Beitzah 10b

ביצה י׳ ע״ב

Learn Beitzah 10b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Beitzah 10b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Birds designated before יום טוב: when birds found the next day count as the designated ones, רוב versus קרוב, and the comparison to רבי and the חכמים on found מעשר שני money.

Overview

This amud first finishes explaining why one may not handle and check birds on יום טוב itself: he might move birds that are מוקצה, or he might reject them all and lose שמחת יום טוב. Then a new משנה teaches when birds found the next morning count as the ones designated before יום טוב (הזמנה). A changed color or an extra bird makes them forbidden. A missing bird, or birds found alone in front of the nest, leaves them permitted. רבה explains that the color case refers to black and white birds that seem to have swapped places, and we assume they are new birds. The גמרא tries to prove רבי חנינא's rule that רוב beats קרוב from רבה's swapped-birds case, but rejects the proof because the case is a ledge in front of the dovecote where outside birds sit, so they are close too. It then explains the counting cases and asks whether the three-became-two ruling follows only רבי, who holds in a ברייתא about מעשר שני coins that part of the money stayed and part was taken. רבי יוחנן and רבי אלעזר answer that young birds are different because they hop, and רב אשי explains that this answer is needed for tied birds and tied pouches. The amud ends as the גמרא begins to explain how רבי would see tied pouches, and that explanation continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (18)

1. StatementFirst reason why checking the birds on יום טוב is forbidden
2. StatementSecond reason: he may lose out on שמחת יום טוב
3. Statementמשנה: designated birds that changed color or number
4. Statementמשנה: birds found in front of the nest
5. ChallengeIsn't the color case obvious?
6. Resolutionרבה: both colors were designated and they swapped places
7. ResolutionThe חידוש: we assume they are different birds
8. ProofDoes רבה's case prove that majority beats proximity?
9. RejectionNo proof: the case is a ledge where birds from everywhere gather
10. StatementDesignated two, found three: forbidden either way
11. QuestionWhy are they permitted if three became two?
12. ResponseThese are the same birds and one flew away
13. ChallengeSuggestion that the משנה follows only רבי
14. ResolutionYoung birds are different because they hop
15. ChallengeWhy is the bird answer needed, given the pouch dispute?
16. ChallengeThe bird answer seems unnecessary under the one-pouch opinion
17. Resolutionרב אשי: the case is about tied birds and tied pouches
18. ResolutionHow רבי would see tied pouches