POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Zevachim 93
1) BLOOD THAT SPLASHED ONTO A GARMENT THAT WAS "TAMEI"
(a) Question (Rami bar Chama): If blood splashed onto a Tamei
garment, what is the law?
2) BLOOD OF A "CHATAS PASUL"
1. Inference (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): (Rami
asked about when it became Pasul (Tamei) at the same
moment it touched the garment -) we infer, he holds
that if it became Pasul before touching the garment,
it need not be laundered, even though it had Sha'as
(b) Answer (Rav Chisda): According to Abaye (who corrected
Rabah), R. Eliezer and Chachamim argue about this:
2. The question is, do we distinguish when the Tum'ah
came before touching the garment from when it came
at the same time, or not.
1. (Beraisa - R. Elazar (ben Shamu'a)): Mei Chatas that
became Tamei is Metaher - we learn from Nidah, the
water is Metaher her, even though she is Metamei it
when it touches her.
(c) Rejection (Rava): No, all agree that we do not learn
prior Tum'ah from simultaneous Tum'ah;
2. (Rabah): R. Elazar holds like his Rebbi, R. Akiva,
who says that if a vessel is passed over Tum'ah, it
is as if it rested on the Tum'ah (this disqualifies
i. (Mishnah - R. Akiva): If a man picked up a
flask with Mei Chatas and passed it over an
oven with a Sheretz inside (the top of the oven
is open), the Mei Chatas becomes Tamei;
3. Rejection (Abaye - Beraisa): R. Akiva admits that if
water was sprinkled and (before touching the Tamei
person) passed over a Tamei earthenware vessel or a
Tamei Mishkav or Moshav, it is Tahor;
ii. Chachamim say, it remains Tahor.
iii. R. Akiva holds that something in the air is
considered to be resting on the ground below,
Chachamim say that it is not.
i. The only Tum'ah that is Metamei above and below
(without physical contact) is a k'Zayis of
(flesh of) a Mes or *other things that are
4. (Abaye): Rather, all agree that something in the air
is not considered to be on the ground;
ii. This comes to include a stone from a house with
i. R. Akiva decrees that it is Tamei, lest he will
let the flask rest on the Tum'ah, Chachamim do
5. Question: What do R. Elazar and Chachamim argue
ii. R. Akiva agrees, once water was sprinkled (i.e.
left the Ezov in his hand and is in mid-air)
there is no concern that he will rest it on the
Tum'ah, we do not decree.
6. Answer #1 (Abaye): They argue whether or not we may
learn the law of a prior Tum'ah (before blood
touched the garment) from Tum'ah that came at the
same time - R. Elazar says that we may learn,
Chachamim say that we may not.
7. (Culmination of answer (b): Likewise, they argue
whether the law of blood that became Tamei before
touching a garment (i.e. it need not be laundered)
is the same as when it became Tamei at the same
1. (Answer #2 to Question 5 - Rava): They argue whether
or not there is a Shi'ur to Haza'ah - R. Elazar says
that there is, therefore we may learn from Nidah
(two drops can join to comprise the Shi'ur for
Taharah, even though the first drop already became
Tamei once it touched her);
2. Chachamim say that there is no Shi'ur for Haza'ah
(so we have no source to say that Tamei Mei Chatas
(a) (Mishnah): Blood of a Pasul Chatas (need not be
3) WHICH BLOOD MUST BE LAUNDERED?
(b) (Beraisa): "Mi'Damah" - blood of a Kosher Chatas must be,
not blood of a Pasul:
1. R. Akiva (Shitah - R. Yakov) says, if blood had
Sha'as ha'Kosher and became Pasul, it must be
laundered; if it never had Sha'as ha'Kosher, it need
not be laundered.
2. R. Shimon says, in both of these cases it need not
3. Question: What is R. Shimon's reason?
4. Answer: It says "Osah" and "Mi'Damah" - one excludes
when it had no Sha'as ha'Kosher, the other excludes
even when it had.
5. R. Akiva uses "Osah" to teach that Merikah u'Shtifah
is necessary for Chatas, not for Terumah;
6. R. Shimon holds that even Kodshim Kalim do not need
Merikah u'Shtifah, all the more so Terumah.
(a) (Mishnah): If Dam Chatas splashed from the animal's neck
onto a garment, it need not be laundered;
(b) If it splashed from the Keren or the Yesod, it need not
(c) If it fell onto the floor (Rashi - without; Rambam -
after) having been received in a Kli Shares and was
gathered from the floor, it need not be laundered;
(d) The only blood which must be laundered is blood that was
received in a Kli and is Kosher for Haza'ah.
(e) (Gemara - Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps if Dam Chatas
splashed from the animal's neck onto a garment, it must
1. Rejection: "Asher Yazeh" - only blood Kosher for
Haza'ah must be laundered.
(f) (Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps if Dam Chatas splashed from
the Keren or the Yesod and fell on a garment, it must be
1. Rejection: "Asher Yazeh" - this excludes blood that
already was thrown.
(g) (Mishnah): If it fell onto the floor... (only blood that
was received in a Kli must be laundered.)
(h) Question: Why does the Mishnah elaborate to say this?
4) BLOOD LEFT ON THE FINGER
(i) Answer: The Mishnah gives the reason for the law:
1. The reason we need not launder blood that was
gathered from the floor is because only blood that
was received in a Kli and is Kosher for Haza'ah must
(j) (Mishnah): ..And is Kosher for Haza'ah.
(k) Question: What does this come to exclude?
(l) Answer: It excludes if less than the amount needed for
Haza'ah was put into each of two Kelim (even if the blood
was later joined, it is Pasul):
1. (R. Chalifta bar Sha'ul): If Kidush Mei Chatas
(putting ashes of the Parah Adumah on water) was
done l'Chetz'aim (in two vessels, neither had the
Shi'ur needed for Haza'ah), the water is not Kadosh
(even if the water is joined now and has a Shi'ur,).
2. Question: What is the law regarding blood?
i. If a tradition from Sinai teaches that Kidush
Mei Chatas cannot be done l'Chetz'aim, we do
not learn to other places;
3. Answer (R. Zerika): Even blood is not Mekudash
ii. If we learn from "V'Toval *ba*'Mayim" (there
must be the proper Shi'ur of water to immerse
the branches and sprinkle), we should learn
similarly from "V'Toval...ba'Dam"!
4. Support (Rava - Beraisa): "V'Toval" - he immerses
(his finger in blood), he does not soak up blood
from the wall of the vessel;
5. "Ba'Dam" - there must be enough blood for Tevilah
from the beginning.
6. "Min ha'Dam" - from the blood we are dealing with
(this will be explained).
7. The Torah must teach both "V'Toval" and "Ba'Dam":
i. If it only said "V'Toval", one might have
thought we do not require enough blood for
Tevilah (Rashi in Menachos - for all the
Haza'os) from the beginning;
ii. If it only said "Ba'Dam", one might have
thought that he may soak up blood.
(a) (Beraisa): "Min ha'Dam" - from the blood we are dealing
5) WHICH GARMENTS MUST BE LAUNDERED?
(b) Question: What does this exclude?
(c) Answer (Rava): This excludes blood left on his finger
after every Haza'ah;
1. This supports R. Elazar, who says that blood left on
his finger is Pasul.
(d) Question (Ravin bar Rav Ada - Beraisa): If blood splashed
onto a garment from a Kohen's hand before he was Mazeh,
it must be laundered (in the Mikdash);
1. If blood splashed from his hand after Haza'ah, it
need not be laundered.
(e) Answer (Rava): No, it distinguishes between before a
Haza'ah, and (blood left on his finger) after Haza'ah.
2. Suggestion: The Beraisa distinguishes between before
and after finishing all the Haza'os - this teaches
that until then, blood left on his finger is Kosher
for remaining Haza'os!
(f) Question (Abaye - Mishnah): After finishing Haza'ah (of
blood of the Parah Adumah), the Kohen would wipe his hand
on the Parah itself.
1. Inference: He would not wipe it until completing the
Haza'os (but before this, blood left on his finger
is Kosher for remaining Haza'os!)
(g) Answer (Rava): No - after completing the Haza'os, he
would wipe his *hand*, after each Haza'ah, he would wipe
(h) Question: We understand, after completing the Haza'os, he
would wipe his hand on the Parah itself - "V'Saraf Es
ha'Parah l'Einav" (the end of this verse requires burning
all the blood with the Parah);
1. Between Haza'os, what would he wipe his finger on?
(He could not wipe it on the Parah, lest hairs stick
to his finger, this would disqualify future
(i) Answer (Abaye): He would wipe his hand on the edge of the
bucket (of blood) - the buckets are called "*Kefori*
Zahav" (the root of this word also connotes cleaning).
(a) (Mishnah): If blood splashed onto a hide before Hefshet
(flaying), it need not be laundered;
(b) R. Yehudah says, if it splashed after Hefshet, it must be
(c) R. Elazar says, it need not be laundered.
(d) Only the part of the garment that absorbed the blood must
(e) Only garments fitting to become Tamei and fitting to be
laundered need be laundered.
(f) The law of laundering is the same for Beged (a cloth
garments), Sak (goat's hair) or leather; it must be
laundered in the Azarah.
(g) An earthenware vessel that must be broken (because it
absorbed Kodshim) must be broken in the Azarah, Merikah
u'Shtifah of copper vessels (or other metal vessels that
absorbed Kodshim) must be in the Azarah.
(h) In this respect (Rashi - laundering garments that
absorbed Dam Chatas; Rambam - also, breaking Klei
Cheres), Chatas is more stringent than other Kodshei
(i) (Gemara) Question: What is the source of this?
(j) Answer (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "Beged" only teaches that
a (cloth) garment must be laundered;
1. Question: What is the source to include hide after
2. Answer: "Asher Yizeh Aleha Techaves."
3. Suggestion: Perhaps this includes hide even before
4. Rejection: "Beged" - only things fitting Lekabel
Tum'ah must be laundered.