Super Daf › Bekhorot 36 › Gems from the Daf
Daf prep · Bekhorot 36 · בכורות ל״ו
Before you learn Bekhorot 36
Where we left off
Rav Pappa challenged Abaye on Rabbi Meir's view regarding priests suspected of causing blemishes. The sugya continues onto this daf to determine if priests are treated as definite sinners.
The question going in
When is a priest or owner believed when claiming an animal was blemished naturally? What level of expertise is required to inspect and permit animals with obvious blemishes?
Know before you start
- הפה שאסר הוא הפה שהתיר (the mouth that forbade is the mouth that permitted): A person is believed when adding a leniency to an otherwise unknown prohibition. Because he could have remained silent, his entire statement is accepted as true.
- מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי (a matter likely to be revealed): A person is presumed not to lie about facts that can be investigated easily. The fear of immediate exposure deters witnesses from making false claims.
- מום מובהק (an obvious blemish): This is an unmistakable permanent defect, like a broken leg or blinded eye. Such visible injuries can be evaluated without the judgment of an expert sage.
Who's who
- Abaye (אביי, Amora): He distinguishes a preventive suspicion from establishing a priest as a definite transgressor.
- Rabbi Yehoshua (רבי יהושע, Tanna): He rules that a learned priest is believed regarding accidental blemishes on his firstborn.
- Rabban Gamliel (רבן גמליאל, Tanna): He maintains that scholars and laymen share the same suspicion regarding animal blemishes.
- Rav Ashi (רב אשי, Amora): He validates hearsay testimony for firstborn animals and evaluates credibility regarding obvious blemishes.