REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 100
CHULIN 100 - (11 Iyar) - dedicated by the Feldman family in memory of
their mother, ha'Rabbanit Sara Dvosya bas Rav Mordechai (of Milwaukee).
(a) With reference to our Mishnah, we ask why a Gid ha'Nasheh that is cooked
together with the thigh is not Bateil be'Rov.
Under what condition would
this be conceivable?
(b) What do we answer? Why indeed is it not Bateil?
(c) And we ask, also with reference to our Mishnah, why a piece of Neveilah
or of a Tamei fish, is not Bateil in other pieces.
What do we mean when we
say that this is not a Kashya according to those who hold 'Kol she'Darko
(d) The Kashya remains however, according to those who hold 'es she'Darko
Why is that?
(a) So why is the large piece of meat or fish not Bateil?
(b) Why does the Tana find it necessary to teach us that both a Gid
ha'Nasheh and a large piece of meat or fish are not Bateil? Why will one not
(a) What did Rabah bar bar Chanah Darshen regarding a piece of Neveilah or
of a Tamei fish.
Under which circumstances will it render the pieces with
which it is cooked, Asur?
(b) And what did Rav appoint an Amora to Darshen regarding a piece of Kasher
meat that is cooked next to a piece of Neveilah, which gives it taste (even
if there are other pieces in the pot), or if they are cooked together, and
the other pieces are added only later?
(c) How do we initially interpret his reason 'Mipnei she'Hein Miyno'?
(d) According to this interpretation, what did Rav Safra ask Abaye
concerning the terms of the actual statement?
(a) In answer to Rav Safra's Kashya, Abaye establishes Rav 'be'she'Kadam
What does he mean by that? What did he remove?
(b) What would Rav then be coming to teach us?
(a) Rava establishes Rav even where he did not remove the piece of Neveilah
Answers to questions
Why will the pieces in the pot not become Asur if the piece of
Neveilah does not give taste to the first piece? What principle governs
(b) What does this mean with regard to our case?
(c) Even if the first piece did become Neveilah, why is it not Bateil in the
(a) According to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah, the Isur of Gid ha'Nasheh
does not apply to a Beheimah Teme'ah.
Is this connected to the Din of
'Yesh' or 'Ein be'Gidin be'Nosen Ta'am'?
(b) Rebbi Yehudah holds that it does.
How does he prove it (from the
location of the La'av)?
(c) How do the Chachamim counter his proof?
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Emor "Neveilah u'Tereifah Lo Yochal
(b) Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa confines this ruling to the Neveilah of a
How does he preclude that of a Tamei bird from the same Pasuk?
(c) What principle does this teach us?
(d) What Kashya does this pose on Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah? How do we
initially interpret his ruling 'including a Beheimah Teme'ah in the Din of
(a) So we suggest that Rebbi Yehudah holds 'Ein be'Gidin be'Nosen Ta'am'.
How will that answer the Kashya?
(b) In another Beraisa, Rebbi Yehudah sentences someone who eats the Gid
ha'Nasheh of a Beheimah Teme'ah to two Malkos. What does Rebbi Shimon say?
(c) What does this Beraisa prove? How does this refute the previous
suggestion in Rebbi Yehudah?
(d) So we conclude that Rebbi Yehudah holds 'Yesh be'Gidin be'Nosen Ta'am',
but he also holds that the Isur extends to a Sh'lil.
How will that answer
(a) How do we reconcile the previous statement of Rebbi Yehudah with the
Mishnah above, where Rebbi Yehudah holds 'Eino Noheg bi'Shelil'?
(b) What problem do we have with the Mishnah in Nazir, which lists among the
things that a Nazir must shave for (should he form an Ohel over them) a Meis
and a k'Zayis from a Meis?
(c) How does Rebbi Yochanan resolve the problem? What sort of Meis is the
Tana referring to?
(d) How does this refute the current answer (that our Mishnah speaks when
the Isur Beheimah Teme'ah and that of Gid take effect simultaneously)?
(a) So we answer that the Isur Gid nevertheless takes effect on that of
Beheimah Teme'ah, because it is Chamur.
Answers to questions
In what way is it Chamur,
according to Rebbi Yehudah?
(b) How do we support this answer from Rebbi Yehudah's own words in our