1)
(a)What is a Yotzei Dofen?
(b)Rebbi Tarfon rules 'Yir'u', with regard to both a Yotzei Dofen and the baby that is born after it. What does Rebbi Akiva say?
(c)What is the basis of their Machlokes?
1)
(a)A Yotzei Dofen is - a baby that does not touch the sides of the womb as it is born (e.g. a cesarean birth).
(b)Rebbi Tarfon rules 'Yir'u', with regard to both a Yotzei Dofen and the baby that is born after it. Rebbi Akiva maintains that - this is not necessary, since the first baby was not born by means of a vaginal birth, and the second one was not its mother's first baby.
(c)The basis of their Machlokes is whether a B'chor in only one respect is considered a B'chor (Rebbi Tarfon thinks that it might be) or not (Rebbi Akiva).
2)
(a)Discussing K'lal ha'Tzarich li'Ferat and P'rat ha'Tzarich li'Chelal (of the thirteen principles via which the Torah is expounded), the Beraisa cites the word "ha'Zachar" (in the Pasuk in Re'ei "Kol ha'Bechor asher Yivaled ... ha'Zachar"), from which it learns that the Pasuk "Kadesh Li Kol B'chor" (in Bo) is confined to males. Into which of the two above principles does this fall?
(b)The Pasuk in Bo also mentions "Peter Kol Rechem". What notion does this come to preclude?
(c)Why does the Torah then need to write "B'chor" (the K'lal)?
(d)Under which of the above principles does this fall?
2)
(a)Discussing K'lal ha'Tzarich li'F'rat and P'rat ha'Tzarich li'Ch'lal, the Beraisa cites the word "ha'Zachar" (in the Pasuk Re'ei "Kol ha'Bechor asher Yivaled ... ha'Zachar", from which it learns that the Pasuk "Kadesh Li Kol B'chor" (is Bo) is confined to males. This is - a K'lal she'Hu Tzarich li'F'rat.
(b)The Pasuk in Bo also mentions "Peter Kol Rechem" - to preclude from the notion that a male born after a female firstborn has the Din of a B'chor (since he is the first male to be born).
(c)And we learn from "B'chor" (the K'lal) that - if the first male is born after a Yotzei Dofen, it does not have the Din of a B'chor.
(d)This is - a P'rat she'Hu Tzarich li'Chelal.
3)
(a)What does Rav Sheravya extrapolate from the fact that ...
1. ... the Metzi'asa of the Beraisa cites "Peter Kol Rechem" and not "B'chor"? What would have been the advantage of citing "B'chor"?
2. ... the Seifa does cite "B'chor"?
(b)To answer the discrepancy, Abaye explains that really "B'chor" does not incorporate a B'chor in just one respect. Then how does he explain the Metzi'asa? What does "Peter Rechem" really come to preclude?
(c)Why would the word "B'chor" then be inappropriate?
(d)Ravina on the other hand, holds that "B'chor" does incorporate a B'chor in one respect. Then why does the Tana cite it in the Seifa?
3)
(a)Rav Sheravya extrapolates from the fact that ...
1. ... the Metzi'asa of the Beraisa cites "Peter Kol Rechem" and not "B'chor" that - the Tana seems to hold that "B'chor" incorporates even a firstborn in only one respect. Otherwise, the Tana should rather have cited "B'chor" in anticipation of the Tana's next question.
2. ... the Seifa cites "B'chor" that - he now believes "B'chor" to mean specifically a B'chor in all respects. Otherwise, what does he prove by quoting it.
(b)To answer the discrepancy, Abaye explains that really "B'chor" means a B'chor in all respects. And he explains that the Metzi'asa "Peter Rechem" comes to preclude - a male that was born first but that was itself a Yotzei Dofen ...
(c)... where the Tana has to quote "Peter Rechem" - because without knowing that it needs to a Peter Rechem, "B'chor" would not preclude it.
(d)Ravina on the other hand, holds that "B'chor" does incorporate a B'chor in only one respect, and the reason that the Tana cites it in the Seifa is - because (bearing in mind that there where a female baby preceded the male, we already know from "Peter Rechem"), the only thing that it can possibly be coming to teach us is that a male that is born after a Yotzei Dofen is Patur from the Bechorah.
4)
(a)Rav Acha mi'Difti queries Ravina however. What does he ask, based on where the Yotzei Dofen is a. a male and b. a female?
(b)What do we therefore conclude?
(c)What does "B'chor" then mean?
4)
(a)Rav Acha mi'Difti queries Ravina however - in that the previous Limud from B'chor (which we learn from the fact that the word is superfluous, and not by implication) will be fine if the Yotzei Dofen is a male (in which case the second baby will only be a B'chor for Rechamim [the first vaginal birth]) - but how will we know to preclude also a case where it was a female (in which case it is also a B'chor li'Zecharim [the first male to be born])?
(b)We therefore conclude that - we have no option but to reject Ravina's explanation, and to adopt that of Abaye ...
(c)... in which case - "B'chor" means a B'chor in all respects.
Hadran alach 'ha'Loke'ach Ubar Paraso'
19b----------------------------------------19b
Perek ha'Loke'ach Beheimah
5)
(a)According to Rebbi Yishmael, if someone purchases a goat from a Nochri without knowing whether it already gave birth or not, as long as it is within its first year, he must give its next baby to the Kohen. What would be the Din if that baby was born after it entered its second year?
(b)Up to what age do we assume that the next baby is the firstborn with regard to ...
1. ... a sheep?
2. ... a cow and a donkey?
5)
(a)According to Rebbi Yishmael, if someone purchases a goat from a Nochri without knowing whether it has already given birth or not, as long as it is within its first year, he must give its next baby to the Kohen. If that baby was born after it entered its second year - it would be a Safek, which means Ro'eh (and when it obtains a blemish, it can be eaten by the owner).
(b)We assume that the next baby is the firstborn with regard to ...
1. ... a sheep - as long as it has not yet entered its third year.
2. ... a cow and a donkey - as long as they have not yet entered their fourth year.
6)
(a)Rebbi Akiva disagrees. What does he mean when he says 'Siman ha'Velad bi'Veheimah Dakah, Tinuf' (which will be explained in the Sugya)?
(b)What, according to him, is the Siman V'lad by ...
1. ... a Beheimah Gasah?
2. ... a woman?
(c)And when is the first baby definitely ...
1. ... not a B'chor?
2. ... a B'chor?
3. ... a Safek?
6)
(a)Rebbi Akiva disagrees. When he says 'Siman ha'V'lad bi'Veheimah Dakah, Tinuf', he means that - even within the first year, a goat might be Patur from the Bechorah, because it may have emitted Tinuf (dirt [which will be explained in the Sugya]) prior to the birth, and that Tinuf might itself have been a birth.
(b)According to him, the Siman V'lad by ...
1. ... a Beheimah Gasah is - the emission of a placenta.
2. ... a woman is - the skin of a baby or a placenta.
(c)The first baby is definitely ...
1. ... not a B'chor - only if we know for sure that the current baby is its first one.
2. ... a B'chor - if we know for sure that it is not.
3. ... a Safek - if we don't know whether it is or whether it isn't.
7)
(a)Rebbi Yishmael just learned that once a goat has entered its second year, the next baby is a Safek B'chor. What problem do we have with this? Why should we assume that it is not a B'chor?
(b)We answer by establishing Rebbi Yishmael like Rebbi Meir. What does Rebbi Meir hold?
(c)We try to establish Rebbi Yishmael even like the Rabbanan, by drawing a distinction between two kinds of Rov. How do we define Tesha Chanuyos and Sanhedrin?
7)
(a)Rebbi Yishmael just learned that once a goat has entered its second year, the next baby is a Safek B'chor. The problem with this is that - most goats conceive within their first year, so why do we not go after the majority, and assume that the next baby is not a B'chor?
(b)We answer by establishing Rebbi Yishmael like Rebbi Meir - who contends with the minority.
(c)We try to establish Rebbi Yishmael even like the Rabbanan, by drawing a distinction between two kinds of Rov. We define Tesha Chanuyos and Sanhedrin as a Ruba de'Isa Kaman (a visible majority, where the numbers [of shops and judges] can actually be counted) ...
8)
(a)By which kind of Rov might the Rabbanan then concur with Rebbi Meir?
(b)We refute this suggestion however, by citing the Mishnah in Yevamos regarding Katan u'Ketanah. What does Rebbi Meir say about a Katan or a Ketanah performing Chalitzah or Yibum
(c)Why is that?
8)
(a)... and it is by a Ruba de'Leisa Kaman (an abstract Rov, such as Most women or Most animals in the world), which cannot and where the Rabbanan might therefore concur with Rebbi Meir.
(b)We refute this suggestion however, by citing the Mishnah in Yevamos regarding Katan u'Ketanah, where Rebbi Meir states that - a Katan or a Ketanah cannot perform Chalitzah or Yibum ...
(c)... in case the former turns out to be a Saris and the latter, an Aylonis, both of whom are Patur from Yibum, and who are therefore subject to Eishes Ach.
9)
(a)The Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Meir regarding Chalitzah. Why is that?
(b)On what grounds do they disagree with him regarding Yibum?
(c)What does Rava therefore conclude? Like whom must Rebbi Yishmael hold?
(d)Ravina maintains that Rebbi Yishmael can still hold like the Rabbanan. Why might the Rabbanan concede in the case of the birth of an animal, that we do not go after the majority?
9)
(a)The Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Meir regarding Chalitzah - by which the Torah writes "Ish" (precluding a Katan).
(b)They disagree with him regarding Yibum - because they go after the majority of men who are not Sarisim, and women who are not Ayloniyos.
(c)Rava therefore concludes that - Rebbi Yishmael must hold like Rebbi Meir.
(d)Ravina maintains that Rebbi Yishmael can still hold like the Rabbanan, because they may well concede in the case of the birth of an animal that we do not go after the majority - because it is a Rov that is determined by the act of Tashmish (see Tosfos DH 'Ravina'), unlike most other cases of Rov, which are automatic.