Temurah 23 - 28
- The lost sacrificial animal
- The lost money designated for purchase of a sacrifice
- The charity receptacles in the Beit Hamikdash
- The sin offerings which cannot be offered
- Consecrating an unborn first-child as a sacrifice
- Consecrating mother and unborn child
- Is an unborn child considered a part of the mother
- Conflicting designations made by the owner
- The terminology which makes an exchange effective
- Redeeming sacred property for less than its value
- The categories of animals which cannot be sacrificed
Mother and Child
Is the unborn child considered an integral part of the mother or a separate entity?
This question arises in regard to a situation in which a man designates a pregnant animal as a chatat sin offering. In regard to the child that is subsequently born, we must consider what status it has, since it became consecrated along with its mother.
There is a halacha stated in Mishnah Temurah (21b) that the child of a chatat cannot be offered as a sacrifice but must be allowed to perish. In regard to our present case, however, Rabbi Yochanan rules that the owner of the animal can use for his atonement either the mother or the child.
The reason for this is that in contrast to the situation of the Mishnah in which the mother was designated as a sacrifice and subsequently became pregnant, the pregnancy occurred before the designation. The owner, therefore, had the option of consecrating the mother alone, and if he chooses to designate both mother and child it is considered as if he designated two separate animals and can therefore use either one of them for his atonement.
This reasoning, of course, is based on the concept that the unborn child is not considered an integral part of the mother, a concept that has many ramifications throughout the Talmud.
- Temurah 25a
What the Sages Say
"An unborn child is not considered an integral part of the mother."
- Rabbi Yochanan - Temurah 25a
