Bekhorot 60aבכורות ס׳ א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Bekhorot 60a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
60aס׳ א

לא יאמר אברור עשרה ואטול מהן אחד והשאר פטורים אלא כונסן לדיר ומוציא עשרה ונוטל מהן אחד והשאר מצטרפין לגורן אחר

he may not say: I will separate ten and bring them into the pen, and I will take one of them as animal tithe, and the rest will be exempt. Rather, he must bring them all into the pen and remove ten of them by causing them to emerge from the opening, and take one of them, the tenth one, as animal tithe. And the remainder combine with animals born later, to be tithed in another designated time of gathering.

והתניא תשעה עשר טלאים לא יאמר אברור עשרה ואטול מהן אחד והשאר פטורין אלא כונסן לדיר ומוציא עשרה ונוטל מהן אחד והשאר פטורין

The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that if one has nineteen lambs he may not say: I will separate ten and bring them into the pen, and I will take one of them as animal tithe and the rest will be exempt; rather, he must bring them all into the pen and remove ten of them by causing them to emerge from the opening, and take one of them, the tenth one, and the remainder are exempt? According to this baraita, the remainder are not combined with animals born later.

תרגמה רב הונא בר סחורה קמיה דרבא בריגלא בדיר שיש לו שני פתחים עסקינן ויצאו ט' בפתח זה וט' בפתח זה דהאיך חד חזי להכא ולהכא

Rav Huna bar Seḥora interpreted the baraita before Rava at the time of the Festival discourse: We are dealing with a pen that has two openings. And nine of the lambs emerged through this opening and nine of them went out through that opening, and this last one remaining in the pen is fit to come out here or to come out there. Therefore, all the lambs emerged as part of a tally fit to reach ten.

ולישני ליה כגון שמנה תשעה וכי מטא עשרה קרי חד מרישא קסבר עשירי מאליו קדוש

The Gemara challenges: But let him teach instead that the baraita is referring to a case where he counted nine, and when the tenth lamb arrived to be counted he called it number one and began counting again from the start. In such a case he designated only the nineteenth lamb that emerged as number ten, and therefore all the other lambs are exempt. The Gemara explains that Rav Huna bar Seḥora holds that the tenth animal to come out of the pen is sanctified of its own accord, even if it was designated as number one.

ולישני ליה בגורן ומנאן זוגות זוגות קסבר עשירי למנין בהמות הוא קדוש

The Gemara challenges: But let him teach instead that the baraita is referring to a case of a designated time for gathering the animals, and that the pen has only one opening, but he counted them pair by pair, i.e., he called the first pair number one, the second pair number two, and so on. In this manner, the nineteenth lamb would be designated as number ten and thereby exempt the others. The Gemara explains that Rav Huna bar Seḥora holds that the tenth according to the number of animals is sanctified, regardless of how he counts them. Accordingly, one of the fifth pair would be the tithed animal, and the remaining nine would not be considered part of a tally fit to reach ten.

אר"נ בר יצחק זכאי אימיה דרב הונא בר סחורה דשני ליה שמעתא בריגלא כשמעתיה:

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said with regard to this incident: The mother of Rav Huna bar Seḥora merited to give birth to such a son, who explained the halakha before Rava at the time of the Festival discourse in accordance with Rava’s own halakha.

מתני׳ יצאו שנים כאחת מונה אותם שנים שנים מנאן אחד תשיעי ועשירי מקולקלין

MISHNA: If two animals emerged as one, one counts them as twos, i.e., as though they came out one after the other. If he mistakenly counted two of the animals at the beginning or in the middle of the ten as one, and then continued his count, the ninth and the tenth are flawed, as he called the tenth: Ninth, and he called the eleventh: Tenth.

קרא לתשיעי עשירי ולעשירי תשיעי ולאחד עשר עשירי שלשתן מקודשין התשיעי נאכל במומו והעשירי מעשר ואחד עשר קרב שלמים ועושה תמורה דברי ר' מאיר

If he mistakenly called the ninth: Tenth, and the tenth: Ninth, and the eleventh: Tenth, the three of them are sacred, although each has a different halakhic status. The ninth is eaten in its blemished state; and the tenth is animal tithe, which is sacrificed in the Temple and eaten by its owner; and the eleventh is sacrificed as a peace offering, from which the breast and the thigh are given to the priest. And the eleventh renders a non-sacred animal that is exchanged for the peace offering consecrated as a substitute and he sacrifices it as a peace offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

א"ר יהודה וכי יש תמורה עושה תמורה אמרו משום ר"מ אילו היה תמורה לא היה קרב קרא לתשיעי עשירי ולעשירי עשירי ולאחד עשר עשירי אין אחד עשר מקודש זה הכלל כל שלא נעקר שם עשירי ממנו אין אחד עשר מקודש:

Rabbi Yehuda said: The eleventh animal itself, which he called tenth, is a substitute for animal tithe, and does a substitute render another animal a substitute? Everyone agrees that a substitute is created only in exchange for an originally consecrated animal. The Sages said in the name of Rabbi Meir: The eleventh animal is not considered a substitute for the animal tithe, since if it were a substitute it would not be sacrificed, as the substitute for an animal tithe is not sacrificed. If one called the ninth animal: Tenth, and the tenth: Tenth, and the eleventh: Tenth, the eleventh is not consecrated. This is the principle: In any situation where the name of the tenth was not removed from the tenth animal, the eleventh that was called the tenth is not consecrated.

גמ׳ אמר ר' יוחנן מנאן זוגות זוגות קינטרן קינטרן עשירי למנינו הוא קדוש

GEMARA: Rabbi Yoḥanan says: If one counted the animals pair by pair, i.e., he called the first pair: One, and the second pair: Two, and so on, or if one counted them hundred [kinteran] by hundred, the tenth according to his number is sanctified.

למנינו מאי רב מארי אמר למנין שלו הוא קדוש רב כהנא אמר למנין בהמות הוא קדוש

The Gemara asks: When Rabbi Yoḥanan says that the tenth is sanctified according to his number, what does he mean? Rav Mari says: It is sanctified according to his counting, i.e., all the animals in whichever pair or group he calls: Ten, are sanctified, e.g., the tenth pair, which consists of the nineteenth and twentieth animals. Rav Kahana says: It is sanctified according to the number of animals, regardless of how he designates them.

תנן יצאו שנים כאחת מונה אותן שנים שנים מנאן אחד תשיעי ועשירי מקולקלין

The Gemara cites support for Rav Mari’s opinion. We learned in the mishna: If two animals emerged as one, one counts them as twos. If he mistakenly counted a pair of animals in the middle as one and continued his count, the ninth and the tenth are flawed, as he called the tenth: Ninth, and the eleventh: Tenth.

בשלמא למאן דאמר למנין שלו הוא קדוש משום הכי הוו תשיעי ועשירי מקולקלין ולעשירי קא קרי ליה תשיעי ולאחד עשר עשירי אלא למאן דאמר למנין בהמות הוא קדוש לתשיעי תשיעי קא קרי ליה ולעשירי עשירי קא קרי ליה

Granted, according to the one who says: It is sanctified according to his counting, i.e., Rav Mari, it is due to that reason that the ninth and the tenth are flawed, because the number by which one designates them is significant, and he called the tenth animal the ninth, and the eleventh he designated as tenth. But according to the one who says that the animal is sanctified according to the number of animals regardless of how the owner designates each one, i.e., Rav Kahana, why are they flawed? It should be considered as though he called the ninth animal the ninth, and the tenth animal he called: Tenth.

אמר לך רבי יוחנן כי אמינא אנא היכי דאיכוין לאפוקי זוגות זוגות היכא דנפק ממילא לא

The Gemara answers that according to Rav Kahana, Rabbi Yoḥanan could have said to you: When I said the designation goes according to the animal I was referring only to a case where he intended to take out the animals pair by pair, and he did not err. In such a case his designation is nullified and the animals are sanctified in accordance with the order they left the pen. But with regard to a case where the animal emerged by itself and the owner miscounted I did not say the designation goes according to the number of the animal, as the Torah explicitly includes a case where the sanctification follows a mistaken designation (see 60b).

תא שמע מנאן למפרע עשירי שבמנין הוא קדוש בשלמא למאן דאמר למנין בהמות הוא קדוש שפיר אלא למ"ד למנין שלו הוא קדוש עשירי חד קרי ליה

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear another proof from a baraita: If one counted them backward, i.e., ten, nine, eight, and so on, the tenth animal in the numbering, which he designated as number one, is sanctified. Granted, according to the one who says that the tithe is sanctified according to the number of animals regardless of how he designates each animal, i.e., Rav Kahana, this works out well, as the tenth animal is sanctified. But according to the one who says it is sanctified according to his counting, i.e., Rav Mari, why is the tenth animal sanctified? After all, he called the tenth animal number one.

אמר רבא הואיל ואיתיה במנינא פרסאה דקרו לעשרה חד:

Rava said: The tenth animal is sanctified according to Rav Mari because it has been counted as number ten in Persian counting, as they call the tenth one in their language by the term one, i.e., they count only in units of ten, and call these units: One. Therefore, in this case there is no contradiction between the designation and the number of the animal.