REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 34
CHULIN 34 (4 Adar) - Today's Daf has been dedicated l'Zecher Nishmat
Pinchas ben Harav Moshe Yehoshua Ha'Kohain, Z"L.
(a) Ula disagrees with Rebbi Elazar. He establishes our Mishnah like Rebbi
How does he explain Rebbi Yehoshua's statement (in the Mishnah
in Taharos) 'be'Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharos Terumah'?
(b) Then why did the latter say ' ... al Taharas Terumah'?
(c) And he ascribes Rebbi Elazar's interpretation of our Mishnah, to Rabah
bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan's description of the Machlokes between
Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua. First of all, Rebbi Eliezer bases his
opinion (that the eater should not be less Tamei than the food that he eats)
on a case where the eater becomes even a higher level of Tum'ah than the
food that he ate.
Which case is that?
(d) What does Rebbi Yehoshua counter? Why can we not use Nivlas Of Tahor as
(a) Rebbi Yehoshua then bases his opinion on the fact that the Shi'ur of the
food is more stringent than that of the eater.
What is he referring to?
(b) How does Rebbi Eliezer counter that? Why can one not use Shi'urin as an
(c) Rebbi Eliezer also queries Rebbi Yehoshua's ruling rendering someone who
eats a Sheini, a Sheini (contradicting his initial ruling). How does Rebbi
Yehoshua answer that? Where do we find a Sheini that makes a Sheini?
(d) On what grounds does he reject Rebbi Eliezer's reply that, if that is
so, he ought to make the eater a Rishon, just like the liquid became a
(a) How did Rebbi Eliezer query Rebbi Yehoshua further from his ruling
regarding someone who ate a Shelishi?
(b) What did Rebbi Yehoshua reply?
(c) How does this prove that Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua's dispute
refers exclusively to Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah?
(a) On what grounds does Ula then disagree with Rabah bar bar Chanah's
version of the Machlokes?
Answers to questions
(b) We learned earlier that Ula explains Rebbi Yehoshua's statement
'be'Chulin she'Na'asu ... ' to mean 'Af be'Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas
What degree of Tum'ah will the latter then ascribe to something
that touched Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh which is a Shelishi?
(c) How else might Ula explain Ula's version of Rebbi Yehoshua? Why might
the latter mention specifically 'Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah?
(a) Rebbi Zeira Amar Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan Amar Rebbi Yanai rules
that someone who eats a Shelishi of Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Hekdesh
becomes a Shelishi. Rebbi Zeira asked Rebbi Asi from the Mishnah in Taharos
that we cited earlier 'Shelishi Sheini le'Kodesh ve'Ein Sheini li'Terumah'.
How does the Mishnah end? What is then Rebbi Zeira's Kashya from there?
(b) Rebbi Asi answers 'Lo Miba'i ka'Amar' (like Ula answered on the previous
Amud), which Rebbi Zeira queried from the Lashon of Rebbi Yehoshua himself
'Af Ani Lo Amarti Ela bi'Terumah', a Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan. How do we
know that Rebbi Yochanan agrees with that version of Rebbi Yehoshua's
(c) How do we resolve the discrepancy?
(a) What does Ula say about someone who eats a Shelishi of Chulin she'Na'asu
al Taharas Terumah?
(b) We query this from the Mishnah in Taharos 'Shelishi, Sheini le'Kodesh,
ve'Ein Sheini li'Terumah, be'Chulin she'Na'asu al Taharas Terumah'.
do we extrapolate from 've'Ein Sheini li'Terumah', that poses a Kashya on
(c) How do we suggest amending the inference, to answer the Kashya?
(d) Why does the Tana then say 'Ein Sheini bi'Terumah'?
(a) According to Ula's current statement, when does Rebbi Yehoshua hold that
we do not give the eater the same degree of Tum'ah as the food?
(b) Rav Hamnuna queries Ula from a Mishnah in Taharos. The Tana rules
there 'ha'Rishon she'be'Chulin Tamei u'Metamei'.
What does he say about a
(a) The Tana concludes 've'ha'Shelishi Ne'echal bi'Nezid ha'Dema.
(b) What problem does Rav Hamnuna now have with Ula from there?
(c) How does Ula answer the Kashya? Why is Nezid ha'Dema different?
(d) What is the significance of the Shi'ur of 'less than a k'Zayis bi'Chedei
(a) According to what we just said, why does the Tana not permit eating a
Rishon and Sheini too, bi'Nezid ha'Dema?
Answers to questions
(b) What problem do we have with Ula's answer (which explains why it is
permitted to eat the Terumah), based on ...
(c) How do we therefore revise our interpretation of the Mishnah? What does
'Nezid ha'Dema' now mean?
- ... the Pasuk in Shemini "Al Titam'u be'Chol Eileh, Ve'nitmeisem Bam"?
- ... the Lashon of Rav Hamnuna's Kashya 'Safinan Leih Midi de'Pasil Leih le'Gufo'?
(d) And how will we now interpret the Ula's answer 'Hanach li'Nezid ha'Dema