Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Zevachim, 75

1) BLOODS OF KORBANOS THAT BECAME MIXED TOGETHER

QUESTION: The Beraisa discusses various cases in which one type of Korban became mixed with another type, and the identity of each Korban is unknown. Specifically, the cases are a Korban Yachid that became mixed with another Korban Yachid, a Korban Tzibur that became mixed with another Korban Tzibur, and a Korban Yachid and a Korban Tzibur that became mixed with each other. The Beraisa tells us that one must perform four Haza'os from the blood of each Korban. This Halachah applies, however, only when the blood of each Korban is in its own vessel and has not been mixed with the blood of another Korban. If the bloods of the various animals have been mixed together, then only four Haza'os are done altogether, for all of the Korbanos.

What is the first part of the Beraisa teaching us? It is obvious that as long as the bloods have not become mixed, we should not mix them, but rather we should perform separate Haza'os for each Korban! (TAHARAS HA'KODESH)

ANSWER: In the case of a Korban Yachid that becomes mixed with a Korban Tzibur, there is a strong reason to suggest that it is preferable to mix the bloods of the two animals together. The Halachah is that a Korban Tzibur has precedence over a Korban Yachid because of the principle of "Tadir v'she'Eino Tadir, Tadir Kodem" -- that which comes more frequently takes precedence. A Korban Tzibur, such as a Korban Tamid, comes more frequently than a Korban Yachid, and, therefore, when the two Korbanos are waiting to be offered, the blood of the Korban Tzibur should be placed on the Mizbe'ach before the blood of the Korban Yachid. Accordingly, in the case of a Korban Yachid and a Korban Tzibur that became mixed and are unidentifiable from each other, there is reason to say that we should mix the bloods of the two Korbanos and perform their Zerikas ha'Dam together, so that the blood of the Korban Yachid not be placed on the Mizbe'ach before the blood of the Korban Tzibur. The reason why we do *not* apply this logic is because of another principle, "Ein Osin Mitzvos Chavilos Chavilos" -- we do not want to make "bundles" out of Mitzvos, but rather we perform each one separately.

There is a problem, though, with this answer. The TAHARAS HA'KODESH points out that we find that we forego the entire Zerikas ha'Dam of a Korban instead of violating the Halachah of precedence, and therefore the Halachah of precedence should override the concern for "Ein Osin Mitzvos Chavilos." The Mishnah later (81b) discusses a case in which blood that is supposed to be placed on the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon becomes mixed with blood that is supposed to be placed on the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi. This poses a dilemma. If we place both bloods on the outer Mizbe'ach first, then we will be violating the rule that the Avodah done with the inner Mizbe'ach precedes that done with the outer Mizbe'ach. On the other hand, we cannot place both bloods on the inner Mizbe'ach first, because if the blood that was supposed to be placed on the outer Mizbe'ach was that of a Korban Chatas, then the Korban will become Pasul by having its blood placed on the inner Mizbe'ach (as the verse states, "v'Chol Chatas Asher Yuva mi'Damah El Ohel Mo'ed..." (Vayikra 6:23)). In such a case, the Halachah is that both bloods are cast into the Amah and the Korban is Pasul. We see from that case that in order to avoid violating the principle of precedence, we let the Korban become Pasul.

Why, then, does the Beraisa here not suggest that we mix the bloods in order to avoid risking a violation of the principle of precedence? If, as the Mishnah later (81b) teaches, we are supposed to throw out the blood in order to avoid violating the precedence of the Korbanos, then, in this case we certainly should mix them!

There are two possible answers to this question.

1. In the Beraisa here, it is merely a *possibility* that the Zerikas ha'Dam of the less-frequent Korban will be performed first. It might happen that the blood of the Korban Tzibur will be placed on the Mizbe'ach first, and thus the principle of precedence will not be violated. In the case of the Mishnah later (81b), if the bloods will be placed on the outer Mizbe'ach first, then the principle of precedence will *certainly* be violated, and, therefore, the bloods are cast into the Amah.

2. The requirement of the precedence of something that is more frequent ("Tadir") applies only when it is possible to preserve the precedence by performing the act now. If the act which is "Tadir" is not ready yet to be performed, or there is some reason for not performing it now, then we are not required to wait but rather we may perform the less-frequent act right away. Therefore, when the bloods are mixed and we have no way of knowing which blood came from the Korban which is "Tadir" and which blood came from the Korban which is not "Tadir," the requirement of precedence does not apply.

In contrast, the precedence of an Avodah done with the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi over an Avodah done with the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon is different. There *is* an obligation to bring the blood upon the inner Mizbe'ach first, even if that means delaying the blood of the outer Mizbe'ach until the blood of the inner Mizbe'ach is ready. Therefore, in the case of the Mishnah later (81b), although we are unable to perform the Avodah of the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi first, we still cannot perform the Avodah of the Mizbe'ach ha'Chitzon before that of the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi, and thus the bloods must be poured into the Amah. (M. Dicker)

75b

QUESTION: The Gemara discusses the principle of "Ein Mevi'in Kodshim l'Veis ha'Pesul" -- we may not cause an item of Kodshim to become Pasul before its allotted time. Accordingly, a Korban Shelamim cannot be offered with the stringencies of a Korban Asham, because the Korban will then be permitted to be eaten only for one day and one night, and not for two days and one night, thus causing it to become Pasul before its allotted time.

The Gemara teaches that this principle also applies to items of Terumah. One may not purchase foods of Terumah with money of Shevi'is (i.e. money received in exchange for fruits of Shevi'is). This is because the Terumah will acquire the Kedushah of Shevi'is, and, consequently, it will need to be eaten or destroyed before the time of Bi'ur, thus limiting the time it may be eaten.

Is this principle a Halachah d'Oraisa, or is it a decree instituted by the Rabanan?

ANSWER: The MABIT in KIRYAS SEFER ((Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin #6) says that the principle of "Ein Mevi'in Kodshim l'Veis ha'Pesul" is only mid'Rabanan. Mid'Oraisa, we would offer a Korban Shelamim with the stringencies of a Korban Asham.

This view seems to contradict the Gemara in Bechoros, however. The Gemara in Bechoros (12b) says that a dough made from flour of Shevi'is should be exempt from the laws of Chalah. This is because the Chalah might become Tamei, and Chalah that is Tamei may not be eaten, but rather it must be burned. Since it is improper to burn an item of Shevi'is, there is no obligation to separate Chalah from dough made from Shevi'is flour. By saying that Shevi'is is exempt from Chalah (which is a Chiyuv d'Oraisa), the Gemara there implies that, mid'Oraisa, we are not supposed to cause a possible loss to Kodshim. Similarly, causing Kodshim to become Pasul before its time should be included in this d'Oraisa law!

The MINCHAS SHLOMO (#39) answers by giving a different explanation for the Gemara in Bechoros. The Gemara there does not mean that dough of Shevi'is should be exempt from Chalah because of the possibility that it might become Tamei and need to be burned. Rather, the Gemara means that if the dough would become Tamei *now*, there would be no obligation to separate Chalah because doing so would be causing Shevi'is products to need to be burned for *certain*. Therefore. The Gemara deduces from this that there is no requirement to separate Chalah even when the dough is Tahor, due to a Hekesh between Chalah that is Tahor and Chalah that is Tamei. (M. Dicker)

QUESTION: The Gemara discusses the principle of "Ein Mevi'in Kodshim l'Veis ha'Pesul" -- we may not cause an item of Kodshim to become Pasul before its allotted time. Accordingly, a Korban Shelamim cannot be offered with the stringencies of a Korban Asham, because the Korban will then be permitted to be eaten only for one day and one night, and not for two days and one night, thus causing it to become Pasul before its allotted time.

The Gemara teaches that this principle also applies to items of Terumah. One may not purchase foods of Terumah with money of Shevi'is (i.e. money received in exchange for fruits of Shevi'is). This is because the Terumah will acquire the Kedushah of Shevi'is, and, consequently, it will need to be eaten or destroyed before the time of Bi'ur, thus limiting the time it may be eaten.

However, from the words of the RAMBAM (Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 6:10) it seems that there is an exception to the principle of "Ein Mevi'in Kodshim l'Veis ha'Pesul."

ANSWER: We find that there are a number of exceptions to the principle of "Ein Mevi'in Kodshim l'Veis ha'Pesul."

1. The RAMBAM (Hilchos Shemitah v'Yovel 5:4) writes that small amounts of Shevi'is produce may be cooked together with Terumah, since it will be eaten right away and will not be left around for such a long time that it will become unfit for eating (at the time of Bi'ur). This ruling is based on the Yerushalmi.

2. In the case of a Korban, if the time for eating only a small amount of the meat of the Korban will be limited, it is not considered to be causing Kodshim to become Pasul. The Rambam (Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 6:10) writes this with regard to the Korban of a Nazir that became mixed with a Korban Todah; although the Zero'a Beshelah of a Nazir is permitted only to Kohanim, we still offer the Shelamim with the stringency of restricting its Zero'a to Kohanim. This is because the restriction affects only a small part of the Korban.

The MINCHAS SHLOMO (#39) understands that this exception is consistent with the Rambam's other exception, that small amounts that can be eaten immediately are not subject to the principle of "Ein Mevi'in Kodshim l'Veis ha'Pesul." In the case of the Korban of a Nazir, the Zero'a Beshelah can (and will) be eaten immediately by the Kohanim and it will not be left to become Pasul.

Others, however, explain that the law with regard to a Korban of a Nazir that become mixed with a Korban Todah is unrelated to the earlier ruling of the Rambam regarding Shevi'is foods that will be eaten right away. The CHASAM SOFER (YD 114) learns that in the case of a Korban of a Nazir that became mixed with a Korban Todah, there are two possibilities as to what to do. The first option is that we should leave both Korbanos to graze and become blemished so that they may be redeemed and new animals brought. The second option is that we should offer both of them with the risk of losing the Mitzvah to eat *part* of the Korban. Here, we prefer to offer them even though a small part of the Todah might not be eaten (and become Pasul), instead of losing the Korbanos entirely.

The CHANUKAS HA'BAYIS (#27) points out that we see from the ruling of the Rambam that the prohibition against causing a Korban to become Pasul is due to the desecration of its Kedushah. Accordingly, it should not make a difference how much of the Korban is becoming Pasul, nor should a rational reason (such as to avoid losing the Korbanos entirely) permit desecrating the Kedushah of the Korban. Rather, these exceptions are permitted because the prohibition against causing Kodshim to become Pasul is due to the fact that one is removing the Mitzvas Achilah (the Mitzvah to eat) from the Korban. Even if the Zero'a Beshelah will not be eaten, nevertheless the Mitzvas Achilah will be fulfilled with the rest of the Korban; it is not being eliminated completely. Therefore, the most preferable course of action is to ensure that the entire Mitzvas Achilah will be fulfilled. If, however, we are faced with a choice of either discarding the Korban entirely, or fulfilling only *part* of the Mitzvas Achilah, then, logically, we offer the Korban so that the Mitzvas Achilah will be fulfilled for most of the Korban. (M. Dicker)