Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) A TUMTUM THAT WAS TORN

(a) (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): He is not killed for stealing from his parents (twice) to buy meat and wine - "Ki Yihyeh l'Ish Ben Sorer u'Moreh" - he must be (recognizably) a son from his birth.
(b) (Ameimar): (If he was not the firstborn) he does not count as a son to diminish the extra portion of the firstborn - "V'Yaldu Lo Banim" - we only consider sons recognizable from birth.
(c) (Rav Shizbi): He is not circumcised on the eighth day (if it falls on Shabbos) - "V'Yaldah Zachar...Uva'Yom ha'Shemini Yimol" - this only applies if he was (recognizably) male from birth.
(d) (Rav Sharbiya): The Tum'ah of one who gave birth to a male does not apply to his mother - "V'Yaldah Zachar v'Tam'ah Shivas Yamim..." - this only applies if he was (recognizably) male from birth.
(e) Question (against Rav Sharbiya - Mishnah): If a woman miscarried (the same applies regarding a viable baby) a Tumtum or Androginus, she is doubtfully Tamei like one who is unsure if she gave birth to a male or female.

1. This refutes Rav Sharbiya.

(f) Suggestion: This also refutes Rav Shizbi!
(g) Rejection: No, the Tana is unsure whether or not we require a male recognizable from birth regarding circumcision and Tum'ah; he is stringent about both (therefore, we do not circumcise the baby on Shabbos).
(h) Question: If so, she should be is doubtfully Tamei like one who is unsure if she gave birth to a male or female or (did not give birth but is) Nidah!
(i) This is left difficult.
(j) Support (for R. Ami - Beraisa): "Ben" - not a Tumtum; "Bechor" - not a doubtful case (this will be explained).

(a) Question: We understand "Ben" - not a Tumtum, like R. Ami's case;

1. What is the case of "Bechor" - not a doubtful case (obviously, a doubtful firstborn does not receive a double portion)!

(b) Answer: It teaches about Rava's case.

1. (Rava): Reuven's two wives gave birth, it was not known who gave birth first. (One of the sons is the firstborn -) one writes a Harsha'ah (power of attorney) to the other (if I am the firstborn, you may take my extra portion), enabling the other to take the extra portion (and they then split it).
2. Question (Rav Papa): R. Yanai taught, if it was once known which was the firstborn, and then it was forgotten, one writes a Harsha'ah to the other; if it was never known which was the firstborn, Harsha'ah does not help.
3. Rava publicized his mistake and taught like R. Yanai.

(c) Question (People of Akra): The Chazakah was that Shimon was Levi's firstborn, and Levi said that Yehudah is his firstborn - what is the law?
(d) Answer (Shmuel): One writes a Harsha'ah to the other, they divide the extra portion.

(e) Question: No matter how he holds, this is difficult!

1. If he holds like Chachamim (in the coming Beraisa), Shimon gets it; if he holds like R. Yehudah, Yehudah gets it!

(f) Answer: Shmuel is unsure if the Halachah follows Chachamim or R. Yehudah.

1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "Yakir" - he will make known to others (who is his firstborn), this teaches that a man is believed to say who is his firstborn;

i. Just as he is believed to say who is his firstborn; he is believed to say that a certain son was born to a divorcee or Chalutzah (and is disqualified from Kehunah).

2. Chachamim say, he is not believed (about either of these).

(g) Question (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): According to Chachamim, what do we learn from "Yakir"?
(h) Answer (Rava): When we need the father to identify the firstborn (we have no Chazakah).
(i) Question: Is this for the sake of giving him an extra portion? A man can give his money to whomever he wants!
(j) Answer: He must establish him as the firstborn in order that the son will receive an extra portion in money the father will receive (after his declaration).
(k) Question: According to R. Meir, a person can transfer ownership of something that is not yet in the world, he can give now an extra portion in money he will get later - how can we answer?
(l) Answer: It enables him to give an extra portion in property the father will receive when he is Goses (close to death, and unable to transfer ownership, therefore he cannot give now what he will receive then).
(m) (Beraisa): If the Chazakah was that Shimon was Levi's firstborn, and Levi said that Yehudah is his firstborn, he is believed;

1. If the Chazakah was that Shimon is not Levi's firstborn, and Levi said that he is, he is not believed.

(n) The first clause is like R. Yehudah, the second clause is like Chachamim.

(a) (R. Yochanan): If he said 'he is my son', and later said 'he is my slave', he is not believed (to retract - one would not call a slave 'my son');

1. If he said 'he is my slave', and retracted and said 'he is my son', he is believed.

i. He meant (the first time), he serves me like a slave.

(b) The law is the opposite in the place where they collect taxes from slave owners: if he said 'he is my son', and (later, where they do not collect taxes) said 'he is my slave', he is believed;

1. If he said 'he is my slave', and later said 'he is my son', he is not believed (he would lie to evade the tax, not to falsely obligate himself).

(c) Question (Beraisa): Reuven was serving Shimon like a son; Shimon said 'he is my son', and later said 'he is my slave', he is not believed;

1. If he was serving him like a slave, Shimon said 'he is my slave', and retracted and said 'he is my son', he is not believed.

(d) Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): The case is, he called him a '100 Metzar slave'.
(e) Question: What does this '100 Metzar slave' mean?
(f) Answer: He is like land worth 100 Dinarim (one would not say this about his son).