To give the foreleg, the jaw and the maw to the priest: That Israel was commanded to give the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw from all pure, slaughtered animals to the priest. And about this was it stated (Deuteronomy 18:3), “This shall be the statute of the priests, etc.” The Sages, of blessed memory, already said (Chullin 134b) about the reason for this commandment that it was in the merit of Pinchas, their father — who was zealous on behalf of his God with regard to the matter of Kozbi, and [was prepared to] surrender his life for the sanctification of [God’s] name, to kill a prince from a tribe of Israel — that his children, the priests, merited this present from God forever: The foreleg — corresponding to, “and he took a spear” (Numbers 25:7); the jaw — in the merit that he prayed for the anguish of Israel, as it is written, “And Pinchas stood up and prayed” (Psalms 106:30); and the maw — corresponding to, “and the woman into her stomach” (Numbers 25:8). And we learn from this that one who openly sanctifies the name of Heaven — he and his descendants attain merit in this world, aside from his merit which is kept eternally for his soul in the world to come.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Chullin 134b), “What is the foreleg? That is the right foreleg from the knee until the arm’s socket” — which are two limbs, one connected to the other. “And the jaw? From the joint of the jaw until the joint of the trachea” — which is the large ring; with the tongue between them. And we give to the priest the stomach with the fat on it. And the priests have already been accustomed to leave the fat of the stomach for the owners. And also that which they said (Chullin 132a) that the obligation of the gifts is only with a pure [domesticated] beast and not with a [wild] animal, as it is stated, “whether an ox or a sheep” — and included in the sheep and its species is the billy goat. And they, may their memory be blessed, also expounded (Chullin 79b), “‘Whether an ox’ [is] to include a koi” — and even according to the one that says [it is] a creature on its own (a completely separate category); “‘whether a sheep’ [is] to include a forbidden mixture,” such as the offspring that comes of a goat and a sheep. And if it comes from a gazelle and a female goat, he is only obligated for half of the gifts, since it is written, “whether a sheep” — and they, may their memory be blessed, expounded (Chullin 79b), “Even if it is partially a sheep.” But the offspring of a billy goat that copulates with a gazelle is not obligated in gifts at all, since it was a doubt for the Rabbis if we are concerned about the seed of the father or not. And since it is such, the Israelite is able to say to the priest, “Bring a proof that we are concerned about the seed of the father, and I will give you half of the gifts” — and he will not be able [to do so]. And hence I can write that there is no obligation of gifts at all with [the offspring of] a billy goat that copulates with a gazelle.
I have already written the opinion of Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, and other commentators regarding the concern for the seed of the father in the Order of Kedoshim Tehiyu on the commandment of the beast of a forbidden mixture (Sefer HaChinukh 244). And so [too,] from the content of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Chullin 132b) that it is permissible to eat from the beast before the gifts were separated. As the law is not like Rabbi Yochanan — who said that the one who eats from it before its gifts are separated is as if he eats unseparated produce — since they are [already] distinguished and distinct in one place; and as a result, they do not make [the rest of it] unseparated. And [this] and the rest of its details are elucidated in Tractate Chullin in the Chapter [entitled] HaZroa, which is distinguished by the laws of this commandment.
And this commandment is practiced with non-sacred animals, but not with those consecrated; by Israelite males and females, but not by priests — since it is written about them, “the statute of the priests from the people,” which implies that it is not from the priests. And [this is the case] also because the priests are not called “people”; and as it is written (Leviticus 16:33), “he shall atone for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” And the Levites have a special law in this matter; as the priests do not take the gifts from them — since the Rabbis were in doubt if they are called “people,” or not. And hence they cannot take from them by force of a doubt; but if they took [the gifts], they do not return [them].
And regarding if they are practiced at this time or not, many of the great commentators have already disagreed about this. And what comes out of the discussion in the Chapter [entitled] HaZroa with the good commentary is that they are practiced today. And that is likewise the opinion of Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, and Ramban, may this memory be blessed. But we do not have the power over the butchers now to force them to give them to them. “And those who trust in the Lord shall renew their strength.”
And there in the Chapter [entitled] HaZroa (Chullin 131b), they, may their memory be blessed, said that we give the gifts to the priestesses [just] like the priests, and even if they are married to an Israelite. And so it said there, “When Ulla came, he said, ‘Give the gift to a priestess.’ Hence, Ulla reasoned, ‘A priest’ — and even a priestess.” And there (Chullin 132a), it is also said, “Rav Kahana ate on behalf of his wife” — and so [too,] Rav Pappa and Rav Yeimar and Rav Eidi.
And an Israelite who transgresses this and slaughters a beast and does not give the gifts to a priest or a priestess has violated this positive commandment. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Chullin 134b) that if there is no priest or priestess with him; on account of the loss to the priest, he estimates the value and eats it — as they do not have sanctity — and afterwards, he gives the money to any priest that he wants.
לָתֵת זְרוֹעַ וּלְחָיַיִם וְקֵבָה לַכֹּהֵן – שֶׁנִּצְטַוּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לָתֵת הַזְּרוֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם וְהַקֵּבָה, מִכָּל בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה שֶׁנִּזְבַּח לַכֹּהֵן, וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר (דברים יח ג) וְזֶה יִהְיֶה מִשְׁפַּט הַכֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹ'. כְּבָר אָמְרוּ חֲכָמֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (חולין קלד, ב) בְּטַעַם מִצְוָה זוֹ, כִּי בִּזְכוּת פִּנְחָס אֲבִיהֶם, שֶׁקִּנֵּא לֵאלֹהָיו עַל דְּבַר כָּזְבִּי וּמָסַר נַפְשׁוֹ לַהֲרֹג נְשִׂיא שֵׁבֶט מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל עַל קְדֻשַּׁת הַשֵּׁם זָכוּ בָּנָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים לְעוֹלָם בְּמַתָּנָה זוֹ מֵאֵת הָאֵל. הַזְּרוֹעַ כְּנֶגֶד וַיִּקַּח רֹמַח (במדבר כה ז). הַלְּחָיַיִם בִּזְכוּת שֶׁהִתְפַּלֵּל עַל צַעֲרָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (תהלים קו ל) וַיַּעֲמֹד פִּנְחָס וַיְפַלֵּל. וְהַקֵּבָה כְּנֶגֶד (במדבר שם ח) וְהָאִשָּׁה אֶל קֳבָתָהּ. וְלָמַדְנוּ מִזֶּה, שֶׁהַמְּקַדֵּשׁ שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם בְּגָלוּי זוֹכֶה לוֹ וּלְדוֹרוֹתָיו בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, מִלְּבַד זְכוּתוֹ שֶׁקַּיֶּמֶת לְנַפְשׁוֹ לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא.
To give the foreleg, the jaw and the maw to the priest: That Israel was commanded to give the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw from all pure, slaughtered animals to the priest. And about this was it stated (Deuteronomy 18:3), “This shall be the statute of the priests, etc.” The Sages, of blessed memory, already said (Chullin 134b) about the reason for this commandment that it was in the merit of Pinchas, their father — who was zealous on behalf of his God with regard to the matter of Kozbi, and [was prepared to] surrender his life for the sanctification of [God’s] name, to kill a prince from a tribe of Israel — that his children, the priests, merited this present from God forever: The foreleg — corresponding to, “and he took a spear” (Numbers 25:7); the jaw — in the merit that he prayed for the anguish of Israel, as it is written, “And Pinchas stood up and prayed” (Psalms 106:30); and the maw — corresponding to, “and the woman into her stomach” (Numbers 25:8). And we learn from this that one who openly sanctifies the name of Heaven — he and his descendants attain merit in this world, aside from his merit which is kept eternally for his soul in the world to come.
מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם) אֵיזֶהוּ זְרוֹעַ? זֶה זְרוֹעַ יָמִין מִפֶּרֶק הָאַרְכֻּבָּה עַד כַּף שֶׁל יָד, שֶׁהֵן שְׁנֵי אֵבָרִים, זֶה מְעֹרֶה בָּזֶה, וְהַלְּחָיַיִם מִן הַפֶּרֶק שֶׁל לֶחִי עַד הַפֶּרֶק שֶׁל גַּרְגֶּרֶת, שֶׁהִיא טַבַּעַת גְּדוֹלָה, עִם הַלָּשׁוֹן שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶם, וְהַקֵּבָה נוֹתְנִין אוֹתָהּ לַכֹּהֵן עִם חֵלֶב שֶׁבָּהּ, וּכְבָר נָהֲגוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים לְהַנִּיחַ חֵלֶב הַקֵּבָה לַבְּעָלִים. וְכֵן מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ (שם קלב, א), שֶׁאֵין חִיּוּב הַמַּתָּנוֹת, אֶלָּא בִּבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה וְלֹא בְּחַיָּה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אִם שׁוֹר אִם שֶׂה, וּבִכְלַל הַשֶּׂה וּמִינוֹ הַתַּיִשׁ. וְעוֹד דָּרְשׁוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם) אִם שׁוֹר לְרַבּוֹת הַכּוֹי, וַאֲפִלּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בְּרִיָּה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ הִיא, אִם שֶׂה לְרַבּוֹת הַכִּלְאַיִם, כְּגוֹן, וָלָד הַבָּא מֵעֵז וְכֶבֶשׂ, וְאִם בָּא מִצְּבִי וּתְיָשָׁה חַיָּב בַּחֲצִי מַתָּנוֹת לְבַד, מִשּׁוּם דִּכְתִיב אִם שֶׂה, וְדָרְשׁוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם) אֲפִלּוּ מִקְצָת שֶׂה, אֲבָל תַּיִשׁ הַבָּא עַל הַצְּבִיָּה אֵין הַוָּלָד חַיָּב בְּמַתָּנוֹת כְּלָל, מִשּׁוּם דִּמְסַפְּקָא לְהוּ לְרַבָּנָן אִי חוֹשְׁשִׁין לְזֶרַע הָאָב, אִי לֹא, וְכֵיוָן שֶׁכֵּן, יֵשׁ לוֹ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לוֹמַר לַכֹּהֵן הָבֵא רְאָיָה דְּחוֹשְׁשִׁין לְזֶרַע הָאָב וְאֶתֵּן לְךָ חֲצִי הַמַּתָּנוֹת, וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל. וּלְפִיכָךְ, יֵשׁ לִי לִכְתֹּב, דִּבְתַיִשׁ הַבָּא עַל הַצְּבִיָּה אֵין בָּהּ חִיּוּב מַתָּנוֹת כְּלָל.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Chullin 134b), “What is the foreleg? That is the right foreleg from the knee until the arm’s socket” — which are two limbs, one connected to the other. “And the jaw? From the joint of the jaw until the joint of the trachea” — which is the large ring; with the tongue between them. And we give to the priest the stomach with the fat on it. And the priests have already been accustomed to leave the fat of the stomach for the owners. And also that which they said (Chullin 132a) that the obligation of the gifts is only with a pure [domesticated] beast and not with a [wild] animal, as it is stated, “whether an ox or a sheep” — and included in the sheep and its species is the billy goat. And they, may their memory be blessed, also expounded (Chullin 79b), “‘Whether an ox’ [is] to include a koi” — and even according to the one that says [it is] a creature on its own (a completely separate category); “‘whether a sheep’ [is] to include a forbidden mixture,” such as the offspring that comes of a goat and a sheep. And if it comes from a gazelle and a female goat, he is only obligated for half of the gifts, since it is written, “whether a sheep” — and they, may their memory be blessed, expounded (Chullin 79b), “Even if it is partially a sheep.” But the offspring of a billy goat that copulates with a gazelle is not obligated in gifts at all, since it was a doubt for the Rabbis if we are concerned about the seed of the father or not. And since it is such, the Israelite is able to say to the priest, “Bring a proof that we are concerned about the seed of the father, and I will give you half of the gifts” — and he will not be able [to do so]. And hence I can write that there is no obligation of gifts at all with [the offspring of] a billy goat that copulates with a gazelle.
כְּבָר כָּתַבְתִּי דַּעַת רַבֵּנוּ אַלְפָסִי זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה וּמְפָרְשִׁים אֲחֵרִים בְּעִנְיַן חֲשַׁשׁ זֶרַע הָאָב בְּסֵדֶר קְדוֹשִׁים תִּהְיוּ בְּמִצְוַת שֶׁלֹּא לְהַרְבִּיעַ בְּהֵמָה כִּלְאַיִם (מצוה רמד). וְכֵן מֵעִנְיַן הַמִּצְוָה מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם קלב, ב), שֶׁמֻּתָּר לֶאֱכֹל מִן הַבְּהֵמָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא הוּרְמוּ מִמֶּנָּה הַמַּתָּנוֹת, שֶׁאֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן שֶׁאָמַר, שֶׁהָאוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה קֹדֶם שֶׁהוּרְמוּ מַתְּנוֹתֶיהָ כְּאִלּוּ אוֹכֵל טְבָלִים, כִּי מְפֹרָשׁוֹת וּמְיֻחָדוֹת הֵן בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, וּמִפְּנֵי כֵן אֵינָן טוֹבְלוֹת. וְיֶתֶר פְּרָטֶיהָ, בְּמַסֶּכֶת חֻלִּין בְּפֶרֶק הַזְּרוֹעַ, הַמְּיֻחָד בְּדִינֵי מִצְוָה זוֹ.
I have already written the opinion of Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, and other commentators regarding the concern for the seed of the father in the Order of Kedoshim Tehiyu on the commandment of the beast of a forbidden mixture (Sefer HaChinukh 244). And so [too,] from the content of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Chullin 132b) that it is permissible to eat from the beast before the gifts were separated. As the law is not like Rabbi Yochanan — who said that the one who eats from it before its gifts are separated is as if he eats unseparated produce — since they are [already] distinguished and distinct in one place; and as a result, they do not make [the rest of it] unseparated. And [this] and the rest of its details are elucidated in Tractate Chullin in the Chapter [entitled] HaZroa, which is distinguished by the laws of this commandment.
וְנוֹהֶגֶת מִצְוָה זוֹ בִּבְהֵמוֹת שֶׁל חֻלִּין, אֲבָל לֹא בְּשֶׁל מֻקְדָּשִׁין, וּבִזְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת יִשְׂרְאֵלִים, אֲבָל לֹא בַּכֹּהֲנִים מִשּׁוּם דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ מִשְׁפַּט הַכֹּהֲנִים מֵאֵת הָעָם, מִכְּלָל שֶׁאֵינָן בַּכֹּהֲנִים, וְעוֹד דְּכֹהֲנִים לָא אִקְּרוּ עַם, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב וְעַל הַכֹּהֲנִים וְעַל כָּל עַם הַקָּהָל יְכַפֵּר. וְהַלְּוִיִּם יֵשׁ לָהֶם בְּעִנְיָן זֶה דִּין מְיֻחָד, שֶׁאֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים נוֹטְלִין מֵהֶם הַמַּתָּנוֹת, לְפִי שֶׁנִּסְתַּפֵּק לְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ אִם נִקְרְאוּ עַם אִם לֹא, וּלְפִיכָךְ אֵין כֹּחַ בְּיָדָם לִטֹּל מֵהֶם מִסָּפֵק, וְאִם נָטְלוּ לֹא יַחְזִירוּ.
And this commandment is practiced with non-sacred animals, but not with those consecrated; by Israelite males and females, but not by priests — since it is written about them, “the statute of the priests from the people,” which implies that it is not from the priests. And [this is the case] also because the priests are not called “people”; and as it is written (Leviticus 16:33), “he shall atone for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” And the Levites have a special law in this matter; as the priests do not take the gifts from them — since the Rabbis were in doubt if they are called “people,” or not. And hence they cannot take from them by force of a doubt; but if they took [the gifts], they do not return [them].
וּלְעִנְיַן אִם נוֹהֲגוֹת עַכְשָׁו בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה אִם לֹא, כְּבָר חָלְקוּ עַל זֶה הַרְבֵּה מִגְּדוֹלֵי הַמְּפָרְשִׁים וְהָעוֹלֶה מִן הַשְּׁמוּעָה בְּפֶרֶק הַזְּרוֹעַ עִם הַפֵּרוּשׁ הַטּוֹב, שֶׁנּוֹהֲגוֹת הֵן הַיּוֹם, וְכֵן דַּעַת רַבֵּינוּ אַלְפָסִי זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה וְהָרַמְבַּ"ן זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה. אֲבָל עַכְשָׁו אֵין בָּנוּ כֹּחַ עַל הַטַּבָּחִים לְהַכְרִיחָם לִתְּנָם, וְקוֹיֵ יְיָ יַחֲלִיפוּ כֹחַ (ישעיה מ, לא).
And regarding if they are practiced at this time or not, many of the great commentators have already disagreed about this. And what comes out of the discussion in the Chapter [entitled] HaZroa with the good commentary is that they are practiced today. And that is likewise the opinion of Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, and Ramban, may this memory be blessed. But we do not have the power over the butchers now to force them to give them to them. “And those who trust in the Lord shall renew their strength.”
וְשָׁם בְּפֶרֶק הַזְּרוֹעַ (שם ב) אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה שֶׁנּוֹתְנִין הַמַּתָּנוֹת לַכֹּהֲנוֹת כְּמוֹ לַכֹּהֲנִים, וַאֲפִלּוּ הֵן נְשׂוּאוֹת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, וְכֵן אִתְּמַר הָתָם, כִּי אֲתָא עוּלָּא אֲמַר, הָבוּ מַתַּנְתָּא לְכָהַנְתָא, אַלְמָא קָסָבַר עוּלָּא כֹּהֵן וַאֲפִלּוּ כֹּהֶנֶת, וְשָׁם (ע"א) נֶאֱמַר עוֹד רַב כָּהֲנָא אָכֵיל בִּשְׁבִיל אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְכֵן רַב פַּפָּא וְרַב יֵימַר וְרַב אִידִי.
And there in the Chapter [entitled] HaZroa (Chullin 131b), they, may their memory be blessed, said that we give the gifts to the priestesses [just] like the priests, and even if they are married to an Israelite. And so it said there, “When Ulla came, he said, ‘Give the gift to a priestess.’ Hence, Ulla reasoned, ‘A priest’ — and even a priestess.” And there (Chullin 132a), it is also said, “Rav Kahana ate on behalf of his wife” — and so [too,] Rav Pappa and Rav Yeimar and Rav Eidi.
וְיִשְׂרָאֵל הָעוֹבֵר עַל זֶה וְשָׁחַט בְּהֶמְתּוֹ וְלֹא נָתַן הַמַּתָּנוֹת לְכֹהֵן אוֹ לְכֹהֶנֶת בִּטֵּל עֲשֵׂה זֶה. וְאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם קלד, ב) שֶׁאִם אֵין עִמּוֹ כֹּהֵן אוֹ כֹּהֶנֶת מַעֲלֶה הַמַּתָּנוֹת בְּדָמִים וְאוֹכְלָן, מִפְּנֵי הֶפְסֵד כֹּהֵן, שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן קְדֻשָּׁה, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתֵן הַדָּמִים לְכָל כֹּהֵן שֶׁיִּרְצֶה.
And an Israelite who transgresses this and slaughters a beast and does not give the gifts to a priest or a priestess has violated this positive commandment. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Chullin 134b) that if there is no priest or priestess with him; on account of the loss to the priest, he estimates the value and eats it — as they do not have sanctity — and afterwards, he gives the money to any priest that he wants.