json/Mishnah/Rishonim on Mishnah/Bartenura/Seder Kodashim/Bartenura on Mishnah Kinnim/English/Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020.json

{
    "language": "en",
    "title": "Bartenura on Mishnah Kinnim",
    "versionSource": "http://sefaria.org",
    "versionTitle": "Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020",
    "status": "locked",
    "license": "CC-BY",
    "versionNotes": "",
    "shortVersionTitle": "Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020",
    "actualLanguage": "en",
    "languageFamilyName": "english",
    "isBaseText": false,
    "isSource": false,
    "direction": "ltr",
    "heTitle": "ברטנורא על משנה קינים",
    "categories": [
        "Mishnah",
        "Rishonim on Mishnah",
        "Bartenura",
        "Seder Kodashim"
    ],
    "text": [
        [
            [
                "חטאת העוף נעשית למטה – from the red line [encircling the Temple altar at precisely half its height], as it is written (Leviticus 5:9): “He shall sprinkle some of the blood of the purification (i.e., sin-offering) on the side of the altar, and what remains of the blood shall be drained out at the base of the altar,” the wall that its remainder is poured out toward the bottom of the altar (see Talmud Zevakhim 64b), and this is the lower wall below the red line, for the upper wall, that is from the [red] line and above, sometimes, it is poured out to the surrounding ledge (which was five cubits above the altar’s base, six cubits from the ground; it was one cubit wide on all sides, surrounding the altar. The priests would walk on this ledge while performing certain sacrificial functions), such as that he performed it above the surrounding ledge, that the [red] line is a cubit below the surrounding ledge.",
                "וחטאת בהמה למעלה – as it is written (Leviticus 4:25, 30, 34): “[The priest shall take with his finger some of the blood of the purification offering and put it] on the horns of the altar [of burnt offering],” on the integral portion of the horn [of the altar]. ",
                "עולת העוף למעלה – The burnt offering of the bird is above, as it is written (Leviticus 1:15): “[The priest shall bring it to the altar,] pinch off its head, and turn the whole into smoke on the altar; and its blood shall be drained [against the side of the altar],” just as the burning on the altar/letting rise in smoke is at the top of the altar, so the pinching and the wringing out [of the blood of the sacrifice] is at the top of the altar.",
                "ושל בהמה למטה – as it is written concerning it (Leviticus 4:7): “[The priest shall put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of aromatic incense, which is in the Tent of Meeting, before the LORD,] and all the rest of the blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar/אל-יסוד המזבח of burnt offering.”",
                "ואם שינה בזה ובזה פסול – this that is invalid if he performed the act [of offering] the sin-offering of the bird above [the red line], specifically regarding the sprinkling. But the pinching of the bird’s head of a sin-offering, even above [the red line] is kosher/fit, for pinching of the bird’s head is kosher in every place of the altar. But the burnt-offering of birds does not have sprinkling of blood, but only the wringing/squeezing out the blood, and if he performed it below [the red line] it is invalid.",
                "סדר קנים של חובה אחד חטאת ואחד עולה – as for example, in the case of a man suffering from gonorrhea/זב, a woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type blood on three consecutive days during a time of the month when she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding/זבה and a woman after childbirth vaginally/יולדת, and ritual impurity with regard to the Temple and its sacred articles/טומאת מקדש וקדשיו and hearing the sound of an imprecation/שמיעת קול אלה and an erroneous statement without legal consequences/ביטוי שפתים, for all of them bring a bird in poverty, but rather that the man suffering from gonorrhea and the woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type blood bring a bird, whether they are in poverty or in wealth, and even though there are bird-offerings of the convert which are obligations, and both of them are burnt-offerings, the Tanna/teacher was not troubled by them, because they are not all that frequent.",
                "בנדרים ונדבות כולן עולות – because only burnt-offerings and peace-offerings are brought for vows and free-will offerings, but birds are not brought as peace-offerings, therefore, vows and free-will offerings are all burnt-offerings."
            ],
            [
                "אפילו אחד ברבוא ימותו כולן – but it is not neutralized in a majority, for these are considered living creatures and are not neutralized.",
                "חטאת שנתערה בחובה – a dove or a pigeon of a sin-offering that was mixed up with two couples of sacrificial birds of an obligatory offering, that is couples of sacrificial birds for a woman giving birth or a woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month when she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding/זבה for each couple of sacrificial birds - of them one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering, and it is now found that there are five pairs of pigeons that are mixed up together.",
                "אין כשר אלא מנין חטאת שבתוכה – and he is not able to bring from those five pairs of pigeons other than two sin-offerings alone, that is the kosher number in two couples of sacrificial birds of an obligation. For if he made three sins-offerings, perhaps from the two couples of sacrificial birds, he made it, and not from that which was mixed up/confused in them, and from the two couples of sacrificial birds, they are not able to make only two sin-offerings, and he cannot make even one burnt-offering and one sin-offering.",
                "וכן עולה – a pigeon or a dove that was separated for the sake of a burnt-offering.",
                "שנתערבה בחובה – with two mere couples of sacrificial birds.",
                "אין כשר אלא מנין עולות שבחובה – as is explained above concerning the sin-offering.",
                "בן החובה מרובה ונדבה מועטת – as for example, one couple of sacrificial birds which is separated that were burnt-offerings, that was combined/confused with several unassigned couples of sacrificial birds that are burnt-offerings, that were mixed up/confused with several regular couples of sacrificial birds of women who gave birth or of a woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month when she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding, that each couple of sacrificial birds, one of them is a sin-offering and one of them is a burnt-offering.",
                "בין וכו' – as for example, one unassigned set of sacrificial birds that became mixed up with several sets of sacrificial birds for burnt-offerings, and we call these burnt-offerings that were set aside as a free-will offering, because with vows and free-will offerings, all of them are burnt-offerings as is taught in the Mishnah at the beginning of the chapter (Tractate Kinnim, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1)."
            ],
            [
                "בחובה ובנדבה – that the couple of sacrificial birds of obligatory offering that some of them are sin-offerings and some of them were burnt-offerings were mixed up with the couple of sacrificial birds for free-will offering – all of which are burnt offerings.",
                "אבל בחובה שנתערבה זו בזו – from the couple of birds concerning which it not been decided if it for the woman who just experienced childbirth or for a woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month in which she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding that became mixed up with a couple of sacrificial birds of a woman who experiences childbirth or that of another woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month in which she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding.",
                "מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – and he (i.e., the priest) offers up only two from the four that are mixed up, one for a burnt offering and one for a sin-offering, and nothing additional. For if he (i.e., the priest) had made two burnt offerings, perhaps he would do them from one nest, and every couple of birds concerning which it has not yet been decided which is to be the burnt offering, and which is to be the sin-offering.",
                "המועט כשר – if one couple of birds concerning which it has not yet been decided which is to be the burnt offering, and which is to be the sin-offering that was mixed up with two or three other couples of birds, he (i.e., the priest) is not able to offer up other than one set of birds, a single pigeon for a sin-offering and a single pigeon for a burnt-offering. But he (i.e., the priest) cannot make two burnt-offerings, lest he take the couple of birds that has been first selected for a woman who gave birth, who cannot make from it other than one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering. And similarly, if ten couples of birds were mixed with one-hundred, he (i.e., the priest) does not offer up from all of them other than ten sets of birds, some of them for sin-offerings and some of them for burnt-offerings and he rest of them are invalid, and that which is the smaller thing is kosher/fit.",
                "בין משם אחד – one birth and another birth, a woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month in which she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding with another woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month in which she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding.",
                "בין משני שמות – a woman who has given birth with a woman who experiences a flow of menstrual-type on three consecutive days during a time of the month in which she is not due to experience menstrual bleeding, whether from two women whether from one woman, as will be explained further on."
            ],
            [
                "רבי יוסי אומר כו' – not because Rabbi Yossi holds that there is a retroactive designation, and we should say that when the Kohen offered up one set of birds for one single denomination/class of them, the matter became clarified retroactively that from the beginning at the time of the taking of the set of birds, this set of birds was hers, but rather, the Gemara (Tractate Eruvin 37a) in the chapter: “With any [food] do they prepare an Eruv” that Rabbi Yossi is speaking that they made a condition at the time of purchase that the Kohen is able to make a set of birds that he desires for the sake of whichever woman that he wants. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yossi."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "קן סתומה – that he did not specify that this one (i.e., bird) is for a sin-offering and that one is for a burnt-offering. And we don’t require that it had been decided upon, for it is obvious, that if one of them flew-off, he (i.e., the owner) would purchase another mate for the second [offering], for since they are separated one from the other (i.e., one for a sin-offering and the other for a burnt-offering), and each one has a designation/denomination upon it. But even a couple of sacrificial birds concerning which it has not yet been decided which is which and they stand together to be specified/defined, you might think I would say that if one flew off, the other would die, this comes to teach us that this is not the case.",
                "לבין המתות – among couples of sacrificial birds that their judgment is that all of them would die, as for example, a sin-offering that got mixed in with a burnt-offering, as it is taught in the first chapter (Tractate Kinnin, Chapter 1, Mishnah 2).",
                "לבין הקריבות – whether a couple of birds concerning which it has not been decided which is to be burnt offering, and which of them is the sin-offering that stand to be offered up.",
                "פסול ופוסל אחד כנגדו – because it is not undetermined, and has been decided if it is for a sin-offering or for a burnt-offering, therefore, it does not invalidate other than the one that is its match in the pair, as will be explained further on."
            ],
            [
                "פרח – one pigeon from this [pair of unassigned birds] to the other woman’s [pair of unassigned birds].",
                "פוסל אחד בהליכתו – from the place that it separated itself. And it invalidates it itself or another from the place where it became mixed. For when one pigeon flew out from two couples of birds to two other couples of birds, there are three pigeons alone and five pigeons alone, but from three pigeons, one is not able to sacrifice only two, one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering, for if he would make two of them burnt-offerings it is fund that the third that remains was fixed/established, and that one (i.e., pigeon) which flew away is for a sin-offering, and he is not able to offer any further from the five individual pigeons, other than the two sin-offerings, according to the law of sin-offerings that were mixed with an obligatory offering, as we stated in the first chapter (see Tractate Kinnim, Chapter 1, Mishnah 2), that is not kosher/fit other than the number of sin-offerings that is part of the obligatory offering. Alternatively, one does not offer up [as a sacrifice] the third that remains, for we are concerned that perhaps that they will offer up the one that flew away with the five single pigeons and make it is a sin-offering, and his fellow that remains with three individual birds will also make it a sin-offering, and it is found that there will be two sin-offerings from one couple of sacrificial birds. And similarly, from the five individual pigeons he is not able to offer only two sin-offerings and two burnt-offerings, for if he made three sin-offerings or three burnt-offerings, perhaps he would make them from two couples of sacrificial birds of one woman, and there is no law of two couples of sacrificial birds other than with two sin-offerings and two burnt-offerings, and that is that is it invalid – it or another [bird] in the place where it was mixed, and it invalidates the other [bird] that is corresponding to it from the place that it flew off and was separated from there.",
                "חזר פוסל אחד בחזרתו – it (i.e., the original bird who flew off) returned and one of the five individual pigeons flew off into [this group of three], that it was now found four individual pigeons from here and four individual pigeons from there. The one through its return invalidates from the place that it separated from and left from there, and it or another are invalid in the place where it mixed there, and the cannot offer up other than one sin-offering and one burnt offering from the four that are here, and one sin-offering and one burnt-offering from the other four. For perhaps, that individual pigeon that flew away second is from the same two couples of sacrificial birds and is not the one that became mixed in it initially, and there remained there three individual pigeons from the two couples of sacrificial birds and that one that flew away there first, and similarly in the second place. But if he made in one place two burnt-offerings and one sin-offering, that [bird] which flew away to the other side would be set for a a sin-offering offering and he would not be able to offer up there [anything] other than one sin-offering, for perhaps, all thee sin-offerings that were made from here and there will be from two couples of sacrificial birds of one woman, therefore, one makes in every place one burnt-offering and one sin-offering, or two burnt-offerings and one sin-offering on this side and one sin-offering on that side, or two sin-offerings and a burnt offering on this side, and on the second side one burnt-offering, but if they returned and mixed together, always, there won’t be for them less than two couples of sacrificial birds that are fit/kosher."
            ],
            [
                "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.",
                "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].",
                "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."
            ],
            [
                "קן סתומה – he did not explain which was [designated/specified] for a sin-offering and which was [designated/specified] for a burnt-offering.",
                "וקן מפורשת – that it is known that this one was [designated/specified] for a sin-offering and that one was [designated] for a burnt-offering. But here, we are speaking when the two pigeons were combined together after they were designated/specified, and now it is not known which is for a sin-offering and which is for a burnt offering, and this is shown in the concluding clause [of the Mishnah] that teaches: “or [if] at first one which had been designated flew off to the first undesignated pair, all of them are left to die, but if the individual pigeons that had been designated/specified did not became mixed with each other, why should they be [all] left to die, but if the burnt-offering flew off, the remaining [bird] for the sin-offering should be offered up, and similarly, the unspecified/undesignated couple of sacrificial birds , should be offered up as one burnt-offering because of the burnt-offering that became mixed up with it. But we are speaking of when individual pigeons that were designated became mixed up one with another, but if one individual pigeon from the pair of sacrificial birds had not been designated/specified had been combined with that which was designated, he (i.e., the Kohen) should take one pair for second [bird] and designate one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering, and the third that had been combined/mixed up together, all of them should be left to die. If one from the three that had been mixed up/combined returned and became combined with the individual [bird] remaining from the undesignated/specified group, or at the outset of flying off, combined one from the designated [pair] to that which was not designated/specified, which is the first as we stat, meaning to say, that at the outset of flying off, one went and combined with an undesignated pair, all of them should be left to die, for since the individual pigeons which had been designated had combined together, they are no longer offered up, and when one of them flee off in another place, that is, one from the ones left to die that flew off among those that were to be offered up, all of them should be left to die."
            ],
            [
                "חטאת מכאן – an individual pigeon that was designated/specified for a sin-offering to one side, and an individual pigeon that was designated/specified for a burnt-offering to the second side, and two individual pigeons of an undesignated/unspecified nature (i.e., either for a sin-offering or for a burnt-offering) in the center.",
                "פרח מן האמצע – one individual pigeon to the right and one individual pigeon to the left.",
                "לא הפסיד כלום – that the one that is combined with the sin-offerings will be made for a sin-offering, and the one that is with the burnt-offerings will be made a burnt-offering, but not for a sin-offering, for perhaps he (i.e., the Kohen) will make it from the designated/specified [ones] for a burnt-offering.",
                "חזר לאמצע – they (i.e., the pigeons) returned from the sides, one from here and the other from there and combined together, they are left to die, for they are a [designated] sin-offering and a [designated] burnt-offering that were combined/mixed together. But those which remained, each one alone, each are offered according to their respective law.",
                "חזר מן האמצעיים לצדדין – those [designated] for sin-offerings and/or burnt-offerings are combined/mixed, and all are left to die.",
                "אין מביאים תורים כנגד בני יונה – but rather either both of them are turtle-doves or both of them are pigeons.",
                "תכפול ותביא עולתה בן יונה – as according to the law for the sin-offering. For the sin-offering is the essence/main object, whether he (i.e., the Kohen) set it aside first or whether he set it aside at the end.",
                "הולכין אחר הראשון – but she does not bring the second, but rather from the species that she set aside/designated first, whether it was a sin-offering first or whether it was a bunt-offering. And the Halakha is according to the first Tanna/teacher (i.e., that both the sin-offering and burnt-offering shojld come from the same species).",
                "לא יביאו היורשים חטאתה – for it is a sin-offering where its owners had died. But if it is not for this reason, we bring a sin-offering even though she offered a burnt-offering first. But even thought that in every case/place the sin-offering precedes the burnt-offering, this is especially for the Mitzvah, but not to be indispensable/to invalidate an act by omission."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "במה דברים אמורים בכהן נמלך (under what circumstances do the rules apply? In the case of a Kohen who makes inquiry) – It is referring to the first chapter [of Tractate Kinnim, Mishnayot 2-3]. And this is what we stated: Under what circumstances do the rules apply? That a sin-offering that was combined/mixed with a burnt-offering that all of them should be left to die, and similarly, one to this one and two to that one and the third to that one, that the minority is Kosher/fit, these words regard a Kohen that comes to inquire and to ask what is their law. But a Kohen who does not inquire and acted according to this own knowledge, one complete couple of sacrificial birds above [the red line] for one woman, the burnt offering is kosher/fit but the sin-offering is invalid. But if he made [an offering of] one complete couple of sacrificial birds below [the red line], the sin-offering is valid and the burnt-offering is invalid. Therefore, one (i.e., sin-offering) for this one [woman] and one (i.e., burnt-offering) for that one [woman, two [complete couples of sacrificial birds] for this one [woman] (i.e., sin-offering) and two [complete couples of sacrificial birds] for that one [woman] (i.e., burnt-offering) and made all of them, above [the red line], half are kosher which are the burnt-offerings and half of them are invalid which are sin-offerings. But if he made [an offering of] all of them, below [the red line], the sin-offerings are kosher/fit but the burnt-offerings are invalid. And all of the first chapter [of Tractate Kinnim] speaks of ab initio, but this chapter speaks of post-facto/after-the-fact. And one [burnt-offering] to this woman and two [burnt-offerings] to that woman, that we stated above when he (i.e., the Kohen) makes inquiry, the minority are kosher, here without inquiry, the majority are kosher/fit, since he (i.e., the Kohen) made [the offering of] half of them above [the red line] and half of them below [the red line]. How so? Behold that from one [sin-offering] for this [woman], he (i.e., the Kohen) made that couple of bird-offerings of [this] woman above [the red line] and from two couples of bird-offerings of another woman, he (i.e., the Kohen) made one individual pigeon from them above [the red line] in order that half of them would be above, and there remained three individual pigeons below [the red line], behold two burnt-offerings above [the red line] ae kosher/fit, and two sin-offerings below [the red line], behold two couples of bird-offerings are kosher/fit, and the third is invalid, and this is the majority that is kosher. And similarly, two [couples of bird-offerings] for this woman and three [couples of bird-offerings] for that woman, from the two couples of bird-offerings, there are four individual pigeons [offered] above [the red line], and furthermore, he (i.e., the Kohen) took one individual pigeon from the three couples of bird offerings, there are five individual pigeons [offered] above [the red line] and five [individual pigeons offered] below [the red line]; from the five individual pigeons [offered] above [the red line], there are three burnt-offerings and from [that offered] below [the red line] there are three sin-offerings, behold three couples of bird-offerings are kosher, and this is the majority that are kosher/fit, but however, ten [couples of bird-offerings] for this [woman] and one-hundred [couples of bird-offerings] for that [woman], it is impossible to find in this matter because they are pairs, and one needs to state that the majority are kosher/fit, as is taught in our Mishnah, he does not return ought other than one to this [woman] and two to that [woman], etc., which are not pairs, but since it is taught in the Mishnah above that in this manner the minority are kosher/fit, it also teaches in this manner that the majority are kosher/fit without making inquiry. But however, even with ten [couples of sacrificial birds] to this [woman] and one-hundred [couples of sacrificial birds] to that [woman], the majority are kosher, for there is nothing invalid from them other than ten [couples of sacrificial birds], for perhaps all of the couples of sacrificial birds were of one woman [offered] above [the red line] and the sin-offerings were invalidated, or all of them [were offered] below [the red line] and the burnt-offerings were invalidated, by force, ten complete couples of bird-sacrifices are invalid.",
                "את שלמעלה מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – [half of them are kosher/fit and half are invalid] since he (i.e., the Kohen) made [the offering up] of a complete couple of bird-offerings above [the red line]. For since these couples of bird-offerings were for two women, they should bring another couple of bird-offerings in partnership and give them between them, if from the first is a burnt-offering for Leah, the let the last be a sin-offering for Leah, or its opposite. And specifically, he (i.e., the Kohen) made [the offering of] a complete couple of bird-offerings above [the red line], but if he split up/divided the couples of bird-offerings, one individual pigeon above [the red line] and one individual pigeon below [the red line] everything is Kosher, for I state that the burnt-offering is above [the red line] and the sin-offering is below [the red line], for the couples of bird-offerings are specified through the action of the Kohen."
            ],
            [
                "זה הכלל כל מקום שאתה יכול לחלוק כו' – meaning to say, that the couple of sacrificial-birds of one woman is not divided in half, but rather one couple of sacrificial birds [is offered] above [the red line] and another woman’s couple of sacrificial birds [is offered] below [the red line], half of it is kosher/fit and half of it is invalid.",
                "וכל מקום כו' – as for example, one [couple of sacrificial birds] to this [woman] and two [couples of sacrificial birds] to that [woman] where there is a division of one woman’s [couple of sacrificial birds to be offered] above [the red line] and below [the red line], the majority are kosher, as has been explained."
            ],
            [
                "חטאת לזו ועולה לזו – this also refers to that which is taught above in the first chapter [of Tractate Kinnim, Mishnah 3], a burnt-offering that became mixed/combined with a sin-offering or the opposite, all of them are left to die. And these words [apply] when [the priest] made inquiry on the mixture and made [the offering] of one couple of sacrificial birds above [the red line] and one couple of sacrificial birds below [the red line], half of them are kosher/fit and half of them are invalid. But even though that he did not come to make inquiry, we state to him that he (i.e., the Kohen) should not offer them up, as it is taught, they should all be left to die, now that he didn’t make any inquiry, we state that each one should be performed according to Halakha and they are kosher/fit."
            ],
            [
                "חטאת ועולה וסתומה ומפורשת – two women who purchased three couples of sacrificial birds, this one (i.e., woman) needs a burnt offering and a complete couple of sacrificial birds, that is two burnt-offerings and one sin-offering, and the second [woman] needs one sin offering and one complete couple of sacrificial birds, which are two sin-offerings and one burnt-offering, and they designated/specified one individual pigeon from the couple of sacrificial birds for a burnt-offering for this one (i.e., woman) and one individual pigeon as a sin-offering for that one [woman], and one from the couple of sacrificial birds they left undesignated , for they didn’t specify which would be for a burnt-offering and which for a sin-offering. But the third [woman] they designated/specified which was for a burnt-offering and which was for a sin-offering, but the owners didn’t specify behold a sin-offering for this [woman] and a burnt-offering for that one [woman] and an undesignated couple of sacrificial birds and a designated couple of sacrificial birds, and he (i.e., the Kohen) needs to offer up as a sacrifice these two couples of sacrificial birds undesignated for both of them, the burnt-offerings above [the red line] and the sin-offerings below [the red line], and a burnt-offering for this one [woman] and a sin-offering for that [woman] he needs to offer in the name of the owners. But if the Kohen gave them, one-half below [the red line] and one-half above [the red line], none are kosher/fit other than the undesignated ones, which type did he made as a burnt-offering and which type did he make as a sin-offering, it is kosher/fit, since each couple of sacrificial birds was of its own.",
                "מתחלקת בימיהם – since he purchased them in a mixture, the one fulfilled for the sin-offering and the other fulfilled for the burnt-offering."
            ],
            [
                "חטאת שנתערבה בחובה – that is to say, that which we taught above in the Chapter One [Tractate Kinnim, Mishnah two] a sin-offering that was combined/confused with an obligatory sacrifice is not kosher/fit other than only the number corresponding to the sin-offerings among [the offerings brought in fulfillment of] an obligation, that sometimes, that number goes up to half kosher/fit and half invalid, and sometimes it goes to less than half, and it will explain further on how so.",
                "חובה שנים בחטאת מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – explanation, two couples of bird sacrifices for an obligation they have twice as many as that brought for a sin-offering, as for example, that he offered up as a sacrifice from them one burnt-offering and there remained two sin-offerings and one burnt-offering.",
                "מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – that one burnt-offering that remains cannot be offered lest this is the one that is set for a sin-offering, and a sin-offering that is confused/combined he (i.e., the Kohen) cannot offer up lest it is the remaining burnt-offering, therefore he does not offer up ought other than two sin-offerings, but the sin-offering that is confused/combined and the burnt-offering that remains are invalid, and this is half of them are kosher/fit and half of them are invalid.",
                "חטאת שנים בחובה מנין שבחובה כשר – explanation, as for example, that she offered up one sin-offering from the two couples of bird sacrifices and there remained two burnt-offerings and one sin-offering. Behold they are four individual pigeons with the sin-offering that was confused/mixed up between them, and he is not able to offer up two burnt-offerings lest he take the confused/mixed-up sin-offering, and also he cannot offer up two sin-offerings lest he take that [bird] that is set for the burnt-offering, therefore, he doesn’t sacrifice anything other than one sin-offering, for the burnt-offering of that is the lesser number that is the less than that which is half-kosher/fit. And in a similar manner we explain also and similarly the burnt-offering that was confused/mixed-up with an obligatory sacrifice."
            ],
            [
                "הרי עלי קן לכשאלד זכר – we are dealing with a poor woman who gave birth, whereas if she was rich, she brings a sheep for her obligatory offering.",
                "והכהן צריך לעשות שלש למעלה -that the couple of sacrificial birds for a free-will offering – both of them are burnt-offerings and the couple of sacrificial birds of the obligatory sacrifice is a burnt-offering above [the red line] and a sin-offering below [the red line], but he did not do so, but rather two [burnt-offerings] above [the red line] and two [sin-offerings] below, and he did not make inquiry with her to know on what she brought, and one individual pigeon was invalidated, therefore, she needs to bring another individual pigeon and she will offer it above [the red line].",
                "ממין אחד – that is to say, in what case is this statement said, when they (i.e., the birds) were of one kind. But if there were two couples of sacrificial birds that she brought from two different species, that is, one couple of sacrificial birds that are turtle-doves and another that are pigeons, she must bring one individual turtle-dove and one individual pigeon, in order to replace the individual bird that was invalidated, and we don’t know if it was from the turtle-doves or from the pigeons, and it is taught in the Mishnah above (see Tractate Kinnin, Chapter 2, Mishnah 5): “They do not bring turtle-doves to make up pairs for young pigeons, or young pigeons to make up pairs for turtle-doves.”",
                "פירשה נדרה - when she brought two couples of bird sacrifices to the Kohen, she specified and stated: \"these are for my vow, and those are for my obligation [sacrifice].\"",
                "ממין אחד – meaning to say, if these two couples of bird sacrifices were from one species, that is, both of them were turtle-doves or both of them pigeons, and the Kohen offered from them two above [the red line] and two below [the red line], only one individual pigeon is kosher from all of the four that he sacrificed, and it is the burnt-offering that is the obligatory sacrifice, and she needs to bring three more individual pigeons and he (i.e., the Kohen) offers them one below [the red line] which is the sin-offering that is in the obligatory [sacrifice] and two above [the red line] and this is the vow.",
                "משני מינים תביא ארבע – if she brought two couples of two bird sacrifices from two species and specified in her vow but the Kohen did not know which two them he performed (i.e., sprinkled the blood of) above [the red line] and which two of them he performed (i.e., sprinkled the blood of) below [the red line], she needs to bring four individual birds, for perhaps the two turtle-doves that she brought for her vow and they are burnt-offerings were performed below [the red line] and there remains for her the entire vow [to be fulfilled]. But the two pigeons which are obligatory were performed above [the red line] and the remains for her one pigeon for the sin-offering of her obligation, or perhaps the two pigeons of her obligation were performed below [the red line] and there remains upon her the pigeon of the burnt-offering from her obligatory [sacrifice].",
                "קבעה נדרה – as for example, that she said at the time of vow: “I pledge upon myself a couple of sacrificial birds from a certain species, and she specified her vow as [mentioned] above, she did not specify anything at the time of the vow, but rather after she made an unspecified vow: “I pledge upon myself a couple of sacrificial birds,” she brought from whichever species that she wanted and stated: “these are for my vow.”",
                "צריכה להביא עוד חמש פרידות – here we are speaking as for example, that after she established her vow and brought her vow with her obligatory [sacrifice] to the Kohen, the Kohen executed two [sprinklings of the blood of the sacrificial birds] above [the red line] and two [sprinklings of the blood of the sacrificial birds] below [the red line] and he did not know if he executed her vow above [the red line] and her obligatory sacrifice below [the red line] if [not] the opposite, and she also forgot which species [of birds] she established for her vow, whether turtle-doves or pigeons, she needs to bring another five single pigeons, for perhaps the vow was executed/performed below [the red line] and the obligatory [sacrifice] was executed above [the red line] and none of it was kosher/fit except the burnt-offering that is part of the obligatory offering alone and there remains upon her the sin-offering of the obligatory sacrifice and two burnt-offerings of the vow, but because she forgot which species [of birds] she established for her vow, she needs to bring two turtle doves and two pigeons and to execute/perform [the sprinkling of the blood] for all of them above [the red line] in order to fulfill her [sacrificial] obligation regarding her vow, and she also needs to bring a pigeon or a turtle dove for the sin-offering to complete her obligatory [sacrifice], hence five individual pigeons. And these words, when she brought from the outset her vow and her obligatory sacrifice, all of them were from one species [of birds]. But if she knew that at the outset that she brought her vow and her obligatory sacrifices from two kinds and she forgot from which species she established her vows, she needs to bring six individual pigeons, four [of them] to complete her vow, that is two turtle doves and two pigeons as we stated above, since she doesn’t know from which species she established her vow and she needs to fulfill her obligation of both of them, and the two turtle doves or the two pigeons to execute [the sprinkling of the blood] of one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering to complete her obligatory sacrifice. But here we don’t say that it is enough for her with one pigeon or turtle dove for a sin-offering alone and that the burnt-offering that she offered initially will fulfill for her for the sake of her obligatory sacrifice as was stated above, for it is all well when she brought it from one species, she doesn’t need to bring [more] for the burnt-offering of her obligatory sacrifice, whichever way you turn, if those turtle doves that she established for her vow will both be executed below [the red line], if so, [the blood] of her obligatory sacrifice [was sprinkled] above [the red line] completely and she fulfilled her obligation from the burnt-offering, but if [the sprinkling of the blood of] the her obligatory sacrifice was executed as a burnt-offering below [the red line] and the sin offering above [the red line], if so, her vow also was executed [through sprinkling of blood] one above [the red line] and one below [the red line] and she fulfilled her obligation of her vow through one [of the sprinklings] , and the two turtle doves that she brought now with one [of them] she fulfilled her obligation regarding her vow and with one [of them] she fulfilled her obligation regarding the burnt-offering of her obligatory sacrifice. But if her obligatory sacrifice was performed completely [through sprinkling of the blood of the birds] below [the red line] then her sin-offering is kosher/fit, and her bunt-offering is invalid, the two turtle doves that she brought now – with one of them she completed her obligatory sacrifice and with of them it was a freewill offering, but the sin-offering that she brings now, is brought in doubtful [fulfillment] and she cannot consume it. But if the first ones were doves, she should bring now for her sin-offering a pigeon, but the burnt-offering is not necessary, whichever way you turn as we stated regarding the turtle doves. But when she brought two kinds of couples of bird sacrifices and she forgot which species she established for her vow and which species she established for her obligatory [sacrifice], and she also forgot what she stated explicitly and the Kohen executed each and every species [of bird] one [whose blood was sprinkled] above [the red line] and the other below [the red line] for he would hold that both of them are unspecified obligatory [sacrifices], she will bring four for her vow – two turtle doves and two doves, because she does not know which species she established for her vow, and also two species [that she needs for the sin-offering for her pair for the burnt-offering of her obligatory sacrifice], because she doesn’t know from which species it was, and we require a turtle dove corresponding to a turtle dove and a dove corresponding to a dove.",
                "נתנתם לכהן ואין ידוע כו' – as for example – that she established her vow and established her obligatory [sacrifice] and brought to the Kohen a couple of sacrificial birds for her vow and a couple of sacrificial birds for her obligatory [sacrifice] and she does not know from which species she established for her vow and from which species she established for her obligatory [sacrifice], or if she gave to the Kohen two species or one species and the Kohen [himself] does not know if he executed every [sprinkling of blood] above [the red line] or every [sprinkling of blood] below [the red line] or half [of them] above [the red line] and half [of them] below [the red line], behold this one brings four individual birds for her vow – two turtle doves and two pigeons, and she also brings two for her obligatory [sacrifice] – one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering from whichever of the two species that she wants, and she brings a sin-offering.",
                "אמר רבי יהושע זהו שאמרו כו' – just as when the sheep is alive, only one voice comes forth from it, but when it is dead that it would be appropriate that its voice would stop, there comes out from it seven voices as it explains further on, here also, when she initially made her vow prior to bringing anything, she did not need anything other than one couple of sacrificial birds for her vow and one couple of sacrificial birds for her obligatory [sacrifice], but after she had established her vow and brought her vow and her obligatory [sacrifice], because she doesn’t know what she established and the Kohen does not know what he offered up as a sacrifice , she needs to bring four individual birds for her vow and four for her obligatory [sacrifice] as we stated.",
                "קרניו לחצוצרות – for Shofarot, that we call the Shofar (before the destruction of the Temple) is now called a trumpet (see Talmud Sukkah 34a).",
                "אף צמרו – to make from it Tekhelet (i.e., the purple-blue thread used for the show-fringes on the prayer shawl). They make from its wool a coat that is entirely Tekhelet and on the skirts of the garment are bells that produces a sound/voice. The first Tanna/teacher does not consider it because the Tekhelet does not produce a sound but rather the bells that are on the skirts of the garment around it.",
                "רבי שמעון בן עקשיא אומר – even all of this is similar to this matter, for just as when it (i.e., the animal) is dead, its voice is seven, so also the Sages of Torah, when they age and come to feebleness/weakness in [physical] strength, they add wisdom [through their teaching].",
                "שנאמר מסיר שפה לנאמנים – but Scripture is speaking about the common, uneducated person, for further on from this it is written (Job 12:24): “He deranges the leaders of the [uneducated/common] people, [And makes them wander in a trackless waste].”",
                "בישישים חכמה – that is the Sages, but for the uneducated/common people, what is wisdom for them?"
            ]
        ]
    ],
    "sectionNames": [
        "Chapter",
        "Mishnah",
        "Comment"
    ]
}