Commentary for Bekhorot 50:31

בבלאי טפשאי משום דיתבי בארעא דחשוכא אמרי שמעתא דמחשכן

Does it not mean that the examination is by the expert to see whether it possesses a permanent blemish [and then killing it, will make everything permissible to be used] or a transitory blemish?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to R. Jose slaughtering the animal makes the wool permissible to be used even according to the Rabbis. Therefore, just as according to R. Jose, the Rabbis allow the use of the wool when the animal is slaughtered, whether the expert had permitted the firstling or not, for R. Jose says that the animal has yet to be examined, similarly Akabya with regard to a dead firstling makes no distinction whether the expert had permitted it or not, for Akabya makes no distinction between a case of slaughtering it and that of a dead firstling. Hence we see that even without the expert permitting the firstling, there is yet a difference of opinion. The text adopted is that of Sh. Mek. Cur. edd. read: the examination is whether it possesses a permanent blemish or a transitory blemish, though the expert did not permit it.');">¹⁷</span>

Explore commentary for Bekhorot 50:31. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.