For the source text click/tap here: Menachot 108
To download, click/tap here: PDF
In the first case of the Mishnah here, when one pledges one of his sheep or bulls to Hekdesh, and he has only two sheep or two bulls, he must give the larger one to Hekdesh. The reason for this presumably is that one who is Makdish an item does so "b'Ayin Yafah," generously, and therefore it is assumed that he meant to give the larger animal.
The Gemara asks that if the person must give the larger animal because of "b'Ayin Yafah Makdish," then what is the reasoning behind the law of the next case of the Mishnah? The Mishnah states that when the person has three animals, the middle animal is Hekdesh. Why is it not assumed that he meant to be Makdish the largest animal because of the principle of "b'Ayin Yafah Makdish"?
Shmuel answers that the Mishnah, in the second case, does not mean that the second animal is certainly Hekdesh. Rather, the Mishnah is saying that we must suspect that the middle animal is the one which the owner meant. We are unsure about whether he meant the largest animal because it is considered "b'Ayin Yafah Makdish," or he meant the middle-sized animal because it is larger than the smallest animal and thus is also considered "b'Ayin Yafah Makdish."
Accordingly, Rebbi Chiya explains, the owner of the animals should wait until the middle animal develops a blemish and transfer the Kedushah that it may have onto the largest animal and bring the largest animal as the Korban.
How does this transferal of Kedushah take place?
We explore this enigmatic notion that Keisha may be transferred somehow.