Bava Kamma - Daf 110
- Kohanim fit for avodah but not eating (e.g., זקן) can appoint another to do avodah but not to eat
The Baraisa from the previous Daf concludes: ואם היה זקן או חולה – If the Kohen bringing his korban was old or sick, נותנה לכל כהן שירצה – he may give it to any Kohen he wishes to sacrifice (even not from the current mishmar), ועבודתה ועורה לאנשי משמר – and the reward for its service (its meat) and its hide are given to the men of the current mishmar. Rav Pappa explains the case is שיכול לעשות על ידי הדחק – where he is able to perform [the avodah and eating] with difficulty. Avodah done with difficulty is valid, so he may also appoint another Kohen. Eating with difficulty is not valid, since it is considered אכילת גסה – excessive eating, so the meat and hide are given to the current mishmar. Rav Sheishess applied the same law to a Kohen tamei who had a קרבן צבור – communal offering to bring. The Gemara explains that no tahor Kohanim were available, so the קרבן צבור can be sacrificed by this Kohen tamei, and he may appoint anyone. He cannot eat it, so it is given to tahor בעלי מום from the mishmar, who may eat it. Rav Ashi applied the same law to a Kohen Gadol אונן (mourner whose relative died that day), who is fit for avodah, but not eating.
- "אשם" זה קרן re: גזל הגר and returning at night
The next Mishnah teaches the law that if one robs a גר (and swears in denial), who dies without heirs, he pays the principal and חומש to Kohanim. A Baraisa darshens: "אשם" זה קרן – the word “asham” in the passuk refers to the principal of the robbery (not the korban), "המושב" זה חומש – and “that is returned” refers to the חומש surcharge. This is the source for Rava’s ruling: גזל הגר שהחזירו בלילה – the robbery of a convert which [the robber] returned to Kohanim at night, לא יצא – he did not fulfill his obligation. החזירו חצאין לא יצא – If he returned it in halves, he did not fulfill his obligation. Since the payment is called “asham,” it shares its laws not to be brought at night, nor by halves. Since the principal is called “asham” (and not the חומש), only the principal payment holds back his atonement, but the חומש does not. Rava also taught that if the principal amount is insufficient to give a perutah’s worth to every Kohen in the mishmar, he does not fulfill his obligation, because the payment is described as "המושב" – returned, teaching: עד שיהא השבה לכל כהן וכהן – until there is a “return” to each and every Kohen.
- כהנים בגזל הגר יורשין הוו או מקבלי מתנות הוו
Rava asked: כהנים בגזל הגר – Regarding Kohanim receiving the robbed property of a convert, יורשין הוו או מקבלי מתנות הוו – are they considered like the convert’s heirs, or the recipients of gifts from Hashem? The Gemara explains the practical difference is where chametz was stolen, which became worthless after Pesach. If they are heirs, they would “inherit” the worthless chametz, and the robber may give it to them (like he may return it to the original owner). If they are gift recipients, he must give them something of value. Rebbe Zeira said that the chametz could be given to Kohanim even if they are considered gift recipients, because this is the “gift” that the Torah said to give them. Rather, the practical difference would pertain to מעשר בהמה. If a Kohen received ten animals as a convert’s robbery payment, then if he is an heir, they would be obligated in מעשר בהמה. If he is a gift recipient, he is exempt, because gifts are exempt from מעשר בהמה. A Baraisa lists the robbed property of a convert as one of the twenty-four מתנות כהונה – gifts of Kohanim, proving they are considered gifts.
