on daf 59b r' yehudah said that the shirayim are essential and therefore if they weren't spilt on the base of the altar, the entire application service isn't worth anything, and he brins a pasuk to prove him right. but on the next daf on 61a they bring that same pasuk but they say there that everyone agrees that shirayim aren't essential and if the blood spilt before you did it then you dont have to slaughter another animal, how do you reconcile these two controadicting opinions, do you say that they are arguing and that r' meir and r' shimon on daf 61 agree w/r ' akiva who says shirayim aren't me'akev, or do you say something else? let me know what you think rabbi, thanks a lot
justin shemesh, u.s.a
For the record, Rebbi Yehudah's opinion is cited not on Daf 59b, but on Daf 60b. Also it is not Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Shimon who say that Shirayim are essential, but Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon (besides the Tana Kama, whose name we do not know).
Regarding your question, I understood that the Tana'im on 61a disagree with the the opinion in Rebbi Yehudah which holds Shirayim.
Not only do I have no problem with this, but I think it is logical, since Rebbi Akiva (with whom they concur) was their Rebbe. And besides, even Rebbi Yehudah's opinion is not unanimous. According to one of the opinions cited earlier, he too holds Shirayim Lo Me'akvi. Consequently, it is not surprising to learn that a second group of Tana'im hold like that too.
Be'Virchas Kol Tuv.
Eliezer Chrysler