ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
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.
(a) Rebbi Zerika (or Rebbi Yirmiyah) objected, when first Rebbi Ami, and
then Rebbi Yitzchak Nafcha, declined to examine a Bechor on Yom-Tov - on the
grounds that when Rebbi Yehudah argues with Rebbi Shimon, we have a
principle 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Yehudah'.
(b) Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'a himself was not a Kohen. Nevertheless, there were
members of his household who were Kohanim (see Rashash).
(c) Rebbi Aba asked Rebbi Zerika and Yirmiyah why they did not let the
Rabbanan rule like Rebbi Shimon, seeing as Rebbi Zeira specifically ruled
like Rebbi Shimon.
(a) Ma'an de'Hu went to Eretz Yisrael to hear it from the mouth of Rebbi
Zeira himself - Ma'an de'Hu means someone of unknown identity.
(b) It turned out that Rebbi Zeira had not actually said that the Halachah
was like Rebbi Shimon (which would imply that he had received such a ruling
from his Rebbes) - but that he himself considered this logical, because the
Beraisa that we quoted on the previous Amud quoted Rebbi Shimon in the name
of the Chachamim.
(a) However, the Gemara is still not certain whether the Halachah is like
Rebbi Shimon or like Rebbi Yehudah, and it asks 'Mai Havi Alah'? Rav Yosef
quotes from 'thick ropes' - Rebbi Shimon ben Pazi ... until Rebbi who quotes
the Kehila Kedishah de'bi'Yeyurashalayim, who say that Rebbi Shimon and his
friends follow the opinion of Rebbi Meir - The Rebbi Shimon here refers to
Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya (see Maharsha).
(b) The Kehila Kedishah de'bi'Yeyurashalayim could not possibly have quoted
Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya in the way that it appears - because they were much
older than him, and they would hardly quote a Halachah in his name.
(c) What they really said was that Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya, who forbade the
examination of a Bechor on Yom-Tov, followed the opinion of Rebbi Meir.
(a) Rebbi Yehudah compares the Shechitah of a Bechor to that of a Tereifah -
he maintains that if one Shechted a Bechor first and showed it to an expert
afterwards, it was permitted (just like an animal that was inspected for
Tereifus after having been Shechted).
(b) Rebbi Meir is strict by a Bechor that was inspected after it was
Shechted. In his opinion, a Bechor (unlike a Tereifah) must be examined when
it is still alive.
(c) Rav Yosef thinks that we can extend Rebbi Meir's Chumra of Bechor over
Tereifah, to say that - whereas a Tereifah may be examined on Yom-Tov, a
Bechor may not. That being the case, Rebbi Yehudah will be an individual
opinion, against that of Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Meir (which would mean that
we cannot in this case, rule like him).
(a) Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan has a different way of
explaining the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah in Bechoros.
Rebbi Yehudah will in fact, agree with Rebbi Meir by a 'Dok she'b'Ayin (a
membrane caused by a disease in the eye) which tends to change its
appearance after death, and whose inspection after death is therefore
(b) Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah argue over whether Chazal decreed other
blemishes because of Dokin she'b'Ayin - Rebbi Meir holds that they *did*;
whereas Rebbi Yehudah holds that they did *not*.
(c) Based on Rebbi Yochanan's interpretation of the Machlokes - Abaye argues
that Rebbi Meir's Chumra with regard to examining blemishes after the
Shechitah has nothing to do with whether one may or may not, inspect
blemishes on Yom-Tov (in fact, he may well agree that one may - like Rebbi
Yehudah) - but is purely because of a decree, as we explained, and because
we subsequently penalize the Kohen (even Bedieved, for having the Bechor
inspected, against the wishes of Chazal).
(d) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak proves this from the Lashon of the Mishnah in
Bechoros - which does not quote Rebbi Meir as saying just 'Asur', but 'Ho'il
ve'Nishchat she'Lo Al Pi Mumcheh, Asur', implying that it is forbidden
because of a penalty and not because of intrinsic Isur.
(a) Ami Vardina'a, the Bechor inspector of the Nasi, refused to inspect
blemishes on Yom-Tov. Some say that he was called by that name because he
was exceptionally good-looking (since Vardina means rose); others maintain
that he came from a place called Vardina.
(b) Rebbi Ami condoned Ami Vardina'as Chumra. He himself would not inspect
blemishes on Yom-Tov. In fact, he used to inspect them on Erev Yom-Tov.
However - if he was satisfied there and then that the Bechor was indeed
blemished, he would instruct the shepherd (assuming he was a Kohen - and
who, like all Kohanim, was suspect on causing the blemish - which was
prohibited) to return on Yom-Tov, when he had more time to cross-examine
(c) Rava behaved in the same way. A certain Kohen explained to him one Yom-
Tov how his Bechor Beheimah had obtained a split lip - by poking his head
aver a fence in order to obtain some barley that was lying there.
(d) Rava was still not satisfied - because he still needed to ascertain
whether the Kohen had not placed the barley there deliberately, thereby
causing the animal to become blemished.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk in Emor "*Kol* Mum Lo Yihyeh Bo" - that it is
even forbidden to *cause* a Bechor to become blemished.
(b) A Yisrael is obligated to look after his Bechor Beheimah for three
months before giving it to a Kohen.
(a) When Rebbi Tarfon came to the Beis Hamedrash to ask about an animal that
died and Chalah that became Tamei, on Yom-Tov - they told him that they may
not be moved on Yom-Tov.
(b) Even feeding them to one's dog is forbidden on Yom-Tov - because the
Torah considers all kinds of destruction of Kodshim like burning, as a
result of which no matter which method one used to destroy Kodshim, it is
forbidden to do so on Yom-Tov (see Tosfos DH 've'Al').
(c) In a Mishnah in Shabbos, Rebbi Shimon permits cutting up gourds for
one's animal and feeding a carcass to one's dogs on Yom-Tov. This does not
however, mean that the author of *our* Mishnah, which forbids feeding a
carcass of an animal that died on Yom-Tov, cannot be Rebbi Shimon - because
Rebbi Shimon concedes that an animal that died on Yom-Tov is Muktzah.
(d) This explanation is the opinion of Mar bar Ameimar quoting Rava. But
according to Mar Brei de'Rav Yosef quoting Rava - Rebbi Shimon argues by an
animal that died on Yom-Tov, too.
(a) In order to conform with Rebbi Shimon - those who quote Rava as saying
that Rebbi Shimon is lenient even with regard to an animal that died on Yom-
Tov, establish our Mishnah by an animal of Kodshim.
(b) Rebbi Shimon will agree that an animal of Kodshim is different - either
because once it dies, it can no longer be redeemed (because before redeeming
it, it must be stood and assessed); or because one is not permitted to
redeem Kodshim in order to feed the dogs (and even if one is, one cannot do
so on Yom-Tov).
(a) We prove that the animal in our Mishnah is one of Kodshim - because it
mentions it together with Chalah (which is Kodshim).
(b) This creates a problem however, according to those who quote Rava as
saying that Rebbi Shimon concedes that an animal that dies on Yom-Tov is
Muktzah anyway - because we can now deduce from our Mishnah that it is only
because the animal is one of Kodshim hat it is forbidden; otherwise, it
would be permitted?
(c) We therefore establish the Mishnah in the case of - an animal that was
about to die already from Erev Yom-Tov, in which case, if it were not
Kodshim, it would be permitted, since his mind is on it, and he does not
'push it out of his mind', like he does a healthy animal.
(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel explains that when our Mishnah writes 'Ein
Nimnin al ha'Beheimah Lechatchilah be'Yom-Tov' - it means that one is not
permitted to fix a price on the animal.
There is no Isur d'Oraysa to do business on Shabbos and Yom-Tov. The source
for the Isur is a Pasuk in Ezra (Nechemyah) 13:19.
(b) One divides an animal by fixing the price before Yom-Tov, failing which
one divides it without fixing any price, and fixes the price on the
(c) Alternatively says Rav, they can bring another animal that is very
similar to the one they are dividing, and then assess the value of the
corresponding part that each person received.
(d) The Beraisa bears out Shmuel's contention that it is forbidden on
Shabbos and Yom-Tov to assess the amount in value that each one is to
receive. The Tana of the Beraisa suggests - that they divide it up into
fractions; a half, a third or a quarter.