(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 15

BECHOROS 12-15 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.


(a) With reference to Pesulei ha'Mukdashin (whose Hekdesh preceded their blemish), what does the Beraisa learn from ...
  1. ... "ha'Tz'vi"?
  2. ... "ve'ha'Ayal"?
  3. ... "*Ach* Kasher Ye'achel es ... "?
(b) Having precluded them from the Din of Bechor, why do we need a separate source to preclude them from Matanos? Why can we not learn them from the same source?

(c) Rav Papa asked Abaye whether we will also exempt Pesulei ha'Mukdashin from the Din of Oso ve'es B'no (like Tz'vi and Ayal).
What did he answer?

(a) How did Rav Papa then query Abaye's answer, from 'Chelbo' (which we just included from the word "Ach")?

(b) Why do we prefer to preclude Pesulei ha'Mukdashin from Bechor and Matanos from the Hekesh to Tz'vi ve'Ayal, and to include them in the Isur of Cheilev and of Oso ve'es B'no from "Ach", and not vice-versa?

(c) Rava disagrees with Abaye.
What does he learn from the Pasuk ...

  1. ... in Re'ei (in connection with a Bechor Ba'al Mum) "Rak es Damo Lo Sochel"?
  2. ... "Ach"?
(a) Why can we not understand the Pasuk "Rak es Damo ... " literally?

(b) Why does the Torah refer to Cheilev as 'Dam'? What we have thought had it written "Rak es Chelbo Lo Sochel"?

(c) When would Cheilev then be subject to Kareis?

(a) What do we learn from "Damo"?

(b) How does Rava reconcile his explanation with the fact that the Tana learns 'Chelbo' from "Ach", and not 'Oso ve'es B'no'?

(a) What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei (in connection with Pesulei ha'Mukdashin) ...
  1. ... "Tizbach"?
  2. ... "Basar"?
  3. ... "Ve'achalta"?
(b) What principle emerges from the last ruling?

(c) What does the second Lashon learn from ...

  1. ... "Tizbach Ve'achalta"?
  2. ... "Basar"?
(d) What does this Lashon hold about redeeming Kodshim?
Answers to questions



(a) When our Mishnah forbids the babies (and the milk) from after the Pidyon of the Pesulei ha'Mukdashin, why can it not be referring to those that were both conceived and born after the redemption?

(b) Then what is the Tana referring to?

(c) What will the Din then be regarding the babies that were conceived and born before the redemption?

(a) The Beraisa discusses the Pasuk in Vayikra "ve'Im Zevach Shelamim Korbano, Im Zachar Im Nekeivah".
Why does the Tana consider "Zachar" and "Nekeivah" superfluous?

(b) "Zachar", he says, comes to include the babies of a Kodshim animal.
What does he learn from ...

  1. ... "Nekeivah"?
  2. ... "*Im* Zachar"?
  3. ... "*Im* Nekeivah"?
(c) There is a Machlokes what happens to the babies of Ba'alei Mumin that are born before their mothers have been redeemed. Some say that are brought on the Mizbe'ach.
What do others say?
(a) According to Rav Huna, those that are born after their mothers have been redeemed are placed in a room and left to starve.
Why can they not be ...
  1. ... brought on the Mizbe'ach?
  2. ... redeemed?
(b) What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(c) How did the B'nei Eretz Yisrael in the name of Rebbi Chanina get round the problem of their weak Kedushah, as we just explained according to Rav Huna?

(d) How do we amend their initial answer 'Samuch le'Pidyonan Matfisan le'Shem Oso Zevach'? What is wrong with the original version?

(a) Seeing as the mother was redeemed, why did the Rabbanan see fit to forbid the babies be'Hana'ah outright?

(b) Then why did they not likewise decree by Kadam Muman le'Hekdeishan?

(c) What makes it uncommon?

(d) And on what grounds did they permit even Kadam Hekdeishan le'Muman, there where the babies were conceived and born after the mother's Pidyon?

(e) There are two other ways of interpretating 'Ta'ama Mai'.
One of them is to explain why Rav Huna disagrees with the Takanah of Rebbi Yochanan.
What is the other?

(a) Ravina asked Rav Sheishes whether it is permitted to declare the babies Hekdesh with a different Kedushah than that of the mother.
What did he reply?

(b) How did Abaye learn this from "bi'She'arecha" "bi'She'arecha" from Bechor?

(c) In a Beraisa that supports Rav Sheishes ruling, what does the Tana say in a case of Kadam Muman le'Hekdeishan, about ...

  1. ... someone who shears their wool or who works with them?
  2. ... Me'ilah for someone who uses them? When is there Me'ilah and when is there not?
(d) What does the Tana mean when he says 'Ein Lecha Bahem Ela Mitzvas Iluy Bil'vad'?
(a) What happens to someone who shears or works with an animal whose Hekdesh preceded its blemish?

(b) Which case has the same Din, even though it had a blemish before the Hekdesh?

(c) The Tana issues the same ruling regarding Me'ilah in this case as it did in the previous one.
Why is there no Me'ilah after the Pidyon?

(d) 'V'ladoseihen Kodesh'.
What does the Tana say about redeeming them?

(a) What distinction does the Tana draw between the Reisha and the Seifa with regard to declaring the two animals Hekdesh? What does this prove?

(b) We include 'Shochtan ba'Chutz' (which is Patur) from the K'lal in the Reisha, and 'La'asuyei Chelbo' (which is Asur) from the K'lal in the Seifa. Which K'lal?

(c) Why do we not include ...

  1. ... 'Shochto be'Chutz' to be Chayav in the Seifa?
  2. ... 'Chelbo' to be permitted in the Reisha?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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