Kids Daf Quest

Daf Yomi for kids · Talmud Bavli · Masechet Keritot

Keritot 27 for kids: Poorer or Richer

כריתות כ״ז

🪙 This daf asks when an animal set aside for an offering can be brought. It also asks whether a sin offering can be used for a different sin, and how an offering changes if a person becomes poorer or wealthier.

Daf Yomi day:

📖 Open Keritot 27a in Daf QuestOpen Keritot 27b in Daf Quest

In the app: the Gemara with Rashi and Tosafot, the printed page, games made from this daf, play coins and treasure chests.

Stories from Keritot 27

Words to know

Rashi and Tosafot on Keritot 27 in simple English

Rashi on Keritot 27a, in English Tab translation (25)
  1. The first clause calls the repayment for his theft “his misuse,” while the latter calls the guilt-offering ram “his misuse” — This is a question.
  2. In the first clause, where the ram’s value covers most of the principal and the added fifth — The mishna must distinguish the two guilt offerings: one fulfills his original obligation, and the other is for misuse of consecrated property. In the first clause, it calls the first ram “his misuse” because it covers the stolen principal and its fifth, and calls the other ram “his guilt offering.” In the latter clause, the ram is worth two sela, while the principal and fifth total only one sela and a fifth. Since that ram is not payment for the theft, the mishna calls it “his misuse” after the guilt offering for misuse.
  3. With accumulated fifths — If someone repeatedly misused money set aside for a guilt offering until the added fifths totaled two sela, may he buy a ram with those fifths and gain atonement? In the fuller case, he set aside two sela for the offering and misused that principal four times; the principal would then go toward gift offerings.
  4. Enhancement of consecrated property — For example, he bought a ram for one sela, and the market price of rams rose to two sela.
  5. Because he did not designate it — When he designated the ram, it was worth only one sela. But in the case of accumulated fifths, he designated each payment for the guilt offering as he set it aside; perhaps he can gain atonement with them.
  6. And learn from it that a person gains atonement — The mishna says that the ram is sacrificed for his guilt offering.
  7. For he spent eight dinars on it — He spent an additional sela fattening the ram.
  8. Come and hear — A proof from the latter clause of that baraita about fattening the ram.
  9. And he improved it by three dinars, and it is worth eight — The Gemara will ask: Does this not prove that a person gains atonement through the one dinar by which the consecrated ram increased in value without any expense on his part?
  10. The remainder needed to make up a sela — One dinar, completing the second sela. Why not say that the shepherd sold him a two-sela ram at a discount? Because the baraita says he must pay a sela to the Temple treasurer from his own money. If the ram was worth two sela when designated, why would he pay anything more, even if the shepherd gave it to him for free?
  11. A ram — He has no ram that he bought for two sela.
  12. What came of it? — The preceding explanation is strained: if a person gains atonement through an increase in consecrated property’s value, he would not need to make up the sela.
  13. Come and hear — A proof that he gains atonement.
  14. This is the correct reading in the Tosefta: “At the time it was designated, it was worth one sela; at the time of atonement, it was worth two sela. He has fulfilled his obligation.”
  15. He asked — Rabbi Elazar had not heard this baraita.
  16. And he did not hear this teaching from me? — This is a question.
  17. And about this he said — In tractate Menaḥot, in the chapter beginning “The thanksgiving offering.”
  18. They do not require bread — The reason is explained there.
  19. They taught this only — The offspring does not require bread if it was born after he gained atonement by offering its mother and thus fulfilled his vow. If it was born before atonement, he may offer it instead of its mother to fulfill his vow, and it requires bread. Thus, a person gains atonement through an offspring, which is an increase in consecrated property.
  20. Can living animals be disqualified? — For example, if one of the two goats for Yom Kippur dies, may the other still be offered with a replacement goat, or was it disqualified when its partner died? This cannot be resolved from the rule that a sin offering whose owner has already gained atonement must die: that rule is a tradition from Moses at Sinai, and other cases cannot be inferred from it.
  21. And it may not be offered — It was unfit from the outset: when he consecrated it, half of it was still non-sacred.
  22. Read it this way: Learn three things from this — Living animals can be disqualified; an animal unfit from the outset remains disqualified; and disqualification applies even when an animal was consecrated only for its monetary value. When he consecrated his half, it could only be consecrated for its value, yet the ruling says the animal may not be offered even after he acquires the other half. Consecration for monetary value can therefore bring about lasting disqualification; these are two ways of stating the same point.
  23. Rams became cheaper everywhere — He cannot find one costing two sela.
  24. Those awaiting atonement — Such as a man or woman with a discharge, a woman after childbirth, or a person cured of leprosy, whose offerings are required before they may eat consecrated food. If they cannot bring an offering at the value the Torah specifies, they have no alternative; thus, a value fixed by the Torah must be met.
  25. He did not teach us — That is, he did not teach it to others.
Rashi on Keritot 27b, in English Tab translation (25)
  1. Mishnah: His son shall not bring it after him — The son may not bring it for his own obligation, and certainly not for his father’s sin, since there is no atonement after death.
  2. Gemara: From a lenient sin for a severe one — This refers to a sin that does not carry a court-imposed death penalty, such as relations with a menstruating woman or eating forbidden fat.
  3. With an animal his father designated — For a severe transgression, such as desecrating Shabbat.
  4. “His offering” is written three times regarding a sin offering — Once concerning a leader and twice concerning an ordinary individual.
  5. He cannot complete his naziriteship with his father’s animal — That is, with an animal his father designated for his own naziriteship.
  6. When the money is unallocated — He did not specify which coins were for a sin offering and which were for a burnt offering. This is explained in the chapter “One Who Said, ‘I Am a Nazirite,’ and His Fellow Heard” (Nazir 27b).
  7. He has not misused consecrated property, and it has not atoned — This is explained below.
  8. He has misused consecrated property — He spent consecrated money for a non-sacred purpose by using it for something other than its designated purpose.
  9. Since he cannot misuse it — He cannot make the animal non-sacred or change its status. Even if he changes its intended purpose, it remains consecrated, for an unblemished consecrated animal never becomes non-sacred.
  10. But money — Money can be misused and become non-sacred, and if he used it improperly, it provides atonement. One might therefore think he may use it this way from the outset.
  11. This teaches us — The verse says, “His offering for his sin.”
  12. Mishnah: One may bring a ewe or a female goat from consecrated funds — If he designated money to buy a ewe for his sin offering, he may instead buy a female goat with it.
  13. He designated a ewe or a female goat — That is, he designated money to buy one. If he becomes poor, he may use some of it to bring a bird, and the remainder becomes non-sacred.
  14. If he becomes wealthy, he brings a ewe — He adds his own money to the funds designated for a tenth of an ephah of flour.
  15. Gemara: If they became blemished, he may bring a bird with their proceeds — For example, if he became poor.
  16. For a bird cannot be redeemed — Redemption applies only to an animal, not a bird.
  17. “From his sin offering”; “on top of his sin offering” — For an offering that varies with a person’s means, “from his sin offering” is written concerning a ewe or female goat: if he becomes poor, he may bring a bird using part of the money. It is also written concerning a bird: if he becomes poorer, he may bring a tenth of an ephah of flour using part of the money for the bird. “On top of his sin offering” is written concerning the tenth of an ephah: if he becomes wealthier, he adds money and brings a bird, or, if he becomes wealthier still, a ewe or female goat.
  18. He designated a ewe — That is, he designated money to buy a ewe.
  19. That is why “from his sin offering” is written again concerning a bird — To teach that he may obtain his atonement using part of the money for the bird, by bringing a tenth of an ephah of flour.
  20. Why is “on top of his sin offering” written concerning the tenth of an ephah — Rather than concerning the bird?
  21. For if “on top of his sin offering” had been written concerning the bird — And not concerning the tenth of an ephah:
  22. I might have thought, and so on. But if he designated money for a tenth of an ephah and became wealthy — I might have thought that if he became wealthier, he must bring a bird using his own money, and if he became much wealthier, he must bring a ewe or female goat using his own money, while the money designated for the tenth of an ephah goes to communal voluntary offerings. That is why the verse speaks of the ewe or female goat brought by a wealthy person.
  23. And for the offering of a poor person — “From his sin offering” is written concerning the bird to teach that if he becomes poorer still, he brings a tenth of an ephah using part of the money.
  24. Concerning the offering of a very poor person — “On top of his sin offering” is written concerning the tenth of an ephah to teach that if he becomes wealthier, he adds to that money and brings a bird. Although a bird is a different kind of offering from flour, he may still bring it; and if he becomes wealthier still, he brings a ewe.
  25. Who designated a pair of birds — Turtledoves.

Sources

Kid summary and story cards written by Tab from the William Davidson Edition English (Sefaria, CC BY-NC 4.0).

Tab translation (machine-assisted) of Rashi and Tosafot, from the Vilna Edition Hebrew (public domain) on Sefaria. May contain mistakes.

In the app, the Gemara text comes from Sefaria (William Davidson Edition, CC BY-NC 4.0; Hebrew/Aramaic Vilna Edition). Rashi and Tosafot Hebrew: Vilna Edition (public domain) via Sefaria.

Also spelled: Kerisus, Kritot, Kerithoth 27.