Keritot 4:1-2
משנה כריתות ד:א-ב
Seder: Kodashim | Tractate: Keritot | Chapter: 4
📖 Mishna
Mishna 4:1
משנה ד:א
Hebrew:
סָפֵק אָכַל חֵלֶב, סָפֵק לֹא אָכַל. וַאֲפִלּוּ אָכַל, סָפֵק יֵשׁ בּוֹ כַשִּׁעוּר, סָפֵק שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ. חֵלֶב וְשֻׁמָּן לְפָנָיו, אָכַל אֶת אַחַד מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, שָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגָג. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם חֹל, וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בְאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן עָשָׂה. מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי:
English:
If there is uncertainty whether one ate forbidden fat and uncertainty whether one did not eat forbidden fat, or even if one ate forbidden fat and there is uncertainty whether there is the measure that determines liability in the piece he ate and uncertainty whether there is not the measure that determines liability in the piece he ate, he must bring a provisional guilt offering. If one has a piece of permitted fat and a piece of forbidden fat before him and he ate one of them and he does not know which of them he ate; or if his wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly engaged in intercourse with one of them and he does not know with which of them he unwittingly engaged in intercourse; or if he confused Shabbat and a weekday and he performed labor prohibited on Shabbat on one of the days and he does not know on which of them he performed the labor, in all of those cases he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering.
Claude on the Mishna:
This mishna opens Chapter 4 by defining the cases that require an asham talui (provisional guilt offering) - the offering for uncertain sin.
The asham talui is brought when: There’s genuine doubt about whether a sin requiring karet (if intentional) or chatat (if unintentional) was actually committed.
Categories of doubt:
| Type of Doubt | Example |
|---|---|
| Did I do it? | Maybe ate chelev, maybe not |
| Was there enough? | Ate something, unsure if olive-bulk |
| Which did I eat? | Chelev and shuman (permitted fat) - ate one |
| Which was it? | Wife and sister - had relations with one |
| When did I do it? | Shabbat or weekday - worked on one |
Key principle: All these cases share the feature of TRUE uncertainty - the person genuinely doesn’t know if they sinned. If they KNEW they sinned, they’d bring a chatat. If they KNEW they didn’t, nothing is required. The asham talui covers the middle ground.
Why “talui” (suspended/hanging)? The offering “suspends” punishment until clarification. If it later becomes clear that the person DID sin, they would then bring a chatat. The asham talui provided protection during the period of uncertainty.
Key Terms:
- אָשָׁם תָּלוּי (asham talui) = Provisional/suspended guilt offering
- כַשִּׁעוּר (kashiur) = The requisite measure (olive-bulk)
- חֵלֶב (chelev) = Forbidden fat
- שֻׁמָּן (shuman) = Permitted fat
- שָׁגַג (shagag) = Acted unintentionally/unwittingly
Mishna 4:2
משנה ד:ב
Hebrew:
כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת, כָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אֶלָּא אָשָׁם אֶחָד. אִם הָיְתָה יְדִיעָה בֵינְתַיִם, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, כָּךְ הוּא מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם נוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, כָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. חֵלֶב וְנוֹתָר לְפָנָיו, אָכַל אַחַד מֵהֶם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ נִדָּה וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, שָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגָג. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזֶה מֵהֶם עָשָׂה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, שֶׁהוּא פָטוּר, שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר, מִקְצָת מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה מֵהַיּוֹם, וּמִקְצָתָהּ לְמָחָר. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ, עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה בְּתוֹךְ הַיּוֹם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בְּשַׁבָּת עָשָׂה וְאִם בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים עָשָׂה. אוֹ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ מֵעֵין אֵיזוֹ מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, פּוֹטְרוֹ הָיָה רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אַף מֵאָשָׁם תָּלוּי:
English:
Just as in a case where one unknowingly ate a piece of forbidden fat and then another piece of forbidden fat in a single lapse of awareness he is liable to bring only one sin offering, so too, in a case where their status is unknown to him and he ate them both unwittingly during a single lapse in awareness, he is liable to bring only one provisional guilt offering. But if he had gained knowledge between the first and second instance of eating that there is a possibility the fat might be prohibited, then the halakha is different: Just as he would be liable to bring a sin offering for each and every piece when he gained knowledge of their prohibited status in between each act of consumption, so too, he must bring a provisional guilt offering for each and every instance in which he consumed food that might be forbidden after learning of their uncertain status in between each unwitting act of consumption. Just as in a case where one ate forbidden fat, and blood, and piggul, and notar in one lapse of awareness he is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every one, so too, with regard to a case where their status is unknown to him and he ate them unwittingly during one lapse of awareness, he must bring a provisional guilt offering for each and every item. If one has pieces of forbidden fat and notar before him and he ate one of them and he does not know which of them he ate; or if his menstruating wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly engaged in intercourse with one of them and he does not know with which of them he unwittingly engaged in intercourse; or if Shabbat and Yom Kippur occurred adjacent to one another and he performed prohibited labor during the intervening twilight period and he does not know on which of the days he performed the labor, in all of these cases, Rabbi Eliezer deems the transgressor liable to bring a sin offering, as he certainly sinned, and Rabbi Yehoshua deems the transgressor exempt, as he does not know the nature of his sin. Rabbi Yosei said: Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua did not disagree with regard to one who performs prohibited labor during the intervening twilight period because they concur that he is exempt, as I say: He performed part of the labor today, and he performed part of the labor the following day. With regard to what case did they disagree? With regard to the case of one who performs prohibited labor in the midst of the day, and he does not know whether it was on Shabbat that he performed the labor or whether it was on Yom Kippur that he performed the labor; or with regard to one who performs a prohibited labor and he does not know which labor he performed. As, in those cases Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt. Rabbi Yehuda said: Rabbi Yehoshua would deem him exempt even from bringing a provisional guilt offering.
Claude on the Mishna:
This mishna establishes that asham talui follows the same rules as chatat for counting obligations.
Parallel rules for chatat and asham talui:
| Chatat Rule | Asham Talui Parallel |
|---|---|
| Same sin, one he’elem = 1 chatat | Same uncertain sin, one he’elem = 1 asham talui |
| Different sins, one he’elem = multiple chatat | Different uncertain sins = multiple asham talui |
| Knowledge between = separates | Knowledge of doubt between = separates |
The complex case: Chelev vs. Notar
When someone has chelev (forbidden fat) and notar (leftover sacrificial meat) before him and eats ONE without knowing which:
- The doubt is “double-sided” - maybe chelev, maybe notar
- Either way, a sin was committed
- But WHICH sin?
The machloket:
| Position | Ruling | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Rabbi Eliezer | Brings chatat | He definitely sinned - uncertainty is only about WHICH sin |
| Rabbi Yehoshua | Exempt | Can’t bring a chatat without knowing which sin to atone for |
Rabbi Yosei’s clarification:
The debate is NOT about twilight (bein hashmashot) between Shabbat and Yom Kippur - everyone agrees he’s exempt there because:
- Part of the labor may have been done “today”
- Part “tomorrow”
- Neither day has a complete prohibited labor!
The debate IS about:
- Definite daytime labor - just unsure which day
- Definite labor - just unsure which TYPE of labor
Rabbi Yehuda’s additional point: Rabbi Yehoshua exempts even from asham talui! Without knowing the nature of the sin, no offering applies.
Key Terms:
- יְדִיעָה בֵינְתַיִם (yedi’ah beinayim) = Knowledge in between - creates separation
- בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת (bein hashmashot) = Twilight - doubtful day status
- מֵעֵין אֵיזוֹ מְלָאכָה (me’ein eizo melacha) = Which type of labor