Daf 79 — Zevachim 79 Summary

Zevachim 79 – Good Morning Raboisai Summary of Reb Eli Stefansky’s Shiur Introduction – Three Types of Bitul: Taste, Majority, and Appearance Today’s daf reviews three different systems of nullification used throughout Shas: 1. טעם (Taste) o Standard Bitul: Batel b’Shishim – 1/60 cancels flavor. o Applies to min b’she’eino mino (two different items). 2. רוב (Majority) o 51% overrides 49%. o Applies to min b’mino (two identical items). 3. ראייה (Appearance / Substitution Test) o Used when two things look identical (e.g., white wine + water). o You pretend one of them is a completely different substance and test dilution based on that. This daf explains when we use each system and why sometimes Chazal require one over the other. Why Not Use "Rayan" (Appearance Test) for Min b’Mino? Question: If two things are identical (min b’mino), why rely on rov ? Use Rayan , which often requires more dilution than rov. Example: White wine + water in a mikveh. White wine doesn’t change color, so how can you tell if the mikveh water overcame the wine? → Pretend it’s red wine , test how much water is needed to dilute red wine into clear water. That is Rayan. But the Gemara concludes: Whether we use rov or rayan is a machlokes Tanaim . Rav Yehuda vs. Rabban Gamliel – Two Systems The Beraisa shows two methods: • Rabban Gamliel → Rayan (pretend white wine is red) • Rabbi Yehuda → Rov (simple majority) But this creates a problem: Across Shas, Rabbi Yehuda holds: Min b’mino loi batul ! You cannot nullify one thing with its identical counterpart. Why here does he allow rov? Tosafos explains: This sugya follows Rava , who later clarifies how to reconcile all the cases. Rava’s Major Principle – Min b’Mino Is Never Batel Rava says: • Min b’mino → never batel • Min b’she’eino mino → use Rayan • Chutz from the case of Mei Chatas (Parah Adumah water) Why is Mei Chatas different? Because of a halachic requirement tied to tvilas keli containing holy water . The Case – How to Toivel a Kli With Mei Chatas Inside Scenario: You have a kli with Mei Chatas inside (very powerful kedushah). You need to toivel the outside of the vessel, because tumas mashkin touched the outside. But if mikveh water enters and mixes inside → You ruin the Mei Chatas (since it cannot be batel). So what do you do? • If you avoid getting water inside, → You might not truly immerse the entire outside surface. • If you immerse fully, → Water will enter and touch the inside. Chazal say: You must allow some mikveh water in, Otherwise we assume you did not immerse the outside properly. But how much water? This depends on Rayan vs. Rov . The Halacha – Only a Slight Amount Is Enough Rava explains: Because the concern is about cheating on the outside , NOT about purifying the inside, the Chachamim only required a small amount of water to enter the kli. Thus: • It’s not about batel • It’s about the psychology of making sure the toveler immerses the whole kli completely. Therefore: In this case only , Rava agrees we use rov – not Rayan. This answers the Tosafos question and aligns all of Rabbi Yehuda’s positions. Summary of All Three Types of Bitul With Examples Type Example When Used טעם – Batel b’Shishim Cooking wheat in rice When different types mix רוב – Majority Two chicken nuggets from two brands When identical items mix ראייה – Appearance Test White wine + water in mikveh When they look the same and can’t be judged by taste New Sugya – Mixing Noisar and Pigul Rish Lakish held: If one kazayis Pigul and one kazayis Noisar mix, and you eat them → you get Malkus . Reason: One issur overpowers the other even though they’re both assur. Rebbi Elazar disagrees: One issur cannot be mevatel another issur. But "Issurei Achila" do not cancel each other. Halacha follows Rish Lakish . Using “Korech” (Hillel’s Sandwich) as a Proof Hillel would wrap Pesach + Matza + Maror together. Gemara uses this to show: Even if Maror is sharp and Matza is mild, one doesn’t nullify the other . Thus, isur + isur becomes a combined entity. Final Mishnah – Mixed Blood in the Beis HaMikdash Two cases of mixed blood: Case 1: Kosher Dam + Pasul Dam If the blood for Zrika mixes with: • Dam Pigul • Dam Nosar • Dam of a disqualified korban Halacha: Pour into the drainage ditch (the amah). May NOT be used for Zrika. Case 2: Dam HaNefesh + Dam HaTamtzis Dam HaNefesh = blood that spurts at shechita (valid for Zrika) Dam HaTamtzis = drainage blood after death (invalid) Chachamim → Also pour into the amah. But Rebbi Eliezer says: You MAY still do Zrika with the mixture. 1 Rava’s Clarity – Why Are There Two Separate Cases? Because: • Case 1: Everyone agrees = assur → Always pour into the amah → Mixture includes Dam that is NEVER valid. • Case 2: Real machlokes → Is there enough Dam HaNefesh that it should still count? → Do we fear future mistakes in the Beis HaMikdash? Thus the Mishnah repeats: “ ׁשֹופְכ ֹו לָאֲמָה ” twice Because each line refers to a different halachic principle . Takeaway – Zevachim 79 • Three systems of halachic cancellation: taste , majority , appearance . • Rabbi Yehuda always holds: Min b’mino is NOT batel . • Rava resolves contradictions: → The case of Mei Chatas is unique because the issue is ensuring proper immersion , not Bitul. • Mixed issurim like Pigul + Noisar create a combined entity → possible malkus. • Mixed blood cases split into: → Absolutely invalid mixtures → Debatable mixtures (Dam Tamtzis) • The Mishnah repeats “pour into the drainage” because the two cases have different halachic logic. לעילוי נשמת אמי מורתי רות בת הרב מנחם מנדל