Chullin 27

Chapter 27

א <big>מתני׳</big> השוחט בשבת וביום הכיפורים אף על פי שמתחייב בנפשו שחיטתו כשרה:

1 <big>MISHNAH: </big>IF A MAN SLAUGHTERED ON THE SABBATH OR ON THE DAY OF ATONEMENT, NOTWITHSTANDING HE IS GUILTY AGAINST HIS OWN LIFE,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For breaking the Sabbath the offender is put to death by stoning, cf. Exod. XXXI, 14-15 and Num. XV. 35; and for profaning the Day of Atonement he incurs the heavenly punishment of Kareth (v. Glos.) in accordance with Lev. XXIII, 30.');">1

ב <big>גמ׳</big> אמר רב הונא דרש חייא בר רב משמיה דרב

2 THE SLAUGHTERING IS VALID.

ג אסורה באכילה ליומא ונסבין חבריא למימר רבי יהודה היא

3 <big>GEMARA: </big>R'Huna said that Hiyya B'Rab in an exposition [on this Mishnah] said in the name of Rab that the animal was nevertheless forbidden to be eaten that same day.2

ד הי רבי יהודה

4 The colleagues thereupon suggested that [the reason for this decision was that] the view [expressed in the Mishnah] was that of R'Judah.

ה א"ר אבא

5 Now where does R'Judah express such a view? - R'Abba said, in the matter of 'Readiness'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. The rule adopted by R. Judah is that such things which on the eve of the Sabbath were not set in readiness or intended for the purpose which they actually serve on the Sabbath are forbidden to be so used on the Sabbath. They are mukzeh (v. Glos.) , set apart, not counted on for use. This rule is based on Ex. XVI, 5, and applies particularly to fruit which fell from the tree on the Sabbath and also to an animal slaughtered on the Sabbath. In these cases neither the fruit nor the animal can be said to have been set in readiness for food on the Sabbath since on the eve of the Sabbath the fruit was still on the tree and the animal was still alive; v. Bez. 2b.');">3

ו רבי יהודה דהכנה היא

6 For we have learnt: One may cut up [on the Sabbath] pumpkins for beasts or a carcass4

ז דתנן

7 for dogs.

ח מחתכין את הדילועין לפני הבהמה ואת הנבלה לפני הכלבים רבי יהודה אומר

8 R'Judah says.

ט אם לא היתה נבלה מערב שבת אסורה לפי שאינה מן המוכן

9 It is forbidden to do so5

י אלמא כיון דלא איתכן מאתמול אסורה ה"נ כיון דלא איתכן מאתמול אסורה

10 if the animal was not dead on the eve of the Sabbath, for then it would not belong to that class of things set in readiness for the Sabbath.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since on the eve of the Sabbath the animal was still alive and so was not set in readiness for food, it is forbidden to be so used (i.e., for food) on the Sabbath (Shab. 156b) .');">6

יא א"ל אביי

11 This therefore shows that since it was not set in readiness on the eve of the Sabbath [for that particular use] it is forbidden [to be so used on the Sabbath]; so, too, in the case of our Mishnah, since the animal was not set in readiness on the eve of the Sabbath [for food] it is forbidden [to be so used on the Sabbath].

יב מי דמי

12 Thereupon Abaye said to him: What a comparison! In the case quoted the animal was originally set in readiness to serve for human food but now it merely serves for dog's food, whereas in the case of our Mishnah the animal was originally set in readiness to serve for human food and now too it serves for human food!7

יג התם מעיקרא מוכן לאדם והשתא מוכן לכלבים הכא מעיקרא מוכן לאדם והשתא מוכן לאדם

13 - [He replied.] You are assuming that a living animal is intended for food; in reality it is intended for breeding purposes.

יד מי סברת

14 If so, why is it permitted, on this view of R'Judah, to slaughter an animal on a festival?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the animal on the eve of the festival was kept for breeding purposes it is clearly mukzeh on the festival, and therefore forbidden. Nevertheless the law is established beyond all doubt that one may slaughter an animal on a festival.');">8

טו בהמה בחייה לאכילה עומדת

15 - R'Abba then replied.

טז בהמה בחייה לגדל עומדת

16 The truth of the matter is that a living animal is intended both for breeding purposes and for food.

יז א"ה בהמה לרבי יהודה בי"ט היכי שחטינן

17 If it is slaughtered,9

יח אמר לו

18 this act proves that it was intended originally to serve for food; if it is not slaughtered,9

יט עומדת לאכילה ועומדת לגדל

19 it proves that it was intended originally for breeding purposes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so in the case of our Mishnah, since the animal was not slaughtered before the Sabbath, it is clear that the owner intended to keep it for breeding purposes, accordingly it is mukzeh and therefore forbidden to be eaten on the Sabbath. vrhrc');">10

כ נשחטה הובררה דלאכילה עומדת לא נשחטה הובררה דלגדל עומדת

20 But surely R'Judah does not hold bererah!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. , retrospective designation, i.e., the legal effect resulting from an actual selection or disposal of things previously undefined as to their purpose. It is applied in our case thus: the purpose of a living animal is uncertain, but the subsequent use of the animal will define its purpose retrospectively. Unless we hold that the animal was definitely intended for food on the eve of the Festival it would be forbidden, according to R. Judah's view, to slaughter it and eat it on the Festival.');">11

כא והא לית ליה לרבי יהודה ברירה

21 Whence do we know this?

כב מנא לן

22 Shall we say from the following [Baraitha] wherein it is taught: If a man bought wine from the Cutheans<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Also called Samaritans. V. supra p. 5, n. 6. It was doubtful whether the Cutheans were wont to set aside the terumah (v. next note) and other dues or not, and therefore it was necessary when purchasing wine or other produce from them to set aside the various dues. The circumstances of this case are as follows: A man has bought 100 logs (a liquid measure) of wine from the Cutheans and has got no other vessels wherein to set aside the dues; or the case may be that it is the eve of Sabbath and there is not sufficient time wherein to set aside the dues before the Sabbath begins.');">12

כג אי נימא מדתניא

23 he may say.'

כד הלוקח יין מבין הכותים אומר

24 Let two logs which I intend later to set aside be terumah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An offering to be given to the priest. The amount to be so given 15 not specified in the Torah but it was the general practice to offer two per cent of the produce. V. Glos.');">13

כה שני לוגין שאני עתיד להפריש הרי הן תרומה עשרה מעשר ראשון תשעה מעשר שני ומיחל ושותה מיד דברי ר"מ

25 ten first tithe,14

כו רבי יהודה ורבי יוסי ור"ש אוסרין

26 nine second tithe',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This tithe had to be consumed by the owner in Jerusalem. The Torah permits the redemption of this tithe with money, which money must be spent in Jerusalem; cf. Deut. XIV, 25. In the present case the circumstances do not prevent the owner from redeeming this tithe with some .money that he may possess.');">15 and then, after redeeming [this latter tithe with money], he may drink it. This is the opinion of R'Meir. R'Judah. R'Jose and R'Simeon do not allow this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is assumed that the issue between these Rabbis relates to bererah. It must be remembered that the wine named as dues is not actually separate from the rest, and R. Meir, holding bererah, argues that when this purchaser subsequently sets aside the various dues, either after the Sabbath or when he acquires sufficient vessels, it is deemed that that which is now set aside is identical with that which was originally named, and there is no fear at all that this person has drunk any of the wine which was consecrated as dues. The other Rabbis, including R. Judah, apparently do not hold bererah, and therefore forbid this procedure on the ground that it is not established retrospectively that that which this person now separates as dues is identical with that which was previously named, and it is to be feared that he may have drunk of the wine consecrated as dues.');">16 -

Previous Chapter Next Chapter