POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafBeitzah 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.
1) PERMITTING A BECHOR ON YOMTOV (cont'd)
(a) R. Ami declined to rule on the Bechor of R. Yehudah
HaNasi (in accordance with R. Shimon).
2) EXAMINING THE MUM AND SUBSEQUENTLY INVESTIGATING IT
(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
(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.
(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
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.
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
(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.
3) MISHNAH: THE MUKTZEH STATUS OF A CARCASS
(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.
4) OUR MISHNAH AND THE POSITION OF R. SHIMON
(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):
5) MISHNAH: TRANSACTIONS ON YOMTOV
1. (R. Shimon) One may cut up a carcass for his dogs.
(b) Answer: R. Shimon could concur with our Mishnah if it
speaks of a *healthy* animal dying on Shabbos.
2. (R. Yehudah) Provided that it was a Neveilah
before Shabbos, or it is Muktzeh.
(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
1. The Mishnah would agree with R. Shimon if the
animal were Chulin.
(e) Question: Then the Mishnah is a challenge to those who
maintain that R. Shimon *prohibits* a healthy animal
which dies on Shabbos!?
2. By coupling this question with Chalah which became
Tameh, the Mishnah indicates that the subject
matter is Kodeshim.
(f) Answer: The Mishnah is speaking of an endangered
(a) A group of people should not join for the purpose of
purchasing an animal on YomTov (Ein Nimnin).
6) 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).