Zevachim 20b (כ:) — the Talmud in English

?

performed the kiddush with a sacred vessel outside

the Temple courtyard,

or

performed the kiddush

with an ordinary vessel inside

the Temple courtyard,

or

did not perform the kiddush of his hands and feet, but

immersed in the waters of a cave

that are valid for immersion,

and performed the service—

his service is invalid!

For although immersion is more significant than the kiddush of the hands and feet, since he immerses his entire body, nevertheless it is not effective in place of the kiddush performed with a sacred vessel!

And we infer:

The reason is that he performed the kiddush with a sacred vessel outside,

and therefore his kiddush is ineffective;

but if he performed the kiddush inside and then left,

and subsequently performed the service, his service is

valid.

For if the kiddush were invalid because he left, why was it necessary to state that the kiddush performed outside is invalid because he did not perform it inside, in its proper place? It should be invalid because he left, since when he performs the kiddush outside, is there any greater leaving than this? Rather, it is proven that it is not invalid because of leaving!

And we reject this:

Perhaps the invalidation of

“performed the kiddush with a sacred vessel outside”

refers to a case where his body did not leave, but only his hands, and he performed the kiddush of them outside.

What are the circumstances?

For example, he extended his hands outside

outside,

and performed the kiddush

of them outside with water from a sacred vessel. Therefore, it was invalidated only because the kiddush was not performed inside, and not by the law of something that has left.

But if his entire body left,

the question

remains for you:

whether he is required to return and perform the kiddush?!

Rav Zevid said to Rav Pappa: Come and hear: If he left

the priest

beyond the wall of the Temple courtyard, if

in order

to remain

outside he left, he is

required to immerse.

If he left only briefly, he is

required to perform the kiddush of his hands and feet!

He said to him

Rav Pappa to Rav Zevid: Its invalidation is not due to distraction. Rather,

what are we dealing with here? For example, he left to remove his sandals,

and this is what “in order to remain outside” means; therefore he must immerse,

and

likewise, when he left

to urinate,

which is what “briefly” means; therefore he must perform the kiddush of his hands and feet.

And we ask: Is it possible to establish this law as referring to one who left to remove his sandals or to urinate?

It is explicitly

already

taught

at the end:

Everyone who removes his sandals is required to immerse,

and everyone who urinates is required to perform the kiddush of his hands and feet!?

And we answer:

Teach

first that if he left in order to remain outside, he is required to immerse, and if he left briefly, he is required to perform the kiddush of his hands and feet!

And afterward it explains

that “in order to remain outside” means removing his sandals, for which he is required to immerse, and “briefly” means urinating, for which he is required to perform the kiddush of his hands and feet.

Come and hear:

A priest engaged in the procedure of the

red heifer

on the Mount of Olives, outside Jerusalem—how does he perform the kiddush of his hands and feet before performing the procedure of the heifer?

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef said: He performs the kiddush

of his hands and feet

with a sacred vessel inside

the Temple courtyard,

and leaves

for the Mount of Olives, for leaving does not invalidate the kiddush of his hands and feet.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

He need not perform the kiddush inside or with a sacred vessel; rather, he performs the kiddush

even outside, even with an ordinary vessel, and even in an earthenware vessel!

And we reject this:

Rav Pappa said: The red heifer is different,

since

all its procedures,

its slaughter and burning, are performed

outside.

Therefore,

leaving does not invalidate it,

the kiddush of the hands and feet that is performed inside and with a sacred vessel [according to Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef].

And we ask:

If so, if the law of the red heifer differs because all its procedures are performed outside,

why do I need

at all

that he perform the kiddush

inside and with a sacred vessel? Why should we not validate, for this reason, performing the kiddush of his hands and feet initially with an ordinary vessel outside?

And we answer: Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef maintains that the kiddush must be performed inside and with a sacred vessel because the laws of the procedure of the red heifer must be performed

resembling a service

that is performed

inside. It is only a scriptural decree that its slaughter and burning be performed outside; but the kiddush, which can be performed inside, must be performed in the manner of a kiddush preceding a service that is performed inside.

The question was raised: Impurity

that befell the priest after he performed the kiddush of his hands and feet [and now the Gemara understood that the issue concerns only impurity of the hands and not impurity of the body],

what is the law regarding its being effective

to invalidate

the kiddush of the hands and feet? [That is, is immersing his hands sufficient to remove the impurity, or must he return and perform the kiddush of his hands and feet?]

For even

if you should conclude that leaving does not invalidate,

perhaps this is because

the person

is

fit

to return and perform the service whenever he wishes, and therefore he does not become distracted, so the kiddush is not invalidated through distraction.

But here, when he became impure,

the person

is not fit,

perhaps

he becomes distracted

from the kiddush,

or perhaps, since he will again be fit,

as he will become fit once he immerses his hands,

he is meticulous,

he carefully guards the kiddush of his hands and feet,

and does not become distracted

from it!?

Come and hear: He performed the kiddush of his hands and feet, and they became impure,

his hands—

he immerses them, and need not perform the kiddush!

And we reject this:

His hands became impure

alone—

this was not asked of us,

and it is obvious that he need not perform the kiddush.

What was asked of us

is when

his entire body became impure,

and he immersed: whether even in such a case he is required to return and perform the kiddush.

The Gemara asks: If

his entire body became impure, why should I need to conclude that

he is obligated to sanctify his hands and feet

since he must wait for sunset,

for even after his immersion he does not become pure until sunset, and if so, certainly

he has diverted his attention

for such a long period?!

And we answer: The case of the question is

for example, that he became impure close to sunset,

and immersed, leaving him only a short period until sunset. The issue is whether he diverted his attention during this short period because he was unfit for service during it, or not .

Come and hear: The red heifer

—

Rabbi Hiyya bar Yosef said: He sanctifies

the hands and feet of the priest who performs its service before the service

in a sacred vessel, inside, and he goes out

and performs the service on the Mount of Olives.

And Rabbi Yohanan said: He may sanctify even outside, even in a non-sacred vessel, and even in an earthenware shard!