Комментарий к Киним 2:3

אחת לזו ושתים לזו כו' – one pigeon flew off from the [woman with the] first [pair] to the [woman who had] two pairs, immediately that individual [bird] that remained in the first [pair] was disqualified/made unfit, for if one would make of it a sin-offering, it would established that it (i.e., the bird) that flew off was for a burnt-offering, and one is not able to offer up [from] the second bird, and with other couples of birds that were mixed up with them, burnt-offerings are [offered up] from only half-of the, like the burnt-offering that was mixed up with an obligatory [sacrifice]. And similarly if it flew off from the second [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] to the third [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds], perhaps it flew off from the body of the second, but that which flew off from the first [woman] remained there with the second, and one cannot make from the second only two individual pigeons, one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering, for if he made two burnt offerings, perhaps he would make them from the pigeons of the body of the second [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds], and if so, that [bird] which flew off from the third [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] would be fixed for a sin-offering and he would not be able to make with the third [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] only half of them as sin-offerings, but not more. And similarly, if it flew off from the third [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] to the fourth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds], perhaps the one (i.e., bird) that flew off was from the body of [couples of sacrificial birds] of the third [woman] , and there did not remain with her other than five individual pigeons and one pigeon from the second [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] that was mixed up with the, and he (i.e., the Kohen) is not able to make with the third [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] anything other than two burnt offerings and two sin-offerings because it was mixed up with the fourth [woman’s complement of sacrificial birds]. And similarly, when it (i.e., the bird) flew off from the fourth [woman’s complement of sacrificial birds] to the fifth [woman’s complement of sacrificial birds], the fourth [woman’s complement of sacrificial birds] is not kosher, other than for three sin-offerings and three sin-offerings. And similarly, from the fifth [woman’s couples to the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds], he (i.e., the Kohen) four sin-offerings and four burnt-offering. And similarly, from the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] to the seventh [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds], it is not kosher/fit with the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] other than five sin-offerings and five burnt-offerings, for it if he (i.e., the Kohen) had made six burnt-offerings, it that [bird] which flew off would be established for sin-offerings in the seventh [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] but he would not be able to make with the seventh [couples of sacrificial birds] anything other than seven sin-offerings without any burnt-offerings. But when he (i.e., the Kohen) returns from the seventh [woman’s couples of sacrificial offerings] and one pigeon flew off from the sixth, perhaps it was not the same [bird] that flew off at the beginning from the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds], but rather from the body of the seventh that it flew off, and it invalidated in the seventh [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] two pigeons , and it is not kosher other than six sin-offerings and six sin-offerings, for he (i.e., the Kohen) had made seven sin-offerings, that [pigeon] that flew off would be fixed [and with others] for a burnt-offering, and he would not be able to offer only burnt-offerings form half of the pigeons, for the other half would be invalid according to the law of a burnt-offering that was mixed up with an obligatory sacrifice. And similarly, when it (i.e., the pigeon) flew off from the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] to the fifth, it was disqualified in its return another couple of sacrificial birds and it is not kosher/fit with the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] other than four sin-offerings and four burnt-offerings, for perhaps from the sixth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] flew off one from the seventh [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] and one from the fifth [woman’s couples of sacrificial birds] in [its] return, and there does not remain for her other than ten individual pigeons from her couples, but if he (i.e., the Kohen) made five sin-offerings and five burnt-offerings, perhaps the two individual pigeons that flew off from her would be offered both as burnt-offerings, and if so, they would make seven burnt-offerings with complements of bird offerings, or if both of them would be made as sin-offerings, it would not be able to make with six couples of bird-offerings six burnt-offerings and six sin-offerings. And similarly, from the fifth [woman’s couples of bird offerings] to the fourth [woman’s couples of bird offerings], and from the fourth [woman’s couples of bird offerings] to the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings]. And from the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings] to the second [woman’s couples of bird offerings], for there isn’t in the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings] other than two individual pigeons, one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt offering. But if you say, but why did the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings lose two [pigeons], for from those [birds] which flew away in the second [woman’s couples of bird offerings] with [their] return, they are not offered up [as sacrifices], for it is taught that the second [woman’s couples of bird offerings] has none, for we should have said that the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings] had two couples of bird offerings but in the second, there aren’t any, or in the second there is one couple of bird-offerings but in the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings] there is one set? But it is possible to say that since in the other [women’s couples] of bird offerings, from the fourth [woman’s couples] onward, two sets of bird-offerings were disqualified, one while going and one returning, we make this decree similarly with the third [woman’s couples of bird offerings]. But with the seventh [woman’s couples of bird offerings], only one couple of bird offerings is invalidated, for only one pigeon went from it in the return, whereas while going, nothing was invalidated and there is nothing missing from it.

Introduction This mishnah continues to illustrate the principle that a bird that leaves a pair disqualifies by flying away and a bird that returns also disqualifies another pair, lest it is not the same bird that flew away. This mishnah uses large numbers, but I think that the principle should be straightforward.

פרח וחזר – this does not refer to the first or second [woman’s couples of bird-offerings, for since they don’t have anything but those [birds] left to die, if one of them flew off from the rest of the couples of bird-offerings, all of them would be left to die, as it is taught shortly in the Mishnah, and if one of those left to die flew off to all of them (i.e., the couples of bird-offerings), all of them would be left to die. But rather, it refers to the [bird] from the third [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] who flew off from it to the fourth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings], or from the fourth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] to the fifth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings], or from the fifth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] to the sixth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] or from the sixth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] to the seventh [woman’s couples of bird-offerings,” and returned from the seventh [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] to the sixth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings until the third [woman’s couples of bird-offerings], for from the seventh [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] is missing two individual pigeons, one through the first return and the other with the second return, and there isn’t fit/kosher in the seventh [woman’s couples of bird-sacrifices other than five individual pigeons for burnt-offerings and five individual pigeons for sin-offerings, for if he (i.e., the Kohen) would make six burnt-offerings, perhaps the two [birds] that left from it would be offered up as burnt-offerings, which are eight burnt-offerings, but in the seven couples of bird-offerings, there aren’t only burnt-offerings. And from the sixth [woman’s couple of bird-offerings] there is missing four individual pigeons, two through flying away and the first [one] returning, and two [pigeons] from the second [woman’s couples of bird-offerings], but there remained two kosher couples of bird-offerings, for if he (i.e., the Kohen) made three burnt-offerings, perhaps the four [birds] that left it will be burnt-offerings, hence seven burnt-offerings, but there aren’t in six couples of bird-offerings anything other than six burnt-offerings. And similarly, in the fifth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings], there is nothing kosher/fit there other than one [bird] for a burnt-offering and one [bird] for a sin-offering. And similarly, it is difficult here, since with the fourth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] she has nothing, he (i.e., the Kohen) would be able to offer from the fifth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] three burnt-offerings and three sin-offerings, for those that left from fourth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] are not offered up, and according to this, that the fifth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] has none other than one that he would be able to offer up, he would be able to offer up with the fourth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] two burnt-offerings and two sin-offerings. But rather, we decreed that with each flying off [of a bird] and each return [of a bird], two couples of bird-offerings [a decree for this one – couple of bird-offerings – is for the sake of/on account of that one – couple of bird-offerings] are affected. And similarly, when it (i.e., the bird) flew off and returned a third time, they have nothing except for the seventh [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] that she has four [pairs of birds], similarly we decree with each flying off and return [of a bird] two couples of bird-offerings [are affected].

If one [woman] had one pair, another two, another three, another four, another five, another six and another seven pairs, and one bird flew from the first to the second pair, [and then a bird flew from there] to the third, [and then a bird flew from there] to the fourth, [and from there a bird flew] to the fifth [and from there a bird flew] to the sixth, [and from there a bird flew] to the seventh, and then a bird returns [in the same order as they flew away] it disqualifies at each flight and at each return. The first and second [women] have none left, the third has one pair, the fourth two, the fifth three, the sixth four, and the seventh six pairs. This section sets out the scenario, sort of a musical chairs of sacrificial birds. Basically one bird has left each group and then one bird has returned to each group. The first woman lost her only pair when one left. The second woman lost one pair when one left and one pair when one returned from her pairs to the first woman, so she is left with nothing. The third woman has one left, the fourth woman two and the fifth woman is left with three. The seventh woman loses only one pair because for her the "flying away" and "returning" are the same. She had one bird fly away and return to a set of pairs from which it had come. So she is left with six pairs.

ויש אומרים השביעית לא הפסידה כלום – an explanation, with flying off and retuning a third time, but rather, always, one will offer up from it five couples of bird-offerings. For three individual pigeons flew off from it at the most, and there remained with it only eleven individual pigeons, he (i.e., the Kohen) will make from them five sin-offerings and five burnt-offerings, since even the sixth [woman’s couples of bird-offerings] has nothing. But here we don’t make the decree through this flying off like with the other couples of bird-offerings, sine it does not lose with flying off at any time, they didn’t make a decree regarding the return [of the birds to the nest]. But the Halakha is not according to the opinion of there are those who say.

If again [one from each group] flew away and returned [in the same order as above], it disqualifies at each flight and return. The third and fourth woman have none left, the fifth has one pair, the sixth two pairs, and the seventh woman five pairs. Remarkably, the same thing repeats itself. One bird leaves the first, flies to the second, and so on up and then down the line. Again, two pairs are disqualified from the valid pairs that each woman has left, except for the last woman, who only loses one pair. Now the women who originally had three or four pairs are left with nothing, the woman with five is left with one, the woman with six is left with two, and the woman who had seven is left with five.

If again one [from each group] flew away and returned [in the same order as above], it disqualifies at each flight and return. The fifth and sixth women have none left, and the seventh has four pairs. But some say that the seventh woman has lost nothing. Incredibly, the same thing happens again (these birds really know what to do!). The only woman left with any valid birds is the last woman. According to one opinion, she again loses one pair. According to the other opinion, since all of the other pairs are already disqualified, the last bird to fly away from her does not disqualify any of her pairs. Therefore, she is left with five, as she was in the beginning.

If [a bird] from those that are left to die escaped to any of all the groups, then all must be left to die. If any birds that have to be left to die fly into any of the pairs, all of the pairs into which they may have flown are disqualified, because any of the birds may be this disqualified bird. In other words, here we do not have the problem of determining which bird is a hatat and which is an olah. Rather the problem is that any of the birds may be a bird that had been left to die and such a bird can never be sacrificed.