יג אמר ליה רבי יוחנן לא שמיע לך הא דאמר ר' ינאי בחבורה נמנו וגמרו המקדיש בעל מום לגבי מזבח עובר משום חמשה שמות ואי בתמורה נמי ששה הוויין דאיכא נמי לאו דתמורה אלא מאי בבעל מום מעיקרו אמאי לקי דיקלא בעלמא הוא
13 is stated only in connection with the case of an unblemished animal which became blemished,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As one might be under the impression that since it was once holy, the fact that it subsequently became blemished should not disqualify it from being offered up on the altar.');"><sup>28</sup></span> in which case there is a transgression, but if it is an originally blemished animal, it is then a mere palm-tree!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He could not possibly have imagined that it would be fit for the altar except for its money value, and therefore one might think that there would not be any punishment of lashes.');"><sup>29</sup></span> - Thereupon R'Hiyya B'Joseph said to him: [Scripture says:] 'Too long or too short'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 23.');"><sup>30</sup></span> in the section<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Dealing with the various permanent blemishes which render an animal unfit.');"><sup>31</sup></span> and these are originally blemished animals.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Concerning which Scripture says, 'Ye shall not offer' which indicates as explained above, that one is guilty in dedicating these blemished animals.');"><sup>32</sup></span> He [Resh Lakish] said: Perhaps we have learnt this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which says that there is a penalty for dedicating.');"><sup>33</sup></span>