Zevachim 76a — the Talmud in English

Abaye raised an objection to him:

We learned below in the Mishna [90a]:

And all of them,

all consecrated offerings that are eaten,

the priests are permitted to alter their eating [that is, to eat them according to their wishes, in every manner of eating ],

that is, to eat them as they wish, in any manner of eating ,

to eat them roasted, boiled, and cooked, and to place into them

of the consecrated offerings, both

non-sacred spices and

both

teruma spices, the words of Rabbi Shimon.

And from the fact that it is permitted to place teruma seasoning into a food of consecrated offerings, it is established that Rabbi Shimon permits, even initially, bringing teruma to a place of disqualification. For once the teruma has been placed into the flesh of the consecrated offering, the time of its eating is reduced to the time of eating the consecrated offering alone!?

He said to him

Rabba to Abaye:

Set aside teruma seasoning,

for it is only

rabbinic,

since by Torah law terumot and tithes apply only to grain, wine, and oil; therefore Rabbi Shimon is not concerned about it.

And furthermore,

he raised an objection

Abaye: We learned in tractate Maaser Sheni [3:2]:

One may not purchase teruma with money of second tithe, because he diminishes its eating

of the teruma. That is, he diminishes the place of its eating, because from the moment it becomes second tithe, it may be eaten only in Jerusalem, according to the law of second tithe.

And Rabbi Shimon permits.

And it is established that even with Torah-level teruma Rabbi Shimon is not concerned!?

He was silent before him

Rabba was silent before Abaye and did not answer him regarding what he had challenged him.

When

Abaye

came before Rav Yosef,

and told him what he had raised as an objection to Rabba,

he said to him

Rav Yosef to Abaye:

Why did you not also refute Rabba

as well

from this

Mishna of Sheviit [8:7]? —

For we learned:

One may not cook a vegetable of the Sabbatical year in teruma oil,

in order

that they not bring

the teruma oil or the vegetable of the Sabbatical year

to a place of disqualification.

For when teruma oil becomes mixed with a vegetable of the Sabbatical year, it may be eaten only until the time of removal of the vegetable. And, conversely, if the oil becomes impure, the vegetable too may not be eaten.

And Rabbi Shimon permits

cooking the vegetable of the Sabbatical year in teruma oil initially. And it is established that Rabbi Shimon is not concerned about bringing the teruma or the Sabbatical produce to a place of disqualification.

And if so, this is difficult for Rabba, who said that Rabbi Shimon permitted only after the fact, and not initially?

Abaye said to him

to Rav Yosef: You are correct that I did not challenge Rabba from this Mishna.

And did I not raise an objection to him

did I not challenge Rabba

from that concerning seasoning,

from the Mishna which says that the priests are permitted to place teruma seasoning into the stew of the consecrated offering,

and he said to me

Rabba:

Set aside teruma seasoning,

for its sanctity is only

rabbinic,

and therefore Rabbi Shimon is not concerned about its disqualification. And if so,

so too here

Rabba would have answered me: Set aside

vegetable teruma,

for its sanctity is only

rabbinic,

because by Torah law teruma applies only to grain, wine, and oil.

And Rav Yosef challenged Abaye:

If so,

if it is as you say, that since vegetable teruma is only rabbinic Rabbi Shimon is not concerned about it, then

it should have taught the opposite:

One may not cook

a vegetable of teruma in oil of the Sabbatical year,

and Rabbi Shimon permits, because he is not concerned about the disqualification of vegetable teruma, since it is only rabbinic.

But since the Mishna said, “One may not cook a vegetable of the Sabbatical year in teruma oil,” this is difficult: teruma oil has Torah-level sanctity, so how does Rabbi Shimon permit bringing it to a place of disqualification by cooking it with a vegetable of the Sabbatical year!?

Abaye said to him

to Rav Yosef:

And did I not raise an objection to him

regarding what a tanna taught before Rav, that one may not purchase teruma with the money of the Sabbatical year because he diminishes its eating, from our Mishna, in which Rabbi Shimon permits slaughtering the guilt-offering and the peace-offering that became mixed with one another and eating them according to the more stringent of them, despite the fact that he brings them to a place of disqualification,

and he said to me

Rabba: In fact, Rabbi Shimon holds that one may not initially bring consecrated offerings to a place of disqualification, and the Mishna is different

because it became mixed

after the fact—the guilt-offering with the peace-offering—and therefore Rabbi Shimon permits it after the fact. If so,

here too

in the Mishna concerning one who cooks a vegetable of the Sabbatical year in teruma oil, Rabba could have said that Rabbi Shimon permitted it only in a case where

it became mixed

the vegetable of the Sabbatical year with the teruma oil, and therefore Rabbi Shimon permitted cooking them together, because it is impossible to squeeze the teruma oil out of the vegetable of the Sabbatical year.

But Rav Yosef challenged Abaye:

If it became mixed

the vegetable with the oil,

what is the reason of the Rabbis

who prohibit cooking them together? They are already mixed, and the cooking will not introduce any additional possibility of disqualification; why did the Rabbis not permit cooking them?

Should you say that the reason the Rabbis prohibited cooking them is

as is the case with the guilt-offering and the peace-offering

that became mixed, for the Sages decreed that they should not be slaughtered and eaten according to the more stringent of them, despite the fact that they had already become mixed after the fact and there is now no possibility of offering them according to their law—this cannot be said, because

are they comparable

a guilt-offering that became mixed with a peace-offering to a vegetable that became mixed with oil?! For

there

in the case of a guilt-offering that became mixed with a peace-offering,

it has a remedy —

through grazing.

For after they graze and a blemish befalls them, and they are sold, with their proceeds they bring a guilt-offering separately and a peace-offering separately, and each is eaten according to its law. But

this,

a vegetable that became mixed with oil,

has no remedy through grazing.

Rather,

this

law of a vegetable that became mixed with oil

is comparable only to a piece

of flesh of edible consecrated offerings

that

became mixed

with pieces

of edible consecrated flesh of another species,

since, as it has no

other

remedy,

the Rabbis too agree

that it is eaten according to the more stringent of them. And if so, this is difficult: how can you establish the Mishna concerning a vegetable of the Sabbatical year that became mixed with teruma oil, in which Rabbi Shimon permits cooking them because they had already become mixed? For once they became mixed, the Rabbis did not disagree with him, and they too would permit cooking them together!?

If so, this is difficult: how can you explain the Mishna concerning Sabbatical-year produce that became mixed with teruma oil as saying that Rabbi Shimon permits cooking them because they had already become mixed? Once they became mixed, the Rabbis would not disagree with him; they too would permit cooking them together!?

Ravina refuted

this challenge of Rav Yosef to Abaye:

Are they comparable

the law of a guilt-offering that became mixed with a peace-offering to a vegetable that became mixed with oil!? For

a piece

of consecrated flesh

that

became mixed

with pieces

of consecrated flesh of another species

has no remedy whatsoever,

except that they all be eaten according to the more stringent of them. But

this

vegetable that became mixed with oil

has a remedy —

through squeezing.

Therefore, this vegetable that became mixed with oil is comparable to a guilt-offering that became mixed with a peace-offering, and Rabba answered well that Rabbi Shimon holds that initially one may not bring consecrated offerings to a place of disqualification. But after the fact, when it became mixed, we are not concerned about bringing them to a place of disqualification, despite their having another remedy; and in this the Rabbis disagree with him and hold that it is preferable to perform the remedy rather than bring them to a place of disqualification!?

And we answer:

And Rav Yosef

held:

How can we squeeze

this oil out of the vegetable? If

we squeeze extensively —

he causes loss

to the vegetable that is consecrated

with

the sanctity of

the Sabbatical year,

and the Merciful One said concerning the Sabbatical year, “For you it shall be for eating”—for eating, and not for loss!? And if

we squeeze a little

in a manner in which the vegetable of the Sabbatical year will not be ruined, then not all the oil will be squeezed out, and if so,

in the end it is still mixed

the teruma oil with the vegetable of the Sabbatical year.

He raised an objection

to Rabba, who said that Rabbi Shimon permits bringing consecrated offerings to a place of disqualification only after the fact, from what was taught in the Tosefta, tractate Nega’im [6:1]: If one was a person who was uncertainly a confirmed leper and became pure, he counts seven days for his purification [after he brought two birds and shaved], and on the seventh day he shaves all the hair of his body and immerses. From this point he lacks only the bringing of the offerings of the leper and the placing of the blood and oil on the thumbs of his hands and feet. And since he is an uncertain leper, he cannot bring the offerings of the leper and become completely pure, because perhaps he is not a leper. And he cannot bring an offering and stipulate concerning it that if he is a leper, this shall be the guilt-offering of a leper, and if he is not a leper, this shall be a peace-offering, and slaughter it and eat it, because of the uncertainty, according to the more stringent of them, because one may not bring consecrated offerings to a place of disqualification.

Rabbi Shimon says: On the following day,

on the eighth day, after he counted seven days for his purification,

he brings his guilt-offering and his log [the log of oil of a leper]

of the oil of a leper

with him,

and stipulates

and says: If

I was a leper, and this offering that I am bringing is the offering of a leper,

this is his guilt-offering, and this is his log.