Enter your email address to get our weekly email with fresh, exciting and thoughtful content that will enrich your inbox and your life.
COVID-19 Passover Resources Go
Please help Chabad.org   Donate Today!

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 8, Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 9, Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 10

Video & Audio Classes
Show content in:

Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 8

1

When a sin-offering of a dove becomes intermingled with a burnt-offerings of doves or a burnt-offering of a dove becomes intermingled with sin-offerings of doves,1 even one in a myriad, they should all be consigned to death.2

When does the above apply? When their identity had been explicitly determined when they were purchased by the owner, [saying]: "This is a sin-offering. This is a burnt-offering." Different rules apply, however, of one brought doves to fulfill his obligation, some [for] a sin-offering and some for a burnt-offering, without stating explicitly [what each was, instead, they were brought] without specification and then a [dove designated as] a sin-offering or as a burnt-offering became mixed with these undesignated [doves] brought to fulfill his obligation.

א

חַטַאת הָעוֹף שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בְּעוֹלַת הָעוֹף. אוֹ עוֹלַת הָעוֹף שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בְּחַטַּאת הָעוֹף. אֲפִלּוּ אַחַת בְּרִבּוֹא כֻּלָּן יָמוּתוּ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהָיוּ מְפֹרָשׁוֹת בִּשְׁעַת לְקִיחַת הַבְּעָלִים זוֹ חַטָּאת וְזוֹ עוֹלָה. אֲבָל אִם הֵבִיא עוֹפוֹת לְחוֹבָתוֹ מֵהֶן חַטָּאת וּמֵהֶן עוֹלָה וְלֹא פֵּרֵשׁ אֶלָּא כֻּלָּן סְתוּמוֹת וְנִתְעָרְבָה חַטָּאת אוֹ עוֹלָה בְּחוֹבָה זוֹ הַסְּתוּמָה יֵשׁ לָהֶן דִּינִים אֲחֵרִים:

2

What are the appropriate laws? If [a dove designated as] a sin-offering becomes intermingled with this unspecified [group of doves] brought to fulfill one's obligation, only the number of doves to be brought as sin-offerings in the unspecified [group] are acceptable.3 The number of burnt-offerings in the unspecified [group] and the sin-offering that became intermingled with them are disqualified, for a sin-offering has become intermingled with burnt-offerings.4

ב

וְכֵיצַד דִּינֵיהֶן. אִם נִתְעָרְבָה חַטָּאת בְּחוֹבָה זוֹ הַסְּתוּמָה אֵין כָּשֵׁר אֶלָּא מִנְיַן חַטָּאוֹת שֶׁבְּחוֹבָה בִּלְבַד. אֲבָל מִנְיַן הָעוֹלוֹת שֶׁבְּחוֹבָה עִם הַחַטָּאת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בָּהֶן פְּסוּלִין שֶׁהֲרֵי נִתְעָרְבָה חַטָּאת בְעוֹלוֹת:

3

Therefore if the unspecified [group] is [at least] twice as large as the number of sin-offerings [that became intermingled with them], half of the unspecified group is acceptable,5 and half are disqualified. It appears to me that [the priest offering the sacrifices] should offer all of them on the lower portion of the altar according to the rites appropriate for a sin-offering.6

ג

לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיְתָה הַחוֹבָה שְׁתַּיִם בְּחַטָּאת. חֲצִי הַחוֹבָה כָּשֵׁר וְחֶצְיָהּ פָּסוּל. וְיֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה כֻּלָּן לְמַטָּן כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת:

4

Similarly, if a burnt-offering7 becomes intermingled with this unspecified [group of doves], only the number of doves to be brought as burnt-offerings in the unspecified [group] are acceptable. The number of sin-offerings in the unspecified [group] and the burnt-offering that became intermingled with them are disqualified, for a burnt-offering has become intermingled with sin-offerings.8

Whether there are more doves in the unspecified group than the number of burnt-offerings that became intermingled with them, there were more burnt-offerings than doves in the unspecified group, or they were of equal amounts, only the amount of burnt-offerings in the unspecified group are acceptable. Therefore if the unspecified group was twice as large as the number of doves that became intermingled with them, half of the unspecified group is acceptable, and half are disqualified. It appears to me that [the priest offering the sacrifices] should offer all of them on the upper portion of the altar according to the rites appropriate for a burnt-offering.

ד

וְכֵן אִם נִתְעָרְבָה עוֹלָה בְּחוֹבָה זוֹ הַסְּתוּמָה. אֵין כָּשֵׁר אֶלָּא מִנְיַן עוֹלוֹת שֶׁבְּחוֹבָה. אֲבָל מִנְיַן הַחַטָּאוֹת שֶׁבְּחוֹבָה עִם הָעוֹלָה שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בָּהֶן פְּסוּלִין. שֶׁהֲרֵי נִתְעָרְבָה עוֹלָה בְּחַטָּאת. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה הַחוֹבָה הַסְּתוּמָה מְרֻבָּה עַל הָעוֹלוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בָּהּ. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ הָעוֹלוֹת מְרֻבִּין עַל הַחוֹבָה הַסְּתוּמָה. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן שָׁווֹת. אֵין כָּשֵׁר אֶלָּא מִנְיַן עוֹלוֹת שֶׁבְּחוֹבָה. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיְתָה הַחוֹבָה שְׁתַּיִם בָּעוֹלוֹת חֲצִי הַחוֹבָה כָּשֵׁר וְחֶצְיָהּ פָּסוּל. וְיֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה כֻּלָּן לְמַעְלָה כְּמַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה:

5

When one unspecified group becomes intermingled with another unspecified group - whether they were all for one purpose, e.g., doves brought by zavim together with doves brought by zavim, or for two purposes, doves brought by zavim together with doves brought by women after childbirth, whether they were both brought by the same person, or they were brought by two separate people, if they were both similar, half are acceptable and half are disqualified.9 [This applies] whether [the priest] offered all of them on the upper portion of the altar or all on the lower portion of the altar, or half were offered on the upper portion of the altar and half on the lower portion, half are always acceptable and half are always disqualified, because half [of the mixture] are burnt-offerings and half are sin-offerings and a sin-offering is offered on the lower portion of the altar and a burnt-offering is offered on the upper portion.

[To explain:] If he offered them all on the upper portion, half are acceptable and they are burnt-offerings.10 If he offered them all on the lower portion, half are acceptable and they are sin-offerings.11 If half were offered on the lower portion of the altar and half on the upper portion, half of the half offered on the upper portion are acceptable [and the other half are disqualified,] because of the mixture.12 [The acceptable ones] are burnt-offerings. And half of the half of those offered on the lower portion are acceptable and they are sin-offerings.

ה

חוֹבָה סְתוּמָה וְחוֹבָה אַחֶרֶת סְתוּמָה שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן מִשֵּׁם אֶחָד. כְּגוֹן קִנֵּי זָבִים עִם קִנֵּי זָבִים. אוֹ מִשְּׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּגוֹן קִנֵּי זָבִים עִם קִנֵּי יוֹלְדוֹת. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶם לְאָדָם אֶחָד. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ לִשְׁנַיִם. אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן שָׁווֹת מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. בֵּין שֶׁעָשָׂה הַכּל לְמַעְלָה אוֹ הַכּל לְמַטָּה אוֹ עָשָׂה חֶצְיָן לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיָן לְמַטָּה לְעוֹלָם מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַכּל חֶצְיָן עוֹלָה וְחֶצְיָן חַטָּאת. וְהַחַטָּאת לְמַטָּה וְהָעוֹלָה לְמַעְלָה. אִם עָשָׂה הַכּל לְמַעְלָה חֶצְיָן כְּשֵׁרוֹת וְהֵן עוֹלוֹת. וְאִם עָשָׂה כֻּלָּן לְמַטָּה חֶצְיָן כְּשֵׁרוֹת וְהֵן חַטָּאוֹת. עָשָׂה חֶצְיָן לְמַטָּה וְחֶצְיָן לְמַעְלָה חֲצִי הַחֵצִי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה לְמַעְלָה כָּשֵׁר מִפְּנֵי הַתַּעֲרֹבֶת וְהוּא עוֹלוֹת וַחֲצִי הַחֵצִי שֶׁל מַטָּה כָּשֵׁר וְהוּא חַטָּאוֹת:

6

[The following rules apply if] two unspecified groups became intermingled with each other and one was larger than the other, e.g., one had four doves and one had six. If he offered them all on the upper portion of the altar, or all on the lower portion, half are acceptable and half are disqualified for the reason we explained.13 [Different laws apply] if he offered half on the lower portion of the altar and half on the upper portion. If he did this after he asked,14 the lesser amount are acceptable.15 If he did this on his own initiative, the greater amount are acceptable.16

ו

הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי הַחוֹבוֹת הַסְּתוּמוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ זוֹ גְּדוֹלָה מִזּוֹ. כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיְתָה אַחַת אַרְבַּע עוֹפוֹת וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה שֵׁשׁ. אִם עָשָׂה הַכּל לְמַעְלָה אוֹ עָשָׂה הַכּל לְמַטָּה מֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל וּמֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמִטַּעַם שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. עָשָׂה חֶצְיָן לְמַטָּה וְחֶצְיָן לְמַעְלָה. אִם אַחַר שֶׁשָּׁאַל עָשָׂה כֵן הַמֻּעָט כָּשֵׁר. וְאִם מִדַּעְתּוֹ עָשָׂה הַמְרֻבֶּה כָּשֵׁר:

7

This is the general principle: Whenever, on his initiative, the priest offered half on the upper portion of the altar and half on the lower portion, and it is impossible that [the doves of] one [owner] will not have been offered on both halves of the altar, the greater amount is acceptable.17 Since it is known that a portion of [this person's]18 sacrifices will be [offered] on the upper portion of the altar and a portion on the lower half, all of his sacrifices are acceptable.

ז

זֶה הַכְּלָל כָּל שֶׁעָשָׂה הַכֹּהֵן מִדַּעְתּוֹ חֶצְיָן לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיָן לְמַטָּה. וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה מִשֶּׁל אֶחָד לְמַעְלָה וּלְמַטָּה. הֲרֵי זֶה הַמְרֻבֶּה כָּשֵׁר הוֹאִיל וְדָבָר יָדוּעַ שֶׁמִּקְצָת קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו לְמַעְלָה וּמִקְצָתָם לְמַטָּה יִהְיוּ כָּל קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו כְּשֵׁרִים:

8

When two individuals purchase pairs of doves together or give the money for them to the priest [to purchase them], the priest may offer whichever he desires as sin-offerings and whichever he desires as burnt-offerings.19 For [the identity of the sacrifices] in the pair is determined only when purchased by the owners or when offered by the priest, as we explained.20

ח

שְׁנַיִם שֶׁלָּקְחוּ קִנֵּיהֶן בְּעֵרוּב אוֹ שֶׁנָּתְנוּ דְּמֵי קִנֵּיהֶן לַכֹּהֵן לְאֵיזֶה שֶׁיִּרְצֶה הַכֹּהֵן יַקְרִיב חַטָּאת וּלְאֵיזֶה שֶׁיִּרְצֶה יַקְרִיב עוֹלָה. שֶׁאֵין הַקִּינִין מִתְפָּרְשִׁין אֶלָּא בִּלְקִיחַת הַבְּעָלִים אוֹ בַּעֲשִׂיַּת הַכֹּהֵן כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

9

If there were [groups of doves], some [groups of] sin-offerings and others, burnt-offerings, before a priest and he offered21 both [groups] on the upper portion of the altar or both on the lower portion, half are acceptable and half are not.22 If he offered half on the upper portion and half on the lower portion without knowing whether it was the sin-offerings or the burnt-offerings that he offered on the lower portion, they are all unacceptable. For we surmise that it was the burnt-offering that were offered on the lower portion and the sin-offerings on the upper portion.

ט

הָיוּ לִפְנֵי הַכֹּהֵן חַטָּאוֹת וְעוֹלוֹת. עָשָׂה שְׁתֵּיהֶן לְמַעְלָה אוֹ שְׁתֵּיהֶן לְמַטָּה מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. עָשָׂה חֶצְיָן לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיָן לְמַטָּה וְלֹא יָדַע אִם הַחַטָּאוֹת הֵם שֶׁעָשָׂה לְמַטָּה אוֹ הָעוֹלוֹת. הֲרֵי הַכּל פָּסוּל. שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר הָעוֹלוֹת הֵם שֶׁעָשָׂה לְמַטָּה וְהַחַטָּאוֹת לְמַעְלָה:

10

If there were three groups of doves before him:23 one sin-offerings, one burnt-offerings, and one undefined, half burnt-offerings and half sin-offerings, without the purpose [for any given dove] being defined, if he offered all of them on the upper portion or on the lower portion, half are acceptable and half are not.24

י

הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁלֹשָׁה צִבּוּרֵי עוֹפוֹת אֶחָד חַטָּאוֹת וְאֶחָד עוֹלוֹת וְהָאֶחָד סָתוּם חֶצְיוֹ עוֹלוֹת וְחֶצְיוֹ חַטָּאוֹת וְלֹא פֵּרֵשׁ. אִם עָשָׂה כֻּלָּן לְמַעְלָה אוֹ לְמַטָּה. מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל:

11

If he offered half on the upper portion and half on the lower portion,25 only the group that was undefined that was offered half on the upper portion and half on the lower portion is acceptable.26 It is divided between the owners27 and [the portion allotted to] each one is considered as valid for them, for the priest does not know which groups were specified [as being sin-offerings] and which one was left undefined. The two specified groups are not acceptable, because it is not known which one was offered on the upper portion of the altar and which one, on the lower portion and it is possible that the burnt-offerings were offered on the lower portion and the sin-offerings on the upper portion.

יא

עָשָׂה חֶצְיָן לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיָן לְמַטָּה. אֵין הַכָּשֵׁר אֶלָּא הַסָּתוּם בִּלְבַד שֶׁעָשָׂה חֶצְיוֹ לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיוֹ לְמַטָּה. וְהוּא מִתְחַלֵּק בֵּין הַבְּעָלִים וְעוֹלֶה לִשְׁנֵיהֶן. שֶׁהֲרֵי הַכֹּהֵן אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ לְאֵי זֶה מֵהֶן פֵּרֵשׁ וּלְאֵי זֶה מֵהֶן הָיָה הַסָּתוּם. וּשְׁנֵי הַצִּבּוּרִין הַמְפֹרָשִׁין פְּסוּלִין שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא יָדַע אֵי זֶה עָשָׂה לְמַעְלָה וְאֵי זֶה עָשָׂה לְמַטָּה וְשֶׁמָּא הָעוֹלָה נַעֲשֵׂית לְמַטָּה וְהַחַטָּאת לְמַעְלָה:

Footnotes
1.

As mentioned in the previous chapter and notes, a zav, a zavah, and a woman who gave birth are required to bring two doves as offerings, one as a sin-offering and one as a burnt-offering. The designation of the doves for these offerings is made either by the owner at the time of purchase or - and this is the most common instance - by the priest when he offers them. If the person bringing the doves did not designate them, the doves are referred to as a chovah, which we have translated as "the unspecified group."

2.

A dove designated as a sin-offering may not be offered as a burnt-offering, nor may one designated as a burnt-offering be offered as a sin-offering, as explained in Chapter 7, Halachot 5-8. Since the identity of the dove is not known, some of the offerings will be unacceptable. Hence none are offered and instead, they are consigned to die.

3.

The rationale is that half of the doves in the unspecified group are sin-offerings. Hence even if another dove that was designated as a sin-offering becomes intermingled with a group of four unspecified doves, there are definitely two doves that can be selected to be offered as sin-offerings (either two are from the unspecified group or one is from the unspecified group and one is the sin-offering that became intermingled).

A third sin-offering may not be brought because it is possible that the third dove is from the unspecified group and it should be designated as a burnt-offering.

4.

Either the dove designated as the sin-offering is among the three. Or the three are from the unspecified group and two are burnt-offerings and one is a sin-offering.

5.

For example, if five sin-offerings become intermingled with an unspecified group of ten, there are five acceptable sin-offerings in the intermingled group of fifteen.

6.

The expression "It appears to me" indicates a conclusion the Rambam reached through the process of deduction without any clearcut prior Rabbinic source. It appears that the Rambam is saying that all of the doves, even those which are disqualified, should be offered on the lower half of the altar. The Ra'avad takes issue with the Rambam, asking how is it possible for him to suggest that unacceptable doves should be offered as sacrifices. (If, he states, the Rambam's intent was that all of the sin-offerings should be offered on the bottom half of the altar, that is obvious and does not need the introduction "It appears to me.")

The Kessef Mishneh states that with the expression "It appears to me," the Rambam is introducing a new idea. The previous halachah is speaking about an instance where the priest offered only half the doves in the unspecified group on the lower half of the altar. If, however, he offers more than half of the doves (half of the unspecified group and the number of doves designated as sin-offerings that became intermingled with them) on the lower half of the altar, not only is half the unspecified group acceptable, the sin-offerings that became mixed with the unspecified group are also acceptable. The priest is allowed to offer the majority of the unspecified group on the lower half of the altar because the other doves were never specified as burnt-offerings. Although they would have to be offered as burnt-offerings (and hence, are disqualified), since they were never specified as such, they may be offered on the lower half of the altar. Rav Yosef Corcus adds that according to the Rambam, the intent is the sacrifices are acceptable. It is just that the owners can fulfill their obligation only for half of them.

7.

In addition to burnt-offerings from the pairs mentioned above, this could also refer to doves donated for freewill offerings which are all burnt offerings [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinnim 1:3)].

8.

I.e., the same principles applied in Halachot 2-3 with regard to a sin-offering are applied here with regard to a burnt-offering.

9.

Here the problem is that perhaps unknowingly, the priest will be offering all the doves from one unspecified group as sin-offerings and all of the other, as burnt-offerings, instead of offering them, half and half, as required.

10.

The other half are unacceptable, because they were sin-offerings and they were offered as burnt-offerings.

11.

The other half are unacceptable, because they were burnt-offerings and they were offered as sin-offerings.

12.

As explained in note 8.

13.

In the previous halachah.

14.

I.e., he consulted with the women and asked them what he should do [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinim 1:4)]. Others interpret this as meaning that he consulted the court.

15.

For example, Leah brought six doves and Rachel, four. If the priest offered five on the upper portion of the altar and five on the lower portion, it is possible that three are from Leah's group and she intended for them to be sin-offerings not burnt-offerings. Hence only two of the doves offered on the upper portion are acceptable. The same applies with regard to those offered on the lower portion (see the gloss of Rav Yosef Corcus).

16.

For the reason explained in the next halachah.

17.

Because the distinction of the sacrifices as burnt-offerings and sin-offerings was left to the priest to determine.

18.

I.e., the person who brought the larger group.

19.

They are all acceptable, because when offering them, he is determining which is a sin-offering and which, a burnt-offering.

20.

Chapter 5, Halachah 11.

21.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinnim 3:2), the Rambam states that this is speaking about an instance where the groups were not intermingled. The identity of the groups was left for the priest to determine. After doing so, he forgot how he had determined the identity of the groups and offered them in the manner described. Afterwards, he remembered they were of different types and inquired what was the outcome of his deeds. If, however, the groups became intermingled at the outset, they should all be consigned to death, as stated in Halachah 1 (see Kessef Mishneh).

22.

I.e., the groups contained an equal number of sin-offerings and burnt-offerings. Thus if they are all offered as one type, half will be unacceptable.

23.

This too is speaking about an instance where the groups are not intermingled, but rather three groups were brought to a priest to define their status and to offer them. Afterwards, he forgot and offered them without being conscious of their different status [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (op. cit.:3)].

24.

This is a combination of the previous halachah and Halachot 2 and 4.

25.

This refers to a situation similar to that described in note 23, except that here, he offered one group on the upper portion of the altar, one group one the lower portion, and one group, half and half.

26.

For it was offered as required, half on the upper portion of the altar and half, on the lower portion.

27.

Each of the people who brought sacrifices are credited with an equal share of the sacrifices offered. Thus each one is considered to have brought half their sacrifices and must bring the other half.

Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 9

1

When a dove from an unspecified group flies to free spaces or among doves that are consigned to death,1 or one of the doves dies, a second one should be taken for its pair.

א

קֵן סְתוּמָה שֶׁפָּרַח מִמֶּנָּה גּוֹזָל לָאֲוִיר. אוֹ שֶׁפָּרַח לְבֵין הָעוֹפוֹת שֶׁיָּמוּתוּ כֻּלָּן. אוֹ שֶׁמֵּת גּוֹזָל אֶחָד. יִקַּח זוּג לַשֵּׁנִי:

2

If it flies among [doves] that are fit to be offered, it is disqualified and it disqualifies one [of the group], for when a dove flies from an unspecified group to among those which will be offered, it becomes disqualified and it disqualifies another one corresponding to it.2

What is implied? A dove from a group of unspecified doves flies to an unspecified group of ten doves. If [the priest] offered five on the lower portion [of the altar] and six on the upper portion, five of the burnt-offerings from the six offered on the upper portion are acceptable3 and four of the sin-offerings from the five offered on the lower portion are acceptable. [The rationale is that] one says: "Perhaps the dove that flew is one of the five offered on the lower portion."4

Similarly, if he offered six on the lower portion and five on the upper portion, five sin-offerings and four burnt-offerings are acceptable. For one might say: "Perhaps the dove [that flew] is one of the five offered on the upper portion." Thus from the ten [from the second group], nine are acceptable and [the dove] disqualified one.

ב

פָּרַח לְבֵין הַקְּרֵבוֹת. פָּסוּל וּפוֹסֵל אֶחָד כְּנֶגְדּוֹ. שֶׁהַגּוֹזָל הַפּוֹרֵחַ מִקֵּן סָתוּם לְבֵין הַקְּרֵבוֹת פָּסוּל וּפוֹסֵל אֶחָד כְּנֶגְדּוֹ. כֵּיצַד. פָּרַח גּוֹזָל מִן הַסָּתוּם לַעֲשָׂרָה עוֹפוֹת סְתוּמוֹת. אִם עָשָׂה חֲמִשָּׁה לְמַטָּה וְשִׁשָּׁה לְמַעְלָה. הֲרֵי חָמֵשׁ עוֹלוֹת כְּשֵׁרוֹת מֵהַשִּׁשָּׁה שֶׁל מַעְלָה וְאַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת כְּשֵׁרוֹת מֵהַחֲמִשָּׁה עוֹפוֹת שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ לְמַטָּה. שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא הַגּוֹזָל הַפּוֹרֵחַ הוּא אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה שֶׁל מַטָּה. וְכֵן אִם עָשָׂה מֵהֶם שִׁשָּׁה לְמַטָּה וַחֲמִשָּׁה לְמַעְלָה נִמְצֵאת הַכָּשֵׁר חָמֵשׁ חַטָּאוֹת וְאַרְבַּע עוֹלוֹת. שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא הַגּוֹזָל מֵחֲמִשָּׁה שֶׁל מַעְלָה. נִמְצֵאת הַכָּשֵׁר מֵהָעֲשָׂרָה תִּשְׁעָה הֲרֵי פָּסַל אֶחָד:

3

[The following rules apply when there is one] unspecified group of four doves and another unspecified group of four doves. If one from the first group flew to the second group, it disqualified one of the second group.5 If, after it became intermingled among them,6 one of the second group flew to the first group, it disqualifies one of the first group.7 Thus there are only two doves in the first group that are acceptable.8

ג

אַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת סְתוּמוֹת וְאַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת שְׁנִיּוֹת סְתוּמוֹת. פָּרַח אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת לַשְּׁנִיּוֹת פָּסַל אֶחָד מִן הַשְּׁנִיּוֹת. אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ חָזַר אֶחָד מִן הַשְּׁנִיּוֹת וּפָרַח לָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת פָּסַל אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת. וְנִמְצָא הַכָּשֵׁר מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת שְׁתַּיִם בִּלְבַד:

4

If, again, one of the first group flew back to the second group, even if [they continue flying back and forth] the entire day, they do not add to the number disqualified,9 for even if they become entirely intermingled with each other, half are acceptable and half are disqualified, as we explained.10

ד

חָזַר אֶחָד וּפָרַח מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת לַשְּׁנִיּוֹת אֲפִלּוּ כָּל הַיּוֹם אֵינוֹ מוֹסִיף לְהַפְסִיד יֶתֶר עַל זֶה שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ הֵן מְעוֹרָבוֹת כֻּלָּן זוֹ בָּזוֹ מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

5

[The following rules apply when there is one] unspecified group of two doves, a second group of four doves, a third of six, a fourth of eight, a fifth of ten, a sixth of twelve, and a seventh of fourteen. If one of the first group flew to the second,11 one of the second12 flew to the third, one of the third to the fourth, one of the fourth to the fifth, one of the fifth to the sixth, and one of the sixth to the seventh - and then, one flew back from group to group until one returned to the first group from which the original one had flown, one dove is disqualified in the first movement from group to group and one is disqualified in the return. Thus the first and second groups do not have any [acceptable doves]; the third group has two; the fourth, four; the fifth, six; the sixth, eight, and the seventh, twelve.13

If one of the doves flew from [group] to [group] a second time and then one flew back from the last [group], going from group to group until it reaches the first, one dove is disqualified in the movement from group to group and one is disqualified in the return. The third14 and the fourth groups do not have any [acceptable doves]; the fifth group has two; the sixth, four, and the seventh, ten.

If one of the doves flew from [group] to [group] a third time and then one flew a fourth time, going from group to group, one dove is disqualified in the movement from group to group and one is disqualified in the return. Thus the fifth and the sixth are disqualified entirely and the seventh has eight acceptable doves remaining, i.e., when the fourteen doves are offered [on the altar], seven on the upper portion and seven on the lower portion, eight will be acceptable and six will be disqualified because of the intermingling of the doves that flew back and forth.

ה

צִבּוּר אֶחָד יֵשׁ בּוֹ שְׁנֵי עוֹפוֹת. וּבַשֵּׁנִי אַרְבָּעָה. וּבַשְּׁלִישִׁי שִׁשָּׁה. וּבָרְבִיעִי שְׁמוֹנָה. וּבַחֲמִישִׁי עֲשָׂרָה. וּבַשִּׁשִּׁי שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. וּבַשְּׁבִיעִי אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר. וּפָרַח גּוֹזָל מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לַשְּׁנִיָּה. וְאֶחָד מִן הַשְּׁנִיָּה לַשְּׁלִישִׁית. וּמִשְּׁלִישִׁית לִרְבִיעִית. מֵרְבִיעִית לַחֲמִישִׁית. וּמֵחֲמִישִׁית לַשִּׁשִּׁית. וּמִשִּׁשִׁית לִשְׁבִיעִית. וְחָזַר אֶחָד וּפָרַח מִצִּבּוּר לְצִבּוּר עַד שֶׁחָזַר לָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁפָּרַח מִמֶּנָּה רִאשׁוֹנָה. פּוֹסֵל אֶחָד בַּהֲלִיכָתוֹ וְאֶחָד בַּחֲזִירָתוֹ. הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה אֵין לָהֶם כְּלוּם. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית יֵשׁ לָהּ שְׁנֵי עוֹפוֹת. וְהָרְבִיעִית יֵשׁ לָהּ אַרְבָּעָה. וְהַחֲמִישִׁית יֵשׁ לָהּ שִׁשָּׁה. וְהַשִּׁשִּׁית יֵשׁ לָהּ שְׁמוֹנָה. וְהַשְּׁבִיעִית יֵשׁ לָהּ שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. חָזַר אֶחָד וּפָרַח פַּעַם שְׁנִיָּה מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ וְחָזַר אֶחָד וּפָרַח מִן הָאַחֲרוֹנָה לְשֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מִמֶּנָּה עַד שֶׁחָזַר לָרִאשׁוֹנָה. פּוֹסֵל אֶחָד בַּהֲלִיכָתוֹ וְאֶחָד בַּחֲזִירָתוֹ. הַשְּׁלִישִׁית וְהָרְבִיעִית אֵין לָהֶם כְּלוּם. וְהַחֲמִישִׁית יֵשׁ לָהּ שְׁנֵי עוֹפוֹת כְּשֵׁרִים. וְהַשִּׁשִּׁית יֵשׁ לָהּ אַרְבָּעָה. הַשְּׁבִיעִית יֵשׁ לָהּ עֲשָׂרָה. פָּרַח פַּעַם שְׁלִישִׁית גּוֹזָל מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ. וְחָזַר פַּעַם רְבִיעִית מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ. פּוֹסֵל אֶחָד בַּהֲלִיכָתוֹ וְאֶחָד בַּחֲזִירָתוֹ. וְהַחֲמִישִׁית וְהַשִּׁשִּׁית נִפְסְלוּ כֻּלָּן. וְהַשְּׁבִיעִית נִשְׁאֲרוּ לָהּ שְׁמוֹנָה עוֹפוֹת כְּשֵׁרִין. כְּשֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר שֶׁבַע לְמַעְלָה וְשֶׁבַע לְמַטָּה יִהְיוּ שְׁמוֹנָה מֵהֶן כְּשֵׁרִין וְהַשִּׁשָּׁה פְּסוּלִין מִפְּנֵי תַּעֲרֹבֶת גּוֹזָלוֹת אֵלּוּ שֶׁפָּרְחוּ בַּהֲלִיכָה וּבַחֲזָרָה:

6

[The following laws apply when there was] a group of doves that was unspecified and another group [in which the doves for the sin-offering and the burnt-offering] had already been specified. If one of the doves from the unspecified group flew to the group that had been specified, [the owner of the unspecified group] should take a partner for the remaining dove.15

If [the above group became intermingled and then of the doves] returned [to the unspecified group] or [at the outset,] one of the doves from the specified group flew to the unspecified group and it was not known whether it was the one designated as a burnt-offering or the one designated as the sin-offering,16 all of the doves in the unspecified group should be consigned to death. [The rationale is that] if it was the one designated as a burnt-offering that became intermingled, all of the sin-offerings [in that group] are disqualified.17 And if it was the one designated as a sin-offering that became intermingled, all of the burnt-offerings [in that group] are disqualified. Therefore,18 they should all be consigned to death.

ו

קֵן סְתוּמָה וְקֵן מְפֹרֶשֶׁת. פָּרַח מִן הַסְּתוּמָה לַמְּפֹרֶשֶׁת. יִקַּח זוּג לְשֵׁנִי. חָזַר אוֹ שֶׁפָּרַח אֶחָד מִן הַמְפֹרֶשֶׁת לַסְּתוּמָה. וְלֹא יָדַע זֶה שֶׁפָּרַח אִם הָיָה עוֹלָה אוֹ חַטָּאת. יָמוּתוּ כָּל הָעוֹפוֹת שֶׁבַּסְּתוּמָה. שֶׁאִם נִתְעָרְבָה בָּהֶן עוֹלָה כָּל הַחַטָּאוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ פְּסוּלוֹת. וְאִם חַטָּאת נִתְעָרְבָה כָּל הָעוֹלוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ פְּסוּלוֹת לְפִיכָךְ יָמוּתוּ כֻּלָּן:

7

[The following laws apply when there were] a group of doves that were designated as sin-offerings on one side, others designated as burnt-offerings on the other side, and an unspecified group in the middle. If one of the unspecified group flew to the group on one side and another, to the other group, nothing is lost. Instead, the owner should say: "The one which flew to the sin offerings is a sin-offering. The one which flew to the burnt-offerings is a burnt-offering."19

If, after they became intermingled, one from each of the sides returned to the center, the two in the center should be consigned to death, for they are a burnt-offering and a sin-offering mixed together and those on the sides should be offered - these as sin-offerings and these as burnt-offerings - as was their original state.

If those [which returned to] the center flew to the sides, they must all be consigned to death for perhaps20 the burnt-offering became intermingled with the sin-offerings and the sin-offering became intermingled with the burnt-offerings.

ז

חַטָּאת מִכָּאן וְעוֹלָה מִכָּאן וּסְתוּמָה בָּאֶמְצַע. פָּרַח מִן הָאֶמְצַע לַצְּדָדִין אֵילָךְ אֶחָד וְאֵילָךְ אֶחָד. לֹא הִפְסִיד כְּלוּם. אֶלָּא יֹאמַר זֶה שֶׁהָלַךְ אֵצֶל הַחַטָּאוֹת חַטָּאת וְזֶה שֶׁהָלַךְ אֵצֶל הָעוֹלוֹת עוֹלָה. חָזַר אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ וּפָרַח אֶחָד מִכָּאן וְאֶחָד מִכָּאן לָאֶמְצַע. הַשְּׁנַיִם הָאֶמְצָעִיִּים יָמוּתוּ שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵן חַטָּאת וְעוֹלָה מְעֹרָבִין. וְהַצְּדָדִין אֵלּוּ יִקָּרְבוּ חַטָּאת וְאֵלּוּ יִקָּרְבוּ עוֹלָה כְּשֶׁהָיוּ. פָּרַח מִן הָאֶמְצָעִית לַצְּדָדִין כֻּלָּן יָמוּתוּ. שֶׁמָּא עוֹלָה נִתְעָרְבָה בַּחַטָּאוֹת וְחַטָּאת בָּעוֹלוֹת:

Footnotes
1.

Because they have become intermingled with a dove designated as a sin-offering.

2.

The redundancy in the Rambam's ruling is a quote from Kinim 2:1.

3.

I.e., it is obvious that one of the six offered as burnt-offerings is unacceptable, because there only five in the second group. The sixth is either one of the original group that should have been offered as a burnt-offering and is thus unacceptable. Or it is the one that flew into it, in which instance, it is unacceptable, because perhaps it was to be offered as a sin-offering. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinim 2:1).

4.

And one of the sin-offerings in that group had been offered together with the burnt-offerings.

5.

As described in the previous halachah.

6.

If, however, it is obvious that the dove that flew from the first group flew back to it, none of the doves are disqualified (ibid.).

7.

And it is disqualified itself.

8.

They should be offered one as a burnt-offering and one as a sin-offering. Similarly, in the second group, only one pair of doves should be offered, for we surmise that it was one of the three that was acceptable that flew to the first group.

9.

I.e., each group has two acceptable doves and two which are disqualified.

10.

Chapter 8, Halachah 5.

11.

And became intermingled there. The dove that flies into the group is unacceptable and it disqualifies another dove in the group. Thus of the group of four, only two acceptable doves remain. This principle applies every time one dove flies from one group to another, as evident from Halachah 3.

12.

If it is discernable that the dove that flew from the first group to the second flew from the second to the third, etc., all of these rules do not apply [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinim 2:3)].

13.

More acceptable doves remain in the last group because only two doves are disqualified in each circuit, while in all the other groups four are disqualified each time.

14.

As mentioned above, all of the doves in the first and second group were disqualified in the first phase of movement.

15.

One should be offered as a sin-offering and one as a burnt-offering. With regard to the doves from the group that had been specified. We are speaking about a situation where the identity of one of the doves - for argument's sake, the burnt-offering - is still known and the one designated as the sin-offering has become intermingled with the dove that flew into that group. Hence one burnt-offering and two sin-offerings should be offered and only one of the sin-offerings is acceptable. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinim 2:4).

16.

If, however, the identity of the dove which became intermingled is known, different laws apply, as explained in Chapter 8.

17.

The rationale is that since the doves are intermingled and it is known that one was a burnt-offering, none may be offered on the lower portion of the altar.

18.

I.e., since we do not know whether it was a burnt-offering or a sin-offering that was intermingled.

19.

Determining their identities with that statement. The fact that the priest offering the doves does not know which doves were brought by which person is not significant. See Chapter 6, Halachah 4.

20.

And even the possibility warrants that the doves be consigned to death.

Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 10

1

When a woman says: "I pledge a pair of doves when I give birth to a male," when she gives birth to a male she must bring four doves: two because of her vow, they are burnt offerings, as we explained,1 and two which she is obligated to bring because of the birth,2 one, a burnt-offering and the other, a sin-offering. Therefore the priest must offer three doves on the upper portion of the altar and one dove on the lower portion.

If he erred and offered two on the upper portion and two on the lower portion,3and he did not consult [with the woman],4 she must bring another dove and offer it on the upper portion of the altar.5

When does the above apply? When she brought all four doves from one type; either they were all turtle doves or young doves. If, however, she brought two turtle doves and two young doves and two6 were offered on the upper portion [of the altar] and two7 on the lower portion,8 she must bring one more turtle dove and one more young dove on the upper portion to fulfill her obligation.9 For if at the outset, two turtle doves were offered on the lower portion, another turtle dove must be brought on the upper portion to complete her obligation.10 [Or] if two young doves were offered on the lower portion, another young dove must be brought on the upper portion to complete her obligation. For a person should not bring a pair to fulfill his obligation that comprises one turtle dove and one young dove.11 Instead, either they should both be turtle doves or both be young doves.

א

הָאִשָׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה הֲרֵי עָלַי קֵן כְּשֶׁאֵלֵד זָכָר. יָלְדָה זָכָר מְבִיאָה אַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת. שְׁנַיִם לְנִדְרָהּ וְהֵן עוֹלָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וּשְׁנַיִם לְחוֹבָתָהּ מִשּׁוּם לֵידָה וְהֵן אֶחָד עוֹלָה וְאֶחָד חַטָּאת. נִמְצֵאתָ לָמֵד שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן צָרִיךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת שָׁלֹשׁ פְּרֵדִין לְמַעְלָה. וּפְרֵדָה אַחַת לְמַטָּה. טָעָה וְעָשָׂה שְׁתַּיִם לְמַעְלָה וּשְׁתַּיִם לְמַטָּה וְלֹא נִמְלַךְ צְרִיכָה לְהָבִיא עוֹד פְּרֵדָה אַחַת וְיַקְרִיבֶנָּה לְמַעְלָה. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהֵבִיאָה הָאַרְבָּעָה מִמִּין אֶחָד כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיוּ כֻּלָּן תּוֹרִין אוֹ בְּנֵי יוֹנָה. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִין עִם שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה וְעָשָׂה שְׁנַיִם לְמַעְלָה וּשְׁנַיִם לְמַטָּה. צְרִיכָה לְהָבִיא עוֹד תּוֹר וּבֶן יוֹנָה וְיַעֲשֶׂה שְׁתֵּיהֶן לְמַעְלָה כְּדֵי לָצֵאת יְדֵי חוֹבָתָהּ. שֶׁאִם עָשָׂה בַּתְּחִלָּה שְׁתֵּי הַתּוֹרִין לְמַטָּה צְרִיכָה תּוֹר לְמַעְלָה לְהַשְׁלִים חוֹבָתָהּ. וְאִם עָשָׂה שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי הַיּוֹנָה לְמַטָּה צְרִיכָה בֶּן יוֹנָה לְמַעְלָה לְהַשְׁלִים חוֹבָתָהּ. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ גּוֹזָל אֶחָד תּוֹר אַחַת אוֹ בֶּן יוֹנָה אֶלָּא אוֹ שְׁנֵיהֶן תּוֹרִין אוֹ שְׁנֵיהֶן בְּנֵי יוֹנָה:

2

If she made her vow explicit, telling the priest: "These12 are for my vow and these are for my obligation," and the priest offered two on the upper portion and two on the lower portion without knowing which ones he offered on the upper portion and which ones he offered on the lower portion,13 she must bring three doves, two for her vow and one to complete her obligation.14 The two should be offered on the upper portion of the altar. [The rationale is that] she made her vow explicit and possibly the two brought because of her vow were offered on the lower portion, thus disqualifying them.15

When does the above apply? When she brought the four doves from which she explicitly defined two as being for her vow from one type. If, however, [she brought them from] two types, she must bring four other doves:16 the two from the type she designated explicitly for her vow should be offered for her vow and the other two may be from either type she desires for her obligation. One should be offered on the upper portion [of the altar] and one on the lower portion.

ב

פֵּרְשָׁה נִדְרָהּ וְאָמְרָה לַכֹּהֵן אֵלּוּ לְנִדְרִי וְאֵלּוּ לְחוֹבָתִי. וַעֲשָׂאָם הַכֹּהֵן שְׁתַּיִם לְמַעְלָה וּשְׁתַּיִם לְמַטָּה וְלֹא יָדַע אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן עָשָׂה לְמַעְלָה וְאֵי זֶה מֵהֶן עָשָׂה לְמַטָּה. צְרִיכָה לְהָבִיא שְׁלֹשָׁה עוֹפוֹת. שְׁנַיִם לְנִדְרָהּ וְאֶחָד לְהַשְׁלִים חוֹבָתָהּ. וְיֵעָשׂוּ הַשְּׁנַיִם לְמַעְלָה שֶׁהֲרֵי פֵּרְשָׁה נִדְרָהּ וְשֶׁמָּא שְׁנַיִם שֶׁל נִדְרָהּ נַעֲשָׂה לְמַטָּה שֶׁהֵם פְּסוּלוֹת. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהֵבִיאָה הָאַרְבָּעָה שֶׁפֵּרְשָׁה נִדְרָהּ בִּשְׁנַיִם מֵהֶן מִמִּין אֶחָד. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵי מִינִין תָּבִיא אַרְבָּעָה אֲחֵרִים. שְׁנַיִם מִמִּין שֶׁפֵּרְשָׁה בּוֹ נִדְרָהּ יֵעָשׂוּ לְנִדְרָהּ וּשְׁנַיִם מֵאֵי זֶה מִין שֶׁתִּרְצֶה יִהְיוּ לְחוֹבָתָהּ וְיֵעָשׂוּ אֶחָד לְמַעְלָה וְאֶחָד לְמַטָּה:

3

[The following laws apply if a woman] defined17 [which types of doves to be offered to fulfill] her vow, saying: "If I give birth to a male, I pledge two turtle doves," and she gave birth and brought four doves:18 two for her vow and two for her obligation. The priest offered two on the upper portion [of the altar] and two on the lower portion, but did not know which were offered on the upper portion and which were offered on the lower portion and she also forgot and did not know the type of doves she had pledged for her vow, whether turtle doves or young doves. She should bring two turtle doves and two young doves for her vow.19[All] four should be offered on the upper portion of the altar. She should bring another dove to complete her obligation and it should be offered on the lower portion. 20

When does the above apply? When originally she brought all of the four of one type. If, however, they were of two types, she must bring six other doves: two turtle doves and two young doves for her vow21 and for her obligation, she should bring either two turtle doves or two young doves22 and offer one on the upper portion of the altar and one on the lower portion.

Similarly, if she gave them to the priest23 and forgot what she gave him and the priest went and offered them, but was not aware where he offered all of the doves, whether he offered them all on the upper portion, all on the lower portion, or half above and half below, she should bring two turtle doves and two young doves for her vow24 and two turtle doves or two young doves for her obligation.

ג

קָבְעָה נִדְרָהּ וְאָמְרָה אִם אֵלֵד זָכָר הֲרֵי עָלַי שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִים. וְיָלְדָה וְהֵבִיאָה אַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת. שְׁנַיִם לְנִדְרָהּ וּשְׁנַיִם לְחוֹבָתָהּ. וְעָשָׂה שְׁנַיִם לְמַעְלָה וּשְׁנַיִם לְמַטָּה וְלֹא יָדַע אֵי זֶה נַעֲשָׂה לְמַעְלָה וְאֵי זֶה נַעֲשָׂה לְמַטָּה. וְגַם הִיא שָׁכְחָה וְלֹא יָדְעָה בְּאֵי זֶה מִין קָבְעָה נִדְרָהּ אִם בְּתוֹרִים אוֹ בִּבְנֵי הַיּוֹנָה. הֲרֵי זוֹ צְרִיכָה לְהָבִיא שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִים עִם שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה לְנִדְרָהּ וְיֵעָשׂוּ אַרְבַּעְתָּן לְמַעְלָה. וְתָבִיא גּוֹזָל אֶחָד לְהַשְׁלִים חוֹבָתָהּ וְיֵעָשֶׂה לְמַעְלָה. (שֶׁכְּבָר עָשָׂה שְׁנַיִם לְמַטָּה שֶׁהֵם חַטָּאת). בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהֵבִיאָה הָאַרְבָּעָה תְּחִלָּה מִמִּין אֶחָד. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵי מִינִין צְרִיכָה לְהָבִיא שִׁשָּׁה עוֹפוֹת. שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִים עִם שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה לְנִדְרָהּ. וְתָבִיא לְחוֹבָתָהּ שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִים אוֹ שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה וְיֵעָשֶׂה אֶחָד לְמַעְלָה וְאֶחָד לְמַטָּה. וְכֵן אִם נְתָנָתַם לַכֹּהֵן וְשָׁכְחָה מַה נָּתְנָה לוֹ. וְהָלַךְ הַכֹּהֵן וְעָשָׂה וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ הֵיכָן עָשָׂה אִם הַכּל לְמַעְלָה אוֹ הַכּל לְמַטָּה אוֹ מֶחֱצָה לְמַעְלָה וּמֶחֱצָה לְמַטָּה. הֲרֵי זוֹ תָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִים עִם שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה לְנִדְרָהּ. וְתָבִיא שְׁתֵּי תּוֹרִים אוֹ שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה לְחוֹבָתָהּ:

4

If she defined [which type of offering25 to be offered to fulfill] her obligation and [which types of doves to be offered to fulfill] her vow and forgot what she defined, it is [also] possible that her obligation was a lamb for a burnt-offering and a dove - either a turtle dove or a young dove - as a sin-offering. Therefore she must bring six doves - four for her vow26 and two for her obligation.27 And she must bring one sin-offering, either a young dove or a turtle dove, with a lamb.28 Thus she will have brought seven doves and a lamb.

ד

קָבְעָה חוֹבָתָהּ וְקָבְעָה נִדְרָהּ וְשָׁכְחָה בַּמֶּה קָּבְעָה. וְאֶפְשָׁר שֶׁחוֹבָתָהּ כֶּבֶשׂ לְעוֹלָה וּפְרֵדָה אַחַת תּוֹר אוֹ בֶּן יוֹנָה לְחַטָּאת. לְפִיכָךְ תָּבִיא שִׁשָּׁה פְּרֵדִין. אַרְבָּעָה לְנִדְרָהּ וּשְׁנַיִם לְחוֹבָתָהּ. וְעוֹד תָּבִיא חַטָּאת אֶחָד בֶּן יוֹנָה אוֹ תּוֹר עִם כֶּבֶשׂ. נִמְצֵאת שֶׁהֵבִיאָה שִׁבְעָה עוֹפוֹת [וְכֶבֶשׂ]:

5

None of these sin-offerings should be eaten, because they are all offered because of a doubt.29

ה

וְכָל הַחַטָּאוֹת הָאֵלּוּ אֵינָן נֶאֱכָלוֹת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם סָפֵק:

Footnotes
1.

The commentaries note that there is no explicit source which states that the doves pledged by a woman should be offered as burnt-offerings. They do, however, point to Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 1:14 which states that a fowl is never brought as a peace-offering. Hence, the only alternative is for them to be offered as burnt-offerings.

2.

I.e., when she is poor, as stated in Leviticus, ch. 14; Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:3.

3.

As would be appropriate in most instances, for pairs of doves are generally required to be offered, one as a sin-offering and one as a burnt-offering.

4.

If he did not consult with her, it is his prerogative to determine which dove should be offered as a sin-offering and which as a burnt-offering, as stated in Chapter 7, Halachah 8.

5.

To fulfill her vow to bring a pair of doves as burnt-offerings.

6.

I.e., of one type.

7.

Of the other type.

8.

This is speaking about a situation where the priest offering the sacrifice forgot which type he offered on the upper portion of the altar and which type on the lower portion [Ra'avad; the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinnim 3:5)]. Were he to know which type he had offered on which portion, it would be sufficient to bring only one more dove.

9.

I.e., to serve as the burnt-offering for the pair she was obligated to bring because of the birth, as the Rambam proceeds to explain.

10.

And the two young doves offered on the upper portion are considered as having been brought to fulfill her vow.

11.

As the Kessef Mishneh states, it is not merely that it is unlikely for a person to do so, through Biblical exegesis, the Sifra derives that it is forbidden to do so.

12.

I.e., this pair of doves.

13.

And thus he is unsure if he fulfilled the woman's instructions.

14.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam explains that since it is possible that the two doves designated for her vow were offered on the lower portion of the altar (as sin-offerings instead of burnt-offerings), it is possible that her vow was not fulfilled and she must bring two other doves instead. Were that to have been the case, of the two offered on the upper portion of the altar, only one was acceptable and another dove must be brought as a sin-offering to fulfill her obligation.

The above explanations are based of Rav Kappach's edition of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah. The initial version (preserved in the standard printed texts) reads differently, stating that this situation is considered like a burnt-offering that became intermingled with an unspecified group. See in Chapter 8, Halachah 4.

15.

For they are burnt-offerings which must be offered on the upper portion of the altar.

16.

Here the difficulty is that since the woman specified that the doves for her vow should come from a specific type and the priest did not remember whether he in fact offered that pair of doves as a burnt-offering. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinnim 3:5), the Rambam explains this law. In the original sacrifice, perhaps the two turtle doves that were intended as burnt-offerings were sacrificed on the lower portion of the altar and were thus disqualified. Thus her vow was not fulfilled and she must bring two turtle doves. The two young doves were offered on the upper portion of the altar as burnt-offerings. Hence it is necessary for another young dove to be offered on the lower portion as a sin-offering to fulfill her obligation.

It is, however, also possible that the two young doves were offered on the lower portion of the altar. In that instance, she would have to bring another young dove to be offered on the upper portion as a burnt-offer to fulfill her obligation. Hence she must bring a total of two turtle doves and two young doves.

17.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam explains the difference between this instance and the one mentioned in the previous halachah. In the previous halachah, we are speaking about an instance where the woman defined which doves were to be offered for which sacrifice at the time she gave them to the priest to offer and the priest forgot how he had offered them. In this instance, in addition to defining them when giving them to the priest, she pledged to bring them from a specific type and then she forgot which type of doves she pledged to bring for each particular sacrifice.

18.

Of one type, as stated below.

19.

The doves offered previously as a burnt-offering are of no consequence, because we are not certain that her vow was fulfilled. Because she is in doubt regarding which type she had specified in her vow, she must bring both types to fulfill it.

20.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam explains that this follows the same rationale as above. One of the burnt-offerings is acceptable. Hence it is necessary to bring a sin-offering to complete her obligation. He continues explaining that this decision is somewhat of a leniency, because it is possible that she will be offering the sin-offering from a different type of dove than the burnt-offering. Nevertheless, since we do not know of which type the original four doves were, this leniency is granted.

The above explanations are based on Rav Kappach's edition of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah. The initial version (preserved in the standard printed texts) reads differently. Similarly, this explanation requires - as suggested by the Kessef Mishneh - amending the standard printed text of the Mishneh Torah to read:

it should be offered on the upper portion, for two were already offered on the lower portion as sin-offerings.

21.

To be offered as burnt-offerings, for as above, it is possible that the ones designated as her vow were not offered as burnt-offerings and she does not remember which type she specified.

22.

In contrast to the previous situations, she must bring two doves to fulfill her obligation. In this instance, one of those that were offered as a burnt-offering is not acceptable, because we know for certain that the offerings originally brought were of two types and we do not know which type of dove was brought as a burnt-offering so that a sin-offering could be brought from the same type of dove. Hence she must bring an entire pair to fulfill her obligation.

The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's rulings based on his interpretation of the Mishnah in Kinnim (which is also supported by Rashi). Rav Yosef Corcus and the Kessef Mishneh explain the Rambam's understanding.

23.

Four doves. This is speaking about a situation where the woman designated two doves as a burnt-offering for her vow and two for her obligation, one as a burnt-offering and one as a sin-offering. She forgot which type of doves she vowed, which she brought to the priest, and how she designated them.

24.

To be offered as burnt-offerings. It is necessary to bring these offerings, because it is possible that no burnt-offerings were offered or those designated as burnt-offerings were not offered for that purpose. It is necessary to bring both types, because the woman does not know which type she pledged as a burnt-offering.

25.

I.e., whether she would bring a lamb, the burnt-offering brought by a woman of means brings after childbirth, or a dove the burnt-offering brought when one lacks adequate means.

26.

Two turtle doves and two young doves. This is necessary, because she forgot what type of dove she specified that she would bring to fulfill her vow.

27.

Of one type, either young doves or turtle doves, for perhaps she intended to bring the sacrifice of a poor woman.

28.

In the event she intended to bring the sacrifice of a woman of means.

It must be noted that Kinnim 3:5, the source for the Rambam's ruling, does not mention a lamb at all. The Rambam mentions it, both here and in his Commentary to the Mishnah, because otherwise, there is no clear reason why an extra dove should be brought as a sin-offering (Kessef Mishneh).

29.

Instead, it should be burnt, as stated in Chapter 7, Halachah 10.

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here. The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard. Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in the one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah