021b אלו קדשים פרק שלישי תמורה כא ע"ב – EILU KODOSHIM CHAPTER THREE TEMURAH

Let maaser^[1] [sheni] come and learn^[2] from bechor [the firstborn].

ואתי מעשר שני ויליף מבכור - By the juxtaposition of "and you shall eat before Hashem your God" (Devarim 14): maaser sheni is juxtaposed to the firstborn. Since there is a firstborn, which is clearly not eaten except before the Temple, like this one, we learn maaser from it.

And can kodashim [sacred animals] learn from one another^[3]?

ומי ילפינן קדשים - From each other, as here: the flesh is learned from the blood, and the maaser from the flesh.

But R. Yochanan^[4] said: The whole Torah may be learned as "a learner from a learner^[5]", except for kodashim, which may not be learned as "a learner from a learner".

והא א"ר יוחנן כו' - And he explains the reason: in what place they are eaten (Zevachim 49).

למד מן הלמד - As here: maaser learns from flesh, and flesh itself learns from blood.

Maaser is chullin^[6] [non-sacred].

חולין הוא - And one learns from it.

This works according to the one who says we follow the learner.

בתר הלמד אזלי' - That is, if it is chullin, one learns (its law) from the teacher.

But according to the one who says we follow the teacher:

בתר המלמד - The blood of the teacher must become chullin.

What can one say?

מאי איכא למימר - Here the teacher is the firstborn; I find it difficult: since it was not sanctified for the future, why is there doubt about maaser? It seems to me that the wording of the Yerushalmi in the books is correct, and so I received it in Makkot (19). If one holds it was sanctified for the future, the firstborn too should be in doubt; if one holds it was not sanctified, maaser too need not be in doubt. The Gemara always holds it was sanctified for the future, and here it is clear regarding the firstborn, for example when its blood was sprinkled before the Temple, etc. The text should not read "since if the blood is not fit for sprinkling..." (לא גרסינן); rather it reads: "and flesh comes and learns from blood: just as its blood is on the altar, so its flesh is on the altar" — that is, just as this one's blood was sprinkled while the altar stands, so its flesh may be eaten only while the altar stands; and maaser comes and learns from this flesh. Grain-maaser comes only from the land (Kiddushin 36b).

Flesh and blood^[7] are one matter.

R. Akiva^[8] says: One might think a man could bring a firstborn from outside the Land^[9] to the Land while the Temple stands, and offer it there.

The verse says (Devarim 14): "And you shall eat before Hashem your God the maaser of your grain, your wine and your oil, and the firstborn of your herd and your flock".

From where you bring maaser of grain, you bring the firstborn; and from where you do not bring maaser of grain, you do not bring the firstborn.

אתה מעלה בכור - The baraita "they did not accept from the house of Antigonus" is R. Akiva's, and the Mishnah is R. Yishmael's, since this verse is not needed for that exposition.

Ben Azzai^[10] says: One might think one may bring maaser sheni and eat it anywhere within sight^[11] (of Jerusalem).

בכל הרואה - In any place from which one standing in Jerusalem can see it.

And a reasoning: the firstborn requires being brought to a place, and maaser requires being brought to a place.

ודין הוא - That it is not eaten (outside).

Just as the firstborn is eaten only inside the wall, so maaser is eaten only inside the wall.

מה בכור אינו נאכל אלא לפנים מן החומה - Because sacrifices are disqualified when taken outside (the walls).

But the firstborn is different, since it requires the giving of blood^[12] and the fats to be placed on the altar.

מה לבכור שכן חילקת בזמן אכילתו - Its eaters differ: the firstborn is eaten only two days and one night, while maaser sheni is for all time; and in its eaters: the firstborn is eaten only by Kohanim, while maaser sheni is for every person.

Could you say this of maaser, since the verse did not say it?

"And you shall eat before Hashem your God the maaser of your grain, your wine and your oil, and the firstborn of your herd and your flock".

The verse compares maaser to the firstborn.

Just as the firstborn is eaten only inside the wall, so maaser is eaten only inside the wall.

What is the difficulty for Ben Azzai who says "one might think"?

ומאי קשיא ליה לבן עזאי דקאמר יכול כו' - And from where do you derive that it may be eaten in all of sight? The verse was needed for this.

You say: since we learned (in a Mishnah): "Between Shiloh^[13] and Jerusalem there is only this difference: in Shiloh they ate lesser sacred offerings^[14] and maaser sheni anywhere in sight, and in Jerusalem inside the wall; and the most sacred offerings^[15] were eaten inside the curtains^[16]."

ובירושלים לפנים מן החומה - And the difficulty for him: granted that lesser sacrifices require the giving of blood, but maaser should be eaten anywhere in sight; the Gemara teaches that it is not.

One might think: in Jerusalem maaser sheni may be brought and eaten anywhere in sight.

The Gemara teaches (that it may not).

Others say: one might think the firstborn whose year has passed should be like disqualified^[17] consecrated animals and become disqualified.

The verse says: "the maaser of your grain, your wine and your oil" (teaching that the firstborn is not disqualified in this way).

ויפסל - From being offered, since "year by year" is written.

It compares^[18] the firstborn to maaser.

Just as maaser is not disqualified by being transferred from one (year) to another, so the firstborn is not disqualified by being transferred from one (year) to another.

And the Rabbis, who derive it by another reason: from where do they know that it is not disqualified by being transferred?

The verse (Devarim 15) says: "Before Hashem your God you shall eat it, year by year", to teach that the firstborn is not disqualified by being transferred from one (year) to the other.

שנה בשנה - Meaning: seven years are implied.

And for the others: "before Hashem your God you shall eat it, year by year" — what do they expound from it?

It should be needed for them, as it was taught:

"One day of this year, and one day of another year" — to teach that the firstborn is eaten for two days and one night.

יום אחד משנה זו - That it was slaughtered as commanded at the end of its year. The verse teaches that it is eaten that day and the next day, which is "another year".

And the Rabbis, who hold it is eaten for two days and one night — from where do they know it?

The verse says (Bamidbar 18): "It shall be yours, like the breast^[19] of the wave-offering".

כחזה התנופה - That is, the breast and thigh of the shelamim are eaten for two days and one night [variant reading: "yihyeh"]. "Their flesh shall be yours like the breast of the wave-offering" — since in general we go toward stringency, and it is said (Zevachim 57): "like the breast and thigh of the todah"; and it is written "yihyeh" to add another "hayah" similar to it, and this is the second day.

Chapter Four - The Offspring of a Sin-Offering

The Mishnah: The offspring of a sin-offering^[20], the substitute^[21] of a sin-offering, and a sin-offering whose owners have died shall die.

And one whose year has passed, and one that was lost and found to have a blemish^[22]: if the owners have atoned^[23] (with another animal), it dies and does not make a substitute.

מתני' ושאבדה ונמצאת בעלת מום - Before it was atoned for with another animal.

אם כיפרו הבעלים - Afterwards, with another animal.

תמות - Even according to the Rabbis, who say below and dispute R. (Rabbi) that a sin-offering dies only if it is found after the owners have atoned — they agree here, since there are two defects: it was lost and found to have a blemish. That is why it says "blemished": if it were unblemished and found before atonement, even if the owners afterwards atoned with another, it is pastured (and does not die).

Tosafot

ממקום שאי אתה מעלה מעשר דגן אי אתה מעלה בכור - Now we find a dispute between R. Yishmael and R. Akiva. R. Yishmael holds that lechatchilah (initially) one may not bring firstborns and maaser from outside the Land to the Land, but after the fact, if they were brought unblemished, they are offered, as in the Mishnah. R. Akiva holds that even after the fact they are not offered, since the firstborn is juxtaposed to grain-maaser; and the baraita of the house of Antigonus follows him. If you ask: granted R. Akiva, as he explains the reason (the juxtaposition to grain-maaser), but for R. Yishmael what is the reason? If he holds the juxtaposition to grain-maaser applies even after the fact, he would not allow it; and if he does not hold it, he should allow it even lechatchilah. And one can answer that he derives it from the Sifri explained above: "Only your holy things which you have..." — from here that sacred things are brought from outside the Land into the Land; one might include firstborns and maaser too, so "only" (raq) is written. This excludes only lechatchilah, since the verse speaks of "you shall come and bring" — that is, lechatchilah.

יכול יעלה אדם מעשר שני ויאכלנו כו' - If you ask: why would one think it could be eaten anywhere in sight, when "before Hashem your God" is written? One can answer: it is like Shiloh, where they ate maaser sheni anywhere in sight. Some texts read this question and this answer.

מתני' ולד חטאת ושאבדה ונמצאת בעלת מום - Rashi explains: even according to the Rabbis, who say below and dispute R. (Rabbi) that a sin-offering dies only if it is found after the owners atoned — they agree here, since there are two defects, lost and found blemished. That is why it says "blemished". But this is not clear: according to his explanation, an accumulation of defects brings it to death; yet the sugya here implies that an accumulation of defects brings it to pasture, as Rava says in the Gemara: "a night-lost animal that was not designated is not lost" — it is pastured and does not die. Moreover, for R. Abba, who says below in the Gemara (Temurah 23) that all agree that if it was atoned for while not lost it dies, and here we speak of atonement while not lost, why is "blemished" needed according to R. Abba? There are sugyot (Pesachim 97; Menachot 90; Temurah 23) where they do not hold R. Abba's view. Further, the Gemara deduces below from the wording of the Mishnah that it is the view of the Rabbis; one could have deduced it from here. Since "blemished" was mentioned, the teaching was to exclude the case where, because it has been doubly reduced (lost and blemished), it is like a night-lost animal and is pastured: the Mishnah teaches that even so it dies.

אם כיפרו בעלים תמות - According to him who holds as he holds, and according to him who holds as he holds: for R. (Rabbi), even if found before atonement; and for the Rabbis, if found after atonement.

Notes

1. 1. Maaser sheni, the second tithe: a tenth of the produce, set aside in the first, second, fourth and fifth years of the seven-year cycle and eaten in Jerusalem. It may be redeemed for money, and the money is spent on food in Jerusalem.
2. 2. "Yelif" means learns by a gezeirah shavah: an analogy drawn from a shared word. The shared word here is "and you shall eat" (Devarim 14:23), which the verse uses for both maaser sheni and the firstborn.
3. 3. Kodashim are sacrificial animals. The question is whether one kind of offering can learn its law from another.
4. 4. R. Yochanan, an Amora of Eretz Yisrael (third century CE). His rule: the Torah may be learned by a derived law, except for kodashim.
5. 5. Lamed (the learner) is the item whose law is derived by analogy from another item; melamed (the teacher) is the source it is learned from. "Learner from a learner" means a law derived from a law that was itself derived.
6. 6. Chullin: ordinary, non-sacred food. Here the Gemara treats maaser as chullin, to test from which source its law is learned.
7. 7. The blood and flesh of an offering are treated as one matter: the flesh may be eaten only when its blood has been sprinkled on the altar, so the laws of blood and flesh are learned together.
8. 8. R. Akiva, a leading tanna of the early second century CE. The baraita opens with his view, that a firstborn may not be brought from outside the Land; the verse is taken to exclude the opposite.
9. 9. Outside the Land: whether firstborns and tithes may be brought from outside Eretz Yisrael to be offered. See Tosfos below.
10. 10. Ben Azzai, a tanna of the early second century, who holds that maaser sheni may be eaten anywhere in sight.
11. 11. In all of sight: anywhere from which a person standing in Jerusalem can see the place; in Jerusalem itself, maaser sheni is eaten only inside the wall.
12. 12. Giving of blood: sprinkling the blood of an offering on the altar, a required step for such offerings; the fats (eimurin) are burned on the altar.
13. 13. Shiloh was the earlier site of the Tabernacle, before the Temple in Jerusalem. There, lesser offerings and maaser sheni could be eaten anywhere in sight, since there was no wall. This Mishnah is quoted and then discussed by the Gemara.
14. 14. Kodashim kalim: lesser offerings, such as shelamim and todah, whose meat is eaten by the owners and the Kohanim (and whose blood is sprinkled).
15. 15. Kodshei kodashim: the most sacred offerings, such as the chatat and asham, whose meat is eaten only by Kohanim inside the Temple court.
16. 16. Kelaim: the curtains that enclosed the Temple court. Inside them the most sacred offerings were eaten.
17. 17. A consecrated animal becomes pasul (disqualified) through a fault, such as a change of time or intent. A disqualified sacrifice may not be offered and its meat may not be eaten.
18. 18. Hekesh: a verbal analogy in which two subjects are linked by juxtaposition, so that the rule of one applies to the other.
19. 19. The breast and thigh (chazeh v'shok): the portions of the shelamim and todah given to the Kohanim. They are eaten for two days and one night.
20. 20. The offspring of a sin-offering is holy and may not be offered on the altar; the Mishnah rules that it must die.
21. 21. Temurah (substitution): when an owner exchanges a consecrated animal for another, both become holy. This is the subject of the tractate.
22. 22. Blemish (mum): a physical defect that disqualifies an animal from being offered on the altar.
23. 23. The owners have atoned: they have made atonement with another animal, so the original animal dies and does not make a substitute.