(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Chulin 6



(a) Rebbi sent Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar to fetch wine from the Bei Kuta'i.

(b) When that old man met him, he cited the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Im Ba'al Nefesh Atah" - meaning that if he was an Adam Kasher ...
2. ... "Ve'samta Sakin Belo'echa" - he should place a knife at his neck, withdraw and not go through with what he was doing.
(c) When Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar repeated this to Rebbi Meir, he reacted - by issuing a decree on the Kutim.
(a) The Kutim earned their ostracisation, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explained - when the image of a dove was found on Har Gerizim (see Tosfos DH 'be'Rosh Har Gerizim').

(b) Despite the fact that only a minority of Kutim resided on Har Gerizim, Rebbi Meir decreed on all the Kutim - because he takes into account the minority (as well as going after the majority).

(c) The simple explanation of the Pasuk (with reference to a Talmid sitting in front of his Rebbe) ...

1. ... "Ki Seishev Lilchom es Moshel, Bin Tavin es Asher Lefanecha" - is that when a person sits down to learn with his Rebbe, if he know that he is able to answer his questions, then he should ask; but if not, then he should refrain from asking (in order not to embarrass him)'.
2. ... "Ve'samta Sakin Belo'echa, Im Ba'al Nefesh Atah" - is that one should, in the latter case, shut up like a clam, though if the answers are of vital importance, then one should go and find another Rebbe.
(a) When Rebbi Avahu sent Rebbi Yitzchak ben Yosef to fetch wine from the Bei Kuta'i, he had a similar experience to that of Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar. And when Rebbi Avahu reported what happened to Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi - they followed in the footsteps of Rebbi Meir and Raban Gamliel, and decreed that they should have the Din of real Nochrim ('Ovdei Kochavim Gemurim').

(b) Rebbi Meir decreed - on their wine, and Raban Gamliel - on their Shechitah.

(c) Nevertheless, Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi needed to issue a fresh decree - because the generation did not accept the previous decrees (like we saw in the cases of Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Asi).

(d) This does not mean that Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi were more influential than Rebbi and Raban Gamliel B'no shel Rebbi - but that (bearing in mind that a Rabbinical decree that is initially rejected by the people is not binding on them) in the earlier generations, the people had closer ties with the Kutim, and found it difficult to accept the decrees. Where later, their association with them gradually decreased.

(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explains 'ke'Ovdei Kochavim Gemurim' to mean 'Levateil Reshus Ve'litol Reshus'. The Din of 'Mevateil Reshus ve'Nosein Reshus with regard to ...
1. ... a Yisrael is - that if he forgot to participate in the Eruv before Shabbos, he may, even on Sabbos, be Mavateil his Reshus to the other members of the Mavoy or the Chatzer, thereby enabling them to carry. No Kinyan is required.
2. ... a Nochri or a Kuti - will only take effect if he rents his rights in the Chatzer or in his house to the other members before Shabbos.
(b) A Mumar has the Din of a Yisrael - if he observes Shabbos in public (even if he does not so in private), and he has the Din of a Nochri - if he desecrates Shabbos in public.
(a) When Rebbi Zeira and Rav Asi arrived together at an inn in Ya'i - the innkeeper offered them well-roasted eggs which were subsequently mixed with wine.

(b) Rebbi Zeira refrained from eating them - because the residents of Ya'i were Amei-ha'Aretz, in which case their wine was D'mai, which needs to be Ma'asered before it may be eaten.

(c) When Rebbi Zeira queried Rav Asi on the fact that he ate Ta'aroves D'mai - he replied that he had not realised the problem.

(d) Rebbi Zeira's reaction to that was - that, based on the principle that we cited earlier (regarding Tzdikim eating forbidden food) if Rav Asi inadvertently ate Ta'aroves D'ami, then there must be a Heter to eat it.

(a) The Beraisa says that someone who buys from an Am ha'Aretz wine to mix with a fish-hash or a beverage called 'Aluntis', oats to add to a bean-stew, or lentils to Resisin - has trangressed the Dinim of D'mai (since when he bought them, they were not not yet mixed).

(b) And the Tana rules - that one is nevertheless permitted to eat the mixture, because now that it is already mixed, Ta'aroves D'mai is permitted Lechatchilah (proving Rebbi Zeira'a theory).

(c) The Tana rules that someone who gives his neighbor (the wife of an Am ha'Aretz) a dough to bake or a pot to cook ...

1. ... S'tam - does not need to worry about the dough or the spices being Shevi'is and Ma'aser (because we do not suspect that she may have switched the dough or the spices with her own, which would be D'mai.
2. ... with instructions to use her own ingredients - must suspect that she may have exchanged the ingredient, and that what she returns contains Shevi'is and is un'Ma'asered (D'mai).
(d) The Seifa of this Beraisa appears to clash with Rebbi Zeira's Beraisa - in that it forbids what the neighbor returns even though it is only Ta'aroves D'mai.
(a) We answer that the fact that the Talmid-Chacham issued instructions makes it worse - because, by making the neighbor's wife his Sheli'ach to mix in her own ingredients, it is as if he mixed them himself.

(b) According to Rafram, it is the yeast in the case of the bread and the spices in that of the cooked dish that are different - because yeast and spices are added for their taste, and whatever gives taste does not become Bateil.

(c) We query the Reisha of the latter Beraisa from a Mishnah in D'mai. The Tana there rules - that someone who gives a dough that he prepared from crops that he has not yet Ma'asered to his mother-in-law to bake on his behalf - is obligated to Ma'aser them, both before he gives it to her and after she has returned the baked bread.

(d) This Mishnah now proves - that a person is suspected of switching the ingredients that he receives to bake or cook on somebody else's behalf (a Kashya on the previous Beraisa).

(a) The answer, in fact, lies in the Mishnah itself. Rebbi Yehudah attributes the Tana Kama's ruling - to the mother-in-law's concern that her son-in-law should have the best, and that she should not need to feel embarrassed in front of her daughter.

(b) This answer too, we query from another Mishnah in D'mai, where the Tana rules that someone who gives the wife of the inn-keeper, his host, a dough to bake - is obligated to Ma'aser it both before giving it to her and after receiving from her the baked bread.

(c) He must Ma'aser the bread that she returns to him - because we suspect that she may have exchanged it.

(d) Indeed we just rejected the theory that a person exchanges the food that one gives him to prepare - but the wife of an inn-keeper is different, inasmuch as she feels embarrassed that she is eating warm, fresh bread, whilst the Talmid-Chacham eats bread that is not fresh.




(a) The Tana Kama of another Beraisa permits the wife of a Chaver (a Talmid-Chacham who has undertaken to eat his Chulin be'Taharah) to help the wife of an Am ha'Aretz grind her corn, as long as she is Tamei, but not when she is Tahor. The reason for ...
1. ... the latter ruling is - because since she is used to eating the food she prepares, we are afraid that she will forget (that she is working with the corn belonging to an Am ha'Aretz), and will inadvertently take some and put it in her mouth.
2. ... the former ruling is - because as the wife of Chaver, she is generally careful, when she is Tamei, to keep a distance between the Taharos with which she is working and herself (to avoid touching the food), so there is nothing to be afraid of.
(b) Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar forbids it even when she is Tamei - because he is afraid that her friend will hand her some kernels to eat.

(c) The problem Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar's ruling creates is - that if we are afraid that the wife of the Am ha'Aretz will steal corn to give it to the wife of the Talmid-Chacham, how much more so ought we to suspect that a woman will exchange one item for another.

(d) Rav Yosef replies that, like in the previous cases, the well-meaning wife of the Am ha'Aretz finds herself a Heter - because, based on the Pasuk 'Lo Sachsom Shor be'Disho', she thinks that the woman who is helping her deserves to eat from what she is working, no less than an animal (even though halachically, it does not apply in this case [see Maharsha] DH 'Nosenes Lo').

(a) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Ziruz testified before Rebbi - that Rebbi Meir ate a vegetable leaf without taking Ma'aser from it, prompting the latter to permit the vegetables and fruit of Beis-Sha'an, without having to separate Ma'asros.

(b) We can justify this leniency, in spite of the fact that the produce of Chutz la'Aretz (regarding countries close to Eretz Yisrael) must be Ma'asered mi'de'Rabbanan - by confining the latter ruling to the species whose Terumos and Ma'asros in Eretz Yisrael are d'Oraysa, whereas vegetables and fruit (except for grapes and olives) are only Chayav mi'de'Rabbanan in Eretz Yisrael (on which the Rabbanan did not therefore decree in Chutz la'Aretz).

(c) Even though Rebbi Meir and Rebbi both lived after the Churban, Terumos and Ma'asros were still applicable min ha'Torah in their time - because even though the first Kedushah (of Yehoshua) became Bateil with the Churban Bayis Rishon, the second Kedushah (of Ezra) was permanent, and did not become Bateil with the second Churban.

(d) The members of Rebbi's father's family objected to Rebbi's ruling - on the grounds of his having broken with family tradition.

(a) In reply, he quoted a Pasuk in connection with Nechushtan - a synonym for the copper snake of Moshe.

(b) Rebbi commented on the Pasuk, which records the fact that Chizkiyahu ha'Melech destroyed it (because the people were treating it as if it was a deity) - how remarkable it was that the kings Asa and Yehoshafat, who had gone out of their way to destroy all Avodah from Eretz Yisrael, seemed to have overlooked Nechushtan.

(c) And he explained the phenomenon - with the principle 'Makom Hinichu Lo Avosav Lehisgader Bo' (meaning that sometimes, Hashem causes someone to forget something, so that somebody else can come and receive credit for doing it).

(d) Likewise - Rebbi's ancestors did not previously think of exempting Beis Sha'an from Terumos and Ma'asros so that Rebbi could come and receive credit for doing it.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,