ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 13
(a) The Mishnah in Machshirin rules that if someone moves 'fruit' (beans or
lentils) on to the roof to prevent them from becoming infested with lice,
and dew falls on them - the fruit does not become Muchshar Lekabel Tum'ah
(subject to Tum'ah).
(b) They would become subject to Tum'ah however - if he specifically had in
mind that the dew should fall on it ...
(c) ... even if the owner has this intention only after he has placed them
on the roof ...
(d) ... as long as the dew has not yet dried.
(a) The Mishnah rules that if a Chashu carries the 'fruit' up on to the
roof - even if he did have the dew in mind, it does become subject to
(b) Rebbi Yochanan qualifies this latter ruling - by confining it to where
the Chashu did not turn over the 'fruit', but if he had, it would become
subject to Tum'ah.
(c) We know that Rebbi Yochanan is speaking in a case where the child did
not say anything - because if he had, Rebbi Yochanan would not need to tell
us what we already know from the Mishnah in Machshirin.
(d) We reconcile this ruling with Rebbi Yochanan's previous She'eilah - by
establishing his Safek as to whether the 'fruit' is subject to Tum'ah min
ha'Torah or mi'de'Rabbanan. Consequently, even having taught us that a
Ma'aseh which indicates is considered a Ma'aseh (Lechumra, with regard to
carrying fruit on to the roof), he still asks a She'eilah regarding
transporting a Korban from the south of the Azarah to the north which is a
Kula (validating a Safek Korban), and which we will not hold of, if it only
(a) In the second Lashon, Rebbi Yochanan asks whether a Katan 'has a
Ma'aseh' or not.
What will he hold with regard to Machshavah?
(b) His ruling with regard to Machshavah indicates that he knew the Mishnah
in Machshirin, and when he asked whether a Katan has a Ma'aseh, he meant -
whther the Ma'aseh of a Katan is d'Oraysa or mi'de'Rabbanan (as we explained
in the first Lashon).
(c) Rebbi Yochanan conclude that a Katan 'has ...
1. ... a Ma'aseh' - mi'd'Oraysa.
2. ... no Machshavah' at all (even mi'de'Rabbanan).
3. ... a Machshavah' that is evident from his act mi'de'Rabbanan.
(a) Shmuel asked Rav Huna for the source which invalidates Mis'asek by
Kodshim. 'Mis'asek' means for exanple - someone who picks up a knife of
Kodshim for whatever reason, such as to throw it, and in the process, he
inadvertently Shechts a Kodshim animal (which would have been a Kasher
Shechitah had the animal been Chulin, according to Rebbi Nasan [see Tosfos
DH 'Minayin' an Rashi at the end of Menachos]).
(b) In reply, Rav Huna learn from the Pasuk "Ve'shachat es ben ha'Bakar" -
that Mis'asek by Kodshim is Pasul.
(c) And when Shmuel replied that he already knew that - and that what he
wanted was the source that it is Pasul even Bedi'eved, he cited the Pasuk
(a) Our Mishnah considers the Shechitah of a Nochri, Neveilah. The Tana adds
to that - 'u'Metam'ah be'Masa' ...
(b) ... irrespective of whether a Yisrael supervises his Shechitah or not.
(c) We extrapolate from the fact that the Tana stops at 'Metamei be'Masa' -
that the animal is not Asur be'Hana'ah.
(d) Consequently, Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan establishes our
Mishnah not like Rebbi Eliezer, who would have indeed declared the animal
Asur be'Hana'ah - because he holds 'S'tam Machsheves Oved-Kochavim
(a) Rebbi Ami extrapolates from the Mishnah that the Shechitah of a Miyn (an
apostate) is for Avodah-Zarah - with reference to a Jewish Miyn (who cleaves
to Avodah-Zarah more than a Nochri does).
(b) He agrees with Rebbi Chiya bar Aba however - that the author of our
Mishnah cannot be Rebbi Eliezer, only he considers Rebbi Chiya bar Aba's
inference superfluous (because it is inherent in the Tana's statement).
(c) A Beraisa corroborates the inference from the Mishnah. The Tana Kama
there considers the bread of a Miyn Pas Kuti (Akum), his wine Yayin Nesach -
the Sefarim that he writes (i.e. T'nachim that he writes on
parchment)'Sifrei Kusmin' (i.e. they must be burned) and his fruit, Tevel
(which must be Ma'asered).
(d) Some say (Rebbi Nasan) that his children are Mamzerim too. The Tana Kama
disagrees with him - on the grounds that Miynim do not permit their wives to
go with other men.
(a) We ask why our Mishnah does not declare an animal Shechted by a Nochri,
Asur be'Hana'ah. Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah explains - that there
are no Miynim among the Nochrim.
(b) Based on the fact that his statement is simply not true) we amend his
initial answer to - 'most Nochrim are not Miynim' (and we do not contend
with the minority).
(c) This in turn, is based on a statement by Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi
Yochanan - who said that the Nochrim in Chutz la'Aretz (see Tosfos DH
'Nochrim') do not worship idols with their full heart, only because their
(d) Rav Yosef bar Minyumi Amar Rav Nachman states - that the Din of Miynim
does not apply to a Nochri Miyn.
(a) Rav Yosef bar Minyumi cannot be referring to ...
1. ... the Shechitah of a Nochri - because if the Shechitah of a Miyn
Yisrael is Pasul, how can that of a Miyn Nochri be Kasher.
(b) Rav Yosef bar Minyumi is in fact referring to - the Din of Korban (as we
2. ... the Din of Moridin (meaning that one is permitted to push him into a
deep pit) - because how can the Din of a Nochri Miyn be more lenient than
that of a Miyn Yisrael (by whom we rule 'Moridin')?
(c) This conforms with a D'rashah of Rav Ukva bar Chama, who learns from the
Pasuk "Adam Ki Yakriv *Mikem* Olah" (besides precluding a Mumar Yisrael from
bringing a Korban) - that we must accept Korbanos even from Nochri Miynim.
(d) He knows that the Pasuk is not coming to preclude a Nochri from bringing
a Korban altogether ("Mikem", 've'Lo Nochri' [even a Tzadik]) - because of
the Pasuk in Emor "Ish *Ish* ... Asher Yakriv Korban" (which includes
Nochrim in the realm of Korbanos).
(a) The problem with our Mishnah adding 'u'Metam'ah be'Masa' is - that
having declared the animal Neveilah, is it not obvious that it is Metamei
(b) Rava extrapolates from here that there is something else that is
Metam'ah even more than be'Masa, according to Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira -
with reference to Tikroves Avodas-Kochavim, which is Metamei be'Ohel, too.
(c) In the second Lashon, Rava establishes our Mishnah not like Rebbi
Yehudah ben Beseira - by extrapolating that there is something else that is
just like Shechitas Oved-Kochavim (which is Metamei be'Masa), and that is
(d) Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira in a Beraisa, learns from the Pasuk
"Va'yitzamdu le'Ba'al Pe'or Va'yochlu Zivchei Meisim" - that Tikroves
Avodas-Kochavim is Metamei be'Ohel, like a Meis.
(a) Our Mishnah - validates a Shechitah that is performed at night-time or
by a blind person.
(b) This Mishnah clashes with the Beraisa 'Le'olam Shochtin, bein ba'Yom
u'vein ba'Laylah' - in that, as opposed to the latter, which permits it
Lechatchilah, the Tana validates it only Bedi'eved.
(c) To resolve the discrepancy - Rav Papa establishes the Beraisa where the
Shochet Shechts by the light of a torch (whereas the Mishnah speaks when he
Shechts in the dark).
(d) We support this answer from 'bein ba'Yom' (in the Beraisa) - implying
that the Tana is speaking where there is light, and 've'Chein ha'Suma' (in
our Mishnah) - which implies that there is not.
(a) The same Beraisa - permits Shechting on a roof or in a boat.
(b) The Mishnah in 'ha'Shochet' forbids Shechting into ...
1. ... the sea or into a river - because people will accuse the Shochet of
Shechting in honor of the Angel of the sea (Neptune).
(c) Shechting in a boat clearly appears to clash with the Mishnah in
'ha'Shochet' (which forbids Shechting into the sea). The problem with
Shechting on the roof into a K'li is - that by the same token, we ought to
be afraid that people will accuse him of receiving the blood, in order to
sprinkle it in honor of the stars.
2. ... a K'li - they will accuse him of subsequently using the blood to
sprinkle to Avodah-Zarah.
(d) We resolve both problems however, by pointing out - that everyone knows
that in the one case, the Shochet is using a K'li in order to keep his roof
clean, and in the other, he Shechts into the sea, in order not to dirty his