Kerisos 5:2-3

Krisos 5:2

For doubtful misappropriation, Rabbi Akiva obligates one to bring a conditional guilt offering, though the Sages exempt. Rabbi Akiva agrees with the Sages that one need not pay for the misappropriation until it is clear that he did indeed violate, at which point he brings it with a definite guilt offering. Rabbi Tarfon asked why this person should have to bring two guilt offerings. Rather, he should just repay the misappropriation plus the extra fifth and bring a guilt offering worth two sela, saying that if he did commit misappropriation, this is his repayment and his guilt offering but if it’s in doubt, the money is a donation and the sacrifice is a conditional guilt offering. This is a viable course of action because one brings the same kind of offering for each of these things.

Krisos 5:3

Rabbi Akiva said that Rabbi Tarfon’s plan makes sense in the case of a minor misappropriation but in the case of doubtfully misappropriating something worth 100 maneh (i.e., 10,000 zuz), one would certainly rather bring a guilt offering worth two sela than pay for doubtfully misappropriating something worth 100 maneh! Accordingly, Rabbi Akiva agrees with Rabbi Tarfon in the case of a minor misappropriation. Let’s say that a woman brought a bird sin offering because of a doubtful miscarriage. If it became certain before the bird’s head is nipped, she should offer it as a definite sin offering because the same type of offering is brought for both the doubtful and the definite.