Gemara Clarity

Temurah 7a

תמורה ז׳ ע״א

Learn Temurah 7a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Temurah 7a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The sources for liability when offering a blemished animal (קבלת הדם and זריקה), and why consecrating a blemished animal brings מלקות

Overview

The amud opens by finishing an earlier point: a פסוק was needed to teach that one gets מלקות for consecrating a blemished animal even after the גורל of יום כיפור. Then רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה says one is also liable for collecting the blood (קבלת הדם) of a blemished animal. The גמרא works out which פסוק teaches which act: 'לא תקריבו' in ויקרא 22:24, 'על המזבח', and 'ומיד בן נכר לא תקריבו' in ויקרא 22:25. It does this in two versions, and in both רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה ends up learning קבלת הדם from 'ומיד בן נכר'. The רבנן use that פסוק instead to teach that we do not accept blemished offerings from non-Jews. Next, ריש לקיש suggests the איסור applies only to an animal that became blemished later, since one blemished from birth is like a date palm. רבי יוחנן proves from the count of five prohibitions that the איסור covers born-blemished animals too, and explains that choosing a blemished animal over perfect ones is a disgrace. Based on this reason, רבא rules that one is lashed even when consecrating a blemished animal for the money of נסכים. A ברייתא supporting רבא is introduced, and its words come on the next amud.

Opening lines

סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא:

It might enter your mind to say:

בִּשְׁלָמָא מֵעִיקָּרָא לָא יָדַעְנָא

Granted, at the start we do not know

אִי הַאי מִיקְּבַע לַשֵּׁם,

whether this one will be fixed for the Name,

אֲבָל הָכָא, כֵּיוָן דְּאִינְּכַר שֵׁם

but here, since it is already clear which is for the Name,

The steps (30)

  1. ResolutionWhy the verse was needed for the case after the lottery
  2. QuestionWhat is the source for רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה's view on collecting the blood?
  3. ResponseThe source: the extra words in the verse about damaged animals
  4. ChallengeWhat does the תנא קמא do with the extra words?
  5. ResolutionThe תנא קמא uses it for sprinkling the blood
  6. ChallengeBut sprinkling is already learned from 'on the altar'
  7. Resolution'On the altar' is just how the verse speaks
  8. ChallengeShouldn't רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה also read it as plain wording?
  9. ResolutionYes, he agrees
  10. QuestionThen where does he learn collecting the blood?
  11. ResponseThe new source: 'From the hand of a foreigner you shall not offer'
  12. QuestionWhy does the first opinion need the verse about a foreigner?
  13. ResponseThe verse forbids a non-Jew to offer a blemished animal on our altar
  14. StatementSecond version: רבי יוסי includes collecting the blood
  15. QuestionWhat is רבי יוסי's source?
  16. Response'Bruised... shall not offer' is collecting; sprinkling is from 'on the altar'
  17. ChallengeThe רבנן should also learn sprinkling from 'on the altar'
  18. ResolutionYes, and 'Bruised' teaches about a private altar
  19. Challengeרבי יוסי also needs 'Bruised' for a private altar
  20. ResolutionYes, so he learns collecting from 'from the hand of a foreigner'
  21. ResolutionThe רבנן need 'מכל אלה' to teach that we do not accept blemished offerings from non-Jews
  22. Challengeריש לקיש: maybe the איסור applies only to an animal that became blemished later
  23. Proofרבי חייא בר יוסף: the פרשה mentions blemishes that exist from birth
  24. Rejectionריש לקיש: maybe those פסוקים speak only about תמורה
  25. ProofFive prohibitions, not six, so the case is not about תמורה
  26. ChallengeWhy give מלקות for an animal blemished from birth?
  27. ResolutionA blemished animal is a disgrace; a date palm is not
  28. ResolutionSecond version: a date palm has no fit kind, an animal does
  29. StatementLashes even when consecrating for the money of נסכים
  30. ProofA ברייתא supports רבא