Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

More particularly, the Rambam considers these as three separate commandments. He discusses the mitzvah to redeem firstborn sons in Hilchot Bikkurim UMatanot Kehunah, ch. 11. See also Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 80) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 392).

This is the mitzvah under discussion in these chapters. Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 79) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 18) include it as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

This is also a separate mitzvah discussed in Hilchot Bikkurim UMatanot Kehunah, ch. 12. See also Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 81) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 22).

An animal with a physical condition that will cause it to die within twelve months. Such an animal is forbidden to be eaten. Nevertheless, the priest may still benefit from its hide, as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 10. Significantly, when a firstborn son is treifah, he is not obligated to be redeemed, as stated in Hilchot Bikkurim UMatnot Kehunah 11:17.

As indicated by Numbers 18:15. See also Hilchot Bikkurim UMatanot Kehunah, ch. 1.

As commanded by Exodus 13:3, paying five silver pieces for a firstborn son and giving a sheep for a firstborn donkey.

Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 5:17-18, 9:25. More particularly, as stated in the first source, the blood of a firstborn offered is poured on the altar, rather than cast, but pouring can be considered as casting. Indeed, Numbers 18:17 uses that term (Rav Yosef Corcus).

See Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 9:25, 10:5.

See Chapter 2 where this term is defined and discussed.

I.e., it need not be taken to Jerusalem like a sacrificial animal.

See Halachah 18.

Nevertheless, he is forbidden to shear it or work with it (Hilchot Me’ilah 1:9).

Rabbenu Asher and the Tur (Yoreh De’ah 306:1) differ and maintain that such a statement need not be made. The Shulchan Aruch quotes the Rambam’s view. The Rama does not comment.

The bracketed additions are based on Hilchot Temurah 4:12.

For the fundamental dimension of the mitzvah - that the firstborn offspring is consecrated - applies in both places. This is the correct version of the Rambam’s text. Several commentaries had versions that stated that the mitzvah does not apply in the Diaspora and, hence, they objected.

See Hilchot Terumot 1:1-9.

I.e., ultimately, they will be like ordinary property after they become blemished and redeemed. Even then, they are not entirely like ordinary property. See Ra’avad.

Challah 4:11 relates that ben Antinas brought his firstborn animals from Babylonia to Jerusalem to offer in the Temple and the Sages did not allow them to be offered. Their unwillingness to accept them was not just a Rabbinic safeguard (as was the case regarding the second Paschal sacrifice mentioned there), but was a reflection of Scriptural Law. See Hilchot Ma’aser Sheni 1:14.

When the Temple is not standing, the way the mitzvah is observed in Eretz Yisrael is comparable to its observance in the Diaspora at all times.

See Hilchot Terumot 1:1.

Once the animals are redeemed, however, the mitzvah applies to the firstborn offspring in certain instances. See Chapter 5, Halachah 8.

Some versions of Sefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit., state that Levites are exempt from this mitzvah.

Halachah 2.

See Halachah 16. The firstborn sacrifice must also be eaten in a state of ritual purity and it may be eaten only until sunset on the day following its offering.

Hilchot Bikkurim UMatanot Kehunah 11:9, 12:14.

With regard to the laws pertaining if it was not eaten within that time, see Halachah 13.

Implied is that just as an unblemished animal should be eaten in its first year, so too, should a blemished one.

This also applies if it was born unblemished and became blemished afterward (Tosafot, Rosh HaShanah 7a).

Leviticus 22:27; Hilchot Issurei HaMizbeiach, ch. 3.

For if an animal was not born after a full-term pregnancy, it is not considered a viable birth until it lives eight days.

I.e., for the first twelve months of its life, but no longer.

The priest would desire that the animal remain alive longer so that it will grow and become larger.

When the firstborn animal cannot be offered as a sacrifice.

Even if doing so causes one to keep it for more than a year.

See Chapter 3, Halachah 1, which states that the blemishes must be analyzed by a sage and verified.

Rosh HaShanah 6a relates a difference of opinion among the Sages. Although some favor following the solar calendar, the halachah follows the opinion which places the emphasis on the lunar calendar.

When an extra month is added.

Thus even though it is older than the second lamb, its year ends after that lamb’s year.

The commandment not to delay the payment of one’s ritual obligations. See Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 14:13; Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 155); Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 574).

On the contrary, as evident from Deuteronomy 14:28, if the tithes were kept for a longer period, they are not invalidated (see Rashi, Rosh HaShanah 5b).

See the parallel in Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 14:15.

And Numbers 18:8 uses the term limashchah, interpreted by Zevachim 28a, et al, as “for eminence,” in relation to the presents given to the priests.

A sheep or a goat.

I.e., a calf.

I.e., the priest is willing to sacrifice the work necessary to care for the animal to ensure that it will in fact be given to him. This exchange is prohibited as the Rambam continues to state.

Hilchot Terumot 12:18-20. That source states: Whoever renders such assistance desecrates the holiness of God’s name. Concerning such people is applied [the malediction, Malachi 2:8]: “You have defiled the covenant of Levi.” It is forbidden for an Israelite to allow [a priest] to help him. Instead, he should grant them their portion with honor.

To receive Terumah and the tithes.

To receive the forearm, jawbone, and maw which must be given to the priests.

To receive the firstborn animals and the first shearings.

Since the priest states that he will be slaughtering the animal immediately, he will not be performing any work to care for it and thus he will not be exchanging work for the rights to the animal.

I.e., the priest need not be a member of the priestly watch serving in the Temple that week. Similarly, it makes no difference whether the priest is learned or unlearned. See Hilchot Terumot 6:2. It can be said that perhaps that latter point is the reason the Rambam uses the term “it appears to me,” which implies a concept inferred by logic and not found in prior sources, while seemingly, this idea is stated in Challah 4:9 (see Rav Yosef Corcus).

The minimum measure for which one is liable for lashes.

Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 144) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 445) include this prohibition as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah. See Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 11:5 which refers to the same prooftext as an admonition prohibiting one from partaking of the sacrifices outside the areas prescribed for their consumption.

This refers to the second tithes.

I.e., in cities other than Jerusalem.

Similarly, the same prohibition includes a priest who partakes of such a sacrifice before its blood was poured on the altar (Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 11:4).

In contrast to a firstborn son and a firstborn donkey.

To be used as ordinary property. This applies even if it is blemished.

Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 108) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 393) include this prohibition as one of 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

This refers to the animal while it is alive. The prohibition against selling the meat of a firstborn animal is mentioned in the following halachah.

Although the Torah gave a priest a right to this animal, that right involves only partaking of it as a sacrifice, not using it as his private property.

After it becomes blemished.

After the firstborn animal contracts a blemish, it must be given to a priest. It becomes that priest’s private property and can be sold or given to whomever he wants without restriction.

Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 1:12. As explained there, this is a difference between a firstborn offering and a tithe offering and other sacrificial animals. The other sacrificial animals may be sold publicly, because the money will be used to purchase another sacrifice and hence, it is preferable to get the best price for it. The firstborn and tithe offerings, by contrast, become ordinary property and selling them publicly, is not respectful for them, since they originally were sacrificial animals.

Even if they use a scale for that purpose [see the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 5:1)].

As explained in Hilchot Shvitat Yom Tov 3:6, riggul refers to a technique where the hide of an animal is skinned off entirely as one unit via its feet, so that it will be useful as a pouch, as a bellows, or the like. Rashi (Temurah 24a) maintain that this method of skinning is forbidden because it is comparable to performing labor with consecrated animals. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 307:1) accept Rashi’s view.

And later redeemed.