Niddah 8: The Virgin Human and the Virgin Sycamore Tree

Today's Gemara focuses on Rabbi Eliezer's teaching about the betula, the virgin: she is one of four types of women who do not menstruate regularly but who are still ritually pure until the moment that they see blood.  

A barita is quoted.  It says that there are three types of virgins: a virgin human, a virgin gourd, and a virgin sycamore.  A virgin human is one who has not had sexual intercourse.  The main reason for noting her status is ensure that only virgins marry high priests (Vayikra 21:19) and their ketubot are worth 200 dinars, twice those of non-virgins.  Virgin gourds are those which have never been cultivated (Devarim 21:4).  A virgin sycamore is one that has never been cut.  This affects its legal status when buying or selling it.

Steinsaltz notes that the sycamore is a tall and wide tree related to the fig. It was grown for its wood, which was large and light.  It would renew itself from the trunk after it was trimmed and then cut down.  We are reminded that Bava Batra (68) teaches about the virgin sycamore and one that has been trimmed when considering sale.  Virgin sycamores were considered part of the field; cultivated sycamores were considered independent and were sold separately from the field.

It is interesting to note that the rabbis are concerned with virgin humans - meaning women or girls rather than men - and their status regarding high priests.  Certainly there was high value put upon virgins in ordinary marriages, as well.  The ketubah was the main focus here, rather than any other aspect of virginity.  Further, a virgin might begin menstruating at any time - or she might have begun menstruating before she married.  

Niddah 7: Women With Irregular Cycles Who are Ritually Pure Until the Moment They See Blood

Today we learn a new Mishna regarding women who are without a veset kavu'a, a set menstrual cycle.  We already know that they cannot assume that their status as niddah begin when they sees blood.  Instead, they have to assume that anything they have touched within 24 hours since their last self-examination with be ritually impure.  However, there are four exceptions.  These women may not have a regular period, but they are still considered ritually pure until they actually see menstrual blood.  They are virgins, pregnant women, nursing women, and old women.

The Mishna Acharona teaches that because these women do not generally menstruate at all, the Sages need not worry that their vaginal walls were holding on to menstrual blood.  That would be an unusual situation, and the Sages do not set rabbinic decrees in unusual situations.  As well, these women have a well established chezkat tahara, presumption of purity, based on the fact that they do not usually menstruate.  

The Kehilat Ya’akov argues that most women are assumed to menstruate somewhat regularly, and thus her vaginal walls with hold back her blood at some point in her life, thus a more stringent set of laws regarding ritual purity are in order.  Again, we return to the principal that rabbinic decree is only required for a usual occurrence.  

Niddah 6: Rabban Gamliel's Maidservant's Examinations for Menstrual Flow

Today's Gemara teaches about people's awareness of their own bodies and their concern about ritual impurity.  The Gemara describes an incident where Rabban Gamliel's maidservant was baking loaves of teruma bread.  She washed her hands with water and examined herself between each loaf. After the last loaf, the she found that she was ritually impure as her period had begun.  Che asked Rabban Gamliel about the status of the loaves, and he told her that they were all impure.  "My teacher," She said to him, "didn't I perform an examination in between each one?"  "if so," he replied, "that last is impure while all of the others are pure".  

Why would Rabban Gamliel first rule that his maid had made all of the teruma loaves impure and then change his mind and only object to the last loaf?  The Me'il Shmuel says that the maid likely did not mention that she examined herself between each batch of loaves.  She might have sounded surprised simply because she assumed that everyone knew that her practice was to examine herself in this way.  The Chatam Sofer said that the maid must have included the fact that she washed herself regularly.  However, he did not understand that she was checking herself for blood, as well.  When he realized that she was examining herself, he changed his ruling.  

The Gemara does not specify which Rabban Gamliel offered this ruling.  The Rashbam says that it was Rabban Gamliel HaZaken who lived in the time of the Temple and when this law was practiced.  Tosafot disagrees, saying that it might have been his son, Rabban Gamliel of Yavne.  Either way, the ruling was made "a long time ago".  Judaism seems to have always suffered from the "I wish we could be as devout as our ancestors".  Perhaps our ancestors were more devout, but perhaps they were just as conflicted and unpredictable in their observance as we are.

Niddah 5: Regular Menstrual Cycles

The rabbis clarify their ruling.  It is only a woman who has a veset kavu'a, regular menstrual cycle, who becomes a niddah and thus imparts ritual impurity from the moment that she examines herself and finds blood.  

The bulk of today's daf focuses on women who check for blood both before and after sexual intercourse.  It is noted that men should examine themselves before and after intercourse as well.  There is some concern about women's capacity to check herself properly (inside all folds of skin) when she is excited for intercourse.  The rabbis argue about whether this was required only during the time of the Temple, when people were deemed ritually impure for the purpose of touching consecrated objects.  The Rambam is one of those who argues that these laws applied after the laws of ritual purity no longer were used.  Instead, they are only a requirement for women who do not have a veset kavu'a.

Steinsaltz teaches that the halacha is that a woman who has a regular cycle should not examine herself for menstrual blood after relations.  Regarding a woman who does not have a regular cycle, both she and her husband should check themselves after the first three times that they have intercourse.  If no blood is seen at that time, it is decided that the act of intercourse does not lead to menstruation and there is no need for further examination.

The rabbis' limited understandings regarding menstrual blood and other types of blood coming from the vagina is puzzling.  The rabbis seem to have a limited understanding of women's anatomy, and yet they speak with great confidence and authority.  Reading this as a woman is challenging - but not (yet) disturbing.

Niddah 4: Teaching Through Errors; Women Checking For Blood Twice Each Day

In today's daf, Rabba asserts that Hillel said that women can feel the sensation of menstruation and thus need not to be concerned about imparting ritual impurity to objects retroactively.  His student Abaye challenges Rabba.  That can't be so, for that is Shammai's argument!  Rabba states that he was only suggesting this analysis to challenge his student.

Our Gemara continues to provide examples, including that of a basket that is ritually pure but then is found holding a slithering animal.  From what point was it ritually impure?  Another example - is one ritually impure if s/he touches a body in the middle of the night, not knowing whether that person is alive or dead, and that person is found to be dead in the morning?  The rabbis debate both the answers to these questions and their applicability to the case at hand.  

We are also made aware of women who have blood stains on their clothing.  From what point were they called ritually impure?  

The rabbis recommend that women examine themselves morning and evening.  The morning check is to ensure that nothing they touched at night has become ritually impure and the evening check is to ensure that nothing they touched during the day has become ritually impure.  This seems to be a needlessly onerous task for women.  Further, it is demeaning to think of women's bodies as in a perpetual state of "possibly ritually impure".  Such traditions have caused many women - and men - great sorrow because they are not able to derive comfort from each other when women are unable to touch their husbands, even non-sexually, for extended periods of time.

Niddah 3: Shammai's Leniency regarding Niddah; Contraception

Why would Shammai have been lenient about niddah when he is usually more stringent?  The Gemara suggests a number of possibilities:

• Like everyone, a woman is in a state of chazaka, holding her status, until it is absolutely clear that her status has changed.  Thus it is not necessary to 'back date' her status as a niddah.
• A woman would feel a sensation when her menstruation begins (Hillel states that a woman might mistake menstruation for an urge to urinate)
• Once menstruating, the blood will be seen (Hillel says that a woman might hold the blood in her vaginal walls)
• Rava states that Shammai was concerned that women would continually be concerned about menstruation which would interrupt sexual relations

The rabbis want to know how to determine the beginning of something that cannot be easily detected.  They use other examples to attempt to better understand the movement from a state of ritual purity to a state of ritual impurity.  One is the sota, a woman accused of adultery, who goes through a ritual to determine her status.  Another is what the sota's ritual is based upon: the mikvah.  A mikvah may have lost water but we are not sure exactly when or how that water was lost.  The rabbis agree that either of these examples quite capture the situation at hand.

We are introduced to the question of a woman who is mentally incompetent.  Would she be able to be trusted with self-examination and the reporting of what she may have touched over 12 hours?  It is also mentioned - several times - that a woman might have been using a tightly packed absorbent cloth in her vagina to prevent pregnancy.  These reports are made without judgement; they are matter-of-fact descriptions of marital sexual relations.  How interesting that while contraception was strictly frowned upon, it was regularly used by our ancestors!

Niddah 2: From When is a Woman a Niddah?

It is hard to believe that we are entering the last Massechet of Daf Yomi.  Massechet Niddah is devoted to the times when a woman is in a state of niddah, ritual impurity.  Men can also become ritually impure, but there is a greater focus on women's ritual impurity likely because this happens (usually) for at least a week of each month.  Further, ritual impurity of this sort is transmitted to objects that women touch or sit upon, and so the rabbis wanted to create guidelines and rituals that were very clear regarding niddah.

In our first Mishna, we learn about Shammai's view: women are ritually impure from the moment that they examine themselves with a cloth and find blood.  Hillel disagrees, saying that women are retroactively ritually impure - from the time that they last checked for blood until they checked again and found blood.  This might be several days.  The Rabbis say that women are retroactively ritually impure from only 24 hours before checking and finding blood.  If a woman checks herself twice each day, the rabbis then allowed women to be considered retroactively niddah for only 12 hours.

Shammai is usually the sage who is more stringent and Hillel is usually considered to be more lenient.  This is one of those times where the Sages do not follow their usual patterns.   

Me'ila/ Middot 37: The Northern and Southern Chambers in the Courtyard

Today's daf includes four short Mishnayot that share further details about the organization of the Temple.  We learn that there were six rooms in the azara, courtyard.  Three of these were in the north and three were in the south.  

The northern chambers were called the Chamber of the Salt, the Chamber of the Parva, and the Chamber of the Rinsers.  The Chamber of the Salt was for storage of salt while the Chamber of the Parva is where the animal hides would be salted.  Its roof was the floor of the Hall of Immersion.  The Chamber of the Rinsers was used to rinse the innards of the sacrificial animals.  A spiral staircase led from that chamber to the Hall of Immersion, which was used by the High Priest on Yom Kippur.  

The southern chambers included the Chamber of the Wood, the Chamber of the Wheel and the Chamber of Hewn Stone.  The Chamber of Wood's purpose seems to have been forgotten.  The Chamber of the Wheel held a giant wheel over a well.  This was said to provide water for the entire Temple courtyard.  The Chamber of the Hewn Stone was named after the stones that were used in its construction.  It was used by the Sanhedrin to convene and judge members of the community.  

Steinsaltz notes that "parva" could refer to a number of different things, including an angushi, a type of sorcerer, or that Parva might have been a particular magician.  The Rambam says that this could only be explained by the following narrative: a magician created a hole in the Temple wall to secretly watch the order of the Temple service.  He was killed there.  Thus the Chamber of the Parva was named after this event.  Somewhat unlikely on a number of levels...

Mei'la/ Middot 36: Draining Sacrificial Blood from the Temple

We are introduced to new Mishnayot today, each focusing on the Temple and the Altar.  One Mishna teaches that at the south-western corner of the base of the altar there were two holes like two fine nostrils.  The sacrificial blood was poured on the western side of the foundation and it flowed until it met blood flowing from the southern side.  From there they flowed out to the brook of Kidron.  Below that corner, there was a cubit square covered by a marble slab with a ring fixed in it.  It was used to go down into the pit to clean it out.

After the sprinkling of the blood, the rest of the blood would go down a drain built into the foundation of the altar.  The blood would mix in with the plumbing pipes of the Temple with the blood poured into another drain in the outer altar.  The blood would flow together to the Kidron Valey and their remains would be sold as fertilizer.  

We learn that the Kidron Valley ran to the east of the Temple Mount.  It is the natural run off point for sewage from the Temple.  The walls of the Temple Mount stand at the edge of the Shiloach, which is dry until the spring.  Steinsaltz reminds us that we learned in Massechet Sukka (49) that only once every seventy years would the congealed blood be cleaned.  Not just that, but the Meiri believed that because those remains were removed and burned at the altar, the cleaning would only go as deep as the young priests could reach using tools.

Me'ila/ Middot 35: The Women's Courtyard and Its Four Chambers

Our Massechet began yesterday and it describes the Temple Mount itself.  There are several Mishnayot that tell us the details about ezrat yisrael, court of the Israelites and south of it.  The northernmost point that a Jewish person (other than a kohen) can enter is this court.  Kohanim can access the ezrat kohanim, the priest's courtyard.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov tells us about how the Temple is arranged:

The ezrat nashim, the women's courtyard, is made up of an open area 135x135 cubits.  Each corner houses an area that is 40x40 cubits.  They are permanent chambers which are uncovered.  Each has a different purpose.

• Lishchat ha'nezirim, chamber of the Nazirites, where the nazir would cut and burn his hair under the pot that burned his sacrifice
• Lishchat dir ha'etzim, chamber of the woodshed, whether the priests who had a blemish would check wood for worms until they were ritually able to participate in the service again.  The Meiri teach that this was because nothing non-Kosher could be brought on the altar and/or because disgusting things cannot be brought to the altar
• Lishchat ha metzora'im, the chamber of the lepers, was where people who recovered from "leprosy" would go to the mikvah before reentering society
• Kishchat beit shemanya, the chamber of the house of oils would hold the oil and wine used for the offerings and libations, as taught by Abba Shaul when Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov could not recall what the office was used for.

Even with all of the detail provided in the Gemara, we still do not understand many areas on the Temple Mount.  Some examples include the azara, which included the altar and the slaughterhouse.  We know that the altar was in the middle of the azara beside the entrance to the Holy and the Holy of Holies.  We also know that there must have been room there for the slaughterhouse, including taba'ot, rings that held the animals, shulchanot, tables upon which animals were butchered, and nanasim, hooks where the animals were hung.  The Rambam teaches us that the altar was across from the entrance to the Ulam, the vestibule, and the heichal, the Temple itself.  The kevesh, ramp was to the south, which left room to the north for the tables, rings and hooks.  And so the azara might not have held all of these items.

Me’ila/ Tamid 30: What is Said When the Sun Rises

The kohanim would partake in four lotteries every morning to dictate who who perform different parts of the sacrificial service.  They would look for the sunrise just after the lottery was performed, which marked the beginning of the day.  When seeing the sun, they would yell, "Barkai!", There is light!. Our first Mishna told us that Matya ben Shmuel said that the priest would then say, "is the sky illuminated as far as Chevron?"  It explains that this was required because a previous error, where moonlight made the kohanim believe that they had reached the morning, and they began the avoda prayer began early and the korban tamid, the first sacrifice of the day, was destroyed.

The Rambam thinks that Matya ben Shmuel was one of the tanna'im and he was challenging the first position in the Mishna - arguing that the question was presented to confirm that the sun had risen even in Chevron.  Tosafot Yeshanim state that Matya ben Shmuel was the name of the priest who was responsible for the lotteries that were done in the Temple, for his name is also mentioned in that context in Massekhet Shekalim.  The Meiri says that Matya ben Shmuel's question asked whether the priest watching for the sun could see all the way to Chevron in the south.  The Jerusalem Talmud notes that everyone agrees that the reference was to Chevron because they wanted to take note of the city where our ancestors were buried.

Me'ila/ Tamid 29: Gathering, Cutting and Arranging Wood for the Altar

The priest who won the payis, lottery, win the prize of terumat hadeshen, removing ash from the altar. Massechet Yoma (22a) teaches that the Sages established this task so that more kohanim would participate in the lottery.  Few thought that they would win.  

Our Mishna teaches that fellow priests would help the winner.  He would hand the priest the wood.  However, it was the winner's job to arrange the wood so that sacrifices could be offered properly.  Wood from all trees was permitted except for the vine and the olive tree.  Usually young branches of fig trees, nut trees and pinewood was used.  That wood would be arranged on the east side of the altar.  Its open side would be on the east and the inner ends of the selected logs would touch the circular heap of ashes.  

Grape vines and olive wood may have been discouraged because they made too much smoke, Rav Pappa taught.  Rav Acha bar Yaakov thought that it hurt the "settlement of the Land of Israel" because we should not deplete the trees that allow us to use wine and oil, which are needed.  The Mishneh LeMelech asserted that bar tash'chit, the prohibition against destroying fruit trees (Devarim 20:19), was not behind this ruling. Branches can be cut; full trees cannot.  The Be'er Sheva points out that cutting trees for use on the altar would not be "destructive" since it was performed to enable an important mitzvah.

Me'ila/ Tamid 28: Kohanim and Leviim Falling Asleep While Gardening

The rabbis acknowledged that anyone guarding the Temple at night might fall asleep.  The Gemara discusses how the the rabbis dealt with this eventuality: an officer would walk to each guard and wait for a response after he said, "peace be upon you".  If he heard nothing, that was considered to be proof that he was asleep and he was beaten with a stick.  People would notice the screaming and would claim that the cry came from a Levite sleeping at his post.  His clothes might also be burnt.

The Gemara asks about what rabbis in other situations might do.  The Tiferet Yisrael teach us that kohanim also burned their clothes.  Based on Vayikra (21:8), we learn that we have been commanded to treat kohanim with respect, and so this would not happen in cases where a kohen was involved.

Tosafot Yom Dov tell the officer of the Temple Mounters responsible for the levi'im only.  Thus he was only able to reprimand a sleeping Levite.

The Rambam says that the punishments beating and burning clothing should be given equalized between kohanim and leviim.  

Me'ila/ Tamid 25: Priests Guarding the Temple, Seminal Emissions

Our first Mishna describes where the priests were to guard the Temple as determined by age and role. It also details where and in what garments the priests should sleep, in addition to the ritual requirements should a priest have a seminal emission while in the Temple or in the courtyard.  This includes a description of underground passageways lit by torches leading to a mikvah, a urinal and a flame and a way to determine if someone else is in the mikvah and in need of privacy.

Me’ila 22: Kutim and Tithes on Shabbat

Today is the final daf of Massekhet Me'ila.  It considers a case where one might buy wine from Kutim, samaritans, and how tithes would be taken from it on Shabbat.  Kutim include the nations that were exiled to Eretz Yisrael by the kings of Assyria who planned to repopulate that land.  In II Melachim ch.17, we learn that the Kutim converted to Judaism because they were afraid of the lions that were attacking them.  They were known as gerei arayot, lion converts, but they continued to worship their own gods.  

When the Jews returned to Ha'Aretz at the beginning of the Second Temple period, the decendents of the Kutim (samaritans) tried to stop them from rebuilding the Temple and the walls of Jerusalem.  They intermarried with each other, as well.  Conflict built between the two groups and Yochanan Hyrcanus destroyed the temple that had been built on Har Gerizim.  At the Bar Kocheva rebellion, however, the Kutim and the Jews worked together.  Our Gemara points out that Sages had different options about the Kutim.  Finally, Kutim were ruled to be non-Jews because of their continued idol worship.  

In Massechet Yevamot, it is said that a bit din should not accept potential converts if they want to convert for any reason other than a sincere desire to join the Jewish people.  However, once they have converted, they were considered to be Jewish by Halacha.  Today, Israeli Samaritans do not worship idols.  They are somewhat more accepted into the larger Jewish community.

Me'ila 20: How Do We Define a Vegetarian?

Today's daf explores what is included in a neder, vow, to not eat meat.  The Gemara shares a baraita teaching that fish and grasshoppers would not be included, though they are kosher.  All other meat including poultry and all parts of animals would be part of the vow.  

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says that ordinary meat would be included in the vow, but poultry, fish, grasshoppers, livers, hearts and other innards would be outside of the vow.  Generally, internal organs are not considered to be the most valuable parts of animals to consume.  Steinsaltz teaches us that only the poorest (or ill) Jews partook in eating these meats in the past.

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says that "kravayim, innards, are not considered to be meat and one who eats them is not a person."  Commentators often remove this line from the Gemara.  Rashi explains that Rabbi Shimon means that people who eat these parts of the animals include them in their vows.

Me'ila 19: Which is the Primary Element of Me’ila, Benefit or Damages?

A new Mishna teaches us more about whether the main element in me'ila is the fact that one is forbidden to derive benefit from a consecrated object or whether one is forbidden from damaging a consecrated object.  The Mishna says that

• if one derives benefit equal to a half peruta from a consecrated item and/or causes one half peruta of damage to that item
• or if one derives benefit equal to the value of a peruta from a consecrated item that has the potential to be damaged, and one caused one peruta of damage to another consecrated item but derived no benefit from it

one is not liable for misuse.  This is because the law applies when one benefits by at least one peruta and causes at least one peruta of damage to the same item.

Thus we learn a basic principle of me'ila: one is not liable for deriving forbidden benefit from a consecrated object unless one both causes at least a Peruta's damage and one derives at least a peruta of forbidden benefit.  The rishonim discuss whether benefit or damage is the primary element of me'ila laws.  This determination helps us understanding how much will be paid to the Temple in the case of me'ila.  Our Gemara shares a number of opinions:

• Rashi says that the damage done is primary and so that defines the amount that one owes the Temple
• The Rambam says that benefit is primary, and thus one must pay the amount by which one benefited
• Tosafot say that me'ila is a combination of these two elements and thus one is obliged to pay whichever is greater, the benefit or the damage

Me'ila 18: How to Valuate Consecrated Items for the Sake of Determining Misuse

In yesterday's daf (Me’ila:17), we learned about a demon that helped the rabbis defeat a Roman decree against Jewish practice by possessing the Emperor's daughter.  Today we begin the fifth perek of Me'ila where we focus on a basic premise of this massechet:

• is me'ila teaching us about the forbidden benefit derived when one uses a consecrated object, or are we concerned about damage done to that object?
• when the object is taken from the Temple and brought to the ordinary world, how might that define whether or not me'ila has taken place?

Our first mishna teaches us what Rabbi Akiva says: as long as one derives benefit from a consecrated item worth a peruta or more, one is liable for its misuse whether or not it is damaged.  The Sages disagree, saying that any consecrated item that might be damaged does not create liability unless its owner causes at least one peruta of damage.  If the item cannot be damaged, one is liable for its misuse after one has derived benefit from it.  

The example in our Mishna concerns a consecrated necklace around a woman's neck or a ring on her finger, or drinking from a consecrated cup.  They are not damaged through their use, but they are liable for misuse once one has derived benefit from them worth at least one peruta.  Wearing a consecrated robe/ garment, or chopping wood with a consecrated ax does not create liability for misuse until one causes them one peruta of damage.  

How do we determine one Peruta's worth of value?  We ask how much a person would be willing to pay their friend for borrowing that object to wear or use at a public function like a wedding party.  Even though some items do not lose their value through their use, others might lessen in value when they are used (clothing, an ax).

Me'ila 16: Consuming Sheratzim, Creeping Animals?

We know that we are forbidden to eat certain food because they are tahor, ritually impure.  Today's daf asks how much must we consume to be held liable?  We know that usually, we must consume at least a ke'zayit, an olive-bulk, to be held liable.  Rav Yehuda teaches that Rav teaches that this same principle applies for eating sheratzim, creeping animals.  But we learned in Vayikra (11:42) that eating sheratzim is forbidden!  

Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Chanina presented Rabbi Yochanan with another passage from Vayikra (20:25) to help us understand how we could eat animals that are considered to be ritually defiled.  We learn that a creature the size of an adasha, a lentil, is enough to consider a creature to be ritually defiled.  Nazir (52) teaches that Vayikra (11:31, 32) states that coming into full contact with such an animal will cause ritual impurity, and everything coming into contact with it will also become impure.  The Gemara says that such a creature might be the size of a chomet, possibly a lizard, when it is first born.  

Vayikra (11:30) tells us that there are eight types of crawling creatures listed as tahor.  Rashi and other say that the chomet, is a snail.  This would explain our Gemara's suggestion that the snail is the size of a lentil when it is first born.  Rav Sa'adia Ga'on and others say that the chomet is a chameleon.  

Me'ila 15: Combining Consecrated and Dedicated Items to Equal the Value of One Peruta

The laws of me'ila describe how we might benefit from consecrated items that are ordinarily forbidden.  They are based on Vayikra (5:15-16) which describes anything kodashei HaShem, holy to G-d. This includes kodeshei mizbe'ach, what is consecrated to be sacrificed, and kodashei bedeck habayit, what is dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple.  If a person is liable for me'ila, the misuse of consecrated property, one must derive a minimum of a peruta of forbidden benefit from the consecrated or dedicated item.  

Today we begin the fourth perek, where our first Mishna asks which types of consecrated objects might be combined to create the value of a peruta both for me'ila and for the status of the person who owns the sacrifice.  And the items need not be of the same category - both consecrated items and dedicated items can be combined for this purpose.  

Steinsaltz shares that Rabbi Shimon Shkop suggests that me'ila has different purposes in kodashei mizbe'ach and in kodashei bedek habayit.  With consecrated items, one has received forbidden benefit from a sacrifice that will be brought to the altar.  With dedicated items, one must pay because s/he stole an item that belongs to the Temple. Regardless, since both are considered to be kodashei HaShem, they are seen to be similar enough to be combined.  Rabbi Chayyim Soloveitchik argues that the obligation to pay applies in all cases because the item is always "stolen" from the Temple.  This argument explains why the the two different types can be combined.  

Me’ila 14: Turtledoves and Pigeons

Any sacrifice that is not protected by the laws of me’ila cannot be brought to the altar will lose its status as holy.  Yesterday a Mishna shared an example, where torim, turtledoves and benei yona, pigeons, are too young or too old, they cannot be consumed but one is permitted to benefit from them.

Today we are introduced to a Mishna where Rabbi Shimon teaches the difference between torim and ben yona.  He says that turtledoves which have not yet reached the right age are subject to the law of misuse.  It is forbidden to benefit from pigeons that are beyond the right age.  If one derived benefit from them, s/he is not liable for their misuse.  Thus Rabbi Shimon is asserting that a turtledove can be offered when it gets older, so the laws of me'ila apply.

Steinsaltz teaches that the the age of appropriateness is approximately four or five days after hatching.  This is when the bird's body is covered with feathers.