Zevachim Daf 14 זבחים דַף 14

Rebbe Shimon ben Lakish said that although Rebbe Shimon holds that שלא לשמה intent during הולכה does not disqualify korbanos, מודה רבי שמעון בהולכת חטאות הפנימיות – Rebbe Shimon concedes regarding bringing blood of the inner chataos that מחשבה פוסלת בהו – intention (for a different korban) invalidates them, because הולכה is unavoidable for this korban, since it is shechted in the עזרה, and its blood is applied in the היכל. The Gemara objects that Rebbe Shimon holds that one is not liable for פיגול intention for any korban whose blood is not applied on the מזבח החיצון – outer mizbeiach (and presumably the same applies to שלא לשמה)!? The Gemara answers that although a חטאת הפנימית cannot become פיגול (to obligate כרת for eating it), the korban is still פסול, based on a kal vachomer: if intent שלא לשמה, which does not invalidate a שלמים, invalidates a חטאת, then intent for חוץ לזמנו, which invalidates a שלמים, certainly should invalidate any חטאת! [However, since intent שלא לשמה does not incur כרת, we cannot derive כרת for חטאות הפנימיות from this kal vachomer]

Rav Chisda was asked: הולכה בזר מהו – what is the halachah if the bringing of the blood was done by a non-Kohen? He answered that it is valid, bringing support from a passuk which says “they” shechted the pesach, and the Kohanim threw the blood "מידם" – from their hands, i.e., the hands of those who shechted. Since a זר can shecht, this implies that זרים can also do הולכה. However, this is refuted from a Baraisa which explicitly invalidates הולכה performed by a זר. The passuk is explained: דעביד מעשה אצטבא – [the זר] only did the act of a pillar, i.e., he stood in place while holding the blood, without bringing it closer to the מזבח. Rabbah and Rav Yosef said that this question is subject to the machlokes between Rebbe Shimon and the Rabbonon. According to Rebbe Shimon, that הולכה is not considered an עבודה, since it can be avoided, then הולכה of a זר would not disqualify. Below, the Gemara objects that bringing the אימורים to the מזבח, which is not critical for כפרה, must still be performed by a כהן!? The Gemara suggests that this is a specific גזירת הכתוב, but objects that a kal vachomer dictates that the same should apply to הולכה, which is essential!? Indeed, Rebbe Elazar said that even Rebbe Shimon agrees that הולכה בזר is פסול.

Rabbah and Rav Yosef had said that according to the Rabbonon, that even avoidable עבודות are considered an עבודה, then הולכה בזר would be פסול. Abaye asked them that שחיטה is unavoidable, yet it is still valid when performed by a זר!? They answered: שחיטה לאו עבודה היא – shechitah is not considered an avodah. Rashi explains that since all people disqualified from other עבודות may perform shechitah (and, Tosafos adds, a כהן is never required for any shechitah), it is apparently not a significant עבודה. The Gemara objects that Rav disqualifies shechitah of the פרה אדומה by a זר!? It answers that פרה אדומה is different, because it is קדשי בדק הבית, i.e., monetary kedushah, and has no עבודה at all. Rather, its disqualification of זרים must be a unique גזירת הכתוב. The Gemara objects that if a זר disqualifies the shechitah of קדשי בדק הבית, certainly he should disqualify the shechitah of true korbanos!? Rav Shishi brei d’Rav Idi explained that this is similar to מראות נגעים – appearances of [צערת]- afflictions, whose examination is certainly not an עבודה, yet requires a Kohen.