## Bekhorot Daf 60b

###### Bekhorot 60b:1
[Bekhorot 60b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:1)

קָרָא לַתְּשִׁיעִי ״עֲשִׂירִי״, וְלָעֲשִׂירִי ״תְּשִׁיעִי״, וְלָאַחַד עָשָׂר ״עֲשִׂירִי״. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מִנַּיִן שֶׁאִם קָרָא לַתְּשִׁיעִי ״עֲשִׂירִי״, וְלָעֲשִׂירִי ״תְּשִׁיעִי״, וְלָאַחַד עָשָׂר ״עֲשִׂירִי״, שֶׁשְּׁלָשְׁתָּן מְקוּדָּשִׁין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: If he mistakenly **called** the **ninth: Tenth, and** the **tenth: Ninth, and the eleventh: Tenth,** all three are sacred, although each has a different halakhic status. The Gemara cites a relevant *baraita*: **The Sages taught: From where** is it derived **that if** one mistakenly **called the ninth** animal: **Tenth, and the tenth** animal: **Ninth, and the eleventh** animal: **Tenth, that** all **three of them are sanctified?**


###### Bekhorot 60b:2
[Bekhorot 60b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:2)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְכׇל מַעְשַׂר בָּקָר וָצֹאן כֹּל אֲשֶׁר יַעֲבוֹר תַּחַת הַשָּׁבֶט הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ״, יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מְרַבֶּה אַף שְׁמִינִי וּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The verse states: “And all the tithe of the herd or the flock, whatever passes under the rod, the tenth shall be sacred to the Lord”** (Leviticus 27:32). This indicates that the tenth animal that passes under the rod is imbued with sanctity, in addition to any animal that the owner designates as the tenth. One **might** have thought **that I include even** the **eighth** animal **or** the **twelfth** animal, if they were mistakenly designated as the tenth.


###### Bekhorot 60b:3
[Bekhorot 60b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:3)

אָמְרַתְּ: הוֹאִיל וְהוּא קָדוֹשׁ, וְטָעוּתוֹ מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת, מָה הוּא אֵינוֹ מְקוּדָּשׁ אֶלָּא בְּסָמוּךְ, אַף טָעוּתוֹ אֵינָהּ מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת אֶלָּא בְּסָמוּךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**You said** in response that **since** the tenth animal **is sanctified and** the animal that he designated by **mistake** as the tenth **is sanctified,** their statuses should be compared: **Just as** the tenth animal **is sanctified only with** an animal that was **close** to the number ten, i.e., it itself was the tenth, **so too,** an animal that was designated by **mistake is sanctified only if it is close** to the number ten, i.e., if it is the ninth or eleventh, but not if it is the eighth or the twelfth.


###### Bekhorot 60b:4
[Bekhorot 60b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:4)

וְהָתַנְיָא: מָה הוּא מְיוּחָד, אַף טָעוּתוֹ מְיוּחֶדֶת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches that if one mistakenly designated the ninth and the eleventh animals as the tenth they are both sanctified. The Gemara raises a difficulty: **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that **just as** the tenth animal **itself is unique,** i.e., it is only one, **so too,** an animal that was designated by **mistake is unique,** i.e., only one additional animal receives the sanctity, but not both the ninth and the eleventh?


###### Bekhorot 60b:5
[Bekhorot 60b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:5)

תָּאנֵי תַּנָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הָא מַנִּי? רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: לְעוֹלָם אֵין אַחַד עָשָׂר קָדוֹשׁ עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁתּוֹק בַּתְּשִׁיעִי, וְיִקְרָא לָעֲשִׂירִי ״תְּשִׁיעִי״, וְלָאַחַד עָשָׂר ״עֲשִׂירִי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **a *tanna* taught before Rabbi Yoḥanan:** In accordance with **whose** opinion **is this** *baraita*? **It is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: The eleventh** animal **is never sanctified unless** the owner **is silent** when **the ninth** animal leaves the pen, i.e., he does not designate it as the tenth, **and he** subsequently **calls the tenth** animal the **ninth and the eleventh** animal the **tenth.** But if he had already designated the ninth animal as the tenth, the eleventh cannot become sanctified.


###### Bekhorot 60b:6
[Bekhorot 60b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:6)

סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר: טָעוּת מַעֲשֵׂר תְּמוּרָה הָוֵי, וְסָבַר לַהּ כַּאֲבוּהּ, דְּאָמַר: אֵין מֵימֵר חוֹזֵר וּמֵימֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further explains that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who says:** When the owner makes **a mistake** in designating animal **tithe,** e.g., if one designates the ninth animal as the tenth, the designated animal has the status of **a substitute** animal. **And** Rabbi Elazar also **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **his father,** Rabbi Shimon, **who says: One cannot effect substitution** on one animal by substituting it for a specific offering, **and again effect substitution,** on another animal, by substituting it for the same offering, and if one attempts to do so the second animal does not become consecrated. Therefore, if one mistakenly called the ninth animal the tenth, that ninth animal has sanctity; but if he also calls the eleventh animal the tenth, this designation has no effect.


###### Bekhorot 60b:7
[Bekhorot 60b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:7)

אָמַר רָבָא: יָצְאוּ שְׁנַיִם בַּתְּשִׁיעִי, קְרָאָן ״תְּשִׁיעִי״ — עֲשִׂירִי וְחוּלִּין מְעוֹרָבִין זֶה בָּזֶה, עֲשִׂירִי מֵאֵלָיו קָדוֹשׁ, לַתְּשִׁיעִי ״תְּשִׁיעִי״ קָא קָרֵי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava says:** If **two** animals **emerged** from the pen together **as the ninth,** and **he called them** both the **ninth,** then the **tenth,** i.e., the tithe, **and a non-sacred** animal **are** considered **intermingled with each other.** Rava elaborates: The **tenth is sanctified of its own** accord, despite the fact that he called it the ninth. And the animal that came out **ninth** is non-sacred, as it came out ninth and **he called it the ninth.** Since there is no way to determine which animal is which, neither of them can be brought as an offering, and they must both be left to graze until they develop a blemish.


###### Bekhorot 60b:8
[Bekhorot 60b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:8)

קְרָאָן ״עֲשִׂירִי״, עֲשִׂירִי וּתְשִׁיעִי מְעוֹרָבִין זֶה בָּזֶה. מַאי טַעְמָא? ״עֲשִׂירִי״ קָא קָרֵי לְהוּ לְתַרְוַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If two animals emerged from the pen together as the ninth, and **he called them** both the **tenth,** then the **tenth,** i.e., the tithe, **and** the **ninth** animal, which he designated as the tenth, **are intermingled with each other. What is the reason? He called both of them** the **tenth.** The tenth has the sanctity of the tithe while the ninth was designated as the tenth, and therefore may not be eaten until it develops a blemish. Since there is no way to determine which animal is which, neither can be sacrificed, but they must both be left to graze until they develop a blemish.


###### Bekhorot 60b:9
[Bekhorot 60b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:9)

יָצְאוּ שְׁנַיִם בָּעֲשִׂירִי וּקְרָאָן ״עֲשִׂירִי״, עֲשִׂירִי וְאַחַד עָשָׂר מְעוֹרָבִין זֶה בָּזֶה. קְרָאָן ״אַחַד עָשָׂר״, עֲשִׂירִי וְחוּלִּין מְעוֹרָבִין זֶה בָּזֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **two** animals **emerged** from the pen together **as the tenth, and he called them** both the **tenth,** then the **tenth, and** the **eleventh** animal, which he designated as the tenth, **are intermingled with each other.** If **he called them** both the **eleventh, the tenth and a non-sacred** animal **are intermingled with each other.**


###### Bekhorot 60b:10
[Bekhorot 60b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:10)

הָא תּוּ לְמָה לִי? הַיְינוּ הָךְ! הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: דְּכֹל בַּת אַחַת תַּרְוַויְיהוּ קָא קָדְשִׁי, וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּלֹא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם ״עֲשִׂירִי״ הֵימֶנּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need **this additional** case? **This** reasoning for the *halakha* in the case where the animals emerged together as the tenth is **identical** to **that** of the first case, where the animals emerged together as the ninth. The Gemara answers: **This** latter clause **teaches us that** in **every** case where two animals emerge **as one they are both sanctified, and** this is the *halakha* **even though the name** of the **tenth was not removed from** the tenth animal. This situation is not included in the principle of the mishna: In any situation where the name of the tenth was not removed from the tenth animal, the eleventh that was called tenth is not consecrated.


###### Bekhorot 60b:11
[Bekhorot 60b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:11)

יָתֵיב רַב כָּהֲנָא וְקָאָמַר לֵיהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְרַב כָּהֲנָא: וַהֲלֹא לֹא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם ״עֲשִׂירִי״ הֵימֶנּוּ, וּתְנַן זֶה הַכְּלָל: כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם ״עֲשִׂירִי״ הֵימֶנּוּ — אֵין אַחַד עָשָׂר מְקוּדָּשׁ! הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּזֶה אַחַר זֶה, אֲבָל בְּבַת אַחַת — תַּרְוַיְיהוּ קָא קָדְשִׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rav Kahana sat and recited this *halakha*. Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana: But the name** of the **tenth has not been removed from it. And didn’t we learn** in the mishna that **this is the principle:** In **any** situation **where the name** of the **tenth was not removed from** the tenth animal, the **eleventh** that was called tenth **is not consecrated?** Rav Kahana replied to Rav Ashi: **This statement,** that the designation of tenth must be removed, applies only when the animals leave the pen **one after the other. But** if two animals emerge from the pen **at the same time,** and he simultaneously designated the tenth and eleventh as tithe, **both of them are sanctified.**


###### Bekhorot 60b:12
[Bekhorot 60b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:12)

זֶה אַחַר זֶה — בְּהֶדְיָא קָתָנֵי לַהּ: קָרָא לַתְּשִׁיעִי ״עֲשִׂירִי״, וְלָעֲשִׂירִי ״עֲשִׂירִי״, וְלָאַחַד עָשָׂר ״עֲשִׂירִי״ — אֵין אַחַד עָשָׂר מְקוּדָּשׁ. ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״ לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מַאי? לָאו לְאֵיתוֹיֵי בְּבַת אַחַת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: How can the mishna be explained as referring only to a case where the animals left the pen **one after the other?** After all, the mishna **teaches explicitly:** If **one called the ninth** animal: **Tenth, and the tenth: Tenth, and the eleventh: Tenth, the eleventh is not consecrated.** This is the principle: In any situation where the name of the tenth was not removed from the tenth animal, the eleventh that was called tenth is not consecrated. **What** does the phrase: **This is the principle,** serve **to include?** Does it not serve **to include** a case where the tenth and eleventh animals leave the pen **at the same time?** And if so, it is teaching that in such a case the eleventh animal is not sanctified.


###### Bekhorot 60b:13
[Bekhorot 60b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:13)

לָא, לְאֵיתוֹיֵי יָצָא עֲשִׂירִי וְלֹא דִּבֵּר, דְּהָא לֹא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם ״עֲשִׂירִי״ הֵימֶנּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Kahana would answer: **No;** it serves not to include that case, but **to include** a situation where **the tenth** animal **emerged** from the pen **and** the owner **did not speak** at all, and when the eleventh animal came out he designated it as the tenth. Therefore, the eleventh animal is not sanctified, **as he did not remove the name** of the **tenth from** the tenth animal. But if the tenth and eleventh animals came out at the same time, and he designated them both as the tenth, they are both sanctified.


###### Bekhorot 60b:14
[Bekhorot 60b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:14)

דְּאִי לָא תֵּימָא הָכִי, הָא דְּתַנְיָא: יָצְאוּ שְׁנַיִם בָּעֲשִׂירִי, וְלֹא קָדַם אֶחָד מֵהֶן אֶת חֲבֵירוֹ, וּקְרָאָן ״עֲשִׂירִי״ — עֲשִׂירִי וְאַחַד עָשָׂר מְעוֹרָבִין זֶה בָּזֶה, וַהֲלֹא לֹא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם עֲשִׂירִי הֵימֶנּוּ! אֶלָּא לָאו מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמְרִינַן: כֹּל בְּבַת אַחַת תַּרְוַיְיהוּ קָא קָדְשִׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara adds that this must be the case, **because if you do not say this** explanation of the mishna there is a problem with **that which is taught** in a *baraita*: If **two** animals **emerged** from the pen together **as the tenth, and one** did **not** come out **before the other, and he called them** both the **tenth,** the **tenth and eleventh** animals **are intermingled with each other.** One is sacred with the sanctity of the animal tithe while the other is a peace offering, but there is no way to determine which animal is which. The Gemara explains the problem here: How can this *baraita* be reconciled with the mishna? **He did not remove the name** of the **tenth from** the tenth animal. **Rather, is it not due to** the fact **that we say:** In **any** case where two animals come out of the pen **at the same time both of them are sanctified?**


###### Bekhorot 60b:15
[Bekhorot 60b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:15)

אִי מִשּׁוּם הָא לָא אִירְיָא, הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? דִּקְדֵים חַד מִינַּיְיהוּ וְאַפֵּיק לְרֵישֵׁיהּ, וְקַרְיֵיהּ ״אַחַד עָשָׂר״, וַהֲדַר אִיעָרוּב וּנְפוּק בַּהֲדָדֵי, וּקְרִינְהוּ ״עֲשִׂירִי״, דְּהָא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם עֲשִׂירִי הֵימֶנּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi would rebut this claim: **If it is due to that** reason **there is no** conclusive **argument. Here we are dealing with** a case **where one of** the two animals came out **before** the other **and brought its head out** from the pen, **and** the owner **called** that animal the **eleventh, and afterward it became intermingled** with the other animals, **and** the last two animals **came out together, and he called them** both the **tenth** animal. In such a case both animals are sanctified, **as** the **name** of the **tenth was removed from** the tenth animal when he mistakenly called it the eleventh animal.


###### Bekhorot 60b:16
[Bekhorot 60b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:16)

וְהָא ״לֹא קָדַם״ קָתָנֵי! מַאי ״לֹא קָדַם״? דַּהֲדַר אִיעָרוּב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to this explanation: How can one interpret the *baraita* as referring to a case where one animal put its head out before the other? **But isn’t it taught** explicitly in the *baraita*: And **one** did **not** come out **before** the other? The Gemara answers: **What** does the *baraita* mean when it states: And **one** did **not** come out **before** the other? It means **that it** did not come out completely, but **returned and became intermingled** with the other animals.


###### Bekhorot 60b:17
[Bekhorot 60b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:17)

וּכְמַאן? דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי, דְּאִי רַבִּי — הָאָמַר: ״אַחַד עָשָׂר״ לָא הָוֵי עֲקִירָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And in accordance with whose** opinion is this *baraita* taught? It is **not** taught **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi. **As, if** it reflects the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi there is a difficulty. **Doesn’t** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **say:** If one called the tenth animal the **eleventh, it is not** considered **a removal** of the name of the tenth from the tenth animal?


###### Bekhorot 60b:18
[Bekhorot 60b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:18)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי, כִּי אָמַר רַבִּי הֵיכָא דְּאִית לֵיהּ בְּהֵמוֹת טוּבָא, דְּאָמְרִינַן: חַד עִישּׂוּרָא קָאָמַר, הָכָא דְּלֵית לֵיהּ בְּהֵמוֹת טְפֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **You** may **even say** that the *baraita* is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, as **when Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **said** his statement he was referring only to a case **where** the owner **has many animals** to tithe. The reason is **that we say** that when he said: *Aḥad asar*, eleventh, his intention was to **say: *Ḥad issura*,** one group of ten, i.e., that this tenth animal completes one set of ten animals, not that it is the eleventh. **Here** it is referring to a situation **where he does not have many animals** to tithe, and therefore he could not have been speaking of more than one set of ten, in which case Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi agrees that calling it the eleventh removes its status as the tenth.


###### Bekhorot 60b:19
[Bekhorot 60b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:19)

מַאי רַבִּי? דְּתַנְיָא: קָרָא לַעֲשִׂירִי ״אַחַד עָשָׂר״, וְלָאַחַד עָשָׂר ״עֲשִׂירִי״ — אֵין אַחַד עָשָׂר קָדוֹשׁ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַחַד עָשָׂר קָדוֹשׁ. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי: כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא נֶעֱקַר שֵׁם עֲשִׂירִי הֵימֶנּוּ — אֵין אַחַד עָשָׂר קָדוֹשׁ. אָמַר רָבָא: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? כְּגוֹן דְּאִית לֵיהּ בְּהֵמוֹת טוּבָא, דְּאָמְרִינַן: חַד עִישּׂוּרָא קָאָמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: To **what** statement of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi is the Gemara referring? **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: If one **called the tenth** animal the **eleventh and the eleventh** animal the **tenth,** the **eleventh** animal is **not sanctified;** this is **the statement of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi. **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says:** The **eleventh** animal **is sanctified. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **said a principle: As long as the name** of the **tenth has not been removed from** the tenth animal, the **eleventh** animal **is not sanctified.** To clarify why the eleventh animal is not sanctified according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi even though the name of the tenth was removed from the tenth animal when it was called the eleventh, **Rava said: Here we are dealing with** a case **where he has many animals,** and the reason is **that we say** that when he said: *Aḥad asar*, his intention was to **say: *Ḥad issura*.**


###### Bekhorot 60b:20
[Bekhorot 60b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:20)

יָצְאוּ שְׁנַיִם בָּעֲשִׂירִי, תָּנֵי חֲדָא: יִרְעוּ, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: יִקְרְיבוּ, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: יָמוּתוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara returns to the earlier discussion. The *baraita* teaches: If **two** animals **emerged** from the pen together **as the tenth,** and one did not come out before the other, and he called them both the tenth, the tenth and eleventh animals are intermingled with each other. The Gemara notes that there is apparently a dispute between *tanna’im* as to how these animals must be treated. **One *tanna*** taught that both animals must be left to **graze** until they develop a blemish, and then they may be eaten by the owner. **And one *tanna*** taught that both animals must **be sacrificed. And** it **is taught** in **another** *baraita* that both animals **must die.**


###### Bekhorot 60b:21
[Bekhorot 60b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/60b:21)

לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא דְּתַנְיָא יִרְעוּ — רַבָּנַן הִיא, דְּאָמְרִי: אֵין מְבִיאִין קָדָשִׁים לְבֵית הַפְּסוּל״

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara resolves the apparent contradiction. It is **not difficult: This** ruling, of the *tanna* **who taught** that both animals must be left to **graze** until they develop a blemish, **is** in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis, who say: One may not bring sacrificial** animals **to a situation** where the time in which they may be eaten is decreased, thereby increasing **the** likelihood of **disqualification.** If both animals were to be sacrificed they would have to be eaten in accordance with the stringencies of both the animal tithe offering and the peace offering. They would have to be eaten within two days, like a peace offering, while the breast and the thigh would be given to the priests, as in the case of an animal tithe offering. Since only priests may eat those portions it is possible that they would be unable to eat them within the permitted time, and the remaining meat would become disqualified.