(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Beitzah 27

BEITZAH 26, 27, 28, 29 - dedicated by Yitzchak Gross of Brooklyn, NY, l'Iluy Nishmas his father, Menashe Yehudah ben Matisyahu, and his mother, Dina bas Yisroel.


(a) R. Ami declined to rule on the Bechor of R. Yehudah HaNasi (in accordance with R. Shimon).
(b) Question (R. Zerika or R. Yirmiyah): But in a dispute with R. Shimon the Halachah follows R. Yehudah!?
(c) R. Yitzhok Nafcha similarly declined the animal.
(d) Question (R. Yirmiyah or R. Zerika): Same as b.
(e) Answer (R. Aba): Let the experts rule like R. Shimon!
(f) Question: On what basis do you say this?
(g) Answer (R. Aba): A tradition from R. Zeira that the Halachah here follows R. Shimon.
(h) Question (A student who travelled to R. Zeira): Did you rule like R. Shimon?
(i) Answer: No, I did not rule that way, it rather seems logical to me (since the position of R. Shimon not to rule on a Bechor is taught in a Beraisa as the position of Chachamim).
(j) Question: What is the Halachah?
(k) Answer (R. Yosef): The previous generations have indicated, by praising the position of R. Shimon b. Menasia as aligning with the view of R. Meir, that the Halachah follows R. Shimon.
1. The elders appeared to be citing R. Shimon as ruling like R. Meir.
2. This is unlikely since they were older than R. Shimon, rather, they were highlighting the similarity between R. Shimon's position regarding examining a Bechor and a position of R. Meir in his dispute with R. Yehudah.
i. (R. Yehudah) One who slaughters a Bechor and only thereafter shows it to an expert may, nevertheless, eat the blemished animal.
ii. (R. Meir) Since the animal was slaughtered without the benefit on an expert it is Asur.
iii. This demonstrates that, according to R. Meir, examining a Bechor is more stringent than examining a regular Tereifah (which may be done after Shechitah).
iv. By extension, this significance afforded the checking of a Bechor makes it prohibited as an act of Tikun on YomTov.
(l) Question (Abaye): The dispute between R. Meir and R. Yehudah is unrelated to examining Mumin, but rather is about penalizing one who acts against Chazal (by knowingly slaughtering a Bechor before its examination)!
1. This may be demonstrated by the assertion of Rabah b.b. Chanah (citing R. Yochanan) that (R. Meir and R. Yehudah would concur to prohibit the animal which had blemishes which may change after the animal is slaughtered and) the dispute surrounds the issue of penalty (applying the prohibition over such changing blemishes to all cases).
2. (R. Nachman b. Yitzhok) The style used by R. Meir to assert the prohibition also indicates that the issue is a penalty.
(a) When people complained to R. Ami that Ami Vardena'ah refused to examine Bechoros on YomTov, R. Ami supported his refusal.
(b) Question: But R. Ami himself examined a Mum on YomTov!?
(c) Answer: He had already inspected the Mum before YomTov and he only investigated the matter on YomTov.

(d) In the reported incident, Rava glanced at the animal during his Erev YomTov preparations and only interrogated the Kohen the next day.
(e) Rava needed to preclude the possibility that the Kohen had indirectly (Gerama) precipitated the Mum by luring the animal into the fence which blemished his eye.
(f) Question: On what basis is Gerama prohibited?
(g) Answer: The Beraisa learns it from *Kol* Mum.
(a) A carcass may not be moved on YomTov.
(b) In the incident where R. Tarfon both received and then asked this question, along with a question regarding moving a Chalah which became Tameh, the answer was that they are not to be moved.
(a) Question: Our (Stam) Mishnah appears to oppose the position of R. Shimon (and supports R. Yehudah):
1. (R. Shimon) One may cut up a carcass for his dogs.
2. (R. Yehudah) Provided that it was a Neveilah before Shabbos, or it is Muktzeh.
(b) Answer: R. Shimon could concur with our Mishnah if it speaks of a *healthy* animal dying on Shabbos.
(c) Question: But what of the opinions that R. Shimon maintains his Heter even when the animal was healthy!?
(d) Answer: Ze'iri interpreted our Mishnah as speaking of a Kodeshim animal (which could anyway not be given to his dogs).
1. The Mishnah would agree with R. Shimon if the animal were Chulin.
2. By coupling this question with Chalah which became Tameh, the Mishnah indicates that the subject matter is Kodeshim.
(e) Question: Then the Mishnah is a challenge to those who maintain that R. Shimon *prohibits* a healthy animal which dies on Shabbos!?
(f) Answer: The Mishnah is speaking of an endangered animal.
(a) A group of people should not join for the purpose of purchasing an animal on YomTov (Ein Nimnin).
(b) They may join before YomTov, and the animal is slaughtered and apportioned on YomTov without.
(a) Question: What is meant by this expression?
(b) Answer (R. Yehudah citing Shmuel): One may not assign a value to an object on YomTov.
(c) Question: Then how can he collect its value tomorrow?
(d) Answer (Rav): By comparing the slaughtered animal to a remaining animal, and evaluating the remaining one at time of payment (as supported by the Beraisa which allows a purchase by referring to a portion to be bought, but without reference to money).
Next daf


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