Arachin 19 – My Weight – To the Temple!

If one says, “I undertake to pay my weight to the Temple,” then he must give it in the substance he specified, whether it be gold, silver, or even pitch - if in his place they sell pitch by weight. There was an incident when the mother of Yirmatya promised to pay the weight of her daughter, but did not specify the material. Since she was fabulously rich, they estimated that she had to pay in gold. The weight is taken at the time and hour of the vow.

If one promised the weight of his arm to the Temple, they measure the water displaced by his arm, and add donkey's flesh, bones, and sinews, until the water riches the same level. Rabbi Yose says that even though donkey meat is a good approximation, it will never be precise, therefore, they just estimate.

If he promised the worth (not weight) of his arm to the Temple, they estimate how much he is worth when working with one hand tied up; in this vows are more stringent than a symbolic value of hand - which is zero, since it is not a vital organ.

Art: Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun - Madame Rousseau and her Daughter

Arachin 18 – Age for Symbolic Value

Symbolic value of a person vowed to the Temple depends on his or her age, and if A vows to give the value of B, it is the age of B, not A, that matters.

The thirtieth day of an infant is considered as days before, and this infant has no symbolic value yet. Similarly, the fifth year is considered as years before, and so the twentieth, which results in lower symbolic values. Why? The Torah said, “From sixty years of age and higher” to teach that only subsequent years are included. But how can we derive anything from the sixtieth year, when the symbolic value decreases, resulting in a stringency, and apply the rule to the twentieth year, when the value increases, resulting in a leniency? – We learn it from an extra word “years” in the phrase “from five years to twenty years” where “from five years to twenty” would have been enough.

At sixty the symbolic value of a man drops by 70%, but that of a woman drops significantly less. Why? Chizkiyah quoted a proverb, “An old man in a house is a calamity, but an old woman in a house is a treasure.”

Art: Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velazquez - Old Woman Frying Eggs

Arachin 17 – When One Pays What He Can

When one vow to donate his symbolic value to the Temple, he pays according to the age and gender guidelines given in the Torah. If he is poor, he only pays what he can afford, as estimated by a Kohen.

What happens, however, when he promises the value of someone else? In this case, the “what he can pay” dispensation applies to him, not to the one whose value he promised. Thus, if a poor man vowed the value of a rich man, he gives the value of a poor man. By contrast, with the sacrifices it is different: if a poor man vowed to buy the sacrifices for a spiritual leper, “metzora,” and this leper is rich, the poor man has to pay for the sacrifices of a rich one. Why is this difference? The symbolic value obligation did not exist until he promised it, therefore, it is his obligation, and it depends on his wealth. By contrast, the obligations of the leper already existed: due to the leper's actions he got this spiritual condition, and it is his ability to pay that determines if he gets a discount.

Art: REMBRANDT Harmenszoon van Rijn - Parable Of The Rich Man

Arachin 16 – What To Do About Bad Talk?

About the one who talks badly of his fellow, God says, “He who slanders his neighbor in secret... him I cannot bear.” What's the correction? If he is a scholar, he should learn Torah and books on self-improvement, and if he can't learn, he should become humble. Rav Acha said, “There is no correction for bad things that were already said. This advice is for one who wants to protect himself from speaking badly.”

Bad speech kills three: the speaker, the listener, and the one they talk about. The garment of the High Priest had bells, and they atoned for bad talk – but only if it had not lead to quarrels.

One should reprove his friend for bad deeds, but only if the friend is righteous and will listen; however, Rabbi Tarfon said that in his generation nobody accepted rebuke, and in the next one nobody could rebuke properly. Assuming that the generations go down, this is all the more true today.

Suffering is helpful spiritually, what is the minimal amount? When newly made clothing does not fit, but some say when one puts a shirt inside out, and some – when one wants to take out three coins and takes out only two. However, if he took out three coins and needs to put one back – it is not suffering.

Art: Herman Frederik Carel ten Kate - A Humble Question

Arachin 15 – How Bad is Bad Talk?

In the laws of a violator and seducer  there are also elements of leniency and stringency. Whether one seduced or violated the daughter of the most prominent family of Kohanim or the lowest family of Israel, he pays fifty shekels. By contrast, the  payments for humiliation depends on who humiliated and who was humiliated.

One who defames his new wife may face a leniency and a stringency: whether he defamed the most prominent maiden in the priesthood or the humblest maiden among the Jewish people, he pays a hundred shekels.

We thus see that one who speaks evil with his mouth is worse than one who performs an evil deed. Similary, the decree that the Jews should not enter Israel and stay in the desert for another forty years was sealed on account of the bad words they said about the Land of Israel. The Torah said, “They tested Me these (literally, this) ten times”, and the word “this” tells that these bad words were the reason. If one is punished so for talking about land and rocks, then now much more when talking about his fellow.

Art: Jean-Baptiste Madou - The Gossips

Arachin 14 – Leniencies and Stringencies

Since symbolic valuation of a person is expressed in fixed currency, this can sometimes result in a leniency and sometimes in a stringency. Thus, whether one vowed to donate the symbolic value of the handsomest man in Israel or of the ugliest man in Israel, he gives fifty selah coins for a male between twenty and sixty years old.

Consecration of ancestral fields may likewise result in a leniency or in a stringency: whether he consecrates land on the perimeter of a city (the worst), or in the vineyards of Sebaste (the best), when he redeems it, he gives fifty silver shekels for an area on which a measure of barley can be sown .

This requires explanation. Ancestral fields are fields inherited from the original division of the Land of Israel between the tribes, or fields sold by the Temple treasury. What measure of barley? - Chomer (same as kor, about 10 cubic feet), and this much barley was enough to sow the area of about five acres. This is the area one would redeem for 50 silver shekels. If the land market value was higher, he got a leniency, if lower – a stringency.

Art: Sir Godfrey Kneller - Portrait of a young Man

Arachin 13 – No Less, But Maybe More

According to the final account, the Second Temple was destroyed in the first year after Shmita. This gives a starting point for counting the Shmita years today; however, there are still two views on how to count the first year of creation – from the creation of Adam, or from the first day of creation, counting the first six days as a full year. The second view is the accepted one, with the result that the next Shmita is in 2014-15.

There were no fewer than six inspected lambs, sufficient for Shabbat and the two days of Rosh HaShanah, but they could add without a limit. But was six lambs enough for three days, seeing that there are additional offerings on these day!? – Six is not precise, just a reminder to keep enough.

There were no less than two trumpets, but up to 120, no less than nine harps, and only one set of cymbals.

Young Levites boys did not play musical instruments, nor stood on the platform, but only sang standing on the floor of the Temple, and they were called assistants of the Levites, but some say, tormentors, because adult ones could never sing as sweet.

Art: Sir Henry Raeburn - The Marchioness of Northampton, Playing a Harp

Arachin 12 – Bad Things Happen on a Bad Day

Is the Levites's singing required for libations in the Temple? Since libations include wine, and the Levites started singing when wine was poured on the Altar, maybe it is required; on the other hand, since there is no meat with libations, maybe it is not required?

Let us try to find an answer in the story of the Temples' Destruction, as related by Rabbi Yose: “Good things are brought about on an auspicious day, and bad things – on a bad day. It was the first day of the week and the first year after Shmita, and the Levites were singing 'God turned their violence against them', and just as they concluded with 'God our Lord will cut them off' the enemies came and vanquished them; and so it was at the destruction of the Second Temple.”

Now, why were they singing? The daily sacrifice stopped a while back, so it must have been the libations, which proves that libations require singing. – Not necessarily, maybe they chanced upon a calf. Furthermore, as Rava said, it would be the wrong song for Sunday anyway, and it just happened that they started singing a dirge, for Resh Lakish said that Temple song can be performed without a sacrifice. But if so, let them sing for libations! – No, if we allow singing for a sacrifice that does not require singing, they may eventually skip singing when it is requried.

Art: Jan Jozef, the Younger Horemans - Lesson of Singing

Arachin 11 – Who Played Flutes in the Temple?

Rabbi Meir's opinion is that it was the slaves of the Kohanim who played flutes in the Temple, Rabbi Yose says that they were from a family of regular Jews, Israelim, but of especially pure lineage, and Rabbi Chanina says that it was the Levites. What is the logic of their disagreement?

Rabbi Meir holds that the essential music of the Temple is vocal, and instrumental music was only for accompaniment, so anybody could play flutes, while Rabbi Chanina holds that the essence of music is instrumental, and thus flutes had to be played by the Levites, the official Temple musicians.

However, this does not explain Rabbi Yose, who holds an in-between position. We have to take it back: everybody believes that the essence of Temple music is singing, and their argument is about something else: does the court assume that once someone was seen playing music in the Temple, he is automatically considered to be Levy and fit to receive the tithe. Rabbi Meir says that the court makes no such assumption, therefore even slaves can play – nobody will make them Levites because of that, and Rabbi Chanina says that music playing is evidence that he is a Levite.

Art: Judith Leyster- Young Flute Player

Arachin 10 – Music in the Temple

Every day they would blow trumpets in the Temple, no less than twenty-one notes, but no more than forty-eight. The Torah said, “On the days of your joy... sound the trumpets!” Trumpets accompanied opening the gates, then nine sounds came with the morning daily sacrifice, and another nine with the afternoon one. Music started when wine libations began pouring. The forty-eight notes occurred when New Moon was celebrated on a Friday: nine notes were added because of additional offering, nine sounds told people to stop working in the fields, and twelve more notes were sounded if it was also Succot.

No less than two lutes accompanied singing (some say they were bagpipes, violins, or even percussion instruments), and no more than six – for sound balance. A minimal Temple orchestra to included nine harps, two instruments discussed above, and two cymbals.

Flutes numbered no less than two and no more than twelve. Flutes were played whenever praise (Hallel) was sung. They were not made from copper but from reeds, or bamboo, because of sweeter sound. At music’s ending, only one flute played, and some say, flutes alone played, because it makes a pleasant ending.

Art: Anthonie Palamedesz - An Officer Blowing a Trumpet

Arachin 9 – No More, No Less

They never made less than four thirty-day months in a year, and never more more than eight twenty-nine-day months. The lunar month is about 29 ½ days, so some months have to be short, and some long. In the time of this ruling, beginning of a new month was declared based on the testimony of witnesses who saw the new moon. The Sages would also move the first day of the month slightly, for calendar purposes, but kept it within the above guidelines, so that Rosh Hashanah would never be too far off from New Moon.

The two loaves of Shavuot are not baked on the holiday itself, so they were eaten at least two days after they were baked, but no more than three days – when Shabbat intervened.

The bread of vision was baked before Shabbat, stayed on the Table in the Temple for the week, and was then eaten the following Shabbat – while still fresh and warm. Thus, they were eaten no less than nine days after baking, but no more than eleven – when two days of Rosh HaShana intervened.

A healthy child is circumcised not fewer than eight days after birth, but no later then eleven – when Shabbat and Rosh HaShana intervened.

Art: Rembrandt Van Rijn - Circumcision

Arachin 8 – Minimum and Maximum Amounts for Personal Valuations

One who vowed to give his own or someone else's symbolic value to the Temple pays according to the schedule given by the Torah, but if he is poor, a Kohen can reduce his payment. However, it is never less than a selah (shekel), since the Torah said, “And every valuation shall be in a sacred shekel.” Incidentally, it cannot exceed 50 shekels, the upper limit given by the Torah.

If one was poor, paid his selah, and then became rich, he does not have to pay the remainder, since he already fulfilled his obligation. However, if while being poor he paid less than a selah, it does not count, and now that he became rich, he has to pay the full amount.

On the subject of minimum and maximum, a woman who confused her menstrual cycle according to the Torah law, never has to compensate less than seven days and never more than seventeen. Due to the complexity of these laws, a custom arose to observe standard, although pretty long, separation time periods.

One who has spiritual leprosy – which was normally caused by defamatory comments – is confined for no less than a week but no more than three weeks.

Art: Louis Gallait - Monk Feeding the Poor

Arachin 7 – No Death Row

Rabbi Yose disagrees about a condemned being led to execution and says that he can promise the valuation others. But who does he disagree with?  Rabbi Yose concealed his message; he meant: if one led to execution harms someone, the Sages declare him liable, while Rabbi Yose says that he does not have to pay. They argue whether his heirs have to pay for him. Alternatively, since the obligations of a damager are written in the Torah, they argue whether this has the power of a court decision.

One condemned by the court is executed immediately, to spare the anguish of waiting. If a pregnant woman is condemned, they don't wait until she gives birth; however, if the baby moved as a beginning of birth, it became a separate person, and then they wait until she gives birth. A dead body is prohibited for benefit, but they may use a woman's hair.

But the hair also should be forbidden! - She said, “Give my hair to my daughter.” Why would we listen? - It's a wig tied to her hair. With her words, she revealed that she does not consider it part of her body, and this permits to remove the hair later.

Art: Vladimir Egorovic Makovsky - The Condemned

Arachin 6 - Money for Charity

If an idolater separated a Kohen’s portion (terumah) from his grain, saying “I wanted to do what Jews do” - this is a valid. However, if he said nothing, then perhaps he meant for the Temple, and since there is no Temple, it has to be hidden. In general, any “consecration for the Temple” today creates a similar problem.

Money designated for charity is similar to a vow: just as a vow has to be fulfilled in its due time, so charity has to be paid; if the time was not specified, it means right away. However, it is not similar to Temple consecration: one can use designated coins, and then repay. One who collects charity - money or objects -from people should be careful to use it according to their designation, unless he knows that they would not mind if he uses it for a different good cause.

One who is in the throes of death and one who is going out to be executed by court cannot be a subject of any monetary vow. But the condemned should at least have a symbolic value!? - Since there is not redemption for a murderer, by analogy there is none for the condemned one.

Art: Camille Pissarro - Charity

Arachin 5 - Personal Valuation of an Infant and of an Idolater

When the Torah assigned symbolic values of people to be donated to the Temple, it started from one month old. What happens when one promises to donate the symbolic value of a child before one month? Rabbi Meir says that people never make vain statements in serious matters, therefore, since he knows that there is no value assigned to the baby, he means to donate its value in the slave market. The Sages say that people do make vain statements, and thus this person is treated as one who said nothing.

An idolater can make regular monetary vows and be a subject of the vows of others. Although idolater’s symbolic value for the Temple was not listed, Rabbi Meir says that he is nevertheless included, while Rabbi Yehudah says that he can donate other people’s symbolic value but not his own. The Torah uses both an inclusive “a man” and exclusive “Children of Israel,” but Rabbi Meir says that it is more common to be a recipient of a symbolic valuation vow, while Rabbi Yehudah argues that it is more common to be a giver.

Pierre Auguste Renoir - Portrait Of An Infant

Arachin 4 - All: Kohanim, Levites, Israelim, Who Else?

When a ruling is formulated as “All are obligated in a certain commandment, Kohahim, Levites, and Israelim (regular Jews),” the word “all” is not superfluous, but in each case it adds something.

ALL are obligated to hear the Megillah - adds those who are occupied with the Temple service; even they should leave the service and listen to the Megillah.

ALL can declare a symbolic personal value donation, according to one’s age and gender, as prescribed by the Torah, Kohanim, Levites, and Israelim. But that is obvious! If not these, then who? Rabbah says that this is a hidden answer to Ben Buchri, who explained that Kohanim never pay a shekel-donation (even though the Sages disagree). One might therefore think the same about personal valuation, and this had to be negated. Abaye argues that there is no connection, rather, it is an answer to a possible idea that since the Kohanim do not redeem their firstborn, perhaps they can’t do symbolic valuations either. Rava denies that connection also and says that ALL excludes the possibility that perhaps one Kohen cannot assign the discounted valuation that another, poor Kohen, has to give - and the answer is that he can!

Art: Giorgione (Giorgio da Castelfranco Veneto) - The Three Ages

Arachin 3 - What Does the Word "All" Add?

The word "all" was used to introduce the valuation rule above, and usually, "all" tells us something in addition to the list. Talmud goes on a whirlwind tour of about fifty cases of using the word “all,” discussing what it adds. Firstly, valuations: ALL can declare a valuation vow - adds minors a year before bat or bar mitzvah, who clearly understand vows. ALL can be the subject of a valuation vow - including an ugly person or one with skin boils, whose value on the slave market is zero.

ALL lean on a sacrifice declaring the reason for bringing it - ALL adds the son who inherits the sacrifice from his father.

One may force ALL the members of his household to move to Israel. This ruling reflects the opinion that living in Israel is a commandment, based on the Torah phrase, “Clear out the land and live in it.” ALL adds one who would have to give up a beautiful dwelling outside Israel and move to inferior quarters in Israel. Other cases of using the word "all" include sukkah, lulav, tzitzit, tefillin, Temple visits, shofar, megillah, impurity discharge, spiritual leprosy, and kosher slaughter of animals.

Art: Rembrandt Van Rijn - Family Group

Arachin 2 - Personal Valuations to the Temple

One can make a personal valuation vow to the Temple, promising to donate his own or someone else’s value. Furthermore, one can promise either a monetary value - the price that this person could fetch in a slave market - or a symbolic value, expressed in shekel coins, in the amount prescribed by the Torah.

All persons can both declare such a vow and be the subject of it, a man or a woman, Kohen, Levi, or a regular Jew. An androgyne or a person of undetermined gender can do all of the above, except for a symbolic value. Since Torah-assigned values are provided only for definite males or females, these two do not have specific symbolic values that can be donated for them. Thus, if one makes a “personal valuation” vow related to them, it is always treated as a monetary value they would fetch in a slave market.

A deaf, deranged, or a minor can have their value donated by others, but they themselves cannot make such vows. Since they lack sufficient understanding, they are considered legally incompetent.

Art: Jozef Israels - Three Women Knitting By The Sea

Bechorot 61 – One's Agent Should Only Help

We learned that if ninth or eleventh animals are mistakenly called “tenth,” they become sanctified. However, this is only true when one tithes himself. If someone sent an agent to tithe his flock, and the agent miscounted, calling the ninth or the eleventh animal “tenth”, then the ninth is indeed sanctified, but the eleventh is not – these are the words of Rav Pappi. Rav Pappa disagrees and says that neither the ninth nor the eleventh become sanctified, because the owner can tell the agent, “I sent you to benefit me, not to harm me, therefore your agency is void.” And Rav Pappi? He says that when the agent called the ninth animal “tenth”, his agency was still in power, he only lost it after this action, and tithe sanctified in error still counts.

But how is this different from one who sends an agent to separate the kohen's portion (terumah) from his grain? There, even if the agent miscalculated the generosity of the owner and gave 10% more, or 10% less, his actions stand? -- For kohen's portion, there are indeed people who give generously or stingily, but for animal tithe the owner can say, “You should not have erred.”

Art: Joseph Augustus Knip - A Flock Of Sheep In A Stable

Bechorot 60 – Mistakes in Counting

If one was counting his animal tithe, and two animals squeezed out through the narrow opening together, he should count them as two. If he counted them as one, then his ninth and tenth animals are messed up: they are both holy to some degree, but not as a complete tithe; therefore, they both need to be allowed to graze until they develop a blemish, and then they can be slaughtered.

If he pronounced the ninth animal to emerge from the pen “tenth”, then, realizing his mistake, tried to correct it, calling the tenth animal “ninth”, and then continued counting and called the eleventh animal “tenth”, the ninth is eaten if it gets a blemish, the tenth is the real tithe, and the eleventh is brought as a peace offering. Why ?

Calling the ninth animal “tenth” gave it a degree of holiness, and it can't be slaughtered until it develops a blemish. The owner made a mistake calling the tenth “ninth,” but it become tithe through his intent. And, since the word "tenth" was never properly applied, it kept its power and made the eleventh animal a Temple sacrifice. Ninth and eleventh are sanctified because of an extra word "it will be" holy.

Art: Anton Mauve - Bringing Home The Flock

Bechorot 59 – Tithing Procedure

To tithe, one gathers his animals into a pen, and makes a small opening for them, so that two animals can't exit at once. He counts them with a staff: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, and the one that exits tenth he marks with red dye, and pronounces, “This one is hereby tithe.”

If he did not mark the tenth one with red dye, did not count them with a staff, or did not pass them through a narrow exit, but counted them as they were crouching or standing, they are still tithed, since the Torah said, “And the tenth one will be holy” – even when the correct procedure is not followed. However, if he just ten out of a hundred or one out of ten, without counting all – it is not tithe, because the Torah said “tenth”, but not “ten”. Rabbi Yose ben Yehudah says that it is tithed even in that case, since the Torah said, “It will be considered to you as tithe” - a mental consideration is sufficient.

If a counted animal jumped back, all are exempt, but if the tithe animal jumped back, all have the stringency of tithe.

Art: Ary Johannes Lamme - Paying The Tithe

Bechorot 58 – Three Dates for Animal Tithes

There are three dates designated for animals tithes: fifteen days before the holidays of Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot. Thirty days before a holiday one starts reviewing its laws, and these dates were in the middle. After the designated date, the animals are considered “untithed.” Although there are opinions that the tithing calendar is somewhat different, all agree that these dates were established by the earlier Sages in order that enough animals were available for those going to Jerusalem and bringing sacrifices on the holidays.

What is the New Year for animal tithe? Rabbi Meir says that it is the first of Elul, a month before the Rosh HaShana of the first of the month of Tishrei, but Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon both say that it is the same as Rosh HaShana. They argue about when the majority of births occur. The practical importance of this day is that only animals born in the same year combine for the count of ten needed to create the tithe obligation. Ben Azzai says that the New Year for tithe is a very old disagreement which cannot be properly resolved, and therefore animals born in Elul form a separate tithing queue.

Art: Theophile Louis Deyrolle - A Shepherdess and her Flock

Bechorot 57 – Who is Obligated in Animal Tithe

When a father dies and brother become heirs to his estate – but until the time that they divide it – they are obligated to give the tithe, because the estate is the real owner. Once they divide it, if they continue to operate it together as partners, they are not obligated to tithe, since no partners are obligated. Incidentally, the law of the “kolbon”, a small coin given in addition to the half-shekel to the Temple, is just the opposite.

Earlier we said that there are multiple cases when one does not have to give animal tithe. In fact, it is the presence of them that allowed the Sages to suspend the separation of tithes altogether, in the time when there is no Temple. Thus, all animals are obligated in tithes, except for a hybrid, a sick animal (terefah), one born by Caesarean section, and an orphan. What is considered an orphan for tithes? Any animal whose mother died or was slaughtered, and then it (the child) came out of the mother's womb. Rabbi Yehoshua says that if the mother's hide is intact, its offspring is not an orphan, because wrapping it in its mother's hide helps.

Art: George Cochran Lambdin - The Little White Heifer

Bechorot 56 – Tithes for Animals Bought or Exchanged for Services

If one buys untithed animals or receives them as a gift, he does not have to tithe them. The Torah compared tithes to a firstborn son, and just as children are born into a family and not acquired, so too only animals born in one's herd are tithed. Rabbi Yochanan said: "If one buys ten fetuses in the wombs of their mothers, they will be subject to tithes." Why? Rabbi Elazar said “I saw Rabbi Yochanan in a dream, so my explanation today must be correct.” The Torah said, “So shall you do (tithe)” to exclude animals acquired though an additional act of buying.

When is an animal given to a harlot as payment tithed? – When he buys it back. But the sale removes the animal from tithes!? – He gave and re-purchased a fetus. But let the harlot tithe the animal herself!? – She is a Cuthean harlot who, not being Jewish, does not have to tithe. But why not teach us a case of a Jewish harlot? - Only a harlot whom he cannot marry has her payment forbidden, but if marriage could take effect, her payment can be brought as tithe in the Temple.

Art: Jusepe de Ribera - Jacob's Dream

Bechorot 55 – Jordan and Other Rivers

Rabbi Meir said that the animals on two sides of the Jordan river are not counted together for giving tithes. Rav Ashi noted that if there is a bridge there, they do combine. But, by the same token, animals on two sides of the Israeli border should combine, because they can cross – and we know that they don't! Rather, as Rav Chiya explained, Jordan is called a border by the Torah. But then animals on different sides of the tribes' borders should not combined, and they do!? Rav Chiya has to say that the “land” combines all tribes, but “Jordan” is not land.

Jordan is called that way because it is “yored mi-dan” - comes from Dan. Its source is the cave of Pameas. Why does it matter? – One who vows not to drink water of Pameas should not drink any Jordan water. Jordan's source – as is the source of all water in the world – is the river Euphrates. Why does that matter? For one who vows against the water of Euphrates. But we judge by common meaning, and that includes only Euphrates' water?! - Rather, if he vows against all water that comes from Euphrates.

But how can all water come from Euphrates seeing that there are springs in the high mountains? – They are fed by underground channels. And why is it called Euphrates? Because its waters multiply (“parim” in Hebrew). This teaching supports Shmuel, who said that a river is primarily fed from its bedrock, and disagrees with the father of Shmuel, who would build a separate mikvah for his daughter in Euphrates, because he felt that its water comes at times mostly from rain.

Art: John Robert Keitley Duff - Highland Bridge with Shepherd and Flock

Bechorot 54 – Animal Title by Species and by Year

Although animal tithe applies both for cattle and to flocks, it cannot be taken from one on the other; rather, the calves are counted by themselves. However, the sheep and goats are combined, because they are collectively designated by the Torah as “flocks”. Furthermore, even though the tithe applies to animals of the last year (if the farmer did not give it yet) as well as of this year, the two years are not combined. Logically, one could reason otherwise and say, “If the animals born in different years, who are not forbidden to be bred between themselves, do not combine for tithe, then sheep and goats, who are forbidden to be bred between themselves, certainly should not combine!” To preclude this, the Torah combined them them as “flocks”.

Animals that are spread out are still considered as one flock and are combined for tithe if they are within the same grazing range, that is, about 4,000 feet from each other. If two groups of animals are farther away than that, but there is a group of animals in between them, it serves to combine them. Rabbi Meir says, “Jordan River separates the animals.”

Art: Julien Dupre - A Shepherd And His Flock

Bechorot 53 – Animal Tithe Today

When one has ten or more sheep, goats, or cows born in his flock in a particular year, he has to give animal tithe. He gathers the animals in a pen and lets them out one by one, through a narrow opening. He counts, and marks every tenth one with red dye, saying, “This one is animal tithe.” The tithe animals are brought as sacrifices in the Temple, and are eaten by the owner and his guests in Jerusalem. When there is no Temple, the owner waits till the animals get a blemish, and then he can slaughter them. This is also true for animals born outside of Israel, except that their tithe is not brought to Jerusalem.

Today, however, animal tithes would be problematic, because of multiple prohibitions associated with them. As Rav Huna had described, the farmers used to place the animals' mothers outside the pen, with the result that orphaned and bought animals – from whom tithe need not be separated – would remain inside. The Sages thus instituted not to separate tithes at all, based on the multiple similar situations where the animal tithe would not apply, and about which general population might have been ignorant.

Art: Albertus Verhoesen - A Summer Landscape With Cows And Sheep By A Pool And A Milkmaid Watching

Bechorot 52 – Firstborn Gets Double

Firstborn son gets a double portion in the inheritance from his father's estate, but not from his mother's. The Torah said, “to him applies the law of the firstborn.” Even though it is talking here about him, the son, it also hints that this law applies only to “him”, the father, and not to “her”, the mother.

If some time passed between the death of the father and the division of the estate, and the property has meanwhile improved (fruit grew on trees), the firstborn does not get a double share in those improvements, but only a regular one, like the rest of the sons. Of course, when he gets the double share of the land, it may happen that together with it he will double share of the improvements, but he will have compensate his brother for them. The Torah said that he gets double from “all that is found in his father possession” to tell us that he does not get from what comes to the estate later, after death. He also does not get a double portion from the money owed to his father but uncollected at the time of death.

Art: Bartolome Esteban Murillo - The Prodigal Son Receiving His Portion Of Inheritance

Bechorot 51 – Firstborn Redemption with Real Estate

To redeem a firstborn one can give to a Kohen either five shekel coins or goods worth that amount. However, lands, slaves, and loan documents cannot be used for redemption. Why not? When the Torah said, “A firstborn is redeemed from one month old”, it included all means of payment. When it continued, “According to the valuation of five shekels of silver”, it limited the available means somewhat, and when it again generalized, “You shall redeem”, we interpret it to mean that only payments similar to the specified ones are included. Just as coins are movable and have intrinsic value, so too all similar items are included. What's excluded? Lands, because they are not movable. Slaves, because they have the laws of the land. Loan documents, because they are pieces of paper not worth anything by themselves, but only because of the obligation recorded in them.

If the father wrote the Kohen a note which said “I owe you five shekels”, he has created the obligation and needs to pay at. However, this does not redeem his son, so he needs to pay another five shekels. If the Kohen wants, he can return five shekels as a present.

Art: Jan Steen- A woman counting coins at a table

Bechorot 50 – Shekel, Selah, and Other Currencies

The amount given to a Kohen to redeem the firstborn son is “five shekels by the sanctuary standard, where the shekel is 20 gerah.” In the times of the Second Temple the names of the coins changed. Since a common payment was a half-shekel, donated yearly by each Jew to the Temple for atonement sacrifices, this half-shekel was called a "shekel," and the full shekel was instead called a "selah". That is why our ruling was formulated in terms of "shekel by the sanctuary standard," and not just a "shekel."

The same “shekel of the sanctuary standard” was used for other payments prescribed by the Torah: the fifty-shekel payment of the rapist and of the seducer of a virgin young girl, and a one hundred-shekel payment of the defamer of his new bride.

These payments can be made with money or with goods, except for the half-shekel collected yearly for sacrifices. They are paid in Tyrian mintage, which was pure silver and eight times more valuable than the “provincial” coins used, for example, for a two hundred-zuz payment of a Ketubah given in the case of divorce. A sanctuary shekel is .8 oz. silver.

Art: Auguste Charpentier

Bechorot 49 – Cases of Firstborn Mix-ups and Deaths

If the firstborn son died within thirty days, even if the father had already given the redemption money to a Kohen, the Kohen must return it, because it was given early on the expectation that they child was viable and would survive. If the son died after thirty days, the father must still give the money. If the son died on the thirtieth day, this is a proof that it was not viable, and the Kohen returns the money. Rabbi Akiva is not certain if it is a proof, so if the Kohen got the money, he need not return it, but the father need not give it now.

If a man had two firstborn sons from two wives, and he redeemed the two boys with ten coins, and then one of the boys died, then if he gave all ten coins to one Kohen, the Kohen returns five coins. However, if he gave it to two different Kohanim, then he cannot get his money back, because each Kohen can say that perhaps he got the money for the son that is alive, and it is the other Kohen who got the money for the one who died.

Art: George Frederic Watts - Death Crowning Innocence

Bechorot 48 – Firstborn Both for Inheritance and the Kohen

One who is a firstborn both for his father and his mother is an obvious case that need not be mentioned. Rather, the first case of this ruling is when a woman has a miscarriage, but an embryo is so undeveloped that it looks full of water or multicolored matter, like a fish or a crawling animal, or if she aborts it on the fortieth day after conception – all these are not considered births, and the next child is a firstborn both for inheritance and for the Kohen.

A firstborns son born by Cesarean section and the naturally born that follows him – neither is a firstborn for either inheritance – because the Torah said “And they bore him sons,” and Caesarean is not a classical birth, or the Kohen – because the child needs be both the first and to open the womb. Rabbi Shimon considers the first one firstborn for inheritance, because in his opinion the Caesarean section is legally included in giving birth. He also regards the second one a firstborn for giving the Kohen five silver coins, because he considers either of the two conditions – first birth or first to open a womb – sufficient.

Art: Nicholas Gysis - New Arrival

Bechorot 47 – How Does One Recognize a Face?

Once a child shows its forehead from its mother's womb, it is considered born; at this moment the lives of the baby and of its mother become equal. However – said Resh Lakish – for the purposes of firstborn inheritance, it is not considered born until his face appears. If he retracts his head and another child appears, the other child will be the firstborn. That is because the word “recognize” is used talking about the firstborn, and for that the complete face must be seen. Rabbi Yochanan says that even here the forehead is enough. Resh Lakish poses multiple questions to Rabbi Yochanan, which the latter answers by emending the rulings. Finally, he answers that perhaps recognizing a firstborn by the forehead is possible while in other situations a full face is needed.

If a woman did not wait for the prescribed three months before remarrying, and her firstborn child does not know the true father, he is the firstborn for the Kohen but not for inheritance. But then he should not get any inheritance, since he can't prove paternity! He should sue the other children jointly with the next son, claiming that between them one is a firstborn.

Art: Franz Cusaude - The Gosnall Twins