We continue in chapter eight of tractate Zevachim, to Mishnah seven. This Mishnah as well deals with blood that became mixed with other blood, but here we are dealing with two new types of mixtures: "nisarev bedam pesulin" - it became mixed with invalid blood, and blood that became mixed with "dam hatamtzis" - draining blood.
"Nisarev bedam pesulin" - it became mixed with invalid blood:
The blood of a valid offering became mixed with the blood of an invalid offering. According to the Bartenura's approach, this refers to blood coming from an offering that was invalidated due to an invalid thought - such as the thought to consume it outside of its proper place and the like - and the two bloods are mixed together.
Strictly speaking, it would seem that we should validate this: since there is no explicit prohibition to bring such blood up to the altar, it can be treated simply as water. Therefore, as long as the ratio between the bloods is not too great - according to the rule explained in the previous Mishnayos in the case of a mixture with water - the mixture is valid, and the kohen has in mind that the invalid blood, which does not belong there, is present merely like water. He does not want it as an offering, but only as part of the mixture, so that the fit blood will be brought up.
However, the Sages prohibited this. They were concerned lest it ultimately lead to placing invalid blood directly on the altar for its own sake, and therefore they decreed rabbinically that such a mixture should not be placed on the altar, but rather "yishafech la'amah" - it is poured into the canal. A small water canal passed through the middle of the Courtyard, flowing down to the Kidron Valley below, into which all the blood that was not used in the offerings was ultimately washed away. Thus, on a Torah level it is permitted, but rabbinically it is prohibited.
What are "pesulin"? A dispute among the Rishonim:
The Bartenura: This refers exclusively to an invalidation stemming from an invalid thought. This is because the next Mishnah will deal with the blood of a blemished animal that became mixed, and there is an explicit Torah prohibition that the blood of a blemished animal does not go up on the altar, and thus the matter is more severe. According to this approach, if it were the blood of an animal that is a rove'a or a nirba and the like - one of the more severe invalidations of offerings - it certainly must not be brought up, since the matter is considered a disgrace to the altar, and it is a kal vachomer from the blemished animal in the next Mishnah.
Rashi (as cited by Tosafos), and so it appears from the words of the Rambam: The "pesulin" in our Mishnah are even severe invalidations like a rove'a and a nirba and the like. According to this approach, the law stated in the Mishnah is applied at the very least to this level.
"Dam hatamtzis" - draining blood:
The blood that comes out from the neck of the animal after the slaughter is of two types:
Dam hanefesh - lifeblood: The blood that spurts and comes out immediately after the slaughter, while the animal is dying but its heart is still beating. This is the blood that is fit for the service.
Dam hatamtzis - draining blood: The blood that drips afterward, once the animal has died, when the remnants of the blood drain from the veins and arteries - the draining blood.
There is no purpose for draining blood on the altar, but there is also no prohibition against bringing it up. Therefore, when draining blood becomes mixed with lifeblood, its law is like the law of a mixture of invalid blood: strictly speaking, on a Torah level, the mixture is valid as long as the ratio is not too great, and the draining blood is viewed as water. However, the Sages were concerned that they might come to offer a mixture that is mostly draining blood, and therefore they decreed that it too "yishafech la'amah" - is poured into the water canal in the Courtyard.
In both of these cases one must wait until after sunset. Since strictly speaking it is permitted to use the mixture, we do not pour it out beforehand; only after sunset is it poured into the canal, and with that its matter is concluded.
"Rabbi Elazar machshir" - Rabbi Elazar declares it valid. Rabbi Elazar disagrees regarding the matter of exudate blood (dam hatamtzis) and holds that the Sages did not enact any rabbinic decree here at all. In his opinion, the concern that they might come to offer a mixture that is mostly exudate blood is far-fetched, and our Sages do not issue decrees or enact measures for far-fetched scenarios. Therefore, it is permitted to use this mixture.
"Im lo nimlach venasan - kasher" - if he did not consult and applied it, it is valid. If the kohen did not ask how to proceed with the mixture in his hand, but rather applied it on the altar assuming everything was in order, in both of these mixtures - the mixture of exudate blood and the mixture of invalid blood - it is valid, and the service is effective. This means the person bringing the offering achieves atonement. Even though this is forbidden by rabbinic law, since it is valid by Torah law in these cases, it is effective post facto (bedieved).
The halachah in this matter follows the Sages, and therefore, post facto, it is valid. The halachah also follows the opinion of the Rambam, that even with the more severe invalidations - not a blemished animal, but the severe invalidations among offerings - if he offered the mixture, it is effective post facto, and the person who was obligated to bring the offering has fulfilled his obligation.
To summarize: In this Mishnah we learned two cases of mixtures that share the same law - valid blood that mixed with invalid blood, and lifeblood that mixed with exudate blood. In both cases, strictly speaking, the additional blood could be treated like water and validated according to the ratio. However, the Sages issued a decree out of concern that one might come to offer the invalid blood for its own sake, and therefore the mixture is poured into the canal after sunset. Rabbi Elazar declares it valid in the case of exudate blood, since the concern is far-fetched; and if he applied it post facto and did not consult - it is valid, and the owners achieve atonement. We also discussed the dispute of the Rishonim regarding the scope of "invalid blood": according to the Bartenura it only includes an invalidation of improper intention, while according to Rashi and the Rambam it includes even severe invalidations such as an animal that copulated with a human (rovea) or was the passive participant in bestiality (nirba).
In the next Mishnah, we will discuss blood that mixed with the blood of a blemished animal, where there is an explicit prohibition from the Torah, and we will see how its law is more stringent than the cases we learned here.