Keritot 1:6-7
משנה כריתות א:ו-ז
Seder: Kodashim | Tractate: Keritot | Chapter: 1
📖 Mishna
Mishna 1:6
משנה א:ו
Hebrew:
הַמַּפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹטְרִין מִן הַקָּרְבָּן, בֵּית הִלֵּל מְחַיְּבִים. אָמְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי, מַאי שְׁנָא אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד מִיּוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד. אִם שָׁוֶה לוֹ לַטֻּמְאָה, לֹא יִשְׁוֶה לוֹ לַקָּרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁכֵּן יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן, תֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל, וַהֲרֵי הַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת תּוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן וְחַיֶּבֶת בַּקָּרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד, רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר, תֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁאֵין הַלַּיְלָה רָאוּי לֹא לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד וְלֹא לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר. הַדָּמִים אֵינָן מוֹכִיחִין, שֶׁהַמַּפֶּלֶת בְּתוֹךְ מְלֹאת, דָּמֶיהָ טְמֵאִין, וּפְטוּרָה מִן הַקָּרְבָּן:
English:
A woman who gives birth to a daughter counts fourteen days during which she is ritually impure. That is followed by sixty-six days during which she remains ritually pure even if she experiences a flow of blood. The Torah obligates a woman to bring her offering on the eighty-first day. In the case of a woman who miscarries a fetus on the night of, i.e., preceding, the eighty-first day, Beit Shammai deem her exempt from bringing a second offering and Beit Hillel deem her liable to bring a second offering. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: What is different between the night of the eighty-first and the day of the eighty-first? If they are equal with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity, i.e., the blood flow of this woman on the eighty-first night renders her ritually impure, will the two time periods not be equal with regard to liability to bring an additional offering as well? Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: No, there is a difference. If you said with regard to a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that she is obligated to bring an additional offering, this is logical, as she emerged into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering. Would you say the same with regard to a woman who miscarries on the night of the eighty-first day, where she did not emerge into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering, as offerings are not sacrificed at night? Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: But let the case of a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that occurs on Shabbat prove that this distinction is incorrect, as she did not emerge into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering because individual offerings are not sacrificed on Shabbat, and nevertheless she is obligated to bring an additional offering. Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: No, there is a difference. If you said this ruling with regard to a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that occurs on Shabbat, the reason is that although Shabbat is unfit for an individual offering, it is fit for a communal offering whose time is fixed. Would you say the same with regard to a woman who miscarries on the night of the eighty-first day, as the night is completely unfit, since neither an individual offering nor a communal offering is sacrificed at night? Beit Shammai add: And as for the blood, this does not prove what the halacha should be with regard to offerings, as with regard to a woman who miscarries before the completion of the term of eighty days, her blood is impure and nevertheless she is exempt from bringing the offering.
Claude on the Mishna:
This mishna presents a classic Beit Shammai vs. Beit Hillel debate with multiple rounds of back-and-forth argumentation.
Background: After giving birth to a daughter, a woman counts 14 days of impurity plus 66 days of purity (during which any blood is “pure blood”). On day 81, she can finally bring her childbirth offering. If she has a second miscarriage before day 81, it’s “absorbed” into the first birth’s offering requirement. But what if she miscarries on the NIGHT before day 81?
The Debate:
| Round | Beit Hillel | Beit Shammai |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Night and day of 81 are equal for impurity - they should be equal for offerings too | Day 81 is “fit for offerings” but night is not - you can’t bring offerings at night |
| 2 | What about Shabbat on day 81? Can’t bring offerings then either, yet she’s obligated! | Shabbat is different - communal offerings ARE brought on Shabbat, so it’s not completely “unfit” |
| 3 | - | Night is COMPLETELY unfit - no offerings at all, individual OR communal |
Beit Shammai’s final point: Don’t compare impurity to offerings. During the 66 days, her blood IS impure (ritually), yet she’s still exempt from a new offering. The categories don’t always align.
Key Terms:
- אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד (or lishmonim ve’echad) = Night of the 81st - the night BEFORE day 81
- מְלֹאת (melo’t) = “Completion” - the 80-day waiting period
- רָאוּי לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן (ra’ui lehavi korban) = “Fit to bring an offering” - daytime, not Shabbat
- קָרְבַּן יָחִיד / צִבּוּר (korban yachid/tzibur) = Individual/communal offering - different Shabbat rules
Mishna 1:7
משנה א:ז
Hebrew:
הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ סְפֵק חֲמִשָּׁה זִיבוֹת וּסְפֵק חֲמִשָּׁה לֵדוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְהַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּדִינְרֵי זָהָב. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, לֹא אָלִין הַלַּיְלָה, עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ בְדִינָרִין. נִכְנַס לְבֵית דִּין וְלִמֵּד, הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. וְעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בְּרִבְעָתָיִם:
English:
With regard to a woman who has in her case uncertainty concerning five births, and likewise a woman with regard to whom there is uncertainty concerning five irregular discharges of blood (ziva), she brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are not an obligation for her. If she experienced five definite discharges of a zava or five definite births, she brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are an obligation for her. There was an incident where the price of nests (pairs of birds) stood in Jerusalem at one gold dinar, as the great demand for birds led to an increase in the price. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: I swear by this abode of the Divine Presence that I will not lie down tonight until the price of nests will be in silver dinars. Ultimately, he entered the court and taught: A woman who has five definite discharges of a zava or five definite births brings one offering, and then she may partake of offerings. And the remaining offerings are not an obligation for her. And as a result, the price of nests stood that day at one-quarter of a silver dinar.
Claude on the Mishna:
This mishna addresses multiple births/discharges and concludes with a remarkable story about Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel using halachic legislation to control prices.
The Basic Rule:
For UNCERTAIN multiple births/ziva: One offering covers everything. No further obligation.
For DEFINITE multiple births/ziva: One offering allows her to eat sacrificial meat, but she still owes the remaining offerings.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s Intervention:
The price of bird pairs (kinim) had skyrocketed to a gold dinar (worth 25 silver dinars!) due to high demand from women needing childbirth and ziva offerings. This was a crushing burden on ordinary families.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel swore a dramatic oath and entered the court to issue a new ruling: even for DEFINITE multiple events, one offering suffices with no further obligation.
The result: Prices crashed from 1 gold dinar to 1/4 silver dinar - a 100-fold decrease - in a single day!
The Deeper Point:
This story demonstrates that halachic authorities can and should consider economic consequences. The Sages had the power to lighten requirements when the burden became too heavy. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel used his authority to help ordinary people afford their religious obligations.
Key Terms:
- זִיבָה (ziva) = Irregular uterine discharge - requires offering after purification
- קִנִּים (kinim) = “Nests” - pairs of birds for offerings
- דִינְרֵי זָהָב (dinarei zahav) = Gold dinars - very expensive
- רִבְעָתָיִם (riv’atayim) = Quarter (of a silver dinar) - very cheap
- הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה (hama’on hazeh) = “This abode” - oath formula referring to the Temple