Daf 81 — Zevachim 81 Summary

Zevachim 81 – Good Morning Raboisai Summary of Reb Eli Stefansky’s Shiur Review of Yesterday — Mei Chatas Dilution (Ain Bilah vs. Yesh Bilah) We continue from the case of a kli containing Mei Chatas (Parah Adumah water) into which someone added sink water . Three halachic variables determine whether one or two sprinklings are required: 1. Yesh Bilah / Ain Bilah o Yesh Bilah: Liquids mix perfectly; every drop contains some of every ingredient. o Ain Bilah: Liquids remain distinct; no guarantee any drop has Mei Chatas. 2. Shiur Hazayah o Does each sprinkling require a minimum measurable amount? 3. Tziruf Hazayos o Do two incomplete sprinklings combine into one full sprinkling? Rav Ashi’s Shita: • Ain Bilah • No shiur • No tziruf → Therefore sprinkle twice , to ensure at least one time has actual Mei Chatas. This serves as the backdrop for today’s daf. New Question — Does Rav Ashi Contradict Himself? The Gemara challenges Rav Ashi using a different halacha: Case: Blood of Bechor/Pesach (1 application required) mixes with blood of Olah/Shelamim (4 applications required). If Ain Bilah is true, how does one application count for both when mixed? Maybe that one application was only Bechor blood and zero Pesach blood! Gemara’s Answer: The case is one of exact equal measures : • For one - matana korbanos : → You perform two applications , one for each type. • For four - matana korbanos : → Perform four applications, each containing part of both types. Because the mixture is applied in full quantities , you ensure coverage for both. This resolves the contradiction. Mixed Matan Arba with Matan A ḥ as The Gemara now revisits the earlier case: • Olah requires four applications • Bechor/Pesach requires one If mixed, how can you fulfill both requirements without violating: • Bal Tosif (adding) • Bal Tigra (subtracting)? Again, the Gemara stresses: We are NOT dealing with molecular mixture inside one bowl. Rather: cups got mixed up , not the liquids themselves. The entire previous contradiction disappears. Clarifying the Mishnah — Not a Case of Mixed Liquids The Gemara emphasizes a key point: Our Mishnah’s machlokes is not about blood mixed in one vessel. Rather, multiple cups got mixed , and we don’t know which cup belongs where. Thus: • Rebbi Eliezer: Uses the principle of Roeh — treat misplaced blood as “mayim" (non - korban), and proceed. • Chachamim: Reject Roeh — misplaced blood invalidates the service → pour into Amah. This explains why Ain Bilah does not arise in our Mishnah. New Sugya — Can Shirayim Be Placed on the Wall? Two types of blood: • Chatas → main application above the red line • Shirayim → poured into the drainage hole (floor level) If Chatas and Olah blood mix after the Chatas was already sprinkled above: Question: Can the remaining mixture be placed on the wall below the red line? Two opinions: 1. Shirayim require a flat surface (horizontal) → must go into the drain. 2. Shirayim can be placed on the wall and drip down. This creates part of today's machlokes between Tannaim. Proof Attempt From Bechor Blood (Kodesh Heim) The pasuk “ קֹד ֶׁש הֵם ” teaches: If Bechor blood mixes with other korban bloods, you may still proceed. Gemara asks: Doesn’t this prove you may put Shirayim on the wall? Because in that case, you're sprinkling mixture onto the wall that contains blood meant for Shirayim. Gemara’s Rejection: No — that case refers to initial zrikos , not Shirayim. Thus no proof. Additional Pasuk — “Dam - Dam” (Double Mention of Blood) Another source says “ הַדָּם… הַדָּם ” — double mention. This teaches: • Even when two different korban bloods mix (e.g., Eilah + Todah), → you may still proceed with sprinkling. But the Gemara clarifies: Only initial blood applications are included. Shirayim (leftovers) are not part of this derivation. Third Source — Yom Kippur: Mixing Par vs. Sa’ir Blood On Yom Kippur the Torah says to mix the blood of the bull and goat. But this cannot serve as the general source for mixtures because: • That blood is never placed on the wall • It is sprinkled inside (Kodesh HaKedoshim + Paroches) Therefore, the halacha of mixed dam for mizbeach ha - chitzon cannot be learned from Yom Kippur. The Three Sources and Why Each Is Necessary 1. Kodesh Heim (Bechor) o Teaches: Korban bloods do not nullify each other (ain min b’mino mevatel). 2. Dam - Dam o Teaches: Even dissimilar korbanos (Olah + Todah) may be sprinkled together. 3. Par + Sa’ir mixture (Yom Kippur) o Teaches mixing is halachically valid even when one has significantly more blood . No single pasuk covers all situations. Thus all three are needed. Final Sugya — Two Chataos Mixed: Penimi (Inner) + Chitzon (Outer) New case: • Chatas Penimi → inner blood applications (inside the Heichal) • Chatas Chitzon → outer applications (mizbeach ha - chitzon) They get mixed . If the blood was already sprinkled above the red line (as a Chitzon Chatas), the remaining Shirayim seem problematic: • Penimi shirayim → must be poured in the Heichal • Chitzon shirayim → must go into the drain outside Yet the Mishnah implies there is a way to use the leftovers properly. Gemara’s resolution: The Mishnah is speaking about: Two Chataos Chitzon Not Chatas Penimi. Thus the leftover blood all belongs to the same type → no conflict. This avoids the contradiction. Takeaway – Zevachim 81 • The earlier challenges to Rav Ashi fall away because the Mishnah concerns mixed cups , not mixed liquids. • Blood mixtures for different korbanos have three distinct pesukim , each covering a different halachic angle. • Shirayim placement is a major debate: flat drain surface vs. wall dripping. • We cannot extrapolate from Yom Kippur laws to regular mizbeach procedures. • Two Chataos mixed = no issue unless one is Penimi and the other Chitzon . Our Mishnah avoids that case. לעילוי נשמת אמי מורתי רות בת הרב מנחם מנדל