9. r. If a man sold his field7 * at a time when the law of the year of Jubilee was binding, he may not redeem it until after two years, for it is written, According unto the number of years of the crops he shall sell unto thee} If there was a year of blight or mildew, or a Seventh Year, this is not included in the reckoning. If he only broke up the ground or left it fallow [for a year], that year is included in the reckoning. R. Eleazar says: If it was sold to him full of produce before the New Year, he will then enjoy three crops in two years.
2. If it was sold to the first for 100 denars and the first sold it to the second for 200 denars, he need take account only of the first buyer, for it is written, [Let him...restore the overplus ] unto the man unto whom he sold it. If he sold it to the first for 200, and the first sold it to the second for 100, he need take account only of the last, for it is written, Unto the man; to the man that is in possession of it. A man may not sell a distant field in order to redeem one that is near by, or a poor field to redeem one that is good. He may not borrow money in order to redeem it, nor may he redeem it by halves. But with what has been dedicated all these things are permitted. Thus greater stringency applies to common property than to what has been dedicated.
3. If a man sold a house from among the houses in a walled city,9 he may redeem it at once and at any time during twelve months. This is a kind of usury10 which is yet not usury." If he that sold it died, his son may redeem 3 If he had vowed to offer a beast and had set it apart, he may still ‘devote’ it; he must then, besides offering it, give the priest its value.
4 Who are priests and so have a right to Firstlings.
5 Deut. is1*. 6 Lev. 27s*. 3 His by inheritance.
* Lev. 25. ‘Years’ cannot be less than two. « Lev. 25**.
10 The buyer having the use of the house in addition to having the purchase price returned.
II Since there was a valid purchase, and the seller was not certain to redeem it.
it; if he that bought it died it may be redeemed from his son. A man can only reckon the year from the time when he sold it,1 for it is written, Within the space of a full year. 2 And in that it says a ‘full’ year, this is to include also an intercalary month.3 Rabbi says: He is allowed a year and its intercalary [days].4 4. If the [last] day of the twelve months was come and it was not re¬ deemed, it becomes his for ever, no matter whether he bought it or was given it was a gift, for it is written, In perpetuity. 5 Beforetime the buyer used to hide himself on the last day of the twelve months so that [the house] might be his for ever; but Hillel the Elder ordained that he [that sold it] could deposit his money in the [Temple] Chamber, and break down the door and enter, and that the other, when he would, might come and take his money.
5. Whatsoever is within the city wall is accounted a dwelling house in a walled city,0 save only fields. R. Meir says: Even fields. If a house is built into the wall, R. Judah says: It is not accounted a dwelling house in a ivalled city. R. Simeon says: Its outer wall is deemed to be the city wall.
6. [A house within] a city whose house-roofs7 form its city wall, or that was not encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua the son of Nun, is not accounted a dwelling house in a walled city. [A house in any of these] is accounted a dzvelling house in a walled city: [a city in which are not less than] three courtyards, having each two houses, which have been encompassed by a wall since the days of Joshua the son of Nun, such as the old castle of Sepphoris, 8 the fortress of Gush-Halab,9 oldYodpat,l0Gamala,u Gadwad,’2 Hadid,13 Ono,14 Jerusalem, and the like.
7. Houses in courtyards are given alike the rights of a dwelling house in a walled city and the rights that pertain to fields: they can be redeemed, anti redeemed at once or redeemed any time during the twelve months— like dwelling houses [in a walled city]; and they go out [to their first owners] in the year of Jubilee, or [at an earlier time] by [payment of] a lessened price15 — like fields. [The houses in any of] these are accounted but as houses in [open] courtyards: [a city in which are] two courtyards, having each two houses, even though they have been encompassed by a wall since the days of Joshua the son of Nun; they are accounted as but houses in [open] court¬ yards.
8. If an Israelite inherited [a house in a city of the levites] from his mother’s father that was a levite, he cannot redeem it according to the order here prescribed.16 So, too, if a levite inherited [a house in a city of Israelites] from his mother’s father that was an Israelite, he cannot redeem it according to the order here prescribed, for it is written, For the houses of the cities of the levites\ 17 [thus the order does not apply] unless he is a levite and in the 1 To a first owner, and not from the time when it came into the possession of any later owner. 2 Lev. 2gJ0.
3 If Second Adar was intercalated he need not redeem it before thirteen months.
4 The extra days by which the solar exceeds the lunar year.
5 Lev. 6 Lev. 2 5 29. 7 The Cambridge text reads: 'whose gardens’.
8 In lower Galilee, ten miles west of mount Tabor.
9 In upper Galilee. Cf. Gischala mentioned by Josephus {Bell., II. xx. 6).
10 In lower Galilee; the Yotapata of Josephus (Vita, 37).
11 On the eastern shore of lake Galilee.
lz Or Gadud. Variant: Gadur. Perhaps the same as Gadara, east of the Jordan.
13 Cf. Ezra 233; 1 Maccabees 1238; east of Lydda.
14 Ezra z33. The modern Kefr Auneh, three miles north of Lydda.
13 A price determined by the years remaining in the Jubilee cycle. See above, 71, Cf.
17 Lev. 25s3. According to the Gemara ‘the order’ refers to the foregoing rules in the FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM cities of the Ievites. So Rabbi.1 But the Sages say: It applies only to the cities of the Ievites. They may not turn a field into a city’s outskirts2 or a city’s outskirts into a field, or a city’s outskirts into a city, or a city into a city’s outskirts. R. Eleazar said: It applies only to the cities of the Ievites; but in the cities of the Israelites they may turn a field into a city’s outskirts, but not a city’s outskirts into a field; a city’s outskirts into a city, but not a city into a city’s outskirts, that they destroy not the cities of Israel. The priests and the Ievites can sell [a house] at any time and redeem it at any time, for it is written, [The houses of the cities of their possession ] may the Ievites redeem at any time?
1. i. All, be they men or women, may substitute [another beast in the place of that which they first assigned for an offering]; howbeit none has the right to substitute [another beast], but if he has substituted it, it is substi¬ tuted; and he incurs the Forty Stripes. Priests may substitute5 [only] what belongs to themselves, and Israelites [only] what belongs to themselves. Priests may not substitute a Sin-offering or a Guilt-offering6 or a Firstling.7 R. Johanan b. Nuri said: Why may they not substitute a Firstling?8 R. Akiba said to him: The Sin-offering and the Guilt-offering are a priest’s due and the Firstling is a priest’s due; and as they may not substitute a Sin-offering or a Guilt-offering, neither may they substitute a Firstling. R. Johanan b. Nuri answered: But why may not a priest substitute a Sin- offering or a Guilt-offering? — the priests have no claim to them while they are yet alive, and wouldest thou deduce aught therefrom touching the Firstling, to which they have a claim while it is yet alive? R. Akiba said to him: But is it not written, Then both it and that for which it is changed shall be holy?9 Where does the holiness befall it? — in the owner’s house; so, too, the Substitute becomes holy in the owner’s house.10 2. They may11 substitute oxen for small cattle, and small cattle for oxen, sheep for goats and goats for sheep, males for females and females for males, unblemished for blemished and blemished for unblemished, for it is written, He shall not alter it nor change it, a good for a bad or a bad for a good.lz A good for a bad means [to bring a Substitute] for them that are blemished but that were consecrated before they suffered a blemish. They may substitute one beast in place of two, or two beasts in place of one; one Mishnah, and the present passage should read: ‘except according to the order here pre¬ scribed.’ 1 Cambridge text reads: 'R. Meir’.
2 Cf. M.Sh. 5U; Sot. 53. A region extending a thousand cubits outside a town which was neither sown over nor built upon. 2 Lev. 2532.
4 Lev. z710 prescribes that a beast set apart and dedicated as an offering may not be re¬ placed by another. If, however, another beast is brought in its stead the substitute is deemed a valid offering, yet the first beast still retains the sanctity which it acquired by its first dedication, and he who changes it for another has transgressed a negative command, and must suffer the Forty Stripes.
5 The object (expressed or understood) of the verb ‘substitute’ is always the second, the beast that replaces, and not the first beast that is replaced.
6 These belong to the priests only after they have been offered and their sacrificial por¬ tions burnt: as living beasts they do not belong to the priests.
7 Given to him by an Israelite.
8 Which is wholly the priest’s. 9 Lev. 3710.
10 Therefore the priest may not offer what has not become holy in his own possession.
in place of a hundred or a hundred in place of one.1 R. Simeon says: They may only substitute a single beast in the place of another single beast, for it is written, Then both it and that for which it is changed; like as it means but one, so its Substitute must be but one.
3. They may not substitute members [of a beast] for unborn beasts, or unborn beasts for members [of a beast], or members and unborn beasts for whole beasts or whole beasts for them. R. Jose says: They may substitute members for whole beasts but not whole beasts for members. R. Jose said: Is it not so with animal-offerings that if a man says, ‘Let the foot of this beast be a Whole-offering’, the whole beast is a Whole-offering? So, too, if he says, ‘Let the foot of this beast have the place of that beast’, the whole beast shall be a Substitute in its stead.
4. What contains Heave-offering2 renders [other produce] subject to the law of Heave-offering only if it is in the prescribed proportion. What is leavened [with Heave-offering]3 renders [other dough] leavened [as with Heave- offering] only if it is in the prescribed proportion. Drawn water renders the Immersion-pool invalid only if it is in the prescribed propor¬ tion.4 5. Sin-offering water can become [valid] Sin-offering water only by the putting in of the ashes [of the Red Heifer].5 A Grave-area6 cannot make [another field] into a Grave-area. Heave-offering is no Heave-offering if it is given from what has already given Heave-offering. A Substitute for a Substitute is no Substitute.7 A Substitute for the young8 [of an animal¬ offering] is no Substitute. R. Judah says: The Substitute for the young [of an animal-offering] is a [valid] Substitute. They said to him: Only a Substitute for what was itself dedicated9 is valid; neither a Substitute for the young [of the beast] nor a Substitute for [another] Substitute is valid.
6. No Substitute is valid for Bird-offerings and Meal-offerings, for [the law of the Substitute] was written only of cattle. A Substitute brought by the congregation or by jointholders is not valid, for it is written, He shall not 1 Lev. 2710 ‘beast for beast’ is, literally, ‘cattle for cattle’; the word ‘cattle’ (Heb. behemah) can be used either as a singular or as a collective noun.
2 See Ter, s6. If Heave-offering is mixed with common produce in the proportion of one in less than a hundred the mixture is forbidden to non-priests; if this mixture is mixed again with common produce the final mixture is forbidden only if the resultant proportion of original Heave-offering to common produce is still more than one in a hundred.
3 If Heave-offering leaven fell into common dough and the dough was leavened by it, no matter what the proportion, the whole dough is forbidden to non-priests; if the resultant dough fell into other common dough the latter is forbidden only if, in what fell into it, there was enough of the original Heave-offering dough to leaven the latter dough.
4 Unless the Immersion-pool (see tractate Mikwaoth) contains forty seahs of undrawn water it is invalid. If into less than forty seahs of undrawn water three logs of ‘drawn’ water (i.e. water that has remained standing in a vessel) fell or were poured, the Immersion-pool becomes invalid. The Gemara here explains the term ‘prescribed proportion’ differently: (a) if the pool held only twenty-one seahs of undrawn water it becomes permissible if nineteen seahs of other water were made to flow into it over the ground, but if the pool held less than twenty-one seahs the added water does not render it permissible; or ( b ) if into an Immersion-pool a total of three logs of drawn water fell in from three vessels or less, the pool becomes invalid; but if from more than three the pool remains valid.
5 Cf. Par. 6lfl. It is deduced from Num. 1917 that the living water was put into a vessel and the ashes put on the water, and not that the water was put into a vessel containing the 7 i.e. though the sanctity of the original offering can pass also to what is substituted for it, the sanctity of the Substitute cannot pass to what is again substituted for the first Substitute so as to make the second Substitute a valid offering.
8 Born after the dam was dedicated. It also is holy and must be offered, yet its sanctity cannot pass to what is substituted for it so as to make the Substitute a valid offering.
* Since it is written, ‘It (i.e. only it) and that (i.e. only that) for which it is changed shall be holy’.
FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM change it; only a single person may bring a Substitute, and a Substitute brought by the congregation or by jointholders is not valid. No Substitute may be brought for offerings' to the Temple treasury. R. Simeon said: Was not the. Tithe [of Cattle] included [among the offerings for which a Substitute could be brought]?2 Why was it mentioned in particular2 To draw an analogy: as the Tithe [of Cattle] is the offering of the individual,3 the offerings of the congregation are excluded; as the Tithe [of Cattle] is an offering that falls to the Altar, offerings to the Temple treasury are excluded.
2. i. Some conditions apply to offerings of the individual and do not apply to the offerings of the congregation, and some conditions apply to offerings of the congregation and do not apply to offerings of the individual. A Sub¬ stitute may be brought for the offerings of the individual, but a Substitute may not be brought for the offerings of the congregation; for the offerings of the individual male or female beasts are brought, but for the offerings of the congregation only male beasts are brought; for the offerings of the individual he that offers them is answerable [and he must replace them if they are lost], and he is answerable for their drink-offerings,4 but for the offerings of the congregation they are not answerable [and they need not be replaced if they are lost or delayed], and they are not answerable for their drink-offerings; but once the animal-offerings have been offered, they are answerable for their drink-offerings. Some conditions apply to offerings of the congregation and do not apply to the offerings of the individual. The; offerings of the congregation override the Sabbath and [the laws of] un- j cleanness, but the offerings of the individual override neither the Sabbath nor [the laws] of uncleanness. R. Meir said: But are not the Baken Cakes5 of the High Priest and the bullock offered on the Day of Atonement offerings of the individual? — yet they override the Sabbath and [the laws of] uncleanness? But [this is because] they must be offered at a fixed time.
2. The Sin-offerings of the individual whose owner has [otherwise] already made atonement6 are left to die, but those of the congregation are not left to die. R. Judah says: They are left to die. R. Simeon said: Like as we find7 in what concerns the young of a Sin-offering, the Substitute for a Sin-offering, and the Sin-offering whose owner has died, that the rule8 applies only to the offerings of the individual and cannot apply to the offerings of the congregation,6 so, too, in what concerns [the Sin-offering] whose owner has [otherwise] already made atonement, or [the Sin-offering] that has passed the age of a year, the rule applies to the offerings of the individual but not to the offerings of the congregation.
3. Greater stringency may apply to animal -offerings than to a Substitute, and greater stringency may apply to a Substitute than to animal-offerings; for a Substitute may be brought in the stead of animal-offerings but no Substitute may be brought in the stead of a Substitute; the congregation or * Cf. Shek. 6*. Variant: Hallowed Things. * See Lev. 27*’.
J It cannot be exacted from jointholders. Cf. Belch. 9’.
* The term includes also the prescribed Meal-offerings.
6 i.e. the beast set aside as a Sin-offering was lost and only found after another had been offered in its stead. 7 Cf. below, 41.
8 That they shall be left to die.
9 Since (a) the Sin-offerings of the congregation are male beasts, (b) these can be substi¬ tutes only for the offerings of individuals, and (c) the congregation cannot die.
jointholders may dedicate [a beast as an offering] but they cannot bring a Substitute; and they may dedicate the members of a beast or unborn young, but they cannot bring a Substitute [for them]. Greater stringency may apply to the Substitute: for the sanctity [that befalls the Substitute] can befall even a beast that has a lasting blemish and it cannot become un¬ consecrated, or be shorn or used for labour.1 R. Jose b. R. Judah says: A beast becomes a [valid] Substitute alike whether he so dedicated it in error or wantonly, but a beast does not become a [valid] animal-offering alike whether he so dedicated it in error or wantonly.2 R. Eleazar says: A beast that is cross-bred or terefah or born from the side [of the dam], or that is of doubtful or of double sex, cannot become holy' or render [its substitute] holy.4 3. 1. Of these animal-offerings what is born from them and what is substituted for them may be offered as the like kind of offering: the young and the Substitute of a Peace-offering, their young and their young’s young until the end of the world — these may be offered as a Peace-offering, and they require the laying on of hands, drink-offerings, and waving; and the breast and the thigh [must be given to the priests]. R. Eliezer says: The young of a Peace-offering may not be offered as a Peace-offering.5 But the Sages say: It may be so offered. R. Simeon said: They did not dispute whether the young’s young of a Peace-offering or the young’s young of a Substitute should be offered; but they disputed concerning the young itself — R. Eliezer said that it could not be offered, whereas the Sages said that it could be offered. R. Joshua and R. Papias testified6 that the young of a Peace-offering could be offered as a Peace-offering. R. Papias said: I testify that we had a heifer that was offered as a Peace-offering; we con¬ sumed it at Passover and we consumed its young as a Peace-offering at the [next] Feast.
2. The young and the Substitute of a Thank-offering,7 their young and their young’s young until the end of the world — these [may be offered] as a Thank-offering, save only that they need no Bread-offering. The Substitute of a Whole-offering, the young of the Substitute, and its young’s young until the end of the world — these [may be offered] as a Whole-offering, and they require flaying and cutting up, and they wholly fall to the Altar-fire.
3. If a man set apart a female beast as a Whole-offering and it bore a male, this must be left to pasture until it suffers a blemish, when it shall be sold and a Whole-offering brought w'ith its price. R. Eleazar says: It can itself be brought as a Whole-offering. If a man set apart a female beast as a Guilt-offering,8 it must be left to pasture until it suffers a blemish, when it may be sold and a Guilt-offering brought with its price; but if he had already brought his Guilt-offering, the price shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. R. Simeon says: It can be sold [forthwith] before it suffers a blemish. The Substitute of a Guilt-offering, the young 1 ‘Both it and that for which it is changed shall be holy.’
2 e.g. if he designated one beast but had intended to designate another, it becomes a valid substitute, but not a valid offering. Here, too, greater stringency applies to a Sub¬ stitute than to an animal-offering.
3 Be brought as a Substitute.
4 All these four kinds of beast can be holy if, e.g., the one became terefah after it was consecrated, or the other three were born of another beast that was already consecrated; but a Substitute for them is not valid.
5 But must be left to die.
8 For which only a male beast was valid.
558 FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM of its Substitute, its young and its young’s young until the end of the world, must be left to pasture until they suffer a blemish, when they shall be sold, and their price shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. R. Eliezer says: They must be left to die. But R. Eleazar says: Whole- offerings should be brought with their price. A Guilt-offering whose owner has died or [otherwise] already made atonement must be left to pasture until it suffers a blemish, when it shall be sold and its price shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. R. Eliezer says: It must be left to die. But R. Eleazar says: Whole-offerings should be brought with its price.
4. But is not [what falls to the Temple treasury as] a freewill-offering offered as a Whole-offering? How, then, do the words of R. Eleazar differ from those of the Sages? Only in that if it was an offering of obligation he must lay his hand upon it, and bring its drink-offerings, and he must bring the drink-offerings at his own charges; and if he is a priest he himself per¬ forms the offering and takes the hide; whereas if it was a freewill-offering he does not lay his hand upon it or bring its drink-offerings, and the drink- offerings are brought at the charges of the congregation, and even if he is a priest the offering is performed by the priests whose Course1 it then is, who also takes the hide.
5. The Substitute for Firstlings or Tithe [of Cattle], their young and their young’s young until the end of the world, can be offered as Firstlings or Tithe [of Cattle], and, if they are blemished, they may be consumed by their owners. Wherein do Firstlings and Tithe [of Cattle] differ from other animal-offerings? Other animal-offerings2 can be sold and slaughtered in the market and weighed out by measure, save only Firstlings and Tithe [of Cattle]; and they may be redeemed and their Substitutes may be re¬ deemed, save only Firstlings and Tithe [of Cattle]; and they may be brought to the Land [of Israel] from outside the Land, save only Firstlings and Tithe [of Cattle]. If these were brought [from thence] and they are without blemish, they may be offered; but if they are blemished they may be con¬ sumed, in that they are blemished, by their owners. R. Simeon said: Why [are not unblemished Firstlings and Tithe of Cattle brought from outside the Land]? Because Firstlings and Tithe [of Cattle] can be of avail3 wheresoever they are; but other animal-offerings, even if a blemish arises in them, still continue in their sanctity.4 4. 1. The young of a Sin-offering, the Substitute for a Sin-offering, and the Sin-offering whose owner has died must be left to die.5 If it passed the age of a year6 or was lost and found blemished, and its owner had [other¬ wise] already made atonement, it must be left to die; a Substitute for it may not be brought, no use may be made of it, but the law of Sacrilege7 does not apply to it. If the owner had not yet made atonement, it must be left to pasture until it suffers a blemish, when it shall be sold and another [Sin-offering] brought with its price; a Substitute for it may be brought, and the law of Sacrilege applies to it.
3 Outside the Land they can be left to pasture until they incur a blemish, when they can be slaughtered and used for food.
4 Even if they were blemished their money-value must be brought to the Land of Israel and another offering brought in their stead.
5 Shut up and left without food. 6 And so became invalid as a Sin-offering.
2. If a man set apart his Sin-offering and it was lost, and he offered an¬ other in its stead and the first was then found, it must be left to die. If a man set apart money for a Sin-offering, and the money was lost, and he offered another Sin-offering in its stead, and the money was then found, the money must be thrown into the Dead Sea.1 3. If a man set apart money for his Sin-offering and it was lost, and he set apart other money in its stead, and before he could buy a Sin-offering with this money the first money was found, he must bring a Sin-offering that was bought with both sums of money, and the residue shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. If a man set apart money for his Sin-offering and it was lost, and he set apart a Sin-offering in its stead, and before he could offer the Sin-offering the money was found, and the Sin- offering was blemished, it must be sold; and another Sin-offering must be brought from both this price and the first money, and the residue shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. If a man set apart a Sin- offering and it was lost, and he set apart money in its stead, and, before he could buy another Sin-offering with it, the first Sin-offering was found, and it was blemished, it must be sold, and another Sin-offering must be brought from both this price and the other money, and the residue shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. If a man set apart a Sin-offering and it was lost, and he set apart another Sin-offering in its stead, and, before he could offer it, the first was found, and both were blemished, both must be sold and another Sin-offering must be brought from the price of both, and the residue shall fall [to the Temple treasury] as a freewill-offering. If a man set apart a Sin- offering and it was lost, and he set apart another in its stead, and, before he could offer it, the first was found, and both were without blemish, one should be offered as a Sin-offering and the other left to die. So Rabbi. But the Sages say: No Sin-offering may be left to die save only that which is found after its owner had [otherwise] made atonement; and no money may be thrown into the Dead Sea unless it is found after its owner had already made atonement.
4. If a man set apart his Sin-offering and it was found to be blemished, he must sell it and bring another in its stead. R. Eleazar b. R. Simeon says: If the second was offered before the first was slaughtered, the first must be left to die, since its owner had already made stonement.
5. 1. How can the law of Firstlings be evaded?2 If a beast that had not before borne young was pregnant, a man may say, ‘What is within her, if a male, shall be a Whole-offering’; and if she bore a male it is brought as a Whole-offering. [Or he may say,] ‘...and if a female it shall be a Peace- offering’, and if she bore a female it is brought as a Peace-offering. [Or he may say,] ‘...if a male it shall be a W'hole-offering and if a female a Peace¬ offering’, and if she bore a male and a female, the male is brought as a Whole-offering and the female as a Peace-offering.
2. If she bore two males, one should be brought as a Whole-offering and the other sold to any that were under obligation to bring a Whole-offering, and the price is free for common use. If she bore two females one should be brought as a Peace-offering and the other sold to any that were under obligation to bring a Peace-offering, and the price is free for common use.