POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Chulin 118
(a) (Mishnah): A Yad (a handle for a food or Kli) which is
not a Shomer brings Tum'ah (to the food, if Tum'ah
touches the Yad) and transfers Tum'ah (from the food to
other food), but it does not join (to the Shi'ur needed
2) EXTRA SOURCES FOR "YADOS"
1. A Shomer, even if it is not a Yad, brings and
transfers Tum'ah, and joins (for Tum'ah);
(b) Question: Where does the Torah mention Yados?
2. Anything which is neither a Yad nor Shomer does not
bring nor transfer Tum'ah.
(c) Answer #1: "...When (Sheratzim) will [touch] produce, it
will be Tamei to you" - to you, for all your needs - this
includes Yados (what you need to hold the produce).
(d) Answer #2: "...When an animal will die, that is to you
(for food, i.e. of a Tahor species)" - to you, for all
your needs - this includes Yados;
1. These two verses teach that Yados bring and transfer
2. A Kal va'Chomer teaches that a Shomer does this, no
verse is needed!
i. A Yad does not protect (the food), yet it
brings and transfers Tum'ah; all the more so, a
Shomer (which protects, brings and transfers
3. Question: If so, why do we need a verse to teach
4. Answer: It must be, it teaches that they join (to the
food to comprise the Shi'ur for Tum'ah).
5. Question: Why don't we say that a Yad only brings
Tum'ah and a Shomer even transfers Tum'ah, but a Yad
does not transfer Tum'ah, and Shomrim do not join!
6. Answer: That is unreasonable - if a Yad brings
Tum'ah to a food which was never Tamei, all the more
so it transfers Tum'ah from the food!
(a) Question: Why not say that a Yad only transfers Tum'ah
and a Shomer even brings, but a Yad does not bring, and
Shomrim do not join?
(b) Answer #1: The Torah mentions an extra Yad (to teach that
Yados also bring; therefore, the verse of Shomer is
needed only to teach that it joins):
1. "[If a rodent falls into] an oven, it will be
broken...[they will be Tamei] for you" - for all
your needs (to include a Yad to hold the oven).
(c) Question: Of the three verses of Yados, which are extra?
(d) Answer #1: The Yados of Neveilah and oven are extra,
since they can be derived from the Yad of seeds (i.e.
(e) Rejection: They cannot be derived, because Tum'as Ochlim
is more prevalent (even a Rishon l'Tum'ah is Metamei
food, and Shomrim join for Tum'as Ochlim).
(f) Answer #2: The Yados of Neveilah and food are extra,
since they can be derived from the Yad of an oven.
(g) Rejection: They cannot be derived, because an oven is
Mekabel Tum'ah from its interior and is Metamei its
interior (without touching).
(h) Answer #3: The Yados of food and oven are extra, since
they can be derived from the Yad of Neveilah.
(i) Rejection: They cannot be derived, because a Neveilah can
Metamei people, and through Heset (one who moves it), and
Tum'ah emanates from it.
(j) Answer #4: We cannot learn from any one to the others -
one of them is extra, it can be derived from the other
1. Question: Which is extra?
(k) Answer #5: None of the Yados are extra; the verse
teaching a Shomer regarding Neveilah is extra.
2. Answer #1: The Yad of food, it can be derived from
3. Rejection #1: It cannot be derived, because a
Neveilah or oven does not need Hechsher (preparation
to receive Tum'ah), but food does.
4. Objection (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): Also an
oven must be completed to receive Tum'ah - this is
5. Rejection #2: Rather, it cannot be derived, because
they are Metamei without touching (a Neveilah
through Heset, an oven is Metamei its interior),
6. Answer #2: The Yad of oven is extra, it can be
derived from the others.
7. Rejection: It cannot be derived, because Neveilah
and food are both foods.
8. Answer #3: The Yad of Neveilah is extra, it can be
derived from the others.
i. Since it is not needed for Neveilah, it may be
used to teach about Yados in general (that they
also bring Tum'ah).
9. Rejection: The sources (Yados of oven and seeds) are
not Metamei man, we cannot learn more than the
sources! (We need the Yad of Neveilah to teach that
it can be Metamei man.)
ii. Therefore, when the Torah teaches about
Shomrim, it must be that they join.
1. It cannot teach that it joins - the Torah taught
that it does not join!
2. It need not teach that it is Metamei like the
Neveilah - a Kal va'Chomer (from Yados) teaches
this! (It need not teach about bringing Tum'ah to
the Neveilah, a Neveilah is Tamei by itself.)
3. Since it need not teach about Shomer Neveilah, it
must teach about Yad Neveilah.
i. But we already have a source that a Yad is
Metamei like a Neveilah - rather, it must teach
that in general, Yados bring Tum'ah;
ii. The verse of Shomrim of food ("On any Zera
Zeru'a") teaches that a Shomer joins (for
4. Objection: Rather than saying that Shomer Neveilah
teaches about [general] Yados, we should use it to
teach that [general] Shomrim bring Tum'ah!
(l) Answer #2 (to question a): The verses of Yados discuss
bringing Tum'ah, so we cannot say that Yados only
i. The verse of Shomrim of food would teach that a
ii. There is no source that Yados bring Tum'ah!
(m) Question: What do we learn from the verse of Shomer
(n) Answer: It teaches about itself.
(o) Question: What does it teach?
1. It cannot teach that it joins - the Torah precludes
(p) Answer: Really, it teaches that it brings Tum'ah and is
2. It need not teach that it brings Tum'ah and is
Metamei - a Kal va'Chomer (from Yados) teaches this!
1. Even though a Kal va'Chomer teaches this, the Torah
wrote a verse teaching it as well.
(q) Question: Why do we use the verse of Shomer of food to
teach that a Shomer joins? (Let us say, it teaches the
same thing we learned from the Kal va'Chomer!)
(r) Answer: When we can learn something new from the extra
verse, we do not say it teaches the same thing we can
learn from a Kal va'Chomer.
(s) Answer (to Objection k:4 - R. Chaviva): Because Shomer
Neveilah is [only] like a Yad (it does not join for
Shi'ur Tum'ah), we use it to teach about Yados.
(a) Question #1 (Rav Yehudah bar Yishmael - Mishnah): The
Pitma (point opposite the stem) of a pomegranate joins
(for Shi'ur Tum'ah), the surrounding hairs do not.
1. The only source for Shomrim was "Zera Zeru'a" - but
the Pitma is not planted!
(b) Question #2 (Mishnah): Skin, Rotev, spices...join for the
Shi'ur of Tum'as Ochlim.
1. These are not planted - why do they join?
(c) Answer #2 (To Question 3:e, 117b): We learn about Shomrim
from "Al Kol *Zera Zeru'a* Asher *Yizare'a*" - these
three words teach Shomrim of [things that grow from]
seeds, trees, and meat, eggs and fish (which do not grow
from the ground).
(d) (Rav): Yados bring and transfer Tum'ah, but not Hechsher
(if water touches the Yad, the food is not Huchshar);
(e) (R. Yochanan): They also bring Hechsher.
(f) Question: What do they argue about?
(g) Answer: The argument could be based on reasoning, or on
how to expound "Al Kol Zera Zeru'a...":
1. They can argue about the verse - Rav holds, we apply
[Shomrim, which is learned from] the verse to what
precedes it (Tum'ah), not to what precedes what
precedes it (Hechsher);
(h) Support (for R. Yochanan - Beraisa): Just like Yados
bring Tum'ah and are Metamei, they also bring Hechsher;
i. R. Yochanan holds, we also apply it to what
precedes what precedes it.
2. The argument can be based on reasoning - R. Yochanan
holds, Hechsher is the beginning of Tum'ah (so Yad
also applies to Hechsher);
i. Rav holds, Hechsher is not the beginning of
Tum'ah, (so we have no source that Yad applies
1. Just like produce receives Tum'ah only after it is
uprooted, also Hechsher is only after it is