THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
BECHOROS 12-15 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
1) REDEEMING "KODSHIM" TO FEED THEM TO THE DOGS
QUESTION: The Mishnah states that all Kodshim that possessed a permanent
blemish (Mum Kavu'a) before they were consecrated as Kodshim, and then died
before they were redeemed, may be redeemed after their death, except for a
Bechor and an animal of Ma'aser Behemah. RASHI (DH v'Yotz'in) explains that
even after they are consecrated, they do not have "Kedushah Chamurah," a
strong degree of Kedushah, because they possessed a Mum Kavu'a before they
were consecrated and were not fit to be offered on the Mizbe'ach as a
Korban. Rashi (DHJ v'Im Mesu) explains further than since they do not have
"Kedushah Chamurah," they may be redeemed after their death, and their
corpses may be fed to the dogs. However, a Bechor and Ma'aser Behemah cannot
be redeemed, because they have Kedushah even when they have a Mum.
This Mishnah seems to contradict the Gemara in Pesachim (29a). The Gemara
there cites a Beraisa that records a Machlokes regarding one who eats
Chametz of Hekdesh (Chametz that was designated as a gift of Bedek ha'Bayis
to the Beis ha'Mikdash). The Tana Kama in the Beraisa maintains that one is
Chayav for the Isur of Me'ilah, while another opinion ("Yesh Omrim")
maintains that one is not Chayav for Me'ilah. Rav Yosef explains that the
dispute depends on whether one is allowed to redeem Kodshim in order to feed
it to dogs. The Tana Kama maintains that one may redeem Kodshim to feed to
dogs, and thus the Chametz of Hekdesh is considered to have monetary value;
when one uses that value for personal benefit, he is Chayav for Me'ilah. The
other Tana maintains that one may not redeem Kodshim to feed it to dogs.
Therefore, Chametz of Hekdesh on Pesach has no monetary value, and one who
eats that Chametz on Pesach is not Chayav for Me'ilah.
How can there be a Tana that maintains that one may not redeem even Hekdesh
of Kedushas Damim (such as an object or animal that is Hekdesh but that
cannot be offered on the Mizbe'ach)? The Mishnah here explicitly states that
the dead animal may be redeemed! This question is strengthened by the fact
that when the Gemara later (15a) discusses the argument regarding whether
one may redeem Kodshim in order to feed them to dogs, it cites the argument
only with regard to the second case of the Mishnah -- animals that were
sanctified *before* they developed a Mum. The Gemara there implies that
animals that possessed a Mum before they were sanctified may be redeemed
according to all opinions!
ANSWER: The SHITAH MEKUBETZES (#1) answers that everyone agrees that
mid'Oraisa one may redeem Kodshim that cannot be offered on the Mizbe'ach.
Even the opinion in Pesachim that maintains that one may not redeem the
Kodshim maintains that this is only an Isur d'Rabanan. Therefore, that
opinion maintains that when the Mishnah here says that one may redeem the
blemished animal that died, it means that mid'Oraisa it may be redeemed;
there nevertheless is an Isur d'Rabanan to redeem it.
However, according to the opinion that the Rabanan decreed that it is Asur
to redeem Kodshim in order to feed it to dogs, such a decree effectively
removes the Isur of Me'ilah from Chametz of Hekdesh that one eats during
Pesach. How could the Rabanan remove that Isur d'Oraisa of Me'ilah? TOSFOS
in Pesachim (29a, DH Ein) explains that, in reality, the Rabanan did not
remove the Isur d'Oraisa of Me'ilah. Rather, they decreed that one may not
redeem the Chametz of Hekdesh, and, as a consequence, the Chametz loses its
monetary value. Since the Isur of Me'ilah applies only to an object that has
some monetary value, the Isur of Me'ilah does not apply to Chametz of
Hekdesh, since it is now worthless. (D. Bloom)
3) A "BA'AL MUM" OFFERED ON A "BAMAS YACHID"
QUESTION: The Mishnah (14a) states that when one designates an animal as
Kodshim after it developed a Mum, and then he slaughtered that animal
outside of the Azarah, he is not Chayav for the Isur of Shechutei Chutz. The
Gemara quotes Rebbi Elazar who has a different reading of the Mishnah.
According to his reading, the Mishnah states that one is Chayav for such an
How can a person be Chayav for slaughtering this animal outside of the
Azarah? Since the animal became Kadosh when it had a Mum, it should be
considered "Eino Ra'uy Lifnim" (not fit to be brought as a Korban in the
Beis ha'Mikdash). One who slaughters, outside the Azarah, an animal that is
not fit to be brought as a Korban does not transgress the prohibition of
Rebbi Elazar explains that the Mishnah is not discussing the prohibition of
slaughtering Kodshim outside of the Azarah. It is discussing an entirely
different prohibition. The Mishnah is discussing one who slaughters an on a
Bamas Yachid, a private altar, during the time when it was permitted to
offer Korbanos on such an altar. The Mishnah is teaching that slaughtering
an animal with a Mum on a Bamas Yachid is prohibited by a Lo Sa'aseh and
punishable with Malkus.
Why, though, is this law included in the Mishnah here? The Mishnah is
discussing the differences between an animal that was sanctified before it
developed a Mum and an animal that was sanctified after it developed it Mum.
With regard to the prohibition to slaughter a blemished animal on a Bamas
Yachid, there is no difference between the two cases; the prohibition
applies equally whether the Mum developed before or after the animal was
ANSWER: The CHAZON ISH (Kodshim 18:6) answers that Rebbi Elazar maintains
that the Mishnah is teaching a law relevant to the rest of the laws of the
Mishnah. We might have thought that the laws in the Mishnah apply only
during the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash (when private altars are forbidden).
Only during the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash does an animal that developed a
Mum before it was sanctified not have full Kedushah (because, from the
moment it became Kadosh, it could not be offered on the Mizbe'ach). In
contrast, during the periods when private altars are permitted, an animal
that is sanctified when it has a Mum perhaps acquires full Kedushah, since
one may offer a blemished animal on a private altar!
The Mishnah, according to Rebbi Elazar, therefore teaches us that this is
not so. An animal with a Mum cannot be brought on a private altar, just as
it cannot be offered in the Beis ha'Mikdash. The laws of the Mishnah apply
at all times, even when private altars are permitted.