Commentary for Pesachim 168:21

א"ל

Rabina said: In such a case it is not subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone, because we require th standard of eating. But they differ in respect of a limb upon which there is less than an olive of flesh at this point,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he actually breaks the bone.');">¹⁸</span> but which contains as much as an olive of flesh elsewhere. On the view that [the verse refers to] a fit [sacrifice],this indeed is fit. But on the view that [only what is] fit for eating [is subject to this law], we require the standard of eating at the point where it is broken, which is absent. It was taught as four of these.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [R. Joseph, R. Nahman b. Isaac, Abaye and Rabina (or R. Ashi) . V. n. 5. Var. lec., however, omits the passage.]');">¹⁹</span> For it was taught, Rabbi said: 'In one house shall it be eaten. neithe shall ye break a bone thereof': he is culpable on account of that which is fit, but he is not culpable on accoun of that which is not fit. [Thus:] If it had a period of fitness but became unfit by the time of eating, it is no subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone. If it contains the standard of eating,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Either at the point where it is broken, as required by Rabina, or on the limb itself', as required by R. Ashi.]');">²⁰</span> it is subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone; if it does not contain the standard of eating, it is not subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone. That which is intended for the altar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the bone of the fat tail.');">²¹</span> is not subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone. [Only] at the time of eating is it subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone; when not at the time of eating<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., before nightfall.');">²²</span> it is not subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone. It was stated: If a limb does no contain as much as an olive of flesh at this point,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the point of breaking.');">²³</span> but does contain as much as an olive of flesh elsewhere, - R'Johanan maintained: It is subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone; R'Simeon B'Lakish said: It is not subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone. R'Johanan raised an objection against Resh Lakish: 'Neither shall ye break a bone thereof': both a bone upon which there is as much as an olive of flesh and a bone upon which there is not as much as an olive of flesh. Now what does 'there is not as much as an olive of flesh upon it' mean? Shall we say that there is not as much as an olive of flesh upon it at all, then why is subject to the [prohibition of] breaking a bone?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For R. Johanan and Resh Lakish both, agree that it must contain as much as an olive of flesh before it is subject to the prohibition.');">²⁴</span> Hence surely this is what it means: Both a bone upon which there is as much as an olive of flesh at this [very] point and a bone upon which there is not as much as an olive of flesh at this point, but there is as much as an olive of flesh upon it elsewhere? - Said he to him,

Explore commentary for Pesachim 168:21. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.