Keritot 5:4-5
משנה כריתות ה:ד-ה
Seder: Kodashim | Tractate: Keritot | Chapter: 5
📖 Mishna
Mishna 5:4
משנה ה:ד
Hebrew:
חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, פָּטוּר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְחַיֵּב בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד:
English:
If one had a piece of non-sacred meat and a piece of sacrificial meat, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he is exempt from the obligation to bring a guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. Rabbi Akiva deems him liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, in accordance with his opinion in the previous mishna that one brings a provisional guilt offering even in a case of uncertainty with regard to misuse. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a definite guilt offering, as it is certain that he ate the sacrificial meat. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this first person brings a provisional guilt offering and that second person brings a provisional guilt offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring one definite guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that the one who ate the non-sacred meat grants his share of the animal to the one who ate the sacrificial meat, and the guilt offering is sacrificed on his behalf. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one guilt offering, as one may not sacrifice atonement offerings conditionally.
Claude on the Mishna:
This mishna applies the me’ilah uncertainty principles to a concrete case: one piece of chulin (non-sacred meat) and one piece of kodesh (sacrificial meat).
Scenario 1: One person eats one piece
| Opinion | Ruling |
|---|---|
| Sages | Exempt - maybe he ate chulin |
| Rabbi Akiva | Asham talui - uncertainty about me’ilah |
This follows the earlier debate: Sages say no asham talui for uncertain me’ilah; Rabbi Akiva says yes.
Scenario 2: Same person eats both pieces
All agree: He brings a DEFINITE asham for me’ilah. Why? Between the two pieces, he CERTAINLY ate kodesh. No more uncertainty.
Scenario 3: Two different people each eat one piece
This creates a fascinating dilemma. CERTAINLY one of them committed me’ilah - but WHO?
| Opinion | Ruling | Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Rabbi Akiva | Each brings asham talui | Each has individual uncertainty |
| Rabbi Shimon | One joint asham between them | They stipulate: “Whoever ate kodesh - this is his offering” |
| Rabbi Yosei | Neither can bring | Can’t bring conditional offerings |
The underlying issue: Can two people jointly bring ONE offering with a condition about who it’s really for? Rabbi Shimon allows it; Rabbi Yosei forbids conditional atonement offerings.
Key Terms:
- חֻלִּין (chulin) = Non-sacred/ordinary meat
- קֹדֶשׁ (kodesh) = Sacrificial meat
- אָשָׁם וַדָּאי (asham vadai) = Definite guilt offering
- שֻׁתָּפוּת (shutafut) = Partnership - sharing one offering
Mishna 5:5
משנה ה:ה
Hebrew:
חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב, אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת:
English:
If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of non-sacred meat, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the forbidden fat. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a sin offering, as it is certain that he ate the fat. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a provisional guilt offering and that person brings a provisional guilt offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring one sin offering as partners, and they stipulate that the sin offering should be credited to the one who ate the fat. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one sin offering.
Claude on the Mishna:
This mishna presents the parallel case but now with CHELEV (forbidden fat) - which requires a CHATAT, not an asham.
Key difference from mishna 5:4: Eating chelev unknowingly requires a chatat (sin offering), while misusing kodesh requires an asham (guilt offering). The asham talui covers uncertainty for BOTH.
Scenario 1: One person eats one piece All agree: He brings asham talui. (This is classic asham talui territory - uncertain chatat-level sin.)
Scenario 2: Same person eats both pieces He brings a CHATAT. Certainty: he definitely ate the chelev.
Scenario 3: Two people each eat one piece
| Opinion | Ruling | Type of Offering |
|---|---|---|
| Rabbi Akiva | Each brings asham talui | Provisional |
| Rabbi Shimon | One joint CHATAT | Definite, conditional |
| Rabbi Yosei | Neither can bring jointly | Rejects conditional offerings |
Comparison of the two mishnayot:
| Case | Sin Type | Definite Offering |
|---|---|---|
| Chulin + Kodesh | Me’ilah | Asham |
| Chulin + Chelev | Eating chelev | Chatat |
Rabbi Shimon’s innovation: He applies the same partnership solution to both:
- For kodesh/me’ilah: joint asham with condition
- For chelev: joint chatat with condition
Rabbi Yosei’s consistency: He rejects conditional offerings for BOTH asham and chatat. You can’t bring an atonement offering and say “This is for whichever of us sinned.”
Key Terms:
- חֵלֶב (chelev) = Forbidden fat
- חַטָּאת (chatat) = Sin offering
- תְּנַאי (tenai) = Condition/stipulation