Bekhorot 53a — the Talmud in English

A. The Torah said in the passage concerning Animal Tithe [Leviticus 27:32]: “

And every tithe of cattle and flock, every thing that passes under the staff, the tenth shall be holy to the Lord.”

That is to say: when a person comes to tithe his animals, he takes them out through the opening of the pen one after another, and on the tenth animal he strikes with a staff that has red paint, called “sikra,” so that it will be recognizable on it that it is the tithe. And so he does with the calves and lambs of the entire year.

The sanctity of the tithe is to be offered as a sacrifice on the altar, by the presenting of its blood and the burning of its portions. But the flesh is eaten by the owners.

B. Animal Tithe does not “make the animals tevel,” unlike the tithe of grain, which makes the produce tevel.

C. The early authorities disagreed concerning the commandment of Animal Tithe: whether it is a positive obligatory commandment, or whether it is only optional.

D. Whether an unblemished animal or a blemished animal passes under the staff and is tithed, sanctity takes effect upon it. For so the Torah said in the passage concerning the tithe: “He shall not inspect whether it is good or bad,” that is, whether it is unblemished or blemished. But the intention of Scripture is not to say that he should offer it while it is blemished on the altar; rather, only that it should be eaten under the law of the tithe, and it is forbidden to shear it or work with it.

Rashi

in the Pentateuch.

E. Animal Tithe, whether unblemished or blemished, belongs to the owners and is not given to a kohen, for we have not found in Scripture that it is given to a kohen, as explained by Rashi on this folio, s.v. “with its blemish,” and by Maimonides, Bechorot 6:4.

F. It is written: “The tenth shall be holy to the Lord. He shall not inspect whether it is good or bad.” That is to say, it is forbidden to cause specifically an unblemished animal or specifically a blemished animal to emerge as the tenth. G. Animal Tithe is not redeemed and is not sold, and one who does so transgresses a negative commandment. This law is learned from the continuation of the verse, “It shall not be redeemed,” and from the verse concerning things devoted: “It shall not be sold and it shall not be redeemed.” See the views on this in the Gemara above, 32a.

Mishna:

Animal Tithe applies:

in the Land

of Israel

and outside the Land.

Whether the Temple is standing or whether the Temple is not standing.

For non-sacred animals, but not for consecrated animals,

and the Gemara will explain the novelty in this.

And it applies

Animal Tithe

to cattle and flock.

And one species may not be tithed from the other,

but he takes a tithe from cattle separately and from flock separately.

And it applies

to sheep and goats

[for both are flock],

and one may be tithed from the other.

And it applies

to the new

[these are those born after the first of Elul]

and to the old

[these are those born before the first of Elul, for the first of Elul is the New Year for Animal Tithe],

but one may not be tithed from the other.

And we learned this matter—that sheep and goats may be tithed from one to the other—from Scripture, as will be explained in the continuation of the Mishna. And we needed to learn it from Scripture because

it could have been reasoned

that they may not be tithed from one to the other, for:

If the new and the old, which are not kilayim with one another,

nevertheless

may not be tithed from one to the other—

Sheep and goats, which are kilayim with one another—does it not follow that they should not be tithed from one to the other—

The verse teaches: “And every tithe of cattle

and

flock”;

it implies: all flock

is one

kind. And the Gemara will explain how this is learned from this verse, and the amoraim disagreed about it on folio 54b.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: Animal Tithe applies in the Land and outside the Land:

And the Gemara discusses it:

Let us say,

shall we say that

the Mishna,

which obligates Animal Tithe even outside the Land, is

not in accordance with Rabbi Akiva?

For it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Akiva says: One might have thought that a person may bring Animal Tithe from outside the Land and offer it—

The verse teaches [Deuteronomy 12:6]: “

“And you shall bring them there

And you shall bring there

[to the place that the Lord has chosen]

your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices, and your tithes”;

Scripture said “your tithes” in the plural to tell you:

Scripture speaks of two tithes, one Animal Tithe and one grain tithe

[the Second Tithe]. Thus Animal Tithe was compared with the tithe of grain, and we learned:

From the place where you bring up the tithe of grain, you bring up Animal Tithe. And from the place where you do not bring up the tithe of grain,

that is, outside the Land, where the tithe of grain does not apply, for it is one of the commandments dependent on the Land, which apply only in the Land,

you do not bring up Animal Tithe.

If so, our Mishna is not in accordance with Rabbi Akiva?

And we answer:

Even if you say

that our Mishna is

Rabbi Akiva’s

view, for:

Here—

the words of Rabbi Akiva—

concern offering,

meaning that Animal Tithe from outside the Land is not offered upon the altar.

Here—

in our Mishna, which obligates Animal Tithe outside the Land—the matter is

to become holy

alone, but it is not to be offered upon the altar. And, as will be explained, what practical difference is there that Animal Tithe outside the Land becomes holy?

It is precise as well

that Rabbi Akiva excluded it only from offering,

as he based the teaching of the verse

[from which Rabbi Akiva learned this] on: “

And you shall bring there,”

that is, for offering, but not concerning the basic sanctification.

And we conclude: indeed,

infer from this

from this precision that Rabbi Akiva exempted Animal Tithe outside the Land only from offering.

The Gemara asks:

Since it is not offered

even according to Rabbi Akiva,

why is it holy

[why does it become holy]?

And we explain:

to be eaten

to be eaten

only

when blemished

[once a blemish develops in it]

by the owners.

We learned in the Mishna: Animal Tithe applies

whether the Temple is standing or whether the Temple is not standing:

And we object:

If so,

that the commandment of Animal Tithe is not dependent on the existence of the Temple,

even nowadays

[in this present time]

also

we should be obligated in Animal Tithe!?

And we answer:

in accordance with Rav Huna

below, concerning another matter.

For Rav Huna said: As a precaution because of an orphan

[an orphaned animal, whose mother died or was slaughtered and it then gave birth], which is exempt from the tithe, as explained below in the Mishna, 57a, and perhaps he will include it in the count of the ten lambs at the time of tithing.

And we object to this:

If so,

that you are concerned about an orphan, then

from the outset also not

should they tithe Animal Tithe because of this precaution. Why, then, is Animal Tithe not tithed only in the present time!?

Rather

necessarily, they did not take this into consideration, because

it is possible by means of a proclamation

of the court that they would not include an orphan in the count for the animal tithe. And if so,

here

in the present time

as well,

behold,

it is possible by means of a proclamation,

so why would they not tithe them?

Rather, Rabba said: Because of a mishap,

lest they stumble with it in shearing and work, or slaughter it without a blemish, for one must wait until it develops a blemish; therefore they exempted it entirely from the animal tithe.

And from where do you say that we take a mishap into consideration [and from where do we know that we take a mishap into consideration]? From that

which was taught:

One may not consecrate,

nor make valuations, nor declare property herem [for even herem is consecrated like consecrated property, as it is stated [Leviticus 27:28]: “Every herem is most holy to the Lord”]

[for even an item subject to a ban is consecrated like consecrated property, as it is stated [Leviticus 27:28]: “Every item subject to a ban is most holy to the Lord”]

in the present time

and because of a mishap.

And if

one nevertheless

consecrated, made a valuation, or declared a herem:

If

an animal

it is:

it shall be caused to die [this is explained as it proceeds],

so that one will not come through it to a mishap.

And if

produce

or

garments and utensils

they are:

they shall rot.

And if

money or metal utensils

they are,

he shall lead

them

to the Salt Sea,

and all this is because of a mishap.

The beraita explains that which we learned: “An animal—it shall be caused to die”:

And what is causing it to die?

He locks the door before it, and it dies on its own

from hunger.

And we raise an objection:

If so,

since we take a mishap into consideration,

the firstborn also should not become consecrated

because of the concern for a mishap!?

And the Gemara is astonished at the objection: Is it so that

the firstborn depends on us [does the matter depend on our consecration], that you ask: “The firstborn should not become consecrated”? Behold,

[does the matter depend on our consecration, so that you ask, “The firstborn animal should not become consecrated”?] After all,

from the womb

it

becomes consecrated

by itself!?

Therefore, the Gemara explains the objection:

This is what it is saying:

Let the Sages enact that

they should acquire their ears [the owners should acquire the ears of the animals about to give birth]

[that the owners should acquire the ears of the firstborn animals]

for gentiles,

so that

they should not become consecrated from the outset [so that the firstborn should not become consecrated initially],

for the partnership of a gentile exempts them!?