Study Zevachim folio 65B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
§ The Mishnah teaches that after removing the crop and the feathers and innards that emerged with it, the priest ripped the bird lengthwise and did not separate the two halves of the bird. In this regard A baraita states: The verse states: “And he shall rend” (Leviticus 1:17). The act of rending is
§ The Mishnah teaches that if the priest did not remove the crop, or he changed any detail of the sacrificial rite after he squeezed out the blood, the offering is valid. If he separated the head from the body of a bird sin offering, it is disqualified. The Talmud says: The Mishnah is not in accord
The Talmud asks: What is the reason for the difference between them, i.e., what is the basis of the disagreement? Rav Ḥisda says: The difference between them concerns the question of whether squeezing out the blood of a bird sin offering after its blood has been sprinkled is indispensable. The fir
And R' Elazar, son of R' Shimon, holds that squeezing out the blood of a bird sin offering is not indispensable. Consequently, if the priest would separate the bird’s head from its body, he would refrain from squeezing out the blood, in which case the rite is dissimilar to that of a bird burnt offe
Rava says there is an alternative explanation of the dispute: It is possible that all agree that squeezing the blood of a bird sin offering is indispensable, and there is a difference between them with regard to whether interrupting the pinching before severing the second siman, i.e., the gullet or