Temurah Chart #8
Chart for Temurah Daf 32b
IS HA'AMADAH V'HA'ARACHAH REQUIRED
IN ORDER TO REDEEM THIS TYPE OF KODSHIM (1)
| (A) KODSHEI MIZBE'ACH |
(B) KODSHEI BEDEK HABAYIS |
(C) BA'AL MUM ME'IKARA SHE'HEKDISHO LA'MIZBE'ACH |
||
| 1 | RABANAN | R. Yochanan: Yes Reish Lakish: No |
Yes | No (2) |
| 2 | REBBI SHIMON | Yes | No | No |
| 3 | TANA D'VEI LEVI | Yes (3) | Yes (4) | Yes |
==========
FOOTNOTES:
==========
(1) Where Ha'amadah v'Ha'arachah are not needed, one may redeem blemished animals (Ba'alei Mumin) that died. Unblemished animals (Temimim), however, by rabbinical decree may not be redeemed if they died, even if they were sanctified only for Bedek ha'Bayis (Temurah 33b).
(2) His source is the verse, "Osah" (Vayikra 27:12). The reason appears for this appears to be as follows. Since it was a Ba'al Mum before it was sanctified for the Mizbe'ach, it stands to be redeemed, because it is impossible to offer it the way it is. If, however, it wassanctified first and then became blemished, it was originally fit to be offered upon the Mizbe'ach and thus it requires Ha'amadah v'Ha'arachah. Similarly, objects that were sanctified for Bedek ha'Bayis, which may be used by Hekdesh in their present form and may not be redeemed, require Ha'amadah v'Ha'arachah. (M. KORNFELD)
(3) This is inferred from the fact that he says that a Ba'al Mum that was blemished before it was sanctified for the Mizbe'ach requires Ha'amadah v'Ha'arachah.
(4) This is inferred from his use of the word, "ha'Kol." However, this requires further elucidation. (M. KORNFELD)