Chullin 169

Chapter 169

א אלא ספק איש ספק אשה
1 Rather the case of doubt is whether the person [that is sounding the Shofar] is a man or a woman.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' l.e., a tumtum; he may nevertheless sound the Shofar on the Festival. V. supra p. 474, n. 3.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
ב ורבי יוסי לטעמיה דאמר
2 R'Jose however [does not regard this as a refutation for he] is of the opinion that even a woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To whom the precept of sounding the Shofar does not apply at all.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ג אשה ודאית נמי תקעה
3 may sound [the Shofar on the Festival].
ד דתניא
4 For it was taught: The sons of Israel lay on [their hands upon the head of the sacrifice]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. I, 2, 4.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ה בני ישראל סומכין ולא בנות ישראל סומכות
5 but the daughters of Israel do not lay on their hands.
ו רבי יוסי ורבי שמעון אומרים
6 R'Jose and R'Simeon say.
ז נשים סומכות רשות
7 Daughters of Israel lay on their hands of free choice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Hag. 16b. They may do so if they so desire, and it would not be deemed as 'doing work' with a consecrated beast. Likewise a woman may sound the Shofar on the New Year even though she is not obliged to do so.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ח אמר רבינא
8 Rabina said: Even the argument of the Rabbis can be refuted thus: You may say so of the sounding of the Shofar,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a person of doubtful sex may sound the Shofar on the Festival thus overriding the restrictions of the Festival.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ט ולמאי דקאמרי רבנן נמי אית ליה פירכא
9 since in the Temple in a case of certainty it overrides the Sabbath,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 47, n. 2.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
י מה לתקיעת שופר שכן ודאה דוחה שבת במקדש תאמר בכיסוי דליתיה כלל
10 will you say likewise of the covering up of the blood which in no Circumstances [overrides the Sabbath]?
יא השיב ר"א הקפר בריבי
11 R'Eleazar ha-Kappar Beribbi raised this objection against the argument [of R'Jose].
יב מה למילה שכן אינה נוהגת בלילי ימים טובים בלילי ימים טובים הוא דלא נהגא בשאר לילי נהגא
12 You may say so of circumcision since it is not allowed on the night of a festival.'
יג אלא מה למילה שכן אינה נוהגת בלילות כבימים תאמר בכסוי שנוהג בלילות כבימים
13 Is it only on the night of a festival that it allowed but on other nights it is allowed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is written (Lev. XII, 3) , 'And in the eighth day', that is, during the day but not at night.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
יד א"ר אבא
14 - Render thus: You may say so of circumcision since it is not allowed by night as by day;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the rite may not be performed at all times it is reasonable that a case of doubt shall not override a festival.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
טו זה אחד מן הדברים שאמר רבי חייא אין [לי] עליהן תשובה והשיב רבי אלעזר [הקפר] ברבי תשובה:
15 will you say likewise of the covering up of the blood which is allowed by night as by day?
טז <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> השוחט ונמצאת טריפה והשוחט לעבודת כוכבים והשוחט חולין בפנים וקדשים בחוץ חיה ועוף הנסקלים רבי מאיר מחייב וחכמים פוטרים
16 R'Abba said: This is one of the instances about which R'Hiyya had said: 'I have no objection to raise against it', but R'Eleazar ha-Kappar Beribbi did find an objection.
יז השוחט ונתנבלה בידו הנוחר והמעקר פטור מלכסות:
17 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF A PERSON SLAUGHTERED [A WILD ANIMAL OR A BIRD] AND IT WAS FOUND TO BE TREFAH.
יח <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר רבי חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן
18 OR IF HE SLAUGHTERED IT UNTO IDOLS, OR IF HE SLAUGHTERED THAT WHICH WAS UNCONSECRATED INSIDE THE SANCTUARY OR THAT WHICH WAS CONSECRATED OUTSIDE, OR IF HE SLAUGHTERED A WILD ANIMAL OR A BIRD THAT WAS CONDEMNED TO BE STONED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Either because it had killed a human being or because an unnatural crime had been committed upon it; cf. Lev. XX. 15. 16.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
יט ראה רבי דבריו של ר"מ באותו ואת בנו ושנאו בלשון חכמים ודרבי שמעון בכסוי הדם ושנאו בלשון חכמים
19 - R'MEIR SAYS THAT HE IS BOUND [TO COVER UP THE BLOOD].
כ מאי טעמא דרבי מאיר באותו ואת בנו
20 BUT THE SAGES SAY THAT HE IS EXEMPT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In each of these cases the slaughtering does not render the animal or bird fit and permitted to be eaten, hence it is no slaughtering (adopting R. Simeon's view) , and the law of covering up the blood does not apply.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
כא אמר ר' יהושע בן לוי
21 IF HE SLAUGHTERED [A WILD ANIMAL OR A BIRD] AND IT BECAME NEBELAH UNDER HIS HAND OR IF HE STABBED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the rite may not be performed at all times it is reasonable that a case of doubt shall not override a festival.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
כב גמר שחיטה שחיטה משחוטי חוץ מה התם שחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה אף הכא נמי שחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה
22 T<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the throat.');"><sup>11</sup></span>
כג ורבי שמעון מאי טעמא
23 OR TORE AWAY [THE ORGANS OF ITS THROAT], HE IS EXEMPT FROM COVERING UP [THE BLOOD].
כד א"ר מני בר פטיש
24 <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>R'Hiyya B'Abba said in the name of R'Johanan.
כה גמר (בראשית מג, טז) מטבוח טבח והכן מה להלן שחיטה ראויה אף כאן שחיטה ראויה
25 Rabbi approved of R'Meir's view<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a slaughtering which does not render fit for food is deemed a slaughtering.');"><sup>12</sup></span>
כו ור"מ נמי ליגמר מטבוח
26 in connection with the law of 'It and its young' and stated it in the Mishnah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Mishnah supra 81b.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
כז דנין שחיטה משחיטה ואין דנין שחיטה מטביחה
27 as the view of 'the Sages', and he approved of R'Simeon's view in connection with the law of covering up the blood and stated it in our Mishnah as the view of 'the Sages'.
כח מה נפקא מינה
28 What is the reason for R'Meir's view with regard to the law of 'It and its young'? - R'Joshua B'Levi answered: He derives it by an inference made from the term 'slaughtering', used both here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XXII, 28: Ye shall not slaughter it and its young, and XVII, 3: That slaughtereth in the camp.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
כט הא תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל
29 and in connection with the slaughtering of consecrated animals outside [the Sanctuary];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XXII, 28: Ye shall not slaughter it and its young, and XVII, 3: That slaughtereth in the camp.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ל (ויקרא יד, לט) ושב הכהן ובא הכהן זו היא שיבה זו היא ביאה
30 as in the latter case a slaughtering which does not render [the animal] fit for food<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a consecrated beast slaughtered outside the Sanctuary may not be eaten.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
לא הני מילי היכא דליכא דדמי ליה אבל איכא דדמי ליה מדדמי ליה ילפינן ורבי שמעון נמי ליגמר משחוטי חוץ
31 is deemed a slaughtering, so here [in connection with It and its young] a slaughtering which does not render [the animal] fit for food is deemed a slaughtering.
לב דנין חולין מחולין ואין דנין חולין מקדשים
32 And what is the reason for R'Simeon's view? - R'Mani B'Pattish answered: He derives it by analogy from the verse: And slay the beasts and prepare the meat,;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. XLIII, 16.');"><sup>16</sup></span>
לג ור' מאיר
33 as there the slaughtering rendered [the animals] fit for food,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the meat was eaten by Joseph and his brethren.');"><sup>17</sup></span>
לד אטו אותו ואת בנו בקדשים מי לא נהיג
34 so here the slaughtering must render [the animal] fit for food.
לה היינו דקאמר רבי חייא
35 Why does not R'Meir infer it by analogy from 'And slay the beasts'? - One may infer 'slaughtering' from 'slaughtering', but one may not infer 'slaughtering' from 'slaying'.
לו ראה רבי דבריו של רבי מאיר באותו ואת בנו ושנאו בלשון חכמים
36 But what does this [variation] matter?
לז מאי טעמא דר' מאיר בכסוי הדם
37 Was it not taught in the school of R'Ishmael that in the verse: And the priest shall come again.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIV, 39 and 44. The reference is to the treatment of leprosy in a house. cau');"><sup>18</sup></span>
לח אמר ר' שמעון בן לקיש
38 And the priest shall come in,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIV, 39 and 44. The reference is to the treatment of leprosy in a house. cau');"><sup>18</sup></span>
לט גמר שפיכה שפיכה משחוטי חוץ מה להלן שחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה אף כאן שחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה
39 the expression 'coming again' and 'coming in' have the same import [for purposes of deduction]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the deductions inferred from these expressions v. Sifra on these verses and Rashi 'Erub. ');"><sup>19</sup></span>
מ ורבי שמעון
40 - This [variation] is [of no consequence] only where there is no alternative analogy based on identical expressions, but where there is an alternative analogy based on identical expressions we must then make the inference from the identical expressions.
מא (ויקרא יז, י) אשר יאכל כתיב
41 And why does not R'Simeon infer it by analogy from the law of consecrated animals slaughtered outside the Sanctuary? - One may infer by analogy unconsecrated animals from unconsecrated animals, but not unconsecrated from consecrated.
מב ורבי מאיר
42 And [is this not an objection against] R'Meir? - [No, for] does not the law of 'It and its young' apply also to consecrated animals?
מג ההוא למעוטי עוף טמא הוא דאתא
43 It was on account of this [reply] that R'Hiyya [b.
מד ורבי שמעון
44 Abba] said that Rabbi approved of R'Meir's view in connection with the law of 'It and its young' and stated it in the Mishnah as the view of 'the Sages'.
מה עוף טמא מאי טעמא דלאו בר אכילה הוא טרפה נמי לאו בר אכילה הוא
45 What is the reason for R'Meir's view with regard to the law of covering up the blood? - R'Simeon B'Lakish answered: He derives it by an inference made from the term 'pour out'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XVII, 13: He shall pour out the blood thereof and cover it with dust; and also v. 4: He hath poured out blood, with reference to a consecrated animal slaughtered outside the Sanctuary.');"><sup>20</sup></span>
מו והיינו דאמר רבי חייא
46 used both here and in connection with consecrated animals slaughtered outside the Sanctuary; as in the latter case a slaughtering which does not render [the animal] fit for food is deemed a slaughtering, so here [in connection with covering up the blood] a slaughtering which does not render fit for food is deemed a slaughtering.
מז ראה רבי דבריו של רבי שמעון בכסוי הדם ושנאו בלשון חכמים
47 And [is not this against] R'Simeon? - [No, for] it is written: That may be eaten.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. v. 13. This implies that the law of covering up the blood applies only to those that may be eaten.');"><sup>21</sup></span>
מח אמר רבי אבא
48 And R'Meir?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How does he explain away the foregoing argument?');"><sup>22</sup></span> - It serves to exclude unclean birds [from the law of covering up the blood]. And R'Simeon?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How does he explain away the foregoing argument?');"><sup>22</sup></span> - Why is it that an unclean bird is excluded? Because it may not be eaten; then a trefah too may not be eaten.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so it should be exempt from covering up the blood, a ruling which contradicts R. Meir.');"><sup>23</sup></span> It was on account of this [reply] that R'Hiyya [b. Abba] said that Rabbi approved of R'Simeon's view in connection with the law of covering up the blood and stated it in our Mishnah as the view of 'the Sages'. R'Abba said,
Previous ChapterNext Chapter