Zevachim 31A

השתא ״כזית״ ״וכזית״ כללא, ״כזית למחר בחוץ״ מיבעיא?!

Now that R' Yehuda concedes that even: An olive-bulk and an olive-bulk, is one general term, is it necessary to inquire with regard to: An olive-bulk the next day outside?

לישנא אחרינא: ״כזית למחר בחוץ״ פרטא, ״כזית״ ״כזית״ מיבעיא?!

The Talmud presents another version of this discussion: R' Yehuda HaNasi might say that if R' Yehuda maintains that even when one says: An olive-bulk the next day outside, each term is considered separate, is it necessary to inquire with regard to: An olive-bulk, an olive-bulk?

איתמר: חצי זית חוץ לזמנו, חצי זית חוץ למקומו, וחצי זית חוץ לזמנו ⁠– אמר רבא: ״ויקץ כישן״ הפיגול. ורב המנונא אמר: עירוב מחשבות הוי.

§ It was stated: If one had intent to eat half an olive-bulk beyond its designated time, half an olive-bulk outside its designated area, and another half an olive-bulk beyond its designated time, Rava says: In such a case, the piggul: “Awaked as one asleep” (Psalms 78:65), i.e., since one had intent to consume two halves of an olive-bulk beyond their designated time, these intentions are joined together. The middle thought is disregarded, since it constitutes only half the requisite measure, and the offering is rendered piggul. And Rav Hamnuna says: It constitutes a combination of improper intentions. The middle thought, although itself insufficient to disqualify the offering, is sufficient to interfere with the intention to consume it beyond its time, and the offering is not rendered piggul.

אמר רבא: מנא אמינא לה? דתנן: כביצה אוכל ראשון וכביצה אוכל שני שבללן זה בזה ⁠– ראשון. חלקן ⁠– זה שני וזה שני. הא חזר ועירבן ⁠– ראשון הוי.

Rava said: From where, i.e., based on what, do I state my ruling? As we learned in a Mishnah (Teharot 1:5): An egg-bulk of food with 1st-degree impurity and an egg-bulk of food with 2nd-degree impurity that one mixed together are collectively considered to have 1st-degree impurity. If one separated them into two portions, each containing a homogenous mixture, this portion is considered to have 2nd-degree impurity and that portion is considered to have 2nd-degree impurity. Since neither of them contains the requisite amount of food with 1st-degree impurity, each mixture settles to the lower level of impurity between the two foods. Rava reasoned: But if one mixed them again, they revert to be of 1st-degree impurity.