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


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Bechoros 27

BECHOROS 27 - dedicated by Hagaon Rav Mordechai Rabin of London, now living in Yerushalayim.



(a) Despite the previous Halachah (forbidding a Yisrael to allow a Kohen, a Levi or a Yisrael to assist him, in order to receive the Matnos Kehunah ... ), the Beraisa concludes that by all of them, the owner has Tovas Hana'ah - the right to give the Matnos Kehunah ... to whoever he pleases, and even to accept a small amount of money for the privilege.

(b) The solitary example the Tana gives to explain this is - where a Yisrael had just designated Terumah from his crops, when another Yisrael meets him and offers him a Sela to give it to his daughter's son, who is a Kohen.

(c) He did not also present a case of Tovas Hana'ah by a Bechor - because it is Kedushas Damim (meaning that the Kohen would be permitted to sell the Basar of the Bechor after the Zerikas ha'Dam) to a Yisrael, who will not be obligated to eat it as the Kohen would have done (roasted and with mustard), leading the Kohen to believe that the Sela of Tovas Hana'ah has taken it out of its Kedushah, and that he can therefore do likewise.

(d) Tovas Hana'ah does apply to Terumah - because it is Kedushas ha'Guf (meaning that there is no way that a Yisrael will be allowed to eat it) in which case, the Kohen will not make such a mistake.

(a) Rava rules - that Terumas Chutz la'Aretz (from the countries that are close to Eretz Yisrael) is not subject to the above prohibition of 'Mesaye'a be'Veis ha'Geranos (because it is only mi'de'Rabbanan).

(b) Rav Chama subsequently give his Terumah - to his Shamash (who was a Kohen), even though, in Eretz Yisrael, this would be forbidden (see Rabeinu Gershom).

(c) According to Shmuel, Terumas Chutz la'Aretz is Bateil be'Rov - and does not need a hundred and one to become Bateil, like Terumas Eretz Yisrael.

(d) Rabah (who was a Kohen) went even further - in that he would be Mevatel it Lechatchilah (which is forbidden by Terumah d'Oraysa), and eat it when he was Tamei.

(a) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua - used to pour one bottle of his Terumas Chutz la'Aretz wine into a jar containing two bottles of Chulin wine (in order to be Mevatel it). Then after pouring from that jar one bottle of wine for regular use, he would pour another bottle of Terumah wine into the jar, and so on, until he had been Mevatel all his Terumah wine.

(b) Shmuel restricted the Isur of Terumas Chutz la'Aretz to - someone whose Tum'ah emanated from his body (e.g. a Ba'al Keri), but not to a Tamei Meis and suchlike.

(c) Touching it, he said - is in any case permitted.

(a) Ravina extrapolated from Shmuel's latter ruling - that a Nidah is permitted to prepare her dough ...

(b) ... and to then give it to a Kohen Katan (who has never had an emission) to eat.

(c) Even a grown-up Kohen may be included in Kohen Katan however - as long as he Toveled in a Mikvah (see Rashash).

(d) If there is no Kohen Katan available - then one separates a small piece of dough as Chalah and burns it in the oven, before taking a second dough and giving it to a Kohen Gadol (which does not declare Chalah), so that the Din of Chalah should not be forgotten.

(a) Rav Nachman, Rav Amram and Rami bar Chama were traveling on a ship when a woman asked them a She'eilah. Rav Amram was not present at that moment - because he had gone to the other end of the ship in order to relieve himself.

(b) She asked them whether a Tamei Meis who has Toveled- needs to wait for nightfall before eating Terumas Chutz la'Aretz (or not).

(c) Initially, Rav Nachman wanted to permit eating it immediately - on the grounds that since nowadays, there is no Haza'ah, there is no need to wait for nightfall either.

(d) When Rami bar Chama (who was much younger than the other two men) mean, asked whether one should not show respect for the old man - he meant that perhaps one should wait for Rav Amram to return, to hear his opinion, before issuing a ruling.

(a) Meanwhile, Rav Amram returned. He quoted Rav, but added that the Halachah is not like him. Rav said that nowadays, a Tamei Meis may Tovel and eat Terumas Chutz la'Aretz immediately (like Rav Nachman had said).

(b) And he based this ruling on a statement by Mar Zutra in the name of Rav Sheishes - who said the same about a Tamei Sheretz (who does not require Haza'ah in the first place), yet the Halachah is not like him.




(a) We extrapolate from the Lashon of the Mishnah 'Nolad Bo Mum be'Soch *Shenaso*' - that in the realm of Bechor, the year is determined by the animal's birth-date, rather than by the calendar (i.e. Rosh Hashanah).

(b) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav however, learns this from the Pasuk "Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Sochlenu Shanah be'Shanah"- which implies that the animal is within the first year of its birth, even though a second year has begun (i.e. Rosh Hashanah has passed).

(c) de'Bei Rav learns from this Pasuk - that the Korban Bechor may be eaten for two days (the last day of year one and the first day of year two) and the intervening night.

(d) de'Bei Rav, on the other hand, agrees with Rav Acha bar Ya'akov - who learns that from the Pasuk "Keves ben Shenaso" - implying 'its year', and not the calendar year.

(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav learns from the Pasuk "u'Vesaram Yih'yeh Lach ka'Chazeih ha'Tenufah ... " - that the Korban Bechor, like the Shelamim, can be eaten for two days.

(b) de'Bei Rav counters that - by establishing "Chazeih ha'Tenufah and the Shok ha'Terumah" as that of the Todah (which can only be eaten for one day and a night [due to the principle 'Tafasta Merubah Lo Tafasta', meaning that one always learns the smaller Chidush]).

(c) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav refutes that suggestion on account of the words "Yih'yeh Lach" - which clearly comes to add an additional 'Havayah' (i.e. the extra day of the Shelamim).

(a) Tana de'Bei Rav maintains that "u'Vesaram Yih'yeh Lach" is needed to teach us that a Bechor Ba'al-Mum must be given to the Kohen. Rav Yehudah Amar Rav extrapolates the same thing - from "u'Vesaram" (in the plural, implying that the Basar of both a Bechor Tam and of a Bechor Ba'al-Mum go to the Kohen).

(b) Tana de'Bei Rav interprets "u'Vesaram" - to refer to the Bechor Tam of all the Yisre'elim.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,