## Zevachim Daf 67b

###### Zevachim 67b:1
[Zevachim 67b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:1)

תָּא שְׁמַע: חַטָּאת לָזוֹ וְעוֹלָה לָזוֹ;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a challenge to this principle from a mishna in tractate *Kinnim* (24a). A woman after childbirth must bring two bird offerings: A burnt offering and a sin offering. The mishna discusses a case where two women after childbirth, one of whom already brought her burnt offering and one of whom already brought her sin offering, bring their remaining offerings to the Temple, **a sin offering for this one and a burnt offering for that one,** but confusion has arisen as to which bird is which.


###### Zevachim 67b:2
[Zevachim 67b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:2)

עָשָׂה שְׁתֵּיהֶן לְמַעְלָה – מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. שְׁתֵּיהֶן לְמַטָּה – מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. אַחַת לְמַעְלָה וְאַחַת לְמַטָּה – שְׁתֵּיהֶן פְּסוּלוֹת; שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר: חַטָּאת קְרֵבָה לְמַעְלָה, וְעוֹלָה קְרֵבָה לְמַטָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the priest **sacrificed both of them above** the red line, **half** of the birds, i.e., one of them, **is fit,** as in any event the burnt offering has been sacrificed properly, **and half** of the birds, i.e., the other one, **is disqualified.** Likewise, if he sacrificed **both of them below** the red line, **half are fit,** as in any event the sin offering was sacrificed properly, **and half are disqualified.** If he sacrificed **one above** the red line **and one below, they are both disqualified, as I say** that perhaps the **sin offering was sacrificed above, and** the **burnt offering was sacrificed below.**


###### Zevachim 67b:3
[Zevachim 67b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:3)

נְהִי נָמֵי דְּעוֹלָה קְרֵבָה לְמַטָּה, תִּימְשׁוֹךְ וְתֶהֱוֵי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
But according to Rav Adda bar Ahava’s explanation of Rabbi Yehoshua’s principle, the sin offering should be deemed fit in any event; **even** though the **burnt offering was indeed sacrificed below** the red line, **it should be removed** from its status as a burnt offering **and become a bird sin offering.**


###### Zevachim 67b:4
[Zevachim 67b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:4)

אֵימוֹר דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ – בְּחַד גַּבְרָא; בִּתְרֵי גַבְרֵי מִי אָמַר?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this claim: It is reasonable to **say that Rabbi Yehoshua stated** his principle **with regard to one person,** whose offering the priest sacrificed below the red line instead of above it; but **did he state** it **with regard to two people,** one of whose offering the priest sacrificed for the sake of the other person? In the case of the two women, the priest sacrificed the offering for the sake of a different person altogether, and Rabbi Yehoshua would concede that such an offering does not become a sin offering.


###### Zevachim 67b:5
[Zevachim 67b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: חַטָּאת וְעוֹלָה, וּסְתוּמָה, וּמְפוֹרֶשֶׁת –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** another challenge from a mishna in tractate *Kinnim* (24a). The mishna discusses a case of two women who jointly brought three pairs of birds, as follows: The birds of one pair were designated as **a sin offering and a burnt offering** respectively, but it was not specified which woman’s obligation they were to satisfy; **and** the second pair was **unspecified** as to which bird was to be which offering; **and** the third pair was **specified** as to both the type of offering of each bird and whose obligation each bird was to satisfy.


###### Zevachim 67b:6
[Zevachim 67b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:6)

עָשָׂה כּוּלָּן לְמַעְלָה – מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. כּוּלָּן לְמַטָּה – מֶחֱצָה כָּשֵׁר וּמֶחֱצָה פָּסוּל. חֶצְיָין לְמַעְלָה וְחֶצְיָין לְמַטָּה – אֵינָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה אֶלָּא סְתוּמָה, וּמִתְחַלֶּקֶת בֵּינֵיהֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the priest **sacrificed all of them above** the red line, **half** of the birds **are fit,** as in any event the burnt offerings have been sacrificed properly, **and half are disqualified.** Likewise, if he sacrificed **all of them below** the red line, **half are fit,** as in any event the sin offerings were sacrificed properly, **and half are disqualified.** If he sacrificed **half of** every pair **above** the red line **and half of** it **below,** but it is unclear which bird he sacrificed above and which he sacrificed below, **only** the **unspecified** pair is **fit,** as by sacrificing one above and one below the priest has in effect designated them. **And** since the women brought the birds jointly, the fit pair **is divided between them,** one bird counting toward the obligation of each woman.


###### Zevachim 67b:7
[Zevachim 67b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:7)

וְאִילּוּ מְפוֹרָשִׁין – לָא; וְאַמַּאי? נְהִי נָמֵי דְּעוֹלָה קְרֵבָה לְמַטָּה, תִּימְשׁוֹךְ וְתִיהְוֵי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches that only the unspecified pair is fit, **while** the **specified** birds are **not,** as perhaps each bird was sacrificed on the wrong side of the red line and disqualified. **But why** should that be the *halakha*? According to Rav Adda bar Ahava’s explanation of Rabbi Yehoshua’s principle, **even** if the **burnt offering was indeed sacrificed below** the red line, **it should be removed** from its status as a burnt offering **and become a bird sin offering.**


###### Zevachim 67b:8
[Zevachim 67b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:8)

וְכִי תֵּימָא הָא דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ – וּמִי מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ הָכִי?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that **this** mishna **is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua, how can you say that?**


###### Zevachim 67b:9
[Zevachim 67b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:9)

תָּא שְׁמַע, הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה: ״הֲרֵי עָלַי קֵן אִם אֵלֵד זָכָר״; יָלְדָה זָכָר – מְבִיאָה שְׁתֵּי קִינִּים, אַחַת לְנִדְרָהּ וְאַחַת לְחוֹבָתָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **Come** and **hear** evidence that the *mishnayot* in tractate *Kinnim* are in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua from another mishna in the same chapter (24b): The mishna discusses the case of **a woman who said: It** is incumbent **upon me** to bring **one nest,** i.e., one pair of bird offerings, **if I give birth to a male** child. Since all women who give birth must bring one pair of birds in any event, if **she** ultimately **gave birth to a male, she must bring two nests, one for her vow and one for her obligation.**


###### Zevachim 67b:10
[Zevachim 67b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:10)

נְתָנָתַן לַכֹּהֵן – הַכֹּהֵן צָרִיךְ לַעֲשׂוֹתָן שָׁלֹשׁ לְמַעְלָה וְאַחַת לְמַטָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **she gave them to the priest** without specifying which bird is to be which type of offering, **the priest must sacrifice three above** the red line **and one below.** This is because the obligatory pair must consist of a burnt offering and a sin offering, while a pair of birds brought to fulfill a vow must consist of two burnt offerings.


###### Zevachim 67b:11
[Zevachim 67b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:11)

לֹא עָשָׂה כֵּן, אֶלָּא עָשָׂה שְׁתַּיִם לְמַעְלָה וּשְׁתַּיִם לְמַטָּה, וְלֹא נִמְלַךְ – צְרִיכָה שֶׁתָּבִיא עוֹד פְּרֵידָה אַחַת, וְתַקְרִיבֶנָּה לְמַעְלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the priest **did not do so,** but **rather,** thinking that both pairs were obligatory, **sacrificed two above and two below, and** he **did not consult** the woman before sacrificing them, **she must bring one more bird [*perida*] and sacrifice it above** the red line to satisfy her remaining obligation.


###### Zevachim 67b:12
[Zevachim 67b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:12)

מִמִּין אֶחָד. וּמִשְּׁנֵי מִינִין – תָּבִיא שְׁתַּיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is the *halakha* only if both pairs were **of the same species** of bird, either doves or pigeons; **but** if the two pairs were **of two** different **species,** and the priest does not remember which pair he sacrificed first, **she must bring two** more birds, one of each species. Whichever pair was sacrificed first is deemed the obligatory pair, and the woman must bring a bird of the other species to satisfy her remaining obligation of a burnt offering. But since it is not known which species of bird that is, she must bring one of each.


###### Zevachim 67b:13
[Zevachim 67b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:13)

פֵּרְשָׁה נִדְרָהּ – [צְרִיכָה] לְהָבִיא עוֹד שָׁלֹשׁ פְּרֵידִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the woman initially **specified** which species of bird she would bring for **her vow** but subsequently forgot what species she specified, and she then brought two pairs of a single species, and the priest mistakenly sacrificed two birds above the red line and two below, then **she must bring three more birds,** all as burnt offerings. One must be of the species she brought, to replace the bird mistakenly sacrificed below, and the other two must be of the other species, in case that was the species she specified in the first place.


###### Zevachim 67b:14
[Zevachim 67b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:14)

מִמִּין אֶחָד. וּמִשְּׁנֵי מִינִין – תָּבִיא אַרְבַּע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is the *halakha* only if both pairs that she brought were **of the same species. But** if they were **of two** different **species,** and the priest does not remember which pair he sacrificed first, **she must bring four,** two of each species. This is because no matter which species she specified, the priest may have sacrificed the pair of that species first, leaving none of that species to satisfy even part of her vow. She therefore may still need to satisfy an entire vow of either species.


###### Zevachim 67b:15
[Zevachim 67b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Zevachim/r/67b:15)

קָבְעָה נִדְרָהּ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: If, besides forgetting which species of bird she specified to bring for her vow, the woman also **committed** to sacrificing the birds of **her vow** together with the burnt offering of the obligatory pair, but the priest mistakenly sacrificed two birds above the red line and two below,