What is the Din Bechorah with regard to non-Kasher species of animals, such as a horse and a camel?
Bechoros, 6a: All animals apart from those listed are not subject to the Bechorah - because "Kol Mikn'cha Tizachar" is a K'lal, and "Shor Seh va'Chamor", a P'rat, and 'K'lal u'Perat, Ein bi'Chelal Ela Mah she'bi'Perat'.
Out of all the non-Kasher animals, why does the Torah ascribe the Mitzvah of Petter B'chor specifically to a donkey?
What is the status of the lamb?
Rashi: It is Chulin in the hands of the Kohen, to do with as he pleases.
What happens to the donkey?
Rashi: It belongs to the owner to do with as he pleases - even to work with it. 1
As opposed to Pesulei ha'Mukdashin (Kodshim which became Pasul), which are redeemed and may be eaten, but not worked with.
?ve?Im Lo Sifdeh Va?arafto?. What are the connotations of ?Va?arafto??
Rashi, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: It means that he shall break its neck (with a haycht ? Rashi).
Why, if the owner fails to give a lamb to the Kohen, does the Torah obligate him to break the neck of the donkey?
Rashi: Because, since he caused the Kohen a monetary loss, he too. should suffer a monetary loss.
What does "Kol B'chor Banecha Tifdeh" entail?
Rashi and Seforno: It entails giving the prescribed amount (five Sela?im, as stated in Bemidbar 18:16 ? Rashi).
Why does the Torah insert the word "Kol B'chor Banecha Tifdeh"?
Kidushin, 29a: To include each B'chor of someone who has five firstborn sons from five wives in the Din of Bechorah. 1
Yerushalmi Chagigah, 1:1: To obligate the father to redeem him even if if he (the B'chor) died after thirty days.
See Torah Temimah, note 26.
What are the implications of "B'chor Banecha ... "?
R. Bachye: It implies that a B?chor is special 1 ? because the Bechorah hints at Hashem who is the B?chor of the world. 2
R. Bachye (citing Kidushin, 29a): It implies that a firstborn girl is not subject to the Bechorah. 3 4
R. B?achye: Even though he no longer performs the Avodah.
R. Bachye: Hence the Bechorim performed the Avodah until they lost it on account of the Chet ha?Eigel, and Ya?akov went out of his way to purhase the Bechorah from Eisav.
See Torah Temimah, note 30.
See R. Bachye who also learns this from the Pasuk in Bo 13:20 ?Petter Kol Rechem bi?Venei Yisrael?.
If the father is no longer alive, is the mother obligated to redeem her son?
Kidushin, 29a: We Darshen "Tifdeh" 'Tipadeh', 1 to teach us that whoever is subjeect to redemption is obligated to redeem (his son), to preclude a woman, who is not.
See Torah Temimah, note 31.
What is the connection between the redemption of one's firstborn and not appearing before Hashem empty-handed?
Rashi #1: They are two independent Mitzvos, the latter with reference to the Aliyas ha'Regel mentioned in Pasuk 23.
Rashi #2: The Torah inserts the latter here, in order to learn via a Gezeirah Shavah "Reikam" "Reikam" that the Mitzvah of Ha'anakah (when setting free an Eved Ivri) entails five Shekalim of each species mentioned in the Pasuk, equivalent to the redemption of a B'chor.
Kidushin 29b: Pidyon ha'Ben is written first, to teach us that if one does not have enough money for Aliyah le'Regel and to redeem his son, redeeming his son takes precedence. 1
See Torah Temimah, mote 27.
Why does the Torah juxtapose the Mitzvah of Pidyon ha'Ben to that of Re'iyas Panim in the Beis-Hamikdash?
R. Bachye (citing Chazal): To teach us that a B?chor who is not redeemed either by his father or via himself will not merit to see the building of the Beis-Hamikdash.
Bechoros, 51b: To teach us that, just as the heirs are obligated to bring the Olas Re'iyah of their father who died before he had a chance to bring it, 1 so too are they obligated to redeem the firstborn son of the father who died before he redeemed him.
See Torah Temimah, note 28.
