Chapter 4, Mishna 4, 5

Does piggul (improper intent to eat or burn after its time) apply to blood (dam), or only to items that are eaten or burned such as meat and fats? The daf analyzes whether blood, which is not consumed, can be subject to disqualifying intent, and whether its unique role as the vehicle of atonement alters the rule.
Which biblical verses are brought to include or exclude blood from the law of piggul, and how are key terms like leratzon(for acceptance) and yichashev (it shall be considered) interpreted? The discussion turns on whether these verses limit piggul to items designated for consumption or burning.
Since blood is the matir (permitting agent) that allows the meat and fats to be eaten or offered, can piggul ever attach to the matir itself, or only to what it permits? The Gemara probes whether blood’s enabling function shields it from or subjects it to invalidation through improper intent.
If a kohen (priest) has an improper piggul thought during one of the avodot (acts of service) involving blood—slaughter (shechitah), receiving the blood (kabbalat ha-dam), carrying it (holachah), or sprinkling it (zerikah)—does that create piggul in the blood, in the meat, or not at all? The daf examines which acts of service can transmit the disqualifying thought.
Can blood become notar (left over past its permitted time), given that its mitzvah is zerikah and not eating? The Sages debate whether the notion of “leftover” can apply to blood once its primary purpose—sprinkling—has been fulfilled, or whether it is automatically exempt from notar.
Which textual links between notar and “eating” or “burning” are used to argue for or against including blood in the prohibition of notar, and how does the Torah’s wording—“you shall not leave over”—affect this determination? The discussion clarifies whether notar extends beyond food and incense-type offerings.
Does meilah (misuse of sacred property) apply to blood, and if so, when—before sprinkling, after sprinkling, or never? The Gemara compares blood to other consecrated substances like meat or emurim (fats), whose meilah status changes depending on their role in atonement.
How do the laws of piggul, notar, and meilah apply to wood (etzim) placed on the altar and frankincense (levonah)offered with meal offerings? Are these considered “food” for the purpose of piggul and notar, or are they excluded because they are not eaten but burned as fuel or fragrance?
If one derives benefit (hanaah) from consecrated blood, wood, or frankincense—for example, using them as dye, fuel, or perfume—is this considered meilah, a different form of prohibited benefit, or not a liability beyond general prohibitions on sacred use? The daf explores how intention and use determine culpability.
Finally, what halachic conclusions emerge from the combined sugyot of Zevachim 46a–47a regarding piggul, notar, and meilah as they relate to blood, wood, and frankincense, and where do the Tannaim and Amoraim disagree?

Opening song: Moshe Storch leads Hallel at Beis Medrash Hancock Park

❤️ Support our work and dedicate an episode of AT Daily to the healing/honor/memory of a loved one.
🤗 Sign up for our free weekly newsletter!