Bekhorot

MISHNAH. ALL DEDICATED SACRIFICES WHICH HAD A PERMANENT BLEMISH BEFORE THEIR DEDICATION1 AND WERE REDEEMED, ARE LIABLE [TO THE LAW] OF THE FIRSTLING AND THE [PRIESTLY] GIFTS;2 THEY BECOME UNCONSECRATED ANIMALS AS REGARDS SHEARING AND WORKING;3 THEIR OFFSPRING AND MILK ARE PERMITTED TO BE USED AFTER THEIR REDEMPTION;4 HE WHO SLAUGHTERS THEM WITHOUT5 [THE TEMPLE COURT] DOES NOT INCUR [THE PUNISHMENT OF EXCISION]; AND THE LAW OF SUBSTITUTE DOES NOT APPLY TO THEM;6 AND IF THEY DIED [BEFORE REDEMPTION]. THEY MAY BE REDEEMED,7 EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF A FIRSTLING AND AN ANIMAL SET ASIDE FOR TITHE [OF CATTLE].8 ALL ANIMALS HOWEVER WHICH WERE DEDICATED BEFORE THEY BECAME BLEMISHED OR HAD ONLY SUFFERED A TRANSITORY BLEMISH BEFORE THEIR DEDICATION AND AFTER THAT DEVELOPED A PERMANENT BLEMISH, AND WERE REDEEMED, ARE EXEMPT [FROM THE LAW] OF THE FIRSTLING AND FROM THE [PRIESTLY] GIFTS; THEY DO NOT BECOME UNCONSECRATED AS REGARDS SHEARING AND WORKING; THEIR OFFSPRING AND MILK ARE FORBIDDEN TO BE USED AFTER THEIR REDEMPTION; HE WHO SLAUGHTERS THEM WITHOUT [THE TEMPLE COURT] IS PUNISHABLE [WITH EXCISION]; THE LAW OF SUBSTITUTE APPLIES TO THEM; AND IF THEY DIE, THEY ARE TO BE BURIED. GEMARA. The reason9 is because they were redeemed, but if they were not redeemed, they would have been exempt from [the law of] the firstling and from the [priestly] gifts, for [the Mishnah] holds that the consecration of an object consecrated for its value sets aside [the law of] the firstling and the duty of the [priestly] gifts. AND THEY BECOME UNCONSECRATED etc. The reason10 is because they were redeemed, but if they were not redeemed, they would have been forbidden as regards shearing and working. This would confirm the opinion of R. Eleazar who said: Animals dedicated for keeping the Temple in repair,11 are forbidden as regards shearing and working! — [No]. It can he maintained that this is no proof. For an object consecrated for its value, eventually to be used for the altar,12 might be confused with an object which is itself consecrated for the altar, therefore the Rabbis enacted a prohibition.13 But in the case of an object dedicated for keeping the Temple in repair, the Rabbis did not enact a prohibition.14 THEIR OFFSPRING AND MILK ARE PERMITTED etc. How is this to be understood? Shall I say that [we speak of where] they became pregnant and gave birth after their redemption? Surely this is obvious? They are unconsecrated animals! Rather what is meant is that they were pregnant before their redemption and gave birth after their redemption. This implies that before their redemption, [the offspring] are forbidden!?15 with the money sacrifices for the altar. had become unfit for the altar, where shearing and working are prohibited, does not apply to them. are permitted. V. Gemara. before dedication. compared with other dedicated sacrifices, which can only be redeemed when alive. reference also to tithing. Scripture ordains that whether it be good, i.e., without a blemish, or bad (blemished), the animal passes under the rod to be tithed. and working. permit in connection with the object consecrated as such, as there is an obvious distinction between the two. mother is not fit for the altar.