Study Pesachim folio 6A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
That is the reason that it is necessary for the Torah to write: It shall not be found, to indicate that there is a halakha unique to leaven. In this case, it is considered as though it were in his possession. However, according to the one who said: The legal status of an object that effects moneta
They raised a dilemma before Rava: Is the owner of an animal born into a herd from which the royal tax [arnona] is collected obligated in the mitzva to give the firstborn animal to a priest, as the animal still belongs to a Jew? Or perhaps he is not obligated to give the firstborn animal to the pri
The situation when we do raise the dilemma is specifically where the Jew cannot dismiss the non-Jew tax collector with money. What is the halakha is this case? He said to them: The owner is exempt from the mitzva of the firstborn. The rabbis raised a difficulty: But wasn’t it taught in a baraita th
Some say that Rava said: The owner of an animal born into a herd from which the royal tax is collected is exempt from the mitzva of a firstborn, even though the Jew could dismiss the non-Jew tax collector with money. However, the owner of dough from which the royal tax is collected is obligated in
The Talmud explains: What is the reason for the difference between the halakha of a firstborn animal and the halakha of ḥalla? An animal generates publicity; as everyone knows that this Jew’s animal was confiscated by the authorities, no one will suspect him of intentionally refraining from fulfill