Halakhah sobre Zevahim 5:12

And the Torah further also obligated this sacrifice for one who has sexual relations with a designated maidservant; and as it is written in the Order of Kedoshim Tehiyu, as it is stated (Leviticus 19:20-21), "If a man lays with a woman, etc. and she is a maidservant designated (charufah) for a man, but has not been redeemed with redemption, etc. there shall be an investigation, etc. And he shall bring his guilt-offering[, etc.] a ram of guilt." And this is from those that come whether for inadvertent transgression or volitional (Keritot 9a). It comes out that with all of them, there are five definite guilt-offerings. And so did the Sages, may their memory be blessed, count in the Mishnah, such that they said (Mishnah Zevachim 5:5), "These are the guilt-offerings: 1) The guilt-offering of thefts; 2) the guilt-offering of misappropriations; 3) the guilt-offering of the designated maidservant; 4) the guilt-offering of the nazirite; 5) the guilt offering of the metsora." And [regarding] the undetermined guilt-offering which is counted there, its name is upon it [to show] that it is not from the group of definite guilt-offerings. And from these five, three of them come whether they are inadvertent or volitional - and they are the guilt-offering of thefts, the guilt-offering of the designated maidservant and the guilt-offering of the nazirite; and one of them only comes for inadvertent transgression and not for volitional transgression - and that is the guilt-offering of misappropriations; and [for] the fifth - which is the guilt offering of the metsora - the expression, inadvertent and volitional, is not relevant, as we said.

To not eat an unblemished first-born [animal] outside of Jerusalem: That a priest not eat an unblemished first-born [animal] outside of Jerusalem; and so too that a foreigner [non-priest] not eat from a first-born in any place, as the commandment with it is that the priests - the servants of God - should eat it, from the reason that I wrote in the Order of Bo el Pharoah (Sefer HaChinukh 18). And about all of this is it written (Deuteronomy 12:17), "You may not eat in your gates, etc. and the first-born of your cattle and your flocks." And the language of Sifrei Devarim 72 (see [also] Makkot 17a) is "'And the first-born' - this is the first-born. And the verse only comes for a foreigner that ate the first-born, whether before the sprinkling of the bloods or whether after the sprinkling, [to teach] that he transgresses a negative commandment." And the intent is not that the verse does not teach anything except this matter (see Sefer HaMitzvot LaRambam, Mitzvot Lo Taase 144), but rather it is saying that this is [also] included in this negative prohibition. And it comes out that included in it are two matters that we mentioned: prevention of the foreigner from eating an unblemished first-born in any place; and so too, prevention of the priest from eating it outside of Jerusalem. And both of the matters are predicated upon [it being] an unblemished first-born. And there in the Order of Bo el Pharaoh, I wrote at what time and in what place the commandment of the first-born is practiced and the disagreement among my teachers - God protect them - about the matter of the first-born at this time. And there is no need to write at length about the reason for its being eaten in Jerusalem, as it is part of the consecrated foods - and as it is written in the Mishnah Zevachim 5:8, "The first-born, the tithe and the Pesach sacrifice offering are low-level consecrated foods (kedoshim kalim), etc." - and I have already lavished my words in several places (Sefer HaChinukh 360) about the reason [for] the eating of consecrated foods in the holy place and their being eaten by the servants of God.