We are now learning chapter 5, mishnah 4. The next five mishnayos are all structured in a single format: two pieces of food with different halachic statuses, and three cases that repeat in each of them:
Case 1: Reuven ate one of the pieces and does not know which of them he ate.
Case 2: Reuven ate both pieces.
Case 3: Reuven ate one piece and Shimon ate the second piece.
The two pieces in our mishnah:
Before us are two pieces of meat: one is chullin meat, meaning regular kosher meat that poses no problem to eat; and the second is kodesh, which has the status of hekdesh, and therefore one who eats it commits me'ilah and is obligated to bring an asham me'ilos.
We must preface with the principle explained in the previous mishnah: according to Rabbi Akiva, one who is in doubt whether he became obligated to bring an asham me'ilos or not - brings an asham taluy. According to the Sages, and this is the halachah, an asham taluy is only brought in cases where a person may become obligated to bring a chatas.
It is worth remembering that in all these cases, the discussion of chatas and asham offerings applies to someone who committed the transgression inadvertently. A person who knew what he was doing at the time of the act does not come to a chatas offering at all. Therefore, we are dealing here with someone who ate thinking that the food was kosher and permitted.
Case 1 - He ate one of the pieces:
Reuven ate one of the two pieces and does not know which of them he ate: perhaps he did nothing wrong, and perhaps he committed me'ilah. According to the Tanna Kamma, who holds like the opinion of the Sages, "patur" - he is exempt. As long as there is no certain knowledge that me'ilah was committed, he is not required to do anything. And Rabbi Akiva disagrees, consistent with his view in the previous mishnah: since it is possible he became obligated to bring an asham me'ilos and possible not, he brings an asham taluy in its place.
Case 2 - He ate both pieces:
Reuven then ate the second piece as well, and it too was eaten inadvertently, without his knowing that there was a prohibited item on the table. Here it is clear to us that he ate the kodesh, and thus committed me'ilah, and therefore he brings a definite asham - an asham me'ilos.
Case 3 - Reuven and Shimon:
Reuven ate one piece and Shimon ate the second, and neither of them knows which piece he ate: perhaps Reuven committed me'ilah and perhaps not, and the same goes for Shimon. Regarding this we learned: "zeh mevi asham taluy ve'zeh mevi asham taluy, divrei Rabbi Akiva" - this one brings an asham taluy and this one brings an asham taluy, the words of Rabbi Akiva - each of them is in doubt whether he committed me'ilah, and therefore it falls upon him to bring an asham taluy in the meantime.
The Tanna Kamma did not state his opinion here, but according to his view, the law is identical to the first case: both Reuven and Shimon are in doubt whether they transgressed or not, and therefore they do not bring anything. And this is the halachah.
Rabbi Shimon adds and argues: Between these two people, one of them certainly ate the consecrated food, and it turns out that one of them committed me'ilah. Although it is unknown which one it is, the certainty that one of them is liable exists, and therefore they bring one asham together. How? They jointly purchase the ram for the asham and bring it conditionally: Reuven says, if I am the one who ate the consecrated food - this is my me'ilah asham and it takes effect for me, and if not - I hereby relinquish my ownership and it shall belong to Shimon; and Shimon says the same thing. And with this, they fulfill the obligation of the asham.
Rabbi Yosi disagrees and makes the obvious point: the two of them do not bring one asham. There is no such thing as bringing an asham and confessing to the sin when a person does not know the specific sin he committed, as we have already learned. Therefore, even though we know that me'ilah was committed between the two of them, neither of them knows for certain that he is the one who committed it. Therefore, they cannot bring a definite asham, nor do they bring an asham talui - they bring nothing at all. And this is the halachah.
In summary: In this Mishnah we observed the format of the next five Mishnayos - two pieces with different halachic statuses and three cases. In our Mishnah: a piece of chullin and a piece of consecrated food. If he ate one of them - he is exempt according to the Tanna Kamma, and brings an asham talui according to Rabbi Akiva; if he ate both of them - he brings a definite asham; and if two people ate, each eating one piece - according to Rabbi Akiva each brings an asham talui, according to Rabbi Shimon both bring one asham conditionally, and according to Rabbi Yosi, and this is the halachah, they do not bring anything.
In the next section we will continue with the Mishnayos built on this same format, and we will see how the law changes when the halachic status of the two pieces changes.