Soncino English Talmud
Nazir
Daf 25b
It also states above: It might further be thought that the same applies to the offspring [and substitutes] of sin-offerings and the substitute of a guilt-offering, but the text states 'only' precluding [these]. But what need is there of a verse, for there is a traditional ruling that the offspring of a sin-offering is to perish? — That is so; but the verse is required for the guilt-offering. But for the guilt-offering, too, there is a traditional ruling viz., that wherever [an animal] if intended as a sin-offering, is left to perish, if intended as a guilt-offering it is allowed to pasture [until a blemish appears]? — If we had only the traditional ruling, it might be thought that the traditional ruling [is indeed so], but [nevertheless] should someone sacrifice [the animal] he would incur no guilt by so doing; hence the verse tells us that if someone should sacrifice it, he has transgressed a positive precept. 'R. Akiba says that it is unnecessary [to use this argument for the guilt-offering] for it says, It is a guilt-offering, which shows that it retains its status.' What need is there of the verse, since we have it as a traditional ruling that wherever [an animal] if intended as a sin-offering is left to perish, if intended as a guilt-offering it is to pasture [until a blemish appears]? — That is so, and the verse is only necessary for [the case described by] Rab. For R. Huna. citing Rab, said: If a guilt-offering which had been relegated to pasture [until a blemish appears] was slaughtered as a burnt-offering, it is a fit and proper [sacrifice]. This is true only if it was [already] relegated, but not otherwise, for the verse says, 'It is [a guilt-offering,' implying] that it retains its status. The master said [above]: 'This is a traditional ruling concerning the nazirite.' Are there then no other spheres [in which it applies]? Has it not been taught: 'And all others required by the Torah to offer a nest of birds,
Sefaria
Mesoret HaShas