ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 117
(a) Our Mishnah lists the various Chumros of Cheilev over Dam and of Dam
over Cheilev. Besides the fact that the Cheilev Kodshim is subject to
Me'ilah and Dam Kodshim is not - it is also subject to Pigul, Nosar and
Tamei which Dam Kodshim is not.
(b) When we say that Cheilev Kodshim is subject to Tum'ah, we mean - that if
someone eats Cheilev Kodshim be'Tum'as ha'Guf be'Shogeg, he is Chayav two
Chata'os, one for Cheilev, and one for eating Kodshim be'Tum'as ha'Guf.
(c) The Isur Dam on the other hand, pertains to more species than Cheilev.
Besides Dam Chayah, whose Cheilev is permitted, one is also Chayav on Dam Of
and Dam Beheimah Temei'ah, but not on their Cheilev).
(d) We learn from the Pasuk (in connection with Cheilev) "min ha'Beheimah
Asher Yakrivu Mimenah ... " - that one is only Chayav for eating the Cheilev
of a Beheimah that is eligible to go on the Mizbe'ach (precluding, that of a
bird, a Chayah and a Beheimah Temei'ah).
(a) The problem with the Pasuk (in connection with the Par Kohen Mashi'ach)
"Ka'asher Yuram mi'Shor Zevach ha'Shelamim" is - that the Torah does not
teach us anything with regard to the latter that is not mentioned directly
by the former.
(b) Rebbi Yanai therefore explains - that the Pasuk really comes to compare
(not the Par Kohen Mashi'ach to a Shelamim, but) the Eimurim of a Shelamim
to those of the Par Kohen Mashi'ach, to teach us that the Cheilev of a
Shelamim is subject to Me'ilah just like those of the Par Kohen Mashi'ach.
(c) What makes Me'ilah by the Eimurei Par Kohen Mashi'ach more obvious than
by the Eimurei Shelamim - is the fact that like all Kodshei Kodshim, it is
already subject to Me'ilah in its lifetime, whereas a Shelamim, which is
Kodshim Kalim, is not.
(a) Rebbi learns the same thing from the Pasuk (ibid.) "Kol Cheilev
la'Hashem" (to include that of a Shelamim).
(b) When Rebbi Chanina asked Rebbi Yanai why Rebbi's D'rashah was not good
enough for him, Abaye answered - that Rebbi's D'rashah only teaches us
Cheilev, in which case we still need Rebbi Yanai's Pasuk, to incorporate the
two kidneys and the lobe of the liver (which are included in the Eimurim,
even though they are not called Cheilev).
(c) On the other hand, we need "Kol Cheilev la'Hashem" - to include the
Alyah (the fat-tail of the sheep) in the Din of Me'ilah ...
(d) ... which we would not otherwise learn from "Ka'asher Yuram ... ",
because we would have thought that only the Chalavim that pertain to all the
Kasher species is subject to Me'ilah, but not the Alyah (even of a sheep),
which an ox does not have.
(a) The problem Rav Mari has with the fact that the Alyah is called
'Cheilev' is - that if it is, why is not Asur ba'Achilah?
(b) Rav Z'vid answered him, based on the Pasuk "Kol Cheilev Shor, ve'Chesev
va'Eiz Lo Socheilu" - which indicates that the Torah only forbids to eat
those sections of Cheilev that pertain to all the Kasher animals.
(c) Rav Ashi explains why the Alyah is not Asur ba'Achilah - because the
Torah calls it "Chelbo ha'Alyah", but not Cheilev S'tam.
(d) We reject Rav Ashi's answer however, because if the Alyah would not be
called Cheilev - then it would not be subject to Me'ilah either.
(a) Ula learns from the Pasuk (in connection with Dam) "va'Ani Nesativ
*Lachem*" - that Dam Kodshim is not subject to Me'ilah.
(b) de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael learns the same thing from "Lechaper"
('le'Chaparah Nesativ ve'Lo li'Me'ilah'). Whereas Rebbi Yochanan learns it
from "ki ha'Dam *Hu* ... " - which teaches us that Dam Kodshim is the same
before the Kaparah as it is after it (i.e. it is not subject to Me'ilah).
(c) It is not possible to learn the opposite ... that just as Me'ilah
applies before Kaparah, so too, does it apply after Kaparah - because of the
principle 'Ein Lecha Davar she'Na'aseh Mitzvaso u'Mo'alin Bo' (once a
Mitzvah has been completed, there is no Me'ilah on the object involved).
(d) We learn from the Pasuk (in connection with the Terumas ha'Deshen [the
shovel-full of spent ashes that was placed each morning beside the
Mizbe'ach]) "Ve'samo Eitzel ha'Mizbe'ach" - that it was forbidden to derive
benefit from it, and it remained subject to Me'ilah (even though its Mitzvah
has been completed).
(a) And we solve the problem - by citing the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos
"Ve'hinicham Sham", from which we learn that after the completion of the
Avodah on Yom Kipur, the four white Begadim of the Kohen Gadol were
forbidden to be used again, and were subject to Me'ilah. Consequently, we
will apply the principle 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'in ke'Echad, Ein Melamdin'
(when two Pesukim teach us the same thing, then they are the exceptions
rather than the rule).
(b) That goes nicely with the Rabbanan, who hold that the Bigdei Kehunah of
the Kohen Gadol were Asur be'Hana'ah after Yom Kipur. Rebbi Dosa interprets
"Ve'hinicham Sham" to mean - that the Kohen Gadol was forbidden to wear the
same robes again on a subsequent Yom Kipur, but not that they were subject
(c) Rebbi Dosa - will simply replace Bigdei Kehunah with Eglah Arufah, which
remains Asur be'Hana'ah even after its Mitzvah is complete, still leaving us
with two Pesukim.
(d) Whereas those who hold 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'in ke'Echad, Melamdin' -
will learn the principle 'Kol Davar she'Na'asis Mitzvaso Ein Mo'alin Bo'
from the word "Ve'sam*o*" by Terumas ha'Deshen (implying *it* and not other
things whose Mitzvah has been completed) and from the 'Hey' of "ha'Arufah"
(implying that only the Eglah Arufah remains Asur be'Hana'ah after the
completion of its Mitzvah, but not other things).
(a) Now that we preclude Dam Kodshim from Me'ilah, from one of the three
Pesukim ("Lachem", "Lechaper" and "Hu"), we need the other two Pesukim - to
preclude it from the Isur of Nosar and of Tum'ah.
***** Hadran Alach 'Kol ha'Basar' *****
(b) We do not however, need a Pasuk to preclude Dam from Pigul - since only
things that have a Matir are subject to Pigul (such as Basar Kodshim, which
becomes permitted, either to eat or to burn on the Mizbe'ach, through the
sprinkling of the blood), as we learned in the Mishnah in Zevachim, but not
Dam, which is itself a Matir.
***** Perek ha'Or veha'Rotav *****
(a) Our Mishnah lists skin among the things that combine with the Basar to
complete the Shi'ur of Tum'as Ochlin - which is a k'Beitzah.
(b) When the Tana says 'Mitamei Tum'as Ochlin', he means - that if it
subsequently touches water (or one of the other six liquids), it will be
eligible to become Tamei should a Sheretz touch it).
(c) Despite the fact that the skin is not edible, it combines with the Basar
to make up the Shi'ur of Tum'as Ochlin - because it protects it (and is
therefore considered part of it in this regard).
(a) The Tana adds the Rotav (a semi-fluid, gravy-like substance that
emanates from the meat), the Kifah (the spices with which the meat is
cooked) and the Elel (which will be explained in the Sugya). The Rotav and
the Kifah are included in the Shi'ur - because they too, are considered part
of the Basar, inasmuch as the one makes it palatable, whereas the other is
sometimes eaten together with it (if it has congealed on it.
(b) Finally, he adds the Gidin (incorporating the nerves, the sinews and the
cords [Me'iri]), the bones, the horns and the hooves to the list. The horns
(at the base) belong in the list because they are sometimes eaten together
with the meat (which is presumably the reason for the Gidin, too), the bones
(containing marrow) and the hooves are included - because, like the skin,
they protect the Basar.
(a) The Shi'ur of Tum'as Neveilos is a 'k'Zayis.
(b) The Tana rules that the above - do not combine to make up the Shi'ur of
(c) We will learn shortly the source as to why the bones, the Gidin and the
skin do not combine to make up the Shi'ur Tum'as Neveilos, whereas the Kifah
and the Rotav do not combine - because they are not part of the Neveilah,
and the Elel and the Gidin - because they are not Basar.
(d) Rebbi Yehudah rules - that if a k'Zayis of Elel of a Neveilah is
gathered in one place, one is Chayav Malkos for eating it.
(a) In similar vein, says the Tana, if someone Shechts a Beheimah Temei'ah
for a Nochri, and the animal is still convulsing, the animal is Mitamei
Tum'as Ochlin. We might have thought that it is not - because the Nochri is
not allowed to eat it until it stops convulsing.
(b) Despite the fact that a. Shechitah on a Beheimah Temei'ah is not
effective, and b. the Nochri is forbidden to eat the animal anyway - the
Shechitah is effective regarding Tum'as Ochlin, because under different
circumstances, such a Shechitah performed by a Yisrael would be valid.
(c) If ...
1. ... the Nochri himself Shechted the animal - it would not be subject to
(d) The same animal, says the Tana, will only be Metamei Tum'as Neveilos -
once it stops convulsing, or when its head is cut off (even if it is still
2. ... the Yisrael performed Nechirah (tore the animal open), rather than
Shechitah - it would not be subject to Tum'as Ochlin either, as would be the
case if ...
3. ... the Yisrael Shechted the same animal for a Yisrael - because his
Da'as would be Bateil to that of every Yisrael, for whom a Beheimah Temei'ah
is not considered food (see also Daf 121a, close to the foor of the page,
for addtional details).
(a) Our Mishnah bears out the Beraisa 'Shornrim le'Tum'ah Kalah ve'Lo
le'Tum'ah Chamurah'. The reason that the Tana refers to Tum'as Ochlin as
'Tum'ah Kalah' and Tum'as Neveilos as 'Tum'ah Chamurah' is - because the
former (which is only a Toldah) is only Metamei food and drink, whereas the
latter, which is an Av ha'Tum'ah, is Metamei Adam and Keilim as well.
(b) Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael interprets the Pasuk (in connection with
Tum'as Ochlin) "al Kol Zera Zeru'a Asher Yizare'a" to mean - that it is
Metamei Tum'as Ochlin ('Shomrim le'Tum'ah Kalah' [once it has become
Muchshar Lekabel Tum'ah]) in the way that one normally takes them out to be
planted (i.e. together with the shells (which serve as Shomrim).
(c) When the Tana speaks about the shells ...
1. ... of wheat and barley, he is referring to - the outer shell that is
attached to the crops whilst they are still growing. The shell that falls
off at the time of grinding - is considered food.
(d) And from the Pasuk in "ha'Noge'a *be'Nivlasah* Yitma ... " - he
precludes a Shomer (the bones, the Gidin and the skin) from combining to
make up the Shi'ur Tum'as Neveilos.
2. ... of lentils, he is referring - to the outer shell that surrounds the