018b אלו קדשים פרק שלישי תמורה יח ע"ב – EILU KODOSHIM CHAPTER THREE TEMURAH

Rabbi Chiya taught, in support of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: (Leviticus 3) “If it is a sheep that he offers, the first offspring is offered; the second offspring is not offered.”^[1]

כשב - Kesev: implies a male lamb.

It is offered.

הוא קרב - It is offered: the offspring of a shelamim, since the verse is written about shelamim.

And the offspring of all sacrifices is not offered.

The offspring of demai: if it refers to the burnt-offering and the guilt-offering, these are males and do not bear offspring; if it refers to the sin-offering, we have a tradition that it goes to death.^[2]

ולד דמאי - Excludes demai: you said that the offspring of all sacrifices is not offered.

Ravina said: it comes to include the offspring of a tithed animal (ma'aser).^[3]

ולד המעושרת - Ma'aser: a female animal that was tithed as the tenth and afterwards gave birth; her offspring is not offered, but grazes and is eaten by its owner with its blemish, as tithe-animals are eaten by their owners with blemish.

Why do I need a verse for the offspring of a tithed animal?

“It passed, it passed” (the verse on passing under the rod): he derives it from the firstborn.

מבכור גמר - It derives from the firstborn: and for the firstborn, its offspring is not offered, since a firstborn has no offspring of its own, being male.

It is needed. It might enter your mind to say: one may reason from what is possible to what is impossible; therefore the verse teaches us otherwise.^[4]

Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Pappaius testified (as cited).

And according to Rava, who holds that for sacred animals, once one festival has passed over them, each day is a violation of “bal te'ahar” (do not delay); so from Atzeret it must be eaten.^[5][6]

בכל יום ויום עובר בעשה - Every day it transgresses a positive commandment: “you shall come there, and bring there” (Deuteronomy 12), which implies that on the first festival one must come there and bring all the vows upon you.

מעצרת בעי למיכליה - From Atzeret it must be eaten: for at Passover I would not offer it, since it would be (offered) before its time: born on Passover, and the festival passed before it reached seven days.

Rav Zevid said in the name of Rava: this is where he was ill on Atzeret.^[7]

Rav Ashi said: what is the point of the word “chag” here too, “the festival of Shavuot”?

And the other question: wherever it says Passover and wants to mention Atzeret, it says “Atzeret,” not “chag.”

ואידך - The other: Rav Zevid says to you: wherever a baraita mentions Passover and wants to mention something about Atzeret, it mentions Atzeret and does not call it chag; but if it had mentioned Passover as “chag ha-matzot,” it would have mentioned Atzeret as “chag.”

If so: this “chag Shavuot” is what is meant, or he was ill.

אי הכי - If so: this “chag Shavuot” is the meaning, or he was ill.

What is his testimony? It excludes the view of D'R'A, who says that the offspring of a shelamim is not offered as a shelamim; he testifies that it is offered.^[8]

מאי אסהדותיה - What is his testimony: that of R. Pappaius, what does he come to teach us? If you say this “chag” is Sukkot, and that he was not ill on Atzeret, R. Pappaius comes to exclude Rava; but now, what do we learn from him?

The offspring of a todah, and its substitute, and their offspring, to the end of all generations, are like a todah, except that they need not be brought with loaves.^[9]

מתני' הרי אלו כתודה - Mishnah: like a todah: they are offered and eaten for a day and a night.

Our Rabbis taught: where does this come from? “He shall offer it” (Leviticus 27). If one set apart a todah, lost it, and set apart another in its place, and the first was found, both stand. From where do we know that he may offer whichever he wishes, with its bread?^[10]

What does “he shall offer it” mean?

גמ' מהו אומר התודה (ליה) יקריב - Gemara: what does “he shall offer the todah” mean? “If upon a todah he shall offer it” (Leviticus 7:12) could have been written as “if upon a todah” and “he shall offer upon the sacrifice of the todah.”

He set apart a todah and lost it, and set apart another in its place; the first was found, and both stand.^[11]

From where do we know that he may offer whichever he wishes, with its bread?

The verse says “a todah he shall offer”: one might think the second must be brought with bread.^[12]

ת"ל תודה יקריב - “The verse says, a todah he shall offer”: [the Rashi gloss is “mi-mi,” apparently “in any case,” unresolved].

One might think the second must be brought with bread.^[13]

שניה - The second: if he offers it after offering the first.

The verse says “he shall offer it”: one, and not two.

יקריבנו - He shall offer it: one and not two. It excludes the bread, not the offering: the second is not excluded from being offered, as we learn from “if upon a todah” that it is offered.

From where do we derive the inclusion of offspring, substitutes and exchanges?^[14]

מנין לרבות כו' - To include, in the offering.

וחליפות - For example, he lost a todah and set apart another in its place.

The verse says: “if for a thanksgiving” (Leviticus 7:12). I might think that all of them require bread.^[15]

The verse says: “for the thanksgiving sacrifice, a todah requires bread, and not its offspring, its substitute or its exchange.”

The substitute of an olah, its offspring, the offspring of its substitute and their offspring, to the end of all the world, are like an olah, and require flaying, cutting into pieces, and burning whole on the altar.^[16]

מתני' תמורת עולה - Mishnah: for example, he exchanged a male for an olah.

ולד תמורה - For example, he exchanged a female for an olah, and the substitute bore a male.

One who sets apart a female for an olah and she bears a male: it grazes until it is blemished, and is sold, and he brings its money as an olah.^[17]

Rabbi Eliezer says: it itself shall be offered as an olah.^[18]

What is the difference: the first clause, where they do not disagree, and the last clause, where they do?

גמ' מ"ש - Gemara: regarding the offspring of the temurah of an olah, where the Rabbis do not disagree, since all agree: “they are like…” and they are wholly burnt on the altar.

ובסיפא גבי ולד עולה - And in the last clause, regarding the offspring of an olah: the Rabbis dispute, that the animal itself is not offered, only its money.

Rabba bar bar Chana said: it is a disputed mishnah, and it is the view of Rabbi Eliezer.

במחלוקת שנויה - Disputed: as they dispute at the end, so they dispute at the beginning; and the first clause (“they are like an olah”) is Rabbi Eliezer's view.

Rava said: even if you say it is the view of the Rabbis, they dispute with Rabbi Eliezer only regarding one who sets apart a female for an olah, whose mother was not offered; but where the substitute's mother was offered, even the Rabbis agree.^[19]

גבי ולד תמורה אימיה קריבה - Not literally its mother, but the first sanctity from which all these derive; it is offered because it is male. But regarding one who sets apart a female for an olah, she herself was the first sanctity and was not offered.

And did Rabbi Eliezer say: “it itself shall be offered as an olah”?

And bring a contradiction: “the substitute of an asham, its offspring, the offspring of its substitute, and their offspring, to the end of all the world, graze until they are blemished, and are sold, and their money falls to a freewill fund.” Rabbi Elazar says: they die. Rabbi Eliezer says: he brings their money as an olah. (The baraita concludes:) in their money, yes; the thing itself, no.^[20]

תמורת אשם - The temurah of an asham: they graze, since it is a halakhah given to Moses at Sinai that any chatat that dies has an asham that grazes, and the temurah of a chatat dies.

לנדבה - To the collection chests (shofarot), from whose money the public freewill offering is brought. (The word “shofarot” is as printed; its meaning here is taken from context.)

Rabbi Elazar says: they die.^[21]

ימותו - Because it has the status of a chatat, as in the case of an asham; see the beginning of Zevachim (10a).

Rabbi Eliezer says: he brings their money as an olah.

יביא בדמיהן עולה - Because the surplus goes to a private freewill offering.

In their money, yes; the animal itself, no.

הוא עצמו - “Itself”: the offspring of a temurah is not offered, since its mother was not fit for an olah offering (a female is not offered as an olah), and even if it were male, we learned that the temurah of an asham grazes; so the offspring too is not offered. And regarding the offspring of a female olah, why does he say that it is offered?

Rav Chisda said: Rabbi Eliezer said this according to their view, the view of the Rabbis; he said it to them.^[22]

I hold that even the offspring is offered as an olah. According to you, who say that it grazes, at least agree with me that the surplus goes to a private freewill offering.^[23]

And they say to him: the surplus goes to the public freewill fund.^[24]

Rava said: Rabbi Eliezer said “it itself shall be offered as an olah” only in the case of one who sets apart a female for an olah, where the name olah applies to her mother.

דאיכא שם עולה על אמו - Since the name olah applies to its mother: the animal set apart as an olah was sanctified as an olah, and even though it is female, the name olah applies to it, for we find a female in the bird olah; and also its money, when sold, is olah, that is, has the name olah.

Tosafot

תני רבי חייא לסיועי לר' יהושע בן לוי אם כשב הוא מקדיש ולד ראשון הוא קרב ולד שני אינו קרב - Tanna R. Chiya taught in support of R. Yehoshua ben Levi: “If the sheep is offered…” This follows the Rabbis, for according to R. Eliezer the first offspring is not offered at all; this derivation is only a support (asmakhta), since the second offspring not being offered is a rabbinic measure, lest it grow into flocks; in Pesachim (96) they explain this derivation differently.

מעצרתא בעי למיכליה - “Me'atzeretah ba'ei lemichlei”: but he does not ask from Passover “ba'ei lemichlei,” since it is possible that it lacked time (was not yet old enough).

אי הכי מאי אסהדותיה - “If so, what is his testimony”: if it were not that he was ill on Atzeret, and this was the festival of Sukkot, R. Pappaius would come to exclude Rava; but now, what do we learn from him?

וחליפות - “Chalifot”: difficult: what does “chalifot” add? If he set apart a todah, lost it, set apart another in its place, and the first was found and both stand, we already learned this from the first clause of the baraita.

אבל גבי ולד תמורה דאימיה נמי קרבה - “But regarding the offspring of a temurah whose mother was also offered”: not literally its mother, but the first sanctity from which all these derive; it is offered because it is male.

בדמיהן אין הוא עצמו לא - “In their money, not the animal itself”: and if you ask: what is Rabbi Eliezer teaching? Perhaps this case is different: the animal is not offered, since whatever chatat dies, its asham grazes, and the chatat's offspring dies, so in the asham the offspring grazes, but the animal itself is not offered. One answers: the rule of grazing was not established for everything, only for those that correspond to the halakhah of the asham, such as when its owners die, or are atoned, or it is exchanged, or its year passes; all four correspond to the asham. But the offspring of an asham does not correspond to its halakhah, since an asham is male and offspring does not apply to it; in this the halakhah was not established.

אלא לדידכו דאמריתו לא קרב - “Then according to you who say it is not offered”: and if you ask: a dispute among the Rabbis: according to what Rava said above, where the mother was offered even the Rabbis agree that the offspring is offered; here the offspring of a temurah of an asham, its mother was offered, so they should have said the offspring itself is offered. One answers: Rav Chisda does not hold Rava's answer above, but holds as Rabbah bar bar Chana answered, that it is disputed and is R. Eliezer's view; Rava, who answered above that where the mother was offered even the Rabbis agree, gave another answer here, as stated below. My teacher R. Meir (Ramar) explained: one may say that Rav Chisda also holds Rava's answer above, for the statement that where the mother was offered even the Rabbis agree applies only to the offspring of a temurah of an olah, where the original sanctity was offered as an olah, so it is fitting that its offspring be offered as an olah; but here, the original sanctity was offered as an asham and not as an olah, so there is no reason for the offspring to be offered as an olah. So R. Eliezer says regarding one who sets apart a female for an olah, where the original sanctity was not offered as an olah, the offspring itself is offered; so too he should have said regarding the offspring of the temurah of an asham. My teacher R. Meir.

אלא בדמפריש נקבה לעולה - “Only regarding one who sets apart a female for an olah”: the name olah applies to its mother. The first explanation, that the name of a bird's olah applies to its mother, cannot be sustained in the Gemara below; I will explain it in its place.

Notes

1. 1. Leviticus 3 is the chapter on peace-offerings (shelamim); the baraita builds its rule on the verse about a sheep.
2. 2. Demai: produce whose tithing is in doubt, bought from someone who may not have tithed it. Here the word refers to an offspring whose sacred status is in doubt.
3. 3. Ma'aser behemah: every tenth animal from the herd or flock is holy (Leviticus 27:32). If the tenth animal gives birth, its offspring is not offered; it is eaten with its blemish by the owner.
4. 4. Sala kedaata (ס"ד), “it might enter your mind”: the Gemara raises a suggestion and then rejects it.
5. 5. Rava: a leading Babylonian Amora of the fourth generation.
6. 6. Bal te'ahar: the prohibition against delaying a sacrifice past its time.
7. 7. Atzeret: Shavuot.
8. 8. Quoted-back view: the offspring of a shelamim is not itself offered as a shelamim. The testimony of R. Pappaius is brought to exclude that view.
9. 9. Todah: a thanksgiving offering, a kind of peace-offering brought with forty loaves of bread (Leviticus 7:12).
10. 10. T"R: tanu rabbanan, “our Rabbis taught”; introduces a baraita.
11. 11. The case: he set apart a todah, lost it, and set apart another in its place; when the first is found, both stand.
12. 12. Talmud lomar (“the verse teaches”): the formula that introduces a verse used to derive a law.
13. 13. Yachol: “one might think,” a possibility the Gemara raises and then answers from the verse.
14. 14. Lirbot: to include; here, to derive the inclusion of offspring, substitutes and exchanges.
15. 15. Leviticus 7:12, “if for a thanksgiving”; the derivation rests on the word “al” (for).
16. 16. Temurah: when a consecrated animal is exchanged for another, both become holy; the substitute is the temurah.
17. 17. Olah: the burnt-offering, wholly burnt on the altar, no part eaten (Leviticus 1).
18. 18. Quoted-back Mishnah clause: R. Eliezer's view that the animal itself is offered as an olah; the Gemara asks about it below.
19. 19. Even if you say it is the view of the Rabbis: the Gemara allows that the Rabbis agree in this case and draws its conclusion.
20. 20. Lit. “and bring a contradiction”: a baraita that seems to contradict the view just stated.
21. 21. Asham temurah: see Zevachim 10a (cited by Rashi). The offspring of such an animal dies, as one with the status of a chatat.
22. 22. Rav Chisda: a Babylonian Amora of the third generation.
23. 23. Grazing: the animal grazes until it becomes blemished, and is then sold; the money goes to the freewill fund.
24. 24. Nedavat tzibbur: the public freewill fund, used for communal offerings.