Bekhorot 5: Wilderness Accounting

0:00Hello and welcome back to Talking Tomlid. I'm one of your host, Jordana Asman here with my friend, Akadrita Angordan, our daughter today, my son, the chorode, daughter, page five. We have a couple of interesting, I would say a little bit more storyage from the dry halacha that we're having. Just going to talk about a couple of highlights here and then Anne's going to get to the new mission now. So the Gamara begins, it really starts on yesterday's dot, a discussion about race luckiest and what exactly race luckiest shows opinion was about whether or not the hoard were actually sanctified in the mid bar and is disagreeing with Robbie with Robbie Yohanada. I'm not going to get into the details of that particular one, I'll focus, but there's Robbie a leather comes and says the following statement, I'm a Robbie a leather, Robbie Yohanada Kazai Vajama, Demil Samay Alsa Amina. So he tells us

1:05that his teacher, Robbie Yohanada came to him in a dream and then he knew that he was going to have like a fine thing that day, he was going to know something and then he goes on and he sort of explains Robbie Yohanada's opinion about this. So he says here, I'm our cry Lee you the pussic says about the bechow earth that were counted in the census mind they will be and what do we learn to this? But have you had time to you? They will be always as they are now. In other words, that their sanctification never ends. This seems to be the mucleus between race luckies and Robbie Yohanada. Now I just thought this was like a very, you know, sort of beautiful little thing that sort of you could miss it very, very quickly that Robbie a leather is basically telling us that, you know, he has this dream of his teacher and when his teacher appears in his dream, it means that that day he was going to somehow have some type of very good, you know, hot, very good drussia on some of the pussuchin. And this was the, this was the drussia that he came to. It's not clear that

2:08the drussia is what appears to him in the dream. It seems to be more that when his teacher appears to him in his dream, he knows that his learning is going to be good the next day. And I thought that was just like a nice, beautiful little thing there, you know, that we saw. Okay. Next thing that I want to point out is we have two stories here on Ahmed Aleppo where there's a Roman official who bothers Robbie Yohanab and Zaka. And I think we just have to put some context to this. Robbie Yohanab and Zaka is of the first generation to Niam. Right? Remember Robbie Yohanab and Zaka is who gives away Yushalayim. Those are the Gamars that we have in Gitten. His students are Robbie Alazar and Robbie Yohanab. So sorry, Robbie Yohanab and Robbie Yohanab. Excuse me, excuse me, I confused because I just mentioned Robbie Yohanab. So it's Robbie Yohanab. Robbie Yohanab and Shua are students. And some of his students, he advised students all together. And so the Gamar retails sort of two conversations he has with Roman, with an Roman official. Remember, he's living

3:10in the time where Rome has sort of taken over Judea. And also they're responsible for the fall Jerusalem. So the first one is Sha'al Kuntirukus has Sa'ar at Rabin Yohanab and Zaka. So Kuntirukus, who was a Roman, you know, Saar minister, asked Rabin Yohanab and Zaka. But for a time shall Levine, a time would see a stream which Niam Aleppo should wash me out. When the Torah talks about the census of the Levine in the midbar, it says that there were 22,300 Bichlalana, a time would seem a stream which Niam Aleppo. But in their total count, the Torah later says that there were only 22,000. Okay, so there's one positive that says there were 22,300. And the final count that says that there were only 22,000. Ushtloud me sho'le he'achan al-Hauqlou. So where did those 3,000 actually go? What happened to them? Okay. And so, so, Wa'b-Nyokhanab and Zaka'i basically says them Amar-Lau. O'tanshler shmeyod bichlou'otayu. Those 300 were the 300 Levine who were actually first

4:14born. The Aenbachar Mifakia Bichor and at first point, Levy did not remove the sanctity of a first born Israel. Remember, we talked about that before that they took all the first borns of the other tribes, which was 22,273 I believe. There were only 22,000 Levine, so there were 273 who needed to give a shekal to the gohanim to redeem themselves. But at his point, he had to be saying, hey, there's an inconsistency in the text. There's Roman minister. And so, he's saying basically, what did you do with those 300? And so, Wa'b-Yokhanab and Zaka'i says those 300 couldn't redeem a first born Israel because they were first born Levine. And so, the question becomes my time. What's the reason? Amar-Bai, Ba'i says, Diolivhorsche, F-Kia, could you shot that smoke? It's sufficient. Ba'i says, it's sufficient for a first point, Levy, to remove his own sanctity. So in other words, since all the first borns are sanctified in Mitsraim, the first borns of the Levine were sanctified as well.

5:14And they had to be replaced by, you know, they too had to be replaced by other Levine. But just as an ordinary Levy could remove the sanctity only of an Israel first born, and I just saw a first born, a first born Levy could remove his own sanctity by just being a Levy himself. So in other words, his being a Levy removes the sanctity of his being a bechor. Okay? So that's how he answers it. And then they have another exchange, B'O-Challu, right? What does he ask? B'Gibui, Qasabat, Tama-Ti, Ma-Tain-Ba-Had, Qikar, Ba-Had, A-Saram-A-Nah. When they talked about collecting the silver for the Mishkan, right? It says that there was 201 key cars in 11 Manaz, D'Q-T-Beq-Lig-Lig-Lig-Lig-Lig-Gol-E, Mah-Khasid-A-Chekal-B-Chekal-Hak-Had-Kodesh, because it says in the puss of a bechah for every head and a half-shekah of sacred Shekal for 600, 3,550. Okay? This is a puss of Shmot chapter 38 verse 26. So we're 600,

6:163,550 men who gave half a Shekal. So that comes at the 3,175 Shekal, right? Each key car is 1,500 Shkullum. So then you get to 2001 key cars basically. And then you have 275 Shkullum left over, and each Mah-Nah is 25 Shkullum, so there should be 11 Manaz there, okay? So you have 201 key cars with 11 Manaz, all right? Ubn-Nitinada-Kesab-Atam-Otseema-Ats-Kee-Kar, but when they give the silver for the tabernacle, it actually says that they gave 100 key cars. Dhrti-Vaya-Maya-Kee-Kar, lit-se-get, okay? And so this is a puss suit that appears later on that says that the 100 key cars were poured, the sockets of the sanctuary, and they're saying it only used 101 key cars and 11 Manaz, so 101 key cars and 11 Manaz are basically not a cancer port because the sockets were only 100 Manaz. So he says, Mousha your teacher must have been a thief. Oh, Kuvius-Tus,

7:24Haya, or he was a kidnapper, right? Who hid half the people? Oh, he's a Bucky-Bechash-Mo-Not, or he was not skilled in accounting. That's how Makhats-Evon-Atam-Makhats-Evon. He gave half to the Mishkanah, maybe he took half for himself, and Makhats-Evon-Atam-Otseema-Ats-Shal-Ain-Vil-O-Khsir, or it was not even a complete half that he returned to the Mishkanah, okay? Now I'm not going to read the whole thing, but we're basically Robbiyyach-Nam-Banzak-A-Raphtel-Zum-Iz. No, Mousha-Avaina was a very good, right? He says Bucky-Bechash-Mo-Not. Of course, he was a good accountant, and that essentially the key card that he's thinking of, it's actually a different key card of what was actually measured in the, in the Torah itself. I think what's fascinating here is this idea that sort of the Roman minister was well versed enough in Tanakh that he could argue with Rubin-Yohan-A-Banzak-Ai about these two scenarios. And I think it's interesting to see sort of that Anan-Ju knew our text well to the point that he could get into a discussion about it. These stories. I love that they're here also in Bechorot. I don't want to take more time on them,

8:28however, and I'm going to jump to the Mishkanah or the Imgis of Time. And you'll see why, because the Mishkanah itself needs them unpacking. Pirashy-O-Dam-Meen-Sum-Mur. A cow, I'm going to just say this very slowly. A cow that gave birth to a kind of donkey. Now a kind of donkey to begin with is already a difficult kind of thing to think of emerging from a cow, right? Just to be clear, the idea that, yeah, right? If a cow gives birth to a donkey, then does that mean that there was a some kind of mating between the cow and some kind of horse or some kind of donkey? It seems to be that way, but that doesn't make much sense. In any case, just we're going to go with it without trying to figure out too much of the science. We are not the first generation, let's say, to be puzzled about this, the Rishonim and so on, also ask. But in any case, right? Hamurshield,

9:32Kaminsuus, you have a donkey that gave birth to a kind of horse and that might be a little bit more close than a cow that gives birth to a donkey, or donkey that gives birth to a cow of sorts, but still tricky, tricky progeny from the parents. But to Rabidab-Achorah, all these animals are exempt from having to give, from being the first born that would be dedicated. Shnema, Heter-Ghamur, Heter-Ghamur, Shnepa Amim, because it says in the Torah, Heter-Ghamur, the first born of the donkey, and it says it twice. And so when it says it twice, Ajyeh, Hayolayh, Ghamur, Vano-Lad, Ghamur. So then we understand that the that the birthing herein to must be a donkey and the birth here, animal must be a donkey. Meaning, both animals, because it says, Heter-Ghamur twice. Now, again, on, you know, having a little bit of difficulty here to say, you need Heter-Ghamur twice to understand

10:35that Heter-Ghamur has to be a donkey. Meaning, I would think that we don't need to have a repetition, a textual conundrum of repetition of words to teach that both the parent and the child, the progeny must both be the same kind of animal, because I would think that Heter-Ghamur, just the once, is pretty clear that we're talking about a donkey in the word Heter-Ghamur, meaning donkey. Umaheim Bakhilah, and then the Ghamur goes one task, what about what's the situation about consumption? Meaning, what's the halakhic status of these offspring? Meaning, they're not like the mother animal, right? That's the bottom line. The mother has given birth to a child, a progeny that is some kind of mutation or some kind of kyliam, some kind of mixed breed, that changes it from the mother to the mother itself. Behemato Rashi-Oldak-Kimin-Behemato-Me-Ah, Moutain Bakhilah, Moutain Bakhilah. Moutain Bakhilah, Moutain Bakhilah, Moutain Bakhilah, Moutain Bakhilah, Moutain Bakhilah. So, the mission explains, it follows the mother, that if you have a pure, a Tachwar animal, a kosher

11:38animal that gives birth to a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, seems to be, in Angosher, Tameh, impure animal, then it was the animal, the, the progeny would be permitted Bakhilah because of the mother. And likewise, the non-kosher animal that gives birth to what seems to be a kosher animal, the assumption of it would be prohibited, Shayot-Sameh-Nat-Tameh, Tameh, Viyot-Sameh-Nat-Tahwar, Tahwar, because that which comes from a non-kosher animal is going to be considered non-kosher, and that which comes from a Tachwar, a kosher animal, pure animal is going to be considered pure. Okay, so I say, you know, we need some time here to reflect on this mission because it just is a very difficult case. I think that it's a kind of thing that must have happened on occasion, and that's why there's a reason to discuss it. As opposed to the, the question we raise often enough in terms of are they pushing, are they pushing the envelope to say here that they're pushing an envelope seems, um, it's usually it goes too far, even though we've seen some extreme cases

12:44of late where like, where it seems obvious enough by definition that XYZ is what they're really talking about, and so then they, you know, push it to some much more landage case, here they'll landage case, it seems, I don't know, you didn't even me disagree with me, but it seems sure. I don't know enough about animals, but it certainly does seem to me that this was something that happens with animals. I would need to speak to a farmer to understand this, like, how often did you get animals that look different than what you expected them to look like? Right, right. So the commander does pick up on exactly this, and it's not just a matter of donkeys for a civil, we should establish that. And on Hata, we have a mission there, meaning they're on page 16B, we'll get to it. Raquel, she'll done min A's if you have a sheep, or you, right, EWE, it gives birth to a kind of goat, and she'll done min Raquel, and a goat that gives birth to a kind of you, again, EWE, right, the sheep, but Tor min Abakhora, and Imi Aishbo Miksatansi Manin Khayaf,

13:48and so the position is that the animal would be exempt from having the first born status, right? But if the offspring has some of the characteristics of the mother, meaning maybe sheep and goats are more similar than, let's say, a donkey and a cow, and so there's room to talk about the possibility of similar traits, similar physical traits. And if that's the case, then it can be considered more of the more like the first born of the animal, the of the mother, and therefore it can have that first born status and be obligated to be a bachor, right, to be donated, whatever, to be treated in that way. Look at my ass me not in Imi Leigh, where do we get this from? I'm a reviewed of the Amrakra akabakhora shore. So reviewed says it comes from a verse, and the verse says specifically about a first born kosher animal, you know, ah, but bachor shore, the first born of an ox, and then the verse itself goes when it's not cited in the gammari here, but the first born of a lamb

14:51or the first born of a goat, right, you don't redeem them, they're already holy. She, hey, I mean, they are holy, so you don't redeem them. You're not supposed to redeem them because of their holiness. Forgive me. She, hey, who shore, bachor, shore, bachor, kessive, she, hey, who, because, kessive, bachor, kessive, bachor, a, she, hey, o, a, o, bachor, a, and each time the ox and the first born of the ox, the lamb and the first born of the lamb and the goat and the first born of the goat, the assumption is that you're talking about the obligation to bring the first born animal is that the animal is like its parent, meaning there's no question that the kind of animal that is being born is the same kind of animal that is giving birth to the animal that is being born. And that's why we come to this idea that if you have some of those characteristics of the mother, then, you know, the question of whether it would be exempt, it only kicks in if there are few enough physical traits that it doesn't really resemble the mother at all. And the gammari goes on to raise this

15:52question, the hot-tonna petter, petter conceivleip lapara, when the, when the tonna of the missioner talks about first born and specifically with regard to the cow that gives birth to a donkey of some kind of donkey, then, does that mean that the first born, meaning the animal that happens to be born first doesn't ever have that first born status. And then what, what are we doing when we come to interpret these psukim, these verses, and they're talking about something totally different. So, I'm going to recommend that you'll read through the rest of this stuff. We get the opinion of Yabusek Lili. He often thinks outside of the box. And here he's really trying just to define, you know, what the first born status, what that means. But again, this mission itself, your day and I find it puzzling. Yeah, I mean, I also want to point out her, the gammari just talk about why the donkey, there's a specific love at the donkey. And first it says, it's just a rule in the Torah. But then it does give this explanation that the donkeys helped bin Asaro when they left

16:56Mitsrayim. So just pay attention to that also, which is very interesting. I think it's a difficult petter hum or it's just difficult to understand. There's a big Y question there. That's our dot discussion for the day. Thank you for joining us. Regus Reviews where you get your podcast. Come talk to us on our Facebook page until so you think of this stuff. Thank you to Rebany Michele Farber for hosting us on the Hanuman website. And until tomorrow, go and learn.