(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 40

CHULIN 37-40 - sponsored by Dr. Lindsay A. Rosenwald of Lawrence NY, in honor of his father, David ben Aharon ha'Levy Rosenwald of blessed memory.


(a) Our Mishnah invalidates a Shechitah in the name of the mountains.
What does that mean?

(b) Which item does the Tana add to the list?

(c) And what does the Tana say about a case where two people are holding opposite ends of the knife, and one of them Shechts in the name of one of the above, and the other, S'tam?

(a) What do we extrapolate from the Lashon of the Tana 'ha'Shochet le'Shem Harim ... *Pesulah*'?

(b) What is the reason for this? Why is it ...

  1. ... not Zivchei Meisim?
  2. ... then Pasul?
(c) After presenting a list equivalent to our Mishnah, the Beraisa adds the sun, the moon, the stars, the Mazalos, Micha'el the great angel and a little worm''.
What is the significance of the last two?

(d) How does the Tana conclude?

(a) How does Abaye resolve the discrepancy between the Mishnah and the Beraisa?

(b) And how does he prove it?

(a) From where do we know that one is permitted to bring as a Korban, an animal before which someone prostrated himself?

(b) What does Rav Huna say in a case where someone Shechted one Si'man of an animal to Avodah-Zarah?

(c) Does this mean that the animal would be permitted if he Shechted less than one Si'man?

(d) Why does he refer to his friend's animal and not to his own? What did we learn in Avodah-Zarah about someone who digs pits in his field and prostrates himself to them?

(a) Rav Huna holds like Ula Amar Rebbi Yochanan, who refers to the Halachah 'ha'Mishtachaveh le'Behemas Chaveiro, Lo Asrah'.
Does this Halachah also incorporate bringing it on the Mizbe'ach?

(b) What did Ula Amar Rebbi Yochanan comment, based on this Halachah?

(c) Why does Rav Huna add that the animal was already crouching? Of what significance is that?

(a) Rav Nachman queries Rav Huna from a Beraisa.
How many Chata'os does the Tana obligate someone to bring if he Shechts be'Shogeg, a Chatas on Shabbos outside the Azarah?

(b) Why is the Shechitah on Shabbos not considered 'Mekalkel' (damaging the animal, by depriving it of its plowing potential)?

Answers to questions



(a) What does Rav Nachman now ask on Rav Huna? Why should the Shochet not be Chayav on Shechutei Chutz?

(b) Bearing in mind the Halachah that we cited earlier, rendering Chayav someone who 'Shechts one Si'man ba'Chutz and one Si'man bi'Fenim, since he performed Ma'aseh Chatas ha'Of ba'Chutz, what is the Kashya? Why is he not Chayav here too, for the same reason?

(c) Then why does Rav Nachman not ask the same Kashya on Shechitas Shabbos?
Why is it nevertheless obvious that he is Chayav for that?

(a) Rav Papa answer the Kashya by establishing the Beraisa by Chatas ha'Of.
How does that answer the Kashya?

(b) Why does he mention specifically Chatas ha'Of and not Olas ha'Of?

(c) What problem do we have with ...

  1. ... this answer, based on the fact that Rav Huna holds like Ula? Why would the Shechitah to Avodah-Zarah still negate the Shechitah?
  2. ... the suggestion that the Beraisa is speaking when the Shochet specifically states that he only wants to worship the animal at the end of the Shechitah, based on the Tana's reference to Chatas?
(d) What does this Kashya have to do with Rav Huna?
(a) How does Rav Zutra in the name of Rav Papa therefore establish the Beraisa, given that the Tana is referring to a Chatas ha'Of, and that the Shochet did not make any conditions?

(b) Rav Papa also comments on the fact that Rav Huna mentioned 'Si'man Echad'.
How does that reflect on Ula (Amar Rebbi Yochanan)'s opinion?

(c) Why would Rav Nachman not have queried Rav Huna had he simply concluded ' ... Keivan she'Shachtah, Asrah'?

(a) Rav Papa adds that Rav Nachman would not have queried Rav Huna either, had the latter not mentioned 'Behemas Chaveiro', because then we would have understood that Rav Huna holds that one cannot forbid somebody else's animal.
On what basis would Rav Nachman's Kashya from the Beraisa then have fallen away? Who does 'somebody else' pertain to?

(b) Why does Rav Papa need to say that? Why is it not obvious?

(a) Alternatively, when we ask why (if the Tana is speaking when the owner stipulated that he only wants to Shecht the animal to Avodah-Zarah at the end of the Shechitah) the Tana says 'Chatas' and not Zevach, we are referring to Shelamim in particular.
What is then the Kashya on Rav Huna?

(b) What is the difference between this Lashon and the first Lashon?

(c) Why is this Lashon preferable to the first one?

(a) Rav Nachman, Rav Anan and Rav Yitzchak all maintain that Reuven cannot render Shimon's animal forbidden, even with a Ma'aseh.
What sort of Ma'aseh are they talking about?

(b) We already established the Beraisa of 'ha'Shochet Chatas be'Shabbos' by a Chatas ha'Of. How do we know that this is the case even according to these Amora'im, too?

(c) Had the Tana referred to a Zevach, why would he have rather referred to an Olah than to a Chatas?

(d) According to Rav Nachman, Rav Anan and Rav Yitzchak, why does the Tana then speak about a Chatas ha'Of and not ...

  1. ... a Chatas Beheimah or an Asham?
  2. ... an Olas Beheimah?
  3. ... a Shelamim or other Kodshim Kalim?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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