Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Reference for Bekhorot 36:67

ואי אשמועינן הא בהא קאמר רבי עקיבא דתרוייהו לא ביכרו אבל אחת ביכרה ואחת שלא ביכרה וילדו שני זכרים אימא מודי ליה לר' טרפון

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>[All these cases where R'Tarfon and R'Akiba differ] are necessary [to be stated]. For if we had been informed of the first case above,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where a ewe begot two males.');"><sup>24</sup></span> [I might have assumed] that in that case R'Akiba held that the claimant must produce the evidence, because two males came from one ewe,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And as there is a doubt, we say that the claimant must produce the evidence.');"><sup>25</sup></span> but in the case of two ewes which had never previously given birth, and where two animals [a male and a female] were born from one, and one [male] from the other, I might have said that he agrees with R'Tarfon that the animal which came forth singly is much the better one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the reason why this is the strong one is because it came forth without a companion and had more room in emerging; therefore it is undoubtedly the firstling.');"><sup>26</sup></span> And if he had stated only the latter case, I might have assumed that in this case R'Akiba [held that the claimant must produce the evidence], for neither had previously given birth, but where one ewe had given birth and the other had not given birth and they begot two males, I might have said that he agrees with R'Tarfon,

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse