(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 12

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


(a) Our Mishnah precludes a calf, a Chayah, a Shechutah, a Tereifah, Kil'ayim or a Koy from the Din of Seh.
What is the difference between Kil'ayim and a Coy?

(b) Why does Rebbi Eliezer incorporate Kil'ayim in the Din of Seh, but preclude a Coy?

(c) What does the Mishnah finally rule in a case where the owner gave the Peter Chamor to a Kohen?

(a) We establish the author of our Mishnah as ben Bag Bag.
What does ben Bag Bag in a Beraisa, learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Seh" "Seh" from the Korban Pesach?

(b) On the other hand, he does not preclude a female animal, one that is blemished or in its second or third year (as we learned earlier).
From where does he learn that?

(a) We ask whether a ben Peku'ah is included in the Din of Seh.
What is a ben Peku'ah?

(b) Why is this She'eilah not valid according to Rebbi Meir? What does Rebbi Meir say about the Shechitah of a ben Peku'ah?

(c) Why, according to the Rabbanan, might it not have the Din of a Seh?

(a) Mar Zutra holds that a ben Peku'ah is indeed not considered a Seh.
What does Rav Ashi say? Why?

(b) Is a ben Peku'ah eligible to be brought as a Korban Pesach?

(c) Rav Ashi includes a ben Peku'ah from "Tifdeh" "Tifdeh".
What does Mar Zutra say?

(a) We ask whether a Nidmeh is included in the Din of Seh.
What is a Nidmeh?

(b) Why is this She'eilah not valid according to Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah?

(c) What is then the She'eilah according to the Rabbanan?

(a) We try to resolve the She'eilah from the Beraisa 'Parah she'Yaldah Miyn Eiz, Ein Podin'.
What can we extrapolate from there?

(b) Why do we initially establish the author as the Rabbanan, thereby automatically resolving the She'eilah?

(c) We refute this proof however, by establishing the author as Rebbi Eliezer, after all.
What is then the Chidush (of the actual Halachah)?

(a) Rabah bar Shmuel cites another Beraisa describing Kil'ayim as a ewe that gives birth to a goat, whose father is a sheep. Seeing as the description is that of a Nidmeh, what is the Tana coming to teach us?

(b) He cannot be referring to Kodshim (meaning that a Nidmeh, like a Kil'ayim, cannot be brought as a Korban), because we already know this from another source. If the Pasuk in Emor "Shor O Kesev" comes to preclude an animal that is Kil'ayim from the Mizbe'ach, what do we learn from "O Eiz"?

(c) Neither can he be referring to a Bechor or an animal of Ma'aser Beheimah.
What do we learn from ...

  1. ... the Pasuk "Ach Bechor Shor"?
  2. ... the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Tachas (ha'Sheivet)" "Tachas (Imo)" (from Kodshim)?
(d) So what do we suggest the Tana of Rabah bar Shmuel's Beraisa is talking about? What does then prove?
(a) We reject this proof however, on the grounds that maybe the Tana is talking about Ma'aser after all, where the animal has some of the Simanim of its mother.
What might we otherwise learn from the Gezeirah-Shavah "Kol Asher *Ya'avor* Tachas ha'Sheivet" "*Ve'ha'avarta* Kol Peter Rechem la'Hashem" from Bechor?

(b) From where does the Tana then learn that such an animal is not subject to Ma'aser?

(a) The previous She'eilah remains unresolved, and we now ask whether the owner is permitted to redeem a Peter Chamor with a lamb of Pesulei ha'Mukdushin.
Why is this not a She'eilah according to Rebbi Shimon? What does Rebbi Shimon say about Pesulei ha'Mukdashin that renders them Chulin?

(b) Then what is the She'eilah according to Rebbi Yehudah?
Why might it be ...

  1. ... forbidden?
  2. ... permitted, in spite of that?
(c) Rav Mari b'rei de'Rav Kahana resolves the She'eilah from the Pasuk (in connection with Pesulei ha'Mukdashin) "ka'Tz'vi ve'cha'Ayal"?

(d) What final comment do we therefore make in this regard, in connection with Rebbi Shimon's opinion?

Answers to questions



(a) We now ask whether one is permitted to redeem the Peter Chamor with a lamb of Shevi'is. What is a 'lamb of Shevi'is'?

(b) We declare that this She'eilah is only valid in a case of Safek Peter Chamor, but not Vaday.
Why not?

(c) Why will the She'eilah then not go according to Rebbi Shimon? What does Rebbi Shimon say with regard to Safek Peter Chamor?

(d) What is then the She'eilah according to Rebbi Yehudah? Why might it be ...

  1. ... permitted?
  2. ... forbidden?
(a) We resolve the She'eilah with a statement by Rav Chisda. What distinction does Rav Chisda draw between redeeming a Vaday firstborn donkey and a Safek?

(b) Rav Chisda also precludes an 'animal of Shevi'is' from the Bechorah.
Why is that?

(c) What does he rule, in the same statement, regarding Matanos (Zero'a Lechayayim ve'Keivah)?

(a) What does the Beraisa rule regarding someone who eats from a dough that is made from Shevi'is produce, before the Chalah has been separated?

(b) What problem does this create with Rav Chisda's previous ruling (by the Din of Bechor) from a Beraisa?

(c) We substantiate our answer (that Chalah is different), with a Beraisa. What does the Tana learn from the Pasuk in Korach "me'Reishis Arisoseichem ... *le'Doroseichem*"?

(d) Why do we not learn the Din of Bechorah from there? If it is considered 'la'Achilah' regarding Chalah, why is it not considered 'Achilah' with regard to the Bechorah?

(a) Our Mishnah, which forbids the Kohen to retain the Peter Chamor that he receives from a Yisrael, supports the Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa say about a Kohen who asks a Yisrael to give him his Peter Bechor, which he volunteers to redeem for a lamb?

(b) What does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah extrapolate from there?

(c) Why is Rav Nachman's statement not obvious from the Mishnah and Beraisa themselves? What might we otherwise have thought?

(d) What does Rav Nachman teach us?

(a) Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah rules that if the lamb which the owner separated as Pidyon Peter Chamor dies, the owner remains responsible to replace it like the five Sela'im of Pidyon ha'Ben that got lost.
What do the Chachamim say?

(b) What did Rebbi Yehoshua and Rebbi Tzadok testify in connection with a Pidyon Peter Chamor that died?

(c) Rebbi Eliezer also rules that if the donkey itself dies before the owner has managed to give the lamb to the Kohen, it must be buried and the owner may retain the lamb. What do the Chachamim say?

(d) What does Rav Yosef, commenting on Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah, learn from the Pasuk in Korach "Ach Padoh Sifdeh ... es Bechor ha'Adam ve'es Bechor ha'Beheimah ha'Temei'ah Tifdeh"?

(a) What does Abaye ask Rav Yosef from Rebbi Eliezer's own ruling in the Seifa of our Mishnah) requiring a dead Peter Chamor to be buried?

(b) How do we try to resolve this problem? To what other reason might we attribute the obligation to bury the donkey?

(c) Besides the mistaken implication from here that other than a Bechor, other humans are Mutar be'Hana'ah, what problem do we have with this answer, from Rebbi Eliezer himself? What did Rebbi Eleizer say about a Yisrael who has a Safek Peter Chamor in his house?

(d) So what does Rava finally learn from Rebbi Eliezer's source Pasuk "Ach Padoh Sifdeh ... ", to explain the latter's opinion?

(a) The Beraisa rules 'ha'Erchin be'Sha'atan, u'Pidyon ha'Ben Achar Sheloshim'.
What does 'ha'Erchin be'Sha'atan' mean?

(b) What does the Tana add regarding Pidyon Peter Chamor?

(c) What does another Beraisa say about Erchin, Pidyon ha'Ben Nezirus, and Peter Chamor? What do they all have in common?

(d) The Tana concludes 'u'Mosifin ad Olam'.
What does this mean?

(a) How does Rav Nachman establish the first Beraisa, to resolve the discrepancy between the two rulings regarding Pidyon Peter Chamor?

(b) What can we then extrapolate regarding Pidyon ha'Ben within thirty days?

(c) How does Rava reconcileow HowHow this with Rav, who said 'B'no Paduy'?

(d) Rav Sheishes accepts the first Beraisa literally (i.e. Lechatchilah).
How does he then explain the second Beraisa ('Ein be'Erchin Pachos mi'Sheloshim')?

(a) Rami bar Chama queries Rav Sheishes from the Beraisa 'Mitzvaso Kol Sheloshim Yom; O Podeihu O Arfo'.
How does Rami bar Chama interpret 'Mitzvaso'? What is then the problem with Rav Sheishes?

(b) Why can Rav Sheishes not interpret the Beraisa to mean 'Mitzvah Lifdoso'?

(c) Rava concedes that Mitzvaso means 'Lish'hoso'.
How does he nevertheless reconcile this Beraisa with the earlier Beraisa which rules 'Le'alter', to concur with Rav Sheishes?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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