Kiddushin, Daf Nun Heh, Part 5

 

Introduction

The Talmud returns to the mishnah about the lost sacrificial animal. The assumption was that male animals are either burnt offerings or peace offerings. But is that all they can be?

 

אמר מר זכרים עולות

דילמא תודה היא

דמייתי נמי תודה

והא בעיא לחם

דמייתי נמי לחם

 

The Master said: Males are burnt-offerings.

But maybe it is a thanksgiving-offering?

He also brings a thanksgiving-offering.

But they require loaves?

He also brings loaves.

 

The Talmud adds another possibility the animal might be a thanksgiving offering, so he has to bring one of those too. And the loaves that go with it. The altar is really making out here!

 

ודילמא אשם הוא

אשם בן שתי שנים ואישתכח בן שנה

ודילמא אשם מצורע הוא אשם נזיר הוא לא שכיחי

 

Yet perhaps it is a guilt-offering? A guilt-offering requires a two year old [animal], whereas a yearling was found.

Then perhaps it is a guilt-offering of a leper or a nazir?

These are rare.

 

It can t be a guilt offering because a one year old animal was found, not a two year old (no idea how they know this). It is not assumed to be a guilt-offering of a leper or a nazir which are yearlings because these are not common sacrifices.

 

ודילמא פסח הוא פסח בזמנו מזהר זהירי ביה ושלא בזמנו שלמים הוא

 

Yet perhaps it is a Pesah sacrifice?

A Pesach sacrifice in its season, people are careful about it. And when not in its season it is a peace offering.

 

We are not concerned with the animal being a Pesach because people don t lose those sacrifices so close to Pesah. And when it is not close to Pesah, the animal has the status of a peace offering.

 

ודילמא בכור ומעשר נינהו למאי הילכתא למיכלינהו במומן הכי נמי במומן מתאכלי

Yet perhaps it is a firstling or tithe?

In what respect? That it may be eaten when blemished? Here too, it is eaten when blemished.

 

If it is a firstling or tithe, then this is not a problem. We wait for a blemish and then eat it when blemished, which is always the rule for firstlings and tithes.