פרשת ראה תשי"ט - מעשר שני

And thou shalt eat before the LORD thy God, in the place which He shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, the tithe of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the firstlings of thy herd and of thy flock; that thou mayest learn to fear the LORD thy God always.

למען תלמד ליראה, when you are an eyewitness to the priests performing their service in the Temple, etc., the site at which G’d’s presence manifests itself.

למען תלמד ליראה, for the site chosen by G’d for the Temple also houses the Supreme Court, Sanhedrin, from where knowledge and understanding is dispensed.

The commandment that one who appraises a man give the value delineated in the Torah: To rule on appraisals of people; that is, one who says, "My appraisal is upon me" or "The appraisal of x is upon me," must give to the priest according to the amount that he said, and not less - as appears explicitly in Scripture about a male and female and according to the tally of [their] years - as it is stated (Leviticus 27:2), "If a man proclaims an oath of the appraisal of souls to the Lord." And the matter of appraisals is included in vows of consecration and we are therefore obligated to keep them on account of "he shall not profane his words" (Numbers 30:3), "you shall not delay" (Deuteronomy 23:22) and "he shall do like everything that comes out of his mouth" (Numbers 30:3). It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is] since a person only belongs to the higher [realm] through speech, and this is the entire esteemed part in him. And it is what called the "living soul" (Genesis 2:7) of a man - as Onkelos' translates [this phrase as] "and there was a speaking spirit in man" - since the rest of the parts of the body die. And if a man lose this good part, the body remains dead and like an undesirable vessel. Therefore he is obligated to [at least] fulfill his speech in whatever he uses it for matters of the Heavens, such as consecrations and with all matters of charity. And regarding all other matters of the world - even though there is no particular positive or negative commandment specified for them - the Sages commanded and warned with several warnings that a person should never change his words. And they also ordained to curse one who changes his words so long as an act is done with the matter. And that is the matter of [the curse of] "He who repaid" that is mentioned about them in many places, about which they said (Bava Metzia 44a), "Words and money [do not] acquire, but they said, etc." as it appears in the chapter [entitled] HaZahav. And I have already written at much length about the roots of oaths and vows in the Order of Vayishma Yitro in the commandment of "You shall not bear" (Sefer HaChinukh 30). From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 18b) that we received from the tradition that these years that are stated for appraisals are measured day to day - meaning from the day of birth - and also that all the shekel-coins stated there are the holy shekels. And we have known from the received tradition that the weight of a holy shekel is three hundred and twenty barley grains of pure silver. And the Sages have already added upon it and made its weight like the weight of the coin called the sela at the time of the Second [Temple], which is three hundred and eighty-four medium barley grains (so is it in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Sheqel Dues 1:2-3). And they, may their memory be blessed, said that this sela is (four) dinar, and the dinar is six maah - and the maah is what was called gerah in the days of Moshe, as Onkelos translates gerah as maah - and its weight is sixteen barley grains. And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 2a) that there is no distinction in appraisals whether he is handsome or ugly or sick or blind or stump-legged. Rather all are appraised according to [their] years, as the Torah commanded about them. And that which they said (Arakhin 2a) that the value is not like appraisal, such that one who says, "The value of x is upon me," gives according to what he is worth and we do not pay attention to the years at all - as the Torah only commanded to give the valuation according to years specifically for appraisal, as we explained. And [payment of] undifferentiated appraisals and values are for the upkeep of the [Temple] and we always give all of it into the cell that was prepared in the Temple for the consecrated items of the upkeep of the [Temple] (so is it found in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 1:10). And [also] the law of one [the sex of which is in doubt], a gentile or a slave who appraised or were appraised; the law of one who is dying that he has no appraisal or value; the law of one who is going out to be killed; the law of one who appraises one limb; the law of one who says, "My weight is upon me"; the law of one who says, "My height is upon me," or "My full height is upon me"; [the law of] one who says, "Gold and silver are upon me," but he did not specify from which [type of] coin (Menachot 104b); and the law of how it is that we arrange things for one who made an appraisal and his hand could not reach to pay what he appraised - and this is what the Sages said about this matter (Arakhin 23b): We take collateral from those obligated in appraisals and values, and we do not return the collateral during the day or the night; and we sell everything that is found to them of land and movable items - even clothing and household utensils, and there is no need to say, slaves and beasts. But we do not sell for them the clothing of their wives or their children - and not even clothes that he [just] dyed for their sake nor new shoes from when he bought them for their sake before he made the appraisal. And so [too,] one who consecrates all of his possessions, does not consecrate these. And the matter of the arrangement is that we provide for the one that has appraisals or values [that he owes], thirty days of food and twelve months of clothing - clothes that are suitable for him - and his shoes and his tefillin, but not other books. And [we provide him with] a suitable bed and bedding. But we do not provide food and clothing for his wife and children, even though he is obligated in their food and clothing. And when we give him alone clothing for twelve months, it is only that which is suitable for him, but if he wore silk items and golden clothing we take it off of him, and we provide him with suitable clothing for a man like him for weekdays, but not for Shabbat and holidays (Bava Metzia 113b). And if he was a craftsman, we provide him with tools of his trade - two craft tools from each and every type. How is this? If he was a carpenter, we provide him with two planes and two saws. And if he had many tools of one type and few of another type, we do not sell the many in order to buy him of the few. Rather we provide him with two of the many and all that he has of the few. But if he was a donkey driver or a shipowner, we do not provide him with the beast or the ship, even though their [sustenance] is only from them. And so [too,] if he is a Torah scholar and he has nothing with which to earn his livelihood besides his study, the commentators said that we do not leave him his books, as this is also not included in tools of a trade - and from here I have a proof that it is upon the student to bring the book to the teacher. But there are some of the commentators who said that we leave him the tractate that he is studying at that time - and they said well, on account of the honor of the Torah. And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 23a) that we ask about appraisals and values [in order to annul them] in the [same] way that we ask about other vows and consecrations. And they also said (Arakhin 24a) that if there were animals or slaves or jewels among the possessions of the appraiser and the traders say, "If he buys clothing of thirty dinar for this slave, he will increase his value by more than sixty"; or "If you wait on this animal for a month, its value will increase by double"; or "If they bring this jewel to place x, it will be worth much money" - we do not listen to them at all. Rather we sell everything in their place and in their time, as it is stated (Leviticus 27:23), "and he shall give the appraisal on that day, holy to the Lord." And the understanding came about this that this verse teaches about all consecrated things that we do not sustain them, we do not wait with them for the market day and we do not take them from one place to [another]. And this is the principle - that they only have their place and time alone. And what are these words speaking about? About movable items. But we proclaim [the intention to sell] lands sixty consecutive days - morning and evening - and afterwards, we sell them. And since the matter of arranging [this debt] has come to our hand, we shall write here that which they, may their memory be blessed, said about a [general] debtor in the chapter [entitled] HaMekabel Sadeh Mechavero in Bava Metzia 113b: That there we say, "A teacher taught in front of Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, 'In the [same] way that we arrange things with appraisals, so do we arrange things with a debtor.'" And they brought many challenges and solutions and the end of the matter is that which the Gemara brings, "A story of Eliyahu, who Rabbah bar Avoua found standing in a graveyard of gentiles. He said to him, 'What is [the law] about their arranging things for a debtor?'" And Rashi, may his memory be blessed, and others had a textual variant [instead], "From where [do we know] about their arranging things for a debtor?" [This is] meaning to say, it was obvious to Rabbah bar Avoua that we arrange [things for a debtor], but he was asking Eliyahu, from which verse we learn it. "And Eliyahu answered him, 'That this is how we learn it, "destitution, destitution," from appraisals.'" [This is] meaning to say that it is written about a loan (Leviticus 25:35), "And if your brother becomes destitute and his hand falters with you, you shall strengthen him" - which is a loan, as it is written at its end (Leviticus 25:35), "Do not take from him interest or increase, etc."; and it is written about appraisals (Leviticus 27:8), "And if he is destitute from [paying] the appraisal" - and the received tradition (Arakhin 24a) comes [that its understanding is], revive him from his appraisal. And [so] we learn, "destitution, destitution," to arrange things with a debtor in the way that we arrange things with appraisals, and we should not hesitate about the words of Eliyahu. And so did all the Geonim and Rabbenu Alfasi rule. And even though Rabbi Yaakov in the name of Rabbi Pedat, and Rabbi Yirmiya in the name of Ilfa, said that we do not arrange things for a debtor, in the way of it being obvious in the Gemara - [nonetheless] we do not hesitate about the words of Eliyahu. And even though we found that Rabbenu Tam wrote like the opinion that we do not arrange things, and his proofs are in his book, 'after the many do we incline.' And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, also ruled like the other Geonim that we arrange things (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Creditor and Debtor 1:7). And nonetheless, he wrote that the agent of the court only leaves the debtor items that are essential to him, such as a bed and bedding and that which he wears. And it appears that what forced the Teacher to say this is when he saw in this chapter [entitled] Mekabel regarding an agent of the court: That they said in the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 113a), "If he had two items, he takes one and returns one - the pillow at night, and the plow during the day." And they did not list tools of the trades. But from what it appears, this is certainly not a great compulsion [to rule as he did]. As since it is established to us that we arrange things with him in the way that we arrange things with appraisals, they are the same in every matter. And even though the Mishnah did not enumerate them, this is no matter; as it is not like a peddler that enumerates [all of his wears] and repeats [them] in every place. [Rather] it mentioned pillow and plow, and the law is the same for everything that is fitting to leave him. And the principle of the matter, according to that which seems - and that which is agreed by all the savants of the world whose fame about Torah has been disseminated - is that we arrange things with a debtor exactly in the way that we arrange things with appraisals. And they have what to rely upon from the words of the Gemara and from that of Eliyahu - may he be remembered for the good - as we we have written. And if you ask, "And how do we arrange his clothing; and behold, we say in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 11b), 'His clothing, and even the cloak that is on his shoulder'" - it is possible to say that it is an expression of exaggeration. And also [one could say it is referring to] a very precious cloak - such as [one] of silk and gold - from those that we said are not included in the arrangement [of what he keeps]. And the rest of the many laws of appraisals are elucidated in the tractate that is built upon this, and that is Tractate Arakhin (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 4). And the commandment of appraisals is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females - meaning that it is practiced such that if they appraised, their appraisal is effective and [the amount] is consecrated. And nonetheless, the Sages said that at this time we should not appraise from the outset. And [it is] as we say in Tractate Avodah Zarah 13a [in the] first chapter, "We do not consecrate, and we do not appraise and we do not dedicate at this time. But if one did consecrate, or appraise or dedicate, a beast should be destroyed; produce, garments, or vessels should rot; money or metal vessels, he should take to the Dead Sea. And what is destroying? He locks the door before it, and it dies on its own." And the understanding of this consecration is consecration for the [Temple] upkeep - as with regards to appraisals, it was taught with it, that their undifferentiated [pledge] is also for the [Temple] upkeep. And even though Shmuel said in Arakhin 29a, "Consecrated items worth a maneh (a hundred large coins) that they desanctified upon that which is worth a perutah (the smallest coin), is desanctified (it is effective)" - and this is also about consecrated items of the [Temple] upkeep, as with consecration for the poor, it is certainly not something that can be desanctified, but rather we pay it in full; and that which Shmuel said, "desanctified," in the past is not [meant] to be precise, as he holds that we can desanctify it on the worth of the smallest coin at the outset, as is clearly proven in the Gemara - it is not a difficulty at all: That which we say about it here, "A beast should be destroyed, etc." - such is the law; but Shmuel said the solution [to the problem created by the law]. And it appears that this is how Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, solves [it] in his Laws in the first chapter of Avodah Zarah, as he brings both of [these statements] together there. And one who transgresses this and appraises at the time of the [Temple] and does not fulfill [it] to give the amount specified in the Torah; or that at this time he did not do in the thing that which they, may their memory be blessed, said to destroy everything according to the law - or that which Shmuel said as its solution - has violated this positive commandment. And his punishment is very great, as he has 'misappropriated a misappropriation of the Lord.' And if three festivals have passed him by after he appraised, there is another punishment in the things, since he is [also] transgressing, 'do not delay.' And there are those that explained that he transgresses immediately also on account of 'do not delay': That in everything that he obligated himself and it is fit to pay, like charity and that which is similar to it, 'do not delay' [applies] immediately. [This is] to exclude a sacrifice, as he did not obligate himself, such that he does not transgress until three festivals - and like the words of Rabbi Shimon (Rosh Hashanah 4b), "Until three festivals, and the holiday of [Pesach] is first." And there are those that said that even regarding charity - and all the more so, other vows - we do not transgress on account of 'do not delay,' until three festivals. And [it is] like we find in the Gemara (Rosh Hashanah 5b) concerning gleanings, forgotten sheaves and the corner, "And we do not differentiate between if he obligated himself or he did not obligate himself." And that which they said in the Gemara, in Rosh Hashanah 6a, "And for charity, he is liable for it" - meaning, immediately - [means] he is liable for it with a positive commandment (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 4). To not exchange consecrated things: To not exchange consecrated things - meaning to say one should not exchange a beast that has been consecrated for another beast afterwards, but it should rather be offered itself. And about this is it stated (Leviticus 27:10), "He shall not substitute nor exchange for it." And from when they exchanged it - meaning, that they said, "This instead of that"; "This in exchange for that"; or what is similar to these expressions, which is the essence of exchange (Temurah 26b) - there is liability for lashes in the thing, even though there is no act [involved] with it. [This is the case] even if there was somewhat of an error in the case. How is this? One who intends to say, "Behold this is in exchange for the burnt-offering that I have," but he says, "in exchange for the peace-offering that I have" - behold, this is an exchange and he is lashed; as nonetheless regarding the exchange it was volitional. But if his thought was that it was permissible to exchange, he is certainly not lashed. For one, it was inadvertent. And also, we only administer lashes with witnesses and a warning - and behold there is no warning [in such a case]. And if you will ask, "And why do we administer lashes for exchange - behold, it is a negative commandment that is rectifiable by a positive commandment, and that [commandment] is, 'and it and its exchange will be consecrated'"; the Sages, may their memory be blessed, have already given a reason for that matter. And they said (Temurah 4b) it is because there are two negative commandments about it, as I have written in this Order (Sefer HaChinukh 352); and a positive commandment does not come and uproot two negative commandments. And they also said another reason - since the negative commandment of exchange is not the same as the positive commandment about it: As if the community, or partners make an exchange, they do not create an exchange (it is not effective), even if they are warned not to exchange (it is forbidden). And since the negative commandment is not the same as the positive commandment, we do not say about it that its law is like a negative commandment that is rectifiable by a positive commandment. And if you will ask further, "And why do we administer lashes for this negative commandment, as it is possible to transgress it without an act, with speech alone - and the principle is established for us that we do not administer lashes for any negative commandment that does not have an act [involved] with it"; we have already written the answer in many places: That they, may their memory be blessed, explicitly excluded (Shevuot 21a) swearing, exchanging and cursing his fellow with [God's] name from this principle. As the Torah was very stringent about them to make them liable for lashes, even though there is no act [involved] with them. And do not ruminate that it is on account of the bending of the lips, as it is an act. As behold, it is concluded in the Gemara in Sanhedrin 65a that it is not an act. Rather without an act at all is there a liability for lashes with some sins. And they are the three mentioned, one who puts out a bad name and a colluding witness. Some of them the lashes are explicit in the Torah about them - such as one who puts out a bad name and a colluding witness. And some of them we learned out from Scripture, such as swearing - as we learn in Shevuot 21a in the chapter [entitled] Shevuot Shtayim. And some commentators said about some of them that it is because an act will come out from it in the end - such as this of exchange, since the beast became consecrated with his speech and one who benefits from it will misappropriate it. The root of this commandment and some of its laws are all written in this Order in the next commandment. And this prohibition is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. As even at this time, if a man transgressed and consecrated a beast for the altar and afterwards exchanged it [in front of] witnesses and [with] a warning, he is liable for lashes. The commandment of the one who exchanges the beast of a sacrifice with another beast, such that both of them be consecrated: That the exchange be consecrated - meaning to say, that both will be consecrated if one exchanges the beast of a sacrifice with another beast, such that he said, "This one will be for a sacrifice in exchange for that one," as it is stated (Leviticus 27:10), "and it and its exchange will be consecrated." And this passage is a positive commandment - meaning that the Torah commanded us that the exchange be holy and that we practice holiness with both of them. And the proof that this is a positive commandment is their, may their memory be blessed, saying in Tractate Temurah 4b regarding the one who exchanges, "A positive commandment does not come and uproot two negative commandments." [This is] meaning to say that the prevention of exchange is repeated twice - as it is stated, "He shall not exchange nor substitute for it" - and the positive commandment of "and it and its exchange shall be" does not come and uproot these two negative commandments. Behold, what we wanted is elucidated, that it is a positive commandment. It is from the roots of the commandment that God, blessed be He, wanted to instill His fear in the hearts of people in all matters of sanctity, and as I wrote in the building of the the holy House and its vessels in the Order of Vayikchu Li Terumah (Sefer HaChinukh 95). In that commandment you will see our intent, from the angle of the simple understanding, about the great stringency that is fitting for us to practice with the holy. And therefore in order to establish the awe of the matter of the holy in our hearts, the verse commanded us that we not change our words. Rather, from when the beast is sanctified, it is in its sanctity forever; and we should not think to remove it from its sanctity and to exchange it with another beast. But if he did [speak] this thing from his mouth, his thought and all of his action is reversed and both of them are holy. As he came with his actions to remove holiness and it shall be the opposite - that it expand more and be attached to all [of them]. And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Substitution 4:13) about the reason for this commandment, and about that which we have been commanded to add a fifth for the redemption of consecrated things, that the Torah went down to the bottom of man's thinking and his evil impulse. As his nature is to multiply his [own] possessions and to be concerned with his money. And even though he vowed and sanctified, it is possible that he will go back on it and regret and want to redeem it for less than its worth. Therefore, he adds a fifth. And likewise he will exchange the beast that he sanctified with one that is less than it. And if permission was given to him to exchange a bad one with a good one, he will exchange a good one with a bad one. And therefore Scripture sealed the door in front of him. And he was further lengthy about this matter and wrote, "And even though all the statutes of the Torah are decrees, you are fitting to examine them (about) and give a reason for [everything] that you can." And the Teacher should be remembered for the good, as he aided me in this [project] of mine. From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Temurah 17a) [that in the case of one] who exchanges with a forbidden mixture, a 'torn' (terminally ill) animal, or [one of unknown sex], sanctity does not descend upon it - since there is no sacrifice with its type. And therefore he is not lashed. But a beast that has a blemish creates an exchange, since there is a sacrifice with its type. And like that which they said (Temurah 9a) that a man can not exchange his beast for a sacrifice that is not his. But if the owner of the sacrifice said, "Anyone who wants to exchange may exchange," any man can exchange for it. And one who exchanges cattle for sheep or sheep for cattle, sheep for goats or goats for sheep, males for females or females for males, or exchanged one beast for a hundred or a hundred for one - whether at one time or whether one after the other - behold, this is an exchange and he is lashed according to the calculation of the animals that he has exchanged. And the exchange cannot create a [further] exchange, nor can the offspring of a sanctified beast create an exchange, as it is stated, "and it and its exchange will be consecrated." And they, may their memory be blessed, were precise, alongside the received traditional understanding (Temurah 13a): "'It,' and not its offspring; 'and its exchange,' and not the exchange of its exchange." But [in the case of] one who exchanges for a beast and goes back and exchanges for it even a thousand times, they are all an exchange and he is lashed for every one. And fowl and meal-offerings do not create an exchange, as only "beast" is stated in the verse. And the exchange for the sanctified things of gentiles [is not effective] from Torah writ. But rabbinically, [in the case of] a gentile who exchanges, it is exchanged (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Substitution 1:6). And everyone exchanges - both men and women. It is not that a man is permitted to exchange, but rather if he exchange [an appropriate beast], it is exchanged and he absorbs the forty [lashes]. And that which they said how the law is of sacrificing the exchange; the law of its offspring and the offspring of its offspring; and the rest of its details, are elucidated in Tractate Temurah (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Substitution 1). And it is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and exchanges, but does not practice holiness towards both of the beasts - meaning, with the first and its exchange - has violated a positive commandment; besides the punishment that there is in the thing that he misappropriates what is holy. The commandment of the appraisal of a beast, such that one give according to what the priest appraises: To rule in the case of appraisals of beasts according to that which the Torah commanded us about it - as it is stated (Leviticus 27:11-12), "and he shall place the beast in front of the priest. And the priest shall appraise it" - and to give according to the appraisal that the priest appraises, and not less. As a man should not decrease and lie about that which he opens his mouth for the Heavens; and it is even forbidden to lie with common things, as I explained above (Sefer HaChinukh 350). And what I wrote in the law of the appraisals of a man at the beginning of the Order (Sefer HaChinukh 350) is from the roots of the commandment. From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Temurah 32b) that one who consecrates an unblemished beast for the altar and a blemish develops on it and it becomes disqualified, behold it is appraised and redeemed and he brings another beast instead of it. And about this is it stated (Leviticus 27:11), "And if it is any impure animal from which shall not be sacrificed to the Lord, he shall appraise the beast, etc." - as so did it come in the received traditional understanding, that Scripture expressed [this] with the expression of "impure." And whether a man consecrated a pure animal for the altar and a blemish developed upon it, as we said - or an impure [one] for the [Temple] upkeep - it requires being placed in front of the priest, as it is stated, "and he shall place the beast in front of the priest," and he appraises it. And if it died before it is appraised and redeemed, we do not appraise it and we do not redeem it after it died. But if he slaughtered two (the esophagus and the trachea) or the majority of two - even though it is like dead regarding slaughter, as it is established for us (Chullin 28a), as so was Moshe commanded about the majority of one with fowl and the majority of two with a beast - behold, it is living regrading appraisals. And [so] he brings it in front of the priest, and he appraises it. And the rest of its details are in [various] places in Temurah and Meilah (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Substitution 4). And this commandment is practiced by males and females at the time of the [Temple]. But at this time, the Sages, may their memory be blessed, said (Avodah Zarah 13a) that "We do not consecrate, and we do not appraise and we do not dedicate [...]. But if one did consecrate, or appraise or dedicate," the law is that "a beast should be destroyed and produce, garments, or vessels should rot." But if he wants its solution, he can do to them like that of Shmuel, who said, "Consecrated items worth a maneh (a hundred large coins) that they desanctified upon that which is worth a perutah (the smallest coin), is desanctified (it is effective)" - as I wrote. And since this is so, we should write that the law of placing [it] in front of the priest is now not practiced at all. But nonetheless the law of appraisals of a beast is practiced with regards to that which if one did transgress and appraise his beast at this time, he needs to do what the Sages commanded with the thing. And since ex post facto we need a solution for the thing even at this time, I should count it and anything that is similar to it, among the commandments that are are practiced at this time. The commandment of appraising houses, such that he give the appraisal that the priest appraises and the addition of a fifth: To rule about the appraisals of homes; meaning [that] the priest appraise the house of one who consecrated it and wants to redeem it from that which is consecrated - he or his wife or his inheritors - and that [the redeemer] gives him according to the appraisal that he says to him, and also a fifth [of that sum]; as it is stated (Leviticus 27:14), "And if a man consecrates his house, holy, etc." What I wrote about exchange in this Order (Sefer HaChinukh 352) is from the roots of the commandment - that God wanted for our good to place the fear of the holy in the hearts of people. And even though it was from His many kindnesses to give them room to redeem them, He wanted that they add a fifth to their redemption in order to distance [us], that we not reduce anything from the value of that which is consecrated. And even though there is no fifth with a purchased field, it is since it is not common that a man will consecrate his purchased field - as it is very beloved to him, since he acquired it with his money. Scripture is never concerned with what is not common. From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 5:3) that [in the case of] one who consecrates his house - and so [too,] his impure beast or movable items - that all of these are evaluated according to their worth, whether it is good or bad. And when the priests come to appraise them, we force the owners to open first and to say, "I would take it for me for such and such," and [that] value goes to the upkeep of the [Temple]. But they, may their memory be blessed, said (Avodah Zarah 13a) that we do not consecrate at this time. And it appears certain that if [one] transgressed and consecrated his house at this time to the [Temple] upkeep - that we appraise its worth and he does like the solution of Shmuel or throws all of its value to the Dead Sea. And whether it was a house in the walled cities or whether it was in the unwalled cities, the owners or inheritors are always allowed to redeem them from the consecrated. But if another man redeemed it - if it was from the houses of the walled cities and it stood in the hand of the redeemer twelve months, it is finalized [to be his]; and if it was from the houses of the unwalled cities and the Jubilee came and it was in the hand of the redeemer, it goes back to its [original] owner at the Jubilee. And from that which the verse stated, "if a man consecrates his house," and it did not state, "a house," they, may their memory be blessed were precise (Bava Kamma 69b): "Just as one’s house is in his possession, so too anything" that one wants to consecrate must be "in his possession." But if it is not in his possession, he many not consecrate it, even if it is his. And so [too,] did they, may their memory be blessed, say (Bava Kamma 68b), "If he stole [something] but the owners did not despair, neither of them can consecrate it - this one because it is not his, and that one because it is not in his possession." And that is specifically with movable items; but land stays in the possession of its owners. And even with movable items that were deposited - he may consecrate anything that he can extract with judges. And the rest of its details are in Tractate Arakhin. And [it] is practiced at the time that the Jubilee is practiced, as the law of appraisals of houses is only practiced - meaning to consecrate a house from the outset - at the time that the Jubilee is practiced. And one who transgresses it and consecrates his home and does not give its appraisal like the law written in the section of the Torah, at the time of the [Temple] - or did not solve the thing as we said, at this time - has nullified the positive commandment. And he also has a punishment since he misappropriated that which is consecrated. The commandment of appraising a field, that he give the appraisal specified in the section of the Torah: To rule in the laws of appraisal of fields - meaning to say that one who consecrates his field and wants to redeem it, that he should give the appraisal fixed in the section of the Torah - "the seed of a chomer of barley for fifty shekel-coins of silver" (Leviticus 27:16), for all of the years of the Jubilee [cycle], which are forty-nine years. And according to the exact calculation, the appraisal of the field that is fitting to plant a chomer of barley is a sela and a pundyon a year. As the shekel-coin stated in the Torah is called an undifferentiated sela in the language of the Sages; and the gerah that is stated in the Torah is the maah in the words of the Sages - and the Sages added a sixth upon the shekel-coin, that is called a sela, as we have said. And that sela is equal to four dinar, and a dinar is four maah, and a maah is two pundyon. It comes out [to] a sela and a pundyon for each year. As even though the sela is forty-eight pundyon according to this calculation of ours - nonetheless, one who wants to take a sela from a money changer, needs to give forty-nine pundyon so that the money changer will earn one pundyon. And since he has to give forty-nine pundyon [in this case], we calculate it according to the calculation of what the consecrator would pay the money changer - as the hand of (terms for) the consecrated is always upon the higher. And we appraise it the same if he consecrates a field so good that there is none like it in the land or a field so bad that there is none as bad as it. As Scripture did not want to distinguish in this matter and made [the same] appraisal for all lands (Arakhin 14a). And since we explained the shekel-coins, it is fitting that we explain how much is a chomer: You should know that the chomer is a measure that is [also] called a kor. And a kor is two letech, and a letech is fifteen seah. It comes out that a chomer is thirty seah, which is ten eipah - as an eipah is three seah. It is a well-known thing and we also already knew it from our Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, (Eruvin 23b) that a place that has fifty ells by fifty ells is a beit seah - meaning that it is [what contains what grows from] a seah of barley - and that is two thousand five hundred [square ells] by arithmetic (multiplication). It comes out that a place that is fitting for the seed of a chomer of barley - which is thirty seah - is seventy-five thousand ells by arithmetic. And what is the way of the calculation with the appraisal of fields? A field of holding is distinguished in its content from a purchased field. And when we measure [a field of holding], we only measure the places in it that are fitting for planting; and its appraisal is that stipulated by the Torah - "the seed of a chomer of barley for fifty shekel-coins of silver" - as we elucidated, whether it is good or bad; and he adds a fifth to this stipulated appraisal. And let this rule be in your hand: with every fifth stated in the Torah, it is a fourth of the principle, so that the principle and the fifth that is added to it are five [portions together]. And if the entire field that he consecrated is not fitting for seeding at all, we redeem it according to its worth. And which is that which is called a field of holding? That is a field that a man inherited from his bequeathers. And a purchased field is a field that a man purchased [on] his own, or that he received the rights to it in any way that is not because of inheritance. And the law of one who consecrates his purchased field - that we estimate it worth - is [that] we see how much it is worth until the Jubilee year. And if the consecrator redeems it, he does not add a fifth onto it. And its redemption is for the upkeep of the [Temple], like other appraisals and values (Arakhin 24a). And when the Jubilee arrives, the field goes back to its [original] owners who sold it. Whether it was redeemed from the treasurer by any man and it goes out [now] from under his hand, or whether it was not redeemed and it goes out from the hand of the consecrated - it always returns to the one for which it is a holding in the Land. And it does not go out to the priests because a man cannot consecrate something that is not his, and this land was the purchaser's only until the Jubilee year. And this is not the case for a field of holding: As if the Jubilee arrived and the owners did not redeem it from the hand of the consecrated or from the hand of another who acquired it from the consecrated, the priests give its value - since the consecrated only goes out with redemption - and it is a holding for them forever. And those monies go to the consecrated for the upkeep of the [Temple]. And any field that we estimate for the consecrated, to sell it for its value, we announce sixty days - morning and evening, which is the time that the workers come in from their work and go out - so that all will hear about the thing. And we demarcate its borders and say, "Its quality is such and [price] x is its estimation." And whoever wants to buy comes and buys (Arakhin 21b). And the rest of its details are elucidated in the tractate that is built on this, and that is Tractate Arakhin. And [it] is practiced by males and females at the time that the Jubilee is practiced. But at this time, the Sages, may their memory be blessed, already said (Avodah Zarah 13a) that we do not consecrate and we do not appraise, as we wrote above (Sefer HaChinukh 360). But nonetheless, if one transgressed and did consecrate land now to the [Temple] upkeep, it is possible for him to solve it - like that of Shmuel - such that he desanctifies it upon that which is worth a perutah (the smallest coin) or more and he throws it to the Dead Sea. But if he does not want this solution, it appears certain that he must appraise it according to the statute that we have written and throw its money to the Dead Sea - so that it not be a stumbling block for him or for his children. It is better that [the money] be lost and that people not stumble with it, than that he leave it in a corner for the [Temple] upkeep - as there will not be a lack of money in the future to support the House of our God. To not change the consecrated from a sacrifice to a sacrifice: To not change the consecrated from a sacrifice to a sacrifice, such that we turn a peace-offering back into a guilt-offering, or a guilt-offering we turn back into a sin-offering - there is a negative commandment in this and that which is similar to it. And about this thing is it stated (Leviticus 27:26), "a man may not consecrate it" - meaning that he not make the first-born a burnt-offering nor a peace-offering nor any other sacrifice. And the received tradition comes that it is not specifically with a first-born that the verse is concerned - that the law is the same for all that is consecrated [for] the altar. As so did they say in Sifra, Bechukotai, Section 8:3, "I only have the first born. From where [do we know] about all the consecrated that we do not change it from [one] holiness to [another] holiness? [Hence] we learn to say, 'with a beast, a man may not consecrate it.'" It hints that with every consecrated animal - whether the consecration of the consecrated for the altar or even for the upkeep of the [Temple] - we do not change it from its holiness, but it is [to be] left like it is; and "a man may not consecrate it" is stated about everything. That which we wrote above in the commandment of exchange (Sefer HaChinukh 352) is from the roots of the commandment - that all this is from the awe of the holy. From the law of the commandment is, for example, that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Substitution 4:11) that if he consecrated [a beast] to the upkeep of the sanctuary, he should not change it to the upkeep of the altar. And they also said (Temurah 25a) that we are not to be tricky with a consecrated animal, to consecrate its embryo [with] a different holiness, but it is rather in the [same] holiness as its mother - as offspring of consecrated animals are consecrated from the innards of their mother. This is not the case with the first-born, as the first-born is consecrated upon its exit, as Scripture makes it depend on opening the womb. And therefore it is possible to be tricky with a first-born before it is born, to consecrate it with a different holiness. And about this is it stated, "which becomes a first-born of [...], a man may not consecrate it" - from when it becomes a first-born, you may not consecrate it, but you can consecrate it in the belly. And therefore one who said, "If the one that is first is a male, behold it is a burnt-offering," must sacrifice it as a burnt-offering. But he may not make it into a sacrifice of a peace-offering, since he cannot remove it from its holiness. As the holiness of peace-offerings is below that of the first-born; such that the first-born is only eaten by priests, whereas the peace-offerings [are eaten] by every person. And the rest of its details are in the fifth chapter of Temurah. And this prohibition is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. As even at this time that we do not consecrate, one who transgressed and did consecrate a beast for one consecration may not change it to another consecration. And one who transgresses this and changed it from [one] holiness to [another] holiness - for example if he consecrated it for a peace-offering and afterwards said that its holiness should be for a burnt-offering, or another sacrifice - has violated this negative commandment. But we do not administer lashes for it, since there is no act [involved] with it. The commandment of the law of one who dedicates from his properties, that it is of the priests: To rule in matters of dedications (cherem, something that is put off limits) - that is, if anyone dedicated something of his possessions undifferentiatedly - for example, [if] he said, "Thing x of mine will become dedicated" - that thing must be given to the priest; as it is stated (Leviticus 27:28), "But any dedication that a man dedicates, etc." [That is,] unless he explicitly said that the dedication be to the Lord, or to the upkeep of the [Temple]. As so did the they, may their memory be blessed, say (Arakhin 28b), "Undifferentiated dedications are for the priest." And their proof is from that which is written explicitly in the section, "like the dedicated field, his holding shall be of the priest." It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is] because Israel is the nation that God chose from all the other nations for His service and to recognize His Name, and they are not under the rule of the constellations that God apportioned to all the other nations. They are instead [directly] under the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, without any intermediary of an angel or constellation; and as it is written (Deuteronomy 32:9), "For the portion of the Lord is His people, Yaakov is the measure of His inheritance." And as you find when He took them out from Egypt - which was a miracle that included all the people - that He took them out by Himself in His glory. And [this is] as they, may their memory be blessed, expounded, "'I will pass through Egypt' (Exodus 12:12) - I and not an angel; 'and I will strike the first-born' - I and not a seraph," as it appears in the Haggadah. And therefore anytime Israel maintains the Torah and crowns themselves with His service, only goodness will rest upon them, and the flow of blessing and a pure benevolent spirit will support them; and the opposite - the curse and the 'dedication' - will [rest] upon their enemies and haters. As such, if one of their tempers become short and he pronounces an expression of curse and 'dedication' on his money or his lands - which are under the blessing - the verse informs that it is impossible to remove it from the domain of the blessed to another domain. [This is] since everything that belongs to Israel - who is the portion of God - is His; [as] whatever a slave acquired, his master acquired (Pesachim 88b). Still, since we truly know that the intention of the one who dedicates is to remove that thing from his domain, it is fitting to fulfill his will; and [so] it returns to the domain of his Master and it becomes holy. And that is [the sense of that] which Scripture (Leviticus 27:29) states nearby, "Any dedication that is dedicated of a man you shall not redeem, he shall surely die"; as its content in the way of the simple meaning is that [in the case of] one who dedicates of a man that is not his - for example, those fighting against their enemies who make a vow, "If this nation is surely given into my hands, I will dedicate their cities" (Numbers 21:2) - [the objects of the vow] should die. As other nations are not included in the wellspring of blessings, as we have said; and [so] the expression of 'dedication' clings to them. And so did Ramban (Rambam) explain this verse in the way of its simple understanding (Ramban on Leviticus 27:29). And even though there are many midrashic explanations about this verse, there are seventy faces to the Torah and 'they are all straight for the one who understands.' And from this root they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 28a) that all that belongs to the Levites and the priests - whether land or whether movable items - cannot be dedicated. That is, even if the priest or the Levite said about his field that it be dedicated, it does not hold. As he is like one who dwells in his Master's house - the place of blessing and kindness and good - and all that he has is God's. And amidst blessing there is no place for 'dedication.' From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 28b), "What [is the difference] between dedications of the priests and dedications of the Heavens? That dedications of the Heavens are consecrated and are redeemed with their worth, their value goes to the [Temple] upkeep and the properties go out to the non-sacred. But the dedications of the priests" - meaning to say, an undifferentiated dedication, that [goes] to the priests - "never have redemption, but are rather given to the priests like priestly tithe." And it is concerning the dedications of the priests that it is stated, "it shall not be sold and it shall not be redeemed" (Leviticus 27:28) - "it shall not be sold" to another, "and it shall not be redeemed" for its [original] owners. It is one whether he dedicates land or movable items - they are given to the priests of that shift, [serving] at the time that he dedicates. And during the whole time that the dedications of the priests are in the house of the owners, they are consecrated for all of their purposes - as it is stated (Leviticus 27:28), "every dedication is holy of holies to the Lord." [Once] they are given to the priest, behold they are like the non-sacred for all of their purposes - as it is stated (Numbers 18:14), "Every dedication in Israel shall be for you." And a field that is dedicated to a priest never returns to the original owners. And the rest of its details are in the eight chapter of Arakhin and the first of Nedarim (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 6). And [it] is practiced at the time of the [Temple] by males and females. But at this time, we have already said in the first commandment of this Order (Sefer HaChinukh 350) that we do not dedicate. If, however, one transgressed and did dedicate [something] at this time, Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 8:11) that if one dedicated outside of the Land [of Israel] movable property undifferentiatedly or land explicitly to the priests - that they are given to the priests found in that place; as the status of land outside of the Land is like movable items for this matter. But if he dedicated land in the Land, it is not dedicated - as the field of dedications is only practiced when the Jubilee is practiced. And one who transgressed this and dedicated from his properties but did not give them to a priest or to the upkeep of the [Temple] - in the cases that we explained that they are given to the upkeep of the [Temple] - has violated this positive commandment. And his punishment is very great, as he has misappropriated from the holy. That owners that dedicated land not sell it, but that it rather be given to the priests: That one should not sell a dedicated field, and so [too,] all other lands. And the law is the same for movable items that have been dedicated by their owners. Rather, they should be given to the priests of that watch, as we wrote in this Order, positive commandment 6 (Sefer HaChinukh 357). And it is even forbidden for the owners to sell it to the treasurer of the consecrated, but rather [the latter] should attain the rights to it with nothing. As God gave the rights of dedications to the priests. And this is with undifferentiated dedications, as we said above. Since it established for us [that the law is] like the [opinion] that says, undifferentiated dedications - meaning to say that one who dedicated but did not specify to whom - are for the priests. As if he dedicates explicitly for the upkeep of the [Temple], the priests do not get rights to [it]. And about the dedications of the priests is it stated here (Leviticus 27:28), "any dedication [...] shall not be sold." But the priests can certainly sell them according to their will. As [with] the dedications of the priests - after they have gone out from the hand of their owners who dedicated them and have reached the hand of the priests - behold they are like the non-sacred for all of their purposes, as it is stated (Numbers 18:14), "Every dedication in Israel shall be for you." But so long as they are still under the hand of the owners, it is stated about them (Leviticus 27:28), "every dedication is holy of holies to the Lord." And the root of the commandment and all of its content is written above (Sefer HaChinukh 357). See there, 'as it is close' (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 6). That a dedicated field not be redeemed: That a dedicated field not be redeemed; and the law is the same for all other lands and movable items that are dedicated - they do not have redemption but are rather given to the priests; and [the priests] do with them according to their will. And about this is it stated (Leviticus 27:28), "any dedication [...] shall not be redeemed." And they said in Sifra, Bechukotai, Chapter 12:4, "'It shall not be sold' to another, 'and it shall not be redeemed' for its [original] owners." The roots of the commandment are written above (Sefer HaChinukh 357). From the laws of the commandment is that which our Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 6:4) that one who dedicates to the Heavens consecrates [the property], but he [may] redeem it for its worth, such that the value goes to upkeep of the [Temple] and the property goes out to the non-sacred. But dedications of the priests never have a redemption. Rather behold they belong to the priests and their children forever. And [in the case of] a priest who got the rights for a field of dedication and sold it, it goes back to him or his seed in the Jubilee; as is is stated (Leviticus 27:21), "for the priest shall it be a holding" - this teaches that his field of dedication is like a field of holding for an Israelite. And the rest of its details and of its content - all of it is like I wrote above (Sefer HaChinukh 357) and it is all elucidated in Tractate Arakhin. And there is no doubt that these two negative commandments - which are "it shall not be sold" and "it shall not be redeemed" - are practiced today according to the opinion of Rambam, may his memory be blessed, as I wrote above: [In the case of] one who dedicates land or movable objects outside the Land at this time, it is given to the priests. [This is so] even though the field of dedication is not practiced in the Land [of Israel] today, but only at the time that the Jubilee is practiced. So did Rambam, may his memory be blessed, write in the Book of Separation (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 8:11-12). The commandment of the tithe of pure beasts every year: To tithe all the pure beasts - which are cattle, sheep and goats (Bekhorot 53a) - that are born in our flocks each and every year, and to take that tithe and eat it in Jerusalem after the fat and blood have been offered on the altar (Zevchim 56b), as it is written (Leviticus 27:32), "And all the tithe of your cattle and sheep, all that passes beneath the rod, the tenth shall be holy to the Lord." And they, may their memory be blessed, said in Bekhorot 58b, "How do we tithe? He brings them to a pen and makes for them a small opening, so that two cannot go out at the same time. He places their mothers outside, and they would moan, so that the lambs would hear their voices and exit the pen to meet them on their own and not from the effort of another. And he counts them with a rod, 'One, two, three, four' and so on, until ten. And the one that comes out tenth he marks with red chalk and he says, 'Behold, this is tithe.'" It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is because] God chose the nation of Israel and wished for the sake of His righteousness that all of them be engaged with His Torah and be knowers of His Name. And in His Wisdom, he lured them with this commandment so that they would study [and] draw moral teachings. As God knows that most people are lured by lower physicality, 'as [they] are also flesh,' and they will not put their souls to the toil of the Torah and its constant involvement. Therefore in His understanding, He caused [it] and gave them a place wherein everyone will know the words of His Torah regardless - for there is no doubt that every man will be drawn to establish his residence in the place that his money is there. And as such, when each person brings up the tithe of all his cattle and his sheep each year to the place where involvement with wisdom and Torah is found - that is Jerusalem, where is the Sanhedrin of those who master knowledge and understand information - and we similarly bring up the tithe of our grain in four years of the sabbatical [cycle], as we know that the second tithe is eaten there, and so [too,] the fourth year planting is eaten there; the owner of [these things] will perforce either go there and study Torah himself, or send one of his sons to study there and to be sustained by that produce. And through this, each and every house in all of Israel will have someone who is wise and knowledgeable in the Torah who can [then] teach all of the household of his father with his wisdom. And with this, 'the land will be filled with knowledge of the Lord.' As if there was only one sage in each city - or even ten - there would be many men who would only come in front of them once a year, and all the more so the women and the children. And even if they heard their words once a week, they would [then] go to their home and throw all the words of the sage behind their back. But when the teacher is in each and every house, dwelling there evening, morning and afternoon and constantly reminding them; then they will all - men, women and children - be careful and aware and no matter of sin or iniquity will be found among them. And through this they will merit that which is written (Leviticus 26:11-12) "And I will place My dwelling amongst you [...] and you will be for Me a nation, and I will be for you God" (while the second part of this citation is likely meant to be a very similar quote from Leviticus 26:12, the actual quote is from Jeremiah 11:4). From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bekhorot 53a) that we do not tithe from cows onto sheep, or from sheep onto cows, but we do tithe from sheep onto goats and goats onto sheep, as Scripture used the expression, "sheep" for both of them, and they are considered like one species. We do not tithe from that which is born this year for [that born] another year, [just] as we do not tithe with the seed of the ground from the new onto the old, nor from the old onto the new, as it is written about it, "which comes out from your field each year" (Deuteronomy 14:22). Still, if one transgressed and nonetheless tithed from the old beasts onto the new or the new onto the old, Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Firstlings 7:5) that it appears to him that it is tithe, because of the severity of the tithes - as behold, "each year," is only written about the seed of the earth. And it is enough for us that we learn from it that the tithe of beasts be like it regarding [the law] from the outset, but not ex post facto. And also from the content of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bekhorot 57b) that the newborn lambs are not like untithed produce, from which it is forbidden to eat until they are tithed. Rather, it is permissible to slaughter and eat all that he wants from the lambs; and when the times that the Sages have set for tithing arrive - and they are called the threshing floor of the beast - he tithes those [still] found with him. And once those times arrive, it is forbidden for him to eat or sell until he tithes them. But if one transgressed and slaughtered them, behold it is permissible [to eat them]. And there are three times set by them, may their memory be blessed, and these are them: The last day of the month of Adar, the thirty-fifth day of the counting of the omer, and the last day of the month of Elul. And why did they set these times that are close to the holidays? So that animals should be available for pilgrims. For even though it is permissible to sell the animals before tithing, as we said - nonetheless people would refrain from selling until they tithed them, so as to fulfill the commandment with them. And the law that if one counted and erred in the number and called the eighth, the tenth; or the twelfth, the tenth - they are not consecrated. But if he erred in the ninth or the eleventh and called them the tenth - they are consecrated, since they are adjacent to the tenth. And we known this thing from the tradition (Bekhorot 23a). And that which they said (Bava Metzia 6b) that any beast about which there is a doubt as to whether it is obligated in tithing or it is not obligated in tithing, behold it is exempt from the tithe. And all - whether unblemished or blemished - are brought into the pen for the counting; except for forbidden mixtures, 'torn' (terminally ill) animals and one lacking time (very young ones), and so [too,] an orphan whose mother died or was slaughtered at its birth. And we have known these things from the heard tradition (Bekhorot 57a, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Firstlings 6:14). And the rest of its details are in the last chapter of Bekhorot. And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Sefer HaMitzvot LaRambam, Mitzvot Ase 68), "This commandment is practiced by males and females - whether Israelites or whether priests and Levites; in the Land [of Israel] and outside of the Land - whether in the presence of the [Temple] or not in the presence of the [Temple]. And this is the Torah law; however as a rabbinic decree so that one not eat [tithe] without a blemish - since we do not have a Temple and he would come to a great prohibition which is slaughtering consecrated animals outside [the Temple] - they, may their memory be blessed, said that it is only practiced in the presence of the [Temple]. But when there will be a Temple built there, it [will be] practiced in the Land and outside of the Land." To here is his language. And he further wrote in a different place (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Firstlings 6:2, 4) that if one transgressed and did it at this time, behold it is tithe and he eats it with its blemish (if and when it develops a blemish) in any place - as it is like the totally non-sacred. And the law of the unblemished that is eaten in Jerusalem at the time of the [Temple] is that all of it be eaten by the owners, like the Pesach sacrifice - except for the entrails and the blood which is offered, as we said above. To not sell the tithe of beasts, but rather that it be eaten in Jerusalem: To not sell the tithe of beasts in any way, but rather its owners - or whoever they want - eat it in Jerusalem. And regarding this is it stated here about the tithe of beasts (Leviticus 27:33), "it shall not be redeemed." And they said in Sifra, Bechukotai, Chapter 13:4, "With the tithe, it states, 'it shall not be redeemed' - it is not sold, neither alive nor slaughtered; neither unblemished nor blemished." And the expression of redemption is used here as an expression of sale, because redemption is similar to sale, since [redemption is when] a man gives value (money) and he purchases land. That which I wrote in this Order in the commandment of the tithe of cattle and sheep (Sefer HaChinukh 360) is from the roots of the commandment. And from that reason that you will see there, we have been commanded not to sell the tithe in any way, but rather it must be eaten in Jerusalem regardless. From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Zevachim 56b) the tithe of beasts was eaten completely by the owners in Jerusalem, and the priests have nothing in it. However it was slaughtered in the courtyard and they would offer its entrails and sprinkle its blood with one sprinkling across from the base [of the altar]. And if it developed a blemish, it is eaten in any place. But the Sages forbade to sell it nonetheless, and even if it is a blemished one. And even if it is slaughtered is it forbidden to sell it [as a] decree lest one will sell it alive (Bekhorot 31b). And therefore they said that we do not weigh one piece from it against [another] piece - as it appears like selling. And [this is the law] even though this thing is permitted to do even with an unblemished first-born; as they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bekhorot 31a) [that] the priests that are designated for a first-born are permitted to weigh one piece against [another] piece. And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said [regarding] the tithe of beasts that is slaughtered, [that] it is permissible to sell its fat, its tendons, its skin and its bones - as the they only forbade to sell its meat alone. And if the bones were expensive and he included the value of the meat in [that of] the bones, it is permitted. And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Firstlings 6:5) that it appears to him that [in the case of] one who sells the tithe, the purchaser does not acquire [it]. And therefore the seller is not lashed for it - since his actions were not effective. And [it is] like one who sells the dedications of the priests, such that the buyer did not acquire [it], and like one who sells a woman (captive) of beautiful form, such that the buyer did not acquire [it] - as is elucidated in its place. To here [are his words]. And the rest of the details of the commandment are elucidated in Tractate Bekhorot and in Tractate Maaser Sheni at the beginning. And this prohibition is practiced by males and females - Israelites, priests and Levites - in every place and at all times. And even though the Sages forbade to tithe beasts at this time [as a] decree lest he eat them unblemished and there would be a prohibition of excision in the thing - which is the slaughter of consecrated animals outside [of the Temple], as we wrote above - nonetheless, [in the case of] one who transgressed and tithed at this time, it has the sanctity of the tithe. And if he sold it in any way, he has violated this negative commandment - which is "it shall not be redeemed." But we do not administer lashes for it, like we said adjacently in the name of Rambam, may his memory be blessed. And praise to great and awesome God, we have completed the Book of Leviticus.

Your grain, your wine. First we must explain the end of the verse, “In order that you learn to fear Hashem…” It is taught in Sifrei: The mitzvah of maaser sheini was only given in order that you will learn to fear Hashem. The explanation is that maaser sheini may only be eaten in Yerushalayim, and it is impossible for the owners to eat all of the tithes in the short time that they are there for the festivals. Therefore the owner must remain on his own in Yerushalayim after the festival, when he has nothing to do but to learn to fear Hashem, or he must leave the food to students in Yerushalayim, which is the purpose of maaser sheini, to increase Torah study. So this verse is speaking not about during the days of the festival, but all the other days of the year.

And thou shalt eat before the LORD thy God, in the place which He shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, the tithe of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the firstlings of thy herd and of thy flock; that thou mayest learn to fear the LORD thy God always.

And if the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it, because the place is too far from thee, which the LORD thy God shall choose to set His name there, when the LORD thy God shall bless thee;

כי יברכך WHEN [THE LORD THY GOD] HATH BLESSED THEE — so that your produce will be too much to carry [as far as Jerusalem].