Today's daf is sponsored by Jason, Erica, and Raquel in honor of the birthday of our mom, Patty Belkin. "Mom - you love, support, and inspire us every day. Mazel tov on your birthday!" And by Lisa Denker in honor of Steven Denker on his 70th Birthday “Happy 70th! All my love, Zis." And by Hannah Katzman "in memory of her brother, Shlom Pinchas ben Ben-Zion and Taibe Gittel Wachholder. And by Gitta Neufeld "in loving memory of my special mother-in-law, Alice Neufeld, Aidel bat Nathan a"h, who treated me like Naomi treated Ruth. She was so proud of her family and their dedication to the ideals of Torah with Derech Eretz. At a time when many chose to send their children to the NYC public schools, she and my father-in-law sacrificed joyfully to ensure that their two sons received a quality Yeshiva education, laying the foundations for four generations of Shomrei Torah u'Mitzvot across the globe. Ma, I miss you every day (especially when I set the table) and am certain that you celebrate my learning." The Gemara starts by telling a story to demonstrate that one can examine firstborn animals for blemishes on Yom Tov. Rabbi Yehuda Nesia had a firstborn that he brought to Rabbi Ami on Yom Tov but Rabbi Ami refused to examine it. He then proceed to Rabbi Yitzchak Nafha who also refused. The insistence on refusing to examine the firstborns leads to a discussion about Rabbi Zeira who apparently once said that that we hold like Rabbi Shimon who forbids. The Gemara then notes that “someone “ (anonymously) once came to Rabbi Zeira to find out if he really ruled this way and that he told him that he didn’t say explicitly that the halakha was like Rabbi Shimon but rather, it appeared to him that this was the case. Ultimately who is right? The Gemara tries to derive this from a statement of Rabbi Meir who didn’t permit eating a firstborn who was examined for blemishes after it was already slaughtered. But Abaye says that really Rabbi Meir had no issue with examining on Yom Tov, rather it was forbidden as a penalty for those who did it. There was a concern that mistakes would be made in some types of blemishes (in the eyelids) that change after death and for this reason, all examinations were prohibited (a decree). In order to determine whether one can examine for blemishes on Yom Tov, the story is told about how Ami Vardena wouldn’t check in the house of the Nasi and Rabbi Ami approved of this. This is questioned as Rabbi Ami himself would examine blemishes on Yom Tov! However, it was explained that Rabbi Ami would look at blemishes before Yom Tov and issue his ruling on Yom Tov after having quizzed the animal’s owners about the facts of the case (to ensure the kohen hadn't inflicted the blemish himself). In fact, even causing a blemish indirectly (for example by placing dough behind the ears of a calf so a dog will bite it) is prohibited. The next Mishnah prohibits an animal that died on Yom Tov from being moved. This seems to only match Rabbi Yehuda's opinion in Masechet Shabbat in which there is a debate between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon on feeding carcasses to dogs. However, it is possible that Rabbi Shimon agrees that in the case of a healthy animal where there was no indication the animal was going to die, the animal would be considered mukzeh. Alternatively, our Mishnah might be speaking about sanctified property only. In what way can meat be sold on Yom Tov and in what way is it not permitted?