## Meilah Daf 6b

###### Meilah 6b:1
[Meilah 6b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:1)

**מַתְנִי׳** בְּשַׂר קׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁיָּצָא לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** The mishna presents a dispute with regard to the status of offerings of the most sacred order, which normally are not subject to the *halakhot* of misuse once their blood has been sprinkled and they have been permitted to the priests. The case of the mishna is **the meat of offerings of the most sacred order,** whose consumption is permitted from the moment their blood was sprinkled, **that left** the Temple courtyard **before the sprinkling of the blood,** and then reentered the courtyard.


###### Meilah 6b:2
[Meilah 6b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:2)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: מוֹעֲלִין בּוֹ, וְאֵין חַיָּיבִין עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם פִּיגּוּל וְנוֹתָר וְטָמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Eliezer says:** The sprinkling of this blood does not permit its consumption by the priests. Consequently, one is liable for **misusing it. And** he is **not liable for** eating **it due to** violation of the prohibitions of ***piggul*,** if he partook of it after it was slaughtered with the intent to partake of it or sprinkle its blood beyond its designated time, **or** of ***notar*,** if he partook of the meat after it remained overnight, **or** of partaking of the meat while **ritually impure.**


###### Meilah 6b:3
[Meilah 6b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:3)

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵין מוֹעֲלִין בּוֹ, וְחַיָּיבִין עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם פִּיגּוּל וְנוֹתָר וְטָמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Akiva says:** The sprinkling is effective despite the fact that the meat left the Temple courtyard and was disqualified, and therefore one is **not** liable for **misusing it.** Likewise, other *halakhot* that apply to offerings whose blood was sprinkled apply to it, **and** consequently **one is liable for** eating **it due to** violation of the prohibitions of partaking of meat that is ***piggul*, or *notar*, or** remained overnight, **or** of partaking of the meat while **ritually impure.**


###### Meilah 6b:4
[Meilah 6b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:4)

אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: וַהֲרֵי הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן עוֹמְדוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Akiva said,** in support of his opinion: **But** there is the case of **one who designated** an animal as **his sin offering and it was lost, and he designated another** animal **in its stead, and thereafter the first** sin offering **was found and both of them are standing** fit for sacrifice. If he slaughtered both animals at the same time and sprinkled the blood of one of them, which means that the second was disqualified as a leftover sin offering, the question arises as to the status of the meat of the second animal with regard to the *halakhot* of misuse.


###### Meilah 6b:5
[Meilah 6b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:5)

לֹא כְּשֵׁם שֶׁדָּמָהּ פּוֹטֵר אֶת בְּשָׂרָהּ, כָּךְ הוּא פּוֹטֵר אֶת בְּשַׂר חֲבֶרְתָּהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Is it not** the case that **just as** the **blood** of the animal whose blood was sprinkled **exempts its meat from** liability for its misuse, **so** too **it exempts the meat of the other** animal? Since he could have chosen to sprinkle the blood of either animal, they are considered as though they were one offering.


###### Meilah 6b:6
[Meilah 6b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:6)

אִם פָּטַר דָּמָהּ אֶת בְּשַׂר חֲבֶרְתָּהּ מִן הַמְּעִילָה, דִּין הוּא שֶׁיִּפְטֹר אֶת בְּשַׂר עַצְמָהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If so, one may learn from there by an *a fortiori* inference with regard to the case of sprinkling the blood of meat that left the courtyard and returned: **If** the sprinkling of **its blood exempted the meat of the other** animal **from** the *halakhot* of **misuse,** it is only **right that it** should **exempt its own meat** that left the courtyard.


###### Meilah 6b:7
[Meilah 6b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:7)

אֵימוּרַי קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים שֶׁיָּצְאוּ לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna adds that just as Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva disagree as to whether the sprinkling of blood exempts meat that left the courtyard from liability for its misuse, so too, they disagree with regard to **the sacrificial portions of offerings of lesser sanctity** consumed on the altar **that left** the Temple courtyard **before the sprinkling of the blood.** The dispute is whether the subsequent sprinkling of the blood generates liability for misuse of those portions.


###### Meilah 6b:8
[Meilah 6b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:8)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אֵין מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, וְאֵין חַיָּיבִין עֲלֵיהֶן מִשּׁוּם פִּיגּוּל נוֹתָר וְטָמֵא. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, וְחַיָּיבִין עֲלֵיהֶן מִשּׁוּם פִּיגּוּל נוֹתָר וְטָמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Eliezer says:** The sprinkling of the blood is completely ineffective in rendering those portions consecrated to the Lord. Consequently, one is **not** liable for **misusing them. And** similarly, **one is not liable for their** consumption **due to** violation of the prohibitions of ***piggul*, *notar*, or** of partaking of meat while **ritually impure. Rabbi Akiva says:** The sprinkling is effective, and therefore one is liable for **misusing them. And** likewise, **one is liable for its** consumption **due to** violation of the prohibitions of ***piggul*, *notar*, or** of partaking of the meat while **ritually impure.**


###### Meilah 6b:9
[Meilah 6b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:9)

**גְּמָ׳** וְהָנֵי תַּרְתֵּי לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need the mishna to cite **these two** disagreements, i.e., both the case of offerings of the most sacred order and offerings of lesser sanctity? After all, both disagreements are based on the same principle.


###### Meilah 6b:10
[Meilah 6b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:10)

צְרִיכִי, דְּאִי אִיתְּמַר בְּקׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: בְּהָא קָא אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מוֹעֲלִין בּוֹ, מִשּׁוּם דִּזְרִיקָה כְּתִיקְנָהּ מַפְּקָא מִידֵי מְעִילָה, שֶׁלֹּא כְּתִיקְנָהּ – לָא מַפְּקָא מִידֵי מְעִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Both cases **are necessary, as, if** the disagreement **was stated** only **with regard to offerings of the most sacred order, I would say** that it is specifically in **that** case that **Rabbi Eliezer says** that one is liable for **misusing** the meat of the offering, **due to** the fact **that** only **sprinkling** the blood **properly removes** the offering **from** being subject to the *halakhot* of **misuse.** By contrast, sprinkling the blood **improperly,** including for meat that left the courtyard, **does not remove** the offering **from** the *halakhot* of **misuse.**


###### Meilah 6b:11
[Meilah 6b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:11)

אֲבָל לְאֵיתוֹיֵי לִידֵי מְעִילָה – מוֹדֵי לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא דַּאֲפִילּוּ שֶׁלֹּא כְּתִיקְנָהּ מַיְיתָא לִידֵי מְעִילָה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** with regard to the issue of when the rite of sprinkling **brings** the offering **into** being subject to the *halakhot* of **misuse,** i.e., in the case of sacrificial portions of offerings of lesser sanctity, Rabbi Eliezer **concedes to Rabbi Akiva that even** sprinkling the blood **improperly,** as in this case, **brings** the offering **into** being subject to the *halakhot* of **misuse.**


###### Meilah 6b:12
[Meilah 6b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:12)

וְאִי אִיתְּמַר גַּבֵּי קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: גַּבֵּי קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים הוּא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, דַּאֲפִילּוּ זְרִיקָה שֶׁלֹּא כְּתִיקְנָהּ מַיְיתָא לִידֵי מְעִילָה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** by contrast, **if** their disagreement **was stated** only **with regard to offerings of lesser sanctity, I would say** that **it is** specifically **in** the case of **offerings of lesser sanctity that Rabbi Akiva said** one is liable for **misusing them.** This is due to the fact **that** here the act of sprinkling serves to include them in the category of misuse, and therefore **even sprinkling** the blood **improperly,** as in this case, **brings** the offering **into** being subject to the *halakhot* of **misuse.**


###### Meilah 6b:13
[Meilah 6b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:13)

אֲבָל קׇדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים, דִּלְאַפּוֹקֵי הוּא, שֶׁלֹּא כְּתִיקְנָהּ – לָא מַפְּקָא מִידֵי מְעִילָה, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** with regard to **offerings of the most sacred order, where** the sprinkling of the blood serves **to remove** the offering from being subject to the *halakhot* of misuse, one might say that Rabbi Akiva agrees **that** sprinkling the blood **improperly does not remove** the offering **from** being subject to the *halakhot* of **misuse.** Therefore, the mishna **teaches us** that the *tanna’im* disagree in both cases.


###### Meilah 6b:14
[Meilah 6b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:14)

אִתְּמַר, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כִּי אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא זְרִיקָה מוֹעֶלֶת לַיּוֹצֵא – שֶׁיָּצָא מִקְצָתוֹ, אֲבָל יוֹצֵא כּוּלּוֹ – לֹא אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It **was stated** that *amora’im* disagree with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna. **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: When Rabbi Akiva says** that **sprinkling is effective to** remove the meat of offerings of the most sacred order **that left** the courtyard from the *halakhot* of misuse, that applies specifically in a case **where** only **part of it left** the courtyard and part remained inside. In such a situation, as the sprinkling is effective for the portion that remained inside the courtyard, it also is effective for the portion that left the courtyard. **But** if **all of it left** the courtyard, **Rabbi Akiva did not say** that the sprinkling is effective to remove the meat from the *halakhot* of misuse.


###### Meilah 6b:15
[Meilah 6b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Meilah/r/6b:15)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַסִּי לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּבָר לִימְּדוּנִי חֲבֵירַי שֶׁבַּגּוֹלָה

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Asi said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: My colleagues in the exile,** i.e., the Sages of Babylonia, **already taught me** that