(a)Question (Rava bar Ada): From when are Bikurim have a punishment of Misah b'Yedei Shamayim for a Zar who eats them?

(b)Answer: It is after they enter the Azarah.

(c)This is like R. Eliezer.

1.(Beraisa - R. Eliezer): If Bikurim are partially in the Azarah, the part inside is like Hekdesh in all respects, and the part outside is like Chulin in all respects.

(d)(Rav Sheshes): Hanachah is Me'akev Bikurim, but Kri'ah is not Me'akev.

(e)This is like R. Yishmael.

1.(Beraisa - R. Yosi citing R. Yishmael) Suggestion: Perhaps even nowadays (after the Churban) one may bring Ma'aser Sheni to Yerushalayim and eat it!

i.Question: We should learn from Bechor, which also must be brought to Yerushalayim. It may be eaten only when the Mikdash stands!

ii.Answer: We do not learn from Bechor, for its blood and Eimurim must be thrown on the Mizbe'ach.

iii.Question: We should learn from Bikurim (which may not be eaten today)!

iv.Answer: We do not learn from Bikurim, for they require Hanachah (in front of the Mizbe'ach).

2.Rejection: "V'Ochalta... Ma'aser Degancha... u'Vchoros Bekarcha" equates Ma'aser to Bechor;

i.Just like Bechor may be eaten only when the Mikdash stands, also Ma'aser.

3.R. Yishmael said that we do not learn from Bikurim, for they require Hanachah. He did not say that they require Hanachah and Kri'ah. (This shows that he holds that Kri'ah is not Me'akev.)

(f)Objection (Rav Ashi): Even if Kri'ah is not Me'akev, there is a Mitzvah to do Kri'ah. He should have said that we cannot learn from Bikurim because the Mitzvos of Hanachah and Kri'ah apply to them!

(g)Answer (Rav Ashi): He did not ask from Kri'ah because it does not always apply. E.g., a convert does not do Kri'ah, for he cannot say "Asher Nishba Hash-m la'Avoseinu." (There is no proof whether or not R. Yishmael holds that Kri'ah is Me'akev.)

(h)Question: Why do we need a Hekesh to learn from Bechor? We should be able to learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah of Bechor and Bikurim!

(i)Answer: We cannot learn from them, for both require the Mizbe'ach (for Zerikas Dam and Eimurim of Bechor, and Hanachah of Bikurim).

(j)Question: What is R. Yishmael's opinion about Kedushah (of the Mikdash)?

1.If the original Kedushah was permanent, we should be able to bring Bechor today!

2.If it was not permanent, he should also ask about Bechor! (If Zerikah was done for a Bechor before the Churban, may one eat the meat in Yerushalayim (within the allotted two days, even if this is) after the Churban? Tosfos' text - If it was not permanent, also Ma'aser should be forbidden!)

(k)Answer (Ravina): He holds that the original Kedushah was not permanent;

1.If the Churban came after Zerikas Dam of a Bechor and meat remained, it is obvious to him that it is forbidden because he equates the meat to the blood;

i.Just like the Mizbe'ach is needed for Zerikah, it is needed to eat the meat.

(l)Question: R. Yishmael learned Ma'aser from a Hekesh to Bechor. Bechor itself was learned from a Hekesh, so it cannot teach through a Hekesh! (Regarding Kodshim, we do not learn a Hekesh from something learned from a Hekesh.)

(m)Answer: Ma'aser (of Peros) is not Kodshim. It is Chulin.


(n)Question: This is like the opinion that it (learning a Hekesh from a Hekesh) depends on whether or not the matter being learned is Kodesh;

1.However, according to like the opinion that it depends on what we learn from, Bechor is Kodesh, we cannot learn to Ma'aser!

(o)Answer: Blood and meat are the same. (It is as if the Isur to eat the meat was learned directly, and not from a Hekesh.)


(a)(Mishnah): Kodshei Kodoshim... (and Ma'aser Sheni outside the wall).

(b)Question: The first Mishnah of our Perek already taught Ma'aser Sheni and Hekdesh that were not redeemed!

(c)Answer (R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina): Our Mishnah discusses a Tahor (person) eating Tahor Ma'aser Sheni outside Yerushalayim. The first Mishnah discusses eating in Yerushalayim when the person or Ma'aser Sheni is Tamei.

(d)Question: What is the source that one is lashed for this?

(e)Answer (Beraisa - R. Shimon): (It says in the Viduy of Ma'aser) "v'Lo Vi'arti Mimenu b'Tamei" - I did not eat when I or the Ma'aser was Tamei;

1.I do not know where the Torah warns against this...

i.Interjection: The Torah explicitly warns a Tamei person - "... v'Tam'ah Ad ha'Erev v'Lo Yochal Min ha'Kodoshim"!

ii.Clarification: R. Shimon asks where the Torah warns against eating Tamei Ma'aser.

2.Continuation: It says (about a blemished Bechor) "bi'She'arecha Tochalenu ha'Tamei veha'Tahor Yachdav";

i.(Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): A Tamei and Tahor may eat from the same bowl. We are not concerned lest the food is Tamei. . It says "Lo Suchal Le'chol bi'She'arecha (Ma'aser... )", i.e. one may not eat Ma'aser the way one may eat something else (a blemished Bechor) that is eaten "bi'She'arecha", i.e. when the food is Tamei.


(a)Question: What is the source that one may redeem Tamei Ma'aser?

(b)Answer (R. Elazar): One may redeem Tamei Ma'aser even in Yerushalayim (because it may not be eaten) - "Lo Suchal Se'eso";

1.'Seis' refers to eating - "va'Yisa Mas'os me'Es Panav" (Yosef gave to his brothers to eat.).

(c)(Rav Bivi): Tahor Ma'aser may be redeemed even one step outside the wall (because it may not be eaten there) - "Lo Suchal Se'eso."

(d)Question: We need the verse for R. Elazar's law!

(e)Answer: Had the Torah wanted to teach only his law, it should have said 'Lo Suchal Le'achlo';

1."Se'eso" (which connotes carrying) alludes to Rav Bivi's law (permission to eat depends on carrying it into Yerushalayim).

(f)Question: Perhaps the verse teaches only Rav Bivi's law!

(g)Answer: If so, it should have said 'Lo Suchal Litlo';

1.Rather, it says "Se'eso", which also connotes eating, to teach both.

(h)(R. Chanina and R. Hoshaya): What is the law if he is (carrying Ma'aser) at the entrance to Yerushalayim?

1.Clearly, if he is outside and the Ma'aser is inside, it is considered inside (and he may not redeem it if it is Tahor);

2.If he is inside and the Ma'aser is outside, what is the law?

(i)Answer (An elder from R. Shimon's academy): "Ki Yirchak Mimcha ha'Makom" - from your entirety, i.e. you may redeem (Tahor) Ma'aser only if you and your load are outside.

(j)Question (Rav Papa): If he is (inside,) holding it on a stick (and the Ma'aser is outside), what is the law? (Since it does not rest on his body, perhaps he may redeem it.)

(k)This question is not resolved.

(l)(Rav Asi): One is liable for eating Ma'aser Sheni outside Yerushalayim only if it was once inside.

1.It says "Lifnei Hash-m Elokecha Tochalenu..." and "Lo Suchal Le'chol bi'She'arecha." The Lav applies only if it was once possible to eat it "Lifnei Hash-m" (inside Yerushalayim).