Kommentar zu Temurah 2:2
חַטָּאת הַיָּחִיד שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, מֵתוֹת. וְשֶׁל צִבּוּר, אֵינָן מֵתוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה מָּצִינוּ בִּוְלַד חַטָּאת וּבִתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת וּבְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, בְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֲבָל לֹא בְצִבּוּר, אַף שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים וְשֶׁעָבְרָה שְׁנָתָן, בְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֲבָל לֹא בְצִבּוּר:
Das Gespräch eines Individuums [Sündopfer], dessen Besitzer [andernfalls durch ein anderes Sündopfer] gesühnt haben, ist [zurückgezogen, bis es] stirbt; Das Gespräch der Öffentlichkeit [unter ähnlichen Umständen] ist nicht [abgeschlossen, bis es] stirbt. Rabbi Yehuda sagte: Sie werden [beide zurückgezogen sein, bis sie] sterben. Rabbi Shimon sagte: Was finden wir über die Nachkommen eines Chattats und den Ersatz für ein Chattat und ein Chattat, dessen Besitzer gestorben ist? Diese Angelegenheiten wurden in Bezug auf eine Person [ Chattat ] angesprochen , aber nicht in Bezug auf ein öffentliches [ Chattat ] - ebenso wurde in Bezug auf ein Chattat, dessen Besitzer [ansonsten] büßen, und ein Chattat , das ein Jahr [im Alter] vergangen ist, in Bezug auf diese Angelegenheiten gesprochen ein Individuum [ chattat ], aber nicht in Bezug auf ein öffentliches [ chattat ].
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
חטאת היחיד שכיפרו בעליו – that it was lost and he became expiated through another [animal], and afterwards, the first animal was found.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Temurah
Introduction
Our mishnah continues to explain the differences between sacrifices of an individual and those of the congregation.
To understand our mishnah we must discuss the category of a hatat (a sin-offering) that is left to die. There are five types of hatats that must be left to die: 1) the offspring of a hatat; 2) the substitute of a hatat; 3) a hatat whose owners have died; 4) a hatat whose owners were atoned for by a different hatat; 5) a hatat whose year has passed.
The sages in our mishnah argue whether these laws apply to all hatats, or just to those brought by an individual. The argument is really only over the last two categories, because the first three are not relevant to a congregational hatat. The hatat brought by the congregation is always male (so no offspring, at least not that we can be certain about) and it cannot make a substitute (as we learned in yesterday’s mishnah). Furthermore, it is impossible to conceive of a hatat brought by the congregation whose owners have all died. Therefore, the argument is only about the last two categories, and whether they apply to the congregational hatat.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
ושל צבור – that atoned through another [animal].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Temurah
A hatat of an individual whose owners have been atoned for is left to die, whereas that of a congregation is not left to die. Rabbi Judah says: it is left to die. If a person sets aside an animal to be a hatat, a sin-offering, and then loses the offering, and then sets aside and brings a different animal to be a hatat, the first animal, if found, must be left to die. According to the Bavli, it is put into a pen and is starved to death. Our mishnah limits this to the hatat of an individual. According to the first opinion, the hatat of a congregation is not left to die. Rather, it goes out to pasture until it becomes blemished at which point it can be sold and the proceeds used to buy another sacrifice. Rabbi Judah disagrees and holds that the same rules apply to the hatat of the congregation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
אינן מתות – that sin-offerings left to die (i.e., sin-offerings that were disqualified and consequently can no longer be sacrificed on the altar are confined In an enclosure until they die: the offspring of a sin-offering; an animal substituted for a sin-offering; a sin-offering whose owners have died; a sin-offering whose owners have already gained atonement through an other offering; and a sin offering of sheep or goats that is more than a year old), is a usage dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai (i.e., a traditional law or a traditional interpretation of a written law), and the first Tanna/teacher [of our Mishnah] holds, that for an individual sacrifice it was learned [regarding individual sin-offerings that were disqualified] but not that of the community.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Temurah
Rabbi Shimon said: Just as we have found with regard to the offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat and a hatat whose owners died, that these rules apply only to an individual but not to a congregation, so too [the rules concerning] the hatat whose owners have been atoned for and [a hatat] whose year has passed apply only to an individual but not a congregation. Rabbi Shimon defends the first opinion. Just as the first three types of hatat are left to die only if they belong to an individual and not to the congregation, so too when it comes to the other two types of hatat, the rules of being left to die apply only to that brought by the individual and not to that brought by the congregation. In other words, although it is possible for there to be a hatat whose congregation has already been atoned for or a hatat brought by a congregation, but whose year has already passed, nevertheless, these hatats are not left to die.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
רבי יהודה אומר ימותו – that those of the community were also learned/derived.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
אמר ר' שמעון מה מצינו – meaning to say, we hold that five sin-offerings are left to die, that their owners have died, or that their owners acquired expiation through another [animal], or that its year has passed (for sheep and/or goats), the offspring of a sin-offering and the substitution of a sin-offering. For just as that three of them are not derived from that of a community [offering], for we do not have a case found with a community, for there is no feminine sin-offering for a community [offering], and the exchange of a sin-offering also, there is no community offering that one does a substitution/exchange, or that if its owners died, there are no community offerings where it the animals are left to die (see Tractate Temurah 15b).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
אף שכפירו בעליה ושעברה שנתה – even though it is possible that it may be found in a community, we don’t learn/derive that they died.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Temurah
ביחיד דברים אמורים – that the animals are left to die, but not for a community [offering]. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Shimon.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy