THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
BECHOROS 12-15 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
1) "GIZAH" AND "AVODAH" WITH A BLEMISHED ANIMAL THAT WAS REDEEMED FROM
QUESTION: The Mishnah (14a) teaches that an animal of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin,
that was consecrated as a Korban and then developed a Mum, does not lose its
sanctity after it is redeemed. It is forbidden to shear or work such an
animal. The Gemara quotes a Beraisa that derives this from the verse, "You
shall [only] slaughter it and eat it" (Devarim 12:15), which implies that it
may be eaten but not used for shearing.
The Beraisa mentions only that this is the source for the prohibition to
*shear* an animal of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin. From where do we derive the
prohibition of *working* an animal of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin? (SHAI L'MOREH)
ANSWER: RASHI in Temurah (11b, DH Hikdish Ever Mahu b'Gizah) points out that
it is more logical that working an animal of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin should be
forbidden than shearing an animal, because work weakens the animal.
Accordingly, perhaps the prohibition of working an animal of Pesulei
ha'Mukdashin is derived from the verse that the Beraisa quotes. The Beraisa
mentions the prohibition of shearing only in order to emphasize that *even*
shearing is forbidden. Certainly, though, working the animal is also
forbidden. (SHEMEN ROKE'ACH)
2) PROHIBITING THE OFFSPRING OF AN ANIMAL OF "PESULEI HA'MUKDASHIN"
QUESTION: The Gemara asks what the Halachah is in a case of offspring born
to an animal of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin after it is redeemed. When offspring is
born before the animal is redeemed, the Amora'im argue whether it is an
offered as a Korban, or whether it must graze until it becomes blemished and
is then redeemed. What is the Halachah regarding offspring born after the
animal of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin is redeemed?
3) THE FETUS OF "PESULEI HA'MUKDASHIN"
Rav Huna says that the offspring of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin after redemption
must be left to starve. It cannot be offered as a Korban, because it comes
from an animal that was disqualified from being offered. It cannot be
redeemed, because its Kedushah is not significant enough that it can be
transferred to the redemption money.
Rebbi Chanina says that just before redeeming the mother, one can be Makdish
(Matpis) the fetus with the same Kedushah as its mother, and it may then be
redeemed once it develops a Mum.
The Gemara asks, "What is the reason?" Rebbi Levi answers that there is a
Gezeirah that one might intentionally delay redeeming the mother in order to
produce offspring from it and raise flocks. RASHI (DH Amar Rebbi Levi), in
his third and preferred explanation, explains that when the Gemara asks,
"What is the reason," is asking why the Mishnah (14a) forbids the offspring
that is born after the animal is redeemed (but conceived while the animal is
still Hekdesh). Rebbi Levi answers that if the offspring would be permitted,
people would delay slaughtering their redeemed animal of Pesulei
ha'Mukdashin in order to raise flocks. By keeping the redeemed animal around
for a long time, there is a much greater risk that they will accidentally
shear or work with Pesulei ha'Mukdashin.
In contrast, offspring that is both conceived and born after the redemption
of the mother is permitted. Rashi explains the reason as follows. Since the
Rabanan prohibited the offspring that is conceived *before* the Pidyon, the
owner will not delay the slaughter of the mother any further, such that it
would have time to conceive and bear offspring.
Rashi's words are difficult to understand. The Rabanan prohibited the
offspring that is conceived *before* the mother's redemption in order to
ensure that the owner does not keep the pregnant mother alive *after* the
redemption in order for it to *give birth*. Why, then, did the Rabanan not
make an enactment to prevent the owner from delaying the slaughter for an
additional period after the redemption in order that the animal *conceive*
and give birth?
(a) The Rabanan did not make their enactments for the sake of unscrupulous
people who do not endeavor to observe the Mitzvos properly. The Rabanan made
their enactments for the sake of G-d-fearing people who know that Pesulei
ha'Mukdashin are forbidden to shear and work with once they have been
redeemed. Presumably, these people have no intention of keeping the redeemed
Pesulei ha'Mukdashin for breeding purposes. They know that when one redeems
animals of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin, one must slaughter them right away
("Tizbach, v'Achalta Basar").
There is only one case in which the G-d-fearing owner might delay the
slaughter of the Pesulei ha'Mukdashin: when the animal is pregnant. When the
animal is already pregnant with offspring that itself will be permitted,
perhaps the owner will be tempted to wait until after the birth of the baby
to slaughter the mother. Therefore, the Rabanan found it appropriate to make
a Gezeirah prohibited the offspring. In contrast, when the animal is not
pregnant at the time it is redeemed, the owner has no reason to delay
slaughtering it. Accordingly, the Rabanan had no reason to prohibit the
offspring that might be conceived and be born later (in the event that the
owner, for some reason, delays slaughtering the animal). (E. Chrysler)
(b) Once the Rabanan prohibited the offspring that were conceived before the
Pidyon, the owner of the animal will think that the Rabanan certainly
prohibited the offspring conceived after the Pidyon. Consequently, he will
not bother to delay the slaughter of the animal. (M. Kornfeld)
QUESTION: The Mishnah (14a) states that the fetus of an animal of Pesulei
ha'Mukdashin (that was consecrated as a Korban and afterwards developed a
Mum) is forbidden. The fetus has Kedushah, because it was conceived by an
animal that was fit to be brought as a Korban.
The Gemara relates that Ravina asked Rav Sheshes whether one may be "Matpis"
(sanctify) the fetus of the Pesulei ha'Mukdashin with the Kedushah of any
Korban that he chooses, or whether it can only become Kadosh with the
Kedushah with which its mother was sanctified. Rav Sheshes replied that it
cannot be sanctified with any Kedushah other than the Kedushah of its
mother. Rav Sheshes explains that the reason for this is a Gezeirah Shavah
from Bechor. With regard to Bechor, the Torah states that a Bechor with a
blemish may be eaten "bi'She'arecha" (Devarim 15:22). With regard to Pesulei
ha'Mukdashin, the Torah states that Kodshim that become disqualified from
being offered on the Mizbe'ach may be eaten "b'Chol She'arecha" (Devarim
12:15). This Gezeirah Shavah teaches that just as one cannot sanctify a
Bechor for any Korban other than a Bechor (s the Torah teaches in Vayikra
27:26), so, too, one cannot sanctify the fetus of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin for
any type of Korban other than the type for which its mother was sanctified.
The Gemara here seems to contradict the Mishnah in Temurah (24b). The
Mishnah there quotes Raban Shimon ben Gamliel who rules that when an animal
of Kodshim gives birth to a Tumtum (an animal whose reproductive organs are
covered with skin so that we do not know if it is a male or a female) or an
Androginus (a hermaphrodite, with both male and female reproductive organs),
that offspring has no Kedushah. The Gemara there (beginning of 25a) explains
that Raban Shimon ben Gamliel maintains that no fetus of Kodshim has
Kedushah while in the womb. Although a firstborn fetus acquires the Kedushah
of Bechor at the moment it is born, a Tumtum or Androginus does not have the
Kedushah of Bechor, because it is does not have the status of a male.
According to the opinion that a fetus of an animal of Kodshim has no
Kedushah in the womb, one should be able to be "Matpis" and sanctify a fetus
of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin with the Kedushah of any type of Korban that one
wants! The Gemara here says that one cannot give it any type of Kedushah
that one wants because it already has the Kedushah of its mother. If,
however, it does not have the Kedushah of its mother, as Raban Shimon ben
Gamliel maintains, that why can one not sanctify it with any Kedushah that
ANSWER: The CHAZON ISH (Bechoros 18:3:8, DH v'Yesh) answers that there is a
difference between the strong Kedushah of an unblemished animal of Kodshim,
and the weak Kedushah of an animal of Kodshim that become blemished and
unfit to be offered. The weak Kedushah is more like a status of Isur than a
status of sanctity. According to the view that a fetus of Kodshim does not
have Kedushah, if one sanctifies the embryo of a Korban Chatas to be a
Korban Shelamim, at the moment of birth it is a Shelamim and there is no
Kedushah of Chatas in the baby at all. This is because the mother had no
blemish. In contrast, an animal of Kodshim that became blemished becomes
*Asur* of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin. This Isur extends to the fetus as well. This
is what the Gemara learns from the Gezeirah Shavah from Bechor. In the same
way that the Kedushah of Bechor cannot be removed by placing another
Kedushah on it, the Kedushah of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin cannot be changed. The
Gezeirah Shavah teaches us to compare the Halachah of the fetus of Pesulei
ha'Mukdashin before it is born to the Halachah of a Bechor *after* it is
born (and possesses Kedushah). The Chazon Ish writes that the verse that
teaches that one cannot be Makdish a Bechor with any type of Kedushah other
than that of a Bechor also teaches (through the Gezeirah Shavah) that one
cannot be Makdish a fetus of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin even before birth, because
the Isur of the mother applies to the fetus as well.
The Chazon Ish adds that according to the opinion (in Temurah 25a) that the
fetus of Kodshim has Kedushah even in the womb, it seems that no Gezeirah
Shavah is necessary to teach that one may not change the Kedushah to a
different type of Kedushah. Just as one cannot change the Kedushah of a baby
of a non-blemished animal, so, too, one cannot change the Kedushah of a baby
of a blemished animal. (See also TESHUVOS ACHIEZER 2:25:9 and 2:32:5.) (D.