## Temurah Daf 2a

###### Temurah 2a:1
[Temurah 2a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:1)

מַתְנִי׳ **הַכֹּל מְמִירִין**, אֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים. לֹא שֶׁאָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהָמִיר, אֶלָּא שֶׁאִם הֵמִיר — מוּמָר, וְסוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **Everyone substitutes** a non-sacred animal for a consecrated animal, **both men and women.** That is **not** to say **that it is permitted for a person to effect substitution; rather,** it means **that if one substituted** a non-sacred animal for a consecrated animal, **the substitution takes effect,** and the non-sacred animal becomes consecrated, and the consecrated animal remains sacred. **And** the one who substituted the non-sacred animal **incurs the forty [*sofeg et ha’arba’im*]** lashes.


###### Temurah 2a:2
[Temurah 2a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:2)

**גְּמָ׳** הָא גוּפָא קַשְׁיָא: אָמְרַתְּ ״הַכֹּל מְמִירִין״ — לְכַתְּחִילָּה, וַהֲדַר תָּנֵי ״לֹא שֶׁאָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהָמִיר אֶלָּא שֶׁאִם הֵמִיר מוּמָר״ — דִּיעֲבַד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara **notes** an apparent contradiction in the mishna: **This** mishna **itself** is **difficult: You say** that **everyone substitutes** a non-sacred animal for a consecrated one, which indicates that substitution may be performed ***ab initio*. And then you teach:** That is **not** to say **that it is permitted for a person to effect substitution; rather,** it means only **that if one** unlawfully **substituted** a non-sacred animal for a consecrated animal, **the substitution takes effect,** indicating that it is effective only **after the fact.**


###### Temurah 2a:3
[Temurah 2a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:3)

וְתִיסְבְּרָא ״הַכֹּל מְמִירִין״ — לְכַתְּחִילָּה? אַדְּקַשְׁיָא לָךְ מִמַּתְנִיתִין, תִּיקְשֵׁי לָךְ קְרָא! דִּכְתִיב ״לֹא יַחֲלִיפֶנּוּ וְלֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **And can you understand** the phrase: **Everyone substitutes,** as indicating that substitution may be performed ***ab initio*?** If so, **before the mishna poses a difficulty for you, the verse should pose a difficulty for you, as it is written: “He shall not alter it, nor substitute it”** (Leviticus 27:10). The verse clearly states that it is prohibited to perform substitution.


###### Temurah 2a:4
[Temurah 2a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:4)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: הָכִי קָתָנֵי — הַכֹּל מַתְפִּיסִין בִּתְמוּרָה, אֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים, לֹא שֶׁאָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהָמִיר, שֶׁאִם הֵמִיר — מוּמָר, וְסוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rav Yehuda says: This** is what the mishna **is teaching: Everyone can apply** the status of a consecrated animal to a non-sacred animal **by** the act of **substitution, both men and women.** But that is **not** to say **that it is permitted for a person to effect substitution, as, if** one **did effect substitution,** the **substitution takes effect** only after the fact, **and he incurs the forty** lashes.


###### Temurah 2a:5
[Temurah 2a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:5)

הַכׇּל לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מַאי? לְאֵיתוֹיֵי יוֹרֵשׁ, וּדְלָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: Everyone substitutes a non-sacred animal for a consecrated animal. The Gemara asks: **What** does the comprehensive term: **Everyone,** serve **to include?** The Gemara answers: It serves **to include an inheritor, and** accordingly, this mishna is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Temurah 2a:6
[Temurah 2a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:6)

דִּתְנַן: יוֹרֵשׁ סוֹמֵךְ, יוֹרֵשׁ מֵמִיר — דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: יוֹרֵשׁ אֵינוֹ סוֹמֵךְ, וְיוֹרֵשׁ אֵינוֹ מֵמִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As we learned** in a *baraita*: **An inheritor** who inherited a consecrated animal **places** his **hands** on the head of the offering when he sacrifices it as would the original owner, and likewise **an inheritor is able to substitute** a non-sacred animal for the consecrated one that he inherited. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: An inheritor does not place** his **hands** on the head of the offering when he sacrifices it, **and an inheritor does not substitute** a non-sacred animal for a consecrated one that he inherited. These acts may be performed only by the one who initially consecrated the animal. The mishna indicates that an inheritor is able to effect substitution, contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.


###### Temurah 2a:7
[Temurah 2a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:7)

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה? — יָלֵיף תְּחִילַּת הֶקְדֵּשׁ מִסּוֹף הֶקְדֵּשׁ: מָה סוֹף הֶקְדֵּשׁ — יוֹרֵשׁ אֵינוֹ סוֹמֵךְ, אַף תְּחִילַּת הֶקְדֵּשׁ — יוֹרֵשׁ אֵינוֹ מֵמִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yehuda?** The Gemara explains: **He derives** the *halakhot* of **the** animal’s **initial consecration from the end of the consecration,** i.e., the sacrifice of the consecrated animal, as follows: **Just as** with regard to **the end of a consecrated** animal, **an inheritor does not place** his **hands** on the head of the offering before slaughter, **so too,** with regard to **the initial consecration, an inheritor does not effect substitution** to consecrate the animal.


###### Temurah 2a:8
[Temurah 2a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:8)

וּסְמִיכָה גּוּפַהּ מְנָלַן? תְּלָת ״קׇרְבָּנוֹ״ כְּתִיבִי: חַד — ״קׇרְבָּנוֹ״ וְלֹא קׇרְבַּן גּוֹי, וְחַד — ״קׇרְבָּנוֹ״ וְלֹא קׇרְבַּן חֲבֵירוֹ, וְחַד — ״קׇרְבָּנוֹ״ וְלֹא קׇרְבַּן אָבִיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And from where do we** derive the *halakha* of **placing hands itself?** The Gemara answers: The term **“his offering” is written three** times in the passage discussing a peace offering, in connection with the placing of hands (Leviticus 3:2, 8, 12). **One** instance teaches that the requirement of placing hands applies to **his offering but not the offering of a gentile. And one** instance teaches that it applies to **his offering but not the offering of another,** as only the owner places his hands on the offering. **And one** instance teaches that it applies to **his offering but not the offering of his father,** as an inheritor does not place his hands on an offering he inherited.


###### Temurah 2a:9
[Temurah 2a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:9)

וּלְרַבִּי מֵאִיר דְּאָמַר יוֹרֵשׁ סוֹמֵךְ, וְהָכְתִיב ״קׇרְבָּנוֹ״! הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְרַבּוֹת כׇּל בַּעֲלֵי חוֹבְרִין לִסְמִיכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But according to Rabbi Meir, who said** that **an inheritor places** his **hands** on the head of the offering when he sacrifices it, **isn’t** the term **“his offering” written** in the verse? How does he interpret the third instance of that term? The Gemara explains: **He requires that** term **to include all joint owners [*ba’alei ḥoverin*] in** the *halakha* of **placing hands,** to teach that they all must place their hands on the offering’s head.


###### Temurah 2a:10
[Temurah 2a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:10)

וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, בַּעֲלֵי חוֹבְרִין לִסְמִיכָה לֵית לֵיהּ. מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּהָא לָא מְיַחַד קׇרְבָּן דִּידְהוּ. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לְעוֹלָם אִית לֵיהּ, וְקׇרְבַּן גּוֹי וְקׇרְבַּן חֲבֵירוֹ מֵחַד קְרָא נָפְקָא, דְּאִיַּיתַּר לֵיהּ חַד לְבַעֲלֵי חוֹבְרִין לִסְמִיכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **And** as for **Rabbi Yehuda, he does not accept** that **joint owners** are included in the requirement of **placing hands. What is the reason** for this? The reason is **that their offering is not specific** to one person and is therefore not included in the term “his offering.” **And if you wish, say** instead that **actually, he accepts** that one instance of “his offering” serves to include joint owners, **and he derives** both the *halakha* of **the offering of a gentile and** that of **the offering of another from one verse,** so **that one** instance of the term “his offering” **remains for him to** include **joint owners in** the requirement of **placing hands** on the head of an offering, and the third instance serves to teach that an inheritor does not place hands on the offering of his father.


###### Temurah 2a:11
[Temurah 2a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/2a:11)

וְרַבִּי מֵאִיר דְּאָמַר יוֹרֵשׁ מֵמִיר, מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר לָךְ: ״אִם הָמֵר יָמִיר״ לְרַבּוֹת הַיּוֹרֵשׁ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what is the reasoning** of **Rabbi Meir, who said** that **an inheritor** can **effect substitution?** The Gemara answers: Rabbi Meir could **say to you** that the repetition of the verb in the verse: “And **if he shall at all substitute [*hamer yamir*]** animal for animal” (Leviticus 27:10), serves **to include the inheritor.**