Selling Tithes and Sharing the Blemished Firstborn

Learn how the Sages navigated the prohibition of selling animal tithes through absorption, and why Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel clashed over who may eat a firstborn.

Restricting Commerce in Animal Offerings

The Torah designates an animal tithe (מַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה - ma'sar behemah) for its owner and a firstborn animal (בְּכוֹר - bekhor) for the priest. Even after contracting a permanent blemish and being ritually slaughtered, these offerings retain a level of sanctity.

Unlike other disqualified sacrifices, the meat of an animal tithe cannot be sold outright. To prevent financial loss, the Sages allowed the owner to sell the meat indirectly through הַבְלָעָה (havla'ah, absorption), inflating the price of permitted parts such as the hide, fat, and sinews.

וּמַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה שֶׁשְּׁחָטוֹ — מַבְלִיעוֹ בְּעוֹרוֹ, בְּחֶלְבּוֹ, וּבְגִידוֹ, וּבְקַרְנָיו.

And with regard to an animal tithe offering that one has slaughtered, one may include the cost of the meat in the cost of its hide, its fat, its sinews, and its horns. (Bekhorot 31b:12)

May Meat Be Bundled into Bones?

The Gemara asks whether this mechanism extends beyond hides and sinews to the animal's bones. Rabbi Chiyya and Rabbi Shimon beRabbi take opposing positions on this inquiry. One Sage rules that the owner may bundle the meat's price into the bones, while the other rules that he may not.

The core dispute centers on whether bones possess inherent monetary value. If bones are deemed worthless refuse, inflating their price to mask the meat sale is an obvious artifice; but where bones are traded, absorption serves as a valid commercial mechanism.

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מַהוּ לְהַבְלִיעוֹ בַּעֲצָמוֹת? רַבִּי חִיָּיא וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרַבִּי, חַד אָמַר: מַבְלִיעוֹ, וְחַד אָמַר: אֵין מַבְלִיעוֹ.

A dilemma was raised before them: What is the halakha with regard to including its value in the bones? Rabbi Chiyya and Rabbi Shimon beRabbi disputed this: One says he may include it, and one says he may not include it. (Bekhorot 32a:4)

Harmonization: Livestock Size and Local Craft

The Gemara demonstrates that the two Sages do not fundamentally disagree. The Sage who forbids absorption speaks of small livestock, whose brittle bones cannot be fashioned into utensils and are commercially worthless. The Sage who permits it speaks of large cattle, whose sturdy bones are sold to craft tool handles and flutes.

Alternatively, both Sages speak of large cattle, but rule according to their local customs. Absorption is permitted only in regions where artisans routinely purchase bones, ensuring the transaction is recognized as legitimate commerce.

The Commentators Clash Over the Rambam

The Rambam codifies this halacha, ruling that if the bones command a high price, absorbing the meat's value into them is permitted. A notable dispute emerges among the commentators regarding the Rambam's methodology.

The Kessef Mishneh suggests that the Rambam treated the Amoraim as having an unresolved dispute and ruled leniently on rabbinic law. However, the Ohr Sameach rejects this, noting that the Gemara explicitly harmonized the positions. The Kiryat Sefer agrees that the Rambam simply adopted the Gemara's conclusion that absorption is permitted whenever bones are commercially valuable.

כן מפורש בגמרא ולא פליגי עיי"ש, ודברי כס"מ תמוהין

This is explicit in the Gemara, which concludes: 'And they do not disagree'—see there. And the words of the Kessef Mishneh are astonishing. (Ohr Sameach on Mishneh Torah, Firstlings 6:8:1)

Who May Partake of a Firstborn?

The daf next addresses who may partake of a blemished firstborn once slaughtered. The Mishnah records a sharp dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. Beit Shammai rule that an ordinary Israelite cannot be registered to dine with the priest on a firstborn offering.

Beit Shammai derive this restriction from Scripture, which compares the firstborn's flesh to the priestly breast and thigh. Just as non-priests are barred from those consecrated portions, the firstborn remains restricted to priests alone.

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי? דִּכְתִיב ״וּבְשָׂרָם יִהְיֶה לָךְ וְגוֹ׳״, מָה הָתָם כֹּהֲנִים — אִין, יִשְׂרָאֵל — לָא, אַף הָכָא כֹּהֲנִים — אִין, יִשְׂרָאֵל — לָא.

What is the reason of Beit Shammai? As it is written: 'And their flesh shall be yours...' Just as there, priests yes, Israelites no; so too here, priests yes, Israelites no. (Bekhorot 32b:11)

The Halachic Conclusion

Beit Hillel reject Beit Shammai's restriction, permitting non-priests to partake of the meat. The Mishnah follows Rabbi Akiva's formulation of Beit Hillel, ruling that a priest may feed even a gentile from the blemished firstborn.

The halacha follows Beit Hillel regarding the firstborn, allowing non-priests and gentiles to join the meal. Regarding animal tithe, the halacha permits bundling meat into bones whenever local market conditions give those bones tangible value.

While tithe meat may be sold only by bundling it into genuinely valuable parts like bones, a blemished firstborn completely sheds its exclusive priestly restriction after slaughter.

Learn Bekhorot 32 on Super Daf