Midrash su Esodo 34:20

(Deut. 33:1:) “And this is the blessing.” This text is related (to Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.” This is the blessing of Moses,¹PRK 31:11. in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but there was none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence, as he blessed one and cursed another, as stated (Gen. 9:27,) “May God enlarge (ypt) Japheth (ypt) [...]; and let Canaan be a slave to them.” Isaac blessed Jacob, but there was strife in it. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:4), “May He give you the blessing of Abraham, but he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35), “Your brother came with deceit”; and it is stated (in vs. 41), “Then Esau hated Jacob […, and Esau said in his heart, ‘Let the days of mourning for my father come, and I will kill my brother Jacob’].” Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he rebuked Reuben, as stated (in Gen. 49:4), “Unstable as water”; and similarly (in vs. 5), “Simeon and Levi [are brothers; weapons of violence are their swords].” And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned it] from the Holy One, blessed be He. When he created Adam, He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:27-28), “male and female. Then [God] blessed them.” And the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7), “And the Lord said, “I will blot out the humanity which I created.” When Noah left the ark, the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1), “Then God blessed Noah and his children.” The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world, and He added blessing, as stated (in Gen. 12:2), “For I will make you into a great nation.” Once Abraham came, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “It is not honorable for Me, that I should be obliged to bless My creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who they issue a blessing, I am placing my seal upon [those blessings], as stated (in vs. 2, cont.), ‘[I will bless you and magnify your name] and so become a blessing.’” (Vs. 3:) “I will bless those who bless you….” What is the meaning of “I will bless?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Take note. I am handing over the blessings to all whom you bless, and I am sealing [them] through you.” But if from then on the blessings were [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said, “If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking.” A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard,²See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5. [and] gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said, “If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard.” And so also did Abraham say, “If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Rather look here. I will leave him alone until the Holy One, blessed be He, comes, when He will deal with what belongs to Him.” Jacob came and received five blessings: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One, blessed be He.³Cf. Gen. R. 94:5. From his father, as stated (in Gen. 27:33), “Then Isaac trembled (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why “trembled?” R. Eliezer ben Pedat said, “[He did so] because he saw Gehinnom open in front of him. He wanted to say, ‘Cursed will be [Jacob.’ Instead,] he went back [on it], and added blessing [to it], when he said (ibid., end), ‘he also shall be blessed.’” Here is one [blessing]. A second (is in Gen. 28:1), “So Isaac called Jacob and blessed him.” The blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He, (is in Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob [… and blessed him].” The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4), “And may He grant you the blessing of Abraham.” And the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30), “and he (the angel) blessed him there.” When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessings that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28), “All these are the tribes of Israel, [twelve in number, and this is what their father spoke to them when he blessed them, each one with his own blessing is how he blessed them].”⁴The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe. When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” [According to another interpretation, Moses made] an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel,⁵Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4. since it was fitting for him to bless them with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars [he had built];⁶On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29. but [Balaam] only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10), “but here you have even blessed them these three times.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O wicked one, your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair; then he will bless Israel.” And it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9), “He that has a benevolent eye shall be blessed (ybrk).” Do not read “ybrk [with vowels meaning] shall be blessed,” but [with vowels meaning] “shall bless.” This refers to Moses our master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel, such that he blessed them with [the other] four blessings: The first is (in Exod. 39:43), “When Moses saw all the work […] he blessed them.” The second is (in Lev. 9:23), “Then Moses and Aaron came unto the tent of meeting; and when they came out, they blessed the people….” The third is (in Deut. 1:11), “May the Lord God of your ancestors add [to your numbers a thousand times more than you are and bless you].” The fourth is (here in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” It is therefore stated (in Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.”(Deut. 33:1:) And this is the blessing.” It was fitting for Moses to bless Israel because he had constantly risked his life for them.⁷PRK 31(suppl. 1):12. For this reason, it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing [that Moses blessed... the Children of Israel].” (Deut. 33:1:) “The man of God (the Power).” If it says, “man,” why does it say, “God,” and if it says, “God,” why does it say, “man?” It is simply that at the time he fled from in front of Pharaoh, he was a man, but at the time he trounced [the Egyptians], he was a power. Another interpretation: At the time that he went up to the firmament, he was a man; in front of the angels that were all fire, he was a man. But at the time he came down, he was a power. Before he went up to the firmament, he was a man, as he would eat and drink. But all the time that he was there, he was a power, as stated (in Exod. 34:20), “and they were afraid to approach him.”

Another explanation is that Jacob said: “Perhaps the Egyptians will be redeemed through me.” They are compared to asses, as it is said: Whose flesh is the flesh of asses (ibid. 33:20), and I am likened to a sheep, as is said: Israel is a scattered sheep (Jer. 50:17). And it is written elsewhere that The firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a sheep (Exod. 34:20). Hence, (Bury me not in Egypt) lest the Egyptians be redeemed through me. Therefore Bury me not, I pray thee, in Egypt.

"And take the Leviim for me" (Numbers 3:41), that they will be taken for My Name. "I am the Eternal" (ibid.), I am trusted to pay a good reward that they are taken for my name. "In place of every firstborn among the Children of Israel" (ibid.), since the firstborns are Mine, as it says (Numbers 8:17) "For Mine is every firstborn [...] on the day that I smote every firstborn in the land of Egypt... [I consecrated them to Myself]", the Holy Blessed One says, for the sake of their obligation of Israel I changed the order of the world. With which side did I write in the Torah that a donkey may be redeemed with a lamb, as it says (Exodus 13:13) "The firstborn [lit. "opening"] of every donkey you shall redeem with a sheep"? I didn't do this; rather, I redeemed a sheep with a donkey. The Egyptians are called a donkey, as it says (Ezekiel 20:2) "That the flesh of donkeys is their flesh" and Israel is called a sheep, as it says (Jeremiah 50:17) "Israel is a scattered sheep". And I murdered their firstborn, and I sanctified the firstborn of Israel, as it says "For Mine is every firstborn among the children of Israel ... on the day that I struck all the firstborn ... [of Egypt]" (Numbers 3:41). And the animals of the Leviim in place of all the firstborns amongst the animals of the Children of Israel, that they you brought out to kill the place the firstborn of the animals of Egypt, and saved the animals of Israel, and therefore sanctified to His Name the firstborn of the animals of Israel, and since he says "For Mine is every firstborn among the children of Israel ... on the day that I struck all the firstborn ... [of Egypt]" (Numbers 3:41).

Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:29, cont.): Jacob said: So that the Egyptians would not be redeemed through me, since they are likened to the ass. It is so stated (in Ezek. 23:20): WHOSE FLESH IS LIKE THE FLESH OF ASSES. And I have been likened to the flock, where it is stated (in Jer. 50:17): ISRAEL IS A SCATTERED FLOCK. It is also written (in Exod. 34:20): BUT THE FIRSTLING OF AN ASS YOU SHALL REDEEM WITH A LAMB. Lest they be redeemed through me, for that reason (according to Gen. 47:29), PLEASE DO NOT BURY ME IN EGYPT.

Another interpretation (of Numb. 3:40), “enroll every first-born male.” This text is related (to Cant. 6:8-9), “There are sixty queens, eighty concubines, and maidens without number; [but only] One is My dove, My perfect one….” [The matter] is comparable to a certain merchant,¹⁰²Gk.: pragmateutes (“business representative”). who had glass beads,¹⁰³Numb. R. 4:2. which he would bring to market; but he paid no attention to their number (minyan), because he had brought them out without counting (minyan) [them]. So when he came in to put them away, he put them away without counting. Because they were [made] of glass, he did not pay attention to them. However, he had a certain string¹⁰⁴Lat.: linea. of fine pearls;¹⁰⁵Gk. margelis. and this he would take and bring out with a count, then put away with a count. Similarly, as it were, the Holy One, blessed be He, said [in regard] to the nations of the world, “I have not given them a count, because none of them is important to me, as stated (in Is. 40:17), ‘All the nations are as nothing before Him; they are considered by Him as less than nothing and void.’ But as for you, you are My children, [as stated (in Is. 46:3)], ‘the ones who have been borne by Me from birth, carried from the womb.’ I therefore count you on every occasion.” It is therefore stated (in Numb. 3:40), “enroll every first-born male.” Ergo (in Cant. 6:8-9), “There are sixty queens […]; [but only] One is My dove, My perfect one….” This is Israel. Another interpretation (of Numb. 3:40), “enroll every first-born male.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Because of the love for Israel I have altered the [natural] order of the world.¹⁰⁶Numb. R. 4:5. How? I had written in My Torah that an ass should be redeemed with a lamb, as stated (in Exod. 34:20), “But the firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a lamb (seh) ….” But I did not do so. Instead I redeemed a lamb (seh) with an ass. The Egyptians are likened to an ass, where it is stated (in Ezek. 23:20), “whose flesh is like the flesh of asses”; and Israel is called a lamb (seh), where it is stated (in Jer. 50:17), “Israel is a scattered flock (seh).” Then I slew the first-born of the Egyptians and sanctified the first-born of Israel, as stated (in Numb. 3:13), “For every first-born belongs to Me on the day that I smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt,” I sanctified them for Myself. He therefore said to him (in Numb. 3:40), “enroll every first-born male among the Children of Israel.”

Another interpretation (of Numb. 3:40:) ENROLL EVERY FIRST-BORN MALE. The Holy One said: Because of the love for Israel I have altered the <natural> order of the world.¹²⁸Tanh., Numb. 1:20, cont.: Numb. R. 4:5. How? I had written in my Torah that an ass should be redeemed with a lamb, as stated (in Exod. 34:20): BUT THE FIRSTLING OF AN ASS YOU SHALL REDEEM WITH A LAMB (seh). But I did not do so. Instead I redeemed a lamb (seh) with an ass. The Egyptians are likened to an ass, where it is stated (in Ezek. 23:20): WHOSE FLESH IS LIKE THE FLESH OF ASSES; and Israel is called a lamb (seh), where it is stated (in Jer. 50:17): ISRAEL IS A SCATTERED FLOCK (seh). Then I slew the first-born of the Egyptians and sanctified the first-of Israel, as stated (in Numb. 8:17): FOR EVERY FIRST-BORN AMONG [THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL] BELONGS TO ME, [HUMAN AND BEAST; ON THE DAY THAT I SMOTE ALL THE FIRST-BORN IN THE LAND OF EGYPT I SANCTIFIED THEM FOR MYSELF. He therefore said to him (in Numb. 3:40): ENROLL EVERY FIRST-BORN MALE AMONG THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.]

26) An unclean beast has its mitzvah to the L–rd, viz. (Shemoth 34:20): "And the firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a lamb." An animal of the wild and a bird flying in the air — Scripture has exhorted us concerning them that when they come to your hand they should not be lacking a mitzvah, viz. (Vayikra 17:13): "A man of the children of Israel … that shall hunt a hunting of animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth." And other beasts and animals, unspecified by name, are subsumed in a general ruling so that they not be lacking in mitzvoth, viz. (Vayikra 27:28): Every devotion (cherem) which a man shall devote to the L–rd, etc." — Thus, for consecrations outside of the Temple. With Temple consecrations, there are levels upon levels. How so? Of bullocks that are to be burned and he-goats that are to be burned, Scripture states that their blood and devoted portions are to go to the altar.

(Bamidbar 18:15) "All that opens the womb of all flesh": I would think an animal, too, is included (in redemption of the first-born); it is, therefore, written "which they offer to the L-rd" (as a sacrifice) — to exclude an animal (as opposed to a beast, which is not offered). This ("which they offer") implies that both an animal and a blemished (beast) are excluded (from redemption); it is, therefore, written ("in man) and in beast" — to include a blemished (beast) in redemption, (as a blemished man is included). "in man and in beast"; What obtains with the man (i.e., redemption) obtains with his beast" — to exclude Levites: Redemption not obtaining with them, it does not obtain with their (unclean) beast (i.e., an ass). And the first-born of a man is likened to the first-born of a beast, and the first-born of a best to the first-born of a man. Just as with the first-born of a beast, a miscarriage is exempt from the mitzvah of the first-born, so, with the first-born of a man. Just as the (redemption money) for a man is given to a Cohein in whichever place he (the man) wishes, so, he may give the first-born of a beast to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes. For I would think that since it is written (Devarim 12:6) "And you shall bring there (to the Temple) your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices," then even if he were distant from it, he must exert himself and bring it (the first-born beast) to the Temple; it is, therefore, written "in man and in beast." Just as the redemption money for a man may be given to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes, so, he may give the first-born of a beast to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes. And just as the first-born of a man must be cared for for thirty days (before redemption [viz. Bamidbar 18:16]), so, the first-born of a beast. (Ibid. 15) "but redeem shall you redeem": This is what was asked in Kerem Beyavneh before the sages: If a first-born (beast) dies, is it to be redeemed and fed to the dogs? R. Tarfon expounded, "but redeem shall you redeem, etc." You redeem the unclean (beast, i.e., an ass), and you do not redeem the clean, neither alive nor dead. "and the first-born of the unclean beast shall you redeem": I would think that this applied to all the unclean beasts; it is, therefore, written (Shemot 13:13) "And every first-born of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep" — You redeem an ass, but you do not redeem the first-born of any other unclean beast. I might think that the first-born of an ass is redeemed with a sheep, and the first-born of all other unclean beasts, with clothing and vessels; it is, therefore, written again (Shemot 34:20) "And the first-born of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep." The first-born of an ass you redeem with a sheep, but the first-born of all other unclean beasts you do not redeem at all. If so, what is the intent of (Bamidbar 18:15) "the first-born of the unclean beast you shall redeem"? If it does not apply to the first-born, understand it as applying to dedication to Temple maintenance, an unclean beast being dedicated to Temple maintenance, whence it is then redeemed (viz. Vayikra 27:27). (Bamidbar 18:15) ("And the first-born of the unclean beast) shall you redeem": immediately. You say, immediately, but perhaps the intent is after some time (i.e., after thirty days). It is, therefore, (to negate this) written (Ibid. 16) "And his redemption (that of a human first-born), from one month shall you redeem." The first-born of a man is redeemed with five shekalim and is redeemed after (one month's) time; but the first-born of an ass is redeemed immediately or at any time (thereafter). "And his redemption, from one month shall you redeem": "money, five shekalim" tells me only of money. Whence do I derive (the same for something that has) the value of money? From "And his redemption, etc." I might think, (his redemption) with anything. It is, therefore, written "And his redemption" — general; "money, five shekalim" — particular. "general-particular." (The rule is) there is in the general only what is in the particular (i.e., "money," literally). "you shall redeem" — again general. — But perhaps it (the particular) reverts to the first "general" (viz. Shemot 13:13) "And every first-born of man among your sons you shall redeem," (so that we have an instance of general particular.) Would you say that? (i.e., This is unlikely because the particular is too far removed from that "general.") We have, then, an instance of general-particular-general (as stated above). And (the rule is:) We follow the nature of the particular, viz.: Just as the particular is movable property, worth money, so, the general is of that nature — whence they ruled: The first-born of a man may be redeemed with all things, except with bondsmen, writs, and land. Rebbi says: The first-born of a man may be redeemed with all things, except with writs. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "It is twenty gerah": What is the intent of this? (i.e., it is already written [Vayikra 27:25] "Twenty gerah shall the shekel be.") Whence is it derived that if he wishes to increase (the amount) he may do so? From "it shall be." I might think that if he wishes to decrease, he may do so. It is, therefore, written "shall be." (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "But the first-born of an ox": It must look like an ox. "a sheep": It must look like a sheep. "a goat": It must look like a goat — to exclude a hybrid or a nidmeh (superficially similar). "you shall not redeem": I might think that if he redeemed it, it remains redeemed; it is, therefore, written "They are consecrated." R. Yoshiyah says: Why is this ("they are consecrated") written? (i.e., it is already written [Shemot 13:2] "Consecrate unto Me every first-born") To include a (beast-) tithe and the Paschal lamb as requiring one spilling (of blood on the altar), something which was not spelled out in all of the Torah. R. Yitzchak says: This (derivation) is not needed. For it is already written (Devarim 12:27) "and the blood of your sacrifices shall be spilled out" — to include the tithe and the Pesach as requiring one spilling. What, then, is the intent of "They are consecrated"? To include the tithe and the Pesach as requiring smoking of the fats, something which was not spelled out in all of the Torah. Abba Channan says in the name of R. Eliezer: This (derivation) is not needed. For it follows a fortiori, viz.: If other offerings, which are not similar in their applications of blood, are similar in their smoking of fats, then the tithe and the Pesach, which are similar (in a first-born) in their application of blood, how much more so should they be similar in their smoking of fats! What, then, is the intent of "They are consecrated"? What we have mentioned heretofore (i.e., to include tithe and Pesach as requiring one spilling of blood). "Their blood shall you sprinkle upon the altar": one application. You say one application, but perhaps (the intent is) two applications that are four (i.e., one on the north-east corner and one on the south-west corner.) — Would you say that? If in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where fats are increased (viz. Vayikra 3:2), blood is decreased (i.e., only two applications that are four), then here (with first-born, tithe and Pesach), where fats are decreased, how much more so should blood be decreased (to only one application)! Or, conversely, if in a place (first-born, tithe, and Pesach), where fats are decreased, blood is increased (to two applications that are four), then in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where fats are increased, how much more so should blood be increased (to more than two applications that are four)! It is, therefore, written (of the other offerings) (Vayikra 1:11) "And the Cohanim" shall sprinkle … roundabout" — two applications that are four. I have reasoned a fortiori and adduced the converse. The converse has been rejected and I return to the original a fortiori argument, viz.: If in a place where fats are increased, blood is decreased, then here, where fats are decreased, how much more so should blood be decreased (to only one application)! What, then, is the intent of "Their blood shall you sprinkle"? One application. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "and their fats shall you smoke": Does Scripture speak of an (even) layer of fat (covered with) a membrane and (easily) peeled, or also with the fats of the rib cage? — Would you say that? If in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where blood is increased, fats are decreased, (the rib-cage fats, not being smoked) — then here, (vis-à-vis the first-born, where blood is decreased, how much more so should fats be decreased! How, then, am I to understand "and their fats shall you smoke"? As referring to an (even) layer of fat (covered with) a membrane and (easily) peeled. "a fire-offering": Even though you consign it to the wood pile, it is not acceptable until it is consumed by the fire. "a sweet savor to the L-rd": It is My pleasure that I have spoken and My will has been done. (Ibid. 18) "And their flesh shall be for you as the wave-breast": Scripture came and likened first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings. Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born is eaten for two days and one night. This question was asked before the sages in Kerem Beyavneh: For how long is first-born eaten? R. Tarfon answered and said: For two days and one night. There was a certain disciple there, who had come to serve in the house of study first, R. Yossi Haglili by name. He asked him: My master, how do you know this? R. Tarfon: First-born is kodshim (consecrated) and peace-offerings are kodshim. Just as peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born. R. Yossi: My master, a sin-offering is a gift to the Cohein, and a first-born is a gift to the Cohein. Just as a sin-offering is eaten for one day and one night, so, a first-born. R. Tarfon: My son, I will learn a thing from a thing, and I will derive a thing from a thing. I will learn a thing that is a lower-order offering (first-born) from a thing which is a lower-order offering (peace-offerings), and I will not learn a thing which is a lower-order offering from a thing which is holy of holies (a sin-offering). R. Yossi: My master, I will learn a thing from a thing and I will derive a thing from a thing. I will learn a thing which is a gift to the Cohein (first-born) from a thing which is a gift to the Cohein (sin-offering), and I will not learn a thing which is a gift to the Cohein from a thing which is not a gift to the Cohein (peace-offerings). R. Tarfon kept quiet and R. Akiva jumped up and said to him: My son, this is how I expound it; "and its flesh shall be for you as the wave-breast." Scripture came and likened first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings. Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so first-born. R. Yossi: You liken it to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings, and I liken it to breast and shoulder of thank-offerings. Just as these are eaten for one day and one night, (viz. Vayikra 7:16) so, first-born. R. Akiva: My son, this is how I expound it: "And their flesh shall be for you as wave-breast." There is no need to add (Ibid.) "for you shall it be." It ("for you shall it be') is adding another "being" (of one day), that it (first-born) be eaten for two days and one night (— like peace-offerings, and not like thank-offerings). R. Yishmael said: Now where is thank-offering derived from (i.e., that breast and shoulder be given to the Cohanim)? Is it not from (its being likened to) peace-offerings? And something (i.e., first-born), which is derived from something else (i.e., peace-offerings), you (R. Yossi) would come and liken it (first-born) to something else (i.e., thank-offerings, that it [first-born] be eaten for one day and one night as thank-offerings are)? Would you learn something (i.e., that first-born be eaten for one day and one night) from something (thank-offering), which is itself learned from something else (i.e., peace-offerings)? (In sum,) you are not to learn as per the latter version (that of R. Yossi), but as per the former version, viz.: "And their flesh (that of first-born) shall be for you, etc." Scripture hereby comes to liken first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings — Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born is eaten for two days and one night. What, then, is the intent of (the redundant) "for you shall it be"? To include a blemished first-born as reverting to the Cohein, something which was not spelled out in the all of the Torah. R. Elazar says: (A first-born may be eaten) for two days and one night. You say for two days and one night, but perhaps it is for a day and a night? It is, therefore, written (Devarim 15:20) "Before the L-rd your G-d shall you eat it (the first-born), year in year," which implies that it may be eaten for two days and one night (i.e., the last day of the preceding year and the first day of the next year and the intervening night). (Bamidbar, Ibid. 19) "All the terumah of the holy things, which the children of Israel will separate": There are sections which generalize in the beginning and specify at the end; (others) which specify in the beginning and generalize at the end; and this one generalizes in the beginning (18:8) and generalizes at the end, (here, 18:19), and specifies in the middle. "have I given to you and to your sons and to your daughters with you as an everlasting statute": that it continue for all the succeeding generations. "It is a covenant of salt forever before the L-rd": Scripture forged a covenant with Aaron with something (salt), which preserves, and which, furthermore, preserves other things.