(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


POINT BY POINT SUMMARY

Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld


Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Bechoros 19

BECHOROS 19-20 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.

1) A PARTIAL "BECHOR"

(a) (Mishnah - R. Tarfon): If a firstborn was born Yotzei Dofen (through Caesarian section), and the next animal (from this mother) was born normally, both of them graze until they get a Mum, then the owner eats them;
(b) R. Akiva says, neither is a Bechor:
1. The first is not a Bechor because it is not Peter Rechem (the first to leave the womb);
2. The second is not a Bechor because another animal was born to this mother before it.
(c) Question: What do they argue about?
(d) Answer: R. Tarfon is unsure whether or not a partial Bechor (i.e. in only one respect, it was the first offspring *or* the Peter Rechem) is a Bechor, R. Akiva is sure that a partial Bechor is not a Bechor.
(e) (Beraisa) Question: What is the method of expounding Klal ha'Tzarich l'Prat (a general term that cannot be understood without a specific term) and a Prat ha'Tzarich l'Klal?
1. Answer - Suggestion #1: "Kadesh Li Chol Bechor" - perhaps this includes females!
2. Rejection: "Zachar."
3. Suggestion #2: Perhaps "Zachar" teaches that the first male to be born is a Bechor, even if females were born before it!
4. Rejection: "Peter Rechem."
5. Suggestion #3: Perhaps "Peter Rechem" teaches that the first animal to leave the womb is a Bechor, even if a previous animal was born Yotzei Dofen!
6. Rejection: "Bechor."
(f) Question (Rav Sheravya): The Tana did not refute Suggestion #2 by saying that a male born after a female is not "Bechor" - this implies that a partial Bechor is a Bechor;
1. But he refutes Suggestion #3 by saying that an animal born after a Yotzei Dofen is not "Bechor" - this implies that a partial Bechor is not a Bechor!
(g) Answer #1 (Abaye): He holds that a partial Bechor is not a Bechor;
1. Suggestion #2 really means, perhaps "Zachar" teaches that if the firstborn is a male it is a Bechor, even if it was Yotzei Dofen!
(h) Answer #2 (Ravina): He holds that a partial Bechor is a Bechor, nevertheless "Bechor" refutes Suggestion #3;
1. If an animal born after a Yotzei Dofen gets Kedushas Bechor, there would be no need for the Torah to write "Bechor"!
19b---------------------------------------19b

i. It is not needed to exclude the case when a female was born previously - Peter Rechem excludes this!
2. Conclusion: "Bechor" teaches that an animal born after a Yotzei Dofen does not get Kedushas Bechor.
(i) Objection (Rav Acha mi'Difti): If a partial Bechor is a Bechor, the simple meaning of "Bechor" does not exclude a partial Bechor, just it may be expounded to exclude (the most reasonable case to exclude);
1. Indeed, we would exclude a male born normally after a male Yotzei Dofen ("Bechor" is extra to exclude this case, for it is a Bechor with respect to the womb, but not with respect to males);
2. However, we would not exclude a normal male after a female Yotzei Dofen (for the male is a Bechor with respect to the womb and with respect to males).
(j) Rather, we must answer like Abaye.
***** PEREK HA'LOKE'ACH BEHEMAH ****

2) WHEN ARE WE CONCERNED FOR "BECHORAH"?

(a) (Mishnah - R. Yishmael): If Reuven bought an animal from a Nochri and does not know whether or not it already gave birth (and now it gave birth to a male):
1. If [it was] a goat [and it] gave birth in its first year, the kid is given to a Kohen (it is surely a Bechor); if it gave birth after this, it is a Safek (it grazes until it gets a Mum, then Reuven eats it);
2. If a sheep gave birth within two years, the lamb is given to a Kohen; if it gave birth after this, it is a Safek;
3. If a cow gave birth within three years, the calf is given to a Kohen; if it gave birth after this, it is a Safek;
(b) R. Akiva: If the Halachah was that only a proper child exempts from Bechorah, you would be right;
1. However, Chachamim taught that Tinuf (a dissolved fetus; alternatively, bubbles of blood) in a small animal is a sign of a [miscarried] child (and exempts from Bechorah), a Shilya (fetal sac) in a large animal is a sign of a child;
i. In a woman, Shapir (skin in the form of a child) and Shilya are both signs of a child (regarding Tum'as Yoledes).
(c) The general rule is - if we know that an animal previously gave birth (or miscarried), the Kohen does not receive anything (from the next birth);
1. If we know that it did not give birth before, the Bechor belongs to the Kohen;
2. If we do not know whether or not it gave birth before, the owner eats it when it gets a Mum.
(d) (Gemara) Question: Why does R. Yishmael say that after one year, it is a Safek - the majority of goats become pregnant and give birth in their first year, we should follow the majority and say that a kid born after one year is definitely not a Bechor!
(e) Answer #1: R. Yishmael holds like R. Meir, who is concerned for the minority.
(f) Answer #2: He can hold like Chachamim;
1. Chachamim follow a majority d'Isei Kaman (everything is in front of us), such as the majority opinion of judges on the Sanhedrin, or [if meat was found, we follow] the majority of stores in the city (if they sell Kosher meat or Neveilos);
2. They do not follow a majority d'Leisei Kaman (not in front of us, i.e. that most goats in the world give birth in their first year).
(g) Objection: Chachamim do follow a majority d'Leisei Kaman!
1. Copy (Beraisa - R. Meir): A [minor] boy or girl may not do Yibum or Chalitzah.
2. Chachamim: We agree that a minor may not do not Chalitzah; it says "Ish," and the Torah equates the Yevamah to the Yavam;
i. Why do you forbid Yibum?
3. R. Meir: We are concerned that he or she is a Seris or Ailonis (one who will not develop to be a normal male or female; if so, there is no Mitzvah of Yibum, the "Yibum" is merely marrying a sister-in-law, which is Chayavei Kerisus).
4. Chachamim are not concerned for this, they follow the majority (most people are normal).
(h) Conclusion (Rava): We must say that R. Yishmael holds like R. Meir.
(i) Defense (of Answer #2 - Ravina): He can hold like Chachamim;
1. Chachamim follow a majority that does not depend on an act occurring (such as judges' opinions or stores), they do not follow a majority that depends on an action (an animal must breed to become pregnant and bear a child).
Next daf

Index


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,
daf@shemayisrael.co.il