(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 118


(a) Having just precluded a Shomer from the Din of Tum'as Neveilos, what do we learn from the Pasuk in Shemini "ha'Noge'a be'Nivlasah *Yitma* ... " (when it could have written "Tamei")?

(b) What is wrong with the initial text of the Beraisa "be'Nivlasah", 've'Lo Or she'Ein Alav k'Zayis Basar. Yachol ha'Noge'a k'Neged Basar me'Achorav Lo Yehei Tamei, Talmud Lomar "Yitma" '?

(c) How does Rava (or K'di) amend the text?

(a) The Mishnah in Uktzin discusses Yad and Shomer.
In which regard do they ...
  1. ... have the same Din?
  2. ... differ in Halachah? Which Chumra does Shomer posses that Yad does not?
(b) How is it possible for a bone to be a Yad but not a Shomer?

(c) Which kind of Tum'ah is the Tana referring to?

(d) What is the Tana referring to when he says 'Lo Yad ve'Lo Shomer, Lo Tamei ve'Lo Metamei'?

(a) What does the Tana learn from the Pasuk "ve'Chi Yutan Mayim al Zera Ve'nafal mi'Nivlasam Alav, Tamei Hu *Lachem*"?

(b) And he learns the same thing from the Pasuk there "ve'Chi Yamus min ha'Beheimah Asher Hi Lachem ... ".
Why does he need two Pesukim for the same thing?

(c) From where do we know that a Shomer too, both receives Tum'ah and is Metamei others?

(d) Then why does the Torah find it necessary to write "al Kol Zera Zeru'a Asher Yizare'a"?

(a) We query this however, by asking that perhaps we only know Yad Lehachnis by Ochel (and not Lehotzi), and Shomer Lechachnis and Lehotzi (but not Letzaref). Bearing in mind the Pasuk "ve'Chi Yamus min ha'Beheimah ... " (our source for Lehotzi), why do we think that we would not know 'Lehotzi' by Yad?

(b) From where would we then learn a. Lechachnis and b. Lehotzi by Shomer?

(c) And we answer that it is not feasible to suggest Lehachnis and not Lehotzi.
Why not?

(d) We then ask that perhaps we ought to say the reverse, Yad Lehotzi and Shomer Lehachnis and Lehotzi (but not Letzaref). What do we mean when we answer that there is an extra 'Yad' ("Tanur ve'Kirayim Yutatz ... Lachem")?

(a) We set about working out which Yad is superfluous.
Why could we not learn ...
  1. ... Tanur and Neveilah from Zera'im?
  2. ... Neveilah and Zera'im from Tanur?
  3. ... Zera'im and Tanur from Neveilah?
(b) If we cannot learn two from one, we try learning one from two. Initially, we refute the suggestion to learn Zera'im from Tanur and Neveilah, on the grounds that Zera'im require Hechsher, whereas Tanur and Neveilah do not. What objection does Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua raise to that Pircha?

(c) So we change the Pircha to the fact that Zera'im receives its Tum'ah through touching something Tamei, whereas Tanur and Neveilah do not. Seeing as this is neither a Kula or a Chumra, how can it pass as a Pircha?

(d) And on what grounds can we not learn Tanur from Zera'im and Neveilah?

(a) So we suggest to learn Yad Lehachnis - from Yad di'Neveilah (which we are able to learn with a 'Mah ha'Tzad') from Zera'im and Tanur).
How do we refute this source too? Why do we need the Pasuk by Neveilah, even though basically, we are able to learn it from Zera'im and Tanur?

(b) What is an example of Yad di'Neveilah being Metamei Adam?

(a) So we try to learn Yad from Shomer di'Neveilah ("Yitma", as we learned on top of the Amud).
Why is this Pasuk not needed to teach us that the Shomer combines with the Neveilah to make up the Shi'ur k'Zayis?

(b) But how can we learn Yad de'Ochel from Shomer di'Neveilah?

(c) Why do we need to go through two stages? Why can we not simply learn Yad de'Alma (meaning Ochel) 'Im Eino Inyan' from Shomer di'Neveilah?

(d) We refute this explanation too however, because we need it for Shomer. How is that?

Answers to questions



(a) We finally reinstate the original explanation 'Yad Lehachnis, Yad Lehotzi, Shomer Letzaref', by rejecting the earlier Kashya 've'Eima Yad Lehotzi ve'Lo Lehachnis ... '.
Why is that Kashya unacceptable?

(b) Seeing as Shomer does not combine to make up the Shi'ur Neveilah, why does the Torah see fit to write "Yitma', to include Shomer by Neveilah? Why can we not rely on the 'Kal-va'Chomer' from Yad?

(c) If so, how can we Darshen Letzaref from Shomer de'Alma ("al Kol Zera Zeru'a ... ")? Why can we not say there also 'Milsa de'Asya be'Kal-va'Chomer ... ' (and apply it to Hachnasah de'Shomer)?

(d) Rav Chaviva establishes the last explanation ('Im Eino Inyan le'Shomer di'Neveilah ... T'neihu Inyan le'Yad de'Alma'.
How does he answer the Kashya 've'Eima ... T'neihu Inyan le'Shomer de'Alma'? Why is Shomer di'Neveilah different?

(a) So we conclude that it is not possible to learn one Yad from the other, and that we therefore need all the Yados to teach us Yad Lehotzi.
Why do we need Yad di'Neveilah?

(b) And from where do we learn ...

  1. ... Yad de'Hachnasah?
  2. ... Letzaref?
(a) The Mishnah in Uktzin lists the Pitum (the protuberance) of a pomegranate among the things that combine to make up the Shi'ur of Tum'as Ochlin.
Why is that?

(b) Then why does the Tana preclude the fluff inside it (which is also a Shomer)?

(c) What is the problem with the Mishnah in Uktzin? Why would we have thought otherwise?

(d) On which other Mishnah can we ask the same Kashya?

(e) We cite the source Pasuk once more "al Kol Zera Zaru'a Asher Yizare'a". How does the answer lie in the words of the Pasuk?

(a) According to Rav Chiya bar Ashi, there is a Yad for Tum'ah, but not for Hechsher. What does he mean?

(b) What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(c) What are the two possible approaches to explain the Machlokes?

(d) How will we explain it, if the basis of the Machlokes is ...

  1. ... a Pasuk, bearing in mind that the Pasuk preceding the Tum'ah of Yad ("Tamei Hu *Lachem*") is "ve'Chi Yutan Mayim al Zera ... "?
  2. ... a S'vara? What is the S'vara to say that the Din of Yad extends to Hechsher?
(a) Whose opinion has the support of a Beraisa?

(b) In which other regard does the Tana compare Hechsher to Tum'ah?

(c) How does the Toras Kohanim prove that crops can only possibly become Tamei after they have been detached?

(a) If, according to Rav, the minimum size food to which the Din of Yad applies (both as regards Tziruf and Lehachnis and Lehotzi) is a k'Zayis, what is the minimum size pertaining to a Shomer?

(b) Seeing as the minimum Shi'ur of Tum'as Ochlin is a k'Beitzah, what does Rav mean?

(c) What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(d) What will Rebbi Yochanan say about becoming a Yad for less than the size of a Pul?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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