Zevachim 80b — the Talmud in English

And furthermore,

another teyuvta, and it is against Rav Ashi, who said that the reason of Rabbi Eliezer is that he should return and sprinkle because he holds that there is no bila, from this:

it was taught: those given above that became mixed with those given below, Rabbi Eliezer says: he shall give

all of it

above, and I regard the

bloods

below as though they were water,

and he fulfills his obligation of giving the bloods above.

And

if the

bloods below counted for him,

when he gives them below. Thus, the blood of those above will count for him as the pouring of remnants, and the blood of those below will count for him for fulfilling the essential mitzva concerning them.

And if you say

that Rabbi Eliezer

holds that there is no bila, why did they count for him?

For

perhaps he gave the upper ones below,

and he did not fulfill his obligation of giving the blood of the sin-offering above,

and the lower ones above,

and he did not fulfill the giving of the blood of the burnt-offering below!?

And we answer:

here, with what are we dealing? With a case in which there is a majority of upper bloods, and he gives above

all

the measure

of the

lower bloods, and furthermore

he adds to them, so that now it is certain to us that he gave some of the blood of those above above.

And we challenge: If he gave the entire measure of the lower bloods above, and Rabbi Eliezer holds that there is no bila, it is possible that all the lower bloods were given above, and he did not fulfill the obligation of giving the blood of the burnt-offering [which is below], and this is difficult:

for it teaches, “the lower ones counted for him,”

and it implies that it is also certain to us that he fulfilled his obligation of giving the blood of the burnt-offering below!?

And we answer: That which it teaches, “the lower ones counted for him,” does not mean that it is certain to us that he fulfilled his obligation of giving the blood of the burnt-offering below. Rather, he fulfilled the giving

as remnants.

For that blood which was given below, if it is not the blood of the burnt-offering, is the blood of the remnants of the sin-offering, which remained from the blood that was given above.

Come and hear: If he gave below

the blood of the mixture,

and did not consult

whether to give it above first or below [for if he had consulted, we would have instructed him to give it above first according to Rabbi Eliezer, while according to the Rabbis we would have instructed him to pour it into the channel] —

Rabbi Eliezer says: He shall return and give above

from the blood that remains, and he fulfills the obligation of both, since

the lower ones counted for him

in the giving that he performed first, and the upper ones in the giving that he subsequently performed above [while according to the Rabbis, he should now pour it into the channel].

And if so, this is difficult for Rav Ashi, who said that there is no bila: From where do we know that they counted for him? Perhaps he gave the upper ones below and the lower ones above?

And we answer:

here too

it deals

with a majority of upper bloods, and he gives above the measure of the lower ones and more,

so that it is certain to us that he gave some of the upper ones above.

And we challenge:

but it teaches, “the lower ones counted for him,”

and if there is no bila, from where do we know that the lower ones counted for him?

And we answer: That which it teaches, “the lower ones counted for him,” means

as remnants,

as we answered above.

The Gemara raises another difficulty against Rav Ashi:

Come and hear: If he gave

the blood of the mixture

above and did not consult

[for according to the Rabbis, it should be poured into the channel],

both these and those,

both the Rabbis and Rabbi Eliezer,

agree that he should return and give below.

For it is permitted to give the upper ones below as the pouring of remnants. And all that the Rabbis prohibited initially, to give it above, is because they hold that it is forbidden to alter the giving of the blood of the burnt-offering and give it above. But once he did not consult and gave it above, from now it is preferable that he give it below and fulfill the mitzva of giving the blood of the burnt-offering below. And as stated, there is no prohibition in giving the blood of the sin-offering below, since he gives it as the pouring of remnants, which is performed initially below.

And both these and those

agree that

they counted for him

the givings of the blood for fulfilling his obligation.

And this is difficult for Rav Ashi, who said that Rabbi Eliezer holds that there is no bila. For if there is no bila, it is possible that they did not count for him, since perhaps he gave the upper ones below and the lower ones above?

And we answer:

here too

it deals

with a majority of upper bloods, and he gives above the measure of the lower ones and more,

so that then it is certain that he fulfilled his obligation concerning the upper ones above.

And we challenge:

but "

both these and those counted for him"

it teaches,

and it proves that the lower ones also counted for him!?

And we answer:

Does it teach

in the latter clause

" “both these and those agree”

that they counted for him both through the giving of the upper ones and through the giving of the lower ones? But

" it teaches, “both these and those counted,”

and it is not according to everyone; rather,

the latter clause,

which teaches, “both these and those counted for him,”

we come

only

to the Rabbis, who say, “there is bila.”

Come and hear: Those given with one gift,

such as a firstborn,

that became mixed with those given with one gift,

such as a tithe,

shall be given with one gift.

And if you say that there is no bila, why shall they be given with one gift

[if he does not pour all the blood], for there is reason for concern

perhaps he gives from this one, and does not give from that one?

And we answer: With what are we dealing here?

For example,

that bloods became mixed in the measure of

one

from a firstborn with bloods

in the

measure of giving

one

from a tithe, and he gives two gifts, one gift for each of the two bloods.

And likewise, that which is taught in the Mishna: Bloods that are

in a giving of four

with bloods that are

in a giving of four,

and Rabbi Eliezer says that they shall be given in a giving of four,

here too

it deals

with a case in which

blood in the measure of a giving of

four

became mixed with other blood

in the

measure of a giving of

four.

And Rabbi Eliezer says: He shall give the measure of four gifts from this blood, and he shall return and give the measure of four gifts from this blood, because there is no bila.

And furthermore, we consider: That which is taught in the Mishna, “those given with a

giving of four

with those given

with one gift,”

concerning which Rabbi Eliezer says that they shall be given with a giving of four, and I regard the addition of the blood of the firstborn as though it were water, this is difficult for Rav Ashi: For if Rabbi Eliezer holds that there is no bila, there is concern that perhaps he did not give at all from one of the two?