Chullin 43

Chapter 43

א אוחז בראש ובגוף ומזה אף כאן אוחז בראש ובגוף ומזה

1 the priest sprinkles the blood whilst holding the head and the body in his hand, so in this case, too, he sprinkles the blood whilst holding the head and the body in his hand.

ב מאי קאמר

2 1 - It means this: Just as in the latter case he sprinkles the blood whilst the head is still attached to the body,2

ג הכי קאמר

3 so, too, in the case of the burnt-offering of a bird he sprinkles the blood whilst the head is still attached to the body.">

ד מה להלן כשהוא אחוז הראש בגוף מזה אף כאן כשהוא אחוז הראש בגוף מזה

4 But then it should follow, should it not, that just as in the former case only one organ shall be severed, so here, too, only one organ shall be severed?

ה אי מה להלן בסימן אחד אף כאן בסימן אחד

5 It is, therefore, written: 'And he shall bring it near'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. I, 25. The term 'it' implies a distinction, with the result that in the case of the burnt-offering of a bird the second organ must also be cut, though not severed, in order to conform with the rule that the head be attached to the body. Hence the view of R. Eleazar b. R. Simeon, frequently mentioned previously, that the greater portion of both organs must be cut, but no more.');">3

ו ת"ל

6 Now it may be asked against the first Tanna: since he derives the rule4

ז והקריבו

7 from the verse: 'And he shall nip off.

ח ות"ק וכי מאחר דנפקא לן מומלק והקטיר והקריבו למה לי

8 and he shall burn it', what need is there for the verse: 'And he shall bring it near'?5

ט אי לאו והקריבו הוה אמינא

9 - Without the verse: 'And he shall bring it near', he would have interpreted, 'According to the ordinance', to mean, according to the ordinance of the sin-offering of a bird;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which was dealt with in the preceding passage in Scripture. The result would then be that even in the case of the burnt.offering of a bird only one organ shall be severed.');">6

י מאי כמשפט כמשפט חטאת העוף ואי משום ומלק והקטיר הוה אמינא

10 and as to the verse: 'And he shall nip off.

יא מה הקטרה בראשו של מזבח אף מליקה בראשו של מזבח

11 and he shall burn it', would have explained it thus: as the burning [of the sacrifice is performed] upon the top of the altar, so shall [the draining of the blood following] the nipping be performed upon the upper part of the altar wall.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the other hand, the draining of the blood following the nipping of the sin-offering of a bird must be carried out upon the lower half of the altar wall. V, Zeb. 64b. In all other respects, however, the burnt-offering of a bird shall be like unto the sin.offering of a bird.');">7

יב השתא דכתב רחמנא והקריבו דרוש ביה נמי הא

12 But now that the Divine Law states: 'And he shall bring it near', [this verse therefore serves to distinguish in every respect the burnt-offering of a bird from the sin-offering of a bird, and from the verse: 'And he shall nip off.

יג חטאת בהמה דאינה באה אלא מן החולין מנלן

13 and he shall burn it'] he can derive this too.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' (a) That the blood of the bur1it.offering shall be drained upon the upper part of the altar wall; and (b) that both organs of the throat in the case of the burnt-offering shall be absolutely severed.');">8

יד אמר רב חסדא דאמר קרא

14 Whence do we know that the sin-offering of an animal must be brought only from unconsecrated animals?9

טו (ויקרא טז, ו) והקריב אהרן את פר החטאת אשר לו משלו ולא משל צבור ולא משל מעשר

15 - R'Hisda answered: From the verse: And Aaron shall offer the bullock of the sin-offering which is his;10

טז ביום (ויקרא ז, לח) מביום צוותו נפקא

16 [that is to say], it must come from his own means and not from the money of the community nor from Second Tithe.

יז כדי נסבה

17 Is not [the rule that sacrifices may only be offered] by day inferred from the verse: In the day that he commanded?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VII, 38. The rule contained in this verse, namely, that sacrifices may only be offered by day, applies to all the sacrifices enumerated in the preceding verse. Wherefore is it necessary to derive the burnt-offering of a bird from the sin-offering of an animal?');">11

יח ידו הימנית מדרבה בר בר חנה נפקא דאמר רבה בר בר חנה אר"ש בן לקיש

18 - It is indeed stated [above] to no purpose.

יט כל מקום שנאמר אצבע או כהונה אינה אלא ימין

19 Is not [the rule that all the services in connection therewith must be performed] with the right hand derived from the following dictum of Rabbah B'Bar Hannah; for Rabbah B'Bar Hannah declared in the name of R'Simeon B'Lakish.

כ ואידך

20 Wherever the word 'finger' or 'priest' is employed it signifies that the right hand only [shall be Used].12

כא כהונה בעיא אצבע אצבע לא בעיא כהונה

21 - And the other?13

כב ותנא קמא ורבי אלעזר בר' שמעון ממול העורף מנא להו

22 [He is of the opinion that the word] 'priest' requires [with i the word] 'finger' [in order that the above rule may apply], though [the word] 'finger' does not require [with it the word] 'priest'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Men. 10a. The first Tanna in our Baraitha is in agreement with this view, and since in connection with the burnt.offering of a bird the word 'finger' is not found, he is obliged to derive the rule of 'right hand' from the analogy.');">14

כג גמרי מליקה ממליקה:

23 Whence do the first Tanna and R'Eleazar son of R'Simeon<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first Tanna utilizes the analogy for comparing the burnt-offering of a bird with the sin-offering of an animal; and R. Eleazar b. R. Simeon, although comparing the burnt.offering of a bird with the sin-offering of a bird, utilizes the analogy in order to obtain the result that the head of the bird must remain attached to the body.');">15

כד <big>מתני׳</big> כשר בתורין פסול בבני יונה כשר בבני יונה פסול בתורין

24 derive the Jaw [that the nipping in the case of the burnt-offering of a bird shall be] close to the back of the neck?16

כה תחלת הציהוב בזה ובזה פסול:

25 - They derive it from the fact that nipping is prescribed in both cases.17

כו <big>גמ׳</big> ת"ר

26 <big>MISHNAH: </big>[THE AGE] WHICH QUALIFIES TURTLE DOVES [FOR SACRIFICE] DISQUALIFIES PIGEONS, AND [THE AGE] WHICH QUALIFIES PIGEONS [FOR SACRIFICE] DISQUALIFIES TURTLE DOVES.

כז תורין גדולים כשרים קטנים פסולים

27 AT THE PERIOD WHEN THE NECK FEATHERS BEGIN TO GLISTEN IN EITHER KIND THEY ARE DISQUALIFIED.

כח בני יונה קטנים כשרים גדולים פסולין

28 <big>GEMARA: </big>Our Rabbis taught: Turtle doves are qualified [for sacrifice] when fully grown, but not when small; pigeons are qualified [for sacrifice] when small, but not when fully grown.

כט נמצא כשר בתורין פסול בבני יונה כשר בבני יונה פסול בתורין

29 It follows, therefore, that the age which qualifies turtle doves for sacrifice disqualifies pigeons, and the age which qualifies pigeons for sacrifice disqualifies turtle doves.

ל תנו רבנן

30 Our Rabbis taught: The expression, turtle doves,18

לא תורים גדולים ולא קטנים

31 implies fully grown birds, but not small.

לב שיכול והלא דין הוא

32 For [without the Biblical direction] I would have argued by an a fortiori argument thus:

Previous Chapter Next Chapter