Bekhorot 105

מתני׳ <big><strong>מעשר</strong></big> בהמה נוהג בארץ ובחוצה לארץ בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית בחולין אבל לא במוקדשים

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE LAW CONCERNING THE TITHE OF CATTLE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XXVII, 32. The fat and blood of an animal set aside as tithe are offered up and their flesh is eaten by its ritually clean owners in Jerusalem. Also, if blemished, it may be eaten in a state of uncleanness in all places.');">¹</span>

ונוהג בבקר ובצאן ואין מתעשרין מזה על זה בכבשים ובעזים ומתעשרין מזה על זה בחדש ובישן ואינן מתעשרין מזה על זה

IS IN FORCE IN PALESTINE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the Land'.');">²</span>

שהיה בדין

AND OUTSIDE PALESTINE, IN THE DAYS WHEN THE TEMPLE EXISTS AND WHEN IT DOES NOT EXIST, [IT APPLIES] TO HULLIN ONLY BUT NOT TO CONSECRATED ANIMALS.

ומה אם החדש והישן שאינן כלאים זה בזה אינם מתעשרין מזה על זה כבשים ועזים שהן כלאים זה בזה אינו דין שלא יהו מתעשרין מזה על זה

IT APPLIES BOTH TO LARGE CATTLE AND SHEEP.

ת"ל

; TO LAMBS AND TO GOATS (AND ONE CAN BE TITHED FOR THE OTHER) ; TO THE NEW<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Those born after Elul, the first of this month being considered a New Year for the tithing of animals.');">³</span>

{ויקרא כז } וצאן משמע כל צאן אחד:

BREED AND THE OLD,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Those born before Elul.');">⁴</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> לימא מתני' דלא כרבי עקיבא

NOW IT MIGHT BE RIGHTLY ARGUED: SEEING THAT NEW AND OLD ANIMALS WHICH ARE NOT TREATED AS DIVERSE KINDS IN REGARD TO ONE ANOTHER ARE YET NOT TITHED ONE FOR THE OTHER, LAMBS AND GOATS WHICH ARE TREATED AS DIVERSE KINDS IN REGARD TO ONE ANOTHER, ALL THE MORE SHOULD NOT BE TITHED ONE FOR THE OTHER'THE TEXT THEREFORE STATES: AND OF THE FLOCK,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">⁵</span>

דתניא רבי עקיבא אומר

INTIMATING THAT ALL KINDS OF FLOCK ARE CONSIDERED ONE [FOR PURPOSES OF TITHING].

יכול יעלה אדם מעשר בהמה מחוצה לארץ ויקריבנו

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>May we say that our Mishnah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which says that the law concerning tithe of cattle is in force outside Palestine.');">⁶</span>

ת"ל

is not in accordance with R'Akiba?

(דברים יב, ו) והבאתם שמה עולותיכם וזבחיכם ואת מעשרותיכם בשתי מעשרות הכתוב מדבר אחד מעשר בהמה ואחד מעשר דגן ממקום שאתה מעלה מעשר דגן אתה מעלה מעשר בהמה וממקום שאי אתה מעלה מעשר דגן אי אתה מעלה מעשר בהמה

For it was taught: R'Akiba says: You might think that a man may take up an animal set aside as tithe from outside Palestine and offer it?

אפי' תימא ר' עקיבא כאן ליקרב כאן ליקדש

[To guard against this inference] the text states: And thither ye shall bring your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices and your tithes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XII, 6.');">⁷</span>

דיקא נמי דקא נסיב לה תלמודא

Scripture speaks of two kinds of tithes,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The plural tithes implies more than one tithe.');">⁸</span>

והבאתם שמה שמע מינה

one the tithing of animals, and the other the tithe of grain.

אי הכי מאחר שאינו קרב אמאי קדוש

[And I draw an analogy thus]: from the place from which you can bring up the tithe of grain<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The tithing of grain is only practised in Palestine as it is a duty connected with the (Palestinian) soil.');">⁹</span>

לנאכל במומו לבעלים:

you can bring up an animal set aside as tithe, but from a place from which you cannot bring up the tithe of grain, you cannot bring up an animal set aside as tithe [to be sacrificed]! - [No].

בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית:

You can even say [that the Mishnah is] in accordance with R'Akiba.

אי הכי אפי' האידנא נמי

The one statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Baraitha.');">¹⁰</span>

כדרב הונא דאמר רב הונא

refers to offering [the animal up].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Akiba does not permit the tithe animal brought from outside Palestine to be offered up.');">¹¹</span>

גזירה משום יתום

the other to the consecration [thereof].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mishnah refers only to the animal's consecration, stating that the law of tithe regarding an animal applies in that respect even outside Palestine.');">¹²</span>

אי הכי מעיקרא נמי לא

This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That R. Akiba only excludes the animal set aside as tithe from being sacrificed.');">¹³</span>

אלא אפשר בהכרזה

is also indicated by the fact that he [R'Akiba] derives his teaching from the text: 'And thither ye shall bring', [thus referring distinctly to offering up].

הכא נמי אפשר בהכרזה

This proves it But since [the animal] is not offered up, for what purpose is it consecrated?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Unless it be that it might be offered up as a sacrifice.');">¹⁴</span>

אלא אמר רבה

- To be eaten by the owners when it becomes blemished.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Waiting for a blemish to befall the animal, for an animal set aside as tithe may be eaten by the owner whether it is blemished or unblemished, Scripture not enjoining that it must be given to a priest.');">¹⁵</span>

משום תקלה

IN THE DAYS WHEN THE TEMPLE EXISTS AND WHEN IT DOES NOT EXIST.

ומנא תימרא דחיישינן לתקלה

If this be the case, [then the law of tithe as regards animals] should apply even nowadays?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When there is no Temple in existence.');">¹⁶</span>

דתנן אין מקדישין ואין מעריכין ואין מחרימין בזמן הזה ואם הקדיש והעריך והחרים בהמה תיעקר פירות כסות וכלים ירקבו מעות וכלי מתכות יוליך לים המלח

- It is as R'Huna says [elsewhere], for R'Huna said: [It is prohibited] as a prevention against an animal whose mother died<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'an orphan'.');">¹⁷</span>

ואיזהו עיקור נועל דלת בפניה והיא מתה מאיליה

[during or soon after childbirth being brought into the shed].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An orphaned animal not being subject to the law of tithe, v. infra 58b.');">¹⁸</span>

אי הכי בכור נמי לא ליקדש

If this be the case, the same prohibition should have applied originally [when the Temple was standing]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That even when there was a Temple there should be no tithing of animals, in case an orphaned animal enters the shed for tithing.');">¹⁹</span>

בכור בדידן תליא מילתא

[What you must] therefore [reply is that] it is possible for an announcement to be made [by the Beth din].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That one should not bring an orphaned animal to the shed.');">²⁰</span>

ברחם קדוש

[This being so], here too<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With reference to the tithing of animals in these days.');">²¹</span>

הכי קאמר

it is possible to have all announcement made [by the Beth din]? - Rather said Raba: The reason is that one might be led to commit an offence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'a stumbling-block'. For since we have no altar nowadays, we have to keep the animal until it becomes blemished. There is thus a possibility that an offence might be committed, that the animal might be worked and shorn or slaughtered before it is blemished.');">²²</span>

ליקנינהו לאודנייהו לעובדי כוכבים דלא ליקדש מעיקרא

And whence will you prove that we take into account the possibility of one committing an offence? - For it was taught: We are not permitted to consecrate an animal, nor to make valuation, nor to set aside as devoted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Dedicated as holy for the priests or sacred use.');">²³</span> nowadays.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because we cannot hide them until the Temple is rebuilt and therefore we apprehend that an offence might be committed with them.');">²⁴</span> But if one did consecrate an animal, or make a valuation or set aside as devoted, the animal is to be destroyed;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'uprooted'.');">²⁵</span> fruits, garments and vessels shall be allowed to rot and as for money and metal vessels, let him cast them into the Salt Sea. And what is meant by destroying? He locks the door on [the animal] and it dies of itself [from hunger].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. A.Z. 13a.');">²⁶</span> If this be the case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That an animal set aside as tithe nowadays is not holy for fear of the law being transgressed.');">²⁷</span> then a first-born [of an animal] should also not become holy nowadays?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For fear that it might be shorn etc.');">²⁸</span> Is then the sanctity of a first-born dependent on us? Is it not hol from the time it leaves the womb? - This is what is meant [by the question]: Let him make over to a heathen the ears of the [mothers of the prospective offspring] so that they shall not be sanctified from the beginning?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law being that if a heathen has a share in the first-born it is not subject to redemption, v. supra 2a. If you therefore fear an offence against the law, why not adopt this remedy?');">²⁹</span>