Study Zevachim folio 108B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
to exclude from the liability for karet one whose violation was unwitting, or who was compelled to act, or who was mistaken. The term “that man” teaches that only one who offered up with intent is liable to receive karet. The Talmud challenges: If so, here too, with regard to slaughtering outside
The Talmud explains: With regard to slaughtering outside, two instances of the term “that man” are written: “Blood shall be imputed to that man, he has shed blood, and that man shall be cut off from among his people” (Leviticus 17:4). One instance teaches that only one who acts with intent is liabl
The Talmud has now justified its claim that the liability of one who slaughters an offering outside for the sake of an ordinary purpose is derived from the phrase “ish ish.” Accordingly, the Talmud asks: But why do I need the term “to YHWH”? The Talmud explains: It is written to exclude from liabil
§ The Mishnah teaches: The greater stringency with regard to offering up outside is that two people who grasped a knife and together slaughtered an offering outside the courtyard are exempt. But if two grasped a limb from an offering and together offered it up outside, they are liable.
A baraita states: What halakha is alluded to when the verse states: “Any man [ish ish]…that offers up a burnt offering or sacrifice” (Leviticus 17:8)? The verse teaches that two people who grasped a limb of an offering and offered it up together outside the courtyard are liable. It is necessary for