Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Commentary for Kiddushin 112:12

אי נמי לא יאכל את בשרו למה לי אע"ג דשחטיה כעין בשר אסור

Now, how do you know that this [verse], 'and his flesh shall tot be eaten,' comes [to teach the law] if it is [ritually] killed after the trial is ended: perhaps where it is killed after sentence, it is permitted, and this [verse], 'and it shall not be eaten,' refers<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., comes.');"><sup>22</sup></span> to when it is indeed stoned, and [its teaching is that of] R'Abbahu in R'Eleazar's name. For R'Abbahu said in R'Eleazar's name: Wherever it is said: It shall not, be eaten, thou shalt not eat, ye shall not eat, the prohibitions of both eating and benefit [in general] are understood, unless the writ expressly states [otherwise], as it does in the case of nebelah!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIV, 21: Ye shall not eat any nebelah: thou mayest give it unto the stranger . . or sell it unto a foreigner. Now, a stoned ox is nebelah, and so I might think that benefit is permitted; therefore Scripture states that its flesh shall not be eaten, thus intimating the contrary. And as to the verse 'and the owner of the ox shall be clear', it is needed for some other deduction v. infra.');"><sup>23</sup></span>

Daf Shevui to Kiddushin

The Talmud explains that if the words “it shall not be eaten” were the only clue we had that it should be prohibited to eat something, we would indeed say that they teach that it is prohibited to derive benefit. But in this case we know we can’t eat the stoned ox because it is nevelah (improperly slaughtered meat). Furthermore, this case is different from others because the verse says “its flesh shall not be eaten.” The extra word “flesh” intimates that its flesh is prohibited even if the animal was properly slaughtered and not stoned.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse