Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) MAKING A STOLEN ANIMAL HEKDESH

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven stole an animal, made it Hekdesh then slaughtered or sold it (he only pays double).
(b) We understand why he does not pay 4 or 5 for slaughtering it - he slaughters the animal of Hekdesh, not of the original owner!
(c) Question: He should pay 4 or 5 for making it Hekdesh - giving to Hekdesh is as selling to a person!
(d) Answer #1: The Mishnah is as R. Shimon, who says that Kodshim by which there is responsibility (to bring another if it becomes lost or blemished) are considered to be in the jurisdiction of the original owner.
(e) Question: Since R. Shimon taught the end of the Mishnah, the beginning of the Mishnah is not R. Shimon!
(f) Answer #2: Rather, the Mishnah speaks of Kodshei Kalim; it is as R. Yosi ha'Galili, who holds that they are considered the property of the owner, and are in the owner's jurisdiction.
(g) Question: What would he say by Kodshei Kodoshim - that he pays 4 or 5 for them?

1. If so, why does the beginning of the Mishnah teach, if he stole an animal, slaughtered it and made it Hekdesh, he pays 4 or 5 - it should distinguish within the case of slaughtering after making it Hekdesh!

i. It should say, he is only exempt from 4 or 5 by Kodshei Kalim - but by Kodshei Kodoshim, he is liable!

(h) Answer: Even by Kodshei Kodoshim, he is exempt; we distinguish between giving to Hekdesh and selling to a person.

1. When one sells to a person, the animal changes from being Shimon's ox to Levi's ox;
2. When one gives to Hekdesh, the animal is called Shimon's ox before and after the Hekdesh!

(a) (Mishnah): R. Shimon says...
(b) Question: Granted, R. Shimon does not distinguish between giving to Hekdesh and selling to a person - but he should say to the contrary!

1. By Kodshim for which one has responsibility, he should be exempt, for they are still in the original owner's jurisdiction;
2. By Kodshim for which there is no responsibility, he should be liable, for they leave the original owner's jurisdiction!

(c) Answer: R. Shimon refers to a different matter.

1. One who steals from a thief, or Hekdesh from its owner's house, does not pay 4 or 5.
2. Question: Why is he exempt for Hekdesh?
3. Answer: "And it was stolen from the man's house" - not from the house of Hekdesh.

i. R. Shimon says, by Kodshim for which there is responsibility, he is liable.
ii. Question: What is his reason?
iii. Answer: By Kodshim for which there is responsibility, it is considered stealing from the owner's house;
iv. By Kodshim for which there is no responsibility, it is not considered stealing from the owner's house.

(d) Question: But R. Shimon holds that slaughter that does not permit the meat is not considered slaughter - slaughter of Kodshim (outside the Mikdash) does not permit the meat!
(e) Answer #1 (Rav Dimi, citing R. Yochanan): The case is, it was unblemished, he slaughtered it in the Mikdash for the sake of the owner.

1. Question: If so, it is as if he returned the animal to its owner!
2. Answer (R. Yitzchak bar Avin): The case is, the blood spilled (invalidating the sacrifice).

(f) Answer #2 (Ravin, citing R. Yochanan): The case is, it was unblemished, he slaughtered it in the Mikdash not for the sake of the owner.

(g) Answer #3 (Reish Lakish): The case is, it was blemished, he slaughtered it outside the Mikdash.

(a) Objection (R. Elazar): These slaughters do not permit the meat!

1. According to R. Yochanan - slaughter does not permit the sacrifice, throwing the blood permits it; according to Reish Lakish, slaughter does not permit the animal, redemption permits it!

(b) Answer: R. Shimon holds, whenever the blood is standing to be thrown (i.e. after slaughter), it is as if it was thrown (i.e. as if slaughter permits the animal immediately);

1. He also holds, whenever an animal is standing to be redeemed (i.e. after slaughter), we view it as if it was redeemed (and permitted immediately).
2. (Beraisa - R. Shimon): Sometimes, Nosar (Kodshim that was not eaten in the allowed time and is now forbidden) receives Tum'ah (of foods), sometimes it does not:

i. If the time for eating passed and the blood was never thrown, it does not receive Tum'ah;
ii. If the blood was thrown in time, it receives Tum'ah.

3. R. Shimon means, if the blood was not fit to be thrown, it does not receive Tum'ah; if it was fit, it receives Tum'ah.
4. Question: What is considered fit or not fit to be thrown?
5. Answer: It was slaughtered right before sunset, there was no time to throw it, it was not fit; if it was slaughtered with enough time to throw it, it was fit.
6. This shows, he holds that any (blood) fit to be thrown, it is as if it was thrown (and the meat receives Tum'ah).