Комментарий к Бикури́м 2:16

התרומה והבכורים חייבין עליהן מיתה – A foreigner (i.e., non-Kohen/priest) who willfully eats them (i.e., the heave offering and the first-fruit offerings) are liable to death at the hands of heaven, as it is written regarding the heave offering (Leviticus 22:9): “[They shall keep My charge, lest they incur guilt thereby] and die for it, having committed profanation: [I the LORD consecrate them].” And “First-Fruits” are called/referred to as Terumah, “the Terumah of your hands” are the First Fruits, as it says concerning them (Deuteronomy 26:4): “The priest shall take the basket from your hand [and set it down in from pf the altar of the LORD your God.”

Introduction The first four mishnayot of this chapter compare the rules governing bikkurim with those governing terumah and maaser sheni.

וחומש – He (i.e., the foreigner/non-Kohen) who eats of them inadvertently pays the principal amount to the owners and the additional fifth to any Kohen that he desires.

Regarding terumah and bikkurim:
One is liable to death A non-priest who intentionally eats terumah or bikkurim is liable for “death by the hands of heaven.” He is not executed by a human court.

ואסורים לזרים – it is taught [in the Mishnah] for no reason, for since they (i.e., the non-Kohen who partakes of these) are liable for the death penalty [if eaten willfully] and the payment of the additional fifth [in addition to the principal if eaten inadvertently], it is obvious that it is forbidden to foreigners (i.e., non-Kohanim). And for Rabbi Yehuda who stated that half the legal size is forbidden from the Torah, we have found [worthy] to say that is taught in the Mishnah “forbidden to non-Kohanim/foreigners” for half the legal size – that this is forbidden from the Torah, and there is no death [penalty] or [payment of] the additional fifth.

And the [additional] fifth; If a non-priest eats them unwittingly, when he discovers what he has done he must restore the value plus an added fifth (see Terumot 6:1-2).

And they are forbidden to non-priests; We already know this from sections one and two. It is taught here so that when we read section eight, we will understand that tithes are permitted to non-priests.

ועולים באחד ומאה – If it got mixed with one-hundred parts of unconsecrated things.

And they are the property of the priest; Bikkurim and terumah are the personal property of the priest who receives them and therefore he can use them to buy any thing he wishes, as long as the person who ends up eating them is also a priest.

וטעונים רחיצת ידים – A Kohen who wishes to touch them must first [ritually] wash his hands , for one’s unknown hands (i.e., if they are defiled or not) invalidate the Terumah/heave-offering and First Fruits are also called/referred to as Terumah.

And they are neutralized in a hundred and one parts; If one part bikkurim or terumah fall into one hundred parts hullin (non-sacred produce), one can remove one part, give it to the priest and the rest remains hullin. If there is less than 100 parts hullin, then the mixture is doubtful terumah/bikkurim and cannot be eaten by a non-priest.

והערב שמש – An impure person (i.e., in this case, a Kohen), who ritually immersed himself cannot partake of the Terumah until sunset, as it is written (Leviticus 22:7): ‘As soon as the sun sets, he shall be pure; and afterward he may eat of the sacred donations [for they are his food].” And same law applies to the First Fruits.

And they require the washing of hands; One who comes to touch bikkurim or terumah must first ritually wash his hands.

משא"כ במעשר – which is permitted to foreigners (i.e., non-Kohanim). But it is forbidden to purchase with the monetary value of the Second Tithe/Ma’aser Sheni an impure animal or slaves and land, and it is made void with a majority of it where there is not an act that makes it permissible. But he who touches it does not require the ritual washing of the hands, and it does not require [waiting until] sunset for we have said: He may immerse and come up and eat the Second Tithe.

And the setting of the sun. Before an impure priest eats terumah/bikkurim he must first go to the mikveh to purify himself. Afterwards he cannot eat them until the sun sets (see Leviticus 22:7).

These [laws] apply only to terumah and bikkurim, but not to tithe. All of these laws apply only to terumah and bikkurim. When it comes to maaser sheni (second tithe), a non-priest can eat them, one can use maaser sheni money to buy only food, drink or anointing oils (see Maaser Sheni 1:7), and if maaser sheni falls into a mixture, as long as it is less than half the mixture, it is nullified. First tithe is treated like hullin in all ways, except that it must be given to the Levite.

הבאת מקום – to bring them (Ma’aser Sheni and Bikkurim) to Jerusalem, as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:6): “And there you are to bring your burnt offerings and other sacrifices, your tithes and contributions…”And they [i.e., the Rabbis] expound that “contributions”/תרומת ידכם are First Fruits.

Introduction Today’s mishnah compares maaser sheni with bikkurim.

וטעונים וידוי – Regarding [Second and Poor] Tithes, it is written (Deuteronomy 26:13): “You shall declare before the LORD your God: ‘I have cleared out the consecrated portion from the house’..” and regarding First Fruits, it is written (Deuteronomy 26:5): “You shall then recite as follows before the LORD your God: ‘My father was a fugitive Aramean’.…” And even though the heave offering (of consecrated foodstuffs) also requires confession as we say (Deuteronomy 26:13): “and I have given it to the Levite, [the stranger, the fatherless and the widow]…”, this is the heave offering/consecrated food [for the Kohen] and the contribution of tithes [by the Levite for the Kohen]. However, However, the [second] tithe and First Fruits are separate tithes, or First Fruits alone require confession, and the heave offering/consecrated food for the Kohen if he only has the heave offering, it does not require confession.

There are [laws] which apply to [second tithe] and bikkurim but not to terumah:
That [second] tithe and bikkurim must to be brought to [the appointed] place; Both second tithe and bikkurim must be brought to Jerusalem.

ואסורין לעונן – Regarding the [Second] tithe, it is written (Deuteronomy 26:14): “I have not eaten of iot while in mourning,” and regarding First Fruits, it is states (Deuteronomy 26:11): “And you shall rejoice, [together with the Levite and the stranger in your midst]…” which teaches that these are forbidden to someone in mourning (literally, someone whose dead lies before them, as yet unburied).

They require confession; When one brings second tithe and bikkurim he has to make a recitation. For maaser sheni he makes what is known as the “confession of tithes”, see Deuteronomy 26:13 and for bikkurim he recites Deuteronomy 26:5-10.

ורבי שמעון מתיר – [Rabbi Shimon permits] First Fruits [to a Kohen] in mourning, for they are called “heave offerings/consecrated food” by the Torah and heave offerings are permitted to someone in mourning.

They are forbidden to an onen. But Rabbi Shimon permits [bikkurim to an onen]; An onen is a person who has had a close relative die but who has not yet buried him/her. This period extends only to the day of death. When it comes to tithe, as part of his confession he recites, “I did not eat of it in my period of morning (oni).” An onen cannot eat tithe. That same passage refers to tithe as “kodesh (holy)” and since bikkurim are also called “kodesh” the rabbis derive that an onen cannot eat bikkurim either. Rabbi Shimon allows an onen to eat bikkurim. In general we shall see that Rabbi Shimon holds that bikkurim are closer to terumah.

וחייבים בביעור – to remove them out of existence from the world at the end of three years, as it is written in the portion of the [Second] tithe (Deuteronomy 26:13): “I have removed the consecrated portion from the house” and implying also First Fruits, since it is written, “the consecrated portion”. The higher level of sanctity is the First Fruits, which were mentioned in the portion above it.

They are subject to [the law of] removal. But Rabbi Shimon exempts [bikkurim from removal]. On the eve of the last day of Pesah on the fourth and seventh years of the sabbatical cycle one must remove all bikkurim and maaser that has accrued in one’s home (see Deuteronomy 26:13 and Maaser Sheni 5:6). At that point one takes them out and lets them rot. Again, Rabbi Shimon disagrees and says that bikkurim are like terumah and that even after this time period has passed, one must give them to the priest.

ור"ש פוטר – [Rabbi Shimon exempts] First Fruits from the [commandment of] removal, but they should be given to the Kohen, since they are called “Terumah” by the Torah and there is no need to remove Terumah/heave-offering from the world.

And in Jerusalem the slightest mixture of them [with hullin of the same species] renders it forbidden to be consumed [as common food outside of Jerusalem.] If even the smallest amount of either bikkurim or maaser sheni becomes mixed in with hullin, the mixture cannot be eaten outside of Jerusalem. This is true only if the mixture occurs in Jerusalem. However, if the mixture happens outside of Jerusalem, then bikkurim are nullified in a ratio of 100-1 and maaser sheni is nullified as long as it is less than half of the mixture (we learned this in yesterday’s mishnah).

Are forbidden. [If ] maaser sheni or bikkurim become mixed with chullin, the mixture is forbidden irrespective of the relative quantities, and [they] are not nullified if [the ratio to the chullin is less than] one to a hundred.

And what grows from them in Jerusalem is forbidden to be consumed [outside of Jerusalem], If plants grow in Jerusalem from bikkurim or maaser plants, the new plants must be treated as bikkurim or maaser sheni and they too must be consumed in Jerusalem. If the plants grow outside of Jerusalem then they are treated like hullin (see Terumot 9:4).

[May] not be eaten in Yerushalaim. That is to say ["may not be eaten if they were mixed while they were in Yerushalayim":] if maaser sheni or bikkurim become mixed with chullin while they are in Yerushalaim, then the mixture is forbidden to be eaten by the laws of chullin, because they are something for which there are reasons to allow [davar sheyesh lo matirin, a category discussed also in Beitzah, 3b: a prohibited item that can be permitted without the process of nullification, and as such the nullification does not take place, not even if mixed in the ratio of a thousand to one] because it is possible to eat the whole mixture where it [already] is, [i.e. Yerushalaim]. But maaser sheni or bikkurim that become mixed with chullin outside of Yerushalaim are not forbidden irrespective of the relative quantities, because it takes effort to bring them up [to Yerushalaim], and as such are not defined as something for which there is reason to allow.

Even by non-priests or by cattle; But Rabbi Shimon permits. A mixture of the tiniest amount bikkurim and hullin is prohibited to non-priests, as are plants that grow from them in Jerusalem. The same is true when it comes to second tithe and hullin: the mixture cannot be eaten by animals, as is generally true of maaser sheni, nor can the plants that grow from it in Jerusalem. Rabbi Shimon says that the rules in the previous three sections apply only to maaser sheni but not to bikkurim.

And their growths are forbidden. [In the case of]a mixture of maaser [sheni] or bikkurim that was planted and sprouted and grew, also the growths are forbidden to be eaten by the laws of chullin if they are planted and grown in Yerushalaim. And their mixture is forbidden, irrespective of the relative quantities, because it is possible to eat it there in its place.

Even by non-priests or by cattle; But Rabbi Shimon permits. Terumah need not be brought to Jerusalem, nor does one make a confession when one gives it to the priest. The rules regarding terumah are no different inside Jerusalem then they are outside.

אף לזרים ולבהמה – Second Tithe and First Fruits where we forbid their combination in any amount and their growth also is forbidden, and is forbidden [as well] even for foreigners (i.e. non-Kohanim) and cattle. If [we are dealing with] First Fruits, their combination is forbidden to foreigners and if [we are dealing with] [Second] Tithe, their combination is forbidden for cattle, that is not say specifically regarding the matter of it being eaten outside of Jerusalem which is forbidden in any amount, for that matter we consider a thing which requires an act to make them permissible for one can consume them in their place in Jerusalem, and even in one-thousand parts is not neutralized. But to prohibit this mixture to foreigners (i.e. non-Kohanim) and cattle, for the prohibition of foreigners an cattle have nothing that will make it permissible. You might think that I should say that they would not prohibit the

mixture in any amount, therefore, it comes to teach us that since this mixture carries the name “First Fruits” and “[Second] Tithe,” which prohibits eating them outside of Jerusalem, regarding this matter, applies the prohibition for foreigners to eat them if they are First Fruits, or for cattle if it is [Second] Tithe.

ור' שמעון מתיר – This refers only to their growth, for he thinks that they are nullified, but regarding the mixture itself, Rabbi Shimon admits [that it is permitted]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon for this entire Mishnah.

אוסרין את הגורן – It is prohibited to eat from the grain in the threshing floor/granary until the heave-offering/sacred donations to the Kohen and tithes are separated out but First Fruits do not prohibit [the granary].

Introduction This mishnah points out the similarities between terumah and maaser [sheni] that are not shared by bikkurim.

ויש להן שיעור – The heave-offering/sacred-donation to the Kohanim have a Rabbinically [determined] minimal measure which is one-fiftieth (2%), but First Fruits lack a minimal measure, even Rabbinically.

There are [laws] which apply to terumah and maaser [sheni] but not to bikkurim:
Terumah and the [second] tithe render forbidden [the contents of] the threshing-floor; Produce from which terumah or maaser sheni has not been removed is forbidden to be eaten. This is what it means that these things, “forbid the contents of the threshing-floor.” The “threshing-floor” here is just an example. Other types of produce, such as wine, oil, fruits and vegetables, also cannot be eaten until terumah and maaser sheni have been removed. However, one can eat produce if bikkurim have not been removed.

ונוהגים בכל הפירות – Rabbinically, but First Fruits may only come from the seven species (Deuteronomy 8:8 – i.e., wheat, barley, wine, figs, pomegranates, olives and honey).

They have a set amount. Maaser sheni is a tenth of the produce that remains after first tithe and terumah have been removed. While the Torah did not set a fixed amount for terumah, the rabbis established that a generous amount is 1/40, a standard amount is 1/50 and a miserly amount is 1/60. For bikkurim there is no set amount (see Peah 1:1).

בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית – But Bikkurim are in effect only when the Temple exists, as it is written regarding them (Deuteronomy 26:4): “[The priest shall take the basket from your hand] and set it down in front of the altar of the LORD your God.” If there is no altar, there are no “First Fruits.”

They apply to all produce; Terumah and maaser must be removed from all types of produce whereas bikkurim is taken out of the seven species only.

ובאריסות ובחכירות וכו' – It is explained above at the beginning of the first chapter of Bikkurim (Mishnah 2), for the First Fruits do not come other than from someone whose field is legally his, as it is written (Exodus 23:19): “The choice first fruits of your soil [you shall bring to the house of the LORD your God.”

Both during and after Temple times; The laws of terumah and maaser remain in force even at a time when there is no Temple. The laws of bikkurim apply only when the Temple still stands.

[And they apply to to produce grown] by sharecroppers, leasers, or occupiers of confiscated property (, or a robber. In mishnah 1:2 we learned that a person who doesn’t own the land from which he grew his crops does not have to bring bikkurim. This is only true with regard to bikkurim when it comes to terumah and maaser sheni, they must be removed from the produce before it is eaten regardless of who grows it.

These are [the laws] which apply to terumah and maaser [sheni], but not to bikkurim. All of the above rules apply to terumah and maaser sheni, but not to bikkurim.

נקנים במחובר לקרקע – As it is written (Numbers 18:13): “The first fruits of everything in their land [that they bring to the LORD, shall be yours; everyone of your household who is clean may eat them].” At the time when they are attached [to the ground] in their land they are “First Fruits,” and such is taught in the Mishnah (Chapter 3, Mishnah 1) further on, “A person goes down into his field, etc. and ties it with bulrushes/reed-grass and says: ‘Behold these are First Fruits’.”

Introduction Sometimes bikkurim has unique laws that apply only to it and not to terumah or maaser.

ועושה אדם כל שדהו בכורים – as it is written (Numbers 18:13): “The first fruits of everything [in their land]…”

And there are [laws] which apply to bikkurim which do not [apply] to terumah or maaser sheni:
For bikkurim can become acquired while still attached [to the soil]. One can designate produce to be bikkurim while it is still attached to the ground. That would not work when it comes to terumah or maaser. These can only be designated as such once they have already been harvested.

וטעונים קרבן – It is stated with regard to First Fruits: “joy” [as written in Deuteronomy 26:11): “And you shall enjoy (literally, “you shall rejoice”),[together with the Levite and the stranger in your midst…].” And it states further on (Deuteronomy 27:7): “And you shall sacrifice there offerings of well-being and eat them, rejoicing before the LORD your God.” Just as there (Deuteronomy 27:7), [it speaks about] offerings of well-being, so too here (Deuteronomy 26:11).

And a man may make his entire field bikkurim; One can make one’s entire field into bikkurim, but one cannot make one’s entire threshing floor into terumah or maaser (see Hallah 1:9). Perhaps this is a result of terumah and maaser having set amounts since there is a set amount, one cannot make the entire crop into terumah or maaser.

ושיר – It is stated here (Deuteronomy 26:11): “You shall enjoy…all the bounty” and it is stated further on (Ezekiel 33:32): “[To them you are just] a singer of bawdy songs, who has a sweet voice and plays skillfully; [they hear your words , but will not obey them].”

He is responsible for them; As we learned in 1:9, one is responsible for his bikkurim until they get to the Temple Mount. In contrast, if one sets aside terumah or maaser and they spoil or are lost, he is not responsible to replace them.

ותנופה – It is written here (Deuteronomy 26:4): “The priest shall take the basket from your hand;” and it is written there (Leviticus 7:30): “His own hands shall present the LORD’s offerings by fire. [He shall present the fat with the breast, the breast to be elevated as an elevation offering before the LORD].” Just as there is an elevation offering, so also here an elevation offering.

And they require a sacrifice, a song, waving and spending the night in Jerusalem. When one brings bikkurim to the Temple, he must also bring a well-being sacrifice. This is derived from Deuteronomy 26:11, which states, “And you shall enjoy, together with the Levite and the stranger in your midst, all the bounty that the LORD your God has bestowed upon you and your household.” The rabbis understand this mitzvah as being a mitzvah to bring a sacrifice and rejoice in eating it. There is also a Psalm, called by our mishnah a song, that accompanies the bikkurim (we will see this in chapter three, mishnah four). When one presents the basket to the priest, he waves it as if it was a sacrifice (more on this below in 3:6). Finally, one who brings bikkurim to Jerusalem must spend the night there. This was probably done in order to help the innkeepers of Jerusalem make a living, and in order to aid in the festive atmosphere of the bikkurim procession. Funnily, I grew up in Atlantic City and one of the big complaints there was that people would come to gamble for the day and not stay the night. Perhaps the hoteliers should have had some rabbis help them out!

ולינה – It will stay over in Jerusalem the entire night after the day that he brought the First Fruits, as it is written (Deuteronomy 16:7): “[You shall cook and eat it at the place that the LORD your God will choose;] and in the morning you may start back on your journey home.” Therefore all “starting back” that you do only take place in the morning.

נטלת מן הטהור על הטמא – For behold, the heave-offering/sacred donations [for a Kohen] are not taken from that which is pure/clean from that which is unclean/impure which is the reason that we require that which is close-by, and we are concerned that perhaps they are not close-by, for there is doubt that perhaps the pure came in contact with the impure. And this is the reason that we say here that the heave-offering/sacred donations is not taken from a mass which is not in close neighborhood of those products which are to be redeemed.

Introduction Having completed comparing bikkurim, terumah and maaser with one another, the Mishnah now turns its attention to comparing terumat maaser with bikkurim and maaser. Terumat maaser is the terumah that the Levite takes out of the tithe that he receives (see Numbers 18:26).

ויש לה שיעור כתרומה – For the Sages gave a [minimum] measure for the heave-offering/Terumah – two out of one-hundred.

The terumah of tithe is like bikkurim in two ways, and like terumah in two other ways:
It may be taken from pure produce for impure produce; There are two ways in which terumat maaser is like bikkurim. First of all, if one has pure maaser and impure maaser , he can separate terumah from his pure maaser in order to exempt his impure maaser. When it comes to terumah, one cannot do this (see Hallah 1:9; Terumot 2:1).

And from such produce that is not in close proximity, like bikkurim. If one has two piles of maaser, one that is in close proximity and one that lies further away, he can take terumat maaser from the close pile and thereby exempt the pile that is further away. Again, this cannot be done when it comes to giving terumah (see Hallah 1:9).

And it renders the contents of the threshing-floor forbidden, Terumat maaser is similar to terumah in that before one separates terumat maaser he cannot eat the grain that is found on the threshing floor, or other produce found elsewhere (see above mishnah three). Not having taken bikkurim, as we learned, does not render the produce forbidden.

And it has a prescribed amount like terumah. Terumat maaser is 1/10 of the maaser. This amount is fixed, as is terumah. Bikkurim, as we saw in mishnah three, do not have a fixed amount.

שוה לאילן – that we “go” (i.e. determine it) following the formation of fruits or leaves. For we count [the] three [years towards] “Orlah”/being uncircumcised fruit (i.e., fruit-trees of the first three years) from the time when its leaves/fruit form, and similarly for that which is in its fourth year (which was carried to Jerusalem to be eaten there). And similarly for the seventh year produce, for its fruit/leaves formed in the sixth year and were completed in the seventh year, it is permissible [to eat from them]. But nevertheless, it is exempt from tithing, for concerning [the laws of] tithing, we follow after harvesting like the laws of vegetation, and since it is harvested in the seventh year, it is exempt from tithing.

Introduction The rabbis seem to have caught comparison fever. Having finished comparing various agricultural gifts, they thought, "Why stop now?" Our mishnah compares the laws governing etrogim to those governing vegetables and fruits. If you’re sick of talking about produce, don't worry, in the next mishnah we’ll compare different types of blood, and after that we’ll move on to the animal kingdom.

An etrog is similar in three ways to [the fruit of an ordinary] tree, and in one way to a vegetable. is similar to a tree in respect of orlah, fourth year plantings, and [the law of] the seventh year; When it comes to determining what year of its growth or of a sabbatical cycle the fruit of an etrog tree is in, we go after the time that the fruit begins to bud on the tree and not after the time that it is picked from the tree. If it buds during the third year, then it is prohibited because it is orlah. If it buds during the fourth year, it must be brought up to Jerusalem and eaten there. If it buds during the seventh year, it has the status of sabbatical year produce, which means that it must be treated with a certain amount of sanctity (see my Introduction to Sheviit).

And it is similar to a vegetable in one thing: that its tithing goes according to the time it is harvested, the words of Rabban Gamaliel. Rabbi Eliezer says: it is similar to a tree in all ways. When it comes to determining what tithe year an etrog is in, meaning determining whether it is in its first, second, fourth or fifth year of a seven year sabbatical cycle, in which case second tithe is given, or whether it is in its third or sixth year in which case poor tithe is given, Rabban Gamaliel holds that we follow the time when the etrog is harvested, as is the case with vegetables. Thus, if the etrog buds during the second year of the sabbatical cycle, but is picked in the third year, the tithe removed is maaser ani (poor tithe) and not maaser sheni (second tithe).

Rabbi Eliezer holds that in all ways an etrog is treated like the fruit of a tree and thus if it buds in the second year, maaser sheni is given even if it is picked during the third year.

דם מהלכי שתים – which is the blood of a human being, like the blood of the slain

Introduction The mishnah compares the laws governing human blood with those governing the blood of beasts (domesticated animals) and the blood of a sheretz, a creepy crawly thing, which includes reptiles and amphibians.

להכשיר את הזרעים – to be susceptible to become defiled such as the blood of cattle, as it is written concerning it (Deuteronomy 12:24): “You must not partake of it; you must pour it out on the ground like water.”

The blood of those who walk on two [legs] is like the blood of beasts in that it renders seeds susceptible [to impurity]. Interestingly, human beings are called “those who walk on two legs” (which invokes Orwellian images of pigs). In order for seeds (or anything that grows from the ground) to become susceptible to impurity, they must become wet by one of seven liquids, one of which is blood (see Terumot 11:2). The blood of human beings and beasts serves to render the seeds susceptible, but the blood of a sheretz (which is cold-blooded) does not.

ודם השרץ – that is to say, that the blood of those walking on two legs (i.e., human beings) is equivalent to the blood of unclean reptiles/moving creatures, which concerning them we are not liable because of the [prohibition of] blood. But specifically, if they warned him concerning [the] blood, we are not liable for the blood of unclean reptiles but if they warned him on account of the unclean reptiles, he is flogged since the blood of unclean reptiles is like its flesh.

And it is like the blood of a sheretz, in that one is not liable for eating it. While one is not allowed to eat the blood of a sheretz, one who does so is not liable for the biblical punishment of karet (if done intentionally) nor is he liable to bring a sin offering if done unwittingly. The same is true of human blood it is prohibited, but one who eats it is not liable for either karet or a sacrifice.

כוי – The Sages of Israel disputed on [what this is]; there are those who say that a כוי – is a forest ram; and there are those who say that it is [the offspring of] a he-goat [that copulated] with a female gazelle; and there are those who say that it is a [unique] creature unto itself. But the Sages did not decide if it is a beast of chase/deer or cattle.

A koy is in some ways like a wild animal (hayyah); in some ways it is like a domesticated animal (behemah); in some ways it is like both a behemah and a hayyah, and in some ways it is like neither a behemah nor a hayyah.
The laws regarding a domesticated beast (a behemah, such as a cow) and those governing a wild animal (a hayah, such as a deer) are different. The rest of the chapter discusses a koy an animal that is in some ways treated as if it was a domesticated beast and in some ways treated as if it was a wild animal. Because this animal doesn’t fit neatly into one category, how it works must be discussed. Besides, the rabbis just love to categorize and they especially love to talk about things that fall in-between two categories.
Some scholars say that a koy was a type of ram while others say it is the cross-breed between a male goat and a female deer. In any case, its precise identification is not crucial for understanding the Mishnah.
Today’s mishnah is just an introduction, one which doesn’t really provide any information. There is no commentary below.

טעון כיסוי כדם חיה – As a stringency’ and we do not recite a blessing on the act of covering with ashes the blood of killed animals, since it is a matter of doubt.

Introduction This mishnah notes ways in which a koy (see yesterday’s explanation) is similar to a hayyah, a wild animal.

ואין שוחטין אותו ביום טוב – Since it is prohibited to cover its blood, even though the ashes of the portable stove are ready for him; they are ready/prepared for something definitive, but not something doubtful.

How is it like a wild animal?
Its blood must be covered like the blood of a wild animal. When one slaughters a hayyah one must pour the blood out on the ground and cover it (Leviticus 17:13). Since a koy might be a hayyah, one should do the same with a koy.

בטומאת נבילה בחיה – For the fat of a pure cattle is pure, as we derive from “Fat from animals that died or were torn by beasts may be put to any use, but you must not eat it” (Leviticus 7:24). And because it is it is doubtfully cattle and its fat is pure; it is doubtfully a deer/beast of chase, and its fat is impure, therefore, its impurity is doubtful.

It may not be slaughtered on a festival. Preparation of food, including slaughtering, is permitted on Yom Tov, the first and last days of Pesah and Sukkot, and Shavuot. The problem with slaughtering a hayyah is that it is prohibited to dig up dirt in order to cover its blood. If there is already dirt set aside for this use, then one can slaughter a hayyah. However, when it comes to a koy, there is another problem--one cannot use even dirt that has already been dug up, because if the koy is actually a domesticated beast, then the dirt is muktzeh because it could not have been set aside to cover blood. Therefore, one cannot slaughter a koy on Yom Tov.

ואין פודין בו פטר חמור – lest it is an animal of chase/deer and the Torah stated (Exodus 34:20): “Burt the firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep; [if you do not redeem it, you must break its neck].” But this is doubtful whether it is a sheep or a deer.

If he slaughtered it, he should not cover its blood. If he nevertheless did slaughter a koy, he should not cover its blood. It might not be a hayyah, in which case covering its blood would not be necessary.

Its fat is impure like that of a wild animal, but its impurity is of doubtful status. A certain type of fat, called “helev,” is impure when it comes from a hayyah but not when it comes from an improperly slaughtered behemah. When it comes to the koy, we must be concerned lest it really is a hayyah, and therefore we need to treat its fat as if it was impure. However, the status of the impurity that it conveys is only “doubtful” because it may indeed be a behemah. This has certain ramifications that I do not wish to get into here.

One does not redeem with it the first-born of a donkey. A first-born donkey must be redeemed by giving the priest a first born sheep in its stead (Exodus 13:13). Although a koy might be related to a sheep, or perhaps be a type of sheep, it can’t be used to redeem a first born donkey, because it might be a wild animal.

חלבו אסור כחלב בהמה – like the abdominal fat of oxen, sheep or goats

Introduction Today we learn in what ways a koy is similar to a domesticated beast.

ואין חייבין עליו כרת – to bring a sin offering on his inadvertent error, and the same law applies that he is not to be flogged.

And how is [the koy] similar to a behemah (a domesticated?
Its fat ( is prohibited like the fat of a behemah, but one [who eats it] is not liable for karet. Leviticus 7:23-25 prohibits eating the helev, a type of fat, from a domesticated animal (other types of fat are permitted otherwise how would we get shmaltz?). Since a koy might actually be classified as a behemah, one cannot eat its helev. However, since it is not definite that a koy is a behemah, one who does eat the helev of a koy is not liable for the punishment of karet (I just used four Hebrew terms in one sentence I hope they were all clear).

ואינו נלקח בכסף מעשר לאכלו בירושלים – lest it is cattle. And we don’t purchase cattle for meat eaten for satisfying the appetite (i.e., secular meal of meat as opposed to sacrificial meats)from the tithe monies other than to offer peace-offerings.

It may not be bought with the money from second tithe to be eaten in Jerusalem. Second tithe is redeemed outside of Jerusalem, the money is brought to Jerusalem and there it is used to buy food or drink. If one wishes to buy meat he can buy a domesticated beast such as a sheep to use as a sacrifice or he can buy a hayyah to just eat. He can’t buy a koy to eat, because it might be a behemah and one can buy a behemah only to use it as a sacrifice. He also can’t buy a koy to use as a sacrifice because it is not fit for sacrifice as it might be a hayyah, which are never used for sacrifices.

וחייב בזרוע ובלחיים ובקיבה – and we include these from the Biblical verse, as it is written (Deuteronomy 18:3): “This then shall be the priests’ due from the people: Everyone who offers a sacrifice, whether it is an ox or a sheep, must give the shoulder, the cheeks, and the stomach to the priest.” The words “or a sheep”/אם שה – include the כוי/kind of bearded deer or antelope.

It is subject to [the priest’s share of] the shoulder, the two cheeks and the maw. Rabbi Eliezer exempts it because the burden of proof is upon the one who extracts from his neighbor. When one slaughters a domesticated animal as hullin (non-sacrificial), he has to give a priest the shoulder, the two cheeks and the maw. According to the first opinion, since a koy might be a behemah, when one slaughters a koy, he must give these to the priest. Rabbi Eliezer, disagrees and invokes the well-known principle that the burden of proof is upon the claimant. The priest would have to prove that a koy is a behemah in order to get these parts from an Israelite. Since he can’t, the Israelite need not give them to him.

שהמוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה – As the owner of the cattle said to the Kohen, I will bring proof that it is a kind of cattle and we will balance it out. And the Halakha follows Rabbi Eliezer.

לא כתב לו את הכוי – Even though he wrote both of them, he (i.e., the father) only had his mind on a [what was] a definite cow and a definite chase/deer. And Maimonides explained that if he (i.e., the father) had written (to his son) only his cattle, he (the son) did not acquire the kind of bearded deer or antelope/כוי , for when we say to him (the father), bring proof that it is cattle; for if he had written [to his son] only his chase/deer, we say to him, bring proof that it is chase/deer. And it appears from his words that if he wrote both of them, he acquired them, from whichever side you take.

Introduction The final mishnah of this chapter discusses ways that a koy is either different from both a behemah and a hayyah and ways that it is similar to both.

אם אמר הריני נזיר שזה חיה או בהמה – Whether he said I am a Nazirite if this is a deer, or whether he said I am a Nazirite if this is cattle, he is a Nazirite, because in the question of doubt as to whether one has violated a negative commandment, it is judged stringently. For even if he stated, Behold, I am a Nazirite if this is deer and cattle, or this neither deer nor cattle, this is a doubtful Nazirite [and judged stringently].

And how is [a koy] neither like a behemah nor like a hayyah?
It is forbidden because of kilayim [to yoke it] with either a behemah or a hayyah. It is forbidden to yoke together two animals of different species. Since a koy might be a behemah, it cannot be yoked with any hayyah, and since it might be a hayyah, it cannot be yoked together with any other behemah.

One who deeds his son his behemah and his hayyah he has not [thereby] given him the koy. If one writes a will to his son, bequeathing to him his behemot and his hayyot, he has not bequeathed to him his koy, because a koy is neither a behemah or a hayyah.

If one says, “I will become a nazirite if this is [not] a hayyah or a behemah”, he is a nazirite. In all other ways it is like a behemah and a hayyah: The person here makes a bet that an animal approaching is either a behemah or a hayyah. If he loses his bet, he will be a nazirite. Although this would seem to be a hard bet to lose, somehow he does lose the bet, for a koy is indeed, neither a behemah nor a hayyah.

It requires slaughtering ( like them both; The mishnah now begins to list ways in which a koy has the same rules that apply to a behemah and to a hayyah. The first is that one who wishes to eat a koy must slaughter it in the appropriate manner.

It carries carrion impurity; Carrion (nevelah) is an animal that was not slaughtered in a proper manner. The nevelah of a kosher animal is impure, and since the koy is kosher, its nevelah is impure.

And to it applies the law relating to a limb of a living being like them both. It is forbidden to eat the limb of a living animal. This law applies only to beasts and wild animals but not to reptiles and other non-mammals. It applies to the koy in the same way that it applies to all behemot and hayyot.