Temurah 34

Chapter 34

א אמר לך שמואל דלמא הך תנא נמי סבר כל היכא דלא חזיא לגופה לא נחתא לה קדושת הגוף
1 - Samuel can answer you: R'Eleazar holds:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Sh. Mek.; cur. edd.: perhaps this Tanna also.');"><sup>1</sup></span> Wherever [the animal] is not [offered],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not fit to offer on the altar.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב <br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך יש בקרבנות </strong></big><br><br>
2 bodily consecration does not attach to it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore if the animal were trefah at the outset, bodily holiness does not attach to it. Samuel himself, however, will agree with the Rabbis that in the case of trefah, the animal receives bodily holiness and therefore it cannot be redeemed unless permanently blemished, in order to be given to dogs to eat.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ג מתני׳ <big><strong>אלו</strong></big> קדשים שוולדותיהן ותמורותיהן כיוצא בהן ולד שלמים ותמורתן ולדן וולד ולדן עד סוף כל העולם הרי הן שלמים וטעונין סמיכה ונסכים ותנופת חזה ושוק
3 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE FOLLOWING ARE DEDICATIONS WHOSE YOUNG AND EXCHANGES ARE IN THE SAME CLASS AS THEMSELVES: THE YOUNG OF PEACE-OFFERINGS AND THEIR EXCHANGES, THEIR YOUNG<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., the young of peace-offerings and the exchange of the peace-offerings.');"><sup>4</sup></span> AND THE YOUNG OF THEIR YOUNG, TILL THE END OF TIME,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until the end of the world'.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ד <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> כיון דתנא ולדן וולד ולדן עד סוף כל העולם למה לי תנא דידן שמעיה לר"א דאמר ולד שלמים לא יקרב שלמים וא"ל תנא דידן לא מיבעיא בוולדן דלא מודינא אלא אפי' עד סוף העולם לא מודינא לך
4 ARE REGARDED AS PEACE-OFFERINGS REQUIRING LAYING ON OF HANDS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The laying on of the hands prior to the killing of the animal.');"><sup>6</sup></span> DRINK-OFFERINGS AND THE WAVING OF THE BREAST AND SHOULDER'<big><b>GEMARA:</b></big> Since it states: THE YOUNG AND THE YOUNG OF THEIR YOUNG, what need is there for the UNTIL THE END OF TIME? - Our Tanna [of the Mishnah] heard R'Eleazar state that the young of a peace-offering is not offered as a peace-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But is condemned to die.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ה מנא ה"מ דת"ר (ויקרא ג, א) זכר לרבות את הולד
5 Thereupon our Tanna said to him: Not only do I not agree with you with regard to their young.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since I hold that it has the same status as its mother.');"><sup>8</sup></span> but I even do not agree with you with regard to the young born until the end of time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since even then I hold that the young has the law of its mother.');"><sup>9</sup></span> Whence do we derive this? - Our Rabbis have taught: [Scripture says:] A male:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 1. What need is there for the words 'a male', 'a female'? It would have been sufficient if Scripture bad said: 'If he offer it from the herd', which would have implied male and female.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ו והלא דין הוא ומה תמורה שאין גידולי הקדש קריבה ולד שגידולי הקדש אינו דין שיקרב
6 this includes the young. Now have we not here an inference from minor to major; if an exchange which is not reared in holiness is offered,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is derived from the expression 'a female', as stated subsequently in the GEMARA:');"><sup>11</sup></span> how much more should the young [of a dedication] which is reared in holiness be offered?
ז מה לתמורה שכן נוהגת בכל הקדשים תאמר בולד שאינו נוהג בכל הקדשים אינו קרב הואיל ואינו נוהג בכל הקדשים ת"ל זכר לרבות את הולד נקבה לרבות התמורה
7 The case of exchange is different, since it applies to all dedications,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By an individual.');"><sup>12</sup></span> whereas the rule of the young does not apply to all dedications,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since a burnt-offering and a guilt-offering are males.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ח אין לי אלא תמורת תמימין וולד תמימין ולד בעלי מומין ותמורת בעלי מומין מנין ת"ל אם זכר לרבות ולד בעלי מומין אם נקבה לרבות תמורת בעלי מומין
8 [and since it does not apply to all dedications, therefore the young is not offered].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wilna Gaon Glosses.');"><sup>14</sup></span> The text therefore states, 'A male', thus including the young [as being offered]. [The text] A female,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 1.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
ט אמר ליה רב ספרא לאביי ואיפוך אנא מסתברא ממקום שנתרבתה תמורת תמימין נתרבתה תמורת בעלי מומין
9 this includes exchange. I have so far only the young of unblemished<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Wilna Gaon Glosses.');"><sup>16</sup></span> animals<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the mother is unblemished and therefore the young has the same law. ot');"><sup>17</sup></span>
י א"ל מי קאמינא לך ליפוך אם זכר אם נקבה אנא כוליה קרא קאמינא אימא זכר לרבות את התמורה נקבה לרבות את הולד א"ל ולד לשון זכר משמע תמורה לשון נקבה משמע
10 and the exchange of unblemished animals. Whence do we derive the cases of the young of blemished animals and the exchange of blemished animals [as being offered]? Scripture says: If it [be a male],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The word ('if it be') which has an inclusive meaning.');"><sup>18</sup></span> this includes the young of blemished animals, and the words 'if it be [a female]' include the exchange of blemished animals.
יא למאי הלכתא אמר שמואל ליקרב ואליבא דר"א
11 Said R'Safra to Abaye: perhaps I can reverse [this]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And say that the words 'If it be (a male) ' include an exchange of blemished animals, and the words 'If it be (a female) ' include the young of blemished animals.');"><sup>19</sup></span> - From the same text ['A female'] that we include the exchange of unblemished animals [as being offered], we include the exchange of blemished animals.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore from the words 'if it be' which are next to the words 'a female', we derive the case of an exchange of blemished animals but not from the words 'if it be' next to the words 'a male'.');"><sup>20</sup></span> He said to him: Am I asking you to reverse the interpretation of the expression 'if it be' which is next to 'a male and the interpretation of the expression 'if it be' which is next to 'a female'?
יב דמהו דתימא כי קאמר רבי אלעזר עולה דאיכא שם עולה על אמו אבל הני ולדות לא קרבי קמ"ל
12 I mean this: Reverse the whole verse.
יג בר פדא אמר לרעיה ואליבא דדברי הכל (דאתמר) רבא אמר ליקרב ואליבא דר"א רב פפא אמר לרעיה ואליבא דדברי הכל
13 Say as follows: The expression 'a male' includes the case of exchange<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And its phrase 'if it be' will include the exchange of blemished animals.');"><sup>21</sup></span> and the expression 'a female' includes the young!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And its phrase 'if it be' will include the young of blemished animals.');"><sup>22</sup></span> - He replied to him: The word 'walad' ['the young'] has a masculine implication,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore we include it from the text 'a male'.');"><sup>23</sup></span> whereas the word 'temurah' ['exchange'] has a feminine implication.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore we include it from the text 'a female'.');"><sup>24</sup></span> For what practical purpose?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Are the offspring of blemished animals holy, since their mother is not fit to be offered.');"><sup>25</sup></span> - Said Samuel: In order to be offered and according to the opinion of R'Eleazar.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who says in the Mishnah (infra 18a) that if one set apart a female animal for a burnt-offering and it gave birth,its offspring is offered as a burnt-offering, although its mother is not fit for a burnt-offering. Here too in the case of the young of blemished offerings, although the mother is not fit for the altar, the young is offered.');"><sup>26</sup></span>
יד והאי תנא מייתי לה מהכא
14 For you might have thought that R'Eleazar only holds that [the young] is regarded as a burnt-offering because the name of a burnt-offering is applied to its mother,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although the mother itself is not offered, the holiness of a burnt-offering is not eliminated, since there is a case of a burnt-offering which is a female, viz., a burnt-offering of a bird.');"><sup>27</sup></span>
טו (דברים יב, כו) רק קדשיך אלו תמורות אשר יהיו לך אלו הוולדות תשא ובאת
15 but these young [of a blemished peace-offering] are not offered.
טז יכול יכניסנו לבית הבחירה וימנע מהם מים ומזון כדי שימותו ת"ל (דברים יב, כז) ועשית עולותיך הבשר והדם כדרך שאתה נוהג בעולה אתה נוהג בתמורה כדרך שאתה נוהג בשלמים אתה נוהג בוולדי שלמים ובתמורה
16 He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Tanna of the Baraitha above.');"><sup>28</sup></span> therefore informs us [that it is not so]. Bar Padda says:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The object of the Mishnah when it says that the offspring of a peace-offering is considered as a peace-offering is as follows.');"><sup>29</sup></span>
יז יכול כל קדשים כן ת"ל רק דברי רבי ישמעאל ר"ע אומר אינו צריך הרי הוא אומר אשם הוא (אשם אשם לה') הוא קרב ואין תמורתו קריבה
17 In order that they be left to pasture and [this is] according to all the authorities concerned.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even according to the Rabbis who differ from R. Eleazar. They will admit that the young are sacred at least as regards pasturing and that they are not hullin.');"><sup>30</sup></span> It was stated also:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As to what extent the offspring of a blemished peace-offering is holy.');"><sup>31</sup></span> Raba says. In order to be offered and according to the opinion of R'Eleazar. R'Papa says: In order to be left to pasture and according to all the authorities concerned.
יח אמר מר תשא ובאת יכול יכניסנו לבית הבחירה
18 But the following Tanna derives this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The rule of the young of peace-offering being like the mother.');"><sup>32</sup></span> from here:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Naz. 25a; Bek. 24b.');"><sup>33</sup></span>
יט מנא תיתי הא כיון דגמרי חמש חטאות הנך מקרב קרבי
19 [Scripture says:] 'Only thy holy things':<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XII, 26.');"><sup>34</sup></span>
כ מהו דתימא חמש חטאות מתות בכ"מ והנך ימותו בבית הבחירה קמ"ל
20 this refers to exchanges; 'which thou hast': this refers to the young [of dedications]; 'thou shalt take and go': one might think [from this text] that he brings the offspring into the Temple and refrains from giving them water and food in order that they may die?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And thus he would be carrying out the injunction 'take and go'.');"><sup>35</sup></span> The text therefore states: And thou shalt offer thy burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 27 following the verse 'only thy holy things etc.'.');"><sup>36</sup></span>
כא אמר מר יכול אף כל הקדשים כן ת"ל רק קדשיך ולד דמאן אי דעולה זכר הוא ולאו בר אולודי הוא ואי דחטאת גמירי לה דלמיתה קיימי
21 to teach us that you must deal with an exchange as you deal with a burnt-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To sprinkle its blood and burn it entirely.');"><sup>37</sup></span> and that you must deal with the young of peace-offerings and their exchange as you deal with the peace-offerings themselves.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in respect of laying on of hands, drink-offerings and the waving of the breast and shoulders.');"><sup>38</sup></span> One might think that [the young and exchange] even of all dedications [are offered]? The text, however, states: Rak<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One of the words which has a restrictive meaning.');"><sup>39</sup></span> ['only']. This is the teaching of R'Ishmael. R'Akiba says: There i no need [to derive the limitation from 'rak'], for it says: 'It is a guilt-offering',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 19.');"><sup>40</sup></span> implying 'it' is offered but it exchange is not offered.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus excluding the exchange of other dedications from being offered.');"><sup>41</sup></span> The Master said: 'Thou shalt take and go. One might think from this text that he brings the offspring into the Temple, etc.' But how could you have inferred this,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the offspring and exchange of other dedications die, so as to require the text: And thou shalt offer thy burnt-offering, etc.');"><sup>42</sup></span> seeing that tradition mentions five sin-offerings as left to die,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Two of which are an offspring of a sin-offering and the exchange of a sin-offering.');"><sup>43</sup></span> thus implying that these<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The young of peace-offerings and their exchange.');"><sup>44</sup></span> are offered? - You might have thought that the five sin-offerings are left to die everywhere, whereas these<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The young of a peace-offering and its exchange.');"><sup>45</sup></span> are left to die only in the Temple. [Scripture] therefore informs us [that it is not so]. The Master said: 'One might think [that the young and exchange] of all dedications [are offered]? The text, however, says: Rak [only]'. Now to what young [are we alluding here]? If to the [young of a] burnt-offering, it is a male and is not capable of giving birth! If to the young of a sin-offering, there is a traditional law t is condemned to die.
Previous ChapterNext Chapter