Bechoros 10b

בכורות י׳ ע״ב

Bekhorot 10b

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

Open Bechoros 10b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The crow slaughtered for practice, whether רבי שמעון forbids a פטר חמור after its neck is broken, and the minimum value for redeeming it

Overview

The גמרא first finishes its discussion of a פטר חמור slaughtered only for practice. It compares the case to an argument between נימוס and רבי אליעזר about a crow, and then suggests the crow may be special because it has kosher signs. Next it challenges רבה's view that even רבי שמעון forbids benefit from a פטר חמור after its neck is broken (עריפה). The challenge comes from a ברייתא, which the גמרא answers by saying both clauses deal with a live donkey: one with benefit from its value and one with benefit from its body. רב נחמן brings two proofs that רבי שמעון forbids the donkey after עריפה. Both proofs are pushed away. ריש לקיש agrees with רב נחמן, while רבי יוחנן (or רבי אלעזר) says the dispute continues even after death. Another version applies the question to the משנה in קידושין about betrothing with a פטר חמור. רב explains that משנה using רבי יוסי בר יהודה's rule that redemption needs at least a שקל. Finally, the גמרא examines the source for that minimum, and it begins to explain how the רבנן read רבא's פסוק, a discussion that continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (38)

1. ResolutionThe case is slaughtering for practice
2. StatementThe ברייתא about a crow slaughtered for practice
3. ChallengeThe two opinions seem identical
4. ResolutionThey argue about whether being forbidden counts as intent
5. ResolutionThe first opinion: blood counts, but the crow needs intent
6. Resolutionרבי אליעזר's side of the argument
7. RejectionMaybe the crow is special because it has kosher signs
8. ProofProof that kosher signs matter
9. ChallengeThen why limit the case to practicing?
10. ResolutionYes, and the case was chosen because of נימוס
11. ChallengeA ברייתא seems to show רבי שמעון permits benefit after neck-breaking
12. ResolutionRead the dispute as being about the live donkey
13. ChallengeThe end of the ברייתא is already about a live donkey
14. ProofQuoting the end of the ברייתא about shearing and work
15. ResolutionBoth clauses deal with a live donkey, but with different kinds of benefit
16. ResolutionWhy the dispute had to be taught for both kinds of benefit
17. ProofAnother אמורא supports רבה: רבי שמעון forbids benefit after עריפה
18. ProofThe source: a גזירה שוה from עגלה ערופה
19. ProofThe עריפה ברייתא must follow רבי שמעון
20. Rejectionרב ששת: the ברייתא can follow רבי יהודה
21. Proofרב נחמן's second proof: לוי's ברייתא
22. Proofלוי's ברייתא must follow רבי שמעון
23. RejectionThe ברייתא Could Fit Either תנא
24. ResolutionHow It Fits רבי יהודה: The Lost Difference
25. ResolutionHow It Fits רבי שמעון: A Dead Donkey Is Worth Less
26. Proofריש לקיש Agrees with רב נחמן
27. Statementרבי יוחנן: The Dispute Continues After Death
28. StatementAnother version: רב נחמן's teaching was said on the משנה in קידושין
29. ChallengeDoes the משנה go against רבי שמעון?
30. ResolutionThe case is after the neck was broken, so everyone agrees
31. ChallengeThe משנה seems to fit neither רבי יהודה nor רבי שמעון
32. ResolutionIt is רבי יהודה, when the donkey is worth only a shekel
33. ProofThe ברייתא: רבי יוסי בר יהודה says redemption needs at least a שקל
34. ChallengeWhy do we need a verse for this? It is obvious
35. ResolutionThe verse was needed so we would not copy the rules of a firstborn son
36. ChallengeWhere does רבי יוסי בר יהודה get his minimum of a שקל?
37. ResolutionNo comparison: the שקל comes from the rule of valuations
38. ResponseThe Rabbis begin to explain their view of רבא's verse