תלמוד על נזיר 4:3

MISHNAH: The house of Shammai say, dedication in error is dedication, but the House of Hillel say, dedication in error is not dedication. How? If one said, the black ox which comes out of my house first shall be dedicated, and a white one came out; the house of Shammai say, it is dedicated¹We assume that he simply wanted to dedicate one of his animals as a sacrifice and since most of his animals were black, he mentioned black. If he had said explicitly, “the first ox which comes out of my house shall be dedicated if it be black,” the House of Shammai will agree that there is no dedication. Since oxen are possible as sacrifices, the dedication mentioned here is dedication as sacrifice., but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated.
The gold denar which first comes into my hand shall be dedicated, but it was a silver one; the house of Shammai say, it is dedicated, but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated.
The wine amphora which first comes into my hand shall be dedicated, but it was a one of oil; the house of Shammai say, it is dedicated, but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated²Even though all three Mishnaiot illustrate the same principle, the statements imply that the positions of the Houses of Hillel and Shammai apply to all kinds of dedications. Mishnah 1 exemplifies dedications for the altar, Mishnah 2 money donations, and Mishnah 3 things which could be brought to the altar as accessories but never are sacrifices on their own. The three Mishnaiot are an introduction to the nazir vow made in error treated in Mishnah 4..