Bekhorot — Daf 26b

דעיקר לאו לכפרה אתי משהי לה או דלמא כיון דעולה נמי מכפרא אעשה לא משהי לה

ת"ש התולש צמר מבכור תם אע"פ שנולד בו מום שחטו אסור טעמא דתולש הא נתלש שרי וכל שכן עולה דלא משהי לה

הוא הדין אפילו נתלש נמי אסור והאי דקתני תולש להודיעך כחו דעקביא דבבעל מום אפילו בתולש נמי שרי

והאנן נשר תנן תנא נשר להודיעך כחן דרבנן תנא תולש להודיעך כחו דעקביא:

צמר המדולדל כו': היכי דמי אינו נראה עם הגיזה אמר רבי אלעזר אמר ריש לקיש כל שעיקרו הפוך כלפי ראשו רב נתן בר אושעיא אמר כל שאינו מתמעך עם הגיזה

וריש לקיש מאי טעמא לא אמר כרב נתן בר אושעיא אמר רבי אילעא קסבר ריש לקיש לפי שאי אפשר לגיזה בלא נימין המדולדלות:

הדרן עלך הלוקח בהמה

מתני׳ עד כמה ישראל חייבין ליטפל בבכור בדקה שלשים יום ובגסה חמשים יום ר' יוסי אומר בדקה שלשה חדשים אמר לו הכהן בתוך הזמן תנהו לי הרי זה לא יתננו לו ואם בעל מום הוא ואמר לו תנהו לי שאוכלנו מותר ובשעת המקדש אם היה תמים אמר לו תן ואקרבנו מותר

הבכור נאכל שנה בשנה בין תם בין בעל מום שנאמר (דברים טו, כ) לפני ה' אלהיך תאכלנו שנה בשנה נולד לו מום בתוך שנתו רשאי לקיימו כל שנים עשר חדש לאחר י"ב חדש אינו רשאי לקיימו אלא ל' יום:

גמ׳ מנה"מ אמר רב כהנא דאמר קרא (שמות כב, כח) בכור בניך תתן לי כן תעשה לצאנך

מלאתך ודמעך לא תאחר כן תעשה לשורך

איפוך אנא מסתברא דמקדם למקדם דמאחר לדמאחר אדרבה דסמיך ליה לדסמיך ליה

אלא אמר רבא אמר קרא תעשה הוסיף לך הכתוב עשייה אחרת בשורך

ואימא שיתין לא מסרך הכתוב אלא לחכמים:

תניא נמי הכי בכור בניך תתן לי כן תעשה לצאנך יכול אף לשורך תלמוד לומר תעשה הוסיף לך הכתוב עשייה אחרת בשורך לא מסרך הכתוב אלא לחכמים

מכאן אמרו עד כמה ישראל חייבין להטפל בבכור בבהמה דקה שלשים יום בגסה חמשים יום רבי יוסי אומר בדקה שלשה חדשים מפני שטפולה מרובה תנא מפני ששיניה דקות:

אם אמר לו הכהן בתוך הזמן תנהו לי הרי זה לא יתן לו: מאי טעמא אמר רב ששת מפני שנראה ככהן המסייע בבית הגרנות

תנו רבנן הכהנים והלוים והעניים המסייעים בבית הרועים ובבית הגרנות ובבית המטבחים אין נותנין להם תרומה ומעשר בשכרן ואם עושין כן חיללו ועליהן הכתוב אומר (מלאכי ב, ח) שחתם ברית הלוי ואומר (במדבר יח, לב) ואת קדשי בני ישראל לא תחללו ולא תמותו

מאי ואומר וכי תימא מיתה לא ת"ש ואת קדשי בני ישראל לא תחללו ולא תמותו

ובקשו חכמים לקונסן ולהיות מפרישין עליהן תרומה משלם ומפני מה לא קנסום דלמא אתי לאפרושי מן הפטור על החיוב

ובכולן יש בהן

Since it is essentially not brought to atone, he might detain it, or since a burnt-offering also atones for a transgression of a positive precept. [do we say that] he would not detain it? — Come and hear: If one plucks wool from an unblemished firstling, although a blemish appeared on it subsequently and he slaughtered it, the wool is forbidden to be used. Now, the reason is because he actually plucks it, but if it became detached, it would be allowed; how much more so, therefore, in the case of a burnt-offering,1 [is it to be expected] that he would not detain it! — [No]. The same ruling applies if it became detached from an unblemished animal, that it is forbidden, and the reason, why [the Baraitha states] ‘If one plucks’, is to show the length to which Akabya is prepared to go, that in the case of a blemished sacrifice, one is evenly allowed to pluck it. But have we not learnt: WHICH BECAME TORN AWAY’? — It says WHICH BECAME TORN AWAY, to show to what lengths the Rabbis are prepared to go2 [and] it says ‘If one plucks’, to show the lengths to which Akabya is prepared to go. WOOL OF A FIRSTLING LOOSELY CONNECTED etc. How is the expression ‘THAT WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR WITH THE WOOL to he understood?R. Eleazar reported in the name of Resh Lakish: Wherever the root [of the wool] is turned towards its head.3 R. Nathan b. Oshaia says: Wherever it is not attached [to the skin] on a line with [the rest of] the wool.4 Why does not Resh Lakish give the explanation of R. Nathan b. Oshaia?5 — Said R. Ela: Resh Lakish holds [that the reason is] because it is impossible for wool to he free from loosely connected threads. 6 MISHNAH. UP TO HOW LONG IS AN ISRAELITE BOUND TO ATTEND TO A FIRSTLING?7 — IN THE CASE OF SMALL CATTLE, UNTIL THIRTY DAYS, WITH LARGE CATTLE, [THE PERIOD] IS FIFTY DAYS. R. JOSE SAYS: IN THE CASE OF SMALL CATTLE [THE PERIOD] IS THREE MONTHS. IF THE PRIEST SAYS [TO THE ISRAELITE] DURING THIS PERIOD ‘GIVE IT TO ME’, HE MUST NOT GIVE IT TO HIM. BUT IF THE FIRSTLING WAS BLEMISHED AND THE PRIEST SAID TO HIM ‘GIVE IT TO ME SO THAT I MAY EAT IT’, THEN IT IS ALLOWED.8 AND IN TEMPLE TIMES, IF [THE FIRSTLING] WAS IN AN UNBLEMISHED STATE AND THE PRIEST SAID TO HIM ‘GIVE, AND I WILL OFFER IT UP IT WAS ALLOWED. A FIRSTLING IS EATEN YEAR BY YEAR BOTH IN AN UNBLEMISHED9 AS WELL AS IN A BLEMISHED STATE,10 FOR IT IS SAID: THOU SHALT EAT IT BEFORE THE LORD THY GOD YEAR BY YEAR.11 IF A BLEMISH APPEARED ON IT IN ITS FIRST YEAR, HE IS PERMITTED TO KEEP IT ALL THE TWELVE MONTHS.12 AFTER THE TWELVE MONTHS, HOWEVER, HE IS NOT PERMITTED TO KEEP IT EXCEPT FOR THIRTY DAYS. GEMARA. Whence is this proved?13 — Said R. Kahana: Scripture says: The first-born of thy sons thou shalt give unto Me.14 [Likewise shalt thou do] with thy sheep. Thou shalt not delay to offer of the fullness of thy harvest and of the outflow of thy presses.15 Likewise thou shalt do with thine oxen. And why not reverse this?16 — It is reasonable to assume that the part which comes first in the first text17 forms an analogy with that which comes first in the subsequent verse18 and that which comes later in the first text19 forms an analogy with that which comes later in the subsequent text. On the contrary, the text that is near to it should rather form an analogy with the text near to it?20 — Rather said Raba: The text says: ‘Thou shalt do’. Scripture adds [the duty of] another doing21 [i.e., attention] in connection with ‘Thine oxen’. Then why not say sixty days?22 — Scripture refers you to the Sages [for the precise interpretation].23 It has also been taught to this effect: [Scripture says]: ‘The firstborn of thy sons thou shalt give unto Me. Likewise thou shalt do with thy sheep’. I might [conclude from the Biblical text] that it applies also to ‘Thine oxen’? The text therefore states ‘Thou shalt do’, the text adds [the duty of] another doing [i.e., attention] in connection with an ox and Scripture refers you to the Sages [for the precise interpretation]. Hence [the Sages] said: Up to how long is the Israelite bound to attend to the firstling? In the case of small cattle, until thirty days and in the case of large cattle, fifty days. R. Jose Says: In the case of small cattle, [the period] is three months, because it requires extra attention. What does the expression ‘Because it requires extra attention’ mean?24 — A Tanna taught: Because its teeth are small.25 IF THE PRIEST SAID TO HIM DURING THIS PERIOD: GIVE IT TO ME’, HE MUST NOT GIVE IT TO HIM. What is the reason? — Said R. Shesheth: Because it makes him appear like a priest who helps in the threshing floors.26 Our Rabbis taught: If Priests, Levites and poor help in the house of the shepherds,27 in the threshing floors,28 and in the slaughtering place,29 we do not give them the priests’ gifts,30 terumah,31 or tithes in reward; and if they acted thus, they render them hullin.32 And concerning these, Scripture says: Ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi.33 And Scripture further says: And ye shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel, that ye die not.34 What need is there for a further text? — You might think that there is no death guilt. Come therefore and hear: There is a further text, ‘And ye shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel that ye die not’. And the Sages wished to punish the owners by making them separate terumah [a second time] from their own. And what was the reason why they did not punish them? Lest35 [the owners] come to separate from what is exempt [from terumah] for what is subject [to terumah]. And in all these cases [mentioned above] the owners enjoy wool of a blemished firstling. stringent in this connection than Resh Lakish. that would be allowed to be used in such circumstances. animal perforce the priest claims it? as if the priest receives the animal in exchange for looking after it until it becomes blemished, in this instance as the animal can be eaten immediately and there is no necessity for the priest to detain it, it is not so. the following manner: Just as in the case of a first-born son, redemption is necessary after thirty days, similarly in the case of a firstling of small cattle, the Israelite must keep the animal for thirty days. as the fulness of thy harvest, i.e., the first-fruits, ripen on Passover and are brought to the Temple on Pentecost fifty days later, similarly the firstling of oxen, i.e., large cattle, must be looked after for a period of fifty days. thy oxen’, and thus the firstling of large cattle will require only thirty days to be looked after. and thus large cattle would have a period of thirty days. doing for the animal is demanded than is the case with sheep. that of the period of a first-born's redemption? between the text ‘The fullness of thy harvest’ and the verse ‘Likewise thou shalt do with thy oxen’. mother's help. the animal for fifty days, if the priest asks him to deliver the firstling to him during this period to look after, he thus saves the Israelite expense and labour, in consideration for which he takes possession of the firstling and thereby prevents any other priest claiming it. He thus seems to be on a par with a priest who helps with the threshing in order that he may receive the priestly dues for his services, which is forbidden. If, however, the firstling was blemished and the priest asked him for it so that he might eat it, this would be permissible. and to the poor who are the recipients of the poor men's tithing every third year. their obligations. committing a sin which involves the penalty of death, not that he is actually guilty of such a sin. from the other was given to a priest who helped in the threshing. Now, if you say that the owner is compelled to give terumah a second time, then he may think that the second se'ah is regarded as if terumah had not been given from it at all, and he may separate this for the other. This would be separating from what is exempt etc., for the second se'ah is biblically exempt from terumah.