## Bekhorot Daf 55a ###### Bekhorot 55a:1 [Bekhorot 55a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:1) מֵיתִיבִי: הָיָה לוֹ חָמֵשׁ בִּכְפַר חֲנַנְיָה וְחָמֵשׁ בִּכְפַר עוֹתְנַי — אֵין מִצְטָרְפוֹת עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא לוֹ אַחַת בְּצִיפּוֹרִי. תְּיוּבְתָּא דְּרַב! **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara **raises an objection** to the opinion of Rav from a *baraita*: If **one had five** sheep **in the village of** Ḥ**ananya and five** sheep **in the village of Otnai,** which is a distance of thirty-two *mil* from the village of Ḥananya, **they do not combine, unless he** also **has one** sheep between them, **in Tzippori.** This is apparently **a conclusive refutation** of the opinion **of Rav** that there must be at least five sheep in the middle. ###### Bekhorot 55a:2 [Bekhorot 55a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:2) תַּרְגְּמַהּ שְׁמוּאֵל אַלִּיבָּא דְּרַב: כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיוּ תֵּשַׁע מִכָּאן וְתֵשַׁע מִכָּאן וְאַחַת בָּאֶמְצַע, דְּהַהִיא חַזְיָא לְהָכָא וְחַזְיָא לְהָכָא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Shmuel interpreted** the *baraita* **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rav.** The *baraita* does not mean he had five sheep on either side, but rather it is referring to a case **where he had nine** sheep **from here and nine** sheep **from there and one in the middle.** This case is different, **as that** one sheep in the middle **is fit** to combine **with** the animals **here and is fit** to combine **with** the animals **there,** to constitute a total of ten animals on either side, to which the obligation applies. ###### Bekhorot 55a:3 [Bekhorot 55a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:3) אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: וְלִשְׁמוּאֵל, אֲפִילּוּ רוֹעֶה מְצָרְפָן, וַאֲפִילּוּ כִּלְיוֹ שֶׁל רוֹעֶה מְצָרְפָן. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Pappa says: And according to** the opinion of **Shmuel** that one animal in the middle is sufficient to combine the two groups on either side of it, **even** if **the shepherd** himself is in the middle without any sheep, he **combines** the two flocks on either side. **And even** if only **the implements of the shepherd** are in the middle, they **combine** the two flocks on either side into one flock. Since the shepherd must go there to collect his implements it is considered as though he is already there and therefore the two flocks are combined. ###### Bekhorot 55a:4 [Bekhorot 55a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:4) בָּעֵי רַב אָשֵׁי: כַּלְבָּא דְּרוֹעֶה מַאי? כֵּיוָן דְּקָרֵי לֵיהּ וְאָתֵי לָא מִצְטָרְפִי, אוֹ דִלְמָא זִימְנִין דְּלָא אָתֵי, וּמִצְטָרֵךְ אִיהוּ לְמֵיזַל וְאֵתֹיֵיהּ? תֵּיקוּ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Ashi raises a dilemma: What** is the *halakha* in a case where **the dog of the shepherd** is in the middle? Does it combine the two flocks into one or not? **Since** the shepherd can **call** the dog **and it comes,** perhaps it does **not combine** the two flocks, as the shepherd himself has no need to go to the middle, so the dog is not like the implements of the shepherd. **Or perhaps,** because **sometimes** the dog **does not come** when the shepherd calls it, **and** in such cases the shepherd **himself must go and bring it,** it does combine the two flocks. The Gemara states that the dilemma **shall stand** unresolved. ###### Bekhorot 55a:5 [Bekhorot 55a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:5) רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: הַיַּרְדֵּן מַפְסִיק לְמַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה. אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵין שָׁם גֶּשֶׁר, אֲבָל יֵשׁ שָׁם גֶּשֶׁר — גֶּשֶׁר מְצָרְפָן. **William Davidson Edition - English:** § The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Meir says: The Jordan** River **divides** between animals on two sides of the river with regard **to animal tithe,** even if the distance between them is minimal. **Rabbi Ami says: They taught** that the Jordan River serves as a partition **only when there is no bridge there, but** if **there is a bridge there, the bridge combines** the two flocks into one for the purposes of tithing. ###### Bekhorot 55a:6 [Bekhorot 55a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:6) אַלְמָא, מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא מְיקָרְבָן הוּא. מֵיתִיבִי: הָיוּ לוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי עֶבְרֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן אֵילָךְ וְאֵילָךְ, אוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי אַבְטִילָאוֹת כְּגוֹן שֶׁל נָמֵר וְנָמוֹרִי — אֵין מִצְטָרְפִין, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ וָאָרֶץ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara notes: **Apparently,** the Jordan River serves as a partition **because** the flock on one side **is not close** and is unable to join the flock on the other side due to the river between them. The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: If **one had** sheep **on both sides of the Jordan** River, **here and there; or** if the flocks were **in two counties [*avtilaot*], e.g., Namer and Namori,** even if they were under the control of the same ruler, the flocks **do not combine,** even if there is no river between them and they are less than thirty-two *mil* apart. **And needless to say,** if one flock is **outside of Eretz** Yisrael **and** the other is inside **Eretz** Yisrael, they do not combine. ###### Bekhorot 55a:7 [Bekhorot 55a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:7) וְהָא חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ וָאָרֶץ כִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ גֶּשֶׁר דָּמֵי, וְקָתָנֵי: לֹא מִצְטָרְפִין! **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara clarifies its objection: **But** the partition between **outside of Eretz** Yisrael **and** inside **Eretz** Yisrael is **like a place that has a bridge,** as the two areas are not necessarily separated by water. **And** yet the *baraita* **teaches** that they **do not combine.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:8 [Bekhorot 55a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:8) אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הַיְינוּ טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״וְהַיַּרְדֵּן יִגְבֹּל אֹתוֹ לִפְאַת קֵדְמָה״, הַכָּתוּב עֲשָׂאוֹ גְּבוּל בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rather,** the Gemara retracts its previous explanation. **Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This is the reason** for the opinion **of Rabbi Meir: As the verse states: “And the Jordan was to be its border on the east side.** This was the inheritance of the children of Benjamin, by its borders round about, according to their families” (Joshua 18:20). Here, **the verse renders** the Jordan River as **a border in and of itself.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:9 [Bekhorot 55a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:9) אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, ״וְתָאַר הַגְּבוּל״ ״וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל״, הָכִי נָמֵי הַכָּתוּב עֲשָׂאוֹ גְּבוּל בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ! **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara raises a difficulty: But **if that is so,** should one say that the demarcation of the land allotted to each tribe has the status of a border? Consider the verse: **“And the border was drawn** and turned about on the west side southward, from the mountain that lies before Beit Horon southward; and its goings out were at Kiriath Ba’al, which is Kiriath Jearim, a city of the children of Judah; this was the west side” (Joshua 18:14). And consider the verse: **“And the border went up** to the side of Jericho on the north, and went up through the hill country westward; and its goings out were at the wilderness of Beit Aven” (Joshua 18:12). Here **also, the verse** apparently **renders** each of these places **a border by itself.** If so, flocks on either side should not combine for purposes of tithing. ###### Bekhorot 55a:10 [Bekhorot 55a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:10) שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״זֹאת תִּהְיֶה לָכֶם הָאָרֶץ לִגְבֻלֹתֶיהָ סָבִיב״, כּוּלַּהּ אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל גְּבוּל אֶחָד הִיא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara answers: **There,** with regard to the demarcation of each inheritance, it **is different, as the verse states:** “And the border shall go down to the Jordan, and its goings out shall be at the Dead Sea; **this shall be your land according to its borders round about”** (Numbers 34:12). This teaches that **all of Eretz Yisrael is** considered to be within **one border,** notwithstanding the demarcations of each inheritance within. ###### Bekhorot 55a:11 [Bekhorot 55a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:11) אִי הָכִי, יַרְדֵּן נָמֵי! ״אֶרֶץ״ — וְלֹא יַרְדֵּן. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara raises a further difficulty: **If so, the Jordan** River **also** should not be considered a border with regard to animal tithes. The Gemara explains that the verse states: “This shall be your **land,”** which is referring to those parts of land that are connected, **but not** to areas separated by the **Jordan** River, which is not land but water. ###### Bekhorot 55a:12 [Bekhorot 55a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:12) בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא — הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי ״יַרְדֵּן״, אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי אַמֵּי — לִיתְנִינְהוּ לְכוּלְּהוּ נְהָרוֹת! קַשְׁיָא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba,** who maintains that the ruling of Rabbi Meir is a Torah edict, **this** is the reason **that the** *tanna* **teaches: The Jordan** River divides between animals on two sides of the river with regard to animal tithe. **But according to Rabbi Ami,** who holds that the Jordan River serves as a partition because the animals are unable to cross from one side to the other, **let** Rabbi Meir **teach** his principle **with regard to all rivers** that cannot be crossed. They should all divide flocks with regard to animal tithe. The Gemara comments: This is **difficult.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:13 [Bekhorot 55a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:13) לֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי: ״כִּי אַתֶּם עֹבְרִים אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן״, ״אַרְצָה״ — אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן, וְלֹא הַיַּרְדֵּן אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתִירָה. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that the question of whether or not the Jordan River is part of Eretz Yisrael is **the subject of** a dispute between ***tanna’im*,** as it is taught in a *baraita*: The verse states: “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: **When you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan”** (Numbers 35:10). The term **“into the land”** indicates that **the land of Canaan** is considered part of Eretz Yisrael, **but the Jordan** River itself **is not** considered part of **the land of Canaan;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:14 [Bekhorot 55a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:14) רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר: הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״מֵעֵבֶר לְיַרְדֵּן יְרֵחוֹ קֵדְמָה מִזְרָחָה״, מָה יְרֵחוֹ אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן, אַף יַרְדֵּן אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says:** The verse **states** with regard to the portions of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh: “The two tribes and the half tribe have received their inheritance **beyond the Jordan at Jericho eastward, toward the sunrise”** (Numbers 34:15). **Just as Jericho** is part of **the land of Canaan, so too, the Jordan** River is part of **the land of Canaan.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:15 [Bekhorot 55a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:15) אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין ״יַרְדֵּן״ אֶלָּא מִבֵּית יְרֵחוֹ וּלְמַטָּה. לְמַאי הִלְכְתָא? אִילֵּימָא לְנוֹדֵר — הַלֵּךְ אַחַר לְשׁוֹן בְּנֵי אָדָם, וְכֹל הֵיכָא דְּקָרוּ לֵיהּ ״יַרְדֵּן״ אִיתְּסַר לֵיהּ! אֶלָּא לְמַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה. **William Davidson Edition - English:** § **Rabba bar bar Ḥana says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The river is called **Jordan only from Beit Jericho and below,** i.e., to the south. The Gemara asks: **With regard to what *halakha*** is this statement relevant? **If we say** it is relevant **for one who takes a vow,** e.g., that water from the Jordan River is forbidden to him, this cannot be so, as there is a principle with regard to vows that one must **follow** the ordinary **language of people.** The meaning of a vow is interpreted in accordance with the manner in which the words are used in common speech. **And** therefore, **anywhere that** most people **call** the river by the name **Jordan, it is prohibited for him** to drink from it, regardless of whether it is north or south of Beit Jericho. **Rather,** the Gemara explains that Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement is relevant **for animal tithe.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:16 [Bekhorot 55a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:16) תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: יַרְדֵּן יוֹצֵא מִמְּעָרַת פַּמְיָיס, וּמְהַלֵּךְ בְּיַמָּהּ שֶׁל סִיבְכִי, וּבְיַמָּהּ שֶׁל טְבֶרְיָא, וּבְיַמָּהּ שֶׁל סְדוֹם, וְהוֹלֵךְ וְנוֹפֵל לַיָּם הַגָּדוֹל, וְאֵין ״יַרְדֵּן״ אֶלָּא מִבֵּית יְרִיחוֹ וּלְמַטָּה. **William Davidson Edition - English:** According to the opinion of Rabbi Meir the Jordan River acts as a partition only south of Beit Jericho, but north of that point it is not a partition. The Gemara notes: **That is also taught** in a *baraita*: The **Jordan** River **issues forth from the Cave of Pamyas and flows via the Sea of Sivkhi,** i.e., Lake Hula, **and via the Sea of Tiberias,** i.e., the Sea of Galilee, **and via the Sea of Sodom,** i.e., the Dead Sea, **and continues and falls** down **to the Great Sea. But it is** called **Jordan only from Beit Jericho and below,** i.e., to the south. ###### Bekhorot 55a:17 [Bekhorot 55a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:17) אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ ״יַרְדֵּן״? שֶׁיּוֹרֵד מִדָּן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: אַתּוּן מֵהָתָם מַתְנִיתוּ לַהּ, אֲנַן מֵהָכָא מַתְנֵינַן לַהּ, ״וַיִּקְרְאוּ (לוֹ) לְלֶשֶׁם דָּן בְּשֵׁם דָּן אֲבִיהֶם״. וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: לֶשֶׁם זוֹ פַּמְיָיס, וְתַנְיָא: יוֹצֵא יַרְדֵּן מִמְּעָרַת פַּמְיָיס. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Why is** the river **called Jordan? Because it descends [*yored*] from** the city of **Dan. Rabbi Abba said to Rav Ashi: You learned** that the Jordan River emerges from the territory of Dan **from there,** i.e., from its name. **We learn it from here:** “And the border of the children of Dan went out from them; and the children of Dan went up and fought against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt there, **and called Leshem: Dan, after the name of Dan their father”** (Joshua 19:47). **And Rabbi Yitzḥak says** that **this Leshem** is a city that was known in the talmudic period as **Pamyas. And it is taught** in a *baraita* that **the Jordan** River **emerges from the Cave of Pamyas.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:18 [Bekhorot 55a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:18) אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: זַכְרוּתֵיהּ דְּיַרְדְּנָא מִמְּעָרַת פַּמְיָיס, הֵיכָא דְּאָמַר: ״לָא שָׁתֵינָא מַיִם מִמְּעָרַת פַּמְיָיס״ — אִיתְּסַר לֵיהּ בְּכוּלֵּיהּ יַרְדְּנָא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Kahana says: The source of the Jordan** River is **from the Cave of Pamyas.** Therefore, in a case **where** one **says: I will not drink water from the Cave of Pamyas, it is prohibited for him** to drink water **from the entire Jordan** River. ###### Bekhorot 55a:19 [Bekhorot 55a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:19) זַכְרוּתָא דִּדְמָא — כַּבְדָּא, כִּדְרַבִּי יִצְחָק, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: כָּבֵד שֶׁנִּימּוֹחַ — מְטַמֵּא בִּרְבִיעִית. **William Davidson Edition - English:** Rav Kahana also states: **The source of blood is the liver.** The halakhic ramification of this observation is **in accordance with** a statement **of Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: A liver that dissolved,** i.e., a decomposed liver from a corpse, **imparts** ritual **impurity** if it has the volume **of a quarter-***log*, which is the minimum amount of blood that imparts ritual impurity. ###### Bekhorot 55a:20 [Bekhorot 55a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:20) זַכְרוּתָא דְּמַיָּא — פְּרָת, דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: הַנּוֹדֵר מִמֵּימֵי פְּרָת — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מֵימוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם. **William Davidson Edition - English:** Rav Kahana also states: **The source of** all **the water** in the world is the **Euphrates** River. The halakhic ramification of this is in accordance with a statement of Rav Yehuda, **as Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says:** With regard to **one who takes a vow** rendering **the waters of the Euphrates** River forbidden to him, **it is prohibited** for him to drink **from any water in the world.** ###### Bekhorot 55a:21 [Bekhorot 55a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:21) הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִילֵימָא דְּאָמַר ״לָא שָׁתֵינָא מִמֵּימֵי דִּפְרָת״ — מֵי פְרָת הוּא דְּלָא שָׁתֵינָא, הָא מִנַּהֲרָא אַחֲרִינָא שָׁתֵינָא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances** in which it is prohibited to drink from any water in the world? **If we say** this is a case **where he says: I will not drink from the water of the Euphrates** River, **it is** only **the waters of the Euphrates** River **that he may not drink,** whereas **he may drink** water **from another river,** since one follows the ordinary language of people. ###### Bekhorot 55a:22 [Bekhorot 55a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bekhorot/r/55a:22) אֶלָּא, דְּאָמַר: ״לָא שָׁתֵינָא מִמַּיִם דְּאָתוּ מִפְּרָת״, דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל הַנְּהָרוֹת לְמַטָּה מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה נְהָרוֹת, וּשְׁלֹשָׁה נְהָרוֹת לְמַטָּה מִפְּרָת. וְהָאִיכָּא **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rather,** it is referring to a case **where he says: I will not drink from** any **water that comes from the Euphrates** River. It is prohibited for him to drink any water at all, **as Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says: All the rivers are below,** i.e., they receive their waters **from, three rivers:** The Pishon, the Gihon, and the Tigris (see Genesis 2:11–14). **And** these **three rivers are below** and receive their waters **from the Euphrates** River. The Gemara asks: **But there are**