- פיגול for "דבר הנעשה בחוץ" of חטאות הפנימיות
The Gemara brings three sources to disprove Rav Huna’s statement on the previous Daf, that Rebbe Yose holds that פיגול intent about one part does not render the rest of the korban פיגול. In the second proof, Rebbe Yose in a Baraisa discusses פיגול of חטאות הפנימיות – “inner” chataos, whose blood is sprinkled inside the היכל. He says: that if he had פיגול intent with something done outside the היכל, it is פיגול, but not if he had פיגול intent with something done inside the היכל. Thus, whether he intended to sprinkle the blood on the מזבח הפנימי the next day, or had פיגול intent (about an “outside” avodah) while he sprinkled the blood inside, it is not פיגול. However, if he shechted outside intending to pour the שירים or burn the אימורין the next day, it is piggul, שמחשבה בחוץ בדבר הנעשה בחוץ – because there is intent outside about something done outside. Since consuming פיגול blood (or any מתיר which has no מתיר for itself) never incurs כרת, Rebbe Yose must mean that through פיגול intent about the blood, he is liable to כרת for eating the korban’s meat, disproving Rav Huna’s statement!?
- Rebbe Yose considers שתי הלחם and לחם הפנים separate items for פיגול, but they can be combined
On the previous Daf, Rebbe Yose ruled that פיגול intent about one loaf of שתי הלחם does not render the other loaf פיגול, yet he ruled in a Baraisa that פיגול intent for a כזית from both loaves can combine to make פיגול. Having proven that Rebbe Yose agrees that פיגול about one part makes the entire korban פיגול, Rebbe Yochanan gives a new explanation of Rebbe Yose’s ruling: הכתוב עשאן גוף אחד – the Torah made them one item, והכתוב עשאן שני גופין – and the Torah made them two (separate) items. They are considered one item, דמעכבי אהדדי – because they are essential to each other, and both are required to offer either. Yet, they are considered two items, because Hashem said they should be made separately. Therefore, regarding פיגול, they can also be considered one item or two items: ערבינהו מתערבין – if he combined them (by intending to eat a כזית from both), they are combined and the פיגול is effective; פלגינהו מיפלגי – If he separated them (by intending פיגול only about one of them), they are separated, and only that loaf is פיגול.
- Combining פיגול intents during different עבודות
A Baraisa states that if one intended during shechitah to eat a חצי זית, and then intended during זריקה to eat a חצי זית (the next day), it is piggul, מפני ששחיטה וזריקה מצטרפין – because shechitah and zerikah can be combined for פיגול. Some inferred that only shechitah and zerikah, דתרווייהו מתירין – which are both permitters (since shechitah permits the blood for the מזבח), can be combined, but קבלה and הולכה cannot. Others said that if shechitah and zerikah, דמרחקן – which are distant from each other, can be combined, then certainly הולכה and קבלה, which are near each other, can be combined. The Gemara objects that Levi taught a Baraisa ruling that none of the four עבודות can be combined for פיגול!? Rava answers that this second Baraisa reflects Rebbe’s opinion: if one shechted one כבש of Shavuos intending to eat a חצי זית of one לחם, and shechted the other כבש intending to eat a חצי זית of the other לחם (the next day), Rebbe says it is כשר, proving he does not combine two separate half-zayis intents. Abaye rejects Rava’s inference, because Rebbe’s case was combining a חצי זית from one half-מתיר with another half-מתיר (each of the two lambs), but perhaps he would agree to combine two half-זיתים from one full מתיר with another (i.e., two עבודות)!?