Bekhorot

The ninth also is not sacred1 except when the name of the tenth was eliminated therefrom.2 And it is a proper conclusion. For if the eleventh [animal] possesses sufficient holiness to be sacrificed3 and is yet not holy except when the name of the tenth has been eliminated therefrom,4 it surely follows that in the case of the ninth, which does not possess sufficient holiness to be sacrificed,5 if the name of the tenth is elim inated therefrom it is holy6 but if not,7 it is not [holy at all]! But [on the contrary], it is thus that we should argue: The eleventh is capable of becoming holy enough to be sacrificed. If therefore the name of the tenth has been eliminated therefrom,8 it should require this holiness, but if not, not.9 But the ninth is not capable of becoming holy enough to be sacrificed. Hence it should become holy10 even if the name of the tenth has not been eliminated therefrom. Or perhaps [we can argue] seeing that the eleventh is not reached till the tenth has already established itself [as the tithe],11 then if the name of the tenth was eliminated therefrom,12 the eleventh becomes holy but if not,13 not; whereas the ninth which comes before the tenth has established itself [as the tithe]14 is holy even if the tenth has not been eliminated therefrom.15 And there is nothing more to be said against it.16 Said Raba: A count properly begun redeems.17 Whence does Raba derive this? Shall I say from what we have learnt: IF ONE [OF THE LAMBS] ALREADY COUNTED LEAPED IN AMONG THE FLOCK [IN THE SHED] THEY ARE ALL EXEMPT?18 Now how are [the lambs] already counted exempt? Is it not by means of the count properly begun?19 But perhaps they20 had been already tithed!21 — This you cannot say, for does it not state: IF ONE OF THOSE ALREADY TITHED LEAPED IN AMONG THE FLOCK! But perhaps the phrase ONE OF THOSE ALREADY TITHED refers to one actually set aside as tithe22 I can also prove it.’ For it Says: LET THEM GO TO PASTURE!23 — Raba thereupon said: [My proof is as follows]. Scripture says: Shall pass,24 intimating, but not that which has already passed. Now what does ‘But not that which has already passed’ mean? If it means those already tithed,25 is there any need to say this?26 It must refer to those exempted because of a count properly begun.27 It stands proved. It has been taught in accordance with the ruling of Raba: If he had ten lambs and he led them into a shed, and after he had counted five28 one of them died, if the one which died was of those already counted, he counts and combines them [with others].29 But if the one which died was not of those yet counted, the counted ones are exempt30 but those not yet counted combine with [others born] in a later tithing period. Raba further said: If he had fourteen lambs and he led them into a shed, six [first] passing through one door,31 four through another door and four remaining there [in the shed], if these four [eventually] passed through the same door as the six, he takes one of them as tithe,32 and the rest33 combine [in one shed] with those [born] in a later tithing period.34 But if not,35 the six are exempt36 and the four together with the other four combine with those [born] in a later tithing period. If four pass through this door [first] and six through another door, four remaining there in the shed, if the four [eventually] pass through the same door which the six had passed through, he takes one as tithe and the rest are exempt.37 And if not,38 the first four and the six are exempt39 and the last four combine with those [born] in a later tithing period. If four passed through this door and four through another door, six remaining there [in the shed], if the remaining [six] passed through the door of one of them,40 he takes one [as tithe]41 and the rest are exempt.42 And if not,43 [the first] four and [the second] four are exempt44 and the [remaining] six combine with those [born] in a later tithing period. What does he [Raba] teach us? That a counting properly begun exempts! But has not Raba already taught us this ruling? — You might have said that we apply the principle that a counting properly begun exempts where it is certain that there is a proper number45 but where it is uncertain whether there is a proper number46 seeing that it is possible to combine the six either here47 or there,48 we do not apply [this ruling].49 He [Rab] therefore informs us [that it is not so]. Raba further said: If he had fifteen50 lambs he cannot say: ‘I will select ten, bring them into the shed, take one [as tithe] from them and the rest will be exempt’. But he must bring them [all] into the shed, bring out ten lambs, take one from them [as the tithe] and the rest combine with those [born] in a later tithing period. So indeed it has been taught: If he had fifteen lambs eleventh the tenth, the eleventh is not holy, since he has not omitted the proper name of the tenth, having counted the tenth as the tenth and not the tenth as the ninth. If, however, he called the tenth the ninth, i.e., if he omitted the proper name of the tenth therefrom, then the eleventh is sacred. The ninth, however, if it has been called the tenth, is sacred even if he called the tenth the tenth, i.e., if he did not omit the name of the tenth therefrom. R. Simeon thereupon comes and says that even the ninth in such circumstances is not sacred etc. scriptural verse, and, yet in spite of this considerable sanctity, it is etc. blemished. tenth is counted the tenth. from the others, the nine are redeemed and there is no need to combine them with the others of a later tithing period, since when he commenced counting the requisite number was available for tithing purposes. counted, one of which leaped back into the flock and those in the shed are exempted because he does not recognize which among them is the one which leaped back. Owing therefore to this doubt, not one of the animals is fit to be brought as tithe. cannot prove his ruling that where he properly began to count and the tenth died, we consider the counted ones as redeemed. must therefore be because it is actually tithe, possessing the holiness of an animal set aside as tithe, and concerning each animal there is a doubt whether it be tithe. case Scripture exempts from redemption, since the animals had already passed through under the rod. them properly, as when the first four passed through the door there were only four left in the shed and you cannot combine four with four. of the other four thus making a total of eight, a number insufficient for tithing. for tithing. shed. Likewise with the six, when they passed through the door there were four left in the shed to combine for tithing. properly begun. passing through a third door. the shed at the time of counting. purposes, there being also one door in the shed. In such circumstances, the rest are certainly fit to pass through that door and to combine in order to be tithed with those already counted. Here we cannot say whether the six will pass through this door or the other. required number for tithing (Rashi).