## Zevachim Daf 79a

###### Zevachim 79a:1
[Zevachim 79a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/79a:1)

הָא דִּידֵיהּ הָא דְּרַבֵּיהּ. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: אֵין דָּם מְבַטֵּל דָּם, אֵין רוֹק מְבַטֵּל רוֹק, וְאֵין מֵי רַגְלַיִם מְבַטְּלִין מֵי רַגְלַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**this** statement, that the water of purification is nullified in a majority of water, is **his,** i.e., Rabbi Yehuda’s, own opinion, whereas **that** statement, in the *baraita*, that white wine is not nullified in a majority of water, is **his teacher’s** ruling, i.e., that of Rabban Gamliel, who is stringent with regard to a mixture of a substance in contact with the same type of substance. **As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabban Gamliel: Blood does not nullify blood, spittle does not nullify spittle, and urine does not nullify urine.**


###### Zevachim 79a:2
[Zevachim 79a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/79a:2)

רָבָא אָמַר: בִּדְלִי שֶׁתּוֹכוֹ טָהוֹר וְגַבּוֹ טָמֵא עָסְקִינַן; דְּמִדִּינָא – סַגִּי לְהוּ בְּכֹל דְּהוּ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava says** there is a different resolution of the apparent contradiction between the mishna that states that water of purification is nullified in a majority of water of a ritual bath and Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion in the *baraita* with regard to white wine mixed with water: In the mishna, **we are dealing with a bucket whose internal** surface is **ritually pure, and** only **its external** surface is **impure.** The significance of this is **that by** Torah **law it suffices for** the water of the ritual bath to enter the bucket **in any amount** to purify its external surface, and therefore the water of purification in the bucket does not prevent the purification of the bucket at all.


###### Zevachim 79a:3
[Zevachim 79a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/79a:3)

וְרַבָּנַן הוּא דִּגְזַרוּ בְּהוּ דִּילְמָא חָיֵיס עֲלַיְיהוּ וְלָא מְבַטֵּיל לֵיהּ; וְכֵיוָן דְּאִיכָּא רִיבּוּיָא – לָא צְרִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava continues: **And it is the Sages who decreed with regard to** this case that the internal surface must be purified as well, **lest** the owner wish to **spare** the water of purification **and not** to **nullify** it from its sanctity. In that case he would wish to avoid allowing water from the ritual bath to enter the vessel, and might immerse it in a manner which would not allow even the full external surface to come in contact with the water. Therefore, the Sages required that one immerse the entire vessel. **But once there is a majority** of water in the bucket from the ritual bath, he does **not need** to enable any more water to enter the vessel, as by Torah law it is already pure.


###### Zevachim 79a:4
[Zevachim 79a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/79a:4)

אָמַר רָבָא: אֲמוּר רַבָּנַן בְּטַעְמָא, וַאֲמוּר רַבָּנַן בְּרוּבָּא, וַאֲמוּר רַבָּנַן בַּחֲזוּתָא. מִין בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ – בְּטַעְמָא, מִין בְּמִינוֹ – בְּרוּבָּא, הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא חֲזוּתָא – בְּמַרְאֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava says,** in summary of these *halakhot*: **The Sages said that** the status of an item in a mixture is determined **by the taste,** i.e., if the taste of one substance is noticeable in a mixture with another substance it is not nullified, **and the Sages said** that a prohibited item is nullified **by the majority, and the Sages** also **said** that the status of an item in a mixture is determined **by the appearance,** i.e., if the appearance of a substance is recognizable in a mixture it is not nullified. Rava elaborates: With regard to **a type** of food mixed **with** food **not** of **its** own **type,** the nullification is determined **by the taste.** In the case of **a type** of food mixed **with** food of **its** own **type,** the nullification is determined **by the majority.** In a case **where there is** a possibility to determine the status of an item based on **appearance,** the nullification is **by appearance.**


###### Zevachim 79a:5
[Zevachim 79a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/79a:5)

וּפְלִיגָא דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין מִצְוֹת מְבַטְּלוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ, כָּךְ אֵין אִיסּוּרִין מְבַטְּלִין זֶה אֶת זֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara returns to its discussion of the opinion of Reish Lakish that prohibited items, such as *piggul*, *notar*, and ritually impure meat, nullify one another. The Gemara notes: **And** Reish Lakish **disagrees** with the statement **of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar says: Just as** items used in the performance of **mitzvot do not nullify one another,** despite the fact that one is of greater volume than the other or imparts flavor to it, **so too,** items to which **prohibitions** apply **do not nullify one another.**


###### Zevachim 79a:6
[Zevachim 79a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/79a:6)

מַאן שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ דְּאָמַר: אֵין מִצְוֹת מְבַטְּלוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ? הִלֵּל הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן שֶׁהָיָה כּוֹרְכָן בְּבַת אַחַת וְאוֹכְלָן, מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״עַל מַצּוֹת וּמְרוֹרִים יֹאכְלוּהוּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara adds: **Whom did you hear who says** that items used in the performance of **mitzvot do not nullify one another? It is Hillel, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **They said about Hillel the Elder that** when eating the Paschal offering, *matza*, and bitter herbs on the first night of Passover, **he would wrap them** all **at once and eat them** together, **because it is stated** with regard to the Paschal offering: **“They shall eat it with *matzot* and bitter herbs”** (Numbers 9:11), which indicates that these three foods should be eaten together. Hillel was not concerned that the taste of the bitter herbs would nullify the taste of the *matza*.