## Zevachim Daf 77b ###### Zevachim 77b:1 [Zevachim 77b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:1) אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: בְּדוּקִּין שֶׁבָּעַיִן, וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא – דְּאָמַר: אִם עָלוּ לֹא יֵרְדוּ. אֵימַר דְּאָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא – דְּאִי עֲבַד; לְכַתְּחִלָּה מִי אָמַר?! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Huna says:** When Rabbi Eliezer makes reference to a blemished animal, he is speaking of an unobtrusive blemish, e.g., one that is **on the cornea of the eye. And** his ruling is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rabbi Akiva, who says** that in the case of an offering with such a blemish, **if** its sacrificial parts **ascended** the altar, **they shall not descend** from it, because it is not a disgrace to the altar for the sacrificial parts of such an offering to be burned on it. The Gemara raises a difficulty: **Say that Rabbi Akiva says** this is the *halakha* **after the fact,** meaning that if the priest already brought up the limbs of these blemished animals, they do not descend from the altar. **Does** Rabbi Akiva **say** that one may burn a mixture of these limbs ***ab initio*?** ###### Zevachim 77b:2 [Zevachim 77b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:2) אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – כְּגוֹן שֶׁעָלוּ עַל גַּבֵּי כֶּבֶשׁ. אִי הָכִי, אֲפִילּוּ בְּעֵינַיְיהוּ! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Pappa says: What are we dealing with here?** We are dealing with a case **where** all the limbs in the mixture were **brought up upon** the **ramp.** Since they have been brought on the ramp and sanctified as offerings, it is considered after the fact. The Gemara raises a difficulty: **If so,** i.e., if we are dealing with a case in which the limbs were already carried to the ramp, then **even** if they were **as is,** and not intermingled, the limbs of the blemished animal should be burned, as claimed by Rabbi Akiva. ###### Zevachim 77b:3 [Zevachim 77b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:3) אֶלָּא טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: מִיעֵט רַחֲמָנָא ״מוּם בָּם״ – הוּא דְּלֹא יֵרָצוּ, הָא עַל יְדֵי תַּעֲרוֹבֶת – יֵרָצוּ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rather, the reason of Rabbi Eliezer** is that with regard to the prohibition against sacrificing a blemished animal upon the altar, **the Merciful One excludes** certain cases. After listing the various disqualifying blemishes, the verse states: “Neither from the hand of a foreigner shall you offer the bread of your God of any of these, because their corruption is in them, there is a blemish in them; they shall not be accepted for you” (Leviticus 22:25). This teaches that **it is** only if there is **a blemish** clearly **in them that they shall not be accepted; but** if they were sacrificed **by means of a mixture they shall be accepted.** This exclusion is stated only with regard to blemished animals, not with regard to animals that copulated with people, and consequently the limbs of these animals are not brought up to the altar even if they became intermingled with the limbs of fit offerings. ###### Zevachim 77b:4 [Zevachim 77b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:4) וְרַבָּנַן – ״מוּם בָּם״ הוּא דְּלֹא יֵרָצוּ, הָא עָבַר מוּם – יֵרָצוּ. וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר – מִ״בָּם״–״בָּהֶם״, וְרַבָּנַן – ״בָּם״–״בָּהֶם״ לָא דָּרְשִׁי. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara asks: **And the Rabbis,** how do they expound this verse? The Gemara explains that they expound it as follows: **It is** only if the **blemish** is still **in them that they shall not be accepted; but** if their **blemish has passed, they shall be accepted. And Rabbi Eliezer** derives this *halakha* **from** the previous clause in that same verse: “Because their corruption is in them [*bahem*].” Since the verse could have stated the shorter form of ***bam*,** and instead stated **“*bahem*,”** one derives from here that if the animal no longer is blemished it is accepted as an offering. **And** as for **the Rabbis, they do not interpret** anything from the variation between ***bam*** and **“*bahem*”;** they do not see this as a significant deviation from the standard language of the verse. ###### Zevachim 77b:5 [Zevachim 77b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:5) אִי הָכִי, ״רוֹאֶה״?! הָא רַחֲמָנָא אַכְשְׁרֵיהּ! לְדִבְרֵיהֶם קָאָמַר לְהוּ: לְדִידִי – רַחֲמָנָא אַכְשְׁרֵיהּ; לְדִידְכוּ – אוֹדוֹ לִי מִיהָא, בְּשַׂר בַּעֲלַת מוּם – כְּעֵצִים דָּמֵי, מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַבְּשַׂר חַטָּאת! **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara asks: **If that is so,** and Rabbi Eliezer permits the limbs of blemished animals to be sacrificed if they are in a mixture, why is it necessary for him to say: I **view** the flesh of the limbs of the blemished animals as though they are pieces of wood? After all, **the Merciful One permits** them as an offering. The Gemara explains that Rabbi Eliezer is **speaking to** the Rabbis **in accordance with their statement,** as follows: **According to my** opinion, **the Merciful One permits** these limbs to be sacrificed upon the altar. But even **according to your** opinion, **at least agree with me** that the **flesh of a blemished** animal that was intermingled with the flesh of a qualified offering **is considered like wood, just as is** the *halakha* of the **flesh of a sin offering** that became intermingled with the flesh of a burnt offering, as according to this *baraita* the Rabbis concede that the flesh of these two offerings should be sacrificed together. ###### Zevachim 77b:6 [Zevachim 77b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:6) וְרַבָּנַן – הָכָא מְאִיסִי, הָתָם לָא מְאִיסִי. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara asks: **And the Rabbis,** how do they respond to this claim of Rabbi Eliezer? The Gemara explains: According to the Rabbis there is a difference between the cases: **Here,** with regard to a mixture that includes limbs of blemished animals, these limbs **are repulsive,** and therefore they may not be brought upon the altar, even as wood. Conversely, **there,** in the case of a mixture of limbs of a sin offering and limbs of a burnt offering, the limbs of the sin offering **are not repulsive** in and of themselves, and consequently they may be sacrificed upon the altar as wood. ###### Zevachim 77b:7 [Zevachim 77b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:7) **מַתְנִי׳** אֵבָרִין בְּאֵבָרִין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין – רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אִם קָרַב רֹאשׁ אֶחָד מֵהֶן – יִקְרְבוּ כׇּל הָרָאשִׁין. כְּרָעַיִם שֶׁל אֶחָד מֵהֶן – יִקְרְבוּ כָּל הַכְּרָעַיִם, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֲפִילּוּ קָרְבוּ כֻּלָּם חוּץ מֵאֶחָד מֵהֶן – יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵיפָה. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **MISHNA:** In a case where **limbs** of burnt offerings fit for sacrifice were intermingled **with limbs of blemished** burnt offerings, **Rabbi Eliezer says:** Although all the limbs are unfit for sacrifice, **if the head of one of them was sacrificed all the heads shall be sacrificed,** as the head that was sacrificed is assumed to have been that of the unfit animal in the mixture. Likewise, if one sacrificed **the legs of one of them all the legs shall be sacrificed. And the Rabbis say: Even** if **all** the limbs **were sacrificed except for one of them,** there is a concern that the remaining limb is the unfit limb, which may not be sacrificed. Rather, all of the limbs **must go out to the place of burning** in the Temple courtyard. ###### Zevachim 77b:8 [Zevachim 77b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:8) **גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: לֹא הִכְשִׁיר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אֶלָּא שְׁנַיִם שְׁנַיִם, אֲבָל אֶחָד אֶחָד – לֹא. מֵתִיב רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֲפִילּוּ קָרְבוּ כּוּלָּן חוּץ מֵאֶחָד מֵהֶן – יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵיפָה! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **GEMARA:** **Rabbi Elazar says: Rabbi Eliezer permitted** the sacrificing of all the heads **only** if they were sacrificed **two** by **two,** as at least one of each pair is certainly permitted; **but** he did **not** permit them to be sacrificed **one** by **one,** in case the priest may be sacrificing the prohibited head by itself. **Rabbi Yirmeya raises an objection** from the mishna, which states: **And the Rabbis say: Even** if **all** the limbs **were sacrificed except for one of them,** all the limbs **must go out to the place of burning** in the Temple courtyard. This indicates that even in this situation, where only one of the limbs remains, the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis still applies, which means that Rabbi Eliezer permits it to be sacrificed despite the fact that it is only one limb. ###### Zevachim 77b:9 [Zevachim 77b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:9) אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בַּר תַּחְלִיפָא, אַסְבְּרַהּ לָךְ: מַאי אֶחָד – זוּג אֶחָד. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rabbi Yirmeya bar Taḥlifa said to** Rabbi Yirmeya in response: **I will explain** the meaning of this statement **to you: What** does the mishna mean when it states: Except for **one** of them? It means except for **one pair,** i.e., two limbs, as even Rabbi Eliezer did not permit one to sacrifice the limbs individually. ###### Zevachim 77b:10 [Zevachim 77b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/77b:10) **מַתְנִי׳** דָּם שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמַיִם, אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מַרְאִית דָּם – כָּשֵׁר. נִתְעָרֵב בְּיַיִן – רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְּאִילּוּ הוּא מַיִם. נִתְעָרֵב בְּדַם בְּהֵמָה אוֹ בְּדַם הַחַיָּה – רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְּאִילּוּ הוּא מַיִם. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **MISHNA:** In the case of **blood** of an offering fit for sacrifice **that was mixed with water, if** the mixture **has the appearance of blood** it is **fit** for sprinkling on the altar, even though the majority of the mixture is water. If the blood **was mixed with** red **wine, one views** the wine **as though it is water.** If that amount of water would leave the mixture with the appearance of blood it is fit for presentation. And likewise if the blood **was mixed with the blood of** a non-sacred **domesticated animal or the blood of** a non-sacred **undomesticated animal, one considers** the non-sacred blood **as though it is water.**