שֶׁהִפְרִישׁוּ מָעוֹת לְקִינֵּיהֶם רָצָה לְהָבִיא בָּהֶן חַטַּאת בְּהֵמָה יָבִיא עוֹלַת בְּהֵמָה יָבִיא מֵת וְהָיוּ לוֹ מָעוֹת סְתוּמִין יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה who separated money for their nests and then became wealthy, if the owner wishes to change their designation and to bring an animal sin-offering with them, he may bring a sin-offering with them. If he wishes to use them to buy an animal burnt-offering he may bring it, supplementing the required amount with other money.If the owner died and he had unallocated funds, they all will be allocated for communal gift offerings, including the value of the sin-offering. This shows that the halakha that unallocated funds are used for gift offerings applies in cases other than that of a nazirite.
תַּנָּא נָזִיר וְחַיָּיבֵי קִינִּין דְּדָמוּ לֵיהּ וּלְאַפּוֹקֵי מֵהָא דְּתַנְיָא מִי שֶׁהָיָה מְחוּיָּיב חַטָּאת וְאָמַר הֲרֵי עָלַי עוֹלָה וְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת וְאָמַר הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לְחוֹבָתִי The Gemara answers: He taught the case of a nazirite and also the case of those obligated to bring nests, which is similar to that of a nazirite and is therefore treated identically with regard to its halakha. This serves to exclude that case which is taught in a baraita. The situation discussed in the baraita involves one who was obligated to bring a sin-offering for a transgression he committed, and he also said: It is incumbent upon me to bring a gift burnt-offering, and he separated money and said: These are hereby for my obligatory offering. Since he might have meant either his obligation of the sin-offering or his burnt-offering for the new vow, the question arises as to what should be done with the money.
רָצָה לְהָבִיא בָּהֶן חַטַּאת בְּהֵמָה לֹא יָבִיא עוֹלַת בְּהֵמָה לֹא יָבִיא מֵת וְהָיוּ לוֹ מָעוֹת סְתוּמִים יֵלְכוּ לְיָם הַמֶּלַח The baraita explains that if he wishes to bring an animal sin-offering with it, he may not bring one; if he wishes to use it to purchase an animal burnt-offering, he may not bring it either. If he died and had unallocated funds, one must take them and cast them into the Dead Sea. Since the two offerings are not part of the same obligation, the unallocated funds may not be used for gift offerings.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי הָא דְּאָמְרַתְּ מְפוֹרָשִׁין לָא לָא תֵּימָא דְּאָמַר אֵלּוּ לְחַטָּאתִי וְאֵלּוּ לְעוֹלָתִי וְאֵלּוּ לִשְׁלָמַי אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ אָמַר אֵלּוּ לְחַטָּאתִי וּלְעוֹלָתִי וְלִשְׁלָמַי מְפוֹרָשִׁין הֵן § Rav Ashi said: That which you said with regard to a nazirite who had allocated money, that he may not use it all for gift offerings because the value of the sin-offering must be taken and cast into the Dead Sea, do not say that this is referring only to a case where he explicitly said: These are for my sin-offering, and these are for my burnt-offering, and these are for my peace-offering, each one separately. Rather, even if he said: These are for my sin-offering and for my burnt-offering and for my peace-offering, they are considered allocated for the purposes of this halakha, despite the fact that he did not designate the money for particular offerings.
וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי לָא תֵּימָא עַד דְּאָמַר אֵלּוּ לְחַטָּאתִי וּלְעוֹלָתִי וְלִשְׁלָמַי אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ אָמַר אֵלּוּ לְחוֹבָתִי הֲרֵי הֵן כִּמְפוֹרָשִׁין And some say a different version of this statement. Rav Ashi said: Do not say they are deemed allocated only if he says: These are for my sin-offering and for my burnt-offering and for my peace-offering; rather, even if he said it in broader terms: These are for my obligation, they are considered as allocated.
אָמַר רָבָא הָא דַּאֲמַרַן מָעוֹת סְתוּמִין יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה אִם נָפְלָה דְּמֵי חַטָּאת מִבֵּינֵיהֶן הֲרֵי הֵן כִּמְפוֹרָשִׁין § Rava said: That which we said, that if one had unallocated funds they will be allocated for communal gift offerings, applies only if the money for all of the offerings was mixed together. However, if the money for the sin-offering fell and was separated from the others, all the remaining money is now considered as allocated. This means that instead of the entire sum being used for a gift burnt-offering, part of it is used for a peace-offering, which is eaten for one day and does not require bread.