Study Meilah folio 11A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
ואם עד שלא כיפרו הבעלים – תרעה עד שתסתאב, ותמכר ויקחו בדמיה אחרת. ועושה תמורה, ומועלין בה.
And if the animal whose year passed was found before the owner achieved atonement, the found animal should graze until it becomes blemished [shetista’ev], at which point it may not be sacrificed; and it should be sold and the owner should purchase another animal with the money received from its sale. The animal that was found blemished may be sold immediately, and the owner should purchase another animal with the money received from its sale. In both cases, the animal renders a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute, and one who derives benefit from it is liable for misusing it.
Talmud: The Mishnah first groups together 3 cases of sin offerings that are left to die, after which it discusses the other two as another group. The Talmud asks: What is different about the 3 cases in the first clause that the Mishnah does not distinguish between whether or not the owner has achieved atonement, and what is different about the latter clause that the Mishnah does distinguish between cases where the owner has and has not achieved atonement?
רישא – פסיקא ליה, סיפא – לא פסיקא ליה.
The Talmud answers: The 3 cases of sin offerings discussed in the first clause are absolute, i.e., the halakha is the same whether or not the owner has achieved atonement. By contrast, the cases of the other two sin offerings discussed in the latter clause are not absolute, as their status depends on whether or not their owner achieved atonement by means of another offering.
הא תנא ליה גבי תמורה! תנא התם משום תמורה, תנא הכא משום מעילה.
The Talmud asks: Didn’t the Mishnah teach this same halakha verbatim in connection with the topic of substitution, in tractate Temura (21b)? Why is it repeated here? The Talmud answers: It is taught there, in Temura, because it discusses the halakhot of substitution, and it is taught again here in tractate Me’ila because it discusses the halakhot of misuse.