Bekhorot 24b (כד:) — the Talmud in English

The dilemma was raised

by Ahai barיבי

: Ahai, who was a great and important man in his generation, was uncertain:

He saw a pig tied behind a ewe; what is the halakha?

And the Gemara explains the dilemma:

What is he asking about?

What was Ahai uncertain about?

If we say

that it exempts the ewe from the status of a firstborn,

and this is what he was asking

Ahai:

whether the halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

and it is exempt from the status of a firstborn,

or whether the halakha is in accordance with the Rabbis,

who maintain that even an animal that does not give birth nurses another animal. This cannot be the question, because if so,

he should have asked about a lamb

he should have been uncertain when it nurses a lamb, since it is in that case that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and the Rabbis disagree.

Rather:

His question concerned the status of a firstborn according to the Rabbis, and eating it according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel:

Regarding the status of a firstborn,

he was uncertain,

and even according to the Rabbis, who say

that it shows affection

even according to the Sages who maintain that it shows affection for the offspring of another animal, nevertheless there is room for uncertainty:

Perhaps it shows affection for one of its own species, but not for one of another species

perhaps it shows affection only for its own kind, whereas this one that nurses a pig is certainly its offspring—

Or perhaps: It also shows affection for one of another species

sometimes it shows affection even for offspring that are not of its own species.

Regarding eating it,

he was uncertain,

and even according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel: If you find it stated that he holds that an animal that gives birth shows affection

and regarding eating, his uncertainty according to Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel concerns the possibility that even if it did not specifically give birth to this one, it nevertheless shows affection for it, there is still room for uncertainty: perhaps it shows affection only for

one of its own species,

but

for one that is not of its own species—

if it is not its offspring—

it does not

show affection for it, and it must therefore be its offspring and permitted to be eaten—

Or perhaps: It also shows affection for one that is not of its own species

it shows affection even for offspring that are not of its own species, and, if so, perhaps it is not its offspring and is forbidden to be eaten.

And we conclude:

Teyku!

Mishna:

Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam

says: One who slaughters a firstborn makes a place with a hatchet on either side

on both sides of the place of slaughter, in order to make room for the knife so that the slaughter will not be invalidated because of “ḥaladah”

and pulls out the hair—

and the Gemara will explain how he does this and the reason for permitting it, as he is not concerned with the prohibition, “You shall not shear the firstborn of your flock.”

Provided that he does not move it,

the hair

from its place,

so that people will not say that he is performing shearing on consecrated animals; rather, he should leave it there among the rest of the hairs.

And likewise, one who pulls out

the hair to see the place of a blemish

in order to show it to a Sage.

Gemara:

Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam.

They asked Rav Huna: What is the halakha concerning its equivalent on a Festival

to permit it just as Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam permitted it? The sides of the uncertainty are as follows:

Does the Mishna mean that he may deliberately pull out the hair, and

the reason of Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam

is

because he holds that pulling out

is not the same as shearing,

and the Torah prohibited only, “You shall not shear the firstborn of your flock,”

and,

if so,

on a Festival it is forbidden,

because although one is not liable for pulling out hair on account of shearing, nevertheless it is forbidden

because it is removing something from its place of growth,

which is forbidden on a Festival.

Or perhaps: In general, Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam holds that pulling out is shearing,

and what Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam permitted was only clearing and pulling the hair from side to side, and if it is pulled out, so be it.

And this is the reason that Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam permitted it

because

it is an unintended act,

for he did not intend to pull it out,

and,

if so, even

on a Festival is an unintended act permitted?

He said to them

Rav Huna said to the members of the academy who had raised the uncertainty:

Go and ask Rav Ḥananel,

who was expert in Rav’s statements,

whether he said

to you in the name of Rav,

“The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam.”

If he said so,

then

I will resolve it for you

I will explain to you what Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam’s reasoning is, and your uncertainty will be resolved.

They came

the members of the academy

and asked him

they asked Rav Ḥananel, and

he said to them: Thus Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam.

Once they had established for themselves that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam,

they came before Rav Huna

to hear what his reasoning was and, consequently, what the halakha is concerning its equivalent on a Festival.

He said to them,

Rav Huna said:

Its equivalent on a Festival is permitted,

because with regard to a firstborn as well, Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam permitted it only when one does not intend to pull out the hair; therefore, it is also permitted on a Festival!