Which of our forefathers were considered bechoros? Was Avraham Avinu a bechor? What about Yitzchak or Yaakov?
The Mishnah in Zevachim (14:4) teaches that before the Mishkan was built, the avodah was performed by firstborns. The Mishnah, however, does not specify whether it is referring to private (bamos yachid) or public (bamos tzibbur) altars.
The Tiferes Yisrael explains that the Mishnah must be discussing public altars. His proof is that the Avos themselves offered sacrifices on private altars, even though they were not necessarily firstborns. The Torah also states that Bnei Yisrael offered sacrifices prior to Matan Torah, and the Tiferes Yisrael assumes that these sacrifices must have been brought by firstborns, again implying a public setting.
The Rambam, in his commentary on the Mishnah, disagrees. He rules that from Adam HaRishon until Moshe Rabbeinu, the service of offering korbanos was performed by bechoros. This raises an obvious question: how does the Rambam address the Tiferes Yisrael’s difficulty? Were all of the Avos considered bechoros?
Avraham Avinu
Let us begin with Avraham Avinu. The Gemara in Sanhedrin states that Avraham was the oldest son of Terach, citing the pasuk: “And these are the generations of Terach: Terach fathered Avram, Nachor, and Haran.”
The Gemara initially assumes that Avraham is listed first because he was the eldest. If so, the Rambam encounters no difficulty: Avraham was a bechor and could perform the avodah.
However, the Gemara ultimately rejects this proof, suggesting that the pasuk may be listing Terach’s sons by greatness rather than age. Avraham is mentioned first because he was the greatest. Indeed, whether Avraham was biologically a bechor is a matter of dispute among the Midrashim.
The Midrash Rabbah (Bamidbar) states that due to Avraham’s righteousness, Hashem granted him the status of a bechor. Thus, even if Avraham was not born a bechor, he nevertheless possessed the halachic standing of one. According to this, the Rambam’s position remains intact.
Yitzchak Avinu
What about Yitzchak? He was the firstborn to his mother, Sarah, but not to his father, Avraham. How, then, could he perform the avodah?
The Dam Zevachim suggests that prior to the Mishkan, bechorah may have been determined through the mother rather than the father. According to this view, Yitzchak would indeed qualify as a bechor. While the Tiferes Yisrael would disagree, the Rambam could reasonably adopt this position.
Alternatively, the Rambam could rely on the divine declaration, “Ki b’Yitzchak yikarei lecha zera”—that only Yitzchak would be considered Avraham’s true offspring. This unique designation could itself confer bechor-like status.
Yaakov Avinu
Yaakov Avinu was certainly not born a bechor. Tosafos HaShalem raises an important question: if the avodah belongs to a firstborn, can this right be transferred or sold?
Most commentators, however, understand that Esav did, in fact, sell the right of avodah to Yaakov. Accordingly, although Yaakov was not born a bechor, he legitimately acquired that status. Indeed, Midrash Rabbah (Bamidbar) explicitly states that this is how Yaakov was able to perform the avodah.
Some commentators question how Esav could sell a right that had not yet come into existence (davar shelo ba la’olam), since the avodah would only later become formally relevant with the Mishkan. The Rivash, Tur, and Ketzos HaChoshen address this issue. According to our understanding, however, the avodah was relevant immediately, as Yaakov was able to perform it right away after the sale.
With this, the Rambam’s position regarding all the Avos can be consistently understood.
Shem ben Noach
We also find that Shem ben Noach was considered a kohen. The Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer states that Shem was a bechor, which neatly explains how he performed the avodah.
However, the Gemara in Sanhedrin (69b) concludes that Yefes was actually the bechor, and Rashi on Chumash cites this view as authoritative. As with Avraham, we must say that since Shem was a tzaddik, Hashem granted him the status of a bechor despite his birth order.
Reconciling the Rambam with the Mishnah
The commentators note that the Rambam seems difficult to reconcile with a later Mishnah, which states that on a private altar, when such altars were permitted, there was no requirement for a kohen; even a Yisrael could perform the avodah.
The Minchas Avraham, based on the Meshech Chochmah, resolves this by explaining that even the Rambam agrees: on a private altar, the avodah does not require a kohen or bechor. The requirement applies only to a public altar.
This raises one final question: Avraham, Noach, and others offered sacrifices on private altars, so why would they need to be bechoros?
The answer is striking. The Minchas Avraham explains that they were offering sacrifices on the future site of the Beis HaMikdash. Any korban brought on that location, even before the Mikdash existed, was treated as if it were offered on a public altar. As such, it required a bechor.
This approach allows the Rambam, the Mishnayos, and the actions of the Avos to fit together coherently, each within its proper halachic framework.
Maggid shiur and Rebbe at Yeshiva Ateres Shimon in Far Rockaway. He leads the Daf Yomi chaburah at Eitz Chayim of Dogwood Park in West Hempstead, and writes “Delving into the Daf” each week for The Jewish Home.
