Pisqa’ 77115H:131-132;JN1:221-222. 1. “But your consecrated offerings that you shall have —and your Vow-offerings— you shall take up and bring to the place which HASHEM shall choose” (Dt.12:26). What topic is the verse addressing? If [at issue are consecrated] offerings from the Land, hasn’t this already been discussed (e.g., Dt.12:5-6)?116The verse specifies Holocaust-offerings, tithes, and other offerings which must be brought from the Land. Rather, [it must be speaking about] consecrated offerings from beyond the Land.
[The clause] you shall take up and bring holds [the owner] liable for the [expense of] care and transport until the [he] brings [the offerings] to the Chosen Abode.2. R. Judah says: [If consecrated offerings from beyond the land suffer a blemish or become lost], he is held liable for replacing them until reaching the Uncovered Well.117Hebrew: be’er/bor hagolah, referring to a reservoir in the Court of the Abode. H:132, followed by JN1:221, renders “Cistern of the Diaspora.” Albeck (commentary on M. Mid.5:4 and M. Eruv.10:14), argues that the name refers to the water wheel, (galgal) that lifted water from the well. See also F:142. n.18. who follows Ish-Shalom ad loc. in anchoring the term in Josh. 15:19’s reference to “a spring of water” (gulot mayim). From the Uncovered Well and onward he is not held liable for replacing them.118=T. Bik.1:5.
Is it possible to say that [this requirement to replace a blemished offering applies] even to Firstlings and the Cattle-tithe? The Teaching states: “And your Vow-offerings” (Dt.12:26)! [This verse refers specifically] to consecrated offerings brought [in satisfaction] of vows and voluntary donations. Excluded from liability [for replacement] are Firstlings and the Cattle-tithe, for they are not brought in satisfaction of vows and voluntary donations.
Is it possible for me to exclude [from liability] the Purification-offering and the Guilt-offering? The Teaching states: “Your consecrated offerings” (Dt.12:26).
What inspired you to include the Purification-offering and the Guilt-offering, but to exclude the Firstling and the Cattle-tithe? [The verse itself suggests this,] for after an inclusive expression [regarding obligatory consecrated offerings], it offers a restriction [regarding optional offerings, such as vows]. [Therefore,] I can include the Purification-offering and the Guilt-offering. For, [if disqualified by a blemish], they have a remedy119Heb: parnasah; literally “a livelihood.” In this context the blemished animals are spared a slow death by starvation, since they can be redeemed and slaughtered for food.where they live.120That is, in the Land, where alone, they can be slaughtered as common food, after being replaced by another animal destined for the altar. But I can exclude the Firstling and the Cattle-tithe, for, [if disqualified by a blemish], their remedy is available anywhere.121//M. Tem.3:5. See also T. Men.9:1. Even beyond the Land, the blemished Firstling and Cattle-tithe may be slaughtered for common meat. See comments of H:427, n.4 (Pisqa’ 77) and F:143, ns. 3 and 5.
3. R. Akiva says: The verse [Dt.12:26] addresses the transfer of consecration [from one sacrificial animal to its substitute]. “You shall take up and bring to the place” (Dt.12:26). Is it possible to say that [the transfer of consecration] applies even to Firstlings and the Cattle-tithe? The Teaching states: “And your Vow-offerings” (Dt.12:26)— [excluding the Firstling and the Cattle-tithe, neither of which is brought in satisfaction of a vow].
Is it possible to say that the Cattle-tithe may be donated in joint-ownership? The Teaching states: “That you shall have” (Dt.12:26)— [you in the singular (lekhah) teaches that the Cattle-tithe is not offered jointly].
Is it possible for me to exclude from liability brothers who acquired [a herd] from the liquidation of their common household, and afterward divided it?122//M. Bekh.9:3. The Teaching states: “That you shall have” (Dt.12:26)— [since the property was at one point jointly owned], the brothers’ herd is exempt from tithing.
[Shimon] b. Azzai says: Is it possible to say that the Cattle-tithe should be offered from the inheritance of an fatherless?123Cf. Mechilta Ishmael, piskha’, 18. The Teaching states: “But” (Dt.12:26)— [the exclusionary clause indicating that the estate of fatherlesss is not attached to pay the Cattle-tithe].
(דברים יב כו) רַק קָדָשֶׁיךָ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ לְךָ וּנְדָרֶיךָ תִּשָּׂא וּבָאתָ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם, בְּמָה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר? אִם בְּקָדְשֵׁי הָאָרֶץ – כְּבָר אָמוּר! הָא אֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בְּקָדְשֵׁי חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ.
Pisqa’ 77115H:131-132;JN1:221-222.
1. “But your consecrated offerings that you shall have
—and your Vow-offerings—
you shall take up and bring to the place which HASHEM shall choose” (Dt.12:26).
What topic is the verse addressing?
If [at issue are consecrated] offerings from the Land,
hasn’t this already been discussed (e.g., Dt.12:5-6)?116The verse specifies Holocaust-offerings, tithes, and other offerings which must be brought from the Land.
Rather, [it must be speaking about]
consecrated offerings from beyond the Land.
תִּשָּׂא וּבָאתָ – שֶׁחַיָּב בְּטִפּוּל הֲבָאָתָם עַד שֶׁיְּבִיאֵם לְבֵית הַבְּחִירָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: עַד בְּאֵר הַגּוֹלָה חַיָּב בְּאַחֲרָיוּתָם, מִבְּאֵר הַגּוֹלָה וְאֵילָךְ אֵינוֹ חַיָּב בְּאַחֲרָיוּתָם.
[The clause] you shall take up and bring
holds [the owner] liable
for the [expense of] care and transport
until the [he] brings [the offerings] to the Chosen Abode.2. R. Judah says:
[If consecrated offerings from beyond the land
suffer a blemish or become lost],
he is held liable for replacing them
until reaching the Uncovered Well.117Hebrew: be’er/bor hagolah, referring to a reservoir in the Court of the Abode. H:132, followed by JN1:221, renders “Cistern of the Diaspora.” Albeck (commentary on M. Mid.5:4 and M. Eruv.10:14), argues that the name refers to the water wheel, (galgal) that lifted water from the well. See also F:142. n.18. who follows Ish-Shalom ad loc. in anchoring the term in Josh. 15:19’s reference to “a spring of water” (gulot mayim).
From the Uncovered Well and onward
he is not held liable for replacing them.118=T. Bik.1:5.
יָכוֹל אַף בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: נְדָרֶיךָ, קָדָשִׁים שֶׁהֵם בָּאִים בְּנֶדֶר וּבִנְדָבָה, יָצְאוּ בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁאֵינָם בָּאִים בְּנֶדֶר וּבִנְדָבָה.
Is it possible to say that
[this requirement to replace a blemished offering applies]
even to Firstlings and the Cattle-tithe?
The Teaching states:
“And your Vow-offerings” (Dt.12:26)!
[This verse refers specifically] to consecrated offerings
brought [in satisfaction] of vows and voluntary donations.
Excluded from liability [for replacement]
are Firstlings and the Cattle-tithe,
for they are not brought
in satisfaction of vows and voluntary donations.
יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מוֹצִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: קָדָשֶׁיךָ.
Is it possible for me
to exclude [from liability]
the Purification-offering and the Guilt-offering?
The Teaching states:
“Your consecrated offerings” (Dt.12:26).
מִי לְחָשְׁךָ לְהָבִיא אֶת חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם וּלְהוֹצִיא אֶת בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר, אַחַר שֶׁרִבָּה הַכָּתוּב – מִעֵט, מֵבִיא אֲנִי חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם, שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם פַּרְנָסָה אֶלָּא בִּמְקוֹמָם, וּמוֹצִיא אֲנִי בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר, שֶׁיְּכוֹלִים לְהִתְפַּרְנֵס בְּכָל מָקוֹם.
What inspired you to include
the Purification-offering and the Guilt-offering,
but to exclude the Firstling and the Cattle-tithe?
[The verse itself suggests this,]
for after an inclusive expression
[regarding obligatory consecrated offerings],
it offers a restriction
[regarding optional offerings, such as vows].
[Therefore,] I can include
the Purification-offering and the Guilt-offering.
For, [if disqualified by a blemish],
they have a remedy119Heb: parnasah; literally “a livelihood.” In this context the blemished animals are spared a slow death by starvation, since they can be redeemed and slaughtered for food. where they live.120That is, in the Land, where alone, they can be slaughtered as common food, after being replaced by another animal destined for the altar.
But I can exclude the Firstling and the Cattle-tithe,
for, [if disqualified by a blemish],
their remedy is available anywhere.121//M. Tem.3:5. See also T. Men.9:1. Even beyond the Land, the blemished Firstling and Cattle-tithe may be slaughtered for common meat. See comments of H:427, n.4 (Pisqa’ 77) and F:143, ns. 3 and 5.
רַבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר: בִּתְמוּרַת קָדָשִׁים הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, תִּשָּׂא וּבָאתָ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם, יָכוֹל אַף בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: וּנְדָרֶיךָ.
3. R. Akiva says:
The verse [Dt.12:26] addresses the transfer of consecration
[from one sacrificial animal to its substitute].
“You shall take up and bring to the place” (Dt.12:26).
Is it possible to say that
[the transfer of consecration]
applies even to Firstlings and the Cattle-tithe?
The Teaching states:
“And your Vow-offerings” (Dt.12:26)—
[excluding the Firstling and the Cattle-tithe,
neither of which is brought in satisfaction of a vow].
יָכוֹל יְהֵא מַעֲשַׂר בְּהֵמָה נוֹהֵג בְּשֻׁתָּפוּת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ לְךָ.
Is it possible to say that
the Cattle-tithe may be donated in joint-ownership?
The Teaching states:
“That you shall have” (Dt.12:26)—
[you in the singular (lekhah) teaches that
the Cattle-tithe is not offered jointly].
יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מוֹצִיא אֶת הָאַחִים שֶׁקָּנוּ בִּתְפוּסַת הַבַּיִת וְאַחַר כָּךְ חָלְקוּ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ לְךָ.
Is it possible for me
to exclude from liability
brothers who acquired [a herd] from
the liquidation of their common household,
and afterward divided it?122//M. Bekh.9:3.
The Teaching states:
“That you shall have” (Dt.12:26)—
[since the property was at one point jointly owned],
the brothers’ herd is exempt from tithing.
בֶּן עַזַּי אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל יְהֵא מַעֲשַׂר בְּהֵמָה נוֹהֵג בְּיָתוֹם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: רַק.
[Shimon] b. Azzai says:
Is it possible to say that
the Cattle-tithe should be offered
from the inheritance of an fatherless?123Cf. Mechilta Ishmael, piskha’, 18.
The Teaching states:
“But” (Dt.12:26)—
[the exclusionary clause indicating that the estate of fatherlesss
is not attached to pay the Cattle-tithe].