Rosh Hashanah 10

Chapter 10

א כפסח דמו קמ"ל
1 is on the same footing as the paschal lamb.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the transgression of 'not delaying' is incurred with the passing of one festival (Rashi) .');"><sup>1</sup></span> Therefore we are told [that this is not so].
ב מנהני מילי דתנו רבנן (דברים כג, כב) כי תדור נדר אין לי אלא נדר נדבה מנין
2 What is the authority [in the Scripture] for these rules? - As our Rabbis have taught: ' When thou shalt vow a vow:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 22.');"><sup>2</sup></span> this tells me only [the rule for] a vow; how do I know that a freewill-offering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In making a vow a man said, 'I undertake to bring such-and-such an offering'; in making a freewill-offering he said, 'I undertake to bring this animal as an offering'.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ג נאמר כאן נדר ונאמר להלן (ויקרא ז, טז) אם נדר או נדבה מה להלן נדבה עמו אף כאן נדבה עמו
3 is also included? We have here the term 'vow' and in another place<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VII, 16.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ד (דברים כג, כב) לה אלהיך אלו הדמין הערכין והחרמין וההקדשות (דברים כג, כב) לא תאחר לשלמו הוא ולא חילופיו (דברים כג, כב) כי דרוש ידרשנו אלו חטאות ואשמות עולות ושלמים
4 we find the expression if a vow or a free will-offering; just as there a freewill-offering goes with the vow, so here, a freewill-offering goes with it. To the Lord thy God: this indicates money valuations, valuations, devoted things, and consecrated things.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 11 nn. 5-8. Because all these went for the repair of the Temple and not to the priests.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ה (דברים כג, כב) ה' אלהיך אלו צדקות ומעשרות ובכור (דברים כג, כב) מעמך זה לקט שכחה ופאה (דברים כג, כב) והיה בך חטא ולא בקרבנך חטא
5 Thou shalt not be slack to pay it: it, but not its substitute.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained below.');"><sup>6</sup></span> For he will surely require it: this indicates sin-offerings, trespass-offerings, burnt-offerings and peace-offerings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' All these as distinct from the vow and freewill-offerings were an obligation the fulfilment of which could be demanded. The burnt-offerings and peace-offerings referred to are those which were brought as an additional offering on the festival. If they had been already set aside, they ukt could be brought on a subsequent festival (V. Tosaf., s.v.) .');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ו אמר מר לא תאחר לשלמו הוא ולא חילופיו חילופי מאי אי חילופי עולה ושלמים מקרב קרבי
6 The Lord thy God: this indicates charity contributions, tithes and firstborn.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The words 'the Lord thy God' here are strictly speaking superfluous, and can therefore be used for an exposition.');"><sup>8</sup></span> From thee: this indicates gleanings, forgotten sheaves and corners of the field.
ז אי חילופי חטאת למיתה אזלא אלא מאי חילופיו חילופי תודה
7 And it will be sin in thee; but not sin in thy offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the offering is not disqualified thereby.');"><sup>9</sup></span> The Master has [just] said: "'Thou shalt not be slack in paying it"; It and not its substitute'.
ח דתני רבי חייא תודה שנתערבה בתמורתה ומתה אחת מהן חברתה אין לה תקנה
8 Substitute what? If the substitute for a burnt-offering or a peace-offering is meant, this is actually offered.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the original animal was lost and another substituted and then the first was found, both are offered and the substitute also comes under the rule of 'not delaying'.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ט היכי ליעביד ליקרבה וליקריב לחם בהדה דלמא תמורה היא ליקרבה בלא לחם דלמא תודה היא
9 If the substitute for a sin-offering, this is allowed to perish.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And never offered.');"><sup>11</sup></span> How then are we to understand 'its substitute'? - The substitute for a thanksgiving-offering, as R'Hiyya taught: If a thanksgiving offering became mixed up with its substitute and one of them died , there is no remedy for the other,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it must be allowed to perish.');"><sup>12</sup></span>
י והא כיון דלאו בת הקרבה היא קרא למעוטי למה לי
10 For what is he [the owner] to do? Shall he offer it and offer the bread<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. VII, 12, 13.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
יא אמר רב ששת לעולם למעוטי חילופי עולה ושלמים והכא במאי עסקינן כגון שעברו עליו שני רגלים והומם וחיללו על אחר ועבר עליו רגל אחד סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ומכח קמא קאתי כמאן דעברו עליו ג' רגלים דמי קמ"ל
11 with it? Perhaps it is the substitute.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And according to Men. 79b, bread was not to be brought with the substitute of a thanksgiving-offering.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
יב ולרבי מאיר דאמר כיון שעבר עליו רגל א' עובר בבל תאחר מאי איכא למימר אמר רבא הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שהומם בתוך הרגל וחיללו ועבר עליו הרגל סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ומכח קמא קאתי כמאן דעבר עליה כוליה רגל דמי קמ"ל
12 Shall he offer it without the bread? Perhaps it is the original thank-offering.
יג והיה בך חטא ולא בקרבנך חטא והא מהכא נפקא מדאחרים נפקא דתניא אחרים אומרים יכול יהא בכור שעברה שנתו כפסולי המוקדשין ויפסל
13 But [if that is so,] seeing that it cannot be offered, why do require a text to exclude it? - R'Shesheth replied: In point of fact, [the intention of the verse is] to exclud the substitutes for burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, and we are dealing here with the case of one which was kept over during two festivals and then became blemished and the owner made it profane by substituting another and this was kept over one festival. You might imagine in this case that since it takes the place of the first, it is as if it had been kept over for three festivals; therefore we are told that this i so.
יד תלמוד לומר (דברים יד, כג) ואכלת לפני ה' אלהיך מעשר דגנך תירושך ויצהרך ובכורות בקרך וצאנך מקיש בכור למעשר מה מעשר אינו נפסל משנה לחברתה אף בכור אינו נפסל משנה לחברתה
14 But on the view of R'Meir who said that as soon as one festival has been allowed to elapse there is a transgression of the precept 'not to delay', what can be said? - Raba replied: Here we are dealing with a case where the animal became blemished during the festival and he declared it profane [by substituting another], and this was kept over the festival. You might imagine that since it takes the place of the first it i as if it had been kept over during the whole of the festival.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And thus, according to R. Meir, is the rule of 'not delaying' transgressed.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
טו איצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא הני מילי בכור דלאו בר הרצאה הוא אבל קדשים דבני הרצאה נינהו אימא לא לירצו קא משמע לן
15 Therefore we are told [that this is not so]. "'And it will be sin in thee," but not sin in thy offering'. Do we derive this lesson from here?
טז ואכתי
16 Surely it i derived from the text adduced by the 'Others', as it has been taught: 'Others say, I might say that a firstling after a year has passed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A firstling has to be sacrificed within its first year, v. Deut. XV, 20.');"><sup>16</sup></span> is like consecrated things that have become disqualified<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For being offered on the altar.');"><sup>17</sup></span> and so is disqualified. Therefore it says, And thou shalt eat before the Lord thy God the tithe of thy corn and of thy wine and of thine oil, and the firstlings of thy herd and of thy flock.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIV, 23.');"><sup>18</sup></span> Here firstling is mentioned alongside of tithe, [to indicate that] just as tithe is not disqualified by being kept from one year to another,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because it says, At the end of every three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe etc., Deut. XIV, 28.');"><sup>19</sup></span> so a firstling is not disqualified by being kept from one year to another.' - It was still necessary [to learn the lesson in the other way]. For you might have imagined that this applies only to a firstling, which is not for appeasement, but consecrated<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., burnt - and sin-offerings. ubmrk');"><sup>20</sup></span> things which are for appeasement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. Lev. I, 3 et al. E.V. 'that he (it) may be accepted.'');"><sup>21</sup></span> will not appease [if kept over]. Therefore I am told that this is not so. But still [I may object that]