1)

TOSFOS DH Mah Tzvi va'Ayal Peturin Min ha'Bechorah u'Mion ha'Matanos v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä îä öáé åàéì ôèåøéï îï äáëåøä åîï äîúðåú ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses what we expound from Tzvi va'Ayal.)

áùîòúéï îùîò ãàé ìà ëúá àê äåä ãøùéðï ðîé îä öáé åàéì àéï àåúå åàú áðå ðåäâ áå åçìáå îåúø

(a)

Inference: Our Sugya connotes that had it not written "Ach", we would expound also that just like Tzvi va'Ayal, Oso v'Es Beno does not apply to it, and its Chelev is permitted (also Pesulei ha'Mukdashim).

åìòéì áñåó ô''÷ (ãó éá.) ãøùéðï ðîé îä öáé åàéì àéï ôåãéï àó ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï àéï ôåãéï

1.

Also above (12a), we expound that just like we do not redeem [Peter Chamor according to the law of a Seh] with Tzvi va'Ayal, we do not redeem with Pesulei ha'Mukdashim.

åúéîä îðìï ëì äðê ãøùåú ãúìúà öáé åàéì ëúåáéï åëåìäå öøéëé ëãîôøù ì÷îï ôø÷ ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï (ãó ìâ.)

(b)

Question: What is the source of all these Drashos? Tzvi va'Ayal is written three times, and all of them are needed, like it explains below (33a)!

åé''ì ãäúí ðîé îôøù çã ìáëåøä åîúðåú åäééðå ëãîôøù äëà çã îöáé åçã îàéì

(c)

Answer: Also there, it explains one for Bechorah and Matanos, i.e. like it explains here, one from Tzvi and one from Ayal;

òåã îôøù äúí (çã ìáëåøä) çã ìëãøáé éöç÷ åøáé àåùòéà ëîå ùîôøù ø''ú äîøáéò åäîðäéâ ùåø ùì ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï ìå÷ä âåó àçã äï åòùàï äëúåá ùðé âåôéí åäééðå îöáé åàéì

1.

Also it explains there that one is [to teach] like R. Yitzchak and R. Oshaya, like R. Tam explains, that one who mates or conducts (makes it pull a wagon, or any other work) with an ox of Pesulei ha'Mukdashim is lashed. It is one body, and the Torah considers it two, i.e. Tzvi and Ayal;

ãçã ùåø ãôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï òùàï äëúåá ëùðé âåôéí åëùîðäéâå ìáãå ëàéìå îðäéâ öáé åàéì áéçã åçééá îùåí ëìàéí

i.

One ox of Pesulei ha'Mukdashim, the Torah considers it two bodies, and when one conducts it alone, it is like conducting with Tzvi and Ayal together, and he is liable for Kil'ayim;

åàéãê [ö"ì öáé åàéì àéöèøéê - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã] çã ìëãø' ò÷éáà ãîúéø àôé' ìòåáã ëåëáéí àå ìëãøáé àìòæø ä÷ôø ô' ùðé ãçåìéï (ãó ëç.) îä ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï èòåðéí ùçéèä àó öáé åàéì ëï

2.

The other Tzvi va'Ayal - one [of the two words] is needed [to teach] like R. Akiva, who permits even a Nochri [to eat it], or like R. Elazar ha'Kapar in Chulin (28a) - just like Pesulei ha'Mukdashim need Shechitah, also Tzvi va'Ayal;

åîöáé ìçåãéä äåä éãòéðï àéì ãîöáé éìôéðï ëì çéä

i.

From Tzvi alone we would know Ayal, for from Tzvi we learn every Chayah.

åàéãê ìëãøá îøé ãîä öáé åàéì ãàéï ôåãéï

ii.

The other is [to teach] like Rav Mari - just like we do not redeem with Tzvi va'Ayal [also Pesulei ha'Mukdashim].

åçìáå îåúø åàåúå åàú áðå ãáòé ìîéãøù áñîåê àé ìàå àê

(d)

Implied question: Below, we would have expounded that the Chelev is permitted, and Oso v'Es Beno [does not apply], if not for "Ach". What is the source for this?

äééðå îöáé åàéì ããøùéðï îéðéä áëåøä åîúðåú ãîùîò ùøåöä ìéúï ìäí ãéï çéä (åàé) [ö"ì åìäëé - öàï ÷ãùéí] ëúéá àê ìçééá òì çìáä åàåúå åàú áðå ëãîôøù áéï ìçåìéï îãîéú ìéä áéï ì÷ãùéí îãîéú ìäå

(e)

Answer: It is from the Tzvi va'Ayal from which we expound Bechorah and Matanos, which connotes that he wants to give to them the law of a Chayah, and therefore it is written "Ach" to obligate for its Chelev and Oso v'Es Beno like it explains, whether you compare them to Chulin or to Kodshim.

åáñîåê ã÷àîø ååìãï åçìáï äéëé ãîé àé ãàéòáø åàéúééìéã àçø ôãéåðï åìã öáé åàéì äåà ìàå éúåøà àéëà àìà îîéìà ôùéèà ìéä ãäåé ëåìéä öáé åàéì

1.

Below (15b), it says "what is the case of their offspring and Chelev? If they became pregnant and gave birth after Pidyon, it is the child of a deer or Ayal!" There is nothing extra [that he expounds]. Rather, automatically it is obvious to him that it is totally like Tzvi va'Ayal.

2)

TOSFOS DH Iy Mah Tzvi va'Ayal Ein Oso v'Es Beno Noheg Bo

úåñôåú ã"ä àé îä öáé åàéì àéï àåúå åàú áðå ðåäâ áå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we did not ask about Kisuy ha'Dam.)

ìà îöé ìîéôøê îä öáé åàéì èòåï ëñåé àó ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï ëï

(a)

Implied suggestion: He could have asked that just like Tzvi va'Ayal require Kisuy ha'Dam, also Pesulei ha'Mukdashim!

ãáäãéà ãøùéðï ô' ëéñåé äãí (çåìéï ãó ôã.) âáé ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï òì äàøõ úùôëðå ëîéí îä ëå'

(b)

Rejection: We explicitly expound in Chulin (84a) regarding Pesulei ha'Mukdashim "Al ha'Aretz Tishpechenu ka'Mayim" - just like water need not be covered, also Dam Behemah.

3)

TOSFOS DH Rak Es Damo Lo Sochal

úåñôåú ã"ä ø÷ àú ãîå ìà úàëì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks why we learn from this verse.)

äàé ÷øà âáé áëåø ëúéá

(a)

Explanation: This verse is written regarding Bechor.

åäøáä úéîä ãìà îééúé ø÷ àú äãí ìà úàëì ãëúéá âáé ùàø ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéí

(b)

Question: It is very astounding that [the Gemara] does not bring "Rak Es ha'Dam Lo Sochal" written regarding other Pesulei ha'Mukdashim!

åàéï ìä÷ùåú ããéìîà àéöèøéê ìçîùä ìàåéï äàîåøéï áãí ãîôøùé ô''÷ ãëøéúåú (ãó ã:)

(c)

Implied question: Perhaps we need it for five Lavim said about blood, that are explained in Kerisos (4b)!

ãäà èåáà ìàåéï ëúéáé éåúø îä' çã áåé÷øà åçã áöå àú àäøï åúøé áàçøé îåú åã' áøàä äøé ç' áø îäàé ãáëåø åùîà ãøéù ìäå ìîéìúà àçøéúé

(d)

Answer: Rejection: Many Lavim are written, more than five! One is in Parshas Vayikra, and one is Tzav, two are in Acharei Mos, and four in Re'eh. This is eight, aside from this verse of Bechor! Perhaps he expounds them for something else.

4)

TOSFOS DH v'Ahani Kra Lemeikam Alei b'Lav

úåñôåú ã"ä åàäðé ÷øà ìîé÷í òìéä áìàå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that elsewhere, we say that the initial Isur returns.)

åà''ú àãøáä ëéåï (ãîäãøéä ä÷øà äãø ìâîøé àó îëøú) [ö"ì ãäãøéä ÷øà äãøé' ìâîøé àó ìëøú - öàï ÷ãùéí] ëãúðéà ì÷îï âáé ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï äâåææ åäòåáã áäí ñåôâ àøáòéí

(a)

Question #1: Just the contrary! Since the verse returned it, it totally returned it, even for Kares, like a Beraisa teaches below about Pesulei ha'Mukdashim. One who shears or works with them receives 40 lashes;

åìà (àîø) [ö"ì àî' - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] àéú÷åù ìöáé åàéì åîô÷éò ìâîøé îìàå åëé ëúéá úæáç åìà âéæä àéñåøà áòìîà àìà (àîø) [ö"ì àî' - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] àäãøéä ìàéñåøéä

1.

We do not say that it is equated to Tzvi va'Ayal, and totally uproots the Lav, and when it is written "Tizbach", and not shearing, it is a mere Isur. Rather, we say that it was returned to its [initial] Isur!

åöøéê ìçì÷

(b)

Conclusion: We must distinguish (why we would have said that shearing is returned to its initial Isur, but Chelev is not).

åîääéà ãäâåææ åäòåáã áäí ðîé ÷ùä òì îä (ùôé' èòîå åìà îîùå àñåø åàéï ìå÷éï òìéå ëâåï âéòåìé òåáãé ëåëáéí) [ö"ì ãàîøéðï èòîå åìà îîùå àñåø ãéìôéðï îâéòåìé òåáãé ëåëáéí åàéï ìå÷éï òìéå - öàï ÷ãùéí]

(c)

Question #2: Also the law of shearing and working with them is difficult for what we say that if an Isur can be tasted but there is no substance [of the Isur], e.g. Gi'ulei (absorptions in pots of) Nochrim, it is forbidden, but one is not lashed for it;

(ãäùúà ëé àéùúøé èòí ìôâí ëîå ðáìä îñøçú åëé) [ö"ì ãëééï ãàéùúøé èòí ìôâí ëîå ðáìä îñøçú ëé - öàï ÷ãùéí] äãø àñø âéòåìé òåáãé ëåëáéí áîãéï àéñåøà áòìîà àéëà ìà îì÷åú

1.

Now, since Ta'am li'Fgam was permitted, e.g. a rotten Neveilah, when the Torah returned to forbid Gi'ulei Nochrim in [the spoils taken from] Midyan, it is a mere Isur, and not lashes!

åàéðå ðøàä ãàéú ìê ìîéîø àäãøéä ìàéñåøà ëãôøéùéú:

(d)

Assertion: It seems that this is wrong. We should say that [the Torah] returned it to its Isur, like I explained.

15b----------------------------------------15b

5)

TOSFOS DH Mah Bechor Ein Matfiso l'Chol Zevach she'Yirtzeh

úåñôåú ã"ä îä áëåø àéï îúôéñå ìëì æáç ùéøöä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that he can make it a different Korban before it is born.)

ôé' îùðåìã àáì áîòé àîå éëåì ìùðåúå ìæáç àçø ëãúðï ôø÷ ëéöã îòøéîéï (úîåøä ãó ëã:)

(a)

Explanation: [He cannot Makdish it for any Korban he wants] after it is born, but in the womb, he can change it to another Korban, like a Mishnah (Temurah 24b) teaches;

åîë''î éìôéðï îéðéä ùôéø åìãåú ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï ãàéï îùðï ìæáç àçø àôé' áîòé àîï ìî''ã áîòé àîï äï ÷ãåùéï

1.

And in any case, we properly learn from it offspring of Pesulei ha'Mukdashim, that one may not change them to another Korban, even in their mother's womb, according to the opinion that they are Kadosh in their mother's womb;

ëîå ùàéï éëåì ìùðåú áëåø îùçìä òìéå ÷ãåùú áëåø äëé ðîé ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï (ùäøé ÷ãåùéï ëáø àéï éëåì ìùðåú áæáç) [ö"ì ùäï ÷ãåùéï ëáø àéï éëåì ìùðåú åìãï ìæáç - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã] àçø

2.

Just like one cannot change a Bechor once Kedushas Bechor took effect on it, the same applies to Pesulei ha'Mukdashim, which are already Kadosh. One cannot change their offspring to another Korban;

(àôéìå) [ö"ì åàôéìå - îäøù"à] ìî''ã áäåééúï ÷ãåùéï ìà ãîå ìáëåø ÷åãí ùðåìã ãäðé òåîãéï ìé÷ãù îëç àîï ù÷ãåùä ëáø:

3.

And even according to the opinion that they become Kadosh when they are born, they are unlike a Bechor before it is born, for these are destined to become Kadosh due to their mother, which is already Kadosh.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF