Bechoros Daf 20

All right, Daf Huff. This is Thursday's Daf. Baruch Hashem, we started the third perek. We introduced the machlokes of Rebbi Akiva and Rebbi Yishmael. That Rebbi Yishmael said it's a safek whether or not this animal that you bought from the had already given birth to a bechor. The Gemara suggested that maybe according to Rebbi Yishmael, he holds like Rebbi Meir that he's chaysh l'miuta because it's mute animals that don't have any v'lados in their first year, which the Gemara was dayech. It said no, it really could be a field of tamei d'Rabbanan, but there's a cheiluk between Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael and Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael come on. This is a Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael come on and the Rabbanan aren't necessarily going to go basar the rule of Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael come freaks the Gemara. This is where we're up to. Eight or nine lines from the bottom of the amud on Yevamos base. V'al katan v'ketana d'Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael come on. I'll show you a precedent where even the Rabbanan are moskin d'Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael come on by katan and ketana because they rub on a basar Ruben. And what's the case? It's non because Rebbi Akiva says by yibbum katan v'ketana l'chaltzin l've yabmin. That a katan or a ketana that we don't know if you're going to eventually grow up to become an ayalonis or a saris. And because of that, they should not do chalitzah or yibbum because it could come out they might be isha sachla b'makom mitzvah. That's the fear. That's why they should not do chalitzah or yibbum. Divrei Rebbi Meir. Amru lei d'chamsin d'Rebbi Meir, yaffa amru chein chaltzin because isha kasuv b'parsha umakshinin isha l'ish. So because of that hekesh that they need to be an ish, that's why you can't chalitzah with a katan. But matan miyabmin, why won't you do yibbum? Amru leim Rebbi Akiva and Rebbi Meir because katan shema yimtzah saris like we spoke out. And likewise ketana shema timtzah ayalonis umintzu pagin b'erva. Because if they're married to their sister-in-law and there was no mitzvah of yibbum, there's going to be an erva. So we got to make sure that they are shiyach to yibbum. Now look at the Gemara, v'Rabbanan because they'll basar katanim, v'raiv katanim lav saris ninu. And likewise they'll basar katanos, v'raiv katanos lav ayalonis ninu. So you see that they do go basar Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael come on. Ela amru Rava moving over to amud aleph, machvarta Rebbi Yishmael k'Rebbi Meir's fear lei d'chaysh l'miuta. That's the easy way to go here. Rebbi Yishmael takah does hold like Rebbi Meir. He's chaysh l'miuta and since mute animals don't have any v'lados in their first year, that's why it's going to be a safek bechor and not a vadai non-bechor. Ravina amru no, a field of tamei d'Rabbanan. And it's just that this is a different kind of a raiv because ki azli Rabbanan basar Ruben, that's Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Yishmael b'maisa. The only time the Rabbanan go basar raiv is by when the numbers don't lie because you can go bust a statistical majority. But when the arrive itself is totally on a masa that has to take place like Rashi explains over here where the animal has to be revea in order to be able to make a vlad. That's not as kosher of a arrive. So the totally by masa later not going to be masking to go bust a ruby the laser come on when it's totally by masa. This is a very interesting spin on the whole idea of ruby the laser come on that's totally by masa somehow makes it weaker. The big tumult over here in the achronim is about demai because demai we're used to saying that rave am aratzem from asher name and only chazal go ahead and machmer on demai. But rave am aratzem that are maser is l'chera very clearly totally by masa that it's the masa of their being mafresh truma and ma'aser. So how can we say min ha Torah you can go bust a rave by am aratzem by demai l'chera it's a ruby the totally by masa. There are different terutzem perhaps being mafresh is a masa mitzvah so there's more of an impetus to do it maybe perhaps it was no chezkas tevel l'chatrila because there's a possibility that they weren't mechayev themselves by bringing in the ma'aser. Rabbi Gross actually said his own svara that really the whole needen of rave am aratzem asher name is not about whether they did it's whether they're ne'eman to say they did. And really that's a rave on the mass of the gavras whether they are of that status. Al k'ponim that's the side over here that kiyazu rabbonon go bust rave that's only by ruby de loy totally by masa. Tana rabbonon we learned in the Tosefta eiz bas shnosha so if you bought an animal of an eiz during its first year vadai l'kayan but mikano l'chalon is going to be safek. Rachel a sheep bas shtayim is vadai l'kayan but mikano l'chalon is safek. Para bas sholosh is vadai l'kayan mikano l'chalon is safek and chamira is kapara and now we have this new shita of Rabbi Yosi Rabbi Yosi brings you daimer chamira bas arba shanim up till her fourth year she can only have one vlad but afterwards she can do twice in one year. Now adkan divrei Rabbi Yishmael kishin namrud var milifnei Rabbi Yeshua amru lehen Rabbi Yeshua responded back that su amru leila Rabbi Yishmael go back and tell Rabbi Yishmael to eisa you made a mistake because ilu b'vlad vadai b'heima niftaris if the halacha was only that al yidei that prior leida the animal will be putter from hilchos b'chora haya kid varacha but ela siman of vlad b'heima d'katina you know that even if the outputs this discharge of also the giving of mentioned this yesterday I myself don't hold this way I hold new third that an a goat that is when it was 6 months old can still give birth within that first year and she can give birth within the first 2 years I don't have that said if you know for a fact that the animal is already given its first blood and then the gets squat but if you don't know for sure that the animal hasn't had its first blood how do you then the subsequent ones do belong to the because so because when there's a the subsequent blood should be eaten by by their I'm pretty sure we're going to explain exactly what is the difference between and the other one What are they arguing about and when we say we're talking about the that had quoted because they're saying that the blood born to the is a even if the mother was not fully developed or fully mature during the time when she was living by the guy but holds that such a blood to a is a unless the animal was under the guy's ownership for at least some of the time that she was completely mature so what's the issue here so maybe that's whether or not this this discharge of this part of the guy that so in a so but no because if you saw that the animal did put this thing out it was then the the guy but we're talking about where you didn't know if it had or and and arguing should we be for a prior but whereas for you tell me that would be small might not be mesupec or chashish that the animal was metaneif cuz you'd essentially be going basar a raiv and you want to put Rebbi Shmuel with the shita that holds you go basar a raiv. But Rebbi Meir is really the chashish l'meit. So now we don't have that flexibility anymore. So like the Gemara key chashish l'gomer, when was Rebbi Shmuel chashish l'meit? When it was a chomerah, like the case that Rava had before where the goat gave birth to the v'lad after it was one year old. So if we went basar a raiv eisim that had babies in their first year, then the next baby born to the yid would certainly be not a bechor but Rebbi Shmuel chashish because maybe this is from the goat that is for part of the meit that don't give birth in their first year. But l'kula lo chashish, which is the case we're talking about. Or Rebbi Yishmael told you ben l'kula ben l'chomerah chashish. But what's the with the chachamim metaneifes v'chazers v'lados b'sheish shnosav kemi plugi. After that tinuf, do they kind of heal and are able to bear more offspring in that first year? Rebbi Shmuel said over metaneifes in chazers v'lados b'sheish shnosav. It's not going to go back and have more kids in that first year. V'hameder oyled v'adei l'taneif. And since it has, we see it has a child now in the first year, clearly that wasn't considered tinuf beforehand. And therefore, al kar rach we have to say that the v'lad in front of us is a vadai bechor and not a safek bechor. But Rebbi Yeshua said over metaneifes chazers v'lados b'sheish shnosav. So blives like a safek bechor. But Rebbi Yeshua v'ani eini omer kein. I don't hold this way. Ela aish shetinfa bas shisha. I hold that a goat that was metaneif when it was six months old still yeled es teish shnosav can still give birth within that first year. And likewise Rachel shetinfa bas shnosav, a Rachel that was metaneif in the first year yeled es b'seish shnosav can give birth within the first two years. Fine. So that is now Rebbi Yeshua clarifying himself. But for Gemara my eika ben Gemara l'savarei. What's the cheil between Rebbi Yeshua's mesirah and his own personal opinion that he's now saying? Like I don't hold that way but I'm saying the following. So like the Gemara shetinfa b'seif shisha. You know what the nafka mina is going to be? Let's say this aiz was metaneif at the end of that first six months. Now as we saw it happen at the end of that first six months, so it's at the beginning of the goat's seventh month. V'eika benayu d'zeiri. And the nafka mina will be zeiri d'mer zeiri ein tinuf pachos m'shloshim yom. You don't have it less than 30 days meaning this A's that puts out this Tina is not going to mate for the next 30 more days is essentially the tight sir of the Tina is that it can't become pregnant for 30 more days so the Kumari is lay does he eat it according to be a show is Messiah he's mask into zero but Leslie zero but according to zone personal sheet he's not mask him or because I'm another shot to call you my soul who does he eat everybody holds meaning both for me a show is Messiah and his own personal sheet holds like zero that the effect of the Tina will go on for 30 days but for her could be a lettuce Makuta the Makuta is over here is whether or not can the flood lights of these animals are they viable if their mother animals pregnant with them for less than five months turning over time and base because the Kumari lay him in your lettuce Makuta in according to that Messiah we don't say that she can bear viable flood lights in Makuta in less than five full months but the Savannah according to zone personal sheet I'm reading in your lettuce Makuta in and therefore a flood born at the end of that year would be a selfish Bahar since it followed that day or we buy a same amount of third mile in your lettuce Makuta in everybody's mask him that we're not going to be willing to say that she can give birth to viable flood lights from Makuta in the pregnancies but the Makuta is the same Makuta in when we're counting the time the 30 days do we say Makuta is the same Makuta in because the Savannah I'm reading in Makuta is the same Makuta in and the Kumari I'm reading in Makuta is the same Makuta in that's enough coming between the Messiah and his own personal Savannah the idea Makuta is the same Makuta in doesn't mean that we can only just abbreviate time but it means when you're counting units of measuring time that you're Makuta if you count you can use part of the day best way to bring this out where by Rasner mentioned is how come we wouldn't suggest that Makuta is the same Makuta by Shabbos like oh Shabbos afternoon I've kept most of Shabbos I guess Shabbos is over now meanwhile we're willing to say that by a Shiva one hour of sitting Shiva can take care of the whole day and Makuta is the same Makuta in but the difference is because by Shiva the Halacha is you're Makuta if you count a certain amount of time when you're being minor time you can go with Makuta is the same Makuta in but when the time itself is what's important meaning that day of Shabbos is not about counting it but it's about the existence of the day of Shabbos is Shabbos Well, obviously can't have mixed is kakkule. But now back to the Gemara and he goes to leave the mid to zoo Ella kolshe you do etc. It's about whether you know or not if it had its first vlad and that's all that we're going to care about. So after the Gemara my eek of Rebbe Akiva Rebbe Yeshua. Omar Rebbe Chanina may sura chol of pay to eek of minayo. The big nafka mina between Rebbe Yeshua and Rebbe Akiva whether or not we know it had a baby or had the tin of. That's whether or not you see if this animal is actually actively nursing. Because Rebbe Akiva saw chol of pay to. The very fact that this mother animal is producing milk implies that it had already had a bachar. Because Rebbe Akiva says Rebbe Akiva says in chol voice Ella in kein yoldis. But Rebbe Yeshua saw eek of minayo to the chol voice alpha piece in yoldis. There are some animals that lactate even though they didn't have any children and therefore it will be a safek bachar and not a definitely vadai not bachar. So after the Gemara me kashu Rebbe Yeshua to the miet. Now we're putting Rebbe Yeshua together with the kashin of miet. I have a ton of by yibum. Hi Sila meisa. If a guy had a mother-in-law at the time when they went away on a trip ain a kashashas we don't need to be concerned that the mother-in-law gave birth to another son therefore being mechaiv a yibum. But yet some some maleia kashashas. The leaving mother-in-law already was pregnant and we don't know what happened with that pregnancy. Then you got to be kashashas the mother-in-law gave birth to another son and therefore the woman can't remarry until you resolve whether or not she fell to yibum. But Rebbe Yeshua ain a kashashas. You don't have to worry because we have Rebbe Akiva and my time Rebbe Yeshua kashav Rebbe Akiva ubarais yoldis um miet mapilis b'chol yoldis mechtzis charam mechtzis nikevais s'mach miet l'mapilis l'mechtzis nikevais v'havelu charam miet to l'miet l'kashinan. But what do you see from Rebbe Yeshua that you do go basar raiv and you're not going to be kashin of miet to. So how can we just simply say over here that Rebbe Yeshua is concerned about the miet animals that will be chailev without first having their own vladis. So Rebbe Akiva you're right Ella eebuch. And I'll prove it to you because the Tanya the brisa says chol of pay to Rebbe Yeshua. But Rebbe Akiva eemer chol of ain a pay to. So comes out that Rebbe Yeshua is really not going to be kashin of miet to. And we now have a brisa to support that. And we're going to pick it up with the ton of rabbonim for tomorrow's stuff.