Commentary for Zevachim 61:16

אמר אביי ת"ש לאכול כחצי זית ולהקטיר כחצי זית כשר שאין אכילה והקטרה מצטרפין

When Rabin came, he said: [If one declares his intention of eating] half as much as an olive after time and [another] half an olive after time and half an olive without bounds, - Bar Kappara taught: It is piggul, [because the declaration in respect of] half an olive is of no effect as against [that of] an olive.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But only in this case. In the former case, however, when he declares his intention to eat half an olive without bounds and half an olive after time, these two intentions immediately combine, and his subsequent declaration that he will eat half an olive after time cannot upset the previous combination; hence it is not piggul. Thus we have a controversy between R. Dimi and Rabin as to Bar Kappara's teaching.');">¹²</span> R'Ashi recited it thus: [I one declares his intention to eat] half an olive after time, and an olive, half without bounds and half after time,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus combining the latter two in his declaration.');">¹³</span> - Bar Kappara taught: It is piggul, [because the declaration in respect of] half an olive is of no effe as against [that of] an olive.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This goes further than R. Dimi's view. For here he actually combined the latter two intentions, and yet they are separated and the two intentions concerning after time recombined.');">¹⁴</span> R'Jannai said: If one intended dogs to eat it on the morrow, it is piggul, because it is written, And the dogs shall eat Jezebel in the portion of Jezreel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Kings IX, 10. This proves that eating by dogs is designated eating.');">¹⁵</span> To this R'Ammi demurred: If so, if he intended fire to eat it on the morrow, is that too piggul, since it is written, A fire not blown by man shall eat [consume] him?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Job XX, 26.');">¹⁶</span> And should you say, That indeed is so, - surely we learnt, [IF HE INTENDED] TO EAT HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE [ILLEGITIMATELY] AND TO BURN HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE [ILLEGITIMATELY], IT IS FIT, BECAUSE EATING AND BURNING DO NOT COMBINE? - If he expressed [his intention] in terms of eating, that indeed would be so;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They would combine.');">¹⁷</span> here [in the Mishnah] however he expressed it in terms of burning: [hence they do not combine,] because the term eating is one thing and the term burning is another. R'Assi<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Emended text. Cur. edd: Ashi.');">¹⁸</span> asked: What if he intended as much as an olive to be eaten [illegitimately] by two men? Do we go by his intention, and there is the standard [of disqualification]; or do we go by the eaters, and there is no the standard? - Said Abaye, Come and hear: [IF HE INTENDED] TO EAT HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE AND TO BURN HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE [ILLEGITIMATELY]. IT IS FIT, BECAUSE EATING AND BURNING DO NOT COMBINE.

Explore commentary for Zevachim 61:16. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.