Zevachim 33

מכלל דתרוייהו סבירא להו טומאה דחויה היא בצבור

The Gemara comments: It can be derived by inference that both Abaye and Rava hold that impurity is overridden in cases involving the public and is not entirely permitted.

לימא מסייע ליה כל הסמיכות שהיו שם קורא עליהן אני תכף לסמיכה שחיטה

The Gemara returns to discussing Ulla’s statement that partial entry of a ritually impure individual is considered entry: Let us say that a baraita (Tosefta, Nega’im 8:10) supports Ulla’s opinion: Concerning all the cases of placing hands that were there in the Temple, I say about them that the principle: Immediately following the placing of hands on the head of an offering is its slaughter, is applied, meaning that these acts must take place uninterruptedly and in the same location.

חוץ מזו שהיתה בשער נקנור שאין מצורע יכול ליכנס לשם עד שמזין עליו מדם חטאתו ומדם אשמו ואי אמרת ביאה במקצת לא שמה ביאה ליעייל ידיה ולסמוך

This is so except for this case of a leper who places hands on his guilt offering, which was done in the threshold of the Nicanor Gate and not in the Temple courtyard where the guilt offering was slaughtered. The reason for this is that a leper cannot enter the courtyard until they sprinkle from the blood of his sin offering and from the blood of his guilt offering on the altar on his behalf. The Gemara explains the proof: And if you say that partial entry is not considered entry, let him insert his hands and place them on the head of the offering, and the offering should then be slaughtered in that location next to the gate.

אמר רב יוסף הא מני רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה היא דאמר מרחק צפון

Rav Yosef said: There is no proof from here, as in accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, who says that the northern side of the courtyard in which it is permitted to slaughter offerings of the most sacred order, which includes a guilt offering, includes only the area to the north of the altar and not the entire northern section of the courtyard. This area is far north of the entrance to the courtyard, i.e., more than twenty-two cubits away. Consequently, even if the leper were to insert his hands into the courtyard and place them on the head of his guilt offering, it would not be permitted to slaughter it there.

וליעבד פישפש אביי ורבא דאמרי תרוייהו הכל בכתב מיד ה׳ עלי השכיל את כל מלאכת התבנית

The Gemara suggests: But let an opening [pishpash] be made in the northern courtyard wall facing the altar, where the leper can insert his hands. The Gemara explains: Abaye and Rava both say that such structural changes cannot be made to the Temple, since the verse states with regard to the Temple construction: “All in writing, as the Lord has made me wise by His hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern” (I Chronicles 28:19).

איכא דאמרי אמר רב יוסף כל הסומך ראשו ורובו מכניס מאי טעמא כל כחו בעינן הלכך לא אפשר

There are those who say that Rabbi Yosef said another explanation as to why the leper cannot insert his hands into the courtyard and place them on the head of the offering: Anyone who places hands on the head of an offering must insert his head and most of his body into the courtyard. What is the reason? We require placing hands with all of his force. Therefore, it is not possible for the leper to perform the placing of his hands properly without entering the courtyard, and the placing of hands on the offering is done instead in the threshold of the Nicanor Gate.

מאי קסבר אי קסבר סמיכת אשם מצורע דאורייתא ותכף לסמיכה שחיטה דאורייתא ליעול ולסמוך להדיא דרחמנא אמר

The Gemara clarifies: What does the tanna of the baraita hold? If he holds that placing hands on the head of a guilt offering of a leper is by Torah law, and the principle that immediately following the placing of hands on the head of an offering must be its slaughter is also by Torah law, let the leper openly insert his hands into the courtyard and place them on the head of the offering, as the Merciful One states in the Torah that he must do so.

אמר רב אדא בר מתנה גזירה שמא ירבה בפסיעות איכא דאמרי אמר רב אדא בר מתנה סמיכת אשם מצורע דאורייתא ותכף לסמיכה שחיטה לאו דאורייתא

Rav Adda bar Mattana says: In principle that should be done. But the prohibition against the leper entering the courtyard is a rabbinic decree, due to the concern that perhaps he will increase his steps, enter the courtyard more than is necessary, and be liable for entering there in a state of impurity. There are those who say that Rav Adda bar Mattana says that placing hands on the head of a guilt offering of a leper is indeed by Torah law, but the requirement that immediately following the placing of hands is the slaughter is not by Torah law. Therefore, he places hands on the offering outside of the courtyard.

מיתיבי וסמך ושחט מה סמיכה בטהורין אף שחיטה בטהורין ואי אמרת לאו דאורייתא בטמאין נמי משכחת לה

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita cited previously (32a): The verse states: “And he shall place his hand upon the head of the burnt offering…And he shall slaughter the bull” (Leviticus 1:4–5). Just as placing hands may be performed only by ritually pure individuals, so too, the slaughter may be performed only by ritually pure individuals. And if you say that the requirement that placing hands must immediately precede the slaughter is not by Torah law, then with regard to ritually impure individuals you also find that placing hands may be performed, since they can do so outside the courtyard.

אלא איפוך סמיכת אשם מצורע לאו דאורייתא ותכף לסמיכה שחיטה דאורייתא

Rather, reverse it and say that placing hands on the head of the guilt offering of a leper is not by Torah law, and therefore the leper must do so outside the courtyard, but with regard to offerings that require placing of hands by Torah law, the requirement that immediately following the placing of hands must be the slaughter is by Torah law.

רבינא אמר לענין מלקות איתמר

The Gemara returns to Ulla’s statement in the name of Reish Lakish (32b) that an impure individual who inserted his hand into the Temple courtyard is flogged, as partial entry is considered entry. An objection was then raised from the case of the leper, where he is not liable to be punished with karet for partial entry, and Ulla offered one answer. Ravina says that there is another answer: It was stated only with regard to lashes, teaching that one is flogged for partially entering the courtyard while ritually impure. Reish Lakish agrees that there is no punishment of karet for partial entry as there is for a full entry.

כי אתא רבין אמר רבי אבהו לענין טמא שנגע בקודש איתמר

When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Abbahu says that the statement of Reish Lakish with regard to this verse was stated with regard to a ritually impure individual who touched sacrificial food, and not with regard to partial entry into the courtyard, as Ulla had said.

דאיתמר טמא שנגע בקודש ריש לקיש אמר לוקה רבי יוחנן אמר אינו לוקה ריש לקיש אמר לוקה בכל קדש לא תגע ורבי יוחנן אמר אינו לוקה ההוא בתרומה כתיב

This is as it was stated: There is an amoraic dispute with regard to an impure person who touched sacrificial food. Reish Lakish says: He is flogged. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He is not flogged. The Gemara elaborates. Reish Lakish says: He is flogged, as it is written: “Every consecrated item she shall not touch” (Leviticus 12:4). And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He is not flogged, as that verse is written with regard to touching the portion of the produce designated for the priest [teruma].

וריש לקיש האי קרא להכי הוא דאתא האי מיבעי ליה אזהרה לאוכל בשר קודש דאיתמר אזהרה לאוכל בשר קודש מנין ריש לקיש אמר בכל קדש לא תגע

The Gemara asks: But does Reish Lakish actually hold that this verse comes to teach this halakha? He requires this verse to teach a prohibition for a ritually impure person who eats sacrificial meat. As it was stated: From where is the prohibition for a ritually impure person who eats sacrificial meat derived? Reish Lakish says it is derived from the verse: “Every consecrated item she shall not touch,” which the Gemara will explain is referring to eating.

רבי יוחנן אמר תני ברדלא אתיא טומאתו טומאתו מביאת מקדש מה להלן ענש והזהיר אף כאן ענש והזהיר

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The Sage Bardela teaches that this prohibition is derived from a verbal analogy of the term “his impu-rity [tumato]” written with regard to one who eats sacrificial meat while impure (Leviticus 7:20), and the term “his impurity [tumato]” written with regard to one who enters the Temple while impure (Numbers 19:13). Just as there, with regard to entering the Temple while impure, the Torah prescribed the punishment of karet and also explicitly prohibited doing so, so too here, with regard to eating sacrificial meat while impure, the Torah prescribed the punishment of karet and also explicitly prohibited doing so. Clearly, Reish Lakish understood this verse as referring to eating sacrificial meat, not merely touching it.

טמא שנגע בקודש מדאפקה רחמנא בלשון נגיעה אזהרה לאוכל מדאיתקש קודש למקדש

The Gemara answers: Reish Lakish holds that both can be derived from Leviticus 12:4. The prohibition with regard to a ritually impure individual who touched sacrificial food is derived from the fact that the Merciful One expressed this prohibition with a term of touching, while the prohibition with regard to one who eats sacrificial food while impure is derived from the fact that the Torah juxtaposed the prohibition of eating sacrificial food while impure to the prohibition of entering the Temple while impure in the verse: “Every consecrated item she shall not touch, and to the Temple she shall not come” (Leviticus 12:4).

תניא כוותיה דריש לקיש בכל קדש לא תגע אזהרה לאוכל אתה אומר אזהרה לאוכל או אינו אלא לנוגע

The Gemara comments: It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish. It is written: “Every consecrated item she shall not touch”; this is a prohibition for an impure person who eats sacrificial food. Do you say that it is a prohibition for an impure person who eats sacrificial food, or perhaps it is only a prohibition for an impure person who touches sacrificial food?

תלמוד לומר בכל קדש לא תגע ואל המקדש לא תבא מקיש קודש למקדש מה מקדש דבר שיש בו

The verse states: “Every consecrated item she shall not touch, and to the Temple she shall not come” (Leviticus 12:4). The verse juxtaposes the matter pertaining to sacrificial food to the matter of entering the Temple while ritually impure. Just as entering the Temple is a matter that entails a punishment that involves