Chullin 23

Chapter 23

א פסח וקדשים מאי איכא למימר
1 What about the meat of the paschal lamb and of other sacrifices?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Did he likewise abstain therefrom? This is inconceivable, for it is a positive duty to eat the meat of the paschal lamb and of certain other sacrifices!');"><sup>1</sup></span>
ב אלא היכא דאפשר אפשר היכא דלא אפשר לא אפשר
2 You are therefore obliged to say [that R'Meir's view is]: where it is possible to ascertain the facts<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By carefully enquiring into the case, taking into account even the minority.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ג ה"נ היכא דאפשר אפשר היכא דלא אפשר לא אפשר:
3 one must do so, and only where it is impossible to ascertain the facts does one follow the majority.
ד א"ר נחמן אמר רב
4 Our view then is the same: Where it is possible to ascertain the facts we must do so, and only where it is impossible to do so do we follow the majority.
ה ראה אחד ששחט אם ראהו מתחלה ועד סוף מותר לאכול משחיטתו ואם לאו אסור לאכול משחיטתו
5 R'Nahman said in the name of Rab: If [a man] saw another slaughtering, and he watched him from beginning to end, he may eat of the slaughtering; otherwise he may not eat of the slaughtering.
ו היכי דמי
6 What are the circumstances of the case?
ז אי דידע דגמיר למה לי ראה
7 If he knows that the slaughterer is conversant [with the rules of shechitah], then why is it necessary to watch over him?
ח ואי דידע דלא גמיר פשיטא
8 If he knows that the slaughterer Is not conversant [with the rules at all], then the case is obvious!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the slaughtering is invalid unless some reliable person was watching him all the time.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ט ואלא דלא ידע אי גמיר אי לא גמיר לימא
9 Again, if he does not know whether the slaughterer is conversant [with the rules] or not, then should not the principle that 'the majority of those who slaughter<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'who have to do with slaughtering'.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
י רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן
10 are qualified' apply?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It would therefore be unnecessary to watch over him at all; v. supra 3b.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
יא מי לא תניא
11 For has it not been taught: If [a man] found a slaughtered chicken in the market, or if he said to his agent.'
יב הרי שמצא תרנגולת שחוטה בשוק או שאמר לשלוחו צא שחוט והלך ומצא שחוט חזקתו שחוט
12 G and slaughter [an animal]', and subsequently found it slaughtered, it is presumed to have been ritually slaughtered?
יג אלמא אמרינן
13 This proves that we apply the principle that 'the majority of those who slaughter are qualified'; in our case, too, should we not apply this principle? - The actual facts of our case are that he knows that the slaughterer is not conversant [with the rules at all] and that the latter has cut one of the organs [of the thro in his presence properly [according to ritual].
יד רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן הכא נמי לימא
14 Now it might be said: since he has cut the one organ properly [he will cut] the other just as well; Rab therefore teaches us [that we may not assume such to be the case, because it might just as well be] that it happened merely by chance that he cut the one organ properly but in the cutting of the other he might pause or press.
טו רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן
15 R'Dimi B'Joseph put to R'Nahman the following questions: If [a man] said to his agent: 'Go and slaughter [an animal]', and he subsequently found it slaughtered, what [is the law]? - He replied: It is presumed to have been ritually slaughtered.
טז לעולם דידע דלא גמיר וכגון דשחט קמן חד סימן שפיר מהו דתימא
16 If [a man] said to his agent: 'Go and set aside the terumah',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
יז מדהאי שפיר הך נמי שפיר קמ"ל
17 and he subsequently found it set aside, what [is the law]? - He replied: It is not presumed to have been validly set aside as terumah.
יח האי אתרמויי איתרמי ליה אידך שמא שהה שמא דרס
18 [He thereupon contended:] What is your opinion?
יט בעא מיניה רב דימי בר יוסף מרב נחמן
19 If you hold that there is a presumption that an agent carries out his instructions, then apply it also to the case of terumah;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The terumah would then be valid by reason of this presumption.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
כ האומר לשלוחו צא ושחוט והלך ומצא שחוט מהו
20 and if you hold that there is no presumption that an agent carries out his instructions, then even in the case of shechitah it should not be presumed! - He replied: If you will measure out for it a kor of salt [I will then explain it to you].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a reward for my labour! A facetious remark, generally used when about to explain to some person a subtle distinction between two cases. Kor is a measure of capacity.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
כא אמר לו
21 Actually there is no presumption at all that an agent carries out his instructions; now in the case of shechitah, even if we take into account the possibility that a stranger, having overheard the instructions, went and slaughtered [the animal], there is no harm, because of the principle that 'the majority of those who slaughter are qualified'; whereas in the case of terumah if we take into account the possibility that a stranger having overheard the instructions, went and set aside the terumah [it would be invalid] for he would have done so without the consent of the owner, and [the law is that] if one sets aside terumah without the consent of the owner the terumah is not valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Ter. I, 1, and Git 23b.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
כב חזקתו שחוט
22 Shall we say that the principle, 'The majority of those who slaughter are qualified', is the issue between the following Tannaim?
כג האומר לשלוחו צא ותרום והלך ומצא תרום מאי
23 For it has been taught: If [a man] lost his kids or his chickens and subsequently found them slaughtered.
כד אמר ליה
24 R'Judah forbids them [to be eaten], but R'Hanina the son of R'Jose the Galilean permits them [to be eaten].
כה אין חזקתו תרום
25 Said Rabbi: R'Judah's view is acceptable [to me] in the case where they [the kids or chickens] were found on a rubbish heap,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The fact that they were found on a rubbish heap is an indication that they were unfit to be eaten, probably nebelah.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
כו מה נפשך
26 and R'Hanina's view is acceptable [to me] in the case where they were found in a house.
כז אי חזקה שליח עושה שליחותו אפילו תרומה נמי ואי אין חזקה שליח עושה שליחותו אפילו שחיטה נמי לא
27 May we not assume that the issue between them is the above principle; one [R'Hanina] accepts the principle that 'the majority of those who slaughter are qualified', and the other [R'Judah] does not accept this principle? - R'Nahman B'Isaac replied: It is not so.
כח אמר ליה
28 Both accept the principle that 'the majority of those who slaughter are qualified', and if [the lost kids and chickens were found] in a house, both agree that they are permitted [to be eaten]; and furthermore, if [they were found] on a public rubbish heap, both agree that they are forbidden; the issue between them is only in the case where [the were found] on the rubbish heap of a private house: one [R'Judah] is of the opinion that a man is wont to cast a nebelah on to the rubbish heap in his house, while the other [R'Hanina] is of the opinion that a man is not wont to cast a nebelah on to the rubbish heap in his house.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore, whatsoever is found on a private rubbish heap is permitted to be eaten.');"><sup>11</sup></span>
כט לכי תיכול עלה כורא דמלחא
29 The Master stated: 'Said Rabbi, R'Judah's view is acceptable [to me] in the case where they [the kids or chickens] were found on a rubbish heap'.
ל לעולם אין חזקה שליח עושה שליחותו
30 Now what kind of rubbish heap is meant?
לא ושחיטה אי נמי דילמא אינש אחרינא שמע ואזל שחט רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן
31 Shall I say.
לב תרומה דילמא אינש אחרינא שמע ואזל תרם הוה ליה תורם שלא מדעת והתורם שלא מדעת אין תרומתו תרומה
32 A public rubbish heap?
לג לימא רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן תנאי היא
33 But you have said above that both agree that in such a case they are forbidden [to be eaten]! It must then be a rubbish heap of a private house.
לד דתניא הרי שאבדו לו גדייו ותרנגוליו והלך ומצאן שחוטים רבי יהודה אוסר רבי חנינא בנו של רבי יוסי הגלילי מתיר
34 Now consider the next statement [of Rabbi]: 'And R'Hanina's view is acceptable [to me] in the case where they were found in a house'.
לה אמר רבי
35 What is meant by 'in a house'?
לו נראין דברים של רבי יהודה שמצאן באשפה ודברי רבי חנינא בנו של ר' יוסי הגלילי שמצאן בבית
36 Shall I say: In the house itself?
לז מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי דמ"ס
37 But you have said above that in such a case both agree that they are permitted [to be eaten]! It must then be on the rubbish heap of a private house.
לח אמרינן רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן ומר סבר
38 Is there not then a contradiction between these two statements of Rabbi? -
לט לא אמרינן רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן
39 
מ אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק
40 
מא לא דכולי עלמא רוב מצויין אצל שחיטה מומחין הן
41 
מב ובבית דכ"ע לא פליגי דשרי
42 
מג באשפה שבשוק דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דאסור
43 
מד כי פליגי באשפה שבבית מ"ס
44 
מה אדם עשוי להטיל נבלתו באשפה שבבית ומר סבר
45 
מו אין אדם עשוי להטיל נבלתו באשפה שבבית
46 
מז אמר מר אמר רבי
47 
מח נראין דברי רבי יהודה שמצאן באשפה
48 
מט מאי אשפה
49 
נ אילימא אשפה שבשוק הא אמרת
50 
נא דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דאסור
51 
נב אלא לאו פשיטא באשפה שבבית
52 
נג אימא סיפא
53 
נד ודברי רבי חנינא בנו של רבי יוסי הגלילי שמצאן בבית
54 
נה מאי בית
55 
נו אילימא בית ממש האמרת
56 
נז דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דשרי
57 
נח אלא פשיטא באשפה שבבית קשיא דרבי אדרבי
58 
Previous ChapterNext Chapter