The Gemara here and in Bava Metzia 57b and 87b teaches that property which belongs to Hekdesh is not included in the term "Shor Re'ehu" or "Kerem Re'acha." It seems clear from the Gemara that Hash-m cannot be referred to as "Re'echa."

But this contradicts Rashi words (in Shabbos 31a, Chagigah 7a, Mishlei 27:10, based on Shemos Rabah 27), that the verse " Re'echa v'Re'a Avicha Al Ta'azov" (Mishlei ibid.) refers to Hash-m! (See also Tehilim 139:17.)

It is evident that Hash-m is called the "owner" of Hekdesh from the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah 6a, where Hekdesh is referred to as "the storehouse of Hash-m". In Bava Metzia 114a we infer that the 'owner' of Hekdesh does want to receive our Berachah, since the Hash-m bids us "v'Achalta v'Sava'ata u'Verachta."

If so, why isn't the ox of Hekdesh included in the phrase "Shor Re'ehu"?

Shmuel Moshe Peters, Yerushalayim