ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 7
CHULIN 7 (7 Shevat) - dedicated by Danny & Ramona Schwartz, l'Iluy Nishmat
Yochanan Shabsai ben Yair, Z"L, whose Yahrzeit is 7 Shevat.
(a) We learn from the episode in Beis-Sha'an - that it is wrong to scorn a
Talmid-Chacham who says something that appears startling.
(b) The meaning of ...
1. ... 'Ein Mazichin Oso', based on the Pasuk "ve'Lo Yizach ha'Choshen me'al
ha'Eifod" is - that one may not force him to retract (move him away from his
(c) 'Ein Mazchichim Oso' means - that one may also not brand him as being
conceited on account of it.
2. ... 'Ein Maznichin Oso', based on the Pasuk "ki Lo Yiznach Le'olam
Hashem" is - that one does not make him reject what he said.
(d) The Beraisa in Sotah records that an increase in 'Zechuchei ha'Leiv' -
resulted in an increase in Machlokos among the Talmidei-Chachamim.
(a) The Pasuk relates - that Menasheh did not manage to capture Beis-Sha'an,
Ta'anach and their villages.
(b) The problem Rebbi Yehudah b'rei de'Shimon ben Pazi raises from here with
Rebbi Meir and Rebbi is - that Beis-Sha'an is clearly part of Eretz Yisrael,
so how could they exempt it from Ma'asros?
(c) To answer this Kashya, we cite Rebbi Shimon ben Elyakim ... Amar Rebbi
Elazar ben Shamua, who stated - that there are many cities that the Olei
Mitzrayim captured (took control over), but not the Olei Bavel.
(d) The Olei Bavel deliberately refrained from capturing them - so that the
poor should have a source of sustenance during the Sh'mitah.
(a) When Rebbi observed that Rebbi Meir only ate a vegetable *leaf* in Beis
Sha'an, he meant to ask - how Rebbi could permit Beis-Sha'an on the basis of
that testimony, seeing as a vegetable leaf has the Din of Arai (casual
eating), which does not need to be Ma'asered.
(b) Rebbi Zeira replied - that in fact, he ate from a bunch of vegetables
(the formation of which, renders vegetables subject to Ma'asros, as we
learned in the Mishnah in Ma'asros).
(c) Rebbi knew that Rebbi Meir had not ...
1. ... simply forgotten to Ma'aser the vegetables -because, as our Sugya
stresses, Hashem guards Tzadikim against eating forbidden foods.
2. ... Ma'asered them from a different batch that he had at home - since we
do not suspect Tzadikim of Ma'asering 'she'Lo min ha'Mukaf '(taking Ma'aser
not in the presence of the produce on behalf of which they are Ma'asering.
3. ... looked at one side and separated Ma'aser in his mind, before eating
from the other side - because of the caliber of the testifier, who would not
have testified had there been the slightest doubt that this was not the
(a) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir - was on his way to perform the Mitzvah of
Pidyon Shevuyim (redeeming captives), when he arrived at the River Gana'i.
1. When he discovered that there was no crossing - he asked the river to
split, to allow him to cross.
(c) When the River made its claim, it was referring to the Pasuk in Koheles
"Kol ha'Nechalim Holchim el ha'Yam".
2. When the river refused on the grounds that whereas *it* was certainly
fulfilling the wish of its Creator, *he* was only a Safek whether he would
succeed or not (see Tosfos DH 'Amar Leih') - he retorted that if it refused
to split, he would decree that no more water would ever flow into it again.
(d) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir ordered the river to split also for ...
1. ... his traveling companion - who was also performing a Mitzvah, inasmuch
as he was carrying wheat for Matzos shel Mitzvah.
2. ... the Arab merchant who had joined them - so that people should comment
on how badly one treats those who accompany a Yisrael.
(a) Rav Yosef considered Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir greater than Moshe and the
six hundred thousand members of K'lal Yisrael - for whom the sea only split
once, whereas for him it split three times.
(b) He amended his statement from 'greater than' to 'as great as' - when he
was asked to prove that the river split three times and not just once
(remaining split until all three had crossed).
(a) When Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir' donkey refused to eat the barley ...
1. ... that the innkeeper fed it, he tried sifting it.
(b) 'Chavtinhu' must mean 'sifted' and not 'threshed' - because if it had
not been threshed, it would not yet be subject to Terumos and Ma'asros.
2. ... even after he had sifted the barley - he cleaned it of stones and
waste, using his hands.
(c) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir suggested (with justification, as it turned
out) - that perhaps the barley was not Ma'asered.
(d) He referred to the donkey as 'this poor fellow' - because, he claimed,
here it was on its way to 'carry out the will of its Creator, and here was
the innkeeper feeding it Tevel!
(a) We query the donkey's Chumra, based on the Mishnah in D'mai, which rules
that grain of D'mai that one purchases for seeding or for feeding one's
animal, flour for tanning hides, or oil for fuel or to anoint vessels - does
not need to be Ma'asered.
(b) Vaday Tevel under these circumstances, would be Chayav Ma'asros
mi'de'Rabbanan, only they did not extend the decree to D'mai.
(c) We reconcile the donkey of Rebbi ben Ya'ir with the Mishnah in D'mai
through Rebbi Yochanan - who qualifies the Mishnah, confining it to where
one purchased the grain initially as animal fodder, but not when the owner
initially purchased it for human consumption, and then decided to use it to
feed his animals (as was the case with the innkeeper of Rebbi Pinchas ben
(d) And we support Rebbi Yochanan with a Beraisa, which rules that someone
who buys grain to eat, but then decides to use it to feed ...
1. ... his own animals, or ...
2. ... somebody else's - is first obligated to Ma'aser it.
(a) Rebbi's face shone with pleasure, when Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir initially
accepted his invitation to eat by him - because the latter was known not to
(b) After referring to Yisrael as 'Kedoshim', Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir
ascribed his reluctance to accept invitations to two categories of people -
a. to those who really want to invite guests but who do not have the means
to do so (and whose invitations Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir did want to accept),
and b. to those who do have the means, but who do not really want to have
(c) And it is in connection with the latter that the Pasuk in Mishlei
warns - not to partake of the bread that the miser offers you, for he
invites you reluctantly; he extends an invitation, but the invitation is not
(d) Rebbi, he claimed, was different - in that he both had the means and his
invitation was sincere.
(a) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir promised - to accept Rebbi's invitation upon
his return. He was unable to fulfill his request immediately, he explained -
because he was on his way to perform a Mitzvah.
(b) Upon his return, he exclaimed that the Angel of Death was lurking in
Rebbi's house - when, 'by chance', he entered his estate through one of many
doorways, where he came across white mules (whose bite is incurable) in
(c) When he saw them - he declared that he could not possibly eat by someone
who keeps the Mal'ach ha'Maves in his house.
(d) Neither was he satisfied when Rebbi offered to ...
1. ... sell the mules - because then he would transgress the La'av of
'Lifnei Iver ...'.
2. ... declare them Hefker (and send them into the forests) - because that
would result in a lot of damage.
3. ... cut off the soles of their feet (which would not have been 'bal
Tashchis', since they could still have been used for threshing).
4. ... kill them - because that would mean contravening the La'av of 'bal
(a) When Rebbi began to plead with him to relent - a mountain suddenly
sprung up between them.
(b) Rebbi - burst into tears and exclaimed that if that is how Hashem
protects the interests of Tzadikim during their lifetime, how much more so
after their deaths.
(c) His statement was based on another statement made by Rebbi Chama bar
Chanina, who declared - that Tzadikim are greater after their death than
they are in their lifetime.
(d) This statement was based in turn, on an incident that occurred with
Elisha after his death - when the corpse of a Rasha, who was hastily thrown
into his grave, arose and walked away (so as not to denigrate Elisha with
his presence). And this was a greater miracle than the child of the Shunamis
whom he revived in his lifetime, which he achieved only after considerable
effort on his part.
(a) Rav Papa asked Abaye how Rebbi Chama bar Chanina knew that this incident
was not merely the result of Eliyahu's promise - that Elisha would achieve
double of what he himself achieved (i.e. that he would revive two dead
people against the one that Eliyahu had revived).
(b) This would negate Rebbi Chama bar Chanina's proof - since the miracle
would then be the fulfillment of the Pasuk in Iyov "Ve'sigzar Omer Ve'yakum
Lach" (that Hashem fulfills the requests of Tzadikim) rather than due to the
merit of Elisha.
(c) Abaye answered - that if that was the case, the Rasha should have
remained alive, and not walked a short distance and dropped dead (as the
(d) Eliyahu's promise came true, says Rebbi Yochanan - when he cured the
Tzara'as of Na'aman, general of the Syrian army (and, as the Pasuk in
Beha'aloscha (in connection with Miriam) indicates, Tzara'as is akin to
(a) According to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, does the Pasuk refers to white
mules as "Yeimim" - because they cast fear into the hearts of those who come
(b) Rebbi Chanina was a doctor. When he declared that nobody had ever
consulted him regarding a kick from a white mule and lived, he meant, not
the person, but the wound ('Ve'chaysah', and not 'Ve'chayah').
(c) To reconcile this with the fact that there were cases of people wounded
by the bite of white mules who recovered - we explain 'white mule' to mean a
black mule with white feet.
(a) A witch was trying to remove earth from where Rebbi Chanina was standing
without his noticing - in order to cast a spell on him that would kill him.
(b) But Rebbi Chanina told her - that she was wasting her time, because the
Torah writes "Ein Od mi'Levado" (i.e. it is impossible to cause somebody's
death unless it has been decreed in Heaven).
(c) Rebbi Yochanan explained the word "Cheshafim" - to be the acronym of
'Makchishin Pamalya shel Ma'alah' (meaning that witchcraft defies the Divine
(d) We reconcile this with Rebbi Chanina's previous statement - by
establishing the latter with regard to most people, and the former, to
Tzadikim of the caliber of Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir.
(a) Rebbi Chanina also says - (based on the Pasuk in Tehilim "me'Hashem
Mitz'adei Gaver, ve'Adam Mah Yavin Darko") that if someone knocks his
finger - then it must have been decreed in Heaven.
They said that Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir never ate bread that was not his, and
that - from the time he became independent, he never even ate at his
(b) Rebbi Elazar stated that the blood that flows from a finger that one
knocked - atones like the blood of an Olah.
(c) Rava adds three conditions to that. One, that it pertains specifically
to the right thumb - which one tends to knock with more force.
(d) Secondly, it pertains to the second knock on the same spot (before the
first one has healed). And thirdly - it is confined to a person who is going
to perform a Mitzvah.