Temurah 19aתמורה י״ט א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Temurah 19a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
19aי״ט א

אבל גבי תמורת ולד אשם דליכא שם עולה על אמו מודי רבי אליעזר דבדמיו אין הוא עצמו לא קרב

But with regard to the offspring of the substitute of a guilt offering, where there is no burnt offering status for its mother, as the animal for which it was substituted was a guilt offering, Rabbi Elazar concedes that an animal purchased with its money, received from selling the offspring, yes, it is sacrificed as a burnt offering, but the offspring itself is not sacrificed as a burnt offering.

איתיביה אביי וכי בעי רבי אליעזר שם עולה על אמו והא תניא המפריש נקבה לפסחו ירעה עד שיסתאב ותמכר ויביא בדמיה פסח ילדה ירעה עד שיסתאב וימכר ויביא בדמיו פסח

Abaye raised an objection to Rava: And does Rabbi Elazar require that there be burnt offering status for its mother, in order for the offspring to be sacrificed as a burnt offering? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: In the case of one who designates a female animal for his Paschal offering, which must be a male, the animal is left to graze until it becomes unfit, and it is then sold and he brings a Paschal offering with the money received for its sale. If the female animal gave birth to a male,the offspring may not be sacrificed as a Paschal offering despite the fact that it is a male. Rather, it is left to graze until it becomes unfit, and then it is sold and he brings a Paschal offering with the money received from its sale.

נשתיירה אחר הפסח תרעה עד שיסתאב ויביא בדמיה שלמים ילדה ירעה עד שיסתאב וימכר ויביא בדמיו שלמים ר"א אומר הוא עצמו יקרב בשלמים

If the animal remained without a blemish until after Passover, it is left to graze until it becomes unfit, and he brings a peace offering with the money received for its sale. If it gave birth to a male after Passover, the offspring too is left to graze until it becomes unfit, and then it is sold, and he brings a peace offering with the money received for its sale. Rabbi Elazar disagrees in the latter case and says: The offspring itself is sacrificed as a peace offering.

והא הכא דליכא שם שלמים על אמו ואמר רבי אליעזר יקרב שלמים אמר ליה [רבא] (ר' אלעזר) אחר הפסח קא אמרת שאני אחר הפסח דמותר פסח גופיה קרב שלמים

Abaye explains his objection: But here, it is a case where there is no peace offering status for its mother, as the mother was consecrated as a Paschal offering, and yet Rabbi Elazar says that the offspring is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rava said to Abaye in response: Do you say that this statement of Rabbi Elazar with regard to a Paschal offering after Passover contradicts my explanation? Not so; the status of a Paschal offering after Passover is different, as a leftover Paschal offering itself is sacrificed as a peace offering. Therefore, a female animal designated as a Paschal offering has the status of a peace offering after Passover.

אי הכי ניפלוג נמי ברישא אמר ליה אין ה"נ ופליגי

Abaye asked Rava: If so, that the reason Rabbi Elazar permits the offspring to be sacrificed is that the mother also has the status of a peace offering, let Rabbi Elazar also disagree with the Rabbis in the first clause of the baraita, where the female animal designated as a Paschal offering gave birth before Passover. Rabbi Elazar should state that this offspring itself may be brought as a peace offering, as here too the mother has the status of a peace offering, since a Paschal offering slaughtered before Passover as a peace offering is valid. Rava said to Abaye: Yes, it is indeed so, and they disagree in this case as well.

אביי אמר לא פליג מידי דגמירי למקום שהמותר הולך הולד הולך לאחר הפסח דמותר קרב שלמים ולד נמי קרב שלמים

Abaye suggested another explanation of the opinion of Rabbi Elazar and said: In a case where the female animal designated as a Paschal offering gave birth before Passover, there is nobody who disagrees; rather, they all agree that the offspring may not be sacrificed. As it is learned as a tradition that to the place that the leftover offering goes, the offspring goes as well. Therefore, after Passover, when the leftover Paschal offering is sacrificed as a peace offering, the offspring is also sacrificed as a peace offering.

אבל לפני הפסח אימיה למאי אקדשה לדמי פסח ולד נמי לדמי פסח

But before Passover, when the Paschal offering is not yet considered leftover, the offspring is endowed with the same sanctity as the mother. In what way is the mother consecrated? It is consecrated for the value of a Paschal offering, that is, so that it should be sold and a Paschal offering should be purchased with the proceeds, as the female animal itself may not be sacrificed as a Paschal offering. If so, the offspring as well is consecrated only for the value of a Paschal offering.

מתיב רב עוקבא בר חמא ומי אמרינן מדאימיה לדמי ולד נמי לדמי והתניא המפריש נקבה לפסח היא וולדותיה ירעו עד שיסתאבו וימכרו ויביא בדמיהם פסח ר"א אומר הוא עצמו יקרב פסח

Rav Ukva bar Ḥama raises an objection to this explanation of Abaye: And do we say that Rabbi Elazar maintains that as its mother is consecrated only for the value of a Paschal offering, the offspring as well is consecrated only for the value of a Paschal offering? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: One who designates a female animal as a Paschal offering, it and its offspring are left to graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and he brings a Paschal offering with the money received for their sale. Rabbi Elazar says: The offspring itself is sacrificed as a Paschal offering.

והא הכא דאימיה לדמי ואמר רבי אליעזר הוא עצמו קרב פסח ולא מוקמינן ליה באימיה

But here it is a case where its mother was consecrated for the value of a Paschal offering, and nevertheless Rabbi Elazar said that the offspring itself is sacrificed as a Paschal offering, and we do not establish the status of the offspring based upon the sanctity of the mother.

אמר רבינא במפריש בהמה מעוברת עסקינן רבי אליעזר סבר כרבי יוחנן דאמר אם שיירו משוייר דעובר לאו ירך אמו הוא ואמו היא דלא קדשה קדושת הגוף אבל היא קדשה

Ravina says: One can answer that here we are dealing with a case of one who designates a pregnant animal, and Rabbi Elazar holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said with regard to one who consecrates a pregnant animal for a specific purpose, that if he left it out, i.e., designated the fetus as having a different sanctity, it is left out from the sanctity of the mother and consecrated in accordance with the designated sanctity. The reason is that a fetus is not considered the thigh of its mother, but rather the mother and its offspring are considered two separate animals. Here too, it is only its mother that is not sanctified with the inherent sanctity of a Paschal offering, but only for the value of a Paschal offering, as it is female. But the offspring is consecrated as a Paschal offering.

אמר ליה מר זוטרא בריה דרב מרי לרבינא הכי נמי מסתברא דבבהמה מעוברת עסקינן מדקתני היא וולדותיה שמע מיניה

Mar Zutra, son of Rav Mari, said to Ravina: This, too, stands to reason, that we are dealing with a case where he designated a pregnant animal, from the fact that the baraita teaches: It and its offspring. This indicates that both the mother and its offspring were in existence at the time of the consecration. The Gemara comments: Conclude from here that this explanation is correct.