## Pesachim Daf 78a

###### Pesachim 78a:1
[Pesachim 78a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:1)

אֶלָּא, לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן — בְּיָחִיד, כָּאן — בְּצִיבּוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it is **not difficult: There,** where Rabbi Yehoshua said that it is invalid *ab initio*, he was referring to the offering of **an individual. Here, in** the mishna, which states that it may be sacrificed even *ab initio*, it is referring to an offering involving **the public.**


###### Pesachim 78a:2
[Pesachim 78a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:2)

נֵימָא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל אֲכִילוֹת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵין הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל אֲכִילוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Shall we say that the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei? As it was taught** in a *baraita*: **Rabbi Eliezer says** that **the frontplate appeases** God **for** the impurity of portions of offerings that are supposed to be **eaten. Rabbi Yosei says** that **the frontplate does not appease** God **for** the impurity of portions of offerings that are supposed to be **eaten;** it appeases God only for the impurity of the parts of offerings that are burned on the altar.


###### Pesachim 78a:3
[Pesachim 78a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:3)

קָא סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ מִדְּקָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: אֵין הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל אֲכִילוֹת — כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ סְבִירָא לֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר בָּעֵינַן תַּרְתֵּי. נֵימָא הַשְׁתָּא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the question: It could **enter your mind** to say: **From** the fact **that Rabbi Yosei said** that **the frontplate does not appease** God **for** the impurity of portions of offerings that are supposed to be **eaten,** it can be inferred that **he holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua, who said** that **we require** the **two** parts of the offering, the blood and the meat, to be valid. If this were not the case, it would be sufficient for the frontplate to appease God for the impurity of the blood, and it would not be necessary for the frontplate to appease God for the impurity of the portions of offerings that are supposed to be eaten. **Let us now say that the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei.**


###### Pesachim 78a:4
[Pesachim 78a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:4)

לָא, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סְבִירָא לֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר: דָּם — אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בָּשָׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this assertion: **No, Rabbi Yosei holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer, who said** that the **blood** of an offering is accepted **although there is no meat.**


###### Pesachim 78a:5
[Pesachim 78a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:5)

אִי הָכִי, לְמַאי הִלְכְתָא אֵין הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל אֲכִילוֹת? וְלִיטַעְמָיךְ, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר דְּאָמַר: הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה, כֵּיוָן דְּאָמַר: דָּם — אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בָּשָׂר, הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל אֲכִילוֹת לְמַאי הִלְכְתָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so, with regard to what *halakha*** did Rabbi Yosei say that **the frontplate does not appease** God **for** the impurity of the portions of offerings that are supposed to be **eaten?** Even if it does not appease God for the impurity of these portions, the offering remains valid. The Gemara rejects the question: **And according to your reasoning,** with regard to **Rabbi Eliezer** himself, **who said** that **the frontplate appeases** God for the impurity of the portions that are supposed to be **eaten, since he said** that the **blood** may be sprinkled **although there is no meat, with regard to what *halakha*** did he make his other statement that **the frontplate appeases** God for the impurity of the portions of offerings that are supposed to be **eaten?** Clearly, whether the frontplate appeases God is significant for reasons other than ensuring that an offering is accepted.


###### Pesachim 78a:6
[Pesachim 78a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:6)

אֶלָּא, לְמִיקְבְּעֵיהּ בְּפִיגּוּל וּלְאַפּוֹקֵי מִידֵי מְעִילָה קָמִיפַּלְגִי. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סָבַר: מְרַצֵּה צִיץ עִילָּוֵיהּ וּמְשַׁוֵּי לֵיהּ כְּטָהוֹר, וְקָבַע לֵיהּ בְּפִיגּוּל, וּמַפֵּיק לֵיהּ מִידֵּי מְעִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the fact that **they disagree** about whether the frontplate appeases God for the impurity of the portions of offerings that are supposed to be eaten determines whether it is possible **to establish** the offering **as** one **disqualified due to improper intent [*piggul*] and** whether it is possible **to exclude** the offering **from** the prohibition of **misuse of consecrated property.** The dispute is to be understood in this light: **Rabbi Eliezer holds** that **the frontplate appeases** God **for** the impurity of the meat that is supposed to be eaten, **and it renders it like pure** meat that is not disqualified. Therefore, although the meat may not be eaten, it may be **established as *piggul*.** Similarly, because it is treated as though it were pure, the sprinkling of the blood of the offering **excludes** the meat **from** the prohibition of **misuse of consecrated property.**


###### Pesachim 78a:7
[Pesachim 78a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:7)

וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר: לָא מְרַצֵּה צִיץ עִילָּוֵיהּ, וְלָא מְשַׁוֵּי לֵיהּ כְּטָהוֹר, וְלָא קָבַע לֵיהּ בְּפִיגּוּל, וְלָא מַפֵּיק לֵיהּ מִידֵּי מְעִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yosei holds** that **the frontplate does not appease God for** the impurity of sacrificial meat that has become impure, **and it does not render it like pure** meat. Therefore, sprinkling the blood of the offering **does not establish it as *piggul* and does not exclude it from** the prohibition of **misusing consecrated property.**


###### Pesachim 78a:8
[Pesachim 78a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:8)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב מָרִי: נְהִי נָמֵי דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, בִּשְׁלָמָא זְבָחִים — אִיכָּא דָּם, עוֹמֶר נָמֵי — אִיכָּא קוֹמֶץ, לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים נָמֵי — אִיכָּא בָּזִיכִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Mari strongly objects to this** conclusion: **Even granting that Rabbi Yosei holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer** that an offering is accepted through the blood alone, even if the meat has become ritually impure, there is still a difficulty. **Granted,** in the case of animal **offerings,** which have two permitting factors, the blood and the meat, **there is** at least one of them, the **blood,** for which the frontplate appeases God and causes the offering to be accepted. With regard to the ***omer*, too, there is the handful,** for which the frontplate appeases God and is thereby validated. With regard to **the shewbread, too, there are the bowls** of frankincense, which permit the bread in the same manner that the handful permits a meal-offering.


###### Pesachim 78a:9
[Pesachim 78a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:9)

אֶלָּא שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** with regard to **the two loaves, what is there to say?** They are completely eaten, and nothing is brought on the altar. How can they be brought in a state of ritual impurity, as the mishna has stated, according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei?


###### Pesachim 78a:10
[Pesachim 78a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:10)

וְכִי תֵּימָא לִקְרַב עִמָּהֶן — הַיְינוּ שַׁלְמֵי צִיבּוּר. אִם כֵּן, הָווּ לְהוּ אַרְבָּעָה, וַאֲנַן — חֲמִשָּׁה תְּנַן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say** that the two loaves are valid because the frontplate appeases God for the impurity of the two lambs **that are sacrificed with them, this is** the same as **the communal peace-offerings** that are mentioned separately in the mishna. **If so, there are** only **four** offerings listed in the mishna. **But we learned** in the mishna that there are **five,** because the two loaves and the communal peace-offerings are listed separately.


###### Pesachim 78a:11
[Pesachim 78a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:11)

אֶלָּא, קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: טוּמְאָה הוּתְּרָה בְּצִיבּוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the previous suggestion is rejected. Instead, it is suggested that **Rabbi Yosei holds** that **ritual impurity is permitted in** cases involving **the public,** even without the frontplate. Therefore, the two loaves remain valid.


###### Pesachim 78a:12
[Pesachim 78a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:12)

וְהָא תַּנְיָא: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה — מַזִּין עָלָיו כׇּל שִׁבְעָה מִכׇּל חַטָּאוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵין מַזִּין עָלָיו אֶלָּא שְׁלִישִׁי וּשְׁבִיעִי בִּלְבַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t** the following *baraita* **taught** concerning the purity of both the High Priest on Yom Kippur and the priest who burns the red heifer, each of whom is separated from his house for seven days to ensure his purity? The *baraita* states: In the case of **both this** priest **and that** priest, **one sprinkles on him all seven** days of his separation **from all the purification offerings,** i.e., the ashes of the red heifers, **that are there** in the Temple. If he had become impure through contact with a corpse, he will be purified through the sprinkling of the purification offering. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: One does not sprinkle upon him** on any day **except for the third and seventh** days of his separation. This ensures his purification.


###### Pesachim 78a:13
[Pesachim 78a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:13)

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי טוּמְאָה הוּתְּרָה בְּצִיבּוּר, לְמָה לִי הַזָּאָה כְּלָל? אֶלָּא מְחַוַּורְתָּא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if it enters your mind** that **Rabbi Yosei holds** that **ritual impurity is permitted in** cases involving **the public, why do I** need **sprinkling at all?** The offerings of Yom Kippur are communal offerings and may be sacrificed even in a state of ritual impurity. **Rather, it is clear** that **the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei.**


###### Pesachim 78a:14
[Pesachim 78a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:14)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְאַבָּיֵי: וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי שְׁטָרָא מְזַכֵּי לְבֵי תְרֵי הוּא?! דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בִּזְבָחִים, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּזְבָחִים, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בִּמְנָחוֹת, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּמְנָחוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to Rabbi Yosei’s statement quoted earlier, **Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Rabbi Yosei is** like **a document that awards** something **to two** conflicting parties, **as it was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei said: I see** as correct **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer with regard to** animal **offerings, and the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua with regard to** animal **offerings, and the statement of Rabbi Eliezer with regard to meal-offerings, and the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua with regard to meal-offerings.**


###### Pesachim 78a:15
[Pesachim 78a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:15)

דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בִּזְבָחִים, שֶׁהָיָה אוֹמֵר: דָּם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בָּשָׂר. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּזְבָחִים, שֶׁהָיָה אוֹמֵר: אִם אֵין דָּם אֵין בָּשָׂר, אִם אֵין בָּשָׂר אֵין דָּם. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בִּמְנָחוֹת, שֶׁהָיָה אוֹמֵר: קוֹמֶץ — אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין שָׁם שִׁירַיִם. וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּמְנָחוֹת, שֶׁהָיָה אוֹמֵר: אִם אֵין שָׁם שִׁירַיִם אֵין קוֹמֶץ, אִם אֵין קוֹמֶץ אֵין שִׁירַיִם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The statement of Rabbi Eliezer** is correct **with regard to** animal **offerings, as he would say** that the **blood** brings atonement **although there is no meat. The statement of Rabbi Yehoshua** is correct **with regard to** animal **offerings, as he would say** that **if there is no blood there is no meat,** and **if there is no meat there is no blood. The statement of Rabbi Eliezer** is correct **with regard to meal-offerings, as he would say** that **the handful** is fit **although there is no remainder. The statement of Rabbi Yehoshua** is correct **with regard to meal-offerings, as he would say** that **if there is no** valid **handful there is no remainder,** and **if there is no remainder there is no handful.** Rabbi Yosei accepted several contradictory statements.


###### Pesachim 78a:16
[Pesachim 78a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִסְתַּבְּרָא קָאָמַר. כִּי קָאֵי בִּזְבָחִים, אָמַר: מִסְתַּבְּרָא כִּי הֵיכִי דִּפְלִיגִי בִּזְבָחִים — פְּלִיגִי נָמֵי בִּמְנָחוֹת. קָאֵי בִּמְנָחוֹת, אָמַר: מִסְתַּבְּרָא כִּי הֵיכִי דִּפְלִיגִי בִּמְנָחוֹת — פְּלִיגִי נָמֵי בִּזְבָחִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye **said to him:** Rabbi Yosei did not intend to issue a *halakhic* ruling in favor of both opinions. Rather, **he said what was reasonable.** How so? **When involved in** studying the *halakhot* of animal **offerings, he said: It is reasonable that just as they disagree with regard to** animal **offerings, they also disagree with regard to meal-offerings.** When **involved in** studying the *halakhot* of **meal-offerings, he said: It is reasonable that just as they disagree with regard to meal-offerings, they also disagree with regard to** animal **offerings.**


###### Pesachim 78a:17
[Pesachim 78a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:17)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ, הָתִינַח: כִּי קָאֵי בִּזְבָחִים אָמַר, מִסְתַּבְּרָא כִּי הֵיכִי דִּפְלִיגִי בִּזְבָחִים פְּלִיגִי נָמֵי בִּמְנָחוֹת, דְּעִיקָּר קְרָאֵי כִּי כְּתִיבִי — בִּזְבָחִים כְּתִיבִי. אֶלָּא, כִּי קָאֵי בִּמְנָחוֹת וְאָמַר, מִסְתַּבְּרָא כִּי הֵיכִי דִּפְלִיגִי בִּמְנָחוֹת פְּלִיגִי נָמֵי בִּזְבָחִים — וְהָא עִיקָּר קְרָאֵי בִּזְבָחִים הוּא דִּכְתִיבִי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Pappa **said to him:** It works out **well** to say that **when he was involved in** animal **offerings, he said: It is reasonable that just as they disagree with regard to** animal **offerings, they also disagree with regard to meal-offerings, as the essential verses written** about this topic **are written with regard to** animal **offerings. But** it does not seem realistic to say that **when he was involved in meal-offerings, he said: It is reasonable that just as they disagree with regard to meal-offerings, they disagree with regard to** animal **offerings. Aren’t the essential verses** about this topic **written with regard to** animal **offerings?** Clearly, meal-offerings would not serve as a model for animal-offerings.


###### Pesachim 78a:18
[Pesachim 78a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:18)

אֶלָּא, לָא קַשְׁיָא: רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּנִטְמָא, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּאָבוּד וְשָׂרוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** this answer has been refuted, **and** Rabbi Yosei’s statement is **not difficult** for a different reason. When he said: **I see** as correct **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer,** he was referring to cases in which part of the offering **became impure.** When he said that he agreed with **the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua,** he was referring to cases in which part of the offering **was lost or burned.** In other words, Rabbi Yosei partially accepts the opinions of both Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua.


###### Pesachim 78a:19
[Pesachim 78a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:19)

בְּנִטְמָא מַאי טַעְמָא — מִשּׁוּם דִּמְרַצֵּי צִיץ. הָא שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי דְּאָמַר: אֵין הַצִּיץ מְרַצֶּה עַל אֲכִילוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **In** a case in which the offering **became impure, what is the reason** that Rabbi Yosei accepts the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer? It is **because the frontplate appeases** God for the impurity. But this is impossible, as **you have heard that Rabbi Yosei said** that **the frontplate does not appease** God **for** the impurity of the portions of offerings that are supposed to be **eaten.**


###### Pesachim 78a:20
[Pesachim 78a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:20)

אֶלָּא, לָא קַשְׁיָא: רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּצִיבּוּר, רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּיָחִיד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** this answer should be rejected, and Rabbi Yosei’s opinion is **not difficult** for the following reason. When he said: **I see** as correct **the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer,** he was referring **to** a case **in** which an offering involves **the public.** When he said: **I see** as correct **the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua,** he was referring **to** the offering of **an individual.**


###### Pesachim 78a:21
[Pesachim 78a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/78a:21)

בְּצִיבּוּר מַאי טַעְמָא — מִשּׁוּם דְּטוּמְאָה הוּתְּרָה בְּצִיבּוּר? חֲדָא: דְּשָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי דְּאָמַר טוּמְאָה דְּחוּיָה הִיא בְּצִיבּוּר, וְעוֹד: אִי בְּצִיבּוּר, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מַכְשִׁיר וְלָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **With regard to** an offering involving **the public, what is the reason** that Rabbi Yosei accepts the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer? It is **because ritual impurity is permitted in** cases involving **the public.** This explanation can be rejected for two reasons. **One** reason is **that you have heard that Rabbi Yosei said** that **ritual impurity is** merely **overridden in** cases involving **the public;** it is not wholly permitted. **And furthermore, if** Rabbi Yosei was referring **to** the offering of **the public,** is it only **Rabbi Eliezer** who validates the offering, **and not Rabbi Yehoshua?**