QUESTION: The Mishnah says that if one finds money between the donation box of money designated to be used as Shekalim (to buy the public offerings) and the donation box of money designated to be used as Nedavos (to buy Olos for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach), that money goes to Nedavah out of doubt.

The Gemara asks why that money does not go to Shekalim. The KORBAN HA'EDAH explains that the Gemara's question is that since the laws of money used for Shekalim are more strict ("Chamur") than the laws of money used for Nedavah, the money should go to Shekalim. (The Korban ha'Edah explains that the money for Shekalim is more Chamur because it is used for Korbanos which must be offered at a set time.)

The Gemara gives two answers. First, the Gemara says that the money in doubt does not go to Shekalim in this case because it is not certain that it will be used for Korbanos at all; it might be left over and go to Sheyarei ha'Lishkah instead, which is used to fix the city's walls. Second, the Gemara says that if the money is found between the two boxes, it is considered like the money of "one who died" ("k'Mi she'Mes"), and therefore the money goes to Nedavah.

What does the Gemara's second answer mean? Why is the money that is found compared to the money of one who died, and why does such money go to Nedavah?

(a) The text of the Gemara of RABEINU MESHULAM reads "k'Mi she'Mishtayerah" -- the money that is found between the boxes is considered as if it was left over. The law is that when there are Korbenos Tamid that were purchased but not used, they are offered as Olos for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach (11b). The money that is in doubt is treated like leftover Temidin (since it will not be used, but left over, out of doubt) and is used for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach.

(b) The text of the Gemara of the TALMID SHEL RABEINU SHMUEL BAR SHNEUR reads "k'Mi she'Mis'ameh" -- the money is treated as though it was money of Shekalim that became mixed together with the money of Nedavah. ("Mis'ameh" comes from the word "Te'um," or twin. This term implies that it became mixed with the money that is used entirely for one type of Korban, i.e. money designated for Nedavos, which are offered as Olos.) Still, however, why should the money be used for Nedavah? If the laws of Shekalim are more strict, then the money should go to Shekalim.

The Talmid Shel Rabeinu Shmuel bar Shneur explains that the Gemara never actually thought that Nedavah is less strict. Rather, it knew all along that Nedavah is more strict than Shekalim (because the Korbanos of Nedavah are completely consumed by the Mizbe'ach). The Gemara's question is merely whether there is another reason why the money should go to Nedavah, other than the reason that Nedavah is more strict. The Gemara answers (in its second answer) that there is no other reason; the reason why the money goes to Nedavah is because the laws of Nedavah are more strict. It is comparable to a mixture of two types of money, in which case all of the money is treated like the more stringent type (which, in this case, is Nedavah).

This explanation is consistent with the RAMBAM's explanation (in Perush ha'Mishnayos). The Rambam writes that Nedavah is certainly more strict than Shekalim, because all of the money of Nedavah is used for Olos which are burned completely, while some of the money of Shekalim is used for Shelamim which are not burned completely.

In fact, the Rambam might have had the same Girsa as the Talmid Shel Rabeinu Shmuel bar Shneur, and perhaps he based his explanation on that Girsa. "K'Mi she'Mis'ameh" may mean that the money is used for the type that is all "equal" -- that is, the type of donation which is used entirely for one type of Korban, which is Nedavos (which are all offered as Olos), as opposed to Shekalim (some of which are brought as Chata'os Tzibur). The Gemara, therefore, concludes that Nedavah is more strict.

(c) The text of the Gemara of RABEINU SHLOMO SIRILIYO is the same as our text ("k'Mi she'Mes"). He explains that the money in doubt is used for Nedavah just as it is used for Nedavah in the case of a person who contributed money to the Shekalim and then died. In that case, the money is considered ownerless and may not be placed together with the rest of the Shekalim, because the money of the Shekalim must come from the original contributor, and not from public funds or from Hefker. Similarly, in the case of money found between the collection boxes, the money outside of the box of Shekalim may not be placed back into the Shekalim box, because it will not be the original owner who places it there. It is like money that has no owner.

According to this explanation, the Gemara assumes that the money found between the boxes is not money that was placed into one of the boxes and fell out, but rather it is money that fell onto the floor before it was placed into a box. It is considered like the money of one who died in that it cannot be given to Shekalim by anyone other than its owner. (See the commentary of Har Efraim there.)

(d) RAV CHAIM KANIEVSKY suggests an original explanation for the Girsa of our text of the Gemara. He explains the reason why, when a person dies before his Shekel is placed in the Lishkah, his Shekel is not placed with the other Shekalim but is used for a public Nedavah (Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach). The Shekel must be given by one who is obligated to give it, and a dead person is not obligated. Therefore, even if the money of Shekalim is more strict than the money of Nedavah, the money found between the boxes does not go to Shekalim. If it actually fell from the Nedavah box, giving it to the Shekalim box would be tantamount to giving it to Shekalim as a voluntary donation, and one is not permitted to give a voluntary donation to the Shekalim. Therefore, the money goes to Nedavah.