Mishnah Keritot 2:1-2

Sugya Map

• Issue

  Defining "מחוסר כפרה" (lacking atonement) – who is included in this distinct category, and what specific halakhic impediments does their requisite korban impose?

• Nafka Mina(s)

  Eligibility to partake in Kodshim (sacred foods/offerings); the conceptual completion of giyur (conversion); and the practical halakha for gerim and nezirim in a post-Churban reality.

• Primary Sources

  Mishnah Keritot 2:1-2; Vayikra 12:6-8 (Yoledet), 15:13-15 (Zav), 15:28-30 (Zava); Bamidbar 6:10-12 (Nazir Tamei).

Text Snapshot

• "ארבעה מחוסרי כפורים... הזב והזבה והיולדת והמצורע" (M. Keritot 2:1). These four individuals, having completed their days of purity and immersed, still require a korban for full taharah to consume kodshim.
• "רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר גר מחוסר כיפורין עד שיזרק עליו הדם" (M. Keritot 2:1). R' Eliezer ben Yaakov (REBY) expands this list to include the ger.
• "ונזיר ליינו ותגלחתו וטומאתו" (M. Keritot 2:1). REBY also includes the nazir, whose korban impedes drinking wine, shaving, and contracting tum'ah.

• Dikduk/Leshon

  The Mishnah's opening with a definitive minyan ("ארבעה") for Tanna Kamma (TK) signals a deliberate exclusion of REBY's additions, implying a substantive disagreement on the very definition of "מחוסר כפרה."

Readings

• Rambam, Peirush haMishnayot, Keritot 2:1:1

  The Rambam explains TK's "מחוסרי כפרה" as those whose korban specifically impedes their ability to eat kodshim. REBY, however, broadens the category to any individual whose korban is me'akev (impedes) the completion of any significant religious status or privilege (e.g., a nazir's ability to drink wine).

• Tosafot Rabbi Akiva Eiger (TRAE), Keritot 2:1:2 (on Ra'av d.h. גר מחוסר)

  TRAE offers a masterful terutz, suggesting the TK-REBY machloket on the ger may not be l'dinah (in practical halakha), but rather conceptual. Both agree the ger cannot eat kodshim before the korban. However, TK excludes the ger from the category of "מחוסרי כפרה" because his korban isn't a kappara for tum'ah (like the others), but rather a haskama (completion) for full integration as "ככשרי ישראל" (qualified Israelites).

Friction

If, as TRAE suggests, both TK and REBY agree that a ger cannot eat kodshim before bringing his korban, why does the Mishnah's TK explicitly state "ארבעה," thereby excluding the ger? What is the force of this numerical specificity if the practical outcome is the same?

Terutz

The minyan is not a rejection of the ger's inability to eat kodshim pre-korban, but a precise categorization. TK's "מחוסרי כפרה" are those whose korban atonement completes their tum'ah purification. The ger's korban, while necessary for full kedusha access, is not an atonement in the same sense, but a final step of haskama to his new status (TRAE, ad loc.). Thus, the ger is not lacking atonement from a prior tum'ah, but rather lacking completion of his giyur for the highest levels of holiness.

Intertext

The sugya in Nazir 18b (cited by Rashash, Keritot 2:1:2) debates whether a nazir tamei begins counting his days of purity before his korban. This mirrors the conceptual ikuv discussion: does the korban merely finalize a status, or is it a prerequisite for the status itself to truly begin?

Psak/Practice

The halakha generally follows TK, not REBY (Rambam, Peirush haMishnayot, Keritot 2:1:1). This resonates powerfully today: post-Churban, the korban ger is suspended, yet the ger is fully Jewish. This aligns with TK's understanding that the korban is not me'akev for the essence of giyur, only for the highest level of kedusha (eating kodshim), which is currently unavailable.

Takeaway

The precise definition of "מחוסר כפרה" is not merely semantic; it illuminates different theological functions of korbanot – some providing expiation for tum'ah, others serving as an essential haskama for the completion of a religious status.