Menachot 163

ושלמים שם שם ממעשר [ומינה] מה שלמים אין גופן מעשר אף תודה נמי אין גופה מעשר והני חיטי הלקוחות במעות מעשר שני נמי אין גופן מעשר

And in respect of peace-offerings [this is derived] from the expression 'there' stated [in connection with peace-offerings]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXVII, 7. And thou shalt sacrifice peace-offerings and shalt eat there.');">¹</span> and also in connection with the Second Tithe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIV, 26: And thou shalt eat there. Thus by analogy it is established that peace-offerings may be brought from Second Tithe.');">²</span> Then it follows, as peace-offerings are not brought from actual Second Tithe produce.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For Second Tithe is taken from corn only, and so cannot actually be used for peace-offerings. What is meant is. of course, that the money obtained from redeeming Second Tithe produce may be used for buying animals for peace-offerings.');">³</span>

אימא טעמא דידי תודה מהיכא קא ילפינא לה משלמים ושלמים שם שם ממעשר מה שלמים אין מין מעשר אף תודה אין מין מעשר לאפוקי חיטין הלקוחות במעות מעשר שני דמין מעשר נינהו

so the [bread of the] thank-offering may not be brought from actual Second Tithe produce; and wheat bought with Second Tithe money is not actual Second Tithe produce.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the original Second Tithe wheat had already been redeemed with money.');">⁴</span> And I will state my reason: Whence do I know this of the thank-offering? From peace-offerings.

אמר ר' אמי המתפיס מעות מעשר שני לשלמים לא קנו שלמים מאי טעמא דלא אלימא קדושת השלמים למיחל אקדושת מעשר שני

And in respect of peace-offerings [this is derived] from the expression 'there' stated [in connection with peace-offerings] and also in connection with the Second Tithe. Then it follows, as peace-offerings are not of the same kind as Second Tithe, so the [bread of the] thank-offering may not be from that which is the same kind as Second Tithe;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that any Second Tithe wheat, even that which was bought with Second Tithe money, may not be used for the thank-offering. But he may buy with Second Tithe money wheat expressly for the thank-offering. V. p. 494. n. 5.');">⁵</span> thus excluding wheat bought from Second Tithe money<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For Second Tithe purposes but not for the thank-offering.');">⁶</span>

מיתיבי הלוקח חיה לזבחי שלמים ובהמה לבשר תאוה לא יצא העור לחולין לאו למימרא דקני שלמים

which is the same kind as Second Tithe. R'Ammi said, If a man designated<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'attached'.');">⁷</span> Second Tithe money for a peace-offering, the peace-offering has not appropriated it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But he may use the money for another purpose.');">⁸</span>

הא איתמר עלה אמר רב לא קני שלמים ומאי לא יצא העור לחולין הכי קאמר אינו בתורת לצאת העור לחולין מאי טעמא אמר רבה נעשה כלוקח שור לחרישה

Why? Because the sanctity of the peace-offering is not so potent that it can be imposed upon the sanctity of Second Tithe. An objection was raised: If a man bought<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With Second Tithe money in Jerusalem.');">⁹</span>

איתמר המתפיס מעות מעשר שני לשלמים ר' יוחנן אמר קני רבי אלעזר אומר לא קני

a wild animal for a peace-offering or cattle for use as ordinary food,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Neither purchase is proper, for wild animals may not be offered as peace-offerings, and cattle bought with Second Tithe money should be offered as peace-offerings only and not be slaughtered for a secular meal.');">¹⁰</span> the hide does not become unhallowed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is assumed that this means that the hide of the wild beast must be sold and with the money a peace-offering must be offered. Similarly the hide of the cattle must be sold and the money received must be treated as Second Tithe money.');">¹¹</span> Does not this prove that the peaceoffering has appropriated it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the sanctity of the peace-offering rests upon the hide so that it must be sold and the money received must be spent on peace-offerings.');">¹²</span>

ואליבא דר' יהודה דאמר מעשר ממון הדיוט הוא דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דקני כי פליגי אליבא דר' מאיר דאמר מעשר ממון גבוה הוא מאן דאמר לא קני כר' מאיר ומאן דאמר קני כיון דמעשר קרי ליה שלמים כי מיתפסת ליה נמי תפיס

- Surely it has been stated in connection with this that Rab said, The peace-offering has not appropriated it; and what is meant by 'the hide does not become unhallowed'? It means this:-[The wild animal] does not come within the category [of peace-offerings] for its hide to become unhallowed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the usual way when cattle is bought with Second Tithe money and is offered as a peace-offering the hide becomes absolutely unhallowed and has neither the sanctity of the peace-offering nor the sanctity of Second Tithe. And likewise, if the sanctity of peace-offerings could apply to wild animals the hide thereof would also become absolutely unhallowed. Since, however, this is not the case, for the wild animal does not come within the category of peace-offerings, the hide does not become unhallowed, but it must be sold and the money received must be treated as Second Tithe money (Rashi MS. and Tosaf.) .');">¹³</span> And why is it so? - Rabbah answered.

מיתיבי המתפיס מעות מעשר שני לשלמים כשהוא פודן מוסיף עליהם שני חומשין אחד לקדש ואחד למעשר

It is as if he bought<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With Second Tithe money in Jerusalem.');">¹⁴</span> an ox for ploughing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case the ox must be sold and the money received treated in the sanctity of Second Tithe.');">¹⁵</span> It was stated: If a man designated Second Tithe money for a peace-offering, R'Johanan said, [The peace-offering] has appropriated it; R'Eleazar said, It has not appropriated it.

מי סברת דברי הכל היא הא מני רבי יהודה היא:

According to R'Judah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Kid. 24a, 52b.');">¹⁶</span> who maintains that the [Second] Tithe is secular property they both agree that the peace-offering has appropriated it;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the sanctity of the peace-offering immediately rests upon the secular property.');">¹⁷</span> they differ only according to R'Meir<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Kid. 24a, 52b.');">¹⁶</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> מנין לאומר הרי עלי תודה שלא יביא אלא מן החולין תלמוד לומר (דברים טז, ב) וזבחת פסח לה' אלהיך צאן ובקר והלא פסח אין בא אלא מן הכבשים ומן העזים אם כן מה תלמוד לומר צאן ובקר להקיש כל הבא מן הצאן ומן הבקר לפסח מה פסח דבר שבחובה ואין בא אלא מן החולין אף כל דבר שבחובה אין בא אלא מן החולין

who maintains that the [Second] Tithe is sacred property. He who said that it has not appropriated it is in accord with R'Meir;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he holds that the sanctity of the peace-offering cannot rest upon sacred property. cre hre');">¹⁸</span> but he who said that it has appropriated it is of the opinion that since Second Tithe is usually offered<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So MSS. reading . Cur. edd. read , 'is referred to'.');">¹⁹</span>

לפיכך האומר הרי עלי תודה הרי עלי שלמים הואיל ובאין חובה לא יביאו אלא מן החולין ונסכים בכל מקום לא יביאו אלא מן החולין:

as peace-offerings, if a man designates [Second Tithe money for a peace-offering] the designation is binding. An objection was raised: If a man designated Second Tithe money for a peace-offering, when he redeems it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When a man redeems things consecrated or Second Tithe produce or Second Tithe money for other coinage he must add to the redemption money one fifth part of its value. For the former v.Lev.XXVII, 13, 15 and for the latter v. ibid. 31.');">²⁰</span> he must add two fifths, one in respect of things consecrated and one in respect of Second Tithe!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is thus quite evident that the sanctity of the peace-offering rests upon the Second Tithe money that was merely designated for a peace-offering, contrary therefore to R. Eleazar.');">²¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ופסח גופיה מנא לן דתניא ר' אליעזר אומר נאמר פסח במצרים ונאמר פסח לדורות מה פסח האמור במצרים לא בא אלא מן החולין אף פסח האמור לדורות לא בא אלא מן החולין

- Do you think that this teaching is the opinion of all? It is only the opinion of R'Judah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who regards the Second Tithe as secular property and therefore the sanctity of the peace-offering can rest upon it.');">²²</span> <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>WHENCE [IS IT DERIVED]THAT IF A MAN SAYS,'I TAKE UPON MYSELF [TO OFFER] A THANK-OFFERING', HE MAY BRING IT ONLY FROM WHAT IS UNCONSECRATED?

אמר לו רבי עקיבא וכי דנין אפשר משאי אפשר אמר לו אף על פי שאי אפשר ראייה גדולה היא ונלמד הימנה

BECAUSE IT IS WRITTEN, AND THOU SHALT SACRIFICE THE PASSOVER-OFFERING UNTO THE LORD THY GOD OF THE FLOCK AND THE HERD.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XVI, 2.');">²³</span> BUT IS NOT THE PASSOVER-OFFERING BROUGHT ONLY FROM THE LAMBS AND FROM THE GOATS? WHY THEN IS IT WRITTEN, OF THE FLOCK AND THE HERD?

חזר רבי עקיבא ודנו דין אחר מה לפסח מצרים שכן אין טעון מתן דמים ואימורין לגבי מזבח

IT IS TO COMPARE WHATSOEVER IS BROUGHT FROM THE FLOCK AND THE HERD<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. peace-offerings and thank-offerings.');">²⁴</span> WITH THE PASSOVER-OFFERING: AS THE PASSOVER-OFFERING IS OBLIGATORY AND OFFERED ONLY FROM WHAT IS UNCONSECRATED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. GEMARA:');">²⁵</span> SO EVERYTHING THAT IS OBLIGATORY<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in every case where the expression 'I take upon myself' was used, for this imposes a personal obligation for the fulfilment of the vow.');">²⁶</span> MAY BE OFFERED ONLY FROM WHAT IS UNCONSECRATED. THEREFORE IF A MAN SAYS, 'I TAKE UPON MYSELF [TO OFFER] A THANK-OFFERING', OR 'I TAKE UPON MYSELF [TO OFFER] A PEACE-OFFERING', SINCE THESE ARE OBLIGATORY THEY MAY BE OFFERED ONLY FROM WHAT IS UNCONSECRATED. THE DRINK-OFFERINGS IN EVERY CASE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether the expression 'I take upon myself' was used or not, and whether it was expressly stated that the drink-offerings be brought from Second Tithe or not.');">²⁷</span> MAY BE OFFERED ONLY FROM WHAT IS UNCONSECRATED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the drink-offerings are wholly offered up, and whatsoever is wholly offered up may not be brought from Second Tithe (Tosaf) .');">²⁸</span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>And whence do we know it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it is to be brought only from what is unconsecrated.');">²⁹</span> for the Passover-offering itself? - It was taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yeb. 46a.');">³⁰</span> R'Eliezer said: A Passover-offering was ordained to be brought in Egypt and a Passover-offering was ordained for later generations; as the Passover-offering that was ordained in Egypt could be brought only from what was unconsecrated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For at that time the law of the Second Tithe had not been promulgated, and even later when this law was given it was not to come into force until the Israelites entered the Holy Land.');">³¹</span> so the Passover-offering that was ordained for later generations may be brought only from what is unconsecrated. Said to him R'Akiba, Is it right to infer the possible from the impossible?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Passover-offering in Egypt could not possibly have been brought from Second Tithe (v. prec. n.) whereas that of future generations could.');">³²</span> The other replied, Although it was impossible [otherwise]. it is nevertheless a striking argument and we may make an inference from it. Then R'Akiba put forward the following argument [in refutation]: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it is to be brought only from what is unconsecrated.');">²⁹</span> was so of the Passover-offering ordained in Egypt since it did not require the sprinkling of blood and the offering of the sacrificial portions upon the altar;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since there was no altar in existence at that time.');">³³</span>