## Keritot Daf 8b

###### Keritot 8b:1
[Keritot 8b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:1)

חָמֵשׁ אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין, כִּי מַיְיתֵי חַד מִי מִיפְּטַר? וְהָתַנְיָא, זֶה הַכְּלָל: כֹּל שֶׁחֲלוּקִין בְּחַטָּאוֹת – חֲלוּקִין בַּאֲשָׁמוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
to bring **five provisional guilt offerings, when he brings one** offering **is he exempt** from bringing the rest? **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that **this is the principle:** In **any** case **where** one’s transgressions **are divided with regard to sin offerings,** i.e., where one must bring a separate sin offering for each act when he becomes aware that he has sinned, they are likewise **divided with regard to** provisional **guilt offerings,** when there is uncertainty as to whether or not he sinned?


###### Keritot 8b:2
[Keritot 8b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:2)

אֶלָּא, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לִטְבִילוֹת מְדַמֵּי לְהוֹן, וּבְחוֹשְׁשִׁין לִפְשִׁיעָה קָמִיפַּלְגִי, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי סָבַר: חָיְישִׁינַן לִפְשִׁיעָה, וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא סָבַר: לָא חָיְישִׁינַן לִפְשִׁיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, everyone** agrees that **we compare** the sin offerings of a woman after childbirth and a *zava* **to immersions,** and therefore by Torah law it is sufficient for her to say: I am bringing it for one of them. **And they disagree with regard to** whether **we are concerned for** her **negligence. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri maintains we are concerned for** her **negligence.** In other words, if she says: I am bringing it for one of my obligations, if she gives birth in the following years she might think that she does not need to bring an offering for each birth, and she will neglect to bring an offering. By requiring her to declare: I am bringing the offering for the last definite obligation, the Sages thereby remind her that all her births require offerings. **And Rabbi Akiva maintains we are not concerned for** her **negligence,** and therefore it is sufficient for her to say: I am bringing the offering for one of them.


###### Keritot 8b:3
[Keritot 8b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:3)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ שְׁלֹשִׁים וָשֵׁשׁ **


###### Keritot 8b:4
[Keritot 8b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:4)

מַתְנִי׳ **אַרְבָּעָה** מְחוּסְּרֵי כַּפָּרָה, וְאַרְבָּעָה מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כַּשּׁוֹגֵג.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** There are **four** individuals whose halakhic status is defined as: **Lacking atonement [*khappara*],** which means they had been in a state of ritual impurity and underwent rituals to purify themselves, but since they have not yet brought the requisite atonement offering to complete the purification process, they may not partake of sacrificial meat. **And** there are also **four** individuals who **bring** an offering **for an intentional** transgression in the same manner **as** they do for **an unwitting** transgression.


###### Keritot 8b:5
[Keritot 8b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:5)

וְאֵלּוּ הֵן מְחוּסְּרֵי כַּפָּרָה: הַזָּב, וְהַזָּבָה, וְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת, וְהַמְצוֹרָע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And these are** the four individuals **who lack atonement: The man who experiences a gonorrhea-like discharge [*zav*], the woman who experiences a discharge of uterine blood after her menstrual period [*zava*], the woman after childbirth, and the leper.** In all four of these cases, although the individual has completed all of the other steps of the purification process, the process is not complete until the atonement offering has been brought.


###### Keritot 8b:6
[Keritot 8b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:6)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: גֵּר מְחוּסָּר כַּפָּרָה עַד שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק עָלָיו הַדָּם. נָזִיר – לְיֵינוֹ וְתִגְלַחְתּוֹ וְטוּמְאָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A convert** also **lacks atonement,** even after he has been circumcised and has immersed in a ritual bath, **until** the priest **sprinkles the blood** of his offering on the altar **on his** behalf. **A nazirite** also lacks atonement **with regard to his** permission for drinking **wine, and cutting his hair, and his** exposure to **ritual impurity** imparted by a corpse, until his offerings are sacrificed.


###### Keritot 8b:7
[Keritot 8b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:7)

**גְּמָ׳** שְׁנָא זָב וְזָבָה דְּמָנֵי לְהוֹן בִּתְרֵין – מִשּׁוּם דַּחֲלוּקָהּ טוּמְאָתוֹ, דְּזָב לָא מְטַמֵּא בְּאוֹנֶס וְזָבָה לָא מְטַמְּאָה בִּרְאִיּוֹת בְיָמִים,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna lists four individuals whose status is defined as lacking atonement until their offering is brought: The *zav*, the *zava*, the woman after childbirth, and the leper. The Gemara asks: **What is different** about **a *zav* and a *zava*, that** the *tanna* decided to **count them as two** separate cases? The Gemara answers: They are different **due to** the fact **that the impurity of** a *zav* **is distinct** from that of a *zava*, **as a *zav* does not become impure** if he has a discharge **by accident,** i.e., due to a cause such as an illness or having consumed certain foods, whereas there is no such exemption in the case of a *zava*; **and a *zava*,** unlike a *zav*, **does not become impure by** three **sightings** of menstrual-type blood on one day **like** she becomes impure **by** sightings on three consecutive **days.**


###### Keritot 8b:8
[Keritot 8b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:8)

דתניא: ״מבשרו״ – ולא מחמת אונסו. (ומי טמא) [ומיטמא] בראיות כבימים, דתניא: תלה הכתוב את הזכר בראיות ואת הנקבה בימים. וזבה מטמאה באונס, ולא מטמאה בראיות כבימים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: “When any man has a discharge from his flesh, his discharge is impure” (Leviticus 15:2). The term **“from his flesh”** teaches that the discharge is impure only if it is due to an internal cause, **and not due to his accident. And** furthermore, a *zav* **becomes impure by** three **sightings** of gonorrhea-like discharge on one day **like** he becomes impure **by** three such sightings on three consecutive **days, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **The verse links** the impurity of **the male,** i.e., a *zav*, **to** the number of **sightings** on the same day or on consecutive days, **and** of **the female** *zava* **to** the number of consecutive **days** on which she experiences sightings of blood. **And** by contrast, **a *zava* becomes impure** if she has a discharge **by accident, and does not become impure by** three **sightings** on one day **like** she becomes impure **by** sightings on three consecutive **days.** Therefore, the mishna counts them as two separate cases.


###### Keritot 8b:9
[Keritot 8b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:9)

מְצוֹרָע וּמְצוֹרַעַת נָמֵי חֲלוּקָה טוּמְאָתָן, דִּמְצוֹרָע טָעוּן פְּרִיעָה וּפְרִימָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״בְּגָדָיו יִהְיוּ פְרֻמִים וְרֹאשׁוֹ יִהְיֶה פָרוּעַ״. וְאָסוּר בְּתַשְׁמִישׁ הַמִּטָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: But **the impurities of a male leper and a female leper are also distinct, as a male leper requires letting** his **hair grow wild and rending** his **garments, as it is written: “His garments shall be rent and the hair of his head shall go wild”** (Leviticus 13:45), **and he is prohibited from** engaging in **sexual intercourse.**


###### Keritot 8b:10
[Keritot 8b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:10)

וּמְצוֹרַעַת אֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה פְּרִיעָה וּפְרִימָה, דְּתַנְיָא: אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אִישׁ, אִשָּׁה מִנַּיִן? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וְהַצָּרוּעַ״ – הֲרֵי כָּאן שְׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** by contrast, **a female leper does not require letting** her **hair grow wild and rending** her **garments, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: “He is a leprous man” (Leviticus 13:44): **I have** derived **only** that **a man** can be a leper; **from where** do I derive that **a woman** can also be a leper? **When** the verse **states: “And the leper** in whom the mark is” (Leviticus 13:45), without specifying a man, the verse teaches that **there are two here,** i.e., a man and a woman.


###### Keritot 8b:11
[Keritot 8b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:11)

אִם כֵּן מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִישׁ״? נִתְּקוֹ הַכָּתוּב מֵעִנְיָן שֶׁל מַעְלָה לְעִנְיָן שֶׁל מַטָּה, לוֹמַר: אִישׁ פּוֹרֵעַ וּפוֹרֵם, וְאֵין הָאִשָּׁה פּוֹרַעַת וּפוֹרֶמֶת. וּמוּתֶּרֶת בְּתַשְׁמִישׁ הַמִּטָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְיָשַׁב מִחוּץ לְאׇהֳלוֹ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים״ – וְלֹא מִחוּץ לְאׇהֳלָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* asks: **If so, why** does **the verse state:** “A leprous **man”?** The *baraita* answers: **The verse removed it from the matter** stated **earlier,** and applied it **to the matter** stated **later:** “His garments shall be rent, and the hair of his head shall go wild,” **to say** that **a man** who is a leper **lets his hair grow wild and rends his garments, but the woman** who is a leper **does not** need to **let her hair grow wild and** does not **rend her garments. And** a female leper **is permitted to** engage in **sexual intercourse, as it is stated: “And he shall dwell outside his tent for seven days”** (Leviticus 14:8), **and not: Outside her tent.**


###### Keritot 8b:12
[Keritot 8b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:12)

הִלְכָּךְ נַמְנִינְהוּ בִּתְרֵין! זָב וְזָבָה – עִיקַּר טוּמְאָתָן חֲלוּקָה, מְצוֹרָע וּמְצוֹרַעַת – אֵין עִיקַּר טוּמְאָתָן חֲלוּקָה, הַאי וְהַאי כִּגְרִיס הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now resumes stating its objection: **Therefore, let us count** the male and female leper **as two** separate cases, as the mishna does with regard to the *zav* and *zava*. Why does the mishna not do so? The Gemara explains: With regard to **a *zav* and *zava*,** they are treated as separate cases because the **essence of their impurity is distinct,** as the impurity of a *zav* is based on the number of sightings of discharge, whereas the impurity of a *zava* is based on the number of consecutive days on which she experiences sightings of menstrual-type blood. By contrast, with regard to **a male leper and female leper,** the **essence of their impurity is not distinct,** as in both **this** case of a male leper **and that** case of a female leper, the impurity **is** based on a leprous mark which is at least the area **of a split bean.**


###### Keritot 8b:13
[Keritot 8b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:13)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: גֵּר מְחוּסָּר כּוּ׳. וְתַנָּא קַמָּא, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא תָּנֵי גֵּר? כִּי קָתָנֵי – מִדַּעַם דְּמִישְׁ[תְּ]רֵי לְמֵיכַל בְּקָדָשִׁים, גֵּר – כִּי קָא מַיְיתֵי קׇרְבָּן לְאַכְשׁוֹרֵי נַפְשֵׁיהּ לְמֵיעַל בְּקָהָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A convert** also **lacks** atonement until the priest sprinkles the blood of his offering on the altar on his behalf. The Gemara asks: **And what is the reason** that **the first *tanna* does not** also **teach a convert,** i.e., why does the first *tanna* not include him in the list of individuals lacking atonement? The Gemara answers: **When** the first *tanna* **teaches** those individuals who lack atonement, he includes any **matter where** the atonement offering completes the process of purification and thereby **permits** the individual **to partake of sacrificial** meat. But **when a convert brings** his atonement **offering,** it is **to qualify him to enter the congregation** of Israel through marriage, not to permit him to partake of sacrificial meat.


###### Keritot 8b:14
[Keritot 8b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:14)

וְנָזִיר מַאי טַעְמָא לָא תָּנֵי? סוֹף סוֹף נָזִיר נָמֵי כִּי מַיְיתֵי קׇרְבָּן – לְאִישְׁתְּרוֹיֵי לְמִישְׁתֵּי יַיִן דְּחוּלִּין הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what is the reason** that the first *tanna* also **does not teach** that **a nazirite** lacks atonement? The Gemara answers: **Ultimately, as well, when a nazirite brings** his **offering, it is to permit him to drink non-sacred wine,** not to permit him to partake of sacrificial meat.


###### Keritot 8b:15
[Keritot 8b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:15)

וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּקָתָנֵי נָזִיר לְמִישְׁרֵי נַפְשֵׁיהּ, נִיתְנֵי נָמֵי נָזִיר טָמֵא! כִּי קָא מַיְיתֵי קׇרְבָּן – לְמֵיחַל עֲלֵיהּ נְזִירוּת בְּטָהֳרָה הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **And** according to the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer** ben Ya’akov, **who teaches a nazirite** in the mishna’s list of those who lack atonement, because the nazirite brings his offering in order **to permit himself** to drink wine, **let** him **also teach,** i.e., include in the list, **a ritually impure nazirite.** The Gemara answers: A ritually pure nazirite brings an offering in order to render an action permitted, and therefore Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov considers him lacking atonement. By contrast, **when** a ritually impure nazirite **brings** his **offering, it is** not to render an action permitted, but rather **to effect upon himself** a new period of **naziriteship in purity.**


###### Keritot 8b:16
[Keritot 8b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:16)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: גֵּר מְעוּכָּב לֶאֱכוֹל בְּקָדָשִׁים עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא קִינּוֹ, הֵבִיא פְּרִידָה אַחַת שַׁחֲרִית – אוֹכֵל בְּקָדָשִׁים לָעֶרֶב. כׇּל הַקִּינִּין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה – אֶחָד חַטָּאת וְאֶחָד עוֹלָה, כָּאן – שְׁתֵּיהֶן עוֹלוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to the atonement offering of a convert, **the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: **A convert is precluded from partaking of sacrificial** meat **until he brings his bird nest,** i.e., his offering of a pair of birds, either pigeons or doves. If he **brought one young bird [*perida*]** in the **morning,** he **may partake of sacrificial** meat **in the evening,** and may bring the second bird at a later time. Furthermore, with regard to **all** other cases **in the Torah** where **bird nests** are mandated as offerings, **one** of the birds is brought as **a sin offering and** the other **one** as **a burnt offering;** but **here,** in the case of the convert, **both of them** are **burnt offerings.**


###### Keritot 8b:17
[Keritot 8b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:17)

הֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ מִן הַבְּהֵמָה – יָצָא, עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים – יָצָא, מִנְחָה וּשְׁלָמִים – לֹא יָצָא. לֹא אָמְרוּ קֵן אֶלָּא לְהָקֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: If, instead of birds, the convert **brought** a burnt offering **from an animal** as **his obligatory** offering, he has **fulfilled** his obligation, and if he brought **a burnt offering and a peace offering,** he has also **fulfilled** his obligation; but if he brought **a meal offering and a peace offering,** he **has not fulfilled** his obligation. This is because **a bird nest was stated** in the Torah **only to be lenient** for him. Therefore, if he voluntarily brought an animal, which is more expensive, as a burnt offering, he has fulfilled his obligation.


###### Keritot 8b:18
[Keritot 8b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:18)

מַאי שְׁנָא מִנְחָה וּשְׁלָמִים דְּלֹא יָצָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״כַּאֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשׂוּ כֵּן יַעֲשֶׂה״, מָה אַתֶּם עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים – אַף גֵּר עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is different** about **a meal offering and peace offering, that** if the convert brings these he **has not fulfilled** his obligation? The Gemara answers: It is **as it is written:** “And if a stranger dwell with you, or whosoever may be among you, throughout your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire of a pleasing aroma unto the Lord; **as you do, so he shall do”** (Numbers 15:14). From this verse it is derived: **Just as you** brought **a burnt offering and a peace offering** when you entered the covenant on Mount Sinai, as it is stated: “And they sacrificed burnt offerings, and they sacrificed peace offerings” (Exodus 24:5), **so too, a convert** must bring **a burnt offering and a peace offering.**


###### Keritot 8b:19
[Keritot 8b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:19)

אִם כֵּן, חוֹבָתוֹ אַחַת מִן הַבְּהֵמָה לָא תִּיסְגֵּי עֲלֵיהּ בְּגַוֵּויהּ, דְּהָכְתִיב: ״כַּאֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשׂוּ כֵּן יַעֲשֶׂה״! אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא, יֵשׁ לוֹמַר: לְעוֹף אִיתְרַבִּי, לְעוֹלַת בְּהֵמָה לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **If so,** in a case where he brought **one** offering **from an animal** for **his obligation, that should not be enough for him, as isn’t it written: “As you do, so he shall do,”** which teaches that he must bring both a burnt offering and a peace offering? Why, then, does the *baraita* state that a single burnt offering from an animal is sufficient? **Rav Pappa says:** One **can say** that this is derived from an *a fortiori* inference: **If a bird** offering **was included** as an inexpensive way for a convert to fulfill his obligation, would the Torah **not all the more so** include a more expensive **animal burnt offering?**


###### Keritot 8b:20
[Keritot 8b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:20)

אִי הָכִי, אֲפִילּוּ מִנְחָה נָמֵי! מַיעֵט קְרָא: ״כֵּן״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **If so,** then **even a meal offering** should fulfill the convert’s obligation. The Gemara answers: **The verse restricts** the acceptable offerings, excluding a meal offering, as it states: “Just as you do, **so** he shall do,” meaning that he must not do less than that.


###### Keritot 8b:21
[Keritot 8b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/8b:21)

וָעוֹף הֵיכָא אִיתְרַבִּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״כַּאֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשׂוּ כֵּן יַעֲשֶׂה״ – מָה אַתֶּם עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים, אַף הוּא עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כָּכֶם כַּגֵּר״. מִנַּיִן לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הָעוֹף? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַה׳״ – אֵיזֶה דָּבָר שֶׁכּוּלּוֹ לַה׳? הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר [זוֹ] עוֹלַת הָעוֹף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And where was a bird** offering **included** as an option? The Gemara answers that this is **as the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“As you do, so he shall do”** (Numbers 15:14): **Just as you** entered the covenant with **a burnt offering and a peace offering, so too,** a convert fulfills his obligation with **a burnt offering and a peace offering, as it is stated: “As you are, so** shall **the stranger** be” (Numbers 15:15). **From where** is it derived **to include** the option of **the bird** offering instead of an animal? **The verse states: “An offering made by fire, of a pleasing aroma unto the Lord”** (Numbers 15:14). **Which item is** an offering that is **entirely for the Lord? You must say:** This is referring to **a bird burnt offering,** which is entirely consumed upon the altar.