## Beitzah Daf 26a

###### Beitzah 26a:1
[Beitzah 26a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:1)

אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מוּם — יַעֲלֶה וְיִשְׁחוֹט, וְאִם לָאו — לֹא יִשְׁחוֹט. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: כֹּל שֶׁאֵין מוּמוֹ נִיכָּר מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם, אֵין זֶה מִן הַמּוּכָן —

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If it has** a permanent **blemish,** owing to which it may be slaughtered and eaten, **he may raise it** from the cistern **and slaughter** it; **but if** it does **not** have a blemish, or if its blemish is temporary, **he may not slaughter** it. **Rabbi Shimon says:** Even if it has a blemish, it is prohibited to slaughter it, as **any** firstborn animal **whose blemish is not perceptible while it is still day,** i.e., on the day before the Festival, **is not** considered to be **among** the animals **prepared** prior to the Festival for use on the Festival.


###### Beitzah 26a:2
[Beitzah 26a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:2)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּמַאי קָא מִפַּלְגִי? אִי נֵימָא בְּרוֹאִין מוּמִין קָמִפַּלְגִי, דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר: רוֹאִין מוּמִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן סָבַר: אֵין רוֹאִין מוּמִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב, וְלִפַּלְגוּ בְּרוֹאִין מוּמִין דְּעָלְמָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **With regard to what** principle **do** Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon **disagree? If we say** that **they disagree** about whether or not **one may examine blemishes on a Festival,** such **that Rabbi Yehuda holds** that **one may examine blemishes on a Festival, and Rabbi Shimon holds** that **one may not examine blemishes on a Festival,** if so, **let them disagree** with regard **to examining blemishes in general** on a Festival and not only with respect to the particular case of a firstborn that fell into a cistern.


###### Beitzah 26a:3
[Beitzah 26a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:3)

בְּכוֹר שֶׁנָּפַל לַבּוֹר אִצְטְרִיכָא לֵיהּ, סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא: מִשּׁוּם צַעַר בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים לַעֲרֵים וְלַסְּקֵיהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ — קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **It was necessary** to teach the disagreement with regard to the case of **a firstborn that fell into a cistern,** as **it could enter your mind to say** that **because of** the matter of **the suffering of living creatures, one should employ an artifice** to circumvent the *halakha* **and raise** the animal from the cistern. This would be **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua,** who states elsewhere (37a) with regard to a different case that one may employ an artifice in order to rescue an animal that fell into a cistern on a Festival. Therefore, the mishna **teaches us** that Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon disagree even in the case of a firstborn that fell into a cistern.


###### Beitzah 26a:4
[Beitzah 26a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:4)

אִי הָכִי, ״לֹא יִשְׁחוֹט״? ״לֹא יַעֲלֶה וְיִשְׁחוֹט״ מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! לָא צְרִיכָא — דַּעֲבַר וְאַסְּקֵיהּ, סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא: לִשְׁחֲטֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so,** if the mishna mentions the case of a firstborn that fell into a cistern in order to teach that an artifice may not be employed to raise the animal from the cistern, the phrase: **He may not slaughter** it, is inaccurate. Rather, it **should have** stated: **He may not raise** the animal **and slaughter** it. The Gemara answers: **No,** this teaching **is necessary** in a case **where he transgressed** the prohibition and already **raised it,** as **it could enter your mind to say that he may** now **slaughter it.** Therefore, the mishna **teaches us** that even then he may not do so.


###### Beitzah 26a:5
[Beitzah 26a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:5)

לִשְׁחֲטֵיהּ?! הָא תָּם הוּא! לָא צְרִיכָא, דִּנְפַל בֵּיהּ מוּמָא. וְהָא מוּקְצֶה הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara expresses wonder at this answer: How could one think that **he may** now **slaughter it? Isn’t** the animal **unblemished?** How could one imagine that it is permitted to slaughter a firstborn that is unblemished? The Gemara answers: This teaching **is necessary only** in a case **where it developed a blemish** after it fell. The Gemara challenges this argument: **But** how could one think that he may now slaughter the animal? **Doesn’t** it fall into the category of ***muktze*,** as it was not fit to be eaten on the eve of the Festival, since at that time it was still unblemished? In that case, it should remain in the category of *muktze* for the duration of the Festival.


###### Beitzah 26a:6
[Beitzah 26a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:6)

אֶלָּא: דִּנְפַל בֵּיהּ מוּם עוֹבֵר מֵעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב, וְהַשְׁתָּא הֲוָה לֵיהּ מוּם קָבוּעַ. מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: דְּדַעְתֵּיהּ עִלָּוֵיהּ, וְנִשְׁחֲטֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the mishna is speaking of a case **where** the animal **developed a temporary blemish,** one that might eventually heal, **on the eve of the Festival, and now,** after falling, **it has a permanent blemish. Lest you say** that **his mind was** set **on** the animal as food already before the Festival due to the temporary blemish **and** therefore **he should** now be allowed to **slaughter it,** the mishna **teaches us** that since it was not fit to be eaten before the Festival, it is not considered prepared for use on the Festival. Rather, it falls into the category of *muktze* and may not be slaughtered.


###### Beitzah 26a:7
[Beitzah 26a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Beitzah/r/26a:7)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: בְּכוֹר תָּם שֶׁנָּפַל לַבּוֹר, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הַנָּשִׂיא אוֹמֵר: יֵרֵד מוּמְחֶה וְיִרְאֶה, אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מוּם — יַעֲלֶה וְיִשְׁחוֹט, וְאִם לָאו — לֹא יִשְׁחוֹט. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא: הֲרֵי אָמְרוּ אֵין רוֹאִין מוּמִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב. כֵּיצַד? נוֹלַד בּוֹ מוּם מֵעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב, אֵין מְבַקְּרִין אוֹתוֹ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. נוֹלַד בּוֹ מוּם

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages taught** the following *baraita*: With regard to **an unblemished firstborn that fell into a cistern** on a Festival, **Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: An expert** in these matters **goes down** into the cistern **and examines** the animal. **If it** now **has a** permanent **blemish** as a result of the fall, **he** may **raise** it from the cistern **and slaughter** it; **but if not,** then even if he proceeds to raise it, **he** may **not slaughter** it, even if afterwards it develops a blemish. **Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya said to him:** The Sages of earlier generations **already said** that **one** may **not examine blemishes on a Festival. How so?** If **a blemish came into being on the eve of a Festival, one** may **not examine it on the Festival** itself to see whether it is in fact of the type that permits the animal to be slaughtered. And if the **blemish came into being**