Mishnah.org Logo

Mishnayos Zevachim Perek 13 Mishnah 7

זבחים פרק י"ג משנה ז׳

7

One who pinches the nape of a bird offering inside the Temple courtyard and then offers it up outside the courtyard is liable. But if one pinched its nape outside the courtyard and then offered it up outside the courtyard he is exempt, as pinching the nape of a bird outside the courtyard is not considered valid pinching. One who slaughters, with a knife, a bird offering inside the courtyard and offers it up outside the courtyard is exempt, as slaughtering a bird offering in the Temple courtyard disqualifies it as an offering. But if one slaughtered a bird offering outside the courtyard and then offered it up outside, he is liable. Evidently, the manner of its preparation inside the courtyard, i.e., pinching, effects its exemption outside the courtyard, and the manner of its preparation outside the courtyard, i.e., slaughter, effects its exemption inside the courtyard. Rabbi Shimon says: With regard to any act of killing an animal concerning which, when it was performed outside the courtyard, one is liable for subsequently offering it up outside the courtyard, one is also liable for having offered the animal up outside the courtyard after performing a similar act of killing inside the courtyard. This is the halakha except with regard to one who slaughters a bird inside the courtyard and offers it up outside the courtyard; he is exempt.

הַמּוֹלֵק אֶת הָעוֹף בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, חַיָּב. מָלַק בַּחוּץ וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, פָּטוּר. הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הָעוֹף בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, פָּטוּר. שָׁחַט בַּחוּץ וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, חַיָּב. נִמְצָא, דֶּרֶךְ הֶכְשֵׁרוֹ מִבִּפְנִים, פְּטוּרוֹ בַחוּץ. דֶּרֶךְ הֶכְשֵׁרוֹ בַחוּץ, פְּטוּרוֹ בִפְנִים. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כֹּל שֶׁחַיָּבִין עָלָיו בַחוּץ, חַיָּבִין עַל כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ בִפְנִים, שֶׁהֶעֱלָהוּ בַחוּץ, חוּץ מִן הַשּׁוֹחֵט בִּפְנִים וּמַעֲלֶה בַחוּץ:

ז׳
Bartenura

מלק בחוץ – it is an un-slaughtered animal carcass, for there is no pinching of the head other than inside [the Temple courtyard], therefore he exempt on his offering/bringing it up on the altar outside, and if you should say, but aren’t all that are offered up outside are disqualified through their being taken outside, and similar a person who performs a ritual slaughter outside [of the Temple courtyard] is invalid and they are liable on its being offered on the altar, there the All-Merciful includes it but regarding the matter of the rest of invalid things, we require that it is accepted inside.

שחט בחוץ והעלה בחוץ חייב – even on the bringing up/offering on the altar. For all who are liable on its ritual slaughter outside [of the Temple courtyard] if he went back in and he or someone else brought them up/offered them, he is liable [on the ritual slaughter and on offering it up].

נמצא דרך הכשרו בפנים – In the Gemara it states (i.e., Tractate Zevakhim 111b, that it teaches that the manner of his liability by performing it inside [i.e., the Temple courtyard] exempts him outside [the Temple courtyard], and the manner of his liability by performing it outside, exempts him inside [the Temple courtyard. As for example, if he slaughtered the bird/fowl inside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt. If he slaughtered it outside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard], he is liable. If he pinched the head [of the bird] inside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up outside, he is liable. If he pinched the head [of the bird] outside [the Temple courtyard] and offered it up inside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt. It is found, that the place where he is made liable on his offering it up, if the first Divine service was performed in side, as for example with the pinching of the head that was done inside [the Temple courtyard], he is exempt for his offering it up, if the pinching of the head was done outside [the Temple courtyard]. But a person who becomes liable on his offering up, if the first Divine service was performed outside, like with the ritual slaughtering, he is exempted inside, if the animal was slaughtered inside and offered up outside.

רבי שמעון אומר כו' – the matter of the first Tanna/teacher is deficient and should be read as follows: And similarly, a person who slaughters an animal at night inside [the Temple courtyard] and offers it up outside [the Temple courtyard] is exempt, that it is not accepted inside, as it is written (Leviticus 19:6): “It shall be eaten on the day you sacrifice/ביום זבחכם,” but not at night, and it is found that the animal offering is invalid, and therefore he is not liable for his offering it up But if he did not slaughter outside [the Temple courtyard] at night but offered it up outside at night, he is liable, because since the ritual slaughter was at night outside the Temple courtyard, it was kosher/fit, therefore, he is liable for two things – on the ritual slaughter and on the offering up. But Rabbi Shimon disputes this and states: “Any act for which they are liable [when it is done] outside, for the like act are they liable [when it is done] inside and when one offered it up outside, except for him who slaughters inside and offers up [the bird offering] outside.” כל שחייבין עליו בחוץ חייבין על כיוצא בו בפנים שהעלהו בחוץ – that is to say, just as when the person who performs the ritual slaughter outside at night and the one who offers it up outside is liable, so also if he performed the ritual slaughter inside at night and offered it up outside, he is liable for the offering up [of the sacrifice], except for one who slaughters the bird/fowl inside and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard] that he is exempt even though that if he performed the ritual slaughter and offered it up outside [the Temple courtyard], he is liable. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

מלק בחוץ. נבלה היא שאין מליקה אלא בפנים לכך פטור על העלאתו בחוץ. וא״ת והלא כל הנעלים בחוץ נפסלו ביציאתן, וכן השוחט בחוץ פסול הוא וחייבין על העלאתו התם רחמנא רבייה אבל לענין שאר פסולים מתקבלים בפנים בעינן:

שחט בחוץ והעלה בחוץ חייב. אף על העלאה. דכל שמתחייב על שחיטתו בחוץ אם חזר והעלן הוא או אחר, חייב:

נמצא דרך הכשרו בפנים. בגמרא קאמר, תני דרך חיובו בפנים פטורו בחוץ, ודרך חיובו בחוץ פטורו בפנים. כגון שחט העוף בפנים והעלה בחוץ פטור. שחט בחוץ והעלה בחוץ חייב. מלק בפנים והעלה בחוץ חייב. מלק בחוץ והעלה בחוץ פטור. נמצא, במקום שמתחייב על העלאתו אם נעשית העבודה הראשונה בפנים כגון במליקת פנים פטור על העלאתו אם נעשית המליקה בחוץ. ודרך שמתחייב על העלאה אם נעשית עבודה הראשונה בחוץ כגון בשחיטה, פטורו בפנים, אם נשחט בפנים והעלה בחוץ:

רבי שמעון אומר כו׳. במלתיה דתנא קמא חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני, וכן השוחט בהמה בלילה בפנים והעלה בחוץ פטור, דאינה מתקבלת בפנים, דכתיב (ויקרא י״ט:ו׳) ביום זבחכם, ולא בלילה, ונמצא הזבח פסול ולפיכך אינו חייב על העלאתו. אבל אם שחט בלילה בחוץ והעלה בחוץ חייב, מפני שהשחיטה בחוץ בלילה כשרה היא לפיכך חייב שתים על השחיטה ועל ההעלאה. ופליג רבי שמעון בהא ואמר, כל שחייבין עליו בחוץ חייבין על כיוצא בו בפנים שהעלהו בחוץ. כלומר, כשם שהשוחט בחוץ בלילה והעלה בחוץ חייב, כך אם שחט בפנים בלילה והעלה בחוץ חייב על ההעלאה, חוץ מהשוחט עוף בפנים והעלהו בחוץ שהוא פטור אע״פ שאם שחט והעלה בחוץ חייב. ואין הלכה כר׳ שמעון: