## Temurah Daf 8b

###### Temurah 8b:1
[Temurah 8b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:1)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לָא, לְעוֹלָם בְּתָם, וּבִבְכוֹר בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא דְּאָמַר: אִם בָּאוּ תְּמִימִין יִקְרְבוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye says: No, actually,** the *baraita* is referring **to an unblemished** animal when the Temple is standing, but it is speaking **of a firstborn** offering **outside of Eretz** Yisrael, **and it is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon, who said: If unblemished** firstborn offerings **came** from outside of Eretz Yisrael, **they may be sacrificed** on the altar. This language indicates that there is no obligation to sacrifice such an animal, as people did not generally bring their firstborn offerings from outside Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, a priest is able to acquire it even when it is unblemished. Firstborn offerings from Eretz Yisrael, by contrast, cannot be acquired by the priests.


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

מֵיתִיבִי: אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי: מָה לִי אִם אֵינוֹ מֵימֵר בְּחַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין זָכִין בָּהֶן בְּחַיֵּיהֶן, תֹּאמַר בִּבְכוֹר שֶׁזָּכִין בְּחַיָּיו. בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? אִילֵימָא בְּבַעַל מוּם — הָא דּוּמְיָא דְּחַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם קָאָמַר, אֶלָּא לָאו בְּתָם, וְקָתָנֵי זָכִין בּוֹ בְּחַיָּיו!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara **raises an objection** from the mishna: **Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said to him: What** is this comparison **for me? If** a priest **does not substitute for a sin offering and a guilt offering, which** priests **do not acquire during** the animals’ **lifetimes, will you say** the same **with regard to a firstborn, which** priests **acquire during** the animal’s **lifetime? What are we dealing with** in the mishna? **If we say** that it is referring **to a blemished** animal, **isn’t** the mishna **saying** that the firstborn offering is **similar to a sin offering and a guilt offering,** which the priests acquire only unblemished? **Rather, is it not** referring **to unblemished** animals? **And it** nevertheless **teaches:** Which priests **acquire during** the animal’s **lifetime.**


###### Temurah 8b:3
[Temurah 8b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:3)

אָמַר רָבִינָא: הָא נָמֵי בִּבְכוֹר בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא, דְּאָמַר: אִם בָּאוּ תְּמִימִים — יִקְרְבוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said: This** mishna **too** is referring **to a firstborn** offering **outside of Eretz** Yisrael, **and it is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon, who said: If unblemished** firstborn offerings **came** from outside of Eretz Yisrael, **they may be sacrificed** on the altar. The priests do not acquire firstborn offerings from Eretz Yisrael.


###### Temurah 8b:4
[Temurah 8b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:4)

לֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי: בְּכוֹר, בְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים — עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, בְּבֵית הַכֹּהֵן — אֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּא לִידֵי כֹהֵן — אֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that acquisition of the firstborn offerings by the priests is **the subject of** a dispute between ***tanna’im*.** The *baraita* states: In the case of **a firstborn** offering, when it is **in the house of** its **owner,** who did not yet give it to a priest, its owner **can render** another animal **a substitute** for it. Once it is **in the house of the priest,** its owner **cannot render a substitute** for it. **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Once it has entered the possession of the priest,** its owner **cannot render a substitute** for it.


###### Temurah 8b:5
[Temurah 8b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:5)

הַיְינוּ תַּנָּא קַמָּא! מַאי לָאו הָכִי קָאָמַר: בְּבֵית כֹּהֵן — הוּא עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה, וְאֵין בַּעַל עוֹשֶׂה תְּמוּרָה, אַלְמָא אִית לֵיהּ לְכֹהֵן זְכִיָּיה בְּגַוֵּויהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Apparently, the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar **is** identical to that of **the first *tanna*.** What is their dispute? **What, is it not** correct that **this** is what the first *tanna* **is saying:** Once it is **in the house,** i.e., possession, **of the priest,** the priest **can render a substitute** for it, **but** the **owner cannot render a substitute** for it, as the priest has acquired it; while Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds that once it enters the possession of the priest, neither of them can render a substitute with it. **Apparently,** the first *tanna* **holds** that **the priest has** the right of **acquisition to** an unblemished firstborn offering when the Temple is standing.


###### Temurah 8b:6
[Temurah 8b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:6)

לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, הָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: The opinion of the first *tanna* is **not difficult;** one can say that the dispute in the *baraita* concerns a firstborn offering outside of Eretz Yisrael, while those from Eretz Yisrael are not acquired by the priests. And **this** opinion of the first *tanna* accords with the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri** in the mishna above, and **that** opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar accords with the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva** in that mishna.


###### Temurah 8b:7
[Temurah 8b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:7)

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא כֹּהֵן לְכֹהֵן, אֲבָל כֹּהֵן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל — אָסוּר. מַאי טַעְמָא? דִּלְמָא אָזֵיל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְשָׁדֵי בֵּיהּ מוּמָא, וּמַמְטֵי לְחָכָם, וְאוֹמֵר לוֹ: ״בְּכוֹר זֶה נָתַן לִי כֹּהֵן בְּמוּמוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara earlier (7b) cited a mishna (*Ma’aser Sheni* 1:2) which states that a firstborn offering may be sold unblemished only while it is alive. **Rav Ḥisda says:** The Sages **taught** this *halakha* **only** with regard to **a priest** selling **to a priest, but** with regard to **a priest** selling it **to an Israelite,** it is **prohibited** even when the animal is alive. **What is the reason?** Since an Israelite can consume a firstborn animal only if it is blemished, there is a concern that **perhaps the Israelite will go and inflict a blemish on** the firstborn offering **and bring** it **to a halakhic authority** to attain permission to eat it, **and** he will **say to him: A priest gave me this firstborn** offering **when it** was already **blemished.**


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

וּמִי שָׁרֵי חָכָם הָכִי? וְהָא אָמַר רַב: אֵין רוֹאִין בְּכוֹר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן כֹּהֵן עִמּוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And may a halakhic authority permit** the animal in a case **such as this? But didn’t Rav say:** A halakhic authority **may not look at a firstborn** offering brought **by an Israelite** to determine if it has the type of permanent blemish allowing it to be slaughtered **unless a priest** is **with him,** out of concern that the Israelite will keep the blemished animal for himself without performing the mitzva of giving it to a priest? If so, one can demand that the priest who sold him the animal must be present, and this should prevent the Israelite from lying about the blemish.


###### Temurah 8b:9
[Temurah 8b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:9)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל אָסוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּכֹהֵן הַמְסַיֵּיעַ בְּבֵית הַגֳּרָנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, said: This is the reason why** it is **prohibited** for a priest to sell an unblemished firstborn offering to **an Israelite: Because** this **looks like a priest who assists at the threshing floor** in order to receive *teruma* from an Israelite. Unblemished firstborn offerings have a low purchase price, as the owner must wait for it to become blemished before eating it. It might appear that the priest sold the animal to an Israelite at a discount in order to receive future firstborns from him.


###### Temurah 8b:10
[Temurah 8b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:10)

מָר זוּטְרָא אִיקְּלַע לְבֵי רַב אָשֵׁי. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: לִטְעוֹם מָר מִידֵּי. אַיְיתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ בִּישְׂרָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לֵיכוֹל מָר, דְּמַיבְרֵי מִשּׁוּם דְּבוּכְרָא הוּא. מְנָא לְכוּ הָא? אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: דְּזַבֵּן לַן פְּלוֹנִי כֹּהֵן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Mar Zutra arrived at the home of Rav Ashi.** Those present **said to him: Let** the **Master taste some** food. **They brought meat before him.** The one who placed the meat before him **said: Let** the **Master eat, as** this meat **is** particularly **healthful, because it is a firstborn.** Mar Zutra asked: **From where did you** receive **this** firstborn animal? **They said to him:** It is an animal **that so-and-so** the **priest sold to us.**


###### Temurah 8b:11
[Temurah 8b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:11)

אֲמַר לְהוּ: לָא סְבִירָא לְכוּ הָא דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּכֹהֵן הַמְסַיֵּיעַ בְּבֵית הַגֳּרָנוֹת? אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: לָא סְבִירָא לַן, דַּאֲנַן מִיזְבָּן קָא זָבְנִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Mar Zutra **said to them: Do you not hold** like **that which Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, said,** that Israelites may not receive an unblemished firstborn offering from a priest **because it looks like a priest who assists at the threshing floor? They said to** Mar Zutra: **We hold** that this is **not** a concern, **as we purchased** it for its fair market value, and did not receive it at a discount. Therefore, there is no appearance of impropriety.


###### Temurah 8b:12
[Temurah 8b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:12)

אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְלָא סְבִירָא לְכוּ הָדִתְנַן: עַד כַּמָּה יִשְׂרָאֵל חַיָּיב לִיטַּפֵּל בַּבְּכוֹר? בַּדַּקָּה — שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם, ובגסה — חמשים יום. וְאִם אָמַר לוֹ: ״תְּנֵהוּ לִי בְּתוֹךְ זְמַנּוֹ״ — הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִתְּנֶנּוּ לוֹ. וְאָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: מָה טַעַם? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּכֹהֵן הַמְסַיֵּיעַ בְּבֵית הַגֳּרָנוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Mar Zutra **said to them: But do you not hold** like **that which we learned** in a mishna (*Bekhorot* 26b): **Until when** is **an Israelite obligated to tend to a firstborn** animal before giving it to the priest? In the case **of a small** animal, a sheep or goat, **thirty** days, **and** in the case **of a large** animal, one of a herd of cattle, **fifty days. And if** the priest **said to** the owner: **Give it to me within its period,** the owner **may not give it to him. And Rav Sheshet says: What is** the **reason** for this? **Because it looks like a priest who assists at the threshing floor,** as the priest is assisting the Israelite by assuming the responsibility of tending to the firstborn.


###### Temurah 8b:13
[Temurah 8b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:13)

אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: הָתָם מוֹכְחָא מִילְּתָא, הָכָא מִזְבָּן קָא זָבְנִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**They said to** Mar Zutra: **There** the circumstances of **the matter prove** that the priest accepted responsibility to care for the animal in return for some benefit, and it has the appearance of impropriety. **Here, we purchased it** for its fair market value, and there is no appearance of impropriety.


###### Temurah 8b:14
[Temurah 8b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Temurah/r/8b:14)

לָשׁוֹן אַחֵר, אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: הָכָא לָא יָהֵיב דְּמֵי, הָכָא קָא יָהֵיב דְּמֵי. מַאי אָמְרַתְּ? מוֹזֵיל כֹּהֵן גַּבֵּיהּ, דְּסָבַר כֹּהֵן דְּכִי הָוֵי לֵיהּ בְּכוֹר אַחֲרִינָא יָהֵיב נִיהֲלֵיהּ? לָא, דְּמַסֵּיק אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara presents **an alternative version** of this final response. **They said to** Mar Zutra: **There** the Israelite **does not give payment** to the priest for accepting responsibility to care for the animal. **Here,** the Israelite **gives payment** to the priest, as we purchased the animal. And **what** would **you say** to this claim? Would you say that perhaps the **priest lowered** the price of the animal **for** us, **as the priest thinks that when** we **have another firstborn** offering we **will give it to him,** and therefore it has the appearance of impropriety? This is **not** a concern, **as he thinks:**