REVACH L'DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
daf@dafyomi.co.il http://www.dafyomi.co.il
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
| TEMURAH 27 (14 Av 5779) - Dedicated by Rabbi Kornfeld and family in honor of the marriage of his daughter Sarah to David Tzvi Formal. May they build together a Bayis Ne'eman b'Yisrael, raising children and grandchildren to a life of Torah and Yir'as Shamayim! |
|
|
SUMMARY
1. When a person makes a statement that may or may not mean that he is making a Temurah, there are strong grounds to assume that he is not making a Temurah.
2. There is a dispute about whether one may redeem Hekdesh for much less than its value.
3. If someone says, "This animal is instead of an Olah/Chatas," he has not said anything.
4. If someone proclaims about an animal with a blemish or about a non-kosher animal, "This is an Olah," he has not done anything.
5. The previous cases (#4 and #5) are unlike the opinion of Rebbi Meir.
|
A BIT MORE
1. Since one who makes a Temurah transgresses at least one Torah prohibition, it is logical to assume that the person did not intend to sin and therefore did not make a Temurah.
2. Shmuel says that Hekdesh may be redeemed for much less than its value (although when this may be done is subject to dispute). Rav Chisda says that one cannot redeem Hekdesh for less than its actual value.
3. It must be clear that he is speaking about a specific Olah or Chatas. Accordingly, if he says, "This animal is instead of this Olah/Chatas," or even, "This animal is instead of the animal I have in my house (which is an Olah/Chatas)," the Temurah is valid.
4. However, if he says, "This should be for an Olah," the animal should be sold and the proceeds used to offer an Olah.
5. Rebbi Meir maintains that a person always says things for a reason. Accordingly, even though the person's statement was said incorrectly, it must be that his intent was to dedicate the animals, and therefore his statement is valid.
|
Next Daf
Index to Revach for Maseches Temurah
|
