## Bekhorot Daf 47b

###### Bekhorot 47b:1
[Bekhorot 47b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:1)

אִיתְּמַר: כֹּהֵן שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ בֵּן חָלָל — רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר: הַבֵּן חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ, רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר: אֵין חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ. כֹּל הֵיכָא דְּמֵת הָאָב לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּאֵין הַבֵּן חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ, שֶׁהֲרֵי זָכָה אָבִיו בְּפִדְיוֹנוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It **was stated** that in the case of **a priest who** married a divorcée and then **died and left a son** who was **a priest disqualified due to flawed lineage [*ḥalal*]** and has the status of a non-priest, **Rav Ḥisda says: The son is obligated to redeem himself. Rabba bar Rav Huna says: He is not obligated to redeem himself.** The Gemara explains: **In any** case **that the father died after thirty** days following the birth of the son, at which point the father was already obligated in his redemption, **everyone agrees that the son is not obligated to redeem himself, as his father acquired his redemption** money, i.e., it is as though he separated five *sela* coins and took the money for himself, since he is a priest.


###### Bekhorot 47b:2
[Bekhorot 47b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:2)

כִּי פְּלִיגִי הֵיכָא דְּמֵת הָאָב בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם, רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר: הַבֵּן חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ, דְּהָא לֹא זָכָה אָבִיו (לְפִדְיוֹנוֹ) [בְּפִדְיוֹנוֹ]. רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר: אֵין הַבֵּן חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת עַצְמוֹ, דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָתֵינָא מִכֹּחַ גַּבְרָא דְּלָא מָצֵית לְאִשְׁתַּעוֹיֵי דִּינָא בַּהֲדֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**They disagree when the father died within thirty days** of the birth of the son, before the obligation of redemption had taken effect. **Rav Ḥisda says the son is obligated to redeem himself, as his father did not acquire his redemption** money. **Rabba bar Rav Huna says the son is not obligated to redeem himself, as** he can **say to** a priest who demands the redemption money from him: **I come due to the strength of a man with whom you cannot enter into judgment,** i.e., if my father were alive he would have separated five *sela* coins and taken the money for himself, and I inherit his claim.


###### Bekhorot 47b:3
[Bekhorot 47b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:3)

תְּנַן: נִתְגַּיְּירָה מְעוּבֶּרֶת — בְּכוֹר לַכֹּהֵן, וְאַמַּאי? לֵימָא לֵיהּ: אָתֵינָא מִכֹּחַ גַּבְרָא דְּלָא מָצֵית לְאִשְׁתַּעוֹיֵי דִּינָא בַּהֲדֵיהּ! שָׁאנֵי גּוֹי דְּלֵית לֵיהּ חַיִיס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a challenge to the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna: **We learned** in the mishna: If one married a woman who **converted while** she was **pregnant,** having been impregnated by a gentile, the child is **a firstborn with regard to** redemption from **a priest** and must redeem himself. **But why** is this the *halakha*? **Let** this son **say to** the priest: **I come due to the strength of a man with whom you cannot enter into judgment,** as his father is a gentile, from whom the redemption money cannot be claimed. The Gemara responds: The case of **a gentile is different, as he has no lineage [*ḥayis*],** i.e., this man is not considered his father’s son at all.


###### Bekhorot 47b:4
[Bekhorot 47b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:4)

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן יָאסִינְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: כֹּהֵן שֶׁמֵּת בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשִׁים וְהִנִּיחַ בֵּן חָלָל — הַבֵּן חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ, שֶׁלֹּא זָכָה הָאָב בְּפִדְיוֹנוֹ. מֵת לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם — אֵין הַבֵּן חַיָּיב לִפְדּוֹת עַצְמוֹ, שֶׁהֲרֵי זָכָה הָאָב בְּפִדְיוֹנוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
On this matter, the Gemara notes that **Rabbi Shimon Yasinia says** that **Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says,** in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda: With regard to **a priest who died within thirty** days of the birth of his son **and left a son** who was **a *ḥalal*, the son is obligated to redeem himself, as the father** did **not acquire his redemption** money. If the father **died after thirty days** following the birth of the son, **the son is not obligated to redeem himself, as his father** already **acquired his redemption** money.


###### Bekhorot 47b:5
[Bekhorot 47b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:5)

וְכֵן מִי שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהֲתָה אַחֲרֵי בַּעְלָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וְכוּ׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And likewise** a woman **who did not wait three months after** the death of **her husband** and she married and gave birth and it is unknown whether the son was born after a pregnancy of nine months and is the son of the first husband, or after seven months and is the son of the second husband, the son is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest but is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance.


###### Bekhorot 47b:6
[Bekhorot 47b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:6)

בְּכוֹר לַנַּחֲלָה הוּא דְּלָא הָוֵי, הָא כְּפָשׁוּט שָׁקֵיל. וְאַמַּאי? לֵיזִיל לְגַבַּי הַאי וְלִידְחֲיֵיהּ, וּלְגַבַּי הַאי וְלִידְחֲיֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara infers: This son **is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance, but he takes** a share of the inheritance **like an ordinary** son. **But why** is he entitled to any inheritance? **Let him go to that** son of the first husband **and he will reject him,** by demanding proof that he is from his family, **and** likewise let him go **to that** son of the second husband **and he will reject him** in the same manner.


###### Bekhorot 47b:7
[Bekhorot 47b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:7)

אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: לֹא נִצְרְכָא אֶלָּא לַבָּא אַחֲרָיו, וְהָכִי קָאָמַר: בְּכוֹר לַכֹּהֵן, וְהַבָּא אַחֲרָיו אֵין בְּכוֹר לַנַּחֲלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yirmeya says:** This ruling that he is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance **is necessary only with regard to the** son who **follows him,** born to the second husband, to teach that he is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance, as this son of uncertain status might be his firstborn brother. **And** when the mishna states: The child is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest but is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance, **this** is what it **is saying:** This son of uncertain status is **a firstborn with regard to** redemption from **a priest, and the** son **who follows him,** born to the second husband, **is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance.**


###### Bekhorot 47b:8
[Bekhorot 47b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:8)

וְלִכְתְּבוּ הַרְשָׁאָה לַהֲדָדֵי! וְכִי תֵּימָא: מַתְנִיתִין שֶׁלֹּא בְּהַרְשָׁאָה — הָא מוֹקְמִינַן לַהּ קַמַּן דִּבְהַרְשָׁאָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **And let** the son with uncertain status and the son who follows him **write an authorization to one another,** by which each grants the other the right to claim his own share. In this manner they can claim the double portion together, as one of them is certainly the firstborn. **And if you would say** that **the mishna** is dealing with a case **where** there was **no authorization, we interpret it later on** (see 49a) as referring **to** a situation **where** there was **an authorization.**


###### Bekhorot 47b:9
[Bekhorot 47b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:9)

מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יַנַּאי, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: הוּכְּרוּ וּלְבַסּוֹף נִתְעָרְבוּ — כּוֹתְבִין הַרְשָׁאָה זֶה לָזֶה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The mishna, which indicates that there is no firstborn with regard to inheritance here, **supports** the opinion **of Rabbi Yannai, as Rabbi Yannai says:** In a case where two sons of two men became confused and it is unknown who is the father of whom, if the two sons **were** initially **recognized and were ultimately intermingled, each writes an authorization to the other,** and the other sons in each family cannot claim that these sons are not their brother.


###### Bekhorot 47b:10
[Bekhorot 47b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:10)

לֹא הוּכְּרוּ וּבְסוֹף נִתְעָרְבוּ — אֵין כּוֹתְבִין הַרְשָׁאָה זֶה לָזֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **they were not** initially **recognized and were ultimately intermingled, each does not write an authorization to the other,** as even initially neither of them had any certain right to their father’s inheritance. Likewise, in the case of the uncertain son and the one who follows him in the mishna, neither one was ever recognized as his father’s firstborn. Therefore, writing an authorization is ineffective in claiming any inheritance.


###### Bekhorot 47b:11
[Bekhorot 47b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:11)

**מַתְנִי׳** אֵי זֶהוּ בְּכוֹר לַנַּחֲלָה וְלַכֹּהֵן? הַמַּפֶּלֶת שַׁפִּיר מָלֵא מַיִם, מָלֵא דָּם, מְלֵא גְּנִינִין, הַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים, וְהַמַּפֶּלֶת לְיוֹם אַרְבָּעִים — הַבָּא אַחֲרֵיהֶם בְּכוֹר לַנַּחֲלָה וּלְכֹהֵן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **Which is** the offspring **that is a firstborn** both **with regard to inheritance and with regard to** redemption from **a priest?** In the case of a woman **who miscarried a gestational sac full of water,** or one **full of blood,** or one **full of pieces of flesh;** or one **who miscarries** a mass **resembling a fish, or grasshoppers,** or **repugnant creatures, or creeping animals, or** one **who miscarries on the fortieth day** after conception, **the** son **who follows** any of **them is a firstborn with regard to inheritance and with regard to** redemption from **a priest.**


###### Bekhorot 47b:12
[Bekhorot 47b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:12)

יוֹצֵא דּוֹפֶן, וְהַבָּא אַחֲרָיו — שְׁנֵיהֶן אֵינָן בְּכוֹר, לֹא לַנַּחֲלָה וְלֹא לַכֹּהֵן. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: הָרִאשׁוֹן לַנַּחֲלָה, וְהַשֵּׁנִי לְחָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In the case of a boy **born by caesarean section and the** son **who follows him, both of them are not firstborn, neither with regard to inheritance nor with regard to** redemption from **a priest. Rabbi Shimon says: The first** son is a firstborn **with regard to inheritance** if he is his father’s first son, **and the second** son is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest **for five *sela*** coins, because he is the first to emerge from the womb and he emerged in the usual way.


###### Bekhorot 47b:13
[Bekhorot 47b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:13)

**גְּמָ׳** רִאשׁוֹן לַנַּחֲלָה לֹא — ״וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ״ בָּעֵינַן, לְחָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים נָמֵי לָא — ״פָּטַר רֶחֶם״ בָּעֵינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that neither a son born by caesarean section nor the son who follows him are firstborn, neither with regard to inheritance nor with regard to redemption from a priest. The Gemara explains: The **first** son, born by caesarean section, is **not** considered the firstborn **with regard to inheritance,** as **we require** fulfillment of the verse: **“And they have borne him** children” (Deuteronomy 21:15), written in the context of inheritance, and a caesarean section is not called a birth. Likewise, **with regard to** the redemption with **five *sela*** coins, this son is **also not** considered the firstborn, as **we require** fulfillment of the verse: “Whatever **opens the womb”** (Exodus 13:2), and he did not open his mother’s womb.


###### Bekhorot 47b:14
[Bekhorot 47b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:14)

שֵׁנִי לַנַּחֲלָה לֹא — ״רֵאשִׁית אוֹנוֹ״ בָּעֵינַן, לְחָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים נָמֵי לָא — קָסָבַר: בְּכוֹר לְדָבָר אֶחָד לָא הָוֵי בְּכוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, the **second** son who follows him is **not** considered the firstborn **with regard to inheritance,** as **we require** fulfillment of the verse: “For he is **the first of his strength,** the right of the firstborn is his” (Deuteronomy 21:17), and this son is not the first. In addition, he is **also not** considered the firstborn **with regard to** the redemption of **five *sela*** coins, as the *tanna* of the mishna **holds: A firstborn for** only **one matter,** i.e., he opened his mother’s womb but is not her first child, **is not considered a firstborn** with regard to redemption.


###### Bekhorot 47b:15
[Bekhorot 47b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:15)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: הָרִאשׁוֹן לַנַּחֲלָה, וְהַשֵּׁנִי לְחָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר: ״תֵּלֵד״ לְרַבּוֹת יוֹצֵא דּוֹפֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Shimon says: The first** son is a firstborn **with regard to inheritance** if he is his father’s first son, **and the second** son is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest **for five *sela*** coins. The Gemara explains: The verse states: “And they have borne him children,” and a caesarean section is not called a birth. **Rabbi Shimon** conforms **to his** standard line of **reasoning, as he says** with regard to a verse that deals with the ritual impurity of a woman after childbirth: “But if **she bears** a girl” (Leviticus 12:5), that the apparently superfluous term “she bears” serves **to include** a child **born by caesarean section,** and the same applies with regard to a firstborn for inheritance.


###### Bekhorot 47b:16
[Bekhorot 47b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/47b:16)

וְהַשֵּׁנִי לְחָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים, קָסָבַר: בְּכוֹר לְדָבָר אֶחָד הָוֵי בְּכוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** Rabbi Shimon also rules that **the second** son is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest **for five *sela*** coins, as he **maintains: A firstborn for** only **one matter,** i.e., one who opened his mother’s womb but is not her first child, **is** considered **a firstborn** with regard to the redemption of the firstborn, despite the fact that he is not his mother’s first child.