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 13
BECHOROS 12-15 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
1) THE TIME FOR "PIDYON PETER CHAMOR"
(a) Resolution #2 (Rav Sheshes): Beraisa #2 teaches that one
does not transgress [for delaying] Pidyon Peter Chamor
until 30 days.
2) PREFERABLE MITZVOS
(b) Question (Rami bar Chama - Beraisa): The Mitzvah [of
Pidyon Peter Chamor] is all 30 days; after this, he
redeems it or does Arifah.
1. Suggestion: This means that the Mitzvah is to wait
30 days before redeeming!
(c) Answer: No, it means that for the first 30 days the
Mitzvah is to redeem.
(d) Objection: If so, it should not say "After this, he
redeems it or does Arifah," but rather, "After this, he
redeems it or transgresses"!
(e) Resolution #3 (Rava): Beraisa #1 is like R. Eliezer, who
equates Pidyon Peter Chamor to Pidyon ha'Ben; Beraisa #2
is like Chachamim, who do not equate them.
(a) (Mishnah): If the owner of a Peter Chamor (or a Kohen who
received one) does not want to redeem it, he does Arifah
from the back of the neck and buries it;
***** PEREK HA'LOKE'ACH UBAR PARASO ****
1. The Mitzvah to redeem it takes precedence over
Mitzvas Arifah - "v'Im Lo Sifdeh va'Arafto";
(b) The Mitzvah [for an Amah Ivriyah's master] to do Yi'ud
(marry her) takes precedence over the Mitzvah [for her or
her father] to redeem her[self] - "Asher Lo Ye'Adah
(c) At first, people would do Yibum l'Shem Mitzvah, so it had
precedence over Chalitzah;
1. Nowadays, people are not l'Shem Mitzvah (such a
Yibum is like Arayos, i.e. Eshes Ach), so Chalitzah
(d) If one was Makdish [to Bedek ha'Bayis], he has precedence
to redeem over anyone else (R. Gershom - because he adds
a Chomesh - "v'Yasaf Chamishiso Alav), v'Im Lo Yiga'el
3) EXEMPTIONS FROM "BECHORAH"
(a) (Mishnah): In the following cases, a cow's first calf
does not get Kedushas Bechor:
4) HOW "NOCHRIM" ACQUIRE
1. If one bought the fetus in a Nochri's cow;
(b) We learn from "b'Yisrael" - not of others.
2. If one sold the fetus in his cow to a Nochri, even
though this is forbidden;
3. If one was a partner with a Nochri in a cow;
4. If one was Mekabel from a Nochri (to take care of
his cow, and share the offspring), or he gave his
cow to a Nochri b'Kabalah.
(c) Kedushas Bechor applies to Tahor animals born to Kohanim
1. They are exempt only from Pidyon ha'Ben and Kedushas
(d) (Gemara) Question: Why does our Masechta begin with Peter
Chamor, and only afterwards it discusses Bechor Behemah
1. It is more reasonable to begin with Kedushas ha'Guf,
and then to teach about Kedushas Damim!
(e) Answer #1 (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): The Tana prefers
to teach about donkeys first, on account of R. Chanina's
teaching (it is the only Tamei species with Kedushas
Bechor because donkeys helped Benei Yisrael take wealth
out of Mitzrayim).
(f) Answer #2: Because there are fewer laws of Peter Chamor,
the Tana immediately taught them in the first Perek, and
teaches about Bechor Behemah Tehorah in [most of] the
rest of the Masechta.
(a) (Reish Lakish citing R. Oshaya): If a Jew gave money to a
Nochri for his Behemah, we follow their law (this will be
explained), even though the Jew did not do Meshichah
(take it to his Reshus), he acquired it, and Kedushas
Bechor applies to it;
1. If a Nochri gave money to a Jew for his Behemah, we
follow their law (this will be explained), even
though he did not do Meshichah, he acquired it, and
it is exempt from Bechorah.
(b) Question: What does it mean (in the first clause) "We
follow their law"?
1. Suggestion: We learn from the law of buying a Nochri
(c) (In the following discussion, unspecified acquisition is
i. A Yisrael acquires a Nochri through money -
slaves are called "Lareshes Achuzah" (an
inheritance), they are equated to land;
2. Money acquires a Nochri, all the more so it acquires
ii. Just like land is acquired through money, Shtar
(a document) or Chazakah (usage), also an Eved
3. Rejection #1: The same reasoning would show that
Shtar and Chazakah acquire his property (and this is
4. Rejection #2: A similar Kal va'Chomer should apply
to Yisraelim, but it does not (this shows that we
may not make such a Kal va'Chomer)!
i. Reuven acquires Shimon [to be his Eved Ivri]
through money, but he does not acquire Shimon's
Metaltelim through money, only through
(d) Answer #1 (Abaye): We follow the law that the Torah gave
1. A Yisrael acquires through Meshichah, "mi'Yad
Amisecha" -- from [the hand of] another Yisrael; he
does not acquire from a Nochri through Meshichah,
but rather through money.
(e) (Reish Lakish): If a Nochri gave money for a Jew's
animal, we follow their law, he acquires without
Meshichah, and it is exempt from Bechorah.
2. Suggestion: Perhaps he does not acquire from a
Nochri at all (R. Gershom; Rashi - until he actually
takes it to his premises; when acquiring from a
Yisrael, it suffices to take it to his Reshus (or to
a place where he is allowed to stop), e.g. totally
in his hand, three Tefachim off the ground
(Hagbahah), or to a shoulder of Reshus ha'Rabim).
3. Rejection: Money acquires a Nochri, all the more so
it acquires his property!
4. Suggestion: Perhaps he does not acquire from a
Nochri until he gives money *and* does Meshichah!
5. Rejection: One Kinyan (money) suffices to acquire a
Nochri, all the more so one Kinyan suffices to
acquire his property!
6. Suggestion: Perhaps he acquires from a Nochri
through money *or* Meshichah!
7. Rejection: Acquiring from a Nochri is [learned from
and similar to] acquiring from a Yisrael:
i. Just like there is one Kinyan to acquire from a
Yisrael, also from a Nochri.
(f) Question: What does it mean "their law"?
1. Suggestion: We learn from the law of a Nochri who
buys an Eved Ivri;
(g) Answer #1 (Abaye): We follow the law that the Torah gave
i. A Nochri acquires a Yisrael through money,
"mi'Kesef Miknaso" -- all the more so he
acquires a Yisrael's property through money!
2. Rejection: A similar Kal va'Chomer should apply to
Yisraelim, but it does not;
i. Reuven acquires Shimon through money, but he
does not acquire Shimon's Metaltelim through
money, only through Meshichah!
1. "V'Chi Simkero Mimkar la'Amisecha [...mi'Yad
Amisecha]" - a Yisrael is Makneh (transfers
ownership) to a Yisrael through Meshichah (of the
buyer), but he is not Makneh to a Nochri through
Meshichah, rather, through [receiving] money.
2. Suggestion: Perhaps he is not Makneh to a Nochri at
3. Rejection: A Nochri acquires a Yisrael through
money, all the more so he acquires his property
4. Suggestion: Perhaps he does not acquire until he
gives money and does Meshichah!
5. Rejection: One Kinyan suffices for him to acquire a
Yisrael, all the more so one suffices to acquire a
6. Suggestion: Perhaps he acquires through money or
5) RETRACTING FROM A PURCHASE FROM A "NOCHRI"
7. Rejection: Just like there is one Kinyan to Makneh
to a Yisrael, also to a Nochri.
(h) Ameimar says that a Nochri acquires and is Makneh through
(i) Question: We understand if he holds like R. Yochanan, who
says that mid'Oraisa a Yisrael acquires through money
(but Chachamim disqualified money and enacted that
Meshichah acquires) - "Amisecha" teaches that money works
for a Yisrael, but not for a Nochri, rather, Meshichah;
1. But if he holds like Reish Lakish, who says that
mid'Oraisa a Yisrael acquires through Meshichah,
just like a Nochri, how does he expound "Amisecha"?
(j) Answer: (The verse discusses Ona'ah (overcharging) --
"v'Chi Simkero Mimkar la'Amisecha O Kano mi'Yad Amisecha
Al Tonu.") "Amisecha" teaches that Ona'ah must be
returned to a Yisrael, but not to a Nochri (Rashash -
even though it is forbidden to overcharge him).
(k) Question: We learn this from the end of the verse, "Al
Tonu *Ish Es Achiv*"!
(l) Answer: One of these excludes Ona'ah of a Nochri, one
excludes Ona'ah of Hekdesh; the Torah must teach both:
1. If it only taught Ona'ah of a Nochri, we would have
thought that Ona'ah applies to Hekdesh - therefore,
both are needed.
(m) Question: This is according to the opinion that forbids
stealing from Nochrim;
1. But according to the opinion that permits it, there
is no need to teach that Ona'ah does not apply to
(n) Answer: Indeed, if Ameimar permits Gezel Nochri, he must
hold like R. Yochanan.
(a) Question (Beraisa): If a Yisrael bought pieces of silver
from a Nochri, and found idolatry among them:
1. If he did Meshichah but did not yet give the money,
he can return it;
(b) Answer #1: The case is, the Nochri agreed to conduct
according to the law of Yisrael (only Meshichah
2. If he did Meshichah after giving the money, he must
cast the idolatry to the Dead Sea (he acquired it,
it is forbidden to benefit from idolatry)!
i. If money acquires from Nochrim, why does the
Seifa mention Meshichah - he acquired through
(c) Question: If so, why does the Beraisa discuss giving
(d) Answer: This is a Chidush - even though he gave money, if
he did not do Meshichah, he may return it.
(e) Question: Also in the Reisha, he did Meshichah - why may
he return it?
(f) Answer #1 (Abaye): It is a Mekach Ta'us (mistaken sale,
he never intended to buy idolatry, so he never acquired
(g) Objection (Rava): Also in the Seifa, it is a Mekach
Ta'us, yet he may return it!
(h) Answer #1 (Rava): In both clauses it is a Mekach Ta'us;
1. In the Reisha, he did not give money, it does not
look like a Yisrael's idolatry;
(i) Answer #2 (Abaye): In the Reisha it is a Mekach Ta'us -
since he did not give money, it is understandable that he
did not know that there is idolatry among them;
2. In the Seifa, he gave money, it *looks like* a
1. In the Seifa he gave money, he should have examined
them before doing Meshichah - his failure to do so
is acceptance of whatever is there!
(j) Answer #2 (to question (a) - Rav Ashi): The Reisha shows
that Meshichah does not acquire, therefore also in the
Seifa it does not acquire;
1. There is no real need for the Seifa to mention
Meshichah, it is only for parallel structure with
(k) Answer #3 (Ravina): The Seifa shows that Meshichah
acquires, therefore also in the Reisha it acquires;
1. The Reisha means, if he did not give money *nor* do
Meshichah, he can return it.
(l) Question: If he did neither Kinyan, there is nothing to
(m) Answer: He may retract his words;
1. The Tana holds that one who retracts from verbal
commitments *to a Yisrael* is unfaithful, for a
Yisrael honors his word;
2. Since a Nochri does not honor his word, a Yisrael
need not honor his word to a Nochri.