REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 32
CHULIN 32-33 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
(a) Rava rules that if one Shechted a Chulin animal together with the Parah
Adumah, it is Pasul.
Why is that?
(b) Is the second animal Kasher?
(c) According to Rebbi Nasan, the same ruling will apply if another animal
was Shechted unintentionally together with the Parah Adumah.
mind that there was no 'Hesech Shochet did not take his mind off the Parah
Adumah, on what grounds is the Parah Adumah Pasul?
(d) What will be the Din in this same case, according to the Rabbanan?
(a) What is Rav Papa coming to teach us in this set of rulings, which all
seem to be obvious? What might we have otherwise thought, in the middle
case, according to Rebbi Nasan, based on the Pasuk in Chukas "Ve'shachat
(b) What will be the Din if, as the Shochet is Shechting a Parah Adumah ...
- ... he deliberately cuts a gourd?
- ... he cuts a gourd inadvertently?
(a) What does our Mishnah say about where, in the middle of the Shechitah
(b) What is the Shi'ur Shehiyah, according to Rebbi Shimon?
- ... the Shochet's knife or his clothes fell and he picked them up, before continuing with the Shechitah?
- ... he sharpened the knife and became tired, and his friend came and concluded the Shechitah?
(c) Rav explains 'K'dei Shechitah' to mean the time it takes to Shecht
What is Rav coming to teach us? How might we have
otherwise interpreted 'K'dei Shechitah'?
(a) Rav Kahana and Rav Asi asked Rav exactly what he meant. What might he
have meant besides gauging the Shi'ur Shechitah by the time it takes to
Shecht from scratch whichever animal he is Shechting?
(b) Rav eventually replied Lechumra, like the first side of the She'eilah.
Initially, he said that 'Lo Havah Badichna bei ba'Chavivi'.
What did he
mean by that? Who was 'Chavivi'?
(c) What did Shmuel say?
(d) When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael, he cited Rebbi Yochanan who learned
like Shmuel, whereas Rebbi Chanina gave the time it takes to bring another
animal and Shecht it.
What problem do we have with that?
(e) How does Rav Papa therefore establish the case over which Rebbi Chanina
argues with Rebbi Yochanan?
(a) In Eretz Yisrael, they cited the opinion of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina.
How does he present the Shi'ur Shechitah?
(b) What Shi'ur Shehiyah does he give for ...
(c) If we normally rule like Rebbi Yochanan against Shmuel and certainly
against Rav, why, in this case, do we rule like Rav against Rebbi Yochanan?
- ... a small animal?
- ... a large animal?
- ... a bird?
(d) What does Rava say about someone who takes all day to Shecht an animal
using a bad knife? What is meant by a 'bad knife'?
(a) Rava asked whether a number of Shehiyos combine to invalidate the
Why does he not resolve this She'eilah with his previous
(b) What does Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Nasan mean when he asks 'Shahah
be'Miy'ut Simanim, Mahu'?
(c) Why can the She'eilah not pertain to the beginning of the Shechitah?
(d) What should the Shochet therefore do, if after Shechting the majority of
the Simanim, the animal does not die immediately?
(e) What is the outcome of the She'eilah?
(a) We have already discussed the Machlokes between Rebbi Yesheivav and
Rebbi Akiva in our Mishnah. If the Shochet first Shechted the Veshet and
then broke the Gargeres (Ikur) or vice-versa, or Shechted one of the Simanim
and either waited until the animal died, or performed Chaladah on the second
Si'man, Rebbi Yesheivav considers the animal a Neveilah.
Answers to questions
What does Rebbi
(b) How does Rebbi Yesheivav citing Rebbi Yehoshua, define the distinction
between a Neveilah and a Tereifah with regard to an animal that has been
(c) Bearing in mind the principle 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Akiva me'Chavero', why
do we rule like Rebbi Yesheivav in this case?
(a) What problem does the Mishnah in 'Eilu Tereifos', which lists Pesukas
ha'Gargeres among the Tereifos, create with our Mishnah?
(b) How does Rava resolve ...
(c) What objection, besides the fact that the Tana specifically said
've'Achar-Kach', does Rav Acha bar Huna raise on Rava's answer?
- ... this problem? Why is Shechting a Pesukas ha'Gargeres not comparable to the Neveilah in our Mishnah?
- ... Rav Acha bar Huna's Kashya from our Mishnah itself, which refers to 'Pasak es ha'Gargeres ve'Achar-Kach Shachat es ha'Veshet' as a Neveilah? How does he attempt to amend 've'Achar-Kach Shachat es ha'Veshet'?
(d) So how does Rava interpret 've'Eilu Tereifos', to resolve the two
(a) What does Chizkiyah say about an animal that one made a Gist'ra (by
chopping in two at the neck or the back, as we learned in the first Perek)?
(b) Under which circumstances does Rebbi Elazar declare an animal whose
thigh has been removed, a Neveilah?
(c) According to Rava then, why does the Tana in 'Eilu Tereifos' decline to
insert these two cases in the Mishnah?
(a) Resh Lakish resolves the contradiction between the two Mishnahs by
making it dependent upon the location where the Shochet concludes the
Shechitah after breaking the majority of the Gargeres.
What exactly does
(b) How does *he* interpret 'Eilu Tereifos'?
(c) Resh Lakish himself says elsewhere that if one makes a hole in the lungs
after having Shechted the Gargeres (to which they are attached), the animal
Why is that?
(d) How does this pose a Kashya on what he himself just said? What status
would the animal then have if the Shochet completed the Shechitah on the
Gargeres at the point where the break ended?
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan establishes the Mishnah in 'Eilu
Tereifos' like Rebbi Akiva, who considers a P'sul in the Shechitah a
How will he then reconcile this with the Seifa of our Mishnah,
where Rebbi Akiva retracted from that S'vara?
(b) How can the latter Mishnah make a statement that is no longer correct?
(c) How do we reconcile this with the principle 'Yesh Seider le'Mishnah',
that we apply in one Masechta?
(a) What does Rava say, according to Resh Lakish, about a case where one
made a hole in the intestines (which are attached to the Veshet) after
Shechting the Kaneh?
(b) Why is that?
(c) What objection does Rebbi Zeira raise to that?
(d) How does Rebbi Zeira explain Resh Lakish's ruling, to ask such a Kashya?
(a) Rebbi Zeira himself asked whether, if an animal's intestines were holed
after its Kaneh had been Shechted, going on to Shecht its Veshet would
change its status from Neveilah to Tereifah or not.
(b) And we connect this to the She'eilah of Ilfa, regarding a fetus which
was found inside a Shechted animal, and which is normally permitted through
the Shechitah of its mother.
- ... might it indeed do so?
- ... might it not?
What will be the Din in a case where the fetus
stuck out its leg before its mother was Shechted?
(c) Ilfa now asks what the Din will be if it sticks out the leg between the
Shechitah of the Kaneh and the Veshet.
What is the She'eilah?
(a) We conclude that the Shechitah of the first Si'man will indeed combine
with that of the second, to render the leg in Ilfa's case, and the animal in
Rebbi Zeira's, a Tereifah.
Answers to questions
How about eating them?
(b) How do we try to prove from there that Rebbi Zeira retracted from what
he just said?
(c) How did Rav Acha bar Rav reject this proof? If Rebbi Zeira still holds
that once one Si'man has been Shechted, the animal cannot become a Tereifah,
then why did he ask such a She'eilah (with its implications)?