Bava Kamma 78B

דאיעבר מקלוט, כרבי שמעון.

that the mother animal became impregnated from an animal with non-cloven hooves that was born from a kosher mother and father. This is in accordance with the opinion of R' Shimon, who maintains that the offspring resulting from this, which does not have cloven hooves, is not kosher. Since the animal’s father is not kosher according to the opinion of R' Shimon, the offspring is also not kosher, in accordance with Rava’s principle.

בעי רבא: ״הרי עלי עולה״, והפריש שור, ובא אחר וגנב; מי פטר גנב נפשיה בכבש ⁠– לרבנן, בעולת העוף ⁠– לרבי אלעזר בן עזריה? דתנן: ״הרי עלי עולה״⁠ – יביא כבש. רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר: יביא תור או בן יונה.

Rava raises a dilemma: With regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a burnt-offering, and he subsequently set aside a bull for this purpose, and another person came and stole the bull, can the thief exempt himself from liability by repaying the owner with a sheep, according to the opinion of the Rabbis, or by repaying him with a bird to be used as a bird burnt-offering, according to the opinion of R' Elazar ben Azarya? This is as we learned in a Mishnah (Menaḥot 107a): If one says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a burnt-offering, he must bring a bull or a sheep as a burnt-offering to fulfill his vow. R' Elazar ben Azarya says: He may even bring a turtledove or a young pigeon as a burnt-offering.

מאי? מי אמרינן: שם עולה קביל עילויה; או דלמא, מצי אמר ליה: אנא מצוה מן המובחר בעינא למיעבד?

Rava elaborates: What is the halakha in this case? Do we say that he accepted upon himself to sacrifice an animal with the status of a burnt-offering, in which case any animal that fulfills this requirement will suffice? If so, the thief may compensate the owner with a sheep or bird, as the owner can sacrifice that animal as a burnt-offering. Or perhaps the owner can say to the thief: I want to perform the mitzva in the optimal manner, which is by sacrificing a bull. Therefore, you must pay me back with a bull.