Commentary for Zevachim 182:4

בשלמא לרבי זירא רישא בשירים סיפא בקומץ אלא לאביי קשיא תנא רישא אטו סיפא

As for R'Zera, it is well: the first clause<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which implies that oil, when donated by itself, is shared out among the priests.');">⁵</span> refers to the residue, while the last clause refers to the fistful. But on Abaye's view there is a difficulty? - The first clause is taught on account of the last clause.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the sake of symmetry and parallelism. The first clause, IF YOU SEE OIL BEING SHARED OUT IN THE TEMPLE COURT, is irrelevant to the controversy as to whether oil can be donated or not, for even if it could be donated, it would still not be shared out to the priests and so this oil, which was being shared out to the priests could only be the residue, as the Mishnah explains, on all views. But it is taught merely as a parallel to the second clause referring to a fire-offering, where it is only on the view that oil cannot be donated that one need not doubt, for on the view that oil can be donated, one might doubt what this oil is, since a votive offering of oil too is burnt on the altar.');">⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Zevachim 182:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.