REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bechoros 26
BECHOROS 26 - dedicated anonymously by a student of Rabbi Kornfeld's in
(a) We query Rebbi Asi Amar Resh Lakish (who restricts Rebbi Yossi in our
Mishnah to where the Chacham had examined the Bechor before the wool fell
out) from a Beraisa.
What does the Tana rule with regard to someone who
detaches the wool from a Bechor Tam, and who subsequently Shechts it after
it obtains a blemish?
(b) What do we extrapolate from the fact that the Tana refers specifically
to a Bechor Tam?
(c) Who is the author of this Beraisa?
(d) How do we reconcile this with Rebbi Asi?
(a) We cite a Beraisa, where the Tana Kama argues with Rebbi Yehudah whether
Akavya and the Rabbanan argue over the wool of a Bechor Ba'al-Mum that died
(but agree that it is permitted in a case where it was Shechted [the Tana
Kama, like Rebbi Yossi in our Mishnah]), or over one that was Shechted
What does Rebbi Yossi ...
(b) What problem do we have with this triple Machlokes?
- ... mean when, in the name of his father (Aba Chalafta) he says that 'be'Yichud' the Chachamim said to place it on the windows-sill (perhaps there is hope)? What does 'be'Yichud' mean?
- ... add after that?
(c) We suggest that they are arguing over where the Chacham had not yet
On what basis do we then establish ...
- ... the Tana Kama Lehachmir?
- ... Rebbi Yossi Lehakel?
(a) Rava rejects this explanation however. According to him, they are all
arguing about the corollary between Meis and Shachto.
If, as we already
learned in our Mishnah, Rebbi Yehudah establishes the Machlokes specifically
by Shachto, and Rebbi Yossi, by Meis, how does the Tana Kama establish it?
(b) Then why does he cite it specifically by Meis?
(c) On what grounds does Rav Nachman rule like Rebbi Yehudah (despite the
fact that he is arguing with the Chachamim [a majority opinion], and with
Rebbi Yossi (like whom we generally rule)?
(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak extrapolates this from the Seifa of our
Mishnah, 'Tzemer ha'Meduvlal bi'Vechor, es she'Nir'eh im ha'Gizah, Mutar
Why can the author not be Rebbi Yossi ...
(b) So the author must be Rebbi Yehudah.
- ... assuming that they Shechted the Bechor?
- ... assuming it died, according to the Rabbanan?
- ... assuming it died, according to Akavya? What ought the Tana then to have said?
Why can he not be speaking when
the B'chor ...
(c) So how does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak finally establish the Mishnah?
- ... died?
- ... was Shechted, according to Akavya?
(d) What has he now proved?
(a) Rebbi Yanai asked what the Din will be if someone detaches ('Tolesh')
wool from an Olah Temimah.
On what grounds do we amend the She'eilah to
wool of an Olah that became detached ('Nislash')?
(b) What is now the case?
(a) Why does Rebbi Yanai ask specifically about wool of an Olah Temimah? Why
not a Ba'al-Mum?
(b) Why did he not ask about a Chatas or an Asham?
(c) What then is the She'eilah? If an Olah does not come for a Kaparah, then
why might its wool be permitted, any more than that of a Ba'al-Mum (where we
are afraid that he might delay Shechting it for its wool)?
(a) What do we extrapolate from the Beraisa, which forbids wool of a B'chor
Tam that someone detached, even though it obtained a Mum and was Shechted?
Answers to questions
(b) How will this help us resolve our She'eilah regarding an Olah?
(c) We refute this proof however, by establishing the Beraisa even by
Nislash. Why does the Tana then mention specifically 'Tolesh'?
(d) Then why in our Mishnah, does Akavya mention specifically 'Nashar'
(which is synonymous with Nislash)?
(a) Rebbi Elazar Amar Resh Lakish defines 'Eino Nir'eh im ha'Gizah' (the
Tzemer ha'Meduvlal which is Asur) as the strands of wool that are folded and
it is evident that they were detached when the animal was still alive.
***** Hadran Alach 'ha'Loke'ach Beheimah' *****
does Nasan bar Oshaya define it?
(b) Rebbi Ila'a explains why Resh Lakish disagrees with Rav Nasan bar
What does he say?
***** Perek Ad Kamah *****
(a) According to the Tana Kama, a Yisrael nowadays is obligated to look
after a Beheimah Dakah for thirty days.
For how long must he look after a
(b) What does Rebbi Yossi hold with regard to a Beheimah Dakah?
(c) Under which circumstances is the Yisrael permitted to give the Bechor
to the Kohen before this time, should he ask for it?
(d) And what will be the Din if, in the time of the Beis-Hamikdash, the
Kohen asks for the Bechor before the above times, in order to bring it on
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei "Lifnei Hashem Elokecha
Sochlenu *Shanah be'Shanah*"?
(b) If it obtains a Mum within the year, the Tana permits retaining it until
the end of the year.
What does he say about a Bechor that obtains a Mum
after it has already entered its second year?
(a) How long after the produce ripens does one bring Bikurim?
(b) The Pasuk in Mishpatim writes "Mele'ascha ve'Dim'acha Lo Se'acher,
Bechor Banecha Titen Li. Kein Ta'aseh le'Shorcha le'Tzonecha ... ". What
does Rav Kahana learn from there (according to the Tana Kama of our
(c) On what grounds does he compare a Beheimah Gasah to Bikurim and a
Beheimah Dakah to Bechor, and not vice-versa?
(d) On what basis do we query this explanation? Why would it be more logical
to compare a Beheimah Gasah to a Bechor?
(a) From where does Rava therefore learn the thirty days of a Beheimah
Dakah? What is the significance of the word "Ta'aseh" that is written by
(b) How do we know that it does not signify that a Beheimah Gasah requires
another set of thirty days (totaling sixty days)?
(c) How do we know that Rava's explanation is correct?
(d) Rebbi Yossi requires three months in the case of a Beheimah, because he
claims, it needs more looking after.
What does he mean by that?
(a) We learned in our Mishnah, that if the Kohen asks for a Bechor Beheimah
before the time of Tipul (looking after) is up, one is not permitted to give
it to him.
What reason does Rav Sheishes give for this?
(b) The source for that lies in a Beraisa.
What does the Tana say about
Kohanim and Levi'im who help with the shepherding, in the granary or in the
(c) What is the significance of each of these three?
(d) Which third group does the Tana add to the list?
(a) A Yisrael who contravenes one of the above, says the Tana, has
desecrated the Kedushas Kehunah and Leviyah, as the Pasuk writes in Malachi
"Shichatem B'ris ha'Levi".
Answers to questions
Why does the Tana see fit to also quote the
Pasuk in Korach "ve'es Kodshei B'nei Yisrael Lo Sechalelu ... "? How does
the Pasuk conclude?
(b) The Chachamim would have liked to penalize the transgressors. How did
they intend to do that?
(c) Then why didn't they?