The Eddie D. Sit Edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, Masechet Zevachim, has been dedicated by our good friend and student of the shiur Daf Yomi, Binyamin HaCohen, known as Benny C. He has dedicated this Masechet with the hope that, with God's help, he will achieve success and prosperity. Being a Kohen, it is our prayer that when the Mashiach arrives, he will serve in the Beit Hamikdash alongside the other Kohanim, in the merit of this Masechet, which specifically discusses the avodah of the Kohanim in the Beit Hamikdash concerning the korbanot. We are studying Daf Ayin Gimmel today, which is being learned for the elevation of the soul of Avraham ben Esther, may the soul of the Holy One bless him be at rest in the Garden of Eden. Amen. Additionally, this daf is being studied for the complete recovery of Micky ben Jamie and for the success of Binyamin Mordechai ben Esther. We begin today’s daf on Ayin Gimmel amud rishon, starting from the second line with the word detanya.
Let us review where we are holding in this Gemara. We had a Mishna that stated if one had a korban, specifically a korban chatat hametah, this is a type of korban that must be left to die rather than being placed on the Mizbeach. The Gemara then poses a scenario where this korban got mixed up with other korbanot. For instance, it could have mixed with ten thousand korban shelamim. While shelamim can be offered on the Mizbeach, the chatat hametah cannot. Therefore, the Gemara concludes that all must be removed from the Mizbeach and allowed to die, treating them with the same seriousness as the one korban of chatat hametah.
The Gemara raises an important question: what happened to the principle of rov? Why do we not follow the majority? The majority of the korbanot were permissible. Why then do we not say that this one animal is batel b'rov? The Gemara answers that we do not apply bitul b'rov here because this is considered davar she'biminyan. An animal is something that is counted or sold by quantity. One does not sell a herd collectively; one sells each animal individually. Thus, davar she'biminyan is regarded as a davar chashuv. Since a davar chashuv does not allow for bitul, we cannot apply bitul in this case.
However, the Gemara continues, this is not so simple. There is a machloket regarding the opinion of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Meir discusses whether something sold by quantity is batel or not. One opinion, attributed to Rabbi Yochanan, states that Rabbi Meir holds that it must be strictly sold by number to be considered a davar chashuv. If it is only partly sold by quantity, it does not attain that status. Conversely, Resh Lakish argues that as long as it is mostly sold by quantity, even if sometimes it is not, it remains a davar chashuv.
The Gemara explains that according to Resh Lakish, animals are typically sold by quantity, thus maintaining their status as davar chashuv. This is why there is no bitul. However, according to Rabbi Yochanan, since animals are not sold strictly by quantity, they should be batel. This leads to a question: who is the author of our Mishna? The Gemara concludes that the author of our Mishna is in line with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, specifically regarding the case of litra ketziot, which we will need to explore further.
As the Gemara continues, it introduces a Tosefta discussing litra ketziot, which refers to a specific measurement of dried figs of terumah that were pressed into a cake and placed in a round vessel. If the top layer is terumah and the bottom layer is chullin, and one does not know which vessel contains the terumah, a dilemma arises. Since terumah cannot be consumed by those who are not Kohanim, what should be done?
The Gemara presents similar cases, such as pressing figs on top of a barrel or a basket made of reeds. In each instance, the individual does not know where the terumah is located. Rabbi Meir states that even if there are not a hundred chullin to nullify the terumah, it can still be batel because we consider the top part as if it is separate from the bottom. Thus, the bottoms can be used to achieve the necessary quantity to nullify the terumah.
On the other hand, Rabbi Yehoshua argues that one requires a hundred pumim to nullify the terumah. If there are not a hundred, the pumim are forbidden while the bottoms remain permissible. Rabbi Yehuda offers a different perspective, stating that if there are a hundred pumim, they can nullify the terumah, but if not, the pumim are forbidden. This leads to a further discussion on the status of items sold by quantity and their implications for bitul.
As the Gemara delves deeper, it emphasizes the importance of understanding the distinctions between these opinions. The discussion on davar she'biminyan and its implications for bitul reveals the complexity of halachic rulings regarding items that are counted or sold individually. The Gemara ultimately seeks to clarify the status of animals in this context, affirming their classification as davar chashuv and thus ineligible for bitul.
In conclusion, the Gemara highlights the critical nature of understanding these distinctions, as they directly impact the rulings on korbanot and the responsibilities of the Kohanim. The examination of davar she'biminyan and the differing opinions on its application serves as a reminder of the intricacies of halachic discourse and the importance of precise reasoning in matters of Jewish law.