the hatat becomes remnant. This is true even if another sacrifice, for instance a shelamim, is cooked in there before this time. The rabbis disagree that the taste of the sacrifice will be completely discharged through cooking another sacrifice. Since the taste will remain, it must be scoured and rinsed within the time that any sacrifices are cooked in it.

וחכמים אומרים עד זמן אכילה – so that there will not be between the end of the cooking to the beginning of the scouring and rinsing other than the time of eating alone, and not more that this, as it says (Leviticus 6:21): “[the vessel] shall be scoured and rinsed with water,” and it is written (Leviticus 6:22): “Only the males in the priestly line shall eat of it,” but why did Scripture place these verses next to teach other? To inform you that we delay only the time for eating and afterwards we perform scouring and rinsing immediately on the same day. And the Halakah is according to the Sages.

Scouring is done as the scouring of a goblet; and rinsing is as the rinsing of a goblet, Scouring and rinsing are done to the copper vessels as is done with a goblet, which means that they are thoroughly cleansed.

האסכלה (lattice-work of a fire place, grille, grating) – GRADILA in the foreign tongue. And it is made like a kind of net-work/mat and we roast upon it something roasted.

Scouring [in hot water] and rinsing in cold [water]. There are two different versions of this line. According to one version, not found in manuscripts but accepted by the Rambam, scouring is done with hot water. Since the taste came in to the vessel through hot water, it can only be removed through hot water. According to the other version, the scouring need only be done through cold water. According to both versions, rinsing is done through cold water.

מגעילן – in hot water.

The spit and the grill are cleansed with hot water. A spit or grill upon which a sacrifice was roasted, must be cleansed by being put into boiling water. Since these were directly on the fire, the requirements for cleansing are greater.

הרי הרלים נאכלין כחמורים ואינן טעונין מריקה – Our Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: if they were [sufficient] to impart a flavor, then the [rule of which is] less stringent are eaten with the more stringent in accord with the more stringent rule [applying to the Most Holy Things], inside of the curtains for the day and the night and they require souring and rinsing and are disqualified through contact. But our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Shimon who stated that the Lesser Holy Things do not require scouring and rinsing, therefore, when they did not impart the flavor of the Holy of Holies in the Lesser Holy Things, they do not require scouring and rinsing.

Introduction This mishnah introduces several principles as to when taste is transferred from one thing to another. Again, while the principles here relate directly to sacrificial law that is no longer practiced today (and wasn’t practiced at the time of the Mishnah either), these principles are also applicable to the laws of kashrut and thus historically were and remain significant practical halakhah.

רקיק – a disqualified/unfit [wafer] that came in contact with a fit wafer, and the fit absorbed from the disqualified [only the place which absorbed that which is forbidden – is cut off; the rest is permitted].

If one boiled sacrifices and hullin in it [the copper pot], or most holy sacrifices and lesser sacrifices, if they were sufficient to impart their flavor, the less stringent must be eaten as the more stringent of them; In both cases mentioned here, a person boils two different things in one pot, one of greater stringency (sacrifices, or most holy sacrifices) and one of lesser stringency (hullin, or less holy sacrifices). If there is enough of the sacrifices to impart a taste to the hullin, or enough most holy sacrifices to impart taste to the less holy sacrifices, then the rules of the stringent will apply to everything in the pot. Thus the hullin would have to be treated like sacrificial meat and the less holy sacrifices like most holy sacrifices. But if there is not enough to impart taste, then the more lenient rules remain in place.

But they do not necessitate scouring and rinsing; This line seems to say that even if the sacrifices impart their flavor, the pot still need not be scoured and rinsed. However, the Talmud emends the line to read “they do necessitate scouring and rinsing and they do disqualify by touch; if there is not enough to impart taste, then the less stringent need not be eaten as the more stringent ….” In other words, the Talmud emends the line to read the opposite of what it actually says. As long as the more stringent stuff does not impart taste, the less stringent rules apply.

And they do not disqualify by touch. Leviticus 6:20 states that anything that touches the flesh of the hatat shall become holy. The rabbis rule that any food that absorbs the taste of sacrifices becomes holy like the sacrifice. If the sacrifice is unfit then it too is unfit. If he cooks a mixture of sacrifices and hullin in a pot, and there is not enough sacrifice to impart a taste to the mixture, then the mixture does not disqualify other food which absorbs its taste. (This is according to the talmudic reading of this line, which I mentioned above in my commentary to section two).

If [an unfit] wafer touched a [fit] wafer, or an [unfit] piece of meat touched a [fit] piece of meat, not the whole wafer or the whole piece of meat is forbidden; only the part that absorbed [of the unfit] is forbidden. When a permitted thing and a forbidden thing touch and the permitted thing absorbs some of the taste of the forbidden thing, only the part that absorbed the taste would become prohibited. The mishnah illustrates this with regard to the wafer (brought as an accompaniment to a sacrifice) or a piece of sacrificial flesh.