A burned offering can be only a male, and therefore there is no question of the law for its descendants. However, its exchange can be considered its descendant, in some sense. Additionally, if one exchanges it for a female animal, that female can in turn have descendants. All of these “descendants,” and their descendants, ad infinitum, are brought as burned offerings, with all their laws.
If one designates a female as a burned offering – which is invalid, as we have just said – it is left to graze until it develops a blemish. It is then redeemed, and the money is used for a valid male burned offering. If it gets a male offspring, it, too, is left to graze until it can be redeemed. Rabbi Eliezer says that the offspring itself can be offered. What is the basis for their disagreement? Some say that by the Torah law Rabbi Eliezer is correct, but according to the Sages, there is an additional enactment and a burden on him, since one should not sanctify a female animal as a burned offering. Others say, that since the original offering was “pushed off” from the Altar, its direct descendants cannot be brought either, and the argument is about the effect of “pushing off.”
Art: James Ward - A Dartmoor Ram, Ewe And Wether
No comments:
Post a Comment