Temurah 32

Chapter 32

א וכי דנין אפשר משאי אפשר (ר' שמעון בחד מקום גמיר להו)

1 But can we form an analogy between a case where there is an alternative and a case where there is none?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reason why in the three first cases the sinofferings are not left to die in the case of a congregation is because there cannot be an offering in such circumstances, for they can never occur in connection with a congregation. There is therefore no alternative, whereas in the other two cases the offering can be brought both by an individual and a congregation.');">1 - Said Resh Lakish: Four sin-offerings were specified to the Israelites [on Sinai to be left to die]2

ב אמר ר"ל ארבעה נתנו להן והעמידום על חמש ואי ס"ד בצבור הנך מי איתנהו בצבור אלא על כרחיך ילמד סתום ממפורש

2 and the rule was extended to five.3 Now if you suppose that these were congregational sin-offerings, are three of them4 ever brought by a congregation?5 Then you must admit that we form an analogy between the cases not explicitly stated and those explicitly stated.

ג ר' נתן אומר אחת נתנה להן והעמידוה על חמש

3 R'Nathan says: Only one sin-offering was specified to the [Israelites on Mount Sinai]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To be left to die, and the other four cases of sin-offerings were only to be left to pasture. It was, however, forgotten which were meant to die and which to pasture.');">6 and the rule was extended to all the five sin-offerings.7

ד וליחזי בהי סידרא גמירי להו אי ביחיד אי בצבור

4 But8

ה שתי שכחיות שכחו וקשיא להו

5 [if that is so] let us see in what class they learnt it,9

ו ואי ס"ד בצבור הנך מי איתנהו בצבור אלא ש"מ ילמד סתום ממפורש מה מפורש ביחיד ולא בצבור אף סתום ביחיד ולא בצבור

6 whether in that of the sin-offerings of an individual or of a congregation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Let us see to what class this sin-offering which was to be left to die was remembered as belonging. If it was remembered as being the sin-offering both of a congregation and an individual, then let us say that a sin-offering whose owners procured atonement and a sin-offering whose year is passed are left to die because of doubt, whereas in the other three cases, which are entirely different, as they could not occur in connection with a congregation, there could be no doubt that there is no death for the sin-offerings. And if the case of a sin-offering being left to die was remembered only in connection with the offering of an individual, then let us say that these three sin-offerings, substitute and offspring of a dedicated animal etc., since they can be brought only by an individual, are left to die, but about the other two sin-offerings there can be no doubt, for they are entirely different (Rashi) .');">10 - There were two forgettings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The class in which the sin-offering that was to die was placed at Sinai (viz., congregational or individual) and also which of the five sin-offerings was to die.');">11

ז <big>מתני׳</big> חומר בקדשים מבתמורה וחומר בתמורה מבקדשים חומר בקדשים מבתמורה שהקדשים עושין תמורה ואין תמורה עושה תמורה הצבור והשותפין מקדישין אבל לא ממירין ומקדישין עוברין ואברים אבל לא ממירין

7 And consequently they12 were in a difficulty. If13 you should think that the rule14 applies to the sin-offering of a congregation, can these15

ח חומר בתמורה מבקדשים שהקדושה חלה על בעלת מום קבוע ואין יוצא לחולין

8 be brought by a congregation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For this can never happen. Since therefore it is remembered that there were five sin-offerings which were either to be left to pasture or die, they were stated as regards an individual, in which circumstances all the five sin-offerings can occur.');">16 Then it is proved from here that we form an analogy between the cases not explicitly stated17 and the cases explicitly stated: Just as in the cases explicitly stated the sin-offering is brought by an individual and not by a congregation, so in the cases not explicitly stated the sin-offering is brought by an individual and not by a congregation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This then is the reason for R. Simeon's opinion. The Rabbis however hold that four cases of sin-offerings were imparted from Sinai to be left to die. Therefore wherever we find that a sin-offering applies to an individual and a congregation, then it applies, and where not, it does not apply.');">18 <big>MISHNAH: </big>IN SOME WAYS [THE LAW RELATING TO] DEDICATIONS CARRIES GREATER WEIGHT THAN [THAT RELATING TO] EXCHANGE, AND IN SOME WAYS [THAT RELATING TO] EXCHANGE CARRIES GREATER WEIGHT THAN [THAT RELATING TO] DEDICATIONS. IN SOME WAYS [THE LAW RELATING TO] DEDICATIONS CARRIES GREATER WEIGHT THAN [THAT RELATING TO] EXCHANGE, FOR DEDICATED ANIMALS CAN EFFECT EXCHANGE WHEREAS ONE SUBSTITUTED CANNOT EFFECT EXCHANGE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that if one says concerning an animal consecrated through being a substitute that it should in turn confer holiness on another animal by means of exchange, a further exchange does not take place.');">19 A CONGREGATION OR PARTNERS CAN DEDICATE BUT CANNOT EFFECT EXCHANGE. WE CAN DEDICATE EMBRYOS AND LIMBS,20 BUT WE CANNOT EFFECT EXCHANGE WITH THEM. [THE LAW RELATING TO] EXCHANGE CARRIES GREATER WEIGHT THAN [THAT RELATING TO] DEDICATIONS, SINCE EXCHANGE21 HAS EFFECT ON A PERMANENTLY BLEMISHED ANIMAL22 AND IT DOES NOT BECOME HULLIN

Previous Chapter Next Chapter