## Bekhorot Daf 4a

###### Bekhorot 4a:1
[Bekhorot 4a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:1)

**גְּמָ׳** אִינְהוּ פָּטְרִי?! אָדָם — אָדָם פָּטַר, בְּהֵמָה — בְּהֵמָה פָּטְרָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״קַח אֶת הַלְוִיִּם תַּחַת בְּכוֹר בִּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת בֶּהֱמַת הַלְוִיִּם תַּחַת בְּהֶמְתָּם״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** In stating: If the priests and Levites rendered exempt the firstborn children and donkeys of the Israelites in the wilderness from being counted firstborns, the mishna indicates that the priests and Levites themselves rendered the animals exempt. The Gemara therefore asks: **Did they render** the firstborn children and donkeys **exempt?** With regard to **a person,** i.e., the Israelite firstborn, the **person,** i.e., the priests and Levites, **rendered** them **exempt.** But with regard to **an animal,** i.e., the firstborn donkeys of the Israelites, the **animal,** i.e., the sheep of the priests and Levites, **rendered** them **exempt, as it is written: “Take the Levites in exchange for all the firstborn among the children of Israel, and the animal of the Levites in exchange for their animals”** (Numbers 3:45).


###### Bekhorot 4a:2
[Bekhorot 4a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:2)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, הָכִי קָאָמַר: כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם פְּטוּרִין בְּהֶמְתָּם מִקַּל וְחוֹמֶר — אִם הִפְקִיעָה בְּהֶמְתָּם שֶׁל לְוִיִּם בְּהֵמָה שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּמִּדְבָּר, דִּין הוּא שֶׁתַּפְקִיעַ אֶת שֶׁל עַצְמָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Abaye said this** is what the mishna **is saying:** The firstborn **animals of priests and Levites are exempt** from firstborn status, and that is derived **from an *a fortiori*** inference: **If the animals of the Levites,** i.e., the sheep of the priests and Levites, **rendered** the firstborn status of **the animals of the Israelites in the wilderness abrogated, it is** only **logical that** the sheep of the priests and Levites **should render** the firstborn status of the priests’ and Levites’ **own** firstborn donkeys **abrogated.**


###### Bekhorot 4a:3
[Bekhorot 4a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:3)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: וְהָא ״פָּטְרוּ״ אִינְהוּ קָתָנֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said to him:** How can you interpret the *a fortiori* inference in the mishna as referring to the animals of the priests and Levites? **But doesn’t** it **teach: They,** i.e., the priests and Levites, **rendered** the firstborn children and donkeys of the Israelites **exempt?** The reference is clearly to the priests and Levites themselves, not their animals.


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

וְעוֹד, אִם אִיתָא, אֲפִילּוּ מִבְּכוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה נִפַּטְרוּ! אַלְּמָה תְּנַן: לֹא נִפְטְרוּ מִבְּכוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, אֶלָּא מִפִּדְיוֹן הַבֵּן וּפֶטֶר חֲמוֹר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Furthermore, if it is so** that their animals are exempt due to the *a fortiori* inference, then the priests and Levites **should be exempt even from** the *halakhot* pertaining to a male **firstborn of a kosher animal,** as their firstborn kosher animals rendered the firstborn kosher animals of the Israelites exempt from firstborn status. **Why did we learn** in the mishna (13a): The priests and Levites **were not exempted from** the mitzva of the male **firstborn of a kosher animal; rather,** they were exempted only **from redemption of the** firstborn **son and the firstborn donkey?**


###### Bekhorot 4a:5
[Bekhorot 4a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:5)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא, הָכִי קָתָנֵי: כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם פָּטְרוּ הֵן עַצְמָן מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר, אִם הִפְקִיעָה קְדוּשָּׁתָן שֶׁל לְוִיִּם קְדוּשַּׁת שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּמִּדְבָּר, לֹא יַפְקִיעַ אֶת שֶׁל עַצְמָן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said this** is what the mishna **is teaching: Priests and Levites rendered themselves exempt,** and that is derived **from an *a fortiori*** inference: **If the sanctity of the Levites abrogated the sanctity of the** firstborn of the **Israelites in the wilderness, should it not abrogate** the sanctity **of** the firstborn Levites **themselves?**


###### Bekhorot 4a:6
[Bekhorot 4a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:6)

אַשְׁכְּחַן אָדָם, בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מְנָלַן? אָמַר קְרָא: ״אַךְ פָּדֹה תִפְדֶּה אֵת בְּכוֹר הָאָדָם וְאֵת בְּכוֹר הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּמֵאָה תִּפְדֶּה״, כֹּל שֶׁיֶּשְׁנוֹ בִּבְכוֹר אָדָם — יֶשְׁנוֹ בִּבְכוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, וְכֹל שֶׁאֵינוֹ בִּבְכוֹר אָדָם — אֵינוֹ בִּבְכוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **We have found** a source for the *halakha* that the Levites’ **personal** status as firstborns is abrogated; **from where do we** derive that their **non-kosher animals,** i.e., donkeys, do not have the status of firstborns? The Gemara answers that **the verse states: “Yet you shall redeem the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of non-kosher animals you shall redeem”** (Numbers 18:15). The status of the human firstborn is juxtaposed with that of a non-kosher animal, from which the following principle is derived: **Anything that applies to** a woman’s **firstborn son applies to the firstborn of a non-kosher animal, and anything that does not apply to** a woman’s **firstborn son does not apply to a non-kosher animal.** Therefore, just as firstborn status does not apply to Levites, it does not apply to their donkeys, and they do not need to be redeemed.


###### Bekhorot 4a:7
[Bekhorot 4a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:7)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא לְאַבָּיֵי: לְדִידָךְ דְּאָמְרַתְּ בְּהֶמְתָּם, בֶּן לֵוִי דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ שֶׂה דְּאַפְקַע — לַיפְקַע, דְּלָא הֲוָה לֵיהּ שֶׂה דְּלַיפְקַע — לָא לַיפְקַע!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Safra said to Abaye: According to your** opinion, **that you say the animals of** the Levites did not have firstborn status due to the *a fortiori* inference, then with regard to **a Levite who had a lamb, which abrogated** the sanctity of the firstborn donkeys of the Israelites, **let** the firstborn status of his animals **be abrogated.** But with regard to one **who did not have a lamb that would abrogate** their sanctity, the status of his animals **should not be abrogated.**


###### Bekhorot 4a:8
[Bekhorot 4a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:8)

בֵּין לְדִידָךְ, בֵּין לְרָבָא, בֶּן חֹדֶשׁ דְּאַפְקַע — לַיפְקַע, פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן חֹדֶשׁ דְּלָא אַפְקַע — לָא לַיפְקַע!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Safra asked Abaye an additional question: **According to both you and Rava,** since you agree that the firstborn Levites themselves were exempt from being accorded firstborn status because they rendered the sanctity of the Israelite firstborns abrogated, one should conclude that only a firstborn Levite who was at least one **month old, who abrogated** the sanctity of the Israelite firstborns (see Numbers 3:15), **should** have his own firstborn status **abrogated.** But those firstborn Levites who were **less than** one **month old, who did not abrogate** the sanctity of the Israelite firstborns, **should not** have their own firstborn status **abrogated.**


###### Bekhorot 4a:9
[Bekhorot 4a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:9)

לְוִיָּה לָא תַּיפְקַע? אַלְּמָה אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: לְוִיָּה שֶׁיָּלְדָה — בְּנָהּ פָּטוּר מֵחֲמֵשׁ סְלָעִים?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, the sanctity of a firstborn son born to **a female Levite** who was married to an Israelite **should not be abrogated,** as the women were not included among the Levites who were exchanged for the Israelite firstborn. **Why,** then, **does Rav Adda bar Ahava say:** With regard to **a female Levite who gave birth,her** firstborn **son is exempt from** the obligation of giving **five *sela*** coins to the priest to be redeemed?


###### Bekhorot 4a:10
[Bekhorot 4a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:10)

הָא לָא קַשְׁיָא, כִּדְמָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא, דְּאָמַר: ״פֶּטֶר רֶחֶם״ בְּפֶטֶר רֶחֶם תְּלָה רַחֲמָנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers the last question: **That** is **not difficult, as** it is in accordance with the statement **of Mar, son of Rav Yosef, in the name of Rava, who says:** The fact that the Torah states with regard to the sanctity of the firstborn: **“Firstborn of the womb”** (Exodus 13:12), indicates that **the Merciful One renders** the obligations of firstborn status **dependent on** being **the firstborn of the womb,** i.e., of the mother. Therefore, the mother’s status as a Levite is sufficient to exempt the child from firstborn status.


###### Bekhorot 4a:11
[Bekhorot 4a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:11)

וְאַהֲרֹן שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּאוֹתוֹ מִנְיָן — לָא לַיפְקַע! דְּתַנְיָא: לָמָּה נָקוּד עַל ״אַהֲרֹן״ שֶׁבְּחוֹמֶשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים — שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּאוֹתוֹ מִנְיָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Safra again challenged the opinions of Abaye and Rava: **And Aaron, who was not** included **in that count** of the Levites when they were compared to the number of Israelite firstborns and redeemed from their sanctity as firstborns, **should not** have his own firstborn status **abrogated. As it is taught** in a *baraita*: **Why** do **dots** appear **over** the word **“Aaron”** in the verse **in the book of Numbers:** “All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered” (Numbers 3:39)? It is in order to demonstrate **that he was not** included **in that count** of the Levites.


###### Bekhorot 4a:12
[Bekhorot 4a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:12)

אָמַר קְרָא: ״הַלְוִיִּם״, הוּקְשׁוּ כׇּל הַלְוִיִּם זֶה לָזֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **the verse states: “The Levites”** (Numbers 3:45), to teach that **all of the Levites were juxtaposed with each other.** Therefore, even a firstborn Levite who did not abrogate the sanctity of the Israelite firstborns himself was still abrogated of his own firstborn sanctity.


###### Bekhorot 4a:13
[Bekhorot 4a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/4a:13)

כֹּהֲנִים מְנָלַן? כִּדְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה מְקוֹמוֹת נִקְרְאוּ כֹּהֲנִים ״לְוִיִּם״, וְזֶה אֶחָד מֵהֶן: ״וְהַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם בְּנֵי צָדוֹק״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive that **priests,** including Aaron, were also subject to that *halakha*? The Gemara answers: It is **in accordance with** the statement **of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: In twenty-four places** in the Bible **the priests are called Levites, and this is one of them: “But the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok”** (Ezekiel 44:15). It is derived from this verse that priests are included in the category of Levites even where they are not mentioned explicitly.