Enter your email address to get our weekly email with fresh, exciting and thoughtful content that will enrich your inbox and your life.

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Temurah - Perek 1, Temurah - Perek 2, Temurah - Perek 3

Video & Audio Classes
Show content in:

Temurah - Perek 1

Introduction to Hilchot Temurah

Included in this text are three commandments: one positive commandments and two negative commandments. They include the following:

1) Not to transfer the holiness of a [sacrificial] animal;
2) To regard an animal to which holiness was transferred as consecrated if such a transfer was made;
3) Not to change animals from one consecrated purpose to another.

These mitzvot are explained in the ensuing chapters.

הלכות תמורה - הקדמה יש בכללן שלוש מצוות: אחת מצוַת עשה, ושתים מצוות לא תעשה. וזה הוא פרטן: (א) שלא ימיר.
(ב) שתהיה התמורה קודש אם המיר.
(ג) שלא ישנה הקדשים מקדושה לקדושה. וביאור מצוות אלו בפרקים אלו:

1

Anyone who transfers holiness from one animal to another is liable for lashes for every animal from which he transferred the holiness, as Leviticus 27:10 states: "Do not exchange it and do not transfer its holiness," even though he did not perform a deed. According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that any negative commandment that does not involve a deed is not punishable by lashes with the exception of one who takes a false or unnecessary oath, one who transfers the holiness of a sacrificial animal, and one curses a colleague mentioning God's name. These three negative commandments can never involve a deed at all, and yet one is liable for lashes for their violation.

Why is one liable for lashes for transferring the holiness of an animal, it is a negative commandment that can be corrected by a positive commandment, as ibid.:33 states: "If he will transfer its holiness, it and the animal to which its holiness will be transferred shall be consecrated"? Because it has one positive commandment and two negative commandments and because the negative commandment it involves is not of the same nature as the positive commandment.This is reflected in the ruling that if the Jewish community or partners try to transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal, the transfer is not effective. Nevertheless, they are warned not to transfer the holiness. Thus when an individual transfers the holiness of a sacrificial animal, the animal to which he transferred the holiness is consecrated. Even if he transfers holiness on the Sabbath, he is liable for forty lashes. If, by contrast, partners in a sacrificial animal endeavors to transfer its holiness or an endeavor is made to transfer the holiness of an animal designated for a communal sacrifice - since that person has a share in these sacrifices he is liable for lashes, but the animal to which he endeavored to transfer the holiness is not consecrated.

א

כָּל הַמֵּמִיר לוֹקֶה עַל כָּל בְּהֵמָה וּבְהֵמָה שֶׁיָּמִיר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז י) "לֹא יַחֲלִיפֶנּוּ וְלֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ" וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא עָשָׂה מַעֲשֶׂה. מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁכָּל מִצְוַת לֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ מַעֲשֶׂה אֵין לוֹקִין עָלֶיהָ חוּץ מִנִּשְׁבָּע וּמֵמִיר וּמְקַלֵּל אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ בְּשֵׁם. שְׁלֹשָׁה לָאוִין אֵלּוּ אִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בָּהֶן מַעֲשֶׂה כְּלָל וְלוֹקִין עֲלֵיהֶן. וְלָמָּה לוֹקִין עַל הַתְּמוּרָה וַהֲרֵי לָאו שֶׁבָּהּ נִתָּק לַעֲשֵׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז לג) "וְאִם הָמֵר יְמִירֶנּוּ וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה קֹדֶשׁ". מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ עֲשֵׂה וּשְׁנֵי לָאוִין. וְעוֹד שֶׁאֵין לָאו שֶׁבָּהּ שָׁוֶה לַעֲשֵׂה. שֶׁהַצִּבּוּר וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִין אֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה אִם הֵמִירוּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן מֻזְהָרִין שֶׁלֹּא יָמִירוּ. נִמְצֵאתָ אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַיָּחִיד שֶׁהֵמִיר הֲרֵי הַתְּמוּרָה קֹדֶשׁ. וַאֲפִלּוּ הֵמִיר בְּשַׁבָּת לוֹקֶה אַרְבָּעִים. וְאֶחָד מִן הַשֻּׁתָּפִין שֶׁהֵמִיר. אוֹ מִי שֶׁהֵמִיר בְּקָרְבָּן מִקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר. הוֹאִיל וְיֵשׁ לוֹ בָּהֶן שֻׁתָּפוּת הֲרֵי זֶה לוֹקֶה וְאֵין הַתְּמוּרָה קֹדֶשׁ:

2

Whether one transfers the holiness of an animal as an intentional transgression or one does so inadvertently, the transfer of holiness is effective and the person is liable for lashes.

What is implied? One intended to say: "This animal should be considered as an exchange for an animal consecrated as a burnt-offering that I possess," and instead, he said: "This animal should be considered as an exchange for an animal consecrated as a peace-offering that I possess," the transfer of holiness is effective and he is liable for lashes. If, however, he thought that it was permitted to transfer holiness or he said: "I will enter that house and transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal willfully," and instead, he entered and transferred the holiness of the animal unknowingly, the transfer of holiness is effective, but he is not liable for lashes for it.

ב

אֶחָד הַמֵּמִיר בְּזָדוֹן אוֹ שֶׁהֵמִיר בִּשְׁגָגָה הֲרֵי זֶה עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה וְלוֹקֶה. כֵּיצַד. הַמִּתְכַּוִּן לוֹמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי וְאָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי. הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְלוֹקֶה. אֲבָל אִם דִּמָּה שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְהָמִיר וְהֵמִיר אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר אֶכָּנֵס לְבַיִת זֶה וְאָמִיר מִדַּעְתִּי וְנִכְנַס וְשָׁכַח וְהֵמִיר שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה עָלֶיהָ:

3

A person cannot transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal that does not belong to him. If the owner of a sacrificial animal says: "Whoever desires to transfer the holiness of my sacrificial animal may come and do so," another person may transfer the holiness of that animal.

If a person transferred the holiness of a sacrificial animal belonging to him to another animal that does not belong to him, the transfer is not effective. The rationale is that a person cannot consecrate an entity that does not belong to him.

ג

אֵין אָדָם מֵמִיר בְּהֶמְתּוֹ בְּקָרְבָּן שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ. וְאִם אָמַר בַּעַל הַקָּרְבָּן כָּל הָרוֹצֶה לְהָמִיר בִּבְהֶמְתִּי יָבוֹא וְיָמִיר הֲרֵי זֶה מֵמִיר בָּהּ. הֵמִיר קָרְבָּנוֹ בִּבְהֵמָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ אֵינָהּ תְּמוּרָה שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַקְדִּישׁ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ:

4

It is the one who will receive atonement who has the potential to exchange the holiness of a sacrificial animal, not the person who consecrates it.

What is implied? A person consecrated an animal so that his colleague could gain atonement through its sacrifice, e.g., one consecrated the animals required for the sacrifices of a nazirite so that so-and-so, the nazirite, could gain atonement thereby. It is that nazirite who can transfer their holiness, but not the person who consecrated them, because they do not belong to him.

ד

הַמִּתְכַּפֵּר הוּא שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה אֲבָל לֹא הַמַּקְדִּישׁ. כֵּיצַד. הִקְדִּישׁ בְּהֵמָה שֶׁיִּתְכַּפֵּר בָּהּ חֲבֵרוֹ כְּגוֹן שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ קָרְבְּנוֹת נָזִיר שֶׁיִּתְכַּפֵּר בָּהֶם פְּלוֹנִי הַנָּזִיר. אוֹתוֹ הַנָּזִיר הוּא שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בָּהֶן תְּמוּרָה אֲבָל לֹא זֶה שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ לְפִי שֶׁאֵינָן שֶׁלּוֹ:

5

An heir can transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal he inherits. If a person dies, leaving a sacrificial animal to his two sons, this animal should be offered, but its holiness cannot be transferred. The rationale is that the sons are partners and partners cannot transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal, as we explained.

ה

הַיּוֹרֵשׁ מֵמִיר. הִנִּיחַ בְּהֵמָה לִשְׁנֵי בָּנָיו וּמֵת הֲרֵי זוֹ קְרֵבָה וְאֵין מְמִירִין בָּהּ שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵם בָּהּ שֻׁתָּפִין וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִין אֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

6

The holiness of sacrificial animals consecrated by gentiles may not be transferred according to Scriptural Law. According to Rabbinic Law, however, if a gentile transfers the holiness of a sacrificial animal, the transfer is effective. If a gentile consecrated a sacrificial animal with the intent that a Jew receive atonement through its being offered and then the gentile transferred its holiness to another animal, there is an unresolved question whether the transfer is effective.

ו

אֵין קָדְשֵׁי נָכְרִים עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֲבָל מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי שֶׁהֵמִיר הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה. הִקְדִּישׁ הַנָּכְרִי בְּהֵמָה שֶׁיִּתְכַּפֵּר בָּהּ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהֵמִיר בָּהּ הַנָּכְרִי הֲרֵי זוֹ סְפֵק תְּמוּרָה:

7

When either a man or a woman seek to transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal, the transfer is effective.

ז

אֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים אִם הֵמִירוּ עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה:

8

Even though he is not liable for lashes, there is an unresolved question whether a transfer of holiness made by a minor who has reached the age when his vows are binding is effective or not.

ח

קָטָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְעוֹנַת נְדָרִים שֶׁהֵמִיר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה יֵשׁ בּוֹ סָפֵק אִם עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה אוֹ אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה:

9

The priests cannot transfer the holiness of animals to be sacrificed as sin-offerings and guilt-offerings that were given to them to offer. Although portions of the animal belong to them, they do not acquire them during the lifetime of the animal, for they do not receive a portion of the meat until the blood is cast on the altar.

A priest cannot transfer the holiness of a firstborn animal; even though he does acquire it while it is alive, he does not acquire it at the outset. On the contrary, at the outset, it should be in the home of the Israelite. When, by contrast, an owner transfers the holiness of a firstborn animal, as long as it is in his household, the transfer is binding.Similarly, when a priest transfers the holiness of a firstborn animal born in his herd, not a firstborn animal given to him by an Israelite, the transfer is binding.

ט

אֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִין בְּחַטָּאת וּבְאָשָׁם שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵם שֶׁלָּהֶם אֵינָן זוֹכִין בָּהֶן מֵחַיִּים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם בַּבָּשָׂר עַד שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק הַדָּם. וְאֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִין בִּבְכוֹר שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא זוֹכֶה בּוֹ מֵחַיִּים אֵינוֹ זוֹכֶה בּוֹ מִתְּחִלָּה שֶׁהֲרֵי תְּחִלָּתוֹ בְּבֵית יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא. אֲבָל הַבְּעָלִים שֶׁהֵמִירוּ בִּבְכוֹר כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהוּא בְּבֵיתָם עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה. וְכֵן כֹּהֵן שֶׁהֵמִיר בִּבְכוֹר שֶׁנּוֹלַד לוֹ לֹא בִּבְכוֹר שֶׁלָּקַח מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה:

10

The holiness of the ram of the High Priest can be transferred to another animal. The holiness of his bull, by contrast, cannot be transferred to another animal. Even though it is brought from his own resources, since his priestly brethren derive atonement through its sacrifice, they are considered as partners in it.

י

אֵילוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה אֲבָל פָּרוֹ אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מִשֶּׁלּוֹ הוֹאִיל וְאֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים מִתְכַּפְּרִין בּוֹ הֲרֵי הֵם בּוֹ כְּשֻׁתָּפִין:

11

The holiness of fowl and meal-offerings cannot be transferred, for the relevant verses mention only animals.

יא

הָעוֹפוֹת וְהַמְּנָחוֹת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא (ויקרא כז י) "בְּהֵמָה":

12

The holiness of animals consecrated for the upkeep of the Temple may not be transferred, for with regard to the tithe offering, Leviticus 27:33 states: "He shall not distinguish between good and bad and he should not transfer its holiness." Now the tithe offering was part of the general category of all the sacrifices, why was it singled out?To teach us a concept that applies to the entire general category. The tithe-offering is the sacrifice of an individual, thus excluding communal offerings and sacrificial animals owned by partners. The tithe-offering is a sacrifice offered on the altar, thus excluding animals consecrated for the sake of the upkeep of the Temple. There is an association between the tithe-offerings and the tithes of the crops in which are obligated Jews and not non-Jews; thus excluding sacrifices of the gentiles whose holiness cannot be exchanged as stated.

יב

קָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּמַעֲשֵׂר (ויקרא כז לג) "לֹא יְבַקֵּר בֵּין טוֹב לָרַע וְלֹא יְמִירֶנּוּ" וַהֲלֹא הַמַּעֲשֵׂר בִּכְלַל כָּל הַקָּדָשִׁים הָיָה וְלָמָּה יָצָא לְלַמֵּד עַל הַכְּלָל מָה מַעֲשֵׂר קָרְבַּן יָחִיד יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת צִבּוּר וְכֵן הַשֻּׁתָּפִין מָה מַעֲשֵׂר קָרְבַּן מִזְבֵּחַ יָצְאוּ קָדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת מָה מַעֲשַׂר בְּהֵמָה הֻקַּשׁ לְמַעֲשַׂר דָּגָן שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִין בּוֹ אֶלָּא יִשְׂרָאֵל וְלֹא נָכְרִים יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת נָכְרִים שֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

13

When a person consecrates an animal that has a permanent disqualifying blemish, its holiness cannot be transferred to another animal, because its body has not been consecrated in a complete way; only its worth was consecrated. If, however, one consecrates an animal with a temporary blemish or one consecrates an unblemished animal and then it contracted a permanent blemish, its holiness can be transferred.

יג

הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ אֵינָהּ עוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַדֵּשׁ גּוּפָהּ קִדּוּשׁ גָּמוּר וְאֵינָהּ אֶלָּא קְדֻשַּׁת דָּמִים. אֲבָל הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בַּעֲלַת מוּם עוֹבֵר אוֹ שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ תְּמִימָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד לָהּ מוּם קָבוּעַ הֲרֵי זוֹ עוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה:

14

Whether one transfers the holiness of a blemished animal to an unblemished one or that of an unblemished animal to a blemished one, one transferred the holiness of sheep to cattle, or the holiness of cattle to sheep, or that of goats to sheep or that of sheep to goats, or that of males to females or that of females to males, or transferred the holiness of 100 animals to one or that of one to 100, whether he did so all at once or one after another, the transfer is effective and he is liable for the same number of sets of lashes as animals to which he transferred holiness.

יד

אֶחָד הַמֵּמִיר תָּמִים בְּבַעַל מוּם אוֹ בַּעַל מוּם בְּתָמִים אוֹ שֶׁהֵמִיר בָּקָר בְּצֹאן אוֹ צֹאן בְּבָקָר. אוֹ כְּבָשִׂים בְּעִזִּים אוֹ עִזִּים בִּכְבָשִׂים אוֹ נְקֵבוֹת בִּזְכָרִים אוֹ זְכָרִים בִּנְקֵבוֹת. אוֹ שֶׁהֵמִיר אֶחָד בְּמֵאָה אוֹ מֵאָה בְּאֶחָד בֵּין בְּבַת אַחַת בֵּין בָּזוֹ אַחַר זוֹ. הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְלוֹקֶה כְּמִנְיַן הַבְּהֵמוֹת שֶׁהֵמִיר:

15

The holiness of an animal to which holiness has been transferred cannot be transferred to another animal, nor may the holiness of the offspring of a consecrated animal be transferred to another animal. This is derived from Leviticus 27:10: "And it and the animal to which its holiness was transferred shall be holy." Implied is "it" and not its offspring, "the animal to which its holiness was transferred" and not an animal to which there was an attempt to transfer the holiness of the animal to which its holiness was transferred. If, however, one transferred the holiness of an animal and then transferred its holiness a second time, even 1000 times, the holiness has been transferred to each of them, and one is liable for lashes for each transfer, as we explained.

טו

אֵין הַתְּמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה וְלֹא וְלַד בְּהֵמוֹת הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז י) (ויקרא כז לג) "וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ" הוּא וְלֹא וְלָדוֹ וּתְמוּרָתוֹ וְלֹא תְּמוּרַת תְּמוּרָתוֹ. אֲבָל הַמֵּמִיר בִּבְהֵמָה וְחָזַר וְהֵמִיר בָּהּ וְחָזַר וְהֵמִיר אֲפִלּוּ אֶלֶף כֻּלָּן תְּמוּרָה וְלוֹקֶה עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

16

The holiness of an entire animal may not be transferred to limbs or fetuses, nor may the holiness of the latter be transferred to an entire animal.

What is implied? If one says: "The hindfoot of this animal..." or "Its forefoot should be substituted for this burnt-offering," or he said: "The fetus of this animal should be substituted for this burnt-offering," the holiness is not transferred. Similarly, if one says: "This animal should be substituted for the forefoot..." or "the hindfoot of this burnt-offering," or he said: "This animal should be substituted for the fetus of this sin-offering," the holiness is not transferred.

טז

אֵין מְמִירִין אֵיבָרִים אוֹ עֵבָּרִים בִּשְׁלֵמִים וְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד. הָאוֹמֵר רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה זוֹ אוֹ יָדָהּ תַּחַת עוֹלָה זוֹ אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר עֵבַּר בְּהֵמָה זוֹ תַּחַת עוֹלָה זוֹ אֵינָהּ תְּמוּרָה. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר בְּהֵמָה זוֹ תַּחַת יָדָהּ אוֹ רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל עוֹלָה זוֹ אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר בְּהֵמָה זוֹ תַּחַת עֻבָּרָהּ שֶׁל חַטָּאת זוֹ אֵינָהּ תְּמוּרָה:

17

When one seeks to transfer the holiness of a consecrated animal to a hybrid, and animal that is tereifah, one born of Caesarian section, a tumtum, or an adrogynus, the holiness is not transferred to them and it is as if one sought to transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal to a camel or a donkey. The rationale is that this type of animal is not fit for sacrifice. Therefore one who tries to transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal to it is not liable for lashes.

What is the difference between these and an animal that is blemished? There is the possibly of the type of animal that is blemished serving as a sacrifice, while these types of animals cannot serve as sacrifices.

יז

הַמֵּמִיר בְּכִלְאַיִם אוֹ בִּטְרֵפָה וְיוֹצֵא דֹּפֶן אוֹ בְּטֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס אֵין הַקְּדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן וַהֲרֵי זֶה כְּמִי שֶׁהֵמִיר בְּגָמָל אוֹ בַּחֲמוֹר לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בְּמִינָן קָרְבָּן וּלְפִיכָךְ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. מָה בֵּין אֵלּוּ לְבַעַל מוּם. בַּעַל מוּם יֵשׁ בְּמִינָן קָרְבָּן. אֵלּוּ אֵין בְּמִינָם קָרְבָּן:

18

An animal that was engaged in intercourse with humans - whether it acted as the male or female - is considered as a blemished animal and the holiness of a sacrificial animal can be transferred to it. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

יח

הָרוֹבֵעַ וְהַנִּרְבָּע הֲרֵי הֵם כְּבַעַל מוּם וְעוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן:

19

When an animal was half consecrated and half unconsecrated, holiness cannot be transferred to it, not may its holiness be transferred.

יט

בְּהֵמָה שֶׁחֶצְיָהּ קֹדֶשׁ וְחֶצְיָהּ חֹל לֹא עוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה וְלֹא נַעֲשֵׂית תְּמוּרָה:

20

The holiness of all of the sin-offerings that are consigned to death may not be transferred to another animal. By contrast, the holiness of all of the sin-offerings that are designated to pasture until they contract a blemish and are sold may be transferred to another animal.

כ

כָּל הַחַטָּאוֹת שֶׁדִּינָן שֶׁיָּמוּתוּ אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה וְכָל חַטָּאת שֶׁדִּינָהּ שֶׁתִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בָּהּ מוּם וְתִמָּכֵר עוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה:

21

When a person sets aside a female animal for his Paschal sacrifice, burnt-offering, or guilt-offering, its holiness can be transferred even though it is not fit to be offered. The rationale is that since its worth is consecrated and it is unblemished, it is considered as if its body was consecrated.

If, by contrast, one separated a goat as a sin-offering, a king separated a she-goat as a sin-offering, and a High Priest separated a cow as a sin-offering, their holiness cannot be transferred. The rationale is that anyone who deviates from the commandments prescribed for a sin-offering does not cause the designated animal to be consecrated at all, not even its worth, as we explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.

כא

הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְפִסְחוֹ אוֹ לְעוֹלָתוֹ אוֹ לַאֲשָׁמוֹ עוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיִין לִקָּרֵב הוֹאִיל וְיָרְדוּ לִקְדֻשַּׁת דָּמִים וַהֲרֵי הֵם תְּמִימִים יָרְדוּ לִקְדֻשַּׁת הַגּוּף. אֲבָל הַמַּפְרִישׁ שָׂעִיר לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְנָשִׂיא שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ שְׂעִירָה לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ פָּרָה לְחַטָּאתוֹ. אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה שֶׁכָּל הַמְשַׁנֶּה בְּחַטָּאוֹת לֹא נִתְקַדְּשָׁה כְּלָל וַאֲפִלּוּ קְדֻשַּׁת דָּמִים כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת פְּסוּלֵי הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין:

Temurah - Perek 2

1

The act of transferring the holiness of a sacrificial animal involves the owner of the animal saying with regard to an ordinary animal that he possesses: "This should be substituted for this" or "This is a replacement for this." Needless to say, holiness is transferred if one says: "This should be substituted for this sin-offering" or "... substituted for this burnt-offering." Similarly, holiness is transferred if one says: "This should be substituted for the sin-offering I possess at home" or "...substituted for the burnt-offering I possess in such-and-such a place."

If, by contrast, one said with regard to an ordinary animal: "This should be substituted for a burnt-offering" or "This is substituted for a sin-offering," his words are of no consequence. If he states: "The holiness of this is conveyed to this," a transfer of holiness is not brought about.

א

הַתְמוּרָה הוּא שֶׁיֹּאמַר בַּעַל הַקָּרְבָּן עַל בֶּהֱמַת חֻלִּין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ. אוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ חֲלִיפַת זוֹ. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר אִם אָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת חַטָּאת זוֹ אוֹ תַּחַת עוֹלָה זוֹ שֶׁהִיא תְּמוּרָה. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת חַטָּאת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת אוֹ תַּחַת עוֹלָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְּמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְהוּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר עַל בֶּהֱמַת חֻלִּין הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת עוֹלָה אוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת חַטָּאת לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ מְחֻלֶּלֶת עַל זוֹ אֵינָהּ תְּמוּרָה:

2

The following rules apply when there were two animals before a person, one ordinary animal and one consecrated animal that became blemished. If he placed his hand on the ordinary animal and said: "This one is substituted for this," he has brought about a forbidden exchange of holiness and he is liable for lashes. If, by contrast, he placed his hand on the consecrated animal and said: "This is substituted for this," he has exchanged its holiness and transferred it to the ordinary animal. This is not a forbidden exchange of holiness, but instead, is comparable to redeeming the blemished sacrificial animal with this ordinary animal.

ב

הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁתֵּי בְּהֵמוֹת אַחַת חֻלִּין וְאַחַת הֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁנָּפַל בָּהּ מוּם. הִנִּיחַ יָדוֹ עַל בֶּהֱמַת חֻלִּין וְאָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְלוֹקֶה. הִנִּיחַ יָדוֹ עַל בֶּהֱמַת הֶקְדֵּשׁ וְאָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה חִלְּלָהּ עַל בֶּהֱמַת הַחֻלִּין וְאֵין זוֹ תְּמוּרָה אֶלָּא כְּפוֹדֶה בַּעֲלַת מוּם בְּזוֹ הַבְּהֵמָה:

3

The following rule applies when there were three animals consecrated for the altar before a person and one of them was blemished and awaiting redemption and also three unblemished ordinary animals. If he says: "These are substituted for these," the holiness of two of the consecrated animals is transferred to two of the ordinary animals through the convention of temurah and he is liable for two sets of lashes. The third ordinary animal is substituted for the blemished animal through the convention of chillul. We assume that he sought to use that convention rather than the convention of temurah. The rationale is that since the person had a forbidden course of action, temurah and a permitted course of action, chillul, we operate under the assumption that a person will not abandon the permitted course of action and follow the forbidden one. Therefore he is not liable for three sets of lashes.

Similarly, if one says: "These ten ordinary animals are substituted for these ten consecrated animals," and one of the consecrated animals is blemished, the person is liable for only nine sets of lashes, for he intended to transfer the holiness of the tenth animal through the convention of chillul. Even though he had established a halachic presumption by being liable for many sets of lashes, since there is a permitted way for him to transfer the animal's holiness, we presume that he will not abandon the permitted course of action and follow the forbidden one.

When there are two consecrated animals and one of them is blemished and two ordinary animals and one of them is blemished, and one says: "These are substituted for these," the holiness of the unblemished animal is transferred to the unblemished animal through the convention of temurah and he is liable for one set of lashes and the holiness of the blemished animal is transferred to the blemished animal through the convention of chillul. The rationale is that we presume that he will not abandon the permitted course of action and follow the forbidden one.

ג

הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּהֵמוֹת קָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ וְאַחַת מֵהֶן בַּעֲלַת מוּם שֶׁהֲרֵי הִיא עוֹמֶדֶת לְפִדְיוֹן וְשָׁלֹשׁ בְּהֵמוֹת תְּמִימוֹת חֻלִּין וְאָמַר הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ תַּחַת אֵלּוּ. הֲרֵי שְׁתַּיִם מִן הַחֻלִּין תַּחַת שְׁתַּיִם הַתְּמִימוֹת תְּמוּרָתָן תְּמוּרָה וְלוֹקֶה עֲלֵיהֶם שְׁתַּיִם. וְהַבְּהֵמָה הַשְּׁלִישִׁית הִיא תַּחַת בַּעֲלַת מוּם שֶׁנִּתְחַלְּלָה עָלֶיהָ וּלְחַלְּלָהּ נִתְכַּוֵּן וְלֹא לְהָמִיר בָּהּ. שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְפָנָיו דֶּרֶךְ אִסּוּר וְהִיא הַתְּמוּרָה וְדֶרֶךְ הֶתֵּר וְהוּא הַחִלּוּל חֲזָקָה הִיא שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַנִּיחַ הַהֶתֵּר וְעוֹשֶׂה הָאִסּוּר וּלְפִיכָךְ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה שָׁלֹשׁ מַלְקִיּוֹת. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר עֶשֶׂר בְּהֵמוֹת אֵלּוּ תַּחַת עֶשֶׂר בְּהֵמוֹת אֵלּוּ וְאַחַת מֵהֶן בַּעֲלַת מוּם אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה אֶלָּא תֵּשַׁע מַלְקִיּוֹת שֶׁהַבְּהֵמָה הָעֲשִׂירִית לְחַלְּלָהּ נִתְכַּוֵּן וְלֹא לְהָמִיר בָּהּ. שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֻחְזַק זֶה בְּמַלְקִיּוֹת הַרְבֵּה הוֹאִיל וְיֵשׁ שָׁם דֶּרֶךְ הֶתֵּר אֵינוֹ מַנִּיחַ דְּבַר הַהֶתֵּר וְעוֹשֶׂה הָאִסּוּר. שְׁתֵּי בְּהֵמוֹת שֶׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ וְאַחַת מֵהֶן בַּעֲלַת מוּם וּשְׁתֵּי בְּהֵמוֹת שֶׁל חֻלִּין וְאַחַת מֵהֶן בַּעֲלַת מוּם וְאָמַר הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ תַּחַת אֵלּוּ הֲרֵי הַתְּמִימָה תְּמוּרַת הַתְּמִימָה וְלוֹקֶה אַחַת וּבַעֲלַת הַמּוּם מְחֻלֶּלֶת עַל בַּעֲלַת הַמּוּם שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֵנִיחַ הַהֶתֵּר וְעוֹשֶׂה הָאִסּוּר:

4

When one says: "The holiness of an animal designated as a burnt-offering and one designated as a peace-offering is transferred to this animal," his statements are of consequence. The animal should be sold and half of the proceeds used to bring the exchange of a burnt-offering and half used to bring the exchange of a peace-offering.

If one said: "The holiness of an animal designated as a burnt-offering and the holiness of an animal dedicated as a peace-offering are transferred to this animal," we examine if that was his original intent. If it was, his words are of consequence. If his original intent was merely to transfer the holiness of a burnt-offering, and he afterwards, added "the holiness of a peace-offering" later, only his original statements are of consequence. Even though he retracted them immediately thereafter, only the holiness of a burnt-offering was transferred to the animal.

ד

הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים וְתִמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בַּחֲצִי דָּמֶיהָ תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּבַחֲצִי דָּמֶיהָ תְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים. אָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּתְמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים אִם נִתְכַּוֵּן לְכָךְ מִתְּחִלָּה דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים וְאִם לֹא נִתְכַּוֵּן בַּתְּחִלָּה אֶלָּא לִתְמוּרַת עוֹלָה וְחָזַר וְאָמַר תְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָזַר בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִּבּוּר אֵין תּוֹפְשִׂין אֶלָּא לָשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן וַהֲרֵי הִיא תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה בִּלְבַד:

Temurah - Perek 3

1

What are the laws governing the offering of an animal to which holiness was transferred? A male animal to which the holiness of a burnt-offering was transferred should be sacrificed as a burnt-offering. If the animal to which the holiness of a burnt-offering was transferred was female or blemished, the female should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. Then it should be sold and a burnt-offering brought with the proceeds of the sale.

An animal to which the holiness of a sin-offering was transferred should be consigned to death, as we explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim. An animal to which the holiness of a guilt-offering was transferred should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. Then it should be sold and freewill offerings brought with the proceeds of the sale. An animal to which the holiness of a peace-offering was transferred is like a peace-offering in all respects: It requires semichah, accompanying offerings, and the waving of the breast and the thigh.

An animal to which the holiness of a thanksgiving-offering was transferred is like a thanksgiving-offering except that it does not require bread, as we explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.The following laws apply to an animal to which the holiness of a Paschal sacrifice was transferred. If the transfer was made before noon on the fourteenth of Nisan, the animal to which the holiness was transferred is not offered. Instead, it should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. Then it should be sold and a peace-offering brought with the proceeds of the sale. If the transfer was made after noon, the animal to which the holiness was transferred should itself be sacrificed as a peace-offering.

An animal to which the holiness of a firstborn offering or a tithe offering was transferred should never be sacrificed. This is derived from Leviticus 27:26 which states with regard to a firstborn: "It is God's." According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught: "It" is sacrificed, but an animal to which its holiness is transferred is not sacrificed. The laws pertaining to the tithe offering are the same as those pertaining to the firstborn offering. An animal to which the holiness of these offerings was transferred should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. Afterwards, it may be eaten.

א

כֵּיצַד דִּין הַתְּמוּרוֹת לִקָּרֵב. תְּמוּרַת הָעוֹלָה תִּקָּרֵב עוֹלָה וְאִם הָיְתָה תְּמוּרָתָהּ נְקֵבָה אוֹ בַּעֲלַת מוּם תִּרְעֶה הַנְּקֵבָה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בָּהּ מוּם וְתִמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בְּדָמֶיהָ עוֹלָה. תְּמוּרַת הַחַטָּאת תָּמוּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בִּפְסוּלֵי הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. תְּמוּרַת הָאָשָׁם תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בָּהּ מוּם וְיִפְּלוּ דָּמֶיהָ לִנְדָבָה. תְּמוּרַת הַשְּׁלָמִים כִּשְׁלָמִים לְכָל דָּבָר טְעוּנָה סְמִיכָה וּנְסָכִים וּתְנוּפַת חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק. תְּמוּרַת הַתּוֹדָה כְּתוֹדָה אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה לֶחֶם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת פְּסוּלֵי הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. תְּמוּרַת הַפֶּסַח אִם הֵמִיר בָּהּ קֹדֶם חֲצוֹת יוֹם אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר אֵין תְּמוּרָתוֹ קְרֵבָה אֶלָּא תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בָּהּ מוּם וְיָבִיא בְּדָמֶיהָ שְׁלָמִים וְאִם הֵמִיר בָּהּ אַחַר חֲצוֹת הֲרֵי הַתְּמוּרָה עַצְמָהּ תִּקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים. תְּמוּרַת הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר אֵינָם קְרֵבִין לְעוֹלָם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בִּבְכוֹר (ויקרא כז כו) (ויקרא כז ל) "לַה' הוּא". מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ הוּא קָרֵב וְאֵין תְמוּרָתוֹ קְרֵבָה. וְדִין הַמַּעֲשֵׂר בִּבְכוֹר תְּמוּרָתָן תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בָּהּ מוּם וְתֵאָכֵל:

2

An animal to which the holiness of a firstborn is transferred should be given to the priests and an animal to which the holiness of a tithe offering was transferred is given to its owners. Just as a firstborn animal or a tithe offering that contracts a disqualifying physical blemish is not redeemed, as explained in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach, so too, an animal to which their holiness is transferred is not redeemed.

ב

תְּמוּרַת הַבְּכוֹר לַכֹּהֲנִים וּתְמוּרַת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר לַבְּעָלִים. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין פּוֹדִין בְּכוֹר וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁנָּפַל בָּהֶן מוּם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת אִסּוּרֵי מִזְבֵּחַ כָּךְ אֵין פּוֹדִים תְּמוּרָתָן:

3

When an animal was consecrated half as a burnt-offering and half as a peace-offering, an animal to which its holiness was transferred is given the same status. Similarly, when the holiness of any consecrated animal which should not be sacrificed because of a difficulty at the time of its consecration was transferred to another animal, that second animal should also not be sacrificed.

If one said: "The holiness of a sacrificial animal should be transferred to half this animal and the other half should be consecrated as a burnt-offering," it should be offered as a burnt-offering. If he consecrated it half as a burnt-offering and half, as a tithe offering, it should be sacrificed as a burnt-offering. If he transferred the holiness of a sacrificial animal to half of it and he consecrated half as a tithe offering, its status is in doubt and it should not be sacrificed.

ג

בְּהֵמָה שֶׁהִקְדִּישָׁהּ חֶצְיָהּ עוֹלָה וְחֶצְיָהּ שְׁלָמִים תְּמוּרָתָהּ כָּמוֹהָ. וְכֵן כָּל בֶּהֱמַת הֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁאֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה מִפְּנֵי תְּחִלַּת הֶקְדֵּשָׁהּ הֲרֵי תְּמוּרָתָהּ כָּמוֹהָ. אָמַר חֲצִי בְּהֵמָה זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְחֶצְיָהּ עוֹלָה הֲרֵי זוֹ תִּקָּרֵב עוֹלָה. חֶצְיָהּ עוֹלָה וְחֶצְיָהּ מַעֲשֵׂר תִּקָּרֵב עוֹלָה. חֶצְיָהּ תְּמוּרָה וְחֶצְיָהּ מַעֲשֵׂר הֲרֵי זוֹ סָפֵק וְאֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה:

4

The following rules apply when a person consecrates an animal with a temporary blemish or, needless to say, an unblemished animal and then it contracts a permanent blemish and it is redeemed. If one endeavored to transfer its holiness after it was redeemed, the transfer is binding, but the animal to which the transfer was made should neither be sacrificed, nor redeemed. Instead, it should be left until it dies. It should not be sacrificed, because it comes from holiness that was already deferred. Nor may it be redeemed, because its holiness does not have the strength to encompass the entity used to redeem it.

ד

הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בַּעֲלַת מוּם עוֹבֵר וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר תְּמִימָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד בָּהּ מוּם קָבוּעַ וְנִפְדֵּית וְהֵמִיר בָּהּ אַחַר שֶׁנִּפְדֵּית. הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה וְאֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה וְאֵינָהּ נִפְדֵּית אֶלָּא מַנִּיחָהּ עַד שֶׁתָּמוּת. אֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבָּאָה מִכֹּחַ קְדֻשָּׁה דְּחוּיָה וְאֵינָהּ נִפְדֵּית שֶׁאֵין בְּכֹחַ קְדֻשָּׁתָהּ לִתְפּשֹׁ פִּדְיוֹנָהּ:

5

When any animal to which holiness was transferred was permanently blemished from the outset, they should be redeemed. Nevertheless, they do not become ordinary animals in a complete sense to the extent that it is permitted to shear them or perform work with them after they are redeemed. For holiness that is transferred can encompass an animal that possesses a permanent blemish, as evident from Leviticus 27:10 which speaks of transferring holiness "from the good to the bad." Here the intent of the term "bad" is an animal that is blemished or the like and thus is not fit to serve as a sacrifice. Nevertheless, concerning it, the verse continues: "It shall be consecrated."

ה

כָּל הַתְּמוּרוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין קְבוּעִין מִתְּחִלָּתָן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִפָּדוּ וְאֵינָן יוֹצְאִין לְחֻלִּין לְכָל דָּבָר כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ מֻתָּרִין בְּגִזָּה וַעֲבוֹדָה אַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן. שֶׁהַקְּדֻשָּׁה חָלָה בַּתְּמוּרָה עַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז י) "אוֹ רַע בְּטוֹב" וְרַע הָאָמוּר כָּאן הוּא בַּעַל מוּם וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְקָרְבָּן וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן כָּתוּב בּוֹ (ויקרא כז י) "יִהְיֶה קֹדֶשׁ":

6

The following laws apply when an animal consecrated as a burnt-offering became intermingled with sacrificial animals consecrated as peace-offerings and one transferred the holiness of one of the animals in the mixture to an ordinary animal.One should bring another animal and consecrate it, saying: "If this one had the holiness of a burnt-offering transferred to it, this animal is a peace-offering. And if this one had the holiness of a peace-offering transferred to it, this animal is a burnt-offering." Thus the animal which he brought together with the animal to which the holiness of the animal was transferred are like animals consecrated as burnt-offerings and as peace-offerings that became intermingled.

If the person transformed the holiness of one of these two to a third animal and it is not known which one's holiness he transferred, he should bring another animal fit for sacrifice from his home and consecrate it conditionally, saying with regard to the second animal to which holiness is being transferred: "If this is an animal to which the holiness of an animal was transferred, the animal that was brought remains an ordinary animal. If this animal is an animal to which the holiness of a burnt-offering or a peace-offering was transferred, the animal that was brought is a burnt-offering or a peace-offering." Thus the animal which he brought with the second animal to which holiness was transferred is like a sacrificial animal that became intermingled with an animal to which holiness was transferred. We have already explained the laws pertaining to the intermingling of animals to which holiness was transferred in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.

ו

עוֹלָה שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בִּזְבָחִים וְהֵמִיר בְּאַחַת מִן הַתַּעֲרוֹבוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא בְּהֵמָה אַחֶרֶת וְאוֹמֵר אִם תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה הִיא זוֹ הֲרֵי בְּהֵמָה זוֹ שְׁלָמִים וְאִם תְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים הִיא זוֹ הֲרֵי בְּהֵמָה זוֹ עוֹלָה. וְנִמְצָא הַבְּהֵמָה שֶׁהֵבִיא עִם הַתְּמוּרָה כְּעוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ זֶה בָּזֶה. חָזַר וְהֵמִיר בְּאַחַת מִשְּׁתֵּיהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן הֵמִיר. מֵבִיא זֶבַח אַחֵר מִתּוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ. וְאוֹמֵר עַל הַתְּמוּרָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה. אִם תְּמוּרַת תְּמוּרָה הִיא זוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ שֶׁהֵבִיא חֻלִּין. וְאִם תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה אוֹ שְׁלָמִים הִיא הֲרֵי זֶה שֶׁהֵבִיא עוֹלָה אוֹ שְׁלָמִים. וַהֲרֵי זֶה שֶׁהֵבִיא עִם הַתְּמוּרָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה כְּזֶבַח וּתְמוּרָה שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ זֶה בָּזֶה. וּכְבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ דִּין הַתַּעֲרוֹבוֹת בְּהִלְכוֹת פְּסוּלֵי הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין:

7

When an animal consecrated as a peace-offering became intermingled with a firstborn animal or a tithe offering and one transferred the holiness of one of the animals of the mixture to another animal, that animal should not be offered. Instead, it should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish and then be redeemed, and then it should be eaten in the same manner as a blemished firstborn or tithe offering, as explained.

ז

שְׁלָמִים שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ בִּבְכוֹר אוֹ בְּמַעֲשֵׂר וְהֵמִיר בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶן הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִקְרַב אֶלָּא יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בּוֹ מוּם וְיִפָּדֶה וְיֵאָכֵל כִּבְכוֹר אוֹ כְּמַעֲשֵׂר כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah