This Week's Article

Bringing Kinim Together

Kinim (1:4) | Yisrael Bankier | 16 hours ago

This week we begin Masechet Kinim, that discusses mixtures of bird offerings. We learnt that an obligatory offering, a ken chovah, consists of an olah and chatat offerings. The first Mishnah taught that they are offered in different ways, with blood placed on different parts of the mizbeach. If it is offered in the wrong location, the korban is invalid. We also learn that the pair of birds can be purchase without designating which bird is the chatat and which is the olah, leaving the task of designation to the kohen that offered it -- the ken setumah.

The third and fourth Mishnah discusses the issue when multiple kinei setumah become mixed together, given that only half the birds can be offered above and half below. The issue is made worse considering that once one bird in a ken is offered as a chatat that other is automatically an olah and cannot be offered below. It is important to note, that a person can bring multiple kinim at one time and the kohen decide which will be chataot and which olot. The issue begins when multiple groups of kinim get mixed, for example, if they are owned by different people.

R' Yossi (1:4) however teaches that if two women purchased their birds together, then it would not be considered a mixture, and the kohen would be able to offer all the birds.

The Gemara (Eiruvin 37a) explains that it appears that R' Yossi maintains the principle of bereirah (retroactive selection). This principle allows the current status to be determined at a later time. A korban must be offered on behalf of the owner of the korban. It therefore appears that when the korbanot are offered, bereirah is being employed determining that the korbanot offered for, for example, Rachel belonged to Rachel at the time of purchase.

The Gemara rejects this presumption. The reason why R' Yossi maintains that the two women can purchase and bring their kinim together is because he is referring to a case where the women pooled the funds together and at the time of purchase, agreed that the Kohen would be their messenger in dividing the ownership of the birds before they are offered.

The Ken Meforeshet explains, based on the Rambam and Rashi, that even if the women did not explicitly stated this arrangement, it is considered as if they had. The Yair Kino adds when explaining the opinion of the Ra'avad, that each of the women contributed to the pooled funds unsanctified money with the intention that they be used either for their own sacrifice or their friend's. The Kohen then divided the birds in their presence, and the women were mochel (gave up) their share in the birds that would be offered for their friend. (See the Yair Kino inside for a full explanation of the halachic principles on which this ruling is based such that bereirah is not required.)

The Yair Kino adds that from the wording of our Mishnah it is clear that R' Yossi does not maintain the principle of bereirah. The Mishnah in Shekalim (6:5) lists the money chests in the Beit Ha'Mikdash for people to contribute funds for the offering of korbanot. According to R' Yehuda there was no chest for kinei chovah since he does not agree with the principle of bereirah (Yoma 55). The Bartenura explains that according to R' Yehuda one wishing to offer a ken chovah would need to give the funds to the Kohen (gizbar -- treasurer) directly rather than placing them in a chest. This being the case we understand why R' Yossi specifically stated "or both gave their money to the Kohen" without any mention of a collection chest.

Download

Calendar