Mishneh Torah — Sacrificial Procedure הלכות מעשה הקרבנות, Chapter 15

הָאוֹמֵר וְלָדָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה וִהִיא שְׁלָמִים דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. הִיא שְׁלָמִים וּוְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה. אִם לְכָךְ נִתְכַּוֵּן דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. וְאִם אַחַר שֶׁגָּמַר בְּלִבּוֹ וְהוֹצִיא בִּשְׂפָתָיו שֶׁתִּהְיֶה שְׁלָמִים חָזַר בּוֹ וְאָמַר וּוְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָזַר בּוֹ בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִּבּוּר הֲרֵי וְלָדָהּ שְׁלָמִים. שֶׁאֵין חֲזָרָה בְּהֶקְדֵּשׁ וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִּבּוּר:

When a person says: "The offspring of this [animal] 5:1)]. is [consecrated] as a burnt-offering and it is [consecrated] as a peace-offering," 4:2, the offspring of a sin-offering is not sacrificed, but instead, set aside to die. Hence the Rambam speaks only of the offspring of peace-offerings. his words are binding. [Should he say:] "It is [consecrated] as a peace-offering and its offspring as a burnt-offering," if that was his intent, his words are binding. 4:1). Nevertheless, in this instance, if the person originally had the intent of consecrating the offspring as a burnt-offering, the offspring is given that status, because it was never meant to be a peace-offering. The person could only make one statement at a time and the fact that he chose to speak about the mother first does not affect the offspring's status.If, after he made a resolve in his heart and expressed verbally that [the offspring] should be a peace-offering, he retracted and said: "Its offspring is a burnt-offering," even though he retracted immediately,, has a very specific halachic meaning: "Within the time it takes to say Shalom Elecha, Rebbi" ("Greetings my master"; Hilchot Sh'vuot 2:17). the offspring are [designated] as peace-offerings. For one cannot retract [pledges of] consecration even when one does so immediately. 5:3), the Rambam explains that generally if one seeks to retract his statements immediately, the retraction is effective. There are, however, several instances marriage and divorce, the acceptance of a false divinity, blasphemy, the consecration of sacrifices, and the transfer of holiness from one animal to another where retraction is not possible.Nevertheless, the Rambam's perspective is not accepted by all authorities. Siftei Cohen (Choshen Mishpat 255:5) takes issue with him and argues that one may retract the consecration of an animal. Other sages, however, support the Rambam's position.

הָאוֹמֵר יָדָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה אוֹ רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה תִּמָּכֵר לְחַיָּבֵי עוֹלוֹת וְדָמֶיהָ חֻלִּין חוּץ מִדְּמֵי אוֹתוֹ אֵיבָר. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה זֶה הַמְחֻיָּב עוֹלָה שֶׁקָּנָה אוֹתָהּ נָדַר עוֹלָה בְּדָמִים קְצוּבִים. הָאוֹמֵר לִבָּהּ אוֹ רֹאשָׁהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה. הוֹאִיל וְדָבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְּלוּיָה בּוֹ הוּא כֻּלָּהּ עוֹלָה. הִקְדִּישׁ אֵיבָר אֶחָד מִן הָעוֹף הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק אִם נִתְקַדֵּשׁ כֻּלּוֹ אוֹ לֹא נִתְקַדֵּשׁ:

When one says: "The right forefoot of this animal is a burnt-offering," or "The leg of this animal is a burnt offering," it should be sold to those obligated to bring burnt-offerings. The proceeds of the sale are considered as ordinary funds with the exception of the worth of that limb. [The above applies] provided the person obligated to bring a burnt-offering who purchased [the animal] vowed [to bring] a burnt-offering for a specific price. 1:5) resolves this difficulty, explaining that we are speaking of an instance where the person vowed to spend a specific amount to bring a burnt-offering. Since the animal is worth that amount, he has fulfilled his vow.If one says: "The heart [of this animal]..." or "The head of this [animal] is a burnt-offering," the entire animal is a burnt-offering, for he consecrated an organ upon which [the animal's] life depends. If one consecrated a limb from a fowl, there is an unresolved doubt whether or not the entire fowl becomes consecrated. 11b. The argument centers on the fact that the concept that one can consecrate a limb from an animal as a sacrifice was derived from the exegesis of a verse (Leviticus 27:9 . Now that verse is referring to an animal sacrifice and hence, our Sages question whether the concept applies to all sacrifices or only those involving animals.

הָאוֹמֵר בְּהֵמָה זוֹ חֶצְיָהּ עוֹלָה וְחֶצְיָהּ שְׁלָמִים קָדְשָׁה. וְאֵינָהּ קְרֵבָה אֶלָּא תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּפּל בָּהּ מוּם וְתִמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בַּחֲצִי דָּמֶיהָ עוֹלָה וּבַחֲצִי דָּמֶיהָ שְׁלָמִים. הָיָה מְחֻיָּב חַטָּאת וְאָמַר חֶצְיָהּ חַטָּאת וְחֶצְיָהּ עוֹלָה אוֹ שְׁלָמִים. אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר חֶצְיָהּ עוֹלָה אוֹ שְׁלָמִים וְחֶצְיָהּ חַטָּאת. הֲרֵי הִיא תָּמוּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בַּחַטָּאוֹת הַמֵּתוֹת:

When one says: "Half of this animal is a burnt-offering and half is a peace-offering," it is consecrated, but it should not be offered. Instead, it should be allowed to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying physical blemish and then be sold. Half of the proceeds should be used to bring a burnt offering and half, a peace-offering.If he was obligated to bring a sin-offering and he said: "Half of this animal is a sin-offering and half is a burnt-offering," or "...a peace-offering," or he said: "Half of this animal is a burnt-offering..." or "...a peace-offering and half is a sin-offering," [the animal] should be left to die, as will be explained with regard to the sin-offerings that are left to die. 4:1 regarding what is done with the animal. There the Rambam speaks about an animal separated as a sin-offering that was lost and discovered after its owner had brought another sin-offering in its stead. Since this animal was consecrated for a specific purpose and cannot be sacrificed for that purpose, it cannot be used for any other purpose and is hence caused to die. Similarly, in the instance at hand, since the animal cannot be sacrificed for the purpose for which it was consecrated, it is caused to die.

בֶּהֱמַת הַשֻּׁתָּפִין שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ אֶחָד מֵהֶן חֶצְיָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ וְחָזַר וְלָקַח חֶצְיָהּ הָאַחֵר וְהִקְדִּישׁוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ קְדֵשָׁה וּקְרֵבָה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּתְּחִלָּתָהּ דְּחוּיָה הָיְתָה כְּשֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ חֶצְיָהּ אֵין הַדָּחוּי מֵעִקָּרוֹ דָּחוּי וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא קְדֻשַּׁת דָּמִים הוֹאִיל וְהִיא בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים אֵין בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים נִדָּחִים. וַהֲרֵי נִרְאֵית כֻּלָּהּ לְהַקְרָבָה לְפִיכָךְ תִּקָּרֵב וְעוֹשָׂה תְּמוּרָה:

When one of the partners who owned half an animal consecrated his portion and then purchased the other half and consecrated it, it is consecrated and offered on the altar. Even though originally, when he consecrated half of it, it was unacceptable, the fact that it was originally unacceptable does not cause it to be unacceptable forever. 3:24. Even though originally only its worth was consecrated, since it is a live animal, [we follow the principle:] 59a. This is also a concept that applies in many different contexts of the laws concerning the consecration of animals. See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 3:23; Hilchot Shegagot 3:8, et al. "Living animals are never permanently disqualified." Since it is [ultimately] fit to be sacrificed, it should be sacrificed. [Moreover,] if one sought to transfer its holiness to another animal,. the transfer is binding.

הָאוֹמֵר דְּמֵי בְּהֵמָה זוֹ עוֹלָה אוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ לְעוֹלָה. אִם הָיְתָה רְאוּיָה לִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה נִתְקַדְּשָׁה קְדֻשַּׁת הַגּוּף וְהִיא עַצְמָהּ תִּקָּרֵב עוֹלָה. וְאִם אֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה תִּמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בְּדָמֶיהָ עוֹלָה:

[Whether] one says: "The worth of this animal is a burnt-offering," or "This animal is a burnt-offering," if it is fit to be sacrificed as a burnt-offering, its body itself is consecrated and it should be sacrificed as a burnt-offering. If it is not fit [to be sacrificed], it should be sold elaborates, proving that here also, the Rambam's intent is that it should be left to pasture until it becomes blemished and then sold. and a burnt-offering brought with the proceeds of the sale.

אָמַר עַל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ מֵאִסּוּרֵי קָרְבָּן שֶׁאֵין קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ עוֹלָה לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת אִסּוּרֵי מִזְבֵּחַ. אָמַר הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לְעוֹלָה יִמָּכְרוּ וְיָבִיא בִּדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלָה:

If a person said with regard to an impure animal or another similar animal that is forbidden [to be offered] as a sacrifice that can never be consecrated: "Behold this is consecrated as a burnt-offering," his words are of no consequence. 3:10 and the one stated here. Others maintain that the source refers to the first clause. In Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach (see below), the Rambam speaks of consecrating an animal "for the altar." If he states: "This animal is a sacrifice," no holiness is attached to it at all (see the gloss of the Ra'avad there). Similarly, in this instance, since he wished to designate the animals as a sacrifice, his words are of no consequence at all. As we explained in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach, 3:10 where the Rambam states:One who consecrates an animal which is a tumtum, androgynus, tereifah... to the altar is like one who consecrated stones or wood.... The holiness does not take effect with regard to its physical substance. It is considered as ordinary property in all contexts. It should be sold and the proceeds of the sale used to purchase any sacrifice one desires. It is not considered like a blemished animal, for a sacrifice may be brought from the species of a blemished animal.Similarly, in the case at hand, since a sacrifice cannot be brought from such animals, they should be sold and the proceeds used to purchase the appropriate sacrifice. if he says: "These are [consecrated] for the sake of a burnt-offering," they should be sold and a burnt-offering brought with the proceeds of the sale.

הָאוֹמֵר דְּמֵי פָּרָה זוֹ לְעוֹלָה כָּל שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם וּלְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם לִשְׁלָמִים אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר דָּמֶיהָ לִשְׁלָמִים כָּל שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם וּלְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם לְעוֹלָה דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. וְאִם הִקְרִיב דָּמֶיהָ בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם מֵבִיא בָּהֶן כְּמוֹ שֶׁנָּדַר וְאִם הִקְרִיבוֹ לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם מֵבִיא כְּמוֹ שֶׁנָּדַר:

If a person said: 29a, whether or not the consecration of the value (but not the physical substance) of an object for a limited time expires if nothing is done within that time. As will be stated, his ruling is that it does expire. "The worth of this cow). is [consecrated] for the sake of a burnt-offering for an entire 30 day period. After 30 days, [it is consecrated for the sake of a peace-offering," or he said: "The worth of this cow is [consecrated] for the sake of a peace-offering for an entire 30 day period. After 30 days, [it is consecrated] for the sake of a burnt-offering," his words are binding. [Thus] if he [comes to] offer [a sacrifice from] the proceeds of its sale within 30 days, he should bring the type of sacrifice that he vowed. If he offers it after 30 days, he should bring the type of sacrifice that he vowed.

הָיְתָה לוֹ בְּהֵמָה מְעֻבֶּרֶת וְאָמַר אִם תֵּלֵד זָכָר הֲרֵי הוּא עוֹלָה וְאִם הִיא נְקֵבָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים. יָלְדָה זָכָר יִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה. יָלְדָה נְקֵבָה תִּקָּרֵב זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים. יָלְדָה זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה הַזָּכָר יִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה וְהַנְּקֵבָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים. יָלְדָה שְׁנֵי זְכָרִים אֶחָד יִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה וְהַשֵּׁנִי יִמָּכֵר לְצָרְכֵי עוֹלָה וְדָמָיו חֻלִּין. וְכֵן אִם יָלְדָה שְׁתֵּי נְקֵבוֹת אַחַת תִּקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים וּשְׁנִיָּה תִּמָּכֵר לְצָרְכֵי שְׁלָמִים וְדָמֶיהָ חֻלִּין. יָלְדָה טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס אֵינָן קָדָשִׁים וַהֲרֵי הֵן חֻלִּין כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וְהַמַּקְדִּישׁ עֻבָּר בִּמְעֵי בַּעֲלַת מוּם וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ הֲרֵי זֶה קָדוֹשׁ:

If a person possessed a pregnant animal 12:10, the Lechem Mishneh states that this applies only when the animal is pregnant and thus the fetus exists. If, however, the animal is not pregnant, the person's words are not binding. and said: "Should it give birth to a male, it is a burnt-offering. Should it give birth to a female, it is a peace-offering," if the animal gives birth to a male, it should be sacrificed as a burnt-offering. If it gives birth to a female, it should be sacrificed as a peace-offering. If it gives birth to a male and a female, the male should be sacrificed as a burnt-offering and the female, as a peace-offering.If it gives birth to two males, one should be sacrificed as a burnt-offering and the other sold for the sake of a burnt-offering, but the proceeds of the sale are ordinary money. If it gives birth to two females, one should be sacrificed as a peace-offering and the other sold for the sake of a peace-offering, but the proceeds of the sale are ordinary money. If it gave birth to a tumtum or an androgynus, they are not consecrated and they are like ordinary animals, as we explained. 3:10 (cited above). See the second interpretation given in the notes to Halachah 6. When a person consecrates a fetus, whose mother has a disqualifying blemish or the like, while it is in its mother's womb, it is consecrated.