Zevachim Daf 87 זבחים דַף 87

Rava asked Rabbah: לינה מועלת בראשו של מזבח – is remaining overnight effective in invalidating something kept on top of the מזבח, or is לינה ineffective on top of the מזבח? This question is not relevant if the kodashim did not come down, because even items left on the עזרה floor, which were certainly invalidated, are not removed from the מזבח if they were brought there. Rather, the case is where the kodashim came down from the מזבח, and the question is: לשלחן מדמינן לה – do we compare [the מזבח] to the Shulchan, and just as לחם הפנים on the שולחן remain valid even if they were left there for many days, so too לינה would not invalidate kodashim left on the מזבח, or perhaps לקרקע מדמינן – we compare [the מזבח] to the ground of the עזרה, where לינה is effective to invalidate kodashim? Rabbah answered that אין לינה בראשו של מזבח, but the Gemara proceeds to demonstrate that Rava did not accept this answer, and holds that לינה is מועלת בראשו של מזבח.

Reish Lakish asked Rebbe Yochanan: כלי שרת מהו שיקדשו את הפסולין – do service vessels sanctify invalid [kodashim]? Rebbe Yochanan thought Reish Lakish was asking if פסולין acquire קדושת הגוף – physical sanctity by being placed in a כלי שרת, and as a result can no longer be redeemed. Rebbe Yochanan answered that this halachah is taught in our Mishnah, which states: כשם שהמזבח והכבש מקדשין את הראוי להן – just as the mizbeiach and the ramp sanctify that which is fit for them, כך כלים מקדשין – so do service vessels sanctify [פסולין which are fit for them]. However, Reish Lakish clarified that this was not the intent of his inquiry, and explained: לכתחילה ליקרב קמיבעי לי – I was asking whether a כלי שרת can be mekadesh פסולין to even allow offering them on the מזבח initially. Rebbe Yochanan attempts to resolve this question from a Mishnah, but the proof is deflected.

The Gemara inquires: אויר מזבח כמזבח דמי או לא – is airspace above the mizbeiach considered like the mizbeiach or not? If invalid kodashim were held in the airspace above the מזבח, is it considered off the מזבח and must be taken down? A proof is suggested from the fact that the כבש is mekadesh פסולין to be brought on the מזבח, presumably by being carried up the כבש, proving that the airspace of the כבש is considered like the כבש (otherwise, the פסולין would have to be taken down). However, the Gemara answers: דנגד ליה – he could drag [the פסולין] up the כבש without lifting them. Although there is a gap between the כבש and the מזבח which the invalid part must cross, we say that רובו לכבש ככבש – if the majority of [the part] is on the ramp, it is considered like entirely on the ramp, and when the majority is on the מזבח, it is considered entirely on the מזבח. The Gemara adds that this requires saying there is חיבור לעולין – a concept of attachment to items which go up on the מזבח (i.e., to be considered a single mass), because if they are considered separate pieces, we would not follow their majority.

On the next Daf, Rav Ashi concludes that if the Kohen holding the פסולין is himself standing on the מזבח, it is certainly considered on the מזבח; the inquiry is relevant where someone on the ground holds them over the מזבח with a stick.