Blemishing a Firstborn and Handling Impure Teruma

Discover the halakhic boundaries of damaging sacred offerings indirectly, the scope of rabbinic penalties on heirs, and how impure gifts to kohanim are utilized.

Indirectly Causing a Blemish to a Firstborn

A male בכור (firstborn offering) of kosher livestock possesses innate sanctity from birth and may only be eaten after it develops a permanent blemish. The Torah forbids purposely damaging a consecrated animal, but the Gemara queries whether this restriction extends to גרמא (indirect causation). The Rabbis derive from the inclusive phrasing of scripture that one may not bring dough or dried figs and stick them to the animal's ear so that an animal will bite it off.

The Rambam codifies that placing dough on the ear, guiding the animal through sharp debris, or instructing a gentile to cause damage all disqualify the resulting defect from permitting the animal, establishing that any defect created with a person's knowledge cannot serve as grounds for slaughter. Maran rules in the Shulchan Arukh that causing a blemish indirectly is strictly forbidden, and the owner may not slaughter upon it.

מִנַּיִן שֶׁלֹּא יָבִיא דְּבֵילָה וּבָצֵק וְיַנִּיחֶנָּה עַל הָאוֹזֶן כְּדֵי שֶׁיָּבֹא כֶּלֶב וְיֹאכְלֶנָּה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״כׇּל מוּם״

From where is it derived that one may not bring pressed figs or dough and place it on the animal’s ear so that a dog will come and eat it? The verse states: 'any blemish.' (Bekhorot 34a:1)

Slaughtering an Intentionally Blemished Animal

The Mishnah addresses one who intentionally slits the ear of a בכור to render it permissible for mundane consumption. Rabbi Eliezer imposes an absolute penalty and rules that the owner may never slaughter that animal, whereas the Sages rule that he only cannot slaughter on that specific blemish. If another blemish subsequently develops on its own, the animal becomes permitted.

The Gemara clarifies that the Sages tailor the rabbinic sanction specifically to the prohibited intention of the transgressor, barring him only from benefiting through his improper act. The Shulchan Arukh adopts this ruling of the Sages, deciding that one who causes a blemish directly or through indirect causation cannot slaughter the animal until another blemish falls naturally.

Penalizing an Heir After the Transgressor Dies

A dilemma arose regarding whether rabbinic sanctions pass down through inheritance: if a father intentionally slit the ear of a בכור and then died, do the Sages penalize his son after him? The Gemara resolves this by comparing the case to an agricultural penalty: if a father improperly fertilized his field during שביעית (the Sabbatical Year) and died, his son may still sow the field at the conclusion of the year.

This precedent demonstrates that the Sages imposed personal penalties only upon the wrongdoer himself rather than his innocent heirs. The Shulchan Arukh codifies this conclusion, ruling that if the father blemishes the animal and dies, the bet din does not penalize the son, and the son may slaughter upon that blemish.

הֱטִיבָהּ וָמֵת — בְּנוֹ זוֹרְעָהּ. אַלְמָא לְדִידֵיהּ קְנַסוּ רַבָּנַן, לִבְרֵיהּ לָא קְנַסוּ רַבָּנַן.

If one improved his field and died, his son may sow it. Apparently, the Sages penalized him, but they did not penalize his son. (Bekhorot 34b:17)

Separating and Utilizing Impure Heave-Offering

In comparing the requirement of safeguarding offerings, the Gemara examines the scriptural phrase concerning תרומה (heave-offering) given to the priesthood. The Rambam rules that even when produce becomes ritually impure before separation, one must still designate teruma, which the kohen cannot eat but may utilize by burning it for personal benefit. Impure oil may be burned for lighting, and impure grain may serve as oven fuel.

Maran writes in the Shulchan Arukh that because all agricultural produce is assumed to be ritually impure nowadays, one designates any minimal amount whatsoever for teruma, since it must be destroyed. The Rema adds that the owner gives this teruma to any kohen, who is permitted to benefit from its combustion as fuel.

הַטְּהוֹרָה נֶאֱכֶלֶת לַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַטְּמֵאָה יֵהָנוּ בִּשְׂרֵפָתָהּ. אִם הָיָה שֶׁמֶן מַדְלִיקִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה דָּגָן וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ מַסִּיקִין בּוֹ אֶת הַתַּנּוּר:

The pure terumah may be eaten by the priests and they can benefit from the impure terumah by burning it. If it is oil, it can be kindled; if it is grain or the like, they kindle the oven with it. (Mishneh Torah, Heave Offerings 2:14)

Rabbinic penalties for deliberately damaging sacred offerings restrict the transgressor from benefiting from the act, but they neither transfer to an heir nor bar the utilization of impure teruma for kindling.

Learn Bekhorot 34 on Super Daf