Chullin 65

Chapter 65

א מי מצטרף סימן ראשון לסימן שני לטהרה מידי נבלה או לא

1 Is the first organ to be reckoned together with the second in order to render [the foreleg] clean, and not nebelah, or not?

ב עד כאן לא איבעיא לן אלא לטהרה מידי נבלה אבל באכילה אסורה

2 Now the question put [by R'Zera] was only as to whether or not the animal was to be regarded as clean, and not nebelah, but [admittedly] it is forbidden to be eaten.1

ג א"ל רב אחא בר רב לרבינא

3 R'Aha B'Rab said to Rabina: It may very well be that R'Zera did not withdraw his objection at all,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he is of the opinion that any defect that occurs to any limb in the course of the slaughtering will not affect the validity of the slaughtering, and the animal would even be fit for food.');">2

ד דלמא לעולם לא הדר ביה ור' זירא לדבריו דרבא קאמר וליה לא סבירא ליה

4 but he merely formulated his question from the point of view of Raba,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Raba's view who stated above that Resh Lakish's ruling did not apply to the case where the intestines were pierced after the cutting of the first organ, the question arises: Would the animal be free from the uncleanness of nebelah or not?');">3

ה אמר רב אחא בר יעקב שמע מינה מדר' שמעון בן לקיש

5 though he himself did not agree with it.

ו מזמנין ישראל על בני מעיים ואין מזמנין עובדי כוכבים על בני מעיים

6 R'Aha B'Jacob said: One may conclude from the ruling of R'Simeon B'Lakish that an Israelite may be invited to partake of the intestines, but not a gentile.

ז מאי טעמא

7 Why is this? - Because to an Israelite everything depends upon the slaughtering;4

ח ישראל דבשחיטה תליא מילתא כיון דאיכא שחיטה מעלייתא אישתרי להו

8 therefore, since here the animal has been properly slaughtered he may partake of the intestines.

ט עובדי כוכבים דבנחירה סגי להו ובמיתה תליא מילתא הני כאבר מן החי דמו

9 To the gentile, however, everything depends upon the death of the animal4

י אמר רב פפא

10 [and not upon the slaughtering], for even stabbing would be sufficient; therefore the intestines [of an animal slaughtered by an Israelite] would be regarded as a limb [cut off] from a living animal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For by the cutting of the organs only the animal is not absolutely dead, and at this stage the intestines are regarded, according to R. Simeon b. Lakish, as having been taken out from the living (!) animal and placed in a basket; hence they are forbidden to a gentile as a limb cut off from a living animal.');">5

יא הוה יתיבנא קמיה דרב אחא בר יעקב ובעי דאימא ליה

11 R'Papa said: 'As I was Sitting before R'Aha B'Jacob I thought of putting the question to him: Is there anything which is permitted to an Israelite and forbidden to a gentile?

יב מי איכא מידי דלישראל שרי ולעובד כוכבים אסור

12 But I did not ask him this, for I said t myself: "He has himself suggested the reason for it"'.

יג ולא אמרי ליה דאמינא

13 There was taught [a Baraitha] which contradicts the view of R'Aha B'Jacob: 'If a person desires to eat the meat of an animal before it has actually died, he may cut off an olive's bulk of flesh from around the throat, salt it well, rinse it well, wait until the animal expires,6

יד הא טעמא קאמר

14 and then eat it.

טו תניא דלא כרב אחא בר יעקב

15 Both Israelite and gentile may eat it this way'.

טז הרוצה לאכול מבהמה קודם שתצא נפשה חותך כזית בשר מבית השחיטה ומולחו יפה יפה ומדיחו יפה יפה וממתין לה עד שתצא נפשה ואוכלו אחד עובד כוכבים ואחד ישראל מותרין בו

16 This [Baraitha] on the other hand Supports the view of R'Idi B'Abin.

יז מסייע ליה לרב אידי בר אבין דאמר רב אידי בר אבין אמר ר' יצחק בר אשיאן

17 For R'Idi B'Abin said in the name of R'Isaac B'Ashian: If a person wishes to be in good health he should cut off an olive's bulk of flesh from around the throat, salt it well, rinse it well, wait until the animal expires, and then eat it.

יח הרוצה שיבריא חותך כזית בשר מבית שחיטתה של בהמה ומולחו יפה יפה ומדיחו יפה יפה וממתין לה עד שתצא נפשה אחד עובד כוכבים ואחד ישראל מותרין בו:

18 Both Israel and gentile may eat it in this way.

יט <big>מתני׳</big> השוחט בהמה חיה ועוף ולא יצא מהן דם כשרים ונאכלין בידים מסואבות לפי שלא הוכשרו בדם

19 <big>MISHNAH: </big>IF A MAN SLAUGHTERED CATTLE OR A WILD BEAST OR A BIRD AND NO BLOOD CAME FORTH, THE SLAUGHTERING IS VALID AND IT MAY BE EATEN BY HIM WHOSE HANDS HAVE NOT BEEN WASHED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'with unclean hands'. Hands that have not been washed are regarded by the Rabbis as unclean in the second degree. There is no fear here of the hands defiling the meat for the reason stated in the Mishnah, namely, that the flesh of the animal has not been made wet by water or blood or any other liquid, in conformity with the rule laid down in Lev. XI, 38.');">7

כ ר' שמעון אומר

20 FOR IT HAS NOT BEEN RENDERED SUSCEPTIBLE TO UNCLEANNESS BY BLOOD.

כא הוכשרו בשחיטה:

21 R'SIMEON SAYS, IT HAS BEEN RENDERED SUSCEPTIBLE TO UNCLEANNESS BY THE SLAUGHTERING.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the slaughtering renders the animal fit for food it will likewise render it, as a food, susceptible to uncleanness without the necessity of water or other liquid to moisten it.');">8

כב <big>גמ׳</big> טעמא דלא יצא מהן דם הא יצא מהן דם אין נאכלים בידים מסואבות

22 <big>GEMARA: </big>Now this is so only because no blood came forth, but if blood did come forth [it follows that] it may not be eaten by one with unwashed hands.

כג אמאי

23 But why?

כד ידים שניות הן ואין שני עושה שלישי בחולין

24 Are not [unwashed] hands unclean in the second degree and that which is unclean in the second degree cannot render 'common' food unclean in the third degree? - But whence do you gather that we are dealing with common food? - For it reads [in the Mishnah].

כה וממאי דבחולין עסקינן

25 OR A WILD BEAST, and if it is dealing with consecrated animals [it is unintelligible, for] is there such a thing as a consecrated wild beast?9

כו דקתני חיה דאילו קדשים חיה בקדשים מי איכא

26 Furthermore, if it is dealing with consecrated animals, can it be said that the slaughtering is valid where no blood came forth?

כז ותו אי בקדשים כי לא יצא מהן דם כשרה

27 The whole purpose [of the slaughtering] is to obtain the blood!10

כח הוא עצמו לדם הוא צריך

28 Furthermore, if [it is dealing] with consecrated animals, can it be said that in the case where blood did come forth it would render [the animal] susceptible to uncleanness?

כט ותו אי בקדשים כי יצא מהן דם מי מכשיר

29 Surely R'Hiyya B'Abba has said in the name of R'Johanan: 'Whence do we know that the blood of consecrated animals cannot render anything susceptible to uncleanness?

ל והאמר ר' חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן

30 From the verse: Thou shalt poor it out upon the earth as water,11

לא מנין לדם קדשים שאינו מכשיר

31 which implies that blood which is poured out as water can render susceptible to uncleanness, but blood which is not poured Out as water cannot'.

לב שנאמר

32 Furthermore, if [it is dealing] with consecrated animals, can it be said that where no blood came forth the animal would not be rendered susceptible to uncleanness?

לג (דברים יב, טז) על הארץ תשפכנו כמים דם שנשפך כמים מכשיר שאינו נשפך כמים אינו מכשיר

33 Surely it would be susceptible to uncleanness because of its sacred esteem, for it is established that sacred esteem will render [consecrated] matter susceptible to uncleanness!12

לד ותו אי בקדשים כי לא יצא מהם דם לא מתכשרי ליתכשרי בחיבת הקדש דקיי"ל

34 R'Nahman said in the name of Rabbah B'Abbuha: Here [in our Mishnah] we are dealing with unconsecrated animals that were bought [in Jerusalem] with Second Tithe money, and the ruling is not in accordance with R'Meir's view.

לה חיבת הקדש מכשרתן

35 For we have learnt,13

לו א"ר נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה

לז הכא בחולין שלקחן בכסף מעשר עסקינן ודלא כר"מ

לח דתנן

Previous Chapter Next Chapter