Levítico 1:14 Referencias del Talmud: Jerusalem Talmud Nazir, Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim & Jerusalem Talmud Bikkurim

“ ‘I have to bring birds’, Rebbi Meïr says, he is a nazir, but the Sages say, he is not a nazir.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, because of substitutes of substitutes: “Until his hair became mighty as an eagle’s and his fingernails like those of birds.²²Dan. 4:30. This establishes a proverbial connection between long hair and a mention of birds.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, because an impure nazir brings birds²⁷Num. 6:10. But no pure person would entertain the idea of becoming a nazir if he expects to become impure since that could extend his period of nezirut indefinitely.. Does he bring birds²⁸Many people use צִפּוֹר only for wild birds.? He brings turtledoves or young pigeons. There are some Tannaïm who state that all pure birds are called צפור, and there are some Tannaïm who state that all birds, whether pure or impure, are called צפור. He who says that all pure birds are called צפור, “you may eat any pure bird²⁹Deut. 14:11. In Scripture, צפור is feminine..” He who says that all birds, whether pure or impure, are called צפור, “say to any winged bird³⁰Ez. 39:14.. “What is the rabbi’s reason? He is like somebody offering birds for the upkeep of the Temple³¹The expression הֲרֵי עָלַי “I have to bring” is a regular form of a vow, which in Temple times implied a gift to the Temple. A single bird can be offered as a voluntary sacrifice (Lev. 1:14–17) but a couple can be given only as an obligatory sacrifice, i. e., a reparation or a purification sacrifice. These can never be given voluntarily, as result of a vow. Since the vow was formulated for birds, not a bird, it is concluded that the birds have to be given to the Temple for its upkeep, to be sold to persons needing them for obligatory sacrifices, with the proceeds given to the Temple treasury.. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? He is like somebody offering a reparation sacrifice for the upkeep of the Temple³²This is an impossibility; an obligatory sacrifice cannot be given voluntarily and it has to be offered on the altar, not sold for the Temple’s benefit. Therefore, the vow has to be interpreted as a wish to be in a situation in which one has to bring a reparation sacrifice to the Temple. The only reparation sacrifices which depend on the person’s initiative are either the possible sacrifice of the impure nazir or those required of the person guilty of larceny (Lev. 5:14–16, 21–26). Since it is impossible to think that a person should want to commit larceny for religious purposes, the state of nazir is the only alternative.. What is the difference between them? If somebody says, “I take upon myself to bring a reparation sacrifice.” In the opinion of Rebbi Meïr he is a nazir since one cannot bring a reparation sacrifice for the upkeep of the Temple. In the opinion of the rabbis he is a nazir since an impure nazir brings a reparation sacrifice³³Since in this formulation there is no difference between the rabbis and R. Meïr, all commentaries read “he is not a nazir”; since no person would accept nezirut with the prospect of an indefinite duration unless he spells this out clearly at the start, the vow is invalid because it is unrealistic. If one keeps the original wording, the rabbis and R. Meїr agree not only on the result but also on the reasoning behind it..

MISHNAH: If somebody gives his property to the Temple¹⁰⁴The Temple is supposed to sell the property and to use the proceeds for its needs. As Temple property, the proceeds are under the laws of me`ilah. and in it there were items usable for public sacrifices<sup>105</sup>Which cannot be redeemed, cf. Note 100., they shall be given to the artisans as their wages, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Ben Azzai said to him, this is not they way<sup>106</sup>Since Temple property cannot be given for wages, Tosephta Me`ilah1:23, Note 95. One has to apply the rules of Mishnah 5 in their entirety., but from it one sets apart the artisans’ wages and redeems it on the artisan’s money; one gives it to the artisans as their wages and then buys it back from them from the new disbursement⁸³Since the expenses of the Temple service each year have to be paid by the sheqalim of that year, one cannot simply take the leftover as incense for the next year. On the other hand, since profane use of incense prepared in the proportions prescribed for Temple service is a deadly sin (Ex. 30:38), the incense cannot be used outside of the Temple. One takes money from the sheqalim to pay the artisans who prepare the next year’s batch of incense, then uses this money in order to redeem the incense and make it profane, a possible object of trade. Then one pays the artisans in kind with the incense, and since they could do nothing with it one buys the incense back from them with the money earmarked to this effect. Then the artisans are paid at the same time the incense for the new year is paid with money from the new Temple year starting at Nisan 1..
If somebody gives his property to the Temple¹⁰⁴The Temple is supposed to sell the property and to use the proceeds for its needs. As Temple property, the proceeds are under the laws of me`ilah. and in it there was an animal fit for the altar<sup>107</sup>An unblemished bovine, sheep, or goat, which may not be redeemed, Lev. 27:10. Since they were given to the Temple to be sold, the easiest way to satisfy the will of the donor and the rules is to sell the animals as sacrifices to those who have vowed a sacrifice., males or females. Rebbi Eliezer says, males should be sold to those who need an elevation offering<sup>108</sup>Who in contrast to well-being offerings must be male (Lev. 1:3,10)., and females be sold to those who need well-being offerings, and the revenue together with the remainder be for upkeep of the Temple.
Rebbi Joshua says, the males themselves should be brought as elevation sacrifices, and the females be sold to those who need well-being offerings, and the remaining property be used for upkeep of the Temple.
Rebbi Aqiba says, I agree with the words of Rebbi Eliezer against the words of Rebbi Joshua, since Rebbi Eliezer is uniform in his rules but Rebbi Joshua splits<sup>142</sup>According to R. Eliezer the entire property is for the upkeep of the Temple; R. Joshua excludes male unblemished animals. Also R. Eliezer treats male and female animals by the same rules.. Rebbi Pappaeus said, I heard according to the words of both of them. If somebody dedicates explicitly<sup>143</sup>He says, the animals are to be sacrifices., following the words of Rebbi Eliezer; if the dedication is unspecified<sup>144</sup>He simply hands over his property to the Temple., following the words of Rebbi Joshua.
If somebody gives his property to the Temple<sup>104</sup>The Temple is supposed to sell the property and to use the proceeds for its needs. As Temple property, the proceeds are under the laws of me`ilah. and in it there were things fit for the altar, wines, oils, or birds. Rebbi Eleazar says, they shall be sold to people needing these kinds and from the proceeds one shall bring elevation sacrifices¹⁴⁶Four-legged animals. Even though birds (pigeons and turtle doves) are valid elevation sacrifices (Lev. 1:14–17), only four-legged animals can be brought “to adorn the altar.”; but the remainder of the property shall be used for the upkeep of the Temple.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. The reason of Rebbi Eleazar: ¹³⁸Lev. 22:18–19.Speak to Aaron and to his sons, etc., who would sacrifice to the Eternal as elevation sacrifice; everything may be brought as elevation sacrifice, by your volition, unblemished, male. I could think that this includes birds. The verse says, in cattle, not birds¹⁴⁸Since the verse restricts elevation offerings from four-legged animals to unblemished males, it is inferred that the restriction does not apply to birds [Sifra Emor Parashah7(20), Wayyiqra I Parshata6(3)]. In addition, since Lev. 1:14–17 is addressed to the individual, but Lev. 22:18–19 to the public, it is inferred that birds as elevation offerings are possible only to the individual; the public is restricted to four-legged animals. Since a gift to the Temple is a gift to the public, birds given to the Temple as part of an estate may not be sacrificed.. Rebbi Jeremiah and Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya were sitting and saying, there said Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon is that we find that a female is qualified as elevation offering of a bird¹²⁸Male animals are prescribed for four-legged elevation sacrifices, Lev. 1:3,10, but not for birds, 1:14 (Sifra Wayyiqra I Parshata6(2,5). Argument missing in B.. And here, he¹⁴⁹Even though the statement is transmitted in the name of R. Simeon ben Laqish, we do not hear that R. Joḥanan disagrees; the statement is coming from R. Joḥanan’s Academy. says so? Rebbi Yose said, I confirmed it following what Rebbi Samuel said in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: Anything which could be sacrificed neither itself nor its money’s worth is sanctified only as money’s worth¹⁵⁰If an animal is not dedicated as sacrifice and if sold, the money cannot be used to buy an animal which can validly be dedicated (Note 119), the animal is given for the upkeep of the Temple, not to the gift account.. And you are saying, this is correct. You cannot sacrifice it, for it is written in cattle¹⁵¹And the public to whom the bird was given may not dedicate it as sacrifice.. You cannot redeem it since birds cannot be redeemed.¹⁵²Mishnah Menaḥot12:1. Not only birds, but also dedicated wine and flour cannot be redeemed since the rules of redemption in Lev. 27 are formulated referring to four-legged animals only.