These are the sacrificial animals for which the halakhic status of their offspring and substitutes is like their own halakhic status: The offspring of peace offerings, and their substitute animals, and even the offspring of their offspring or their substitute animals, and even the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time [ad sof kol ha’olam]. They are all endowed with the sanctity and halakhic status of peace offerings, and therefore they require placing hands on the head of the animal, and libations, and the waving of the breast and the thigh in order to give them to the priest. Although the previous mishna stated plainly that the offspring of a peace offering is itself sacrificed as a peace offering, its status is actually subject to a dispute between the tanna’im. Rabbi Eliezer says: The offspring of a peace offering is not sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering; rather it is sequestered and left to die. And the Rabbis say: It is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis do not disagree with regard to the status of the offspring of the offspring of a peace offering or with regard to the status of the offspring of the offspring of the substitute of a peace offering. In those cases, they all agree that the animal is not sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering. With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree about the case of the offspring of a peace offering itself. Rabbi Eliezer says: It is not sacrificed as a peace offering, whereas the Rabbis say: It is sacrificed.Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Pappeyas testified about the offspring of a peace offering that it is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rabbi Pappeyas said: I testify that we ourselves had a cow that was a peace offering, and we ate it on Passover, and we ate its offspring as a peace offering on a different Festival.
The offspring of a thanks offering and the substitute of a thanks offering, and the offspring of the offspring and its substitute, and the offspring of their offspring until the end of all time, they are all like thanks offerings, with the only difference being that they do not require the accompanying loaves, unlike the thanks offering itself. With regard to the substitute of a burnt offering, the offspring of the substitute, e.g., if one substituted a female animal for a burnt offering, and it gave birth to a male, and the offspring of the offspring of its offspring until the end of all time, they are all like burnt offerings and therefore they require flaying and cutting into pieces and must be burned completely in the fire.
In the case of one who designates a female animal as a burnt offering, which may be brought only from males, and that female gave birth to a male, although it is a male, it is left to graze until it becomes unfit [sheyista’ev] and then it is sold, and he brings a burnt offering with the money received for its sale. Rabbi Elazar says: The male offspring itself is sacrificed as a burnt offering. In the case of one who designates a female animal for a guilt offering, which may be brought only from males, it is left to graze until it becomes blemished and then it is sold, and he brings a guilt offering with the money received for its sale. And if in the interim, he designated a male animal and his guilt offering was already sacrificed, so that a guilt offering is no longer needed, the money received for the sale of the blemished female is allocated for communal gift offerings.Rabbi Shimon says: Since a female is unfit to be sacrificed as a guilt offering, its halakhic status is like that of a blemished animal in the sense that it does not become inherently sacred; rather, its value alone becomes sacred. Therefore, it may be sold without a blemish, and a guilt offering is purchased with the money received for its sale. With regard to the substitute of a guilt offering, the offspring of that substitute, their offspring and the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time, they are all left to graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and the money received for the sale is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: These animals are not left to graze; rather they are left to die. And Rabbi Elazar says: Communal gift offerings are not purchased with the money from the sale; rather, the owner should bring an individual burnt offering with the money received for its sale. These tanna’im similarly disagree about the following case: A guilt offering whose owner died, and a guilt offering that was lost and its owner gained atonement with another animal, graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and the money received for the sale is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: These animals are left to die. Rabbi Elazar says: The owner must bring an individual burnt offering with the money received for its sale.
The mishna objects: But even according to the Rabbis, isn’t a gift offering also a burnt offering? And what then is the difference between the statement of Rabbi Elazar and the statement of the Rabbis? Rather, the Rabbis are referring to a communal burnt offering and Rabbi Elazar is referring to an individual burnt offering, and there are several differences between these two offerings: When the animal comes as an individual burnt offering, the owner places his hands upon it and brings the accompanying meal offering and libations, and its libations come from his own property. If the owner of the animal was a priest, the right to perform its Temple service and the right to its hide are his.And when it is a communal gift offering, the owner of the animal that was sold does not place his hands upon it, as there is no placing of hands for communal offerings, and he does not bring its libations; rather, its libations are brought from the property of the community. Furthermore, although the owner of the animal that was sold is a priest, the right to perform its Temple service and the right to its hide are divided among the members of the priestly watch serving in the Temple that week.
With regard to the substitute of a firstborn offering and the substitute of an animal tithe offering, and the offspring of those substitutes and the offspring of their offspring until the end of time, the halakhic status of these animals is like that of a firstborn offering and like that of an animal tithe offering in that they must be treated with sanctity: They graze until they become blemished, and at that point they may be eaten in their blemished state, the substitute of the firstborn by the priests and the substitute of the animal tithe by their owners. They are not sacrificed upon the altar like the original firstborn and animal tithe offerings. What is the practical difference between a firstborn offering and an animal tithe offering and all the other sacrificial animals? The difference is that all the other sacrificial animals that were blemished and redeemed are sold in the butchers’ market [ba’itliz], and slaughtered in the butchers’ market, and weighed and sold by the litra, in the manner that non-sacred meat is slaughtered and sold. This is the case with regard to all consecrated animals except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which are sold only from the home and not by the litra. And in addition, all sacrificial animals that became blemished are subject to redemption through sale, at which point the money becomes sacred and the animal becomes non-sacred, and their substitutes are also subject to redemption through sale.This is true for all consecrated animals, except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which are not subject to redemption. And all sacrificial animals come to be sacrificed in the Temple even from outside of Eretz Yisrael, except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which should not be brought from outside Eretz Yisrael ab initio. But if they came unblemished, they are sacrificed in the Temple like a regular firstborn or animal tithe offering coming from Eretz Yisrael; and if they are blemished animals, they may be eaten in their blemished state, the firstborns by the priests and the animal tithes by their owners.Rabbi Shimon says: What is the reason for this last difference between them? It is that the firstborn and animal tithe offerings have a remedy in their place outside Eretz Yisrael, as they can graze until they become blemished and then can be eaten there. It is not necessary to bring them to Eretz Yisrael in order to eat them. But with regard to all other sacrificial animals, even if a blemish develops in them, these animals remain in their sanctity, and one must redeem them and bring another offering with the money of their redemption. Therefore, when they are unblemished it is proper to bring these animals themselves to Eretz Yisrael.
אֵלּוּ קָדָשִׁים שֶׁוַּלְדוֹתֵיהֶן וּתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן. וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, וּתְמוּרָתָן, וּוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִשְׁלָמִים, וּטְעוּנִים סְמִיכָה וּנְסָכִים וּתְנוּפָה וְחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, וְלַד שְׁלָמִים לֹא יִקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל וְלַד וְלַד שְׁלָמִים וְעַל וְלַד וְלַד תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁלֹּא יִקְרַב. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ, עַל הַוָּלָד, שֶׁרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִקְרַב, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. הֵעִיד רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי פַּפְּיַס עַל וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, שֶׁיִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. אָמַר רַבִּי פַּפְּיַס, אֲנִי מֵעִיד, שֶׁהָיְתָה לָנוּ פָרָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, וַאֲכַלְנוּהָ בְפֶסַח, וְאָכַלְנוּ וְלָדָהּ שְׁלָמִים בֶּחָג:
These are the sacrificial animals for which the halakhic status of their offspring and substitutes is like their own halakhic status: The offspring of peace offerings, and their substitute animals, and even the offspring of their offspring or their substitute animals, and even the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time [ad sof kol ha’olam]. They are all endowed with the sanctity and halakhic status of peace offerings, and therefore they require placing hands on the head of the animal, and libations, and the waving of the breast and the thigh in order to give them to the priest. Although the previous mishna stated plainly that the offspring of a peace offering is itself sacrificed as a peace offering, its status is actually subject to a dispute between the tanna’im. Rabbi Eliezer says: The offspring of a peace offering is not sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering; rather it is sequestered and left to die. And the Rabbis say: It is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis do not disagree with regard to the status of the offspring of the offspring of a peace offering or with regard to the status of the offspring of the offspring of the substitute of a peace offering. In those cases, they all agree that the animal is not sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering. With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree about the case of the offspring of a peace offering itself. Rabbi Eliezer says: It is not sacrificed as a peace offering, whereas the Rabbis say: It is sacrificed. Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Pappeyas testified about the offspring of a peace offering that it is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rabbi Pappeyas said: I testify that we ourselves had a cow that was a peace offering, and we ate it on Passover, and we ate its offspring as a peace offering on a different Festival.
וְלַד תּוֹדָה וּתְמוּרָתָהּ, וְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְתוֹדָה, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁאֵינָן טְעוּנִין לָחֶם. תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, וּוְלַד תְּמוּרָה, וְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְעוֹלָה, וּטְעוּנִין הֶפְשֵׁט וְנִתּוּחַ וְכָלִיל לָאִשִּׁים:
The offspring of a thanks offering and the substitute of a thanks offering, and the offspring of the offspring and its substitute, and the offspring of their offspring until the end of all time, they are all like thanks offerings, with the only difference being that they do not require the accompanying loaves, unlike the thanks offering itself. With regard to the substitute of a burnt offering, the offspring of the substitute, e.g., if one substituted a female animal for a burnt offering, and it gave birth to a male, and the offspring of the offspring of its offspring until the end of all time, they are all like burnt offerings and therefore they require flaying and cutting into pieces and must be burned completely in the fire.
הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְעוֹלָה וְיָלְדָה זָכָר, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב וְיִמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בְדָמָיו עוֹלָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הוּא עַצְמוֹ יִקְרַב עוֹלָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְאָשָׁם, תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, וְתִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אָשָׁם. אִם קָרַב אֲשָׁמוֹ, יִפְּלוּ דָמֶיהָ לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, תִּמָּכֵר שֶׁלֹּא בְמוּם. תְּמוּרַת אָשָׁם, וְלַד תְּמוּרָתָהּ וּוְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, יִרְעוּ עַד שֶּׁיִּסְתָּאֲבוּ, וְיִמָּכְרוּ, וְיִפְּלוּ דְמֵיהֶן לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת. אָשָׁם שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלָיו, וְשֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת:
In the case of one who designates a female animal as a burnt offering, which may be brought only from males, and that female gave birth to a male, although it is a male, it is left to graze until it becomes unfit [sheyista’ev] and then it is sold, and he brings a burnt offering with the money received for its sale. Rabbi Elazar says: The male offspring itself is sacrificed as a burnt offering. In the case of one who designates a female animal for a guilt offering, which may be brought only from males, it is left to graze until it becomes blemished and then it is sold, and he brings a guilt offering with the money received for its sale. And if in the interim, he designated a male animal and his guilt offering was already sacrificed, so that a guilt offering is no longer needed, the money received for the sale of the blemished female is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Shimon says: Since a female is unfit to be sacrificed as a guilt offering, its halakhic status is like that of a blemished animal in the sense that it does not become inherently sacred; rather, its value alone becomes sacred. Therefore, it may be sold without a blemish, and a guilt offering is purchased with the money received for its sale. With regard to the substitute of a guilt offering, the offspring of that substitute, their offspring and the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time, they are all left to graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and the money received for the sale is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: These animals are not left to graze; rather they are left to die. And Rabbi Elazar says: Communal gift offerings are not purchased with the money from the sale; rather, the owner should bring an individual burnt offering with the money received for its sale. These tanna’im similarly disagree about the following case: A guilt offering whose owner died, and a guilt offering that was lost and its owner gained atonement with another animal, graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and the money received for the sale is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: These animals are left to die. Rabbi Elazar says: The owner must bring an individual burnt offering with the money received for its sale.
וַהֲלֹא אַף הַנְּדָבָה עוֹלָה הִיא. מַה בֵּין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לְדִבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. אֶלָּא, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה חוֹבָה, הוּא סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וּמֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִין, וּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁלּוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה כֹהֵן, עֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה נְדָבָה, אֵינוֹ סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִין, וּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁל צִבּוּר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא כֹהֵן, עֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁל אַנְשֵׁי מִשְׁמָר:
The mishna objects: But even according to the Rabbis, isn’t a gift offering also a burnt offering? And what then is the difference between the statement of Rabbi Elazar and the statement of the Rabbis? Rather, the Rabbis are referring to a communal burnt offering and Rabbi Elazar is referring to an individual burnt offering, and there are several differences between these two offerings: When the animal comes as an individual burnt offering, the owner places his hands upon it and brings the accompanying meal offering and libations, and its libations come from his own property. If the owner of the animal was a priest, the right to perform its Temple service and the right to its hide are his. And when it is a communal gift offering, the owner of the animal that was sold does not place his hands upon it, as there is no placing of hands for communal offerings, and he does not bring its libations; rather, its libations are brought from the property of the community. Furthermore, although the owner of the animal that was sold is a priest, the right to perform its Temple service and the right to its hide are divided among the members of the priestly watch serving in the Temple that week.
תְּמוּרַת הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר, וּוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִבְכוֹר וּכְמַעֲשֵׂר, וְיֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָם לַבְּעָלִים. מַה בֵּין הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר לְבֵין כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים. שֶׁכָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים נִמְכָּרִים בְּאִטְלִיס וְנִשְׁחָטִין בְּאִטְלִיס וְנִשְׁקָלִין בְּלִטְרָא, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וְיֵשׁ לָהֶן פִּדְיוֹן, וְלִתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן פִּדְיוֹן, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וּבָאִים מֵחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. אִם בָּאוּ תְמִימִים, יִקְרְבוּ. וְאִם בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, יֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָן לַבְּעָלִים. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה הַטַּעַם. שֶׁהַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר יֵשׁ לָהֶן פַּרְנָסָה בִמְקוֹמָן, וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנּוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בִקְדֻשָּׁתָן:
With regard to the substitute of a firstborn offering and the substitute of an animal tithe offering, and the offspring of those substitutes and the offspring of their offspring until the end of time, the halakhic status of these animals is like that of a firstborn offering and like that of an animal tithe offering in that they must be treated with sanctity: They graze until they become blemished, and at that point they may be eaten in their blemished state, the substitute of the firstborn by the priests and the substitute of the animal tithe by their owners. They are not sacrificed upon the altar like the original firstborn and animal tithe offerings. What is the practical difference between a firstborn offering and an animal tithe offering and all the other sacrificial animals? The difference is that all the other sacrificial animals that were blemished and redeemed are sold in the butchers’ market [ba’itliz], and slaughtered in the butchers’ market, and weighed and sold by the litra, in the manner that non-sacred meat is slaughtered and sold. This is the case with regard to all consecrated animals except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which are sold only from the home and not by the litra. And in addition, all sacrificial animals that became blemished are subject to redemption through sale, at which point the money becomes sacred and the animal becomes non-sacred, and their substitutes are also subject to redemption through sale.This is true for all consecrated animals, except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which are not subject to redemption. And all sacrificial animals come to be sacrificed in the Temple even from outside of Eretz Yisrael, except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which should not be brought from outside Eretz Yisrael ab initio. But if they came unblemished, they are sacrificed in the Temple like a regular firstborn or animal tithe offering coming from Eretz Yisrael; and if they are blemished animals, they may be eaten in their blemished state, the firstborns by the priests and the animal tithes by their owners. Rabbi Shimon says: What is the reason for this last difference between them? It is that the firstborn and animal tithe offerings have a remedy in their place outside Eretz Yisrael, as they can graze until they become blemished and then can be eaten there. It is not necessary to bring them to Eretz Yisrael in order to eat them. But with regard to all other sacrificial animals, even if a blemish develops in them, these animals remain in their sanctity, and one must redeem them and bring another offering with the money of their redemption. Therefore, when they are unblemished it is proper to bring these animals themselves to Eretz Yisrael.