Daf 18 — Bechoros 18 Summary

Bechoros 18 – Good Morning Raboisai Efshar Letzamtzem – Can Two Things Be Exactly Equal? The Daf continues the Sugya of Efshar Letzamtzem: Can two events occur at precisely the same moment, or can two measurements be exactly equal? The Gemara discusses whether this is possible: • Bidei Adam – when people deliberately try to make something exact. • Bidei Shamayim – when two things occur naturally at exactly the same time. 18_transcript A Body Exactly Between Two Cities The Gemara returns to Eglah Arufah. If a murdered person is found between two cities: • The nearest city normally brings the Eglah Arufah. But what happens if the body is: • Exactly the same distance from both cities? This depends on whether exact Tzimtzum is possible. Two Eglos or None? According to one opinion: • Efshar Letzamtzem. • The body really can be exactly between both cities. • Both cities can therefore be equally close. According to the other opinion: • אי אפשר לצמצם – exact equality cannot be established. The Gemara also analyzes the word: • הקרובה – “the closest.” Does it mean: • Only one city can be considered closest, • Or can even two equally close cities qualify? Why Not Bring One Eglah with a Tenai? The Gemara asks: If we are unsure which city is closer, why not bring: • One Eglah, with a condition: • If City A is responsible, it is theirs. • If City B is responsible, it is theirs. The discussion ultimately shows that the issue is not solved simply through: • A Tenai. The underlying questions of Tzimtzum and the meaning of הקרובה determine the Halachah. Two Male Bechoros Rebbi Tarfon – The Kohen Takes the Better One The Mishnah discussed an animal giving birth to: • Two males as its first birth. Rebbi Tarfon initially says: • The Kohen takes the better animal. Why? The assumption is: • The stronger, healthier animal was more likely to have emerged first. If it came out first: • It is the Bechor, • And belongs to the Kohen. The Gemara will later show that Rebbi Tarfon retracts this reasoning. “Mishamnin Beineihen” The Mishnah uses the expression: • Mishamnin Beineihen. At first this could sound like: • Calculate the difference in value and divide it. But the Gemara explains differently. If there are two animals: • The Yisrael keeps the better animal. • The Kohen receives the lesser one. Why? Because of: • HaMotzi MeChaveiro Alav HaRaayah. The Kohen cannot take the more valuable animal without proving that it is the true Bechor. If One of Them Dies Suppose: • Two males were born, • And one subsequently died. The Kohen claims: • “The surviving animal is the Bechor.” The Yisrael responds: • “Perhaps your Bechor was the one that died.” The rule is: • HaMotzi MeChaveiro Alav HaRaayah. Since the animal is currently with the Yisrael: • The Kohen must bring proof to take it. Matanos from the Safek Bechor The Yisrael Must Wait for a Mum The animal that remains with the Yisrael cannot immediately be eaten. Why? Because perhaps: • It really is the Bechor. Therefore: • It must graze until it develops a Mum. Once it has a Mum: • It may be shechted and eaten. Rebbi Meir – Matanos Must Be Given Rebbi Meir says that after the animal develops a Mum and is shechted: • Matanos must be given to a Kohen. The Kohanim have a powerful Mima Nafshach: If it is the Bechor: • The entire animal belongs to a Kohen. If it is not the Bechor: • It is Chullin, • So the Zero’a, Lechayayim and Keivah must be given to a Kohen. Either way: • The Kohanim have a claim. Rebbi Yosi – No Matanos Rebbi Yosi disagrees: • The Yisrael is exempt from Matanos. The Gemara explains this using: • Chalipin B’Yad Kohen. We view the division as though: • The Kohen acquired the better animal, • And then exchanged or sold it to the Yisrael in return for the lesser animal. The Yisrael therefore receives the animal through an exchange involving the Kohen, which exempts it from Matanos. What If There Is Only One Animal? The Gemara asks whether Rebbi Yosi's exemption also applies where: • There was never a second animal available for an exchange. For example: • A male and female were born, • And the Yisrael retains the male because perhaps the female emerged first. Here: • There is no “small animal for large animal” exchange with the Kohen. Therefore, the reasoning of Chalipin B’Yad Kohen does not automatically apply. A Possible Gezeirah The Gemara considers another explanation for Rebbi Yosi. Perhaps Matanos are not given because people might see them being given and assume: • This animal is definitely ordinary Chullin. They may then mistakenly permit: • Working with it, • Or shearing its wool. But perhaps it is really: • A Bechor. The Gemara analyzes whether this concern is really the basis of Rebbi Yosi's opinion. The Beraisa Says “Chalipin” The Gemara brings wording that specifically refers to: • Chalipin B’Yad Kohen. This supports the explanation that Rebbi Yosi's exemption is based on: • The exchange with the Kohen, rather than merely a Gezeirah that people might mistake the animal for ordinary Chullin. Safek Maaser Behemah The Tenth Animal Gets Mixed Back In The Gemara brings a similar case involving: • Maaser Behemah. An owner counts his animals: • One, two, three... • The tenth becomes Maaser. But suppose the tenth animal becomes mixed back among the others before its status can be clearly dealt with. The flock now contains a: • Safek Maaser. Safek Maaser Is Exempt from Matanos Everyone agrees that a Safek Maaser animal is: • Exempt from Matanos. Why? Because there is no Mima Nafshach claim like there was by Safek Bechor. With Bechor, the Kohen can argue: • “Either give me the Bechor or give me the Matanos.” But Maaser Behemah: • Does not belong to the Kohen. Therefore, the Kohen cannot make the same two - sided claim. Will People Forget Matanos? The Gemara considers whether we should nevertheless require Matanos because otherwise: • The laws of Matanos might eventually be forgotten. This possibility is rejected as the primary explanation. The Machlokes revolves around: • The Kohen's monetary claim, • And whether there was a Chalipin with the Kohen. Rebbi Tarfon Retracts Can We Tell Which Animal Was Born First? Earlier, Rebbi Tarfon suggested: • The stronger animal probably emerged first. Now the Gemara asks: If one of the two animals dies, why not simply inspect them? If the stronger animal died: • Perhaps that was the Bechor. If the weaker one died: • Perhaps the surviving stronger animal is the Bechor. The Gemara answers: • Rebbi Tarfon retracted this idea. We cannot reliably determine: • Which animal was born first based on its size or strength. Rebbi Tarfon and Rebbi Akiva Two People Give Sheep to a Shepherd Rebbi Chiya gives a Mashal. Two people each give: • One sheep to a shepherd. One sheep dies. The shepherd does not know: • Whose sheep died. Since neither claimant can prove which surviving sheep is his: • The ownership dispute depends on possession and the normal rules of monetary doubt. This helps explain the positions of: • Rebbi Tarfon and Rebbi Akiva. One Person Already Had a Sheep A second Mashal is where: • A person already owns one sheep, • Another person gives him a second sheep, • And one of them dies. Now the surviving sheep is: • In the possession of the original owner. The other person who wants to claim it must prove: • That his sheep is the surviving one. Again: • HaMotzi MeChaveiro Alav HaRaayah. The Safek Bechor Is in the Yisrael’s Chatzer The Gemara applies these cases back to Bechor. The Safek Bechor is: • In the Yisrael's property. The question is whether we say the Yisrael wants the Kohen to acquire a genuine Bechor through: • His Chatzer. There is a general idea that a person is pleased when: • A Mitzvah is performed with his property. But that reasoning is weaker where: • The owner would suffer a monetary loss. This becomes important in determining whether the Kohen ever acquired the Safek Bechor. Key Chazarah • The Daf continues Efshar Letzamtzem – whether two events or measurements can be exactly equal. • Eglah Arufah found exactly between two cities is a major test case. • The Gemara discusses whether two cities bring two Eglos, none, or whether one could be brought conditionally. • Rebbi Tarfon initially says the stronger of two possible Bechoros is more likely to have been born first, but later retracts. • HaMotzi MeChaveiro Alav HaRaayah means the Kohen cannot take a Safek Bechor without proof. • A Safek Bechor kept by the Yisrael must wait until it develops a Mum before being eaten. • Rebbi Meir requires Matanos because the Kohanim can claim: either it is Bechor or it is Chullin requiring Matanos. • Rebbi Yosi exempts Matanos through the concept of Chalipin B’Yad Kohen. • That reasoning is questioned where there is only one animal and no actual exchange. • Safek Maaser is exempt from Matanos because the Kohen has no equivalent Mima Nafshach claim. • We cannot determine which twin was born first merely from which is larger or stronger. • The Daf uses cases of sheep entrusted to a shepherd to explain the monetary dispute between Rebbi Tarfon and Rebbi Akiva. • The Sugya ends by discussing whether a Yisrael's Chatzer acquires the Bechor for the Kohen when doing so would cause the Yisrael a financial loss. Catch up, review, download previous Dafim & more: https://www.dafchazarah.co.uk Now available as an app (Apple, Google & Amazon): https://dafchazarah.co.uk/download Sponsor a day: https://dafchazarah.co.uk/sponsor לעילוי נשמת אמי מורתי רות בת הרב מנחם מנדל