Bava Kamma - Daf 77
- כל העומד לפדות כפדוי דמי (re: tumah of פרה אדומה)
The Gemara provides the source that Rebbe Shimon holds כל העומד לפדות כפדוי דמי – anything which stands to be redeemed is considered like it is already redeemed. Rebbe Shimon taught in a Baraisa: פרה מטמא טומאת אוכלין – the meat of a shechted parah [adumah] conveys food-tumah, although it is prohibited in benefit, הואיל והיתה לה שעת הכושר – since it had a moment of fitness, i.e., there was a moment after shechitah when it was (considered) permitted in consumption. Reish Lakish explains the “moment of fitness” based on Rebbe Shimon’s ruling: פרה נפדית ע"ג מערכתה – a parah [adumah] may be redeemed [after shechitah] upon its pyre. Although it was shechted properly, if a nicer cow was found, Rebbe Shimon holds the first could be redeemed, becoming chullin and permitted in consumption. Although this did not actually take place, its potential for redemption renders it susceptible to tumah, proving that Rebbe Shimon holds כל העומד לפדות כפדוי דמי.
- ד' וה' for shechting where selling would not be liable, or the reverse
On Daf 76a, Rebbe Yochanan said that a thief pays ד' וה' for shechting someone’s valid korban in the Mikdash. Reish Lakish disagrees, because the passuk says "וטבחו [או] מכרו" – and he shechts or sells it, comparing the two acts. This teaches that ד' וה' is only paid for shechting where it would be paid for selling it, וכל היכא דליתיה במכירה ליתיה בטביחה – but wherever it is not subject to the penalty of ד' וה' for selling, it is not subject to ד' וה' for shechting. Since it is impossible to sell a korban, a thief is not liable for ד' וה' if he shechts the korban. These Amoraim followed their opinions in a reverse case: המוכר טריפה – if [a thief] sells a tereifah (which cannot be eaten, even when shechted), according to Rebbe Shimon’s opinion that a shechitah which does not permit consumption does not constitute shechitah, Rebbe Yochanan says he is liable to ד' וה', אף על גב דליתיה בטביחה איתיה במכירה – for although it is not subject to [ד' וה' for] shechitah, it is still subject to [ד' וה' for] selling. Reish Lakish says that since he would be exempt for shechting it, he is also exempt for selling it.
- The source that a crossbreed is subject to ד' וה' is from the word “או”
A Baraisa taught that one who steals and shechts כלאים – a crossbreed (between a goat and a sheep) pays ד' וה'. The Gemara asks that the passuk uses the word “seh,” and Rava taught: כל מקום שנאמר שה אינו אלא להוציא את הכלאים – wherever the word “seh” is stated, it is only to exclude a crossbreed. Why, then, would a thief pay ד' וה' for shechting a crossbreed? It answers that the extra word "או" (in “an ox ‘or’ a seh”) includes a crossbreed. The Gemara asks that that the word "או" in "שור או כשב" – a cow or a lamb excludes a crossbreed from being used as a korban, so why is "או" used here to include a crossbreed for ד' וה'? Rava explains that each passuk is darshened according to context. In the passuk of ד' וה', the word "או" is written between an ox and a seh, which cannot be crossbred, so a crossbreed of a sheep and goat would not have been included on its own. Therefore, the extra "או" is darshened to include a crossbreed. Regarding korbanos, where "או" is written between a sheep and a goat, which can interbreed, a crossbreed would have been included on its own, so "או" excludes it.
