Sefer HaChinuch ספר החינוך

To not work with consecrated things: To not do work with consecrated beasts. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 15:19), “you shall not work with your firstborn ox.” And the rest of the holy things are learned from the firstborn, as it appears in Bekhorot 25a.

I have written in this Order on the prohibition of the disqualified consecrated things (Sefer HaChinukh 469) and in several places that from the roots of the commandment is to distance ourselves from getting close to the consecrated things and from touching them.

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bekhorot 25a) that all consecrated things for the altar — whether higher-level consecrated things or lower-level consecrated things — are forbidden in shearing and work (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Trespass 1:1, 7); and it is forbidden for commoners (non-priests) to benefit from the consecrated things of God — whether from consecrated things offered on the altar, or whether of the [Temple] upkeep — and anyone who benefits from the value of a small coin has misappropriated. There is no misappropriation of those sacrifices that have become permissible to eat, such as meat of the sin-offering and guilt-offering after the sprinkling of their blood, or the two breads after the sprinkling of the blood of the two lambs. Even if a commoner ate from one of these and similar to them — since they are permissible for some people to benefit from, anyone who benefits from them has not misappropriated. And even if they became disqualified and forbidden to eat — since there was a time that they were permitted, one is not [any longer] liable for misappropriation for them.

Anyone who misappropriates volitionally is lashed and pays the principal of what he damaged of the sacred. And its warning is from that which is stated (Deuteronomy 12:17), “You may not eat in your gates, etc. your vows” — we learned from the tradition that this is a warning to the one that eats meat of the burnt-offering — as we said above (Sefer HaChinukh 447), since all of it is for God, may He be blessed. And the law is the same for the rest of all the consecrated which is only for God — whether it is from the consecrated for the altar or the consecrated of the [Temple] upkeep: If he benefited of the value of a small coin, he is lashed. If he misappropriated inadvertently, he pays what he benefited and an addition of a fifth, and he brings a ram [purchased] with two sela and sacrifices it as a guilt-offering and it atones for him — and this is what is called the guilt-offering of misappropriations, as it is stated (Leviticus 5:15-16), “inadvertently from the consecrated things of the Lord, etc. he shall bring his guilt-offering to the Lord, etc. And that which he sinned from the holy, he shall pay and add its fifth upon it.” The payment of the principal with the addition of the fifth and the bringing of the sacrifice is a positive commandment (Sefer HaChinukh 127). The payment of the principal and the bringing of the guilt-offering impede the atonement, but not the fifth; as it is stated about the ram of the guilt-offering (Leviticus 5:16), “and he shall be forgiven” — the ram and the guilt-offering impede, but the fifth does not impede [it]. If he brought his misappropriation [offering] before he brought his guilt [payment], he has not fulfilled [his obligation]. If he is in doubt if he misappropriated or did not misappropriate, he is exempted from the payments and from the sacrifice. And the fifth is like the beginning of the consecrated things; and [so] if he benefited from it, he adds a fifth to [the] fifth. And we have already elucidated several times (see Sefer HaChinukh 355) that the fifth is one of four [parts] of the principal, [such that] it and its fifth are five. And there are things that one is not liable for misappropriation from Torah writ, but it is forbidden to benefit from them rabbinically; and one who benefits from them only pays the principal, but does not add a fifth and does not bring a guilt-offering, as is elucidated in Tractate Meilah (Chapter 3).

And all consecrated things for the altar — whether higher-level consecrated things or lower-level consecrated things — are forbidden in shearing and work, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 15:19), “you shall not work with your firstborn ox and you shall not shear the firstborn of your flock.” And the law is the same for the rest of the consecrated things. And one who shears his ox or works with it is lashed from Torah writ. But plucking is not like shearing. And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Trespass 1:7), “It appears to me that he is not lashed until he shears enough for the double width of a sit, — [so that] it not be more stringent than Shabbat.” [If] it is a doubt whether it is consecrated things, such as a beast that was [only a possible] firstborn, and similar to it — behold, they are forbidden in shearing and work, but one who shears or works with them is not lashed (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Trespass 1:8). A consecrated beast that contracted a blemish upon it and was redeemed is not permitted for shearing and work and [remains] with its prohibition until it is slaughtered, as we elucidated (Sefer HaChinukh 441). If it is slaughtered after its redemption, its eating is permitted. About what are these words speaking? When their consecration came before their blemish, or [only] a temporary blemish preceded their consecration. But if one consecrates one with a permanent blemish to the Temple, it is only rabbinically forbidden in shearing and work. And [so] if it is redeemed, it is like non-sacred in all matters; and it goes out to be non-sacred, to be shorn and worked — except for the firstborn and the tithe. [In those latter cases,] the sanctity rests upon their bodies, and they do not ever go out to be non-sacred to shear and to work, even though they were ones with blemishes from the beginning. It is forbidden to have a firstborn or a disqualified consecrated [animal] breed. And it is permissible a priori to pluck the hair from consecrated [animals] in order to show the blemish to an expert. But that hair that he plucked — or that shed from the beast, or from a firstborn or from the tithe — behold, it is forbidden to benefit [from] it, even after they were slaughtered because of their blemish. [This is a] decree lest he will delay them, since they are not bringing atonement. But wool that shed from a sin-offering or a guilt-offering is permitted for benefit after being slaughtered because of their blemish; as since they are coming for atonement, he will not delay them. And if it was plucked from a burnt-offering — behold, this is a doubt. And behold, all that detached from the consecrated [animals] after they contracted the blemish is permissible for benefit, since he did not pluck it with his hand; except for the firstborn, as even that which detached from it after it contracted the blemish is forbidden in benefit. One who slaughters a firstborn or the rest of the consecrated [animals] plucks from this [side] and that [side] to make a place for the knife, but he does not move [the hair] from its place. Those consecrated for the [Temple] upkeep are rabbinically forbidden even in shearing and work, but they are not forbidden from Torah writ. Hence one who shears them or works with them is not lashed [from Torah writ], but we lash him with lashes of rebellion. One who consecrates an embryo for the altar, its mother [becomes] rabbinically forbidden in work. They decreed about it, as its work enfeebles the embryo. But behold, it is permitted in shearing, as there is no loss with this to the offspring. If one consecrated one limb of a beast — whether for the [Temple] upkeep or whether for the altar — behold, this is a doubt if it is all forbidden in shearing and work or not. Hence we did not administer lashes for it. [These] and the rest of its details are in Tractate Bekhorot.

And this prohibition is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. As even though they, may their memory be blessed, said (Avodah Zarah 13a) that we do not consecrate a beast for a sacrifice or for the [Temple] upkeep at this time — as we have written many times — nonetheless, the consecration of one who does consecrate [it], is effective. And one who transgresses this and works with a beast [that is] consecrated, in the way that we said, is liable for lashes.