Playback Rate
Zevachim 7:4-5
Zevachim7: 4
עוֹלַת הָעוֹף שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַטָּה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת, לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת — רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ; רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: אֵין מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: מָה אִם חַטָּאת, שֶׁאֵין מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ לִשְׁמָהּ, כְּשֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ; עוֹלָה שֶׁמּוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ לִשְׁמָהּ, כְּשֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּמְעֲלוּ בָהּ! אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: לֹא. אִם אָמַרְתָּ בְּחַטָּאת שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְדָבָר שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ מְעִילָה. תֹּאמַר בְּעוֹלָה שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת — שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְעִילָה?
אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: וַהֲרֵי קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁשְּׁחָטָן בַּדָּרוֹם, וּשְׁחָטָן לְשֵׁם קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים יוֹכִיחוּ — שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָן לְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְעִילָה, וּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן! אַף אַתָּה אַל תִּתְמַהּ עַל הָעוֹלָה, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְעִילָה, שֶׁיִּמְעֲלוּ בָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: לֹא. אִם אָמַרְתָּ בְּקָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁשְּׁחָטָן בַּדָּרוֹם, וּשְׁחָטָן לְשֵׁם קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים, שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָן בְּדָבָר שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ אִסּוּר וְהֶתֵּר. תֹּאמַר בְּעוֹלָה שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ בְּדָבָר שֶׁכֻּלּוֹ הֶתֵּר?
[If] a bird olah was made below, in the manner of a chatas-offering, for the designation of chatas
— R’ Eliezer says: One is subject to me’ilah on its account; [but] R’ Yehoshua says: One is not subject to me’ilah on its account.
Said R’ Eliezer: If a chatas-offering, which is not subject to me’ilah [when it has been offered] for its own designation, is [nevertheless] subject to me’ilah [when] one changed its designation; [then] an olah-offering, which is subject to me’ilah [when it is offered] for its own designation, should surely be subject to me’ilah when he changed its designation! Said R’ Yehoshua to him: Not so. If this can be said of a chatas-offering whose designation one changed to an olah, [it is] because he has changed its designation to something which is subject to me’ilah. Can [the same] be said of an olah-offering whose designation one changed to a chatas — in which case he has changed its designation to something which is not subject to me’ilah?
Said R’ Eliezer to him: Let most holy offerings which one slaughtered in the southern [part of the Courtyard], and which he slaughtered for the lesser holiness designation, serve as proof — in that he has changed their designation to something not subject to me’ilah, and [yet] they are subject to me’ilah! So too you should not wonder at an olah-offering, that even when one changed its designation to something not subject to me’ilah, it [nevertheless] remains subject to me’ilah. Said R’ Yehoshua to him: Not so. If this can be said of most holy offerings which one slaughtered in the southern [part of the Courtyard], and which he slaughtered for lesser holiness designation, [it is] because he changed their designation to something which has forbidden [parts] and permissible [parts]. Can you say [the same] for an olah-offering whose designation one changed to something which is entirely permissible?
Zevachim7: 5
מָלַק בִּשְּׂמֹאל, אוֹ בַלַּיְלָה, שָׁחַט חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ — אֵינָן מְטַמְּאִין בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. מָלַק בְּסַכִּין,
מָלַק חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, תּוֹרִין שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּן, וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה שֶׁעָבַר זְמַנָּן, שֶׁיָּבֵשׁ גַּפָּהּ, וְשֶׁנִּסְמֵית עֵינָהּ, וְשֶׁנִּקְטְעָה רַגְלָהּ — מְטַמֵּא בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל: כָּל שֶׁהָיָה פְסוּלָהּ בַּקֹּדֶשׁ אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה; לֹא הָיָה פְסוּלָהּ בַּקֹּדֶשׁ, מְטַמְּאָה בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. וְכָל הַפְּסוּלִים שֶׁמָּלְקוּ, מְלִיקָתָן פְּסוּלָה, וְאֵינָן מְטַמְּאוֹת בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה.
[If] he performed melikah with the left hand, or at night, or he slaughtered a non-sacred [bird] inside [the Courtyard], or offerings outside [it] — [these] do not contaminate with tumah via the throat. [If] he performed melikah with a knife,
[or] he performed melikah on a non-sacred [bird] inside, [or on] offerings outside, [or on] turtledoves whose time has not arrived, or young pigeons whose time has passed, [or on a bird] whose wing has atrophied, or whose eye was blinded, or whose foot was cut off — [they] contaminate with tumah via the throat. This is the rule: Anything whose disqualification is in the Holy does not contaminate with tumah via the throat; [but] if its disqualification is not in the Holy, it contaminates with tumah via the throat. All disqualified persons who perform melikah, their melikah is not valid, but [the birds] do not contaminate with tumah via the throat.
Suggestions

