## Zevachim Daf 81b

###### Zevachim 81b:1
[Zevachim 81b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:1)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״דָּם״ ״דָּם״? שֶׁיָּכוֹל אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ בִּתְמוּרָתָהּ, שֶׁאַף מֵחַיִּים תִּקְרַב; מִנַּיִן לְרַבּוֹת תּוֹדָה וּשְׁלָמִים?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**the verse states** twice: **“Blood,” “blood”?** The *baraita* explains: If “blood” were written only once, one **might** have thought: **I have** derived **only** that this *halakha* was stated with regard to a case **where this,** i.e., the blood of a burnt offering, **was mixed with** the blood of **its substitute, as even** if these offerings were intermingled **when** the animals were **alive,** the burnt offering and its substitute **shall be sacrificed. From where** is it derived **to include** even a case of the blood of **a thanks offering or a peace offering** that was mixed with the blood of a burnt offering, as these offerings are not sacrificed if they became intermingled with a burnt offering while alive?


###### Zevachim 81b:2
[Zevachim 81b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:2)

מְרַבֶּה אֲנִי תּוֹדָה וּשְׁלָמִים, שֶׁבָּאִין בְּנֶדֶר וּנְדָבָה כְּמוֹתָהּ. מִנַּיִן לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הָאָשָׁם?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: And even if one says: **I include** in this first mention of blood the case of the blood of **a thanks offering or a peace offering** that was mixed with the blood of a burnt offering, **as** they are similar in that **they** both **come as a vow** offering **and a gift** offering, **like** a burnt offering, **from where** is it derived **to include** even a case of the blood of **the guilt offering** that was mixed with the blood of a burnt offering, as a guilt offering cannot be brought as a vow offering or a gift offering?


###### Zevachim 81b:3
[Zevachim 81b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:3)

מְרַבֶּה אֲנִי אֶת הָאָשָׁם, שֶׁטָּעוּן מַתַּן אַרְבַּע כְּמוֹתוֹ. בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר וָפֶסַח מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״דָּם״ ״דָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: And even if one says: **I include** in this first mention of blood even a case of the blood of **the guilt offering** that was mixed with the blood of a burnt offering, **as** they are similar in that a guilt offering **requires** the **placement of** two placements that are **four, like** a burnt offering, **from where** is it derived that the same applies to the blood of **a firstborn** offering, **and** the animal **tithe** offering, **and** the **Paschal offering,** whose blood is placed once on the altar? Therefore, **the verse states** twice: **“Blood,” “blood.”** This repetition serves to teach that in any case where the blood of a burnt offering became mixed with the blood of another offering that is placed below the red line, this blood is presented.


###### Zevachim 81b:4
[Zevachim 81b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:4)

מַאי, לָאו סוֹף עוֹלָה וּבְכוֹר – וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: מְקוֹם עוֹלָה מְקוֹם שִׁירַיִם?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes this *baraita*: **What, is it not** referring even to a case of the **final** portion of the blood **of a burnt offering and** the blood of **a firstborn** offering that were mixed? **And** if so, one can **learn from** this *baraita* that the **place** of the blood **of a burnt offering** is the same as the **place of** the **remainder** of the blood of a firstborn offering.


###### Zevachim 81b:5
[Zevachim 81b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:5)

לָא; תְּחִילַּת עוֹלָה וּבְכוֹר. וּמַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן – אֵין עוֹלִין מְבַטְּלִין זֶה אֶת זֶה? מִ״וְּלָקַח מִדַּם הַפָּר וּמִדַּם הַשָּׂעִיר״ נָפְקָא! תַּנָּאֵי הִיא; אִיכָּא דְּנָפְקָא לֵיהּ מֵהָכָא, וְאִיכָּא דְּנָפְקָא לֵיהּ מֵהָכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **No,** the *baraita* is referring to the **first** part of the blood **of a burnt offering and** the blood of **a firstborn** offering. **But** if so, **what is** this *baraita* **teaching us?** Is it teaching that the blood of offerings that **ascend** to the altar **do not nullify one another?** This *halakha* is already **derived from** the verse: **“And he shall take of the blood of the bull and of the blood of the goat”** (Leviticus 16:18). The Gemara explains: This **is** a dispute between ***tanna’im*,** as **there is** a *tanna* **who derives** this *halakha* **from here, and there is** a *tanna* **who derives it from there.**


###### Zevachim 81b:6
[Zevachim 81b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:6)

וְהָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי, מִ״וְּלָקַח מִדַּם הַפָּר וּמִדַּם הַשָּׂעִיר״ לָא יָלְפִי – קָסָבְרִי אֵין מְעָרְבִין לִקְרָנוֹת; מִ״דָּם״ ״דָּם״ לָא יָלֵיף – ״דָּם״ ״דָּם״ לָא מַשְׁמַע לְהוּ;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara has cited three different verses as the source for the *halakha* that the blood of offerings that ascend to the altar do not nullify one another: “They are holy” (Numbers 18:17); “And he shall take of the blood of the bull and of the blood of the goat” (Leviticus 16:18); “And Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall present the blood and sprinkle the blood” (Leviticus 1:5). The Gemara notes: **And these** other ***tanna’im* do not derive** this principle **from** the verse: **“And he shall take of the blood of the bull and of the blood of the goat,”** as **they maintain** that the High Priest **does not mix** the blood of the bull with the blood of the goat in order **to** place the blood on the **corners** of the golden altar; rather, each type of blood is placed separately. Additionally, these other *tanna’im* **do not derive** this *halakha* **from** the repeated mention of: **“Blood,” “blood,”** as **they do not learn** anything from this repetition.


###### Zevachim 81b:7
[Zevachim 81b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:7)

אֶלָּא מִ״קֹּדֶשׁ הֵם״ – מַאי טַעְמָא לָא יָלְפִי? קָסָבְרִי: ״קֹדֶשׁ הֵם״ – הֵם קְרֵיבִין, וְאֵין תְּמוּרָתָן קְרֵיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But what is the reason** that those other *tanna’im* **do not derive** this *halakha* **from** the verse: **“They are holy”** (Numbers 18:17)? The Gemara explains: **They hold** that the verse should be understood as follows: **“They are holy,”** i.e., **they,** the firstborn offerings themselves, **are sacrificed, but their substitutes are not sacrificed.**


###### Zevachim 81b:8
[Zevachim 81b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:8)

וְאִידַּךְ, נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מֵ״אִם שׁוֹר אִם שֶׂה לַה׳ הוּא״ – הוּא קָרֵב, וְאֵין תְּמוּרָתוֹ קְרֵיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the other** *tanna*, i.e., the *tanna* who derives the *halakha* that the blood of offerings that ascend to the altar do not nullify one another from the verse: “They are holy” (Numbers 18:17), from where does he learn that the substitute of a firstborn is not sacrificed? The Gemara explains: He **derives it from** the verse: **“Whether it be ox or sheep, it is the Lord’s”** (Leviticus 27:26). The emphasis of “it is” teaches that **it is sacrificed but its substitute is not sacrificed.**


###### Zevachim 81b:9
[Zevachim 81b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:9)

תָּא שְׁמַע: נָתַן לְמַעְלָה וְלֹא נִמְלַךְ – אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ מוֹדִים שֶׁיַּחֲזוֹר וְיִתֵּן לְמַטָּה, אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ עוֹלִין לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara resumes its discussion of whether the place of the blood of a burnt offering is the same as the place for the remainder of the blood of offerings. **Come** and **hear** a *baraita*: With regard to blood that is to be placed above the red line that was mixed with blood that is to be placed below the line, which according to the Rabbis must be poured into the Temple courtyard drain, if the priest **placed** the mixed blood **above and did not consult** the authorities, both **these** Sages **and those** Sages, i.e., the Rabbis and Rabbi Eliezer, **concede that he shall again place** the blood **below** the red line, and **these** placements **and those** placements **count for him.**


###### Zevachim 81b:10
[Zevachim 81b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:10)

מַאי, לָאו דְּאִיעָרוּב חַטָּאת וְעוֹלָה? וְכֵיוָן דְּיָהֵיב לֵיהּ לְמַעְלָה, הָווּ לְהוּ שִׁירַיִם; וְקָתָנֵי: אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ מוֹדִים שֶׁיַּחֲזוֹר וְיִתֵּן לְמַטָּה, וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: מְקוֹם עוֹלָה מְקוֹם שִׁירַיִם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes this *baraita*: **What, is it not** referring to a case **where** the blood of **a sin offering and a burnt offering were mixed? And once** the priest **placed** blood of the sin offering **above** the red line, that which is left from the blood of the sin offering **is** considered the **remainder** of the blood. **And** yet the *baraita* **teaches:** Both **these** Sages **and those** Sages **concede that he shall again place** the blood **below** the red line. **And** if so, one can **learn from** the *baraita* that the **place** of the blood **of a burnt offering** is the same as the **place of** the **remainder** of the blood of a sin offering.


###### Zevachim 81b:11
[Zevachim 81b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:11)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף, אֲמַר: אָמְרִי בְּמַעְרְבָא, הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – כְּגוֹן דְּאִיעָרַב חַטָּאת הַחִיצוֹנָה בְּשִׁירַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **When Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, **he said** that **they say in the West,** Eretz Yisrael: **What are we dealing with here?** We are dealing not with a mixture of blood of a sin offering and blood of a burnt offering, but with a case **where** the blood of **a sin offering** sacrificed on **the external** altar, which is placed above the red line, **was mixed with** the **remainder** of the blood of a sin offering whose blood is presented inside the Sanctuary. This remainder is poured on the base of the external altar. Consequently, once the priest has placed blood from the mixture above the red line, all that remains is a mixture of remainders, which are placed in the same location.


###### Zevachim 81b:12
[Zevachim 81b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי, וְנֵימָא מָר: כְּגוֹן דְּאִיעָרַב בְּשִׁירַיִם! דִּלְמָא הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן – אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר שִׁירַיִם מְעַכְּבִין, חָסְרוּ אֵין מְעַכְּבִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to** Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef: Why is it necessary to cite the case of the remainder of the blood of a sin offering whose blood is presented inside the Sanctuary? **But let the Master say** that it is referring to a case **where** the blood of a sin offering sacrificed on the external altar **was mixed with** the **remainder** of the blood of a sin offering sacrificed on the external altar. **Perhaps** you chose that case to indicate that **this** is what the *baraita* **teaches us: Even according to the one who says** that failure to pour the **remainder** of the blood of a sin offering whose blood is presented inside the Sanctuary **disqualifies** the offering, nevertheless, if the remainder was merely **lacking,** as in this case, as some of the blood had been placed above the red line, this does **not disqualify** the offering.


###### Zevachim 81b:13
[Zevachim 81b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא תּוֹסְפָאָה לְרָבִינָא: הָא אוֹקֵימְנָא הָהִיא בְּרוּבָּא עֶלְיוֹנִים, וְקָא יָהֵיב לְמַעְלָה שִׁיעוּר תַּחְתּוֹנִים וְעוֹד! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָנֵי מִילֵּי לְמַאן דְּאָמְרוּ מֵעִיקָּרָא אֵין בִּילָּה; מַסְּקָנָא – בְּכוֹסוֹת פְּלִיגִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava Tosfa’a said to Ravina:** How can that *baraita* be cited as proof for the issue at hand? **We** already **interpreted it** (80b) **with regard to** a mixture of blood that is to be placed above the red line with blood that is to be placed below the red line, which contains **a majority** of blood that is to be placed **above** the line, **and** the priest **places above** the red line **a measure** of blood that is to be placed **below** the line **and** slightly **more.** Ravina **said to him: That statement** applies **according to those who said initially** that Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis disagree with regard to a mixture of blood, and that Rabbi Eliezer holds that **there is no mixing.** But according to **the conclusion,** Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis **disagree with regard to cups** of blood that were intermingled, and therefore the above interpretation of the *baraita* was rejected.


###### Zevachim 81b:14
[Zevachim 81b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:14)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַנִּיתָּנִין בִּפְנִים שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ בְּנִיתָּנִין בַּחוּץ – יִשָּׁפְכוּ לָאַמָּה. נָתַן בַּחוּץ וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בִּפְנִים – כָּשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** Blood **that is** to be **placed** on three locations **inside** the Sanctuary, i.e., between the staves, on the Curtain, and on the golden altar, **that was mixed with** blood **that is** to be **placed outside** the Sanctuary on the external altar in the Temple courtyard, has no remedy, as one may not change the location of the placement of the blood of one to fulfill his obligation with the other type of blood. Therefore, all the blood **shall be poured into the** Temple courtyard **drain.** If the priest, on his own initiative, **placed** the mixture of blood **outside** the Sanctuary **and again placed** the mixture of blood **inside** the Sanctuary, the offering is **fit.**


###### Zevachim 81b:15
[Zevachim 81b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:15)

בִּפְנִים, וְחָזַר וְנָתַן בַּחוּץ – רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא פּוֹסֵל, וַחֲכָמִים מַכְשִׁירִים. שֶׁרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: כׇּל דָּמִים שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ לְכַפֵּר בַּהֵיכָל – פְּסוּלִין, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: חַטָּאת בִּלְבַד. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אַף הָאָשָׁם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כַּחַטָּאת כָּאָשָׁם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the priest, on his own initiative, placed the mixture of blood **inside** the Sanctuary **and again placed** the mixture of blood **outside** the Sanctuary, **Rabbi Akiva deems** the blood placed outside **disqualified, and the Rabbis deem** it **fit. As Rabbi Akiva says: Any blood** that is to be presented outside **that entered to atone in the Sanctuary is disqualified; but the Rabbis say:** That is the *halakha* with regard to the blood of an external **sin offering alone,** as it is written: “And any sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the Tent of Meeting to atone in the Sanctuary, shall not be eaten” (Leviticus 6:23). **Rabbi Eliezer says:** The status of **a guilt offering** is like that of a sin offering **as well, as it is stated: “As is the sin offering, so is the guilt offering”** (Leviticus 7:7), i.e., there is one *halakha* for them. That is not the case with regard to the blood of other offerings.


###### Zevachim 81b:16
[Zevachim 81b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:16)

**גְּמָ׳** וְנִיפְלוֹג נָמֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּהָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that if blood that is to be placed inside the Sanctuary was mixed with blood that is to be placed outside the Sanctuary, all the blood should be poured into the Temple courtyard drain, and there is no opposing opinion recorded in the mishna. The Gemara asks: **And let Rabbi Eliezer disagree** even **with regard to this** case, just as he disagrees with regard to a mixture of blood that is to be placed above the red line that was mixed with blood that is to be placed below the red line, where he holds that the improperly placed blood is considered as though it were water.


###### Zevachim 81b:17
[Zevachim 81b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/81b:17)

הֵיכִי לֶיעְבֵּיד? נִיתֵּיב בַּחוּץ וַהֲדַר נִיתֵּיב לִפְנִים? כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּצְוָה לְהַקְדִּים עֶלְיוֹנִים לַתַּחְתּוֹנִים, כָּךְ מִצְוָה לְהַקְדִּים פְּנִים לַחוּץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains that Rabbi Eliezer does not disagree in this case, as **how should** the priest **act?** If one says that he **should** first **place** blood from the mixture on the altar **outside** the Sanctuary, **and again place** blood from the mixture **inside** the Sanctuary, this is not allowed. **Just as** it is **a mitzva to give precedence** to the blood that is to be placed **above** the red line **over** the blood that is to be placed **below** the line, e.g., the presentation of the blood of a sin offering precedes the presentation of the blood of a burnt offering, since a sin offering serves to effect atonement, **so too** is it **a mitzva to give precedence** to the blood that is to be placed **inside** the Sanctuary **over** blood that is to be placed **outside** the Sanctuary.