Bechoros 35a

בכורות ל״ה ע״א

Bekhorot 35a

Learn Bechoros 35a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bechoros 35a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Blemishes on a בכור: on purpose versus by accident, and who is believed about them

Overview

The amud opens by finishing an earlier ruling. If someone made another person's טהרות impure and then died, his son does not pay, because hidden damage is only a rabbinic קנס aimed at the wrongdoer himself. Next comes a new משנה with two stories, a Roman official and children at play. In each one, a בכור got a blemish and the Sages permitted it the first time, but they forbade it when people copied the act on purpose. The rule is that a blemish made on purpose is forbidden and an accidental one is permitted. The גמרא explains why both stories are needed and debates whether the bystanders' wording can count as encouraging the official. It also explains what the general rule adds: an indirect cause (גרמא) is forbidden, and information that came out in offhand talk is permitted. Another משנה permits a בכור that was kicked while chasing its owner, and רב פפא gives two versions about a kick after the chase. The גמרא then discusses making a blemish before the animal is born and a mouth blemish seen only when the animal cries out. Finally, a משנה rules on which shepherds are believed that a blemish was not made on purpose, and רבי יוחנן and רבי אלעזר begin explaining it in two different ways.

Opening lines

The steps (33)

1. StatementThe son does not pay for his father's hidden damage
2. QuestionAsking for the reason
3. ResponseHidden damage is only a rabbinic penalty aimed at the person himself
4. StatementThe Roman official who slit a בכור's ear
5. StatementThe children who tied lambs' tails together
6. ConclusionThe rule: on purpose is forbidden, by accident is permitted
7. ResolutionWhy the משנה needs the children's story too
8. ResolutionWhy the children's story alone would not be enough
9. StatementThe bystanders' wording can make the blemish count as encouraged
10. Rejectionרבא: both wordings mean the blemish came by itself
11. QuestionWhat does the general rule come to add?
12. ResponseThe rule includes a blemish caused indirectly
13. ResponseWhat 'without intent' comes to include
14. StatementThe משנה: a בכור that chased its owner and was kicked
15. Statementרב פפא: only a kick during the chase
16. ChallengeIsn't רב פפא's point obvious?
17. ResolutionWhy רב פפא's point is needed: the anger idea
18. StatementSecond version: kicking even after the chase is allowed
19. StatementA blemish may be made before the בכור is born
20. StatementWhere to make the blemish: a kid's ear, a lamb's lip
21. StatementSecond version: a lamb's ear works too
22. StatementA blemish seen only when the animal cries out counts
23. ChallengeWhy say it? A משנה already teaches this
24. Resolutionרבא is explaining the reason of the משנה
25. StatementThe new משנה: Israelite shepherds are believed, priest shepherds are not
26. Statementרבן שמעון בן גמליאל: a כהן is believed about someone else's animal
27. Statementרבי מאיר: someone suspected in a matter cannot judge or testify about it
28. StatementFirst reading: Israelite shepherds working for a כהן are still believed
29. StatementPriest shepherds working for an Israelite are not believed
30. StatementOne כהן is not believed for another כהן, because they may trade favors
31. StatementIn the first reading, רבן שמעון בן גמליאל believes a כהן about another כהן's animal
32. StatementIn the first reading, רבי מאיר says a suspected person may not judge or testify at all
33. StatementThe second reading: the 'Israelite shepherds' are כהנים, and they are believed