Zevachim — Daf 31b

הא לאכול ולאכול דומיא דלאכול ולהקטיר והיכי דמי בשני בני אדם מצטרף ש"מ

בעי רבא חישב לאכול כזית ביתר מכדי אכילת פרס מהו לאכילת גבוה מדמינן ליה או לאכילת הדיוט מדמינן ליה

אמר אביי ת"ש לאכול כחצי זית ולהקטיר כחצי זית כשר שאין אכילה והקטרה מצטרפין טעמא דלאכול ולהקטיר הא לאכול ולאכול מצטרף והא הקטרה ביותר מכדי אכילת פרס הוא

דלמא בהיסק גדול:

לאכול כחצי זית ולהקטיר כחצי זית כשר: טעמא דלאכול ולהקטיר הא לאכול ולאכול דבר שאין דרכו לאכול מצטרף

הא קתני רישא לאכול את שדרכו לאכול (מצטרף) את שדרכו לאכול אין שאין דרכו לא

אמר רבי ירמיה הא מני רבי אליעזר היא דאמר מחשבין מאכילת אדם לאכילת מזבח ומאכילת מזבח לאכילת אדם דתנן השוחט את הזבח לאכול דבר שאין דרכו לאכול ולהקטיר דבר שאין דרכו להקטיר כשר ורבי אליעזר פוסל

אביי אמר אפי' תימא רבנן ולא תימא הא לאכול ולאכול דבר שאין דרכו לאכול אלא אימא הא לאכול ולאכול דבר שדרכו לאכול

מאי קמ"ל אי דבר שדרכו לאכול קמ"ל מרישא ש"מ כחצי זית בחוץ כחצי זית למחר פסול (הא כחצי זית למחר פיגול

אלא) אי לאכול ולהקטיר מדוקיא דרישא ש"מ לאכול דבר שדרכו לאכול אין שאין דרכו לאכול לא

השתא ומה לאכול ולאכול דבר שאין דרכו לאכול לא מצטרף לאכול ולהקטיר מיבעי

לאכול ולהקטיר איצטריך ס"ד אמינא התם הוא דלאו כי אורחיה קא מחשב אבל הכא דבהאי כי אורחיה ובהאי כי אורחיה אימא ליצטרף קא משמע לן:

הדרן עלך כל הזבחים שקבלו דמן:

מתני׳ כל הפסולין ששחטו שחיטתן כשרה שהשחיטה כשרה בזרים ובנשים ובעבדים ובטמאים ואפילו בקדשי קדשים ובלבד שלא יהיו טמאים נוגעין בבשר לפיכך הן פוסלין במחשבה

Hence if he intended to eat [half as much as an olive] and to eat [half as much as an olive] in a way similar to [the intention of] eating and burning, — and how is that possible? [that the two half olives] should be eaten by two men, — they would combine. This proves it. Raba asked: What if he intended to eat as much as an olive within more than the time required for eating half [a loaf]?1 Do we compare this to the eating of the All-High,2 or do we liken it to human eating? — Said Abaye, Come and hear: [IF HE INTENDED] EATING HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE AND BURNING HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE, IT IS FIT, BECAUSE EATING AND BURNING DO NOT COMBINE. Thus only eating and burning; but eating and eating in a way similar to eating and burning combine, though burning requires more than the time for eating half [a loaf]!3 — [No:] perhaps it means in a big fire.4 [IF HE INTENDED] TO EAT HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE AND TO BURN HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE IT IS FIT. Thus only to eat and to burn; but [if he intended] to eat [what is fit for eating] and to eat what is not fit for eating5 they combine. Yet surely the first clause teaches: [IF HE INTENDS] TO EAT WHAT IS NORMALLY EATEN [IT IS UNFIT]. Hence, only what is normally eaten, but not what is not normally eaten? — Said R. Jeremiah. This6 is in accordance with R. Eliezer, who maintained [that] you can intend [with effect] for the altar's consumption what is meant for human consumption and for human consumption what is meant for the altar's consumption. For we learnt: If one slaughters the sacrifice [intending] to eat what is not normally eaten or to burn [on the altar] what is not normally burnt, it is fit; but R. Eliezer invalidates [it].7 Abaye said: You may even say that it is according to the Rabbis; but do not deduce: But [if he intends] to eat [what is fit for eating] and to eat what is not normally eaten [it is fit]; deduce rather: But [if he intends] to eat [what is normally eaten] and to eat what is normally eaten8 [it is invalid]. [Then] what does [the Tanna] inform us? if he informs us [the law concerning] what is normally eaten,9 you can infer this from the first clause: [IF HE INTENDS TO EAT] HALF AS MUlch AS AN Olive WITHOUT, HALF AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE ON THE MORROW, [HIS INTENTIONS] COMBINE. If [he informs us about intending] to eat and to burn,10 you can infer this by deduction from the first clause, [viz.,] only [if he intends] to eat what is normally eaten, but not [if he intends to eat] what is not normally eaten. Then seeing that [intentions] to eat [what is normally eaten] and to eat what is not normally eaten do not combine, is it necessary [to teach about intentions] to eat and to burn [that they do not combine]?11 — He needs [to teach about intending] to eat and to burn. For you might argue, Only there12 [do they not combine], because his intention is not normal; but here, where [his intentions in respect of] each are normal,13 I would say that they combine. Hence he informs us [otherwise]. MISHNAH. ALL UNFIT PERSONS14 WHO SLAUGHTERED, THEIR SLAUGHTERING IS VALID, FOR SLAUGHTERING IS VALID [EVEN WHEN PERFORMED] BY LAY-ISRAELITES [ZARIM], AND BY WOMEN, AND BY SLAVES, AND BY UNCLEAN, EVEN IN THE CASE OF SACRIFICES OF HIGHER SANCTITY, PROVIDED THAT UNCLEAN [PERSONS] DO NOT TOUCH THE FLESH; THEREFORE THEY15 INVALIDATE [THE SACRIFICE] BY AN [ILLEGITIMATE] INTENTION. forbidden food in general is punishable only if as much as an olive thereof, which is the standard for punishment, is eaten in the time of an average meal. standard, and therefore if this comparison is made his intention counts. eat half as much as an olive. and burning (human consumption and the altar's consumption) do not combine.