Kids Daf Quest

Daf Yomi for kids · Talmud Bavli · Masechet Bechorot

Bechorot 58 for kids: Counting the Tenth

בכורות נ״ח

🐑 This daf asks when to tithe young animals and how to count them. The Sages discuss which animals belong together when a new year begins.

Daf Yomi day:

📖 Open Bechorot 58a in Daf QuestOpen Bechorot 58b in Daf Quest

In the app: the Gemara with Rashi and Tosafot, the printed page, games made from this daf, play coins and treasure chests.

Stories from Bechorot 58

Words to know

Rashi and Tosafot on Bechorot 58 in simple English

Rashi on Bechorot 58a, in English Tab translation (20)
  1. So that animals will be available — Since the time for tithing animals does not arrive until shortly before the Festivals, people keep their animals until then rather than slaughter them before tithing. Animals will thus be available for pilgrims to buy, whether for food or for offerings, even though the mishna says it is permitted to sell and slaughter them earlier.
  2. A mitzva — The owner wants to tithe the animals, and so will do it.
  3. It makes them subject to tithing, like produce on a threshing floor — By rabbinic law, as the mishna says: Once the designated time arrives, one may not sell or slaughter animals until tithing them.
  4. Shortly before — The word means half.
  5. Thirty days — Half of that is fifteen days.
  6. And ben Azzai — He too holds that the designated time is fifteen days before the Festival: From the twenty-ninth of Adar through the fourteenth of Nisan is fifteen days.
  7. Sometimes it falls on the thirtieth — When Adar has thirty days.
  8. He does not fix a date — Rabbi Akiva does not specify which day of Adar he means.
  9. Because there are not many — Few animals are born between the time shortly before Passover and then. Therefore, he does not tithe fifteen days before Shavuot, as he does before the other Festivals.
  10. For if you say so, they will be gone — Once the animals have been tithed, people will sell and eat all of them.
  11. Separately — Animals born in Elul are not tithed with those born before Elul. If he waited until the last day of Elul, fifteen days before Sukkot, he might mix animals born in Elul with those born in Av and tithe new-year animals with old-year animals. He therefore tithes the summer-born animals on the last day of Av, but not earlier: Whenever possible, the tithing is kept close to the Festival so the animals will not be gone beforehand.
  12. On the thirtieth — Of Av.
  13. And we need a visible distinction — Animals born in Elul could not be tithed together with those born in Av on the first of Elul, since the Elul-born animals are still too young. Nevertheless, a distinction is needed to prevent people from tithing the two groups together later. Therefore, animals born in Av are not tithed in Elul, even on its first day.
  14. In accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who says — The laws of Passover are taught beginning two weeks beforehand, and the animals are tithed then as well. These sages do not use a fifteen-day period before the Festival.
  15. On the first of Tishrei, and so forth — Therefore, they cannot delay tithing beyond the last day of Elul, since a distinction is needed between animals of the new year and the old. The tractate Rosh HaShana explains the reasoning of Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon and that of Rabbi Meir.
  16. Red dye — The pigment used to mark the tenth animal.
  17. Since these sages say different things — Rabbi Meir says the new year is on the first of Elul, while Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say it is on the first of Tishrei. I do not know whose ruling is correct; therefore, animals born in Elul are treated separately.
  18. Except for that bald man — This refers to Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha, mentioned throughout the Talmud, was Rabbi Akiva’s son, as the Talmud calls him ‘Rabbi Yehoshua, son of Rabbi Akiva.’ This shows that ben Azzai was a great scholar able to judge which argument was sound; here too, he could have assessed their reasons.
  19. They said it on the basis of a received tradition — Both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon based their statements on a tradition from Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Ben Azzai therefore did not want to rely on his own judgment to decide the law.
  20. The fifth of Tishrei and the fifth of the following Av — Animals born on those dates can be joined for tithing, despite the designated tithing times between them.
Tosafot on Bechorot 58a, in English Tab translation (4)
  1. A person prefers to perform a mitzva with his money — Although one may tithe, slaughter, and sell the animals before the designated time, once the Sages set a time, people ordinarily wait and tithe them all together.
  2. One cannot tithe on a Festival because of the red marking — Why not simply say that one may not consecrate an animal on a Festival? That prohibition is itself rabbinic, so forbidding an offering lest someone consecrate it would be a decree to prevent another decree. The discussion in Beitza likewise considers whether the ban on riding an animal is a safeguard against leaving the permitted travel area or against cutting a branch. One might also suggest that consecrating the animal is permitted for a Festival peace offering: a person may consecrate a Passover offering on Shabbat and a Festival offering during the Festival. But that permission applies to obligations with a fixed time. Animal tithe does not become such an obligation merely because its owner wants to use it for a Festival peace offering; otherwise the same would be true of vowed and voluntary offerings, which can also serve that purpose. In any case, these answers do not fit here, since the discussion concerns Rosh Hashanah. Rather, the tenth animal becomes sacred automatically, even if its owner does not call it ‘tenth,’ so the Festival prohibition on consecration does not apply.
  3. Except for this bald one — Rashi identifies him as Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha as Rabbi Akiva’s son. But why refer to Rabbi Akiva by an insulting nickname instead of his name? Scripture uses ‘bald one’ as an insult, and the expression in Shabbat is also derogatory. There is a further difficulty: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha blessed Rabbi that he should reach half his own age. Rabbi Akiva died at 120, on the day Rabbi was born. Even if Rabbi Yehoshua was born when Rabbi Akiva married at forty, he was only eighty when Rabbi was born. He must have been at least 140 when he gave the blessing: Rabbi would not have asked it from someone under seventy, the usual human lifespan. Rabbi would then have been sixty, so reaching half of Rabbi Yehoshua’s age meant only another ten years. What sort of blessing is that? Moreover, Rabbi Yehoshua was likely born only after Rabbi Akiva’s twenty-four years of study; in that case, Rabbi was already more than half Rabbi Yehoshua’s age when Rabbi Yehoshua reached 140. Rabbeinu Nissim identifies ‘the bald one’ as Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah, whom the Jerusalem Talmud describes as bald. Rabbeinu Tam explains that Korcha is a personal name.
  4. From Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi — Rashi explains that, because this is prophetic tradition, it is a received law whose underlying reason cannot establish which opinion is correct. But a prophet may not introduce a new law; it would have been better to call it a law received by tradition. Nazir also attributes a received ruling about a quarter-kav of bones and a half-log of blood to Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. A further difficulty is that Rosh Hashanah derives the competing dates for the animal-tithe new year by comparing animal tithe with grain tithe through a verse. Nevertheless, since those interpretations were transmitted by Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, one cannot determine by reasoning which is correct.
Rashi on Bechorot 58b, in English Tab translation (17)
  1. And he takes one of the Elul animals — Not by deliberately making it the tenth, for Scripture says not to select among the animals. Rather, he takes one without knowing its position, for example, by counting them while they lie or stand still. If he passed them through the opening under the rod, he could not know when an Elul animal would emerge tenth. As stated below, animals counted while lying or standing are nevertheless tithed.
  2. And the Av animals are exempt — Because only five animals belong to that year.
  3. What are you saying? Let them combine — The five Tishrei animals could combine at the gathering before Passover with animals born later that same year. But they cannot: the Torah requires a definite tenth to be sacred, not an uncertain one. If the new year is in Elul, those five Tishrei animals may already have been exempted when he took one of the Elul animals.
  4. Isn’t it obvious? — He must take an Elul animal. An Av animal might belong to the previous year, which has only five and is not subject to tithe. A Tishrei animal might belong to the new year, which likewise has only five; taking it would also leave the ten Av and Elul animals untithed.
  5. To take from those — From the Av and Tishrei animals.
  6. MISHNA: Emerge together — If two emerged together, the ninth and tenth animals would be subject to the complications explained below.
  7. Lying — Reclining on the ground.
  8. And he took ten at a time — He did not count them one, two, three, and so on. Instead, he took ten at once each time and designated one from each group as tithe. This is not tithe, because he must count the animals so that the tenth in the count becomes sacred.
  9. The reason for Rabbi Yosei’s ruling — Is explained in the Gemara.
  10. From those already counted — From animals that had passed through the opening under the rod, though no tenth had yet been designated. If one jumped back into the pen, those already counted are exempt because they were included in a count capable of producing a tenth, as the Gemara explains. Since the exempt animal cannot be identified, all the animals in the pen are exempt.
  11. From those already tithed — From the animals designated as tithe themselves.
  12. GEMARA: An orphan — An animal whose mother died before it was born. If a vegetable were thrown outside, such an orphan would also emerge, though it is exempt from tithe. An animal whose mother died after its birth is liable and might emerge only for a vegetable. Nevertheless, placing the mothers outside provides a reminder that an orphan and a purchased animal are not subject to tithe.
  13. A tereifa does not pass — For example, its legs are broken at or above the knee, so it cannot walk.
  14. Read the text this way — ‘One might have thought: If he had one hundred animals...’
  15. With two kinds of terumah — Although ‘your contribution’ is written about the tithe contribution, the verse says ‘like grain from the threshing floor,’ comparing it to the initial contribution an Israelite takes from his harvest. Thus the tithe contribution is compared to the initial contribution on this point.
  16. By estimation — He estimates how much is in the heap and takes the contribution accordingly.
  17. By thought — He intends and says, ‘The two log that I will later separate are the contribution,’ as taught regarding one who buys wine from Samaritans. It is called ‘thought’ because he does not count out the wine. Alternatively, he designates one part by looking at it and eats from another. Both estimation and designation by thought are derived from ‘and it shall be reckoned.’
Tosafot on Bechorot 58b, in English Tab translation (2)
  1. And he takes one of those born in Elul — This is not prohibited as “examining” the animals to choose one. That prohibition applies to bringing out a blemished animal among the first ten, as explained earlier in the chapter.
  2. Just as the great teruma is taken by estimation — By Torah law, estimation is not really relevant to great teruma: even one grain exempts the whole heap, since the Torah gives it no fixed amount. Estimation is relevant to the tithe of the tithe, whose amount the Torah fixes at one tenth, and to great teruma after the Sages established an amount for it. One therefore cannot infer that deliberately giving just one grain suffices for the tithe of the tithe. Deliberately giving extra, however, would apparently work. The comparison to great teruma permits estimation so that a person will give generously: fearing that an estimate might fall short, he gives more. Thus the Mishnah says not to separate teruma by measure, weight, or count. The Tosefta, in the reading of Rabbenu Tam, says that great teruma is separated only by estimation and thought. The Jerusalem Talmud cites Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel in this connection, and the baraita in Menachot also says, ‘Just as great teruma is given generously.’ Menachot permits separating the tithe of the tithe from fresh figs for dried figs by count, or from dried figs for fresh figs by measure, because this gives generously. Its point is not estimation for its own sake, but generosity. One might object from Gittin: Abaye says that if an Israelite tells a Levite, ‘My father said that I hold tithe for you,’ or ‘I hold tithe for your father,’ the Levite must be concerned that its tithe of the tithe has not been separated. If he specifies a kor of tithe, there is no such concern, since the amount was fixed. Gittin connects this to Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel, who compares the tithe of the tithe to great teruma and permits the owner to separate it. Why, then, might the owner not have separated an unspecified amount by estimation? Although the Levite should give generously, the owner should not do so with someone else’s property. Even when permitted to separate it, he should avoid an estimate that could provoke a complaint from either the priest or the Levite. Another difficulty is the Mishnah in Terumot, which praises one who counts, praises one who measures still more, and praises one who weighs most. The Jerusalem Talmud distinguishes this from the rule against measuring: the latter concerns great teruma, which everyone agrees should be estimated; the praise of counting concerns the tithe of the tithe. It cites Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel to show that the tithe of the tithe is disputed. Yet the Jerusalem Talmud says that counting is better than estimating, implying that an estimated separation is valid; it also discusses three methods besides weighing. How can that fit either the Sages, who apparently reject estimation for the tithe of the tithe, or Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel, if he requires it? It seems that even Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel holds only that estimation works, not that it is required. The Jerusalem Talmud’s distinction can thus follow him. Alternatively, the Sages too may agree that an estimated separation is valid, while denying that estimation is preferable. But how can the Sages allow estimation when it might add to the prescribed tithe? The prohibition concerns deliberately adding to it, not making a good-faith estimate. Menachot, however, suggests that where estimation is allowed, even deliberate generosity is permitted: its example of fresh and dried figs involves intentionally giving extra, and it attributes this to Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel. He therefore appears not to accept the rule that adding to tithes invalidates them. Estimation is permitted even for the first tithe, as the discussion here indicates: the Torah calls that tithe ‘teruma’ in the verse that concludes, ‘I have given [it] to the Levites as an inheritance.’ Why, then, does the discussion here need to connect Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda’s ruling on animal tithe to Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel? Why not simply compare animal tithe with produce tithe: one of ten can be taken without passing the animals under the rod? One answer is that Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel’s comparison shows that estimation can be learned from great teruma even though great teruma has no fixed amount and the tithe of the tithe does. Likewise, animal tithe could be compared with produce tithe despite the verse ‘whatever passes under the rod.’ But this explanation is unsatisfying. Rather, Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda apparently validates taking one of ten even when the animals are not equal in value—as is ordinarily the case when animals enter the pen. The discussion therefore needs Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel’s permission to estimate, without concern that one has given too much, or at least his explicit permission in Menachot to give generously. Without that, the comparison to produce tithe might permit taking one of ten without passing them under the rod only when they are equal. Finally, if Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel permits estimation even for the first tithe, why does Menachot interpret Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Yosei’s account of his father taking ten dried figs from the drying rack for ninety in the basket as concerning the tithe of the tithe, rather than the first tithe? Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda may accept such a practice for the first tithe, but Rabbi Elazar ben Gomel need not. Moreover, the beginning of that teaching plainly concerns teruma, since it says, ‘One separates teruma.’

Sources

Kid summary and story cards written by Tab from the William Davidson Edition English (Sefaria, CC BY-NC 4.0).

Tab translation (machine-assisted) of Rashi and Tosafot, from the Vilna Edition Hebrew (public domain) on Sefaria. May contain mistakes.

In the app, the Gemara text comes from Sefaria (William Davidson Edition, CC BY-NC 4.0; Hebrew/Aramaic Vilna Edition). Rashi and Tosafot Hebrew: Vilna Edition (public domain) via Sefaria.

Also spelled: Bekhorot, Bechoros, Bekhoroth 58.