(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 80

CHULIN 80 - dedicated by Rabbi Kornfeld's father in memory of his aunt, Malka Gitel bas Reb Yakov Mordechai (Malvina Marmorstein), who took him into her home and raised him like her own child after the Holocaust. Her Yahrzeit is 20 Nisan.


(a) Rav Yehudah considers a Coy a unique species of animal.
Why does he not consider it the child of a deer and a goat (like Rebbi Eliezer and the Rabbanan)?

(b) According to Rav Yehudah, is a Coy a Beheimah or a Chayah?

(c) How does Rav Nachman (who agrees with Rav Yehudah's basic reasoning) define a Coy?

(d) We cite a Beraisa, where the Tana Kama supports Rav Nachman, and Rebbi Yossi, Rav Yehudah, whereas Raban Shimon ben Gamliel defines it as a Beheimah.
What does he add that Beis Dushai (or Rashai) used to do with the Coy?

(a) What does Rebbi Zeira Amar ... Rav Hamnuna say about 'Izi de'Bali'? What are 'Izi de'Bali'?

(b) He does not consider them Chayos on the basis of a statement by Rebbi Yitzchak.
What did Rebbi Yitzchak say in connection with the ten animals that the Torah lists in Re'ei? How many Beheimos and how many Chayos does the Torah list there?

(c) What does Rebbi Zeira prove from there?

(a) We ask why "Ayal u'Tzvi ... ve'Ako ... U'se'o va'Zamer" should not be a 'P'rat' and "Kol Beheimah" a 'K'lal'.
So what if it were?

(b) On what basis do we refute this Kashya?

(c) Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Ika asked that perhaps the Izi de'Bali are a species of Ako.
What did Rav Acha b'rei de'Rava (or b'rei de'Rav Ivya) ask Rav Ashi?

(d) Judging by what Rav Chanan told Rav Ashi, citing a ruling of Ameimar, the latter seems to consider Izi de'Ba'ali a Chayah.
What ruling did Ameimar issue regarding them?

(a) In response to a She'eilah from Aba b'rei de'Rav Menimin bar Chiya, Rav Huna bar Chiya cited a Beraisa, in connection with the Shor ha'Bar.
What do the Rabbanan there prove from the fact that Unklus translates "Se'o" as 'Turbala' (a forest ox)?

(b) What does Rebbi Yossi say? Why does he disagree with the Tana Kama?

(c) What does Rav Huna bar Chiya now extrapolate from there?

(d) What do Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Ika, Ravina and Ameimar respectively, say about this?

Answers to questions



(a) Rebbi Oshaya points out that our entire Mishnah does not go like Rebbi Shimon.
What does Rebbi Shimon say later in the Perek)?

(b) What are the ramifications of this ruling regarding 'Oso ve'es B'no'?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah that 'Kodshim ba'Chutz, ha'Rishon Chayav Kareis, u'Sheneihem Pesulim, u'Sheneihem Sofgim es ha'Arba'im'.
What will Rebbi Shimon hold in that case?

(b) From where do we learn that Shechutei Chutz is a Shechitah she'Einah Re'uyah

(c) In that case, why is one ever Chayav for Shechutei Chutz?

(a) 'Chulin bi'Fenim, Sheneihem Pesulim, ve'ha'Sheini Sofeg es ha'Arba'im'.
Why will Rebbi Shimon object to that? What ought the second one to receive?

(b) 'Kodshim bi'Fenim, ha'Rishon Kasher u'Patur, ve'ha'Sheini Sofeg es ha'Arba'im u'Pasul'.
What problem will Rebbi Shimon have with this? What makes every Shechitas Kodshim a Shechitah she'Einah Re'uyah'?

(c) All this seems obvious.
What is Rebbi Oshaya coming to teach us? Which of the three cases would we have otherwise thought that Rebbi Shimon concedes?

(a) In the case of Kodshim bi'Fenim, the Tana sentences the second Shochet to Malkos because of 'Oso ve'es B'no'. What La'av are we referring to, when, quoting a Beraisa, we ask that he ought to be Chayav a second set of Malkos?

(b) On what grounds do we query the answer that the Tana is only concerned with the La'av of 'Oso ve'es B'no'?

(c) How do we answer this Kashya? If the Tana mentions the Malkos of Shechutei Chutz regarding the first Shochet in the case of Kodshim ba'Chutz, why does he decline to mention the Malkos of "u'le'Neder Lo Yeratzeh" regarding the second Shochet in the case of Kodshim bi'Fenim?

(a) Rebbi Zeira answers that the La'av of "Lo Yeratzeh" is different. Based on the Pasuk "mi'Yom ha'Shemini va'Hal'ah Yeratzeh ... ", in what way is it different?

(b) How do we know that this is a case of 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei', and not a 'La'av she'Kadmo Asei' (like that of "Lo Sikach ha'Eim al ha'Banim" ... "Shale'ach Teshalach es ha'Eim ... ")?

(a) What does Rebbi Apturiki extrapolate from the Pasuk in Emor ...
  1. ... "Ve'hayah *Shiv'as Yamim* Tachas Imo"?
  2. ... "*ba'Yom ha'Shemini* Titno Li"?
(b) How do we reconcile the apparent contradiction?

(c) What Kashya does this pose on the previous D'rashah?

(d) How do we answer it?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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