The Eddie and D-Sit addition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, has dedicated the study of Masechet Zevachim to our good friend and student of the Shiur Daf Yomi, Binyamin HaCohen, affectionately known as Benny C. May he find success and prosperity, and as a Cohen, may he serve in the Beis HaMikdash when the Mashiach arrives, alongside the other Kohanim in the merit of his dedication to this Masechet, which focuses on the Avodah of the Kohanim in the Beis HaMikdash concerning the Korbanot. Today, we study Daf Kaf Tet, in memory of Avraham ben Esther, may his soul be at rest in the Garden of Eden, and for the speedy recovery of Mickey ben Jamie, as well as for the healing of all the souls and bodies among the ill of Israel. May it be His will, and let us say Amen. We will begin today's Daf on Kaf Tet Amud Rishon, starting five lines down.
Rav Papa said to Rava, "According to you, who learned the laws of Pigul from the long verse in Parshat Tzav, what do you do with the verse in Kedoshim that states, 'If he eats it on the third day, it is Pigul'? Everything has already been learned from the previous verse, so what do we do with the one in Kedoshim?" Rava responds that this verse teaches a special Derasha: it indicates a place that must be Meshulash—that is, it must involve three components: the blood, the meat, and the Imurim, which are the parts of the animal that go on the Mizbe'ach. This means that if someone intended to eat the Korban, or to sprinkle the blood, or to bring the Imurim, the Korban is rendered Nifsal due to a Machshava Chutz L'mekomo.
Rava explains that it is necessary for there to be a place that was permissible during the time of Heteir Bamot to perform all three actions: the service of the blood, the eating of the meat of the Korban, and the bringing of the Imurim. However, once the Beis HaMikdash is built, this place becomes Asur for those actions. A place that was permissible during the time of Heteir Bamot but became forbidden during the construction of the Beis HaMikdash serves to exclude a location like the Heichal. In the Heichal, certain Korbanot, such as the Chatat Penimit, allow for the sprinkling of blood but do not permit the eating of the meat or the offering of other Korbanot there.
If a person intended to eat the Korban in the Heichal, this intention does not render the Korban Pasul, as the Heichal is still suitable for certain services. Thus, it is not considered Chutz L'mekomo in this context. The Gemara questions this logic, suggesting that the principle could be derived from the earlier verse in Parshat Tzav, which states, 'If he eats it on the third day, it is Pigul.' The usage of the word Shlishi implies that it is referring to a place where all three services were allowed during the time of Heteir Bamot, but are now forbidden.
Rav Ashi later argues that if one were to derive this from the earlier verse, one might mistakenly think that the term Shlishi is coming to exclude certain cases. He explains that the term Shlishi is specifically used to indicate a place that was permissible for all three services during the time of Heteir Bamot, which now does not allow any services after the Beis HaMikdash was constructed. Therefore, the second verse in Kedoshim serves to clarify this exclusion.
The Gemara continues to explore the implications of Machshava at the time of service. A person who has an intention at the time of one of the four services—slaughtering, receiving the blood, walking to the Mizbe'ach, or sprinkling—can invalidate the Korban with a Machshava that is improper. This is illustrated through the teachings of Rabbi Eliezer, who emphasizes the significance of intention in determining the validity of the Korban.
As the discussion unfolds, it becomes clear that the Gemara is grappling with the nuances of Pigul and the conditions under which a Korban can be rendered invalid. The distinction between intentions and their timing is crucial, as is the understanding of what constitutes a valid service. Rabbi Yehuda's perspective reinforces the importance of the order of intentions, indicating that if the intention for the time precedes the intention for the place, it leads to Pigul and incurs Karet. Conversely, if the intention for the place comes first, the Korban is merely Pasul without the penalty of Karet.
In conclusion, the Mishnah encapsulates these principles, stating that when one intends to eat or offer parts of the Korban with conflicting intentions, the Korban may be deemed Pasul but without incurring the severe consequences of Karet. Thus, the discussions in Masechet Zevachim illustrate the intricate relationship between intention, action, and the halachic status of Korbanot, guiding us in our understanding of these sacred practices.
Baruch Adonai le'olam, Amen ve'Amen.