(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 17


(a) When Rav Oshaya arrived from Neherda’a, and cited a Beraisa ‘Rachel bas Eiz, ve’Eiz bas Rachel, Rebbi Meir Mechayev, va’Chachamim Potrim’, he asked Rabah to enquire from Rav Huna what the Beraisa is referring to.
Why can the Tana not be referring to the Din of ...
  1. ... Bechorah? What do we learn from ”Ach Bechor Shor” (Korach)?
  2. ... Reishis ha’Gez? What does Tana de’Bei Rebbi Yishmael learn from the Pasuk in Iyov “ve’Geiz Kevasai Yischamam”?
(b) He replied that the Beraisa is referring to Oso ve’es B’no.
How did he then establish the case? What is the Machlokes?

(c) What problem do we have with this?

(a) So we establish that they are arguing over the Bechorah, in one of two possible cases.
What will be the basis of their Machlokes, assuming that the Beraisa is speaking where the lamb resembles its ...
  1. ... mother, but not its grandmother?
  2. ... grandmother, but not its mother?
(b) In this latter case, how will we explain ‘Rachel bas Eiz, ve’Eiz bas Rachel”?

(c) How can the Tana talk about a ‘Rachel bas Eiz’, seeing as a female animal is not subject to the Bechorah?

(d) Rav Ashi establishes the case where the baby resembles its mother in one or two points, in which case, the Chachamim must be Rebbi Shimon.
What does Rebbi Shimon say?

(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan, what does Rebbi Meir concede regarding the Se’ir Chatas of Rosh Chodesh?

(b) How does he learn this from the Pasuk in Pinchas “u’Se’ir Izim Echad”?
Is it confined to the Sa’ir Chatas of Rosh Chodesh?

(c) From the Pasuk in Emor “Shor O Kesev” we preclude Kil’ayim from the realm of Korbanos. What do we learn from “O Eiz”?

(d) Why do we now need two Pesukim to preclude Nidmeh.
Having learned it from ...

  1. ... “Shor O Kesev”, why do we need “u’Se’ir Izim Echad”?
  2. ... “u’Se’ir Izim Echad”, why do we need “Shor O Kesev”?
(a) In connection with the wool of a Nidmeh, what does ...
  1. ... Rav Acha bar Ya’akov learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei “Lo Silbash Sha’atnez, Tzemer u’Fishtim Yachdav”?
  2. ... Rav Papa learn from the Pasuk there “Lo Silbash Sha’atnez ... Gedilim Ta’aseh Lach”, regarding Techeiles?
  3. ... Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak learn from the Pasuk in Tazri’a (in connection with Tum’as Nega’im) “be’Veged Tzemer O be’Veged Pishtim”?
(b) What similar D’rashah does Rav Ashi make with regard to the Nesachim, based on the Pasuk in Emor (in connection with the Korbenos ha’Chag) “*Zevach u’Nesachim* D’var Tom be’Yomo”?

(c) From where does he know that the Zevachim have not been changed?

(a) Ravina queries Rav Ashi from planting flax seeds on top of a bush.
What is the problem from there?

(b) What does Rav Ashi reply? Why can one not compare planting flax seeds on top of a bush with planting a vine on top of a fig-tree?

(a) What does Rebbi Yossi ha’Gelili in our Mishnah say about a sheep that gives birth for the first time, to twins?

(b) How does he learn it from the Pasuk (in Bo, in connection with the Din of Bechor) “ha’Zecharim la’Hashem”?

(c) What do the Chachamim say?

(d) According to Rebbi Tarfon, the Kohen may pick the better of the two.
What does Rebbi Akiva say?

(a) According to Rebbi Akiva, what happens to the ...
  1. ... second twin (that the Yisrael retains)?
  2. ... first twin (that the Kohen takes)?
(b) Why might this speak even in the time when the Beis-Hamikdash is standing? Why can the Kohen not bring it directly on the Mizbe’ach?

(c) Then why does the Tana refer specifically to the second one?

(a) The Tana Kama obligates the owner to give the Matanos of the second animal to the Kohen.
What does Rebbi Yossi say?

(b) Should one of the two animals die, Rebbi Tarfon rules that the owner and the Kohen must divide the remaining one.
Why is that?

(c) What does Rebbi Akiva say?

(d) What does the Tana finally rule in a case where one baby was a male and the other, a female?

Answers to questions



(a) de’Bei Rebbi Yanai commented that if Rebbi Yossi ha’Gelili holds ‘Efshar Letzamtzem bi’Yedei Shamayim’, then he certainly holds ‘Efshar Letzamtzem’ bi’Yedei Adam.
Why is that?

(b) What She’eilah do they now ask according to the Rabbanan?

(c) We try to resolve the She’eilah from the Chut ha’Sikra.
What purpose did the Chut ha’Sikra serve? What would be the problem if they made a mistake in measuring its location?

(d) How do we refute the proof? What could they have done to circumvent the problem?

(a) On what grounds do we refute the proof from the Mizbe’ach and the other Keilim in the Beis-Hamikdash, which had to conform with exact specifications?

(b) What is the criterion for a piece of broken earthenware oven to be subject to Tamei?

(c) What does the Mishnah in Midos say about an oven that broke into two ‘equal’ pieces?

(d) How does Rav Kahana refute the proof from here that the Rabbanan hold ‘I Efshar Letzamtzem Afilu bi’Yedei Adam’? What makes an earthenware oven different?

(a) What does Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa say about a murdered man who is found between two towns at a spot that is equidistant from both of them?

(b) Why must he hold ‘Efshar Letzamtzem bi’Yedei Adam’?

(c) And how does he interpret the Pasuk “Vehayah ha’Ir *ha’Kerovah” el he’ Chalal”?

(d) On what grounds do we refute the proof from here that he holds like the Rabbanan, who clearly then concede that ‘Efshar Letzamtzem bi’Yedei Adam’?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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