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 134
1) CLAIMING THE "MATANOS"
(a) (Mishnah): If a Kohen told a Yisrael, "I sell my animal
to you, except for the Matanos," Matanos need not be
2) "SAFEK MATANOS"
(b) Contradiction (Beraisa #1): If a Kohen sold his animal to
a Yisrael "on condition that I get the Matanos," the
Yisrael may give to any Kohen he wants.
(c) Answer: Saying "except" is not like saying "on condition
1. "Except" limits the sale, "on condition that" does
not limit the sale!
(d) Contradiction (to Beraisa #1 - Beraisa #2): If a Kohen
sold his animal to a Yisrael, "On condition that I get
the Matanos," he gets the Matanos.
(e) Resolution: This Tana holds that "On condition that"
limits the sale (the Matanos were never sold), Tana #1
holds that it does not limit the sale.
(f) Version #1 (Mishnah): If Reuven bought the innards of
Shimon's cow (by weight, he gives the stomach to a Kohen,
and does not pay for its weight).
(g) Version #1A - Rashi - (Rav): This is only if Reuven
weighed the meat for himself, but if Shimon weighed it,
the Kohen may [claim from Reuven or] demand that Shimon
[get the stomach back from Reuven and] give it to him.
(h) (Rav Asi): Even if Shimon weighed the meat, the Kohen's
[only] claim is from Reuven.
(i) Version #1B - Tosfos - (Rav): This is only if Reuven
weighed the meat for himself - but if Shimon weighed it,
the Kohen's [only] claim is from Shimon;
(j) (Rav Asi): Even if Shimon weighed the meat, the Kohen may
claim from Reuven (or demand that Shimon get the stomach
from Reuven to give it to him). (End of Version #1B)
(k) Suggestion: They argue about Rav Chisda's law:
1. (Rav Chisda): If Levi stole from Yehudah, and before
Yehudah despaired of getting it back, David stole it
from Levi, Yehudah may collect from Levi or David.
(l) Rejection: No - both hold like Rav Chisda;
2. (Rashi - Rav holds like Rav Chisda, Rav Asi does
not; Tosfos - Rav Asi holds like Rav Chisda, Rav
1. They argue whether or not (Halachah considers that)
Matnos Kehunah can be stolen;
(m) Version #2 (Rav): Matnos Kehunah can be stolen (this was
said explicitly, not inferred from his explanation of the
2. Rav holds that they can be stolen, Rav Asi does not
(Tosfos - *now*, we explain like Rashi did - Rav
allows the Kohen to claim from either, Rav Asi says
that he can claim only from Reuven).
(n) (Rav Asi): They cannot be stolen.
(a) (Mishnah): If a Nochri converted, and he has a
1. If it was slaughtered before he converted, he is
exempt from Matanos;
(b) Version #1 (Gemara - Reish Lakish) Question: Our Mishnah
teaches that if we are unsure, he is exempt -- we are
2. If it was slaughtered after he converted, he is
3. If we are unsure, he is exempt; to take from him,
the Kohen must bring proof.
(c) Contradiction (Mishnah): If grain was found in an anthole
in a place that was not yet harvested, the landowner
(Reuven) keeps it (Leket is only what falls during
1. If it was found in an anthole in a place that was
(d) Answer (R. Yochanan): That Mishnah is the opinion of an
individual - the proper version is like our Mishnah.
i. What rests on top must be left for the poor
(Tosfos - *perhaps* it is Leket);
2. R. Meir says, even what is inside must be left for
the poor, because Safek Leket is considered Leket.
ii. Reuven keeps what is inside the holes
(presumably, ants brought it there before the
3. (Rashi - our anonymous Mishnah should be like R.
Meir! Tosfos - even Chachamim are stringent about a
Safek, when it is on top.)
1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah ben Agra citing R. Meir):
Safek Leket is considered Leket; the same applies to
Shichechah and Pe'ah.
(e) Question (Reish Lakish): No matter who taught it, he has
a powerful support!
1. Question (Reish Lakish): "Ani va'Rash Hatzdiku" -
what does this mean?
(f) Answer (Rava): Chazakah says that Leket must be left from
the grain, but [until the Nochri converts] the cow is
exempt from Matanos.
i. It cannot mean to vindicate the poor - "v'Dal
Lo Sehedar b'Rivo"!
2. Answer: Rather, give to him what you were entitled
to keep (if not for this verse).
(g) Question (Abaye - Mishnah): If a Nochri converted, and he
has a dough:
1. If it was kneaded before he converted, he is exempt
from taking Chalah;
(h) Answer (Rava): It is forbidden to eat without taking
Chalah - we must be stringent about a Safek Isur; Matanos
are only a monetary privilege of the Kohen, they need not
be given when in doubt.
2. If it was kneaded after he converted, he must take
3. If we are unsure, he must take.
1. (Rav Chisda): There are eight such doubts (whether
something happened before or after conversion) - we
are stringent in four (cases of Isurim), and lenient
in four (cases involving only money):
i. If we are unsure whether a birth was before or
after conversion, the mother must bring a
Korban (she may not eat Kodshim before bringing
ii. If we are unsure whether a dough was kneaded
before the owner converted, Chalah must be
iii. If we are unsure whether a firstborn donkey was
born before the owner converted, he may not
benefit from it until he specifies a Seh to
iv. If we are unsure whether a firstborn calf or
Seh was born before the owner converted, it is
a Safek Bechor, he must wait for it to get a
blemish, then he may eat it.
3) WHEN THERE IS NO ONE TO TAKE THE "MATANOS"
2. In these four doubts we are lenient:
(i) Version #2 (Ravin): Reish Lakish asked a contradiction
between the Mishnah that obligates leaving Safek Leket,
and a Beraisa that exempts (and R. Yochanan said that the
Mishnah is only according to an individual, like above).
i. If we are unsure whether sheep were sheared or
an animal was slaughtered before the owner
converted, he need not give shearings/Matanos
to a Kohen;
ii. If we are unsure whether a [firstborn] boy was
born before the mother converted, he need not
iii. When a convert specifies a Seh to redeem a
firstborn donkey (like above), he need not give
the Seh to a Kohen.
(a) Question (Levi): If there are no poor people in my area
to take Leket from my field, what is the Halachah?
4) WHICH PARTS ARE GIVEN?
(b) Answer (Rav Sheshes): "l'Ani vela'Ger Ta'azov" - you need
not leave it for birds (you may eat it yourself).
(c) Question (Beraisa): A Yisrael need not bring Terumah from
the granary to the city, or from the wilderness to
1. If no Kohen is around, he sends it to a Kohen, lest
it will spoil (the Kohen pays the expense).
(d) Answer #1: Terumah is different, because it is Tovel
(forbids eating the produce until it is separated).
1. Question: Matanos are not Tovel, yet one cannot eat
them for free in the absence of Kohanim!
(e) (This suggests another answer to Question (c).)
i. Version #1 - Rashi - (Beraisa): In a place
where people cook (and eat) meat in the skin,
one must give the Zero'a to the Kohen in its
skin (even though the Torah does not require
giving the skin);
2. Answer: Matanos to a Kohen are different, for the
Torah obligates one to *give* them.
ii. Version #2 - Rif - (Beraisa): Even in a place
where people cook (and eat) meat in the skin,
one may not do this to the Zero'a, for this
harms the skin (and the Torah obligates us to
give the skin to a Kohen). (End of Version #2)
iii. In a place where people flay the head, one must
give the jaw with its skin;
iv. If no Kohen is around, he sets aside the value
of the Matanos and eats them (lest they spoil),
and gives the money to the first Kohen he
(f) Answer #2: Terumah is different, for the Torah obligates
one to give it.
(g) Question: If one need not leave Leket where there are no
Aniyim to take it, what do we learn from the extra
"Ta'azov" in the Parshiyos of Leket, Shichechah and
(h) Answer (Beraisa): If Reuven made his vineyard Hefker,
then harvested it, he must leave Peret, Olelos,
Shichechah and Pe'ah, he need not tithe the produce.
(i) A bag of money was sent to support Rabanan; R. Ami
(j) Question: "v'Nasan" - a person should not take for
(k) Answer #1: He acquired it on behalf of the poor.
(l) Answer #2: The head (of the academy) may take for
1. (Beraisa): "veha'Kohen ha'Gadol me'Echav" - he must
be greater than the other Kohanim in beauty,
Chochmah, and wealth;
2. Others say, "ha'Gadol me'Echav" - if he is not the
wealthiest, the others make him the wealthiest (by
giving him money).
(a) (Mishnah): The Zero'a is given - this is [the upper two
bones of the foreleg,] from the lower knee to the
1. The same is cooked and given to a Kohen from Eil
(b) The jaw is given - this is from the joint (where the
lower and upper jaw meet) until the Pikah (Rashi -
covering on top; Tosfos - the top ring) of the Kaneh
2. The corresponding part of the hind leg is the Shok
(given to a Kohen from a Shelamim).
3. R. Yehudah says, the Shok is only [the middle bone]
between the lower knee and the upper knee.
(c) (Gemara - Beraisa): "ha'Zero'a" - this is the right
(d) Question: Perhaps it is the left!
(e) Answer #1: "*ha*'Zero'a."
1. Question: How does the extra "Hei" teach this?
(f) Answer #2: Expounders explain, the Matanos correspond to
Pinchas' actions in killing Zimri and Kozbi:
2. Answer: This is like Rava taught (regarding Gid
ha'Nasheh), "ha'Yerech" - the special (right) thigh
- similarly, the special (right) Zero'a.
3. Question: What do we learn from "ve*ha*'Lechayayim"?
4. Answer: One must give even the wool on a sheep's
head and the beard of a goat.
5. Question: What do we learn from "ve*ha*'Kevah"?
6. Answer: One must give the Chelev on and in the
i. (R. Yehoshua): Kohanim are generous, they allow
Yisrael to keep the Chelev on and in the
ii. If not for their generosity, Yisraelim would
have to give it.
1. The Zero'a is for taking a spear in his hand
(surely, his right hand), the jaw is for praying,
and the stomach is for stabbing them through their
(g) Answer #3 (Beraisa): "Shok ha'Yamin" - the right hind leg
(of a Shelamim is given to the Kohen).
1. Question: What is the source that the Zero'a of
Kodshim (of Eil Nazir) is the right Zero'a?
(h) (Mishnah): The jaw - one gives from the joint until the
Pikah of the Kaneh.
2. Answer: "Titenu" (in the Parshah of Shok) is extra,
to teach about the Zero'a of Kodshim.
3. Question: What is the source that the Zero'a of
Chulin (Matanos) is the right Zero'a?
4. Answer: It says "Nesinah" (like it says regarding
the Shok, we learn from there).
(i) Contradiction (Beraisa): The Kohen gets the jaw, and the
place of slaughter with it (this is past the Pikah)!
(j) Answer #1: The Beraisa is R. Chanina ben Antignus, who
permits slaughter above the Pikah.
1. (Beraisa): Hagramah (cutting the Simanim outside the
proper place) is invalid slaughter;
(k) Answer #2: The Beraisa is the Chachamim; it really means
the *Yisrael* gets [the whole animal except for the
Matanos], including the place of slaughter.
2. R. Chanina ben Antignus permits [what Chachamim
call] Hagramah (cutting above the Pikah).