Commentary for Bekhorot 113:47

לעולם גמר וביוצא דופן

And our Tanna?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Mishnah who says ALL, what is his position?');">³¹</span> - If he draws an analogy between 'under'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Under the rod mentioned in connection with tithing.');">³²</span> and 'under' mentioned in connection with consecrated objects, these also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The cases of an animal designated for idolatrous purposes and one so used, an animal which covered a woman etc.');">³³</span> should not be tithed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For all these are disqualified in the case of dedicated objects.');">³⁴</span> And if he does not infer from the case of consecrated objects, whence does he infer these?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., an animal too young for sacrifice an orphan, etc. as not being tithed.');">³⁵</span> - One may still say that he does draw the analogy, but the Divine Law included these because it is written: Because their corruption is in them and blemishes be in them; they shall not be accepted for you.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 25.');">³⁶</span> And R'Ishmael taught: Wherever corruption is mentioned, the act of 'lewdness'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Like the case of an animal which covered a woman etc.');">³⁷</span> and idolatry is meant. An act of 'lewdness' because it is written in the Scriptures: For all flesh hath corrupted his way on the earth<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. VI, 12. The 'corruption' referred to here means immorality, as mentioned in verse 2 in the same chapter.');">³⁸</span> and idolatry because it is written: Lest ye corrupt yourselves and make you a graven image the similitude of any figure the likeness of a male or female.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. IV, 16.');">³⁹</span> And where ever a blemish disqualifies, the act of 'lewdness' and idolatry also disqualify,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For Scripture compared them with a blemish: ' Because their corruption is in them and blemishes be in them'.');">⁴⁰</span> and wherever a blemish does not disqualify, the act of 'lewdness' and idolatry do not disqualify. And in the case of tithing an animal, since a blemish does not disqualify, because Scripture writes: He shall not search whether it be good or bad neither shall he change it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 33.');">⁴¹</span> the act of 'lewdness' and idolatry also do not disqualify an animal for tithing. The case of an animal which covers [a woman] or that was covered [by a man] come under the head of 'lewdness'. [An animal] designated for idolatrous purposes and one so used are cases of idolatry. And [one given as] 'hire' comes under the category of an act of 'lewdness'; and the - 'price [of a dog]' is compared with the case of the 'hire'. As regards a tumtum and a hermaphrodite, he holds that there exists a doubt [in each case].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether it is a male or female and consequently both are tithed.');">⁴²</span> R'Simeon B'Judah says etc.' He holds that a tumtum and a hermaphrodite are of doubtful sex. Now in the case of consecrated objects, the Divine Law restricted the offering to an undisputed male and an undisputed female, prohibiting a tumtum or a hermaphrodite; and with regard also to the tithing of animals we form an analogy between 'under' and 'under' mentioned in connection with consecrated objects. Our Rabbis have taught: All lambs enter the shed to be tithed except kil'ayim and trefah. These are the words of R'Eleazar B'Judah a man of Kefar Bartotha, who reported this in the name of R'Joshua. Said R'Akiba: I have heard from him that this applies also to offspring which came forth through the caesarean section, an animal too young for sacrifice and an 'orphan'. And the first Tanna [R'Joshua] quoted above?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who does not mention the cases referred to by R. Akiba.');">⁴³</span> If he draws the analogy between 'under' and 'under' mentioned in connection with consecrated objects, these too [which are added by R'Akiba] should not be tithed. And if he does not make the analogy, we can indeed understand why trefah is not tithed, because Scripture says: 'All that shall pass under the rod', thus excluding the case of trefah which does not 'pass'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it became a trefah, for example, through having its leg broken from the knee upward, in which case it is not in a position physically to 'pass under the rod' in order to be tithed.');">⁴⁴</span> but with regard to kil'ayim, whence does he prove this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it does not enter to be tithed.');">⁴⁵</span> - One may still say that [the first Tanna] draws the analogy [mentioned] and in respect of offspring brought forth by means of the caesarean section

Explore commentary for Bekhorot 113:47. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.