Why did the rabbis forbid eating from shechita of the Cutim and forbade their wine? How did the rabbinic decrees relating to the Cutim change over time? Does one need to worry about demai (whether tithes were taken) in a food that contains produce from an am haaretz? If one gives the am haaretz the ingredients, in what cases would one need to be concerned that the am haaretz switched the ingredients with their own? What were the reactions of others to Rebbi’s permitting fruits of Beit Shean to be eaten without separating tithes and how did Rebbi respond to them?
This month’s learning is dedicated to the refuah shleima of our dear friend, Phyllis Hecht, גיטל פעשא בת מאשה רחל by all her many friends who love and admire her. Phyllis’ emuna, strength, and positivity are an inspiration.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
English
עברית
0:00
0:00
0:00
0:00
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is dedicated to the refuah shleima of our dear friend, Phyllis Hecht, גיטל פעשא בת מאשה רחל by all her many friends who love and admire her. Phyllis’ emuna, strength, and positivity are an inspiration.
Chullin 6
ואי סלקא דעתיך לא קבלה מיניה לישני ליה כאן כשישראל עומד על גביו כאן כשאין ישראל עומד על גביו אלא לאו ש”מ קבלה מיניה ש”מ
And if it enters your mind that Rabbi Zeira did not accept from Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi that Rabban Gamliel prohibited eating from the slaughter of a Samaritan even when a Jew was standing over him, let Rabbi Zeira resolve the matter for himself in a different manner: Here, where Rabbi Yoḥanan ate from the slaughter of a Samaritan, it was when a Jew was standing over him; there, where Rabban Gamliel prohibited eating from the slaughter of a Samaritan, it was when a Jew was not standing over him. Rather, must one not conclude from it that Rabbi Zeira accepted the response from Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi. The Gemara affirms: Indeed, learn this from it.
ומ”ט גזרו בהו רבנן כי הא דר”ש בן אלעזר שדריה ר”מ לאתויי חמרא מבי כותאי אשכחיה ההוא סבא א”ל (משלי כג, ב) ושמת סכין בלועך אם בעל נפש אתה הלך ר”ש בן אלעזר וספר דברים לפני ר”מ וגזר עליהן
§ The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that the Sages, Rabban Gamliel and his court, issued a decree rendering it prohibited to eat from the slaughter of Samaritans? The Gemara answers: It is like that case involving Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, in which Rabbi Meir dispatched him to bring wine from the area of the Samaritans. A certain elder found him and said to him: “And put a knife to your throat, if you are a man given to appetite” (Proverbs 23:2),as a warning to distance himself from them and not to drink their wine, because they were not reliable. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar went and related those matters before Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Meir issued a decree against them.
מאי טעמא אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק דמות יונה מצאו להן בראש הר גריזים שהיו עובדין אותה ור”מ לטעמיה דחייש למיעוטא וגזר רובא אטו מיעוטא ורבן גמליאל ובית דינו נמי כר”מ סבירא להו
What is the reason that the Samaritans are deemed unreliable? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: At the peak of Mount Gerizim they found the image of a dove, which the Samaritan residents of Mount Gerizim would worship; and Rabbi Meir issued the decree according to his line of reasoning that he takes the minority into consideration, and therefore, despite the fact that the majority of Samaritans did not live on Mount Gerizim, he issued a decree rendering meat slaughtered by the majority forbidden due to the minority that worshipped that idol. And Rabban Gamliel and his court also hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.
פשטיה דקרא במאי כתיב בתלמיד היושב לפני רבו דתני רבי חייא (משלי כג, א) כי תשב ללחום את מושל בין תבין את אשר לפניך ושמת סכין בלועך אם בעל נפש אתה
The Gemara asks: As to the plain meaning of that verse: “And put a knife to your throat, if you are a man given to appetite,” with regard to what matter is it written? The Gemara answers: It is written with regard to a student who is sitting before his teacher, as he must consider his words carefully. As Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches a baraita interpreting the verses: “When you sit to eat with a ruler, consider well [bin tavin] him that is before you; and put a knife to your throat, if you are a man given to appetite” (Proverbs 23:1–2).
אם יודע תלמיד ברבו שיודע להחזיר לו טעם בין ואם לאו תבין את אשר לפניך ושמת סכין בלועך אם בעל נפש אתה פרוש הימנו
The tanna explains the verse: If a student knows about his teacher that he knows to respond to him with a reasoned answer, seek wisdom [bin] from him. And if the student believes that the teacher is not capable of doing so, understand [tavin] who is sitting before you, and put a knife to your throat and refrain from embarrassing him with questions that he cannot answer. And if you are a man given to appetite and you seek an answer to your question, distance yourself from him.
רבי יצחק בן יוסף שדריה רבי אבהו לאתויי חמרא מבי כותאי אשכחיה ההוא סבא א”ל לית כאן שומרי תורה הלך רבי יצחק וספר דברים לפני רבי אבהו והלך רבי אבהו וספר דברים לפני רבי אמי ורבי אסי ולא זזו משם עד שעשאום עובדי כוכבים גמורין
Rabbi Abbahu dispatched Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Yosef to bring wine from the area of the Samaritans. A certain elder found him and said to him: The people here are not keepers of the Torah. Rabbi Yitzḥak went and related the matters before Rabbi Abbahu, and Rabbi Abbahu went and related the matters before Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, and they did not move from there until they rendered the Samaritans full-fledged gentiles.
למאי אי לשחיטה ויין נסך מהתם גזרו בהו רבנן אינהו גזור ולא קבלו מינייהו אתו רבי אמי ורבי אסי גזרו וקבלו מינייהו
The Gemara asks: For what matters did those Sages render them full-fledged gentiles? If it was to prohibit eating from their slaughter and to render their wine as wine used for a libation in idol worship, these prohibitions were issued previously. From there, from the generations of Rabbi Meir and Rabban Gamliel, the Sages issued a decree prohibiting them. The Gemara answers: They issued a decree, and the people did not accept it from them. Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi came and issued a decree, and the people accepted it from them.
מאי עובדי כוכבים גמורין אמר ר”נ בר יצחק לבטל רשות וליתן רשות
The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of full-fledged gentiles? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It means that the halakhic status of a Samaritan is like that of a gentile with regard to renouncing his domain in a jointly-owned courtyard on Shabbat and to transferring his domain in the courtyard to residents of that courtyard.
וכדתניא ישראל מומר משמר שבתו בשוק מבטל רשות ונותן רשות ושאינו משמר שבתו בשוק אינו מבטל רשות ונותן רשות
And this is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a Jewish transgressor who nevertheless observes his Shabbat in the marketplace, i.e., in public, if he failed to establish a joining of houses in a courtyard before Shabbat, his halakhic status is that of an observant Jew, and he may renounce his domain in the courtyard and transfer his domain in the courtyard. But a transgressor who does not observe his Shabbat in the marketplace may neither renounce his domain in the courtyard nor transfer his domain in the courtyard.
מפני שאמרו ישראל נותן רשות ומבטל רשות ובעובד כוכבים עד שישכור
This is because the Sages said: Only a Jew may verbally transfer rights in his domain or renounce his rights in his domain, but with regard to a gentile, the other residents cannot establish a joining of courtyards unless the residents of the courtyard lease his domain from him. The halakhic status of one who publicly desecrates Shabbat is that of a gentile.
כיצד אמר לו רשותי קנויה לך רשותי מבוטלת לך קנה ואינו צריך לזכות
How does a Jew transfer or renounce his domain? If a Jew says to his neighbor: My domain is transferred to you or my domain is renounced to you, his neighbor has acquired his domain, and it is not necessary for him to grant it to his neighbor by means of one of the standard modes of acquisition.
רבי זירא ורב אסי איקלעו לפונדקא דיאי אייתו לקמייהו ביצים המצומקות ביין רבי זירא לא אכל ורב אסי אכל א”ל רבי זירא לרב אסי ולא חייש מר לתערובת דמאי א”ל לאו אדעתאי
§ The Gemara revisits the statement that the righteous would not experience mishaps. Rabbi Zeira and Rav Asi happened to come to the inn of the town of Ya’ei. In the inn, they brought before these Sages eggs that shriveled after being cooked in wine. Rabbi Zeira did not eat the eggs, and Rav Asi ate them. Rabbi Zeira said to Rav Asi: And is the Master not concerned about the possibility that the dish is a mixture containing wine that is doubtfully tithed produce [demai]? Rav Asi said to him: It did not enter my mind.
א”ר זירא אפשר גזרו על התערובת דמאי ומסתייעא מילתא דרב אסי למיכל איסורא השתא בהמתן של צדיקים אין הקב”ה מביא תקלה על ידן צדיקים עצמן לא כל שכן
Rabbi Zeira said to himself: Is it possible that the Sages issued a decree on a mixture containing demai and the matter eventuated that Rav Asi ate forbidden food? Now, since even with regard to the animals of the righteous, the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not generate mishaps through them, is it not all the more so true that the righteous themselves would not experience mishaps?
נפק רבי זירא דק ואשכח דתנן הלוקח יין לתת לתוך המורייס או לתוך האלונתית כרשינין לעשות מהן טחינין עדשים לעשות מהן רסיסין חייב משום דמאי ואין צריך לומר משום ודאי
Rabbi Zeira emerged, analyzed, and found that no mishap was generated through Rav Asi, as we learned in a baraita (Tosefta, Demai 1:24): In the case of one who purchases wine to place into fish gravy [hamorayes] or into aluntit, a beverage in which wine is mixed, or one who purchases vetch to prepare grist from it, or lentils to prepare groats from it, if it is uncertain whether what he purchased is tithed, e.g., he bought it from one who is unreliable with regard to tithes [am ha’aretz], one is obligated to tithe it, due to the fact that it is demai. And needless to say, if it is certain that what he purchased is not tithed, he is obligated to tithe it due to the fact that it is certain that it is untithed produce.
והן עצמן מותרין מפני שהן תערובת
And they themselves, the gravy, aluntit, grist, and groats that one purchased from an am ha’aretz, are permitted, because they are a mixture. Since only one element of the mixture must be tithed, the food is permitted.
ולא גזרו על תערובת דמאי והתניא הנותן לשכנתו עיסה לאפות וקדירה לבשל אינו חושש לשאור ותבלין שבה לא משום שביעית ולא משום מעשר
The Gemara asks: And is it so that the Sages did not issue a decree on a mixture containing demai? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to one who gives his neighbor, who is an am ha’aretz, dough to bake and gives her leaven for the dough to rise, or gives her a pot of food and the spices to cook in it, he need not be concerned about the leaven and the spices that are in the dough and the pot respectively, that perhaps she replaced them with her own, neither with regard to the possibility that they are Sabbatical Year produce nor with regard to the possibility that tithe was not separated.
ואם אמר לה עשי לי משליכי חושש לשאור ותבלין שבה משום שביעית ומשום מעשר
And if he says to her: Prepare the dough or the food for me with your own leaven and spices, he must be concerned about the leaven and the spices that are in the dough and the pot respectively, with regard to the possibility that they are Sabbatical Year produce and with regard to the possibility that tithe was not separated, even though it is a mixture containing demai.
שאני התם דכיון דקאמר לה עשי לי משליכי כמאן דעריב בידים דמי רפרם אמר שאני שאור ותבלין דלטעמא עביד וטעמא לא בטיל
The Gemara answers: It is different there, as, since he said to her: Prepare the dough or the food for me from your own, it is like one who mixed it by direct action. Rafram said: Leaven and spices are different, as each of them is made for the purpose of adding taste to the mixture, and taste is not nullified in a mixture.
ולחלופי לא חיישינן והתנן הנותן לחמותו מעשר את שהוא נותן לה ואת שהוא נוטל ממנה מפני שחשודה מחלפת המתקלקל התם כדתניא טעמא א”ר יהודה רוצה היא בתקנת בתה ובושה מחתנה
The Gemara asks: And are we not concerned about replacement of the ingredients that he gave his neighbor with her own? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Demai 3:6): One who gives dough to his mother-in-law, who is suspect with regard to tithing, so that she will prepare it for him, must tithe everything that he gives her and everything that he takes back from her. This is because she is suspected of replacing an ingredient that spoils. The Gemara answers: There, the reason is like it is taught explicitly in that mishna, that Rabbi Yehuda said: The mother-in-law desires her daughter’s well-being and wants to ensure that she eats quality food, and is reticent to tell her son-in-law that she replaced the ingredients that spoiled.
ולעלמא לא חיישינן והתנן הנותן לפונדקית שלו מעשר את שהוא נותן לה ואת שהוא נוטל הימנה מפני שחשודה מחלפת התם נמי מוריא ואמרה בר בי רב ליכול חמימא ואנא איכול קרירא
The Gemara asks: And in general, in a case not involving one’s mother-in-law, are we not concerned about the possibility of replacement? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Demai 3:5): One who gives dough or a pot of food to his innkeeper [pundakit] who is an am ha’aretz to bake or cook, tithes what he gives her and tithes what he takes back from her, due to the fact that she is suspected of replacing the ingredients? The Gemara answers: There too, her intentions are good, as the innkeeper rationalizes her deception and says: Let the student of Torah eat my hot food and I will eat his cold food.
ולחלופי לא חיישינן והתניא אשת חבר טוחנת עם אשת עם הארץ בזמן שהיא טמאה אבל לא בזמן שהיא טהורה
The Gemara asks: And are we not concerned about replacement of the ingredients? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: The wife of a ḥaver, one devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, especially the halakhot of ritual purity, teruma, and tithes,grinds grain with the wife of an am ha’aretz when the wife of the ḥaver is ritually impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. In that case, there is no concern that she will eat her counterpart’s untithed produce, as, since she is impure she will refrain from touching the grain so that she will not render it impure. But she may not do so when she is ritually pure, due to the concern that she will eat the untithed produce.
רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר אף בזמן שהיא טמאה לא תטחון מפני שחבירתה נותנת לה ואוכלת
Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even when she is impure, the wife of the ḥaver may not grind grain together with the wife of the am ha’aretz, due to the fact that her counterpart gives her grain and she eats it without touching the rest of the grain.
השתא מיגזל גזלה חלופי מיבעיא אמר רב יוסף התם נמי מוריא ואמרה תורא מדישיה קאכיל
The Gemara infers: Now that there is suspicion that the wife of the am ha’aretz steals from her husband’s grain and gives it to her counterparts, is it necessary to say that she is suspect with regard to replacing ingredients? Rav Yosef said: There too there are special circumstances, as the wife of the am ha’aretz rationalizes her behavior and says metaphorically: The ox eats from its threshing, and believes that the wife of the ḥaver is entitled to some of the grain that she is grinding.
העיד רבי יהושע בן זרוז בן חמיו של רבי מאיר לפני רבי על ר”מ שאכל עלה של ירק בבית שאן והתיר רבי את בית שאן כולה על ידו
§ The Gemara resumes its discussion of the statement that the righteous would not experience mishaps. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Zeruz, son of the father-in-law of Rabbi Meir, testified before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi about Rabbi Meir that he ate the leaf of a vegetable in Beit She’an without tithing or separating teruma, as he holds that Beit She’an is not part of Eretz Yisrael and therefore is not sacred with its sanctity. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted all the produce of Beit She’an on the basis of his testimony.
חברו עליו אחיו ובית אביו אמרו לו מקום שאבותיך ואבות אבותיך נהגו בו איסור אתה תנהוג בו היתר
His brothers and his father’s household united against him and said to him: In a place where your fathers and the fathers of your fathers treated untithed produce as forbidden, will you treat it as permitted?
דרש להן מקרא זה (מלכים ב יח, ד) וכתת נחש הנחשת אשר עשה משה כי עד הימים ההמה היו בני ישראל מקטרים לו ויקרא לו נחושתן אפשר בא אסא ולא ביערו בא יהושפט ולא ביערו והלא כל עבודה זרה שבעולם אסא ויהושפט ביערום
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi interpreted this verse to them: “And he broke in pieces the copper serpent that Moses had made; for until those days the children of Israel burned incense to it; and it was called Nehushtan” (II Kings 18:4). Is it possible that they burned incense to it and Asa, a righteous king, came and did not eradicate it, and Jehoshaphat, a righteous king, came and did not eradicate it, and it remained until the time of Hezekiah? But didn’t Asa and Jehoshaphat eradicate all objects of idol worship in the world?
Follow
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I began my journey with Rabbanit Michelle more than five years ago. My friend came up with a great idea for about 15 of us to learn the daf and one of us would summarize weekly what we learned.
It was fun but after 2-3 months people began to leave. I have continued. Since the cycle began Again I have joined the Teaneck women.. I find it most rewarding in so many ways. Thank you
Dena Heller
New Jersey, United States
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Gitta Jaroslawicz-Neufeld
Far Rockaway, United States
I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.
Deborah Dickson
Ra’anana, Israel
After being so inspired by the siyum shas two years ago, I began tentatively learning daf yomi, like Rabbanut Michelle kept saying – taking one daf at a time. I’m still taking it one daf at a time, one masechet at a time, but I’m loving it and am still so inspired by Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran community, and yes – I am proud to be finishing Seder Mo’ed.
Caroline Graham-Ofstein
Bet Shemesh, Israel
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Caroline Ben-Ari
Karmiel, Israel
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Rebecca Stulberg
Ottawa, Canada
I began learning with Rabbanit Michelle’s wonderful Talmud Skills class on Pesachim, which really enriched my Pesach seder, and I have been learning Daf Yomi off and on over the past year. Because I’m relatively new at this, there is a “chiddush” for me every time I learn, and the knowledge and insights of the group members add so much to my experience. I feel very lucky to be a part of this.
Julie Landau
Karmiel, Israel
I learned Talmud as a student in Yeshivat Ramaz and felt at the time that Talmud wasn’t for me.
After reading Ilana Kurshan’s book I was intrigued and after watching the great siyum in Yerushalayim it ignited the spark to begin this journey. It has been a transformative life experience for me as a wife, mother, Savta and member of Klal Yisrael.
Elana Storch
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
While vacationing in San Diego, Rabbi Leah Herz asked if I’d be interested in being in hevruta with her to learn Daf Yomi through Hadran. Why not? I had loved learning Gemara in college in 1971 but hadn’t returned. With the onset of covid, Daf Yomi and Rabbanit Michelle centered me each day. Thank-you for helping me grow and enter this amazing world of learning.
Meryll Page
Minneapolis, MN, United States
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Shira Krebs
Minnesota, United States
I decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.
Yafit Fishbach
Memphis, Tennessee, United States
I started Daf during the pandemic. I listened to a number of podcasts by various Rebbeim until one day, I discovered Rabbanit Farbers podcast. Subsequently I joined the Hadran family in Eruvin. Not the easiest place to begin, Rabbanit Farber made it all understandable and fun. The online live group has bonded together and have really become a supportive, encouraging family.
Leah Goldford
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
I learned daf more off than on 40 years ago. At the beginning of the current cycle, I decided to commit to learning daf regularly. Having Rabanit Michelle available as a learning partner has been amazing. Sometimes I learn with Hadran, sometimes with my husband, and sometimes on my own. It’s been fun to be part of an extended learning community.
Miriam Pollack
Honolulu, Hawaii, United States
Years ago, I attended the local Siyum HaShas with my high school class. It was inspiring! Through that cycle and the next one, I studied masekhtot on my own and then did “daf yomi practice.” The amazing Hadran Siyum HaShas event firmed my resolve to “really do” Daf Yomi this time. It has become a family goal. We’ve supported each other through challenges, and now we’re at the Siyum of Seder Moed!
Elisheva Brauner
Jerusalem, Israel
In January 2020, my teaching partner at IDC suggested we do daf yomi. Thanks to her challenge, I started learning daily from Rabbanit Michelle. It’s a joy to be part of the Hadran community. (It’s also a tikkun: in 7th grade, my best friend and I tied for first place in a citywide gemara exam, but we weren’t invited to the celebration because girls weren’t supposed to be learning gemara).
Sara Averick
Jerusalem, Israel
I had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Terri Krivosha
Minneapolis, United States
I was exposed to Talmud in high school, but I was truly inspired after my daughter and I decided to attend the Women’s Siyum Shas in 2020. We knew that this was a historic moment. We were blown away, overcome with emotion at the euphoria of the revolution. Right then, I knew I would continue. My commitment deepened with the every-morning Virtual Beit Midrash on Zoom with R. Michelle.
Adina Hagege
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Caroline Ben-Ari
Karmiel, Israel
I began Daf Yomi with the last cycle. I was inspired by the Hadran Siyum in Yerushalayim to continue with this cycle. I have learned Daf Yomi with Rabanit Michelle in over 25 countries on 6 continents ( missing Australia)
Barbara Goldschlag
Silver Spring, MD, United States
My Daf journey began in August 2012 after participating in the Siyum Hashas where I was blessed as an “enabler” of others. Galvanized into my own learning I recited the Hadran on Shas in January 2020 with Rabbanit Michelle. That Siyum was a highlight in my life. Now, on round two, Daf has become my spiritual anchor to which I attribute manifold blessings.
Rina Goldberg
Englewood NJ, United States
Chullin 6
ืืื ืกืืงื ืืขืชืื ืื ืงืืื ืืื ืื ืืืฉื ื ืืื ืืื ืืฉืืฉืจืื ืขืืื ืขื ืืืื ืืื ืืฉืืื ืืฉืจืื ืขืืื ืขื ืืืื ืืื ืืื ืฉ”ื ืงืืื ืืื ืื ืฉ”ื
And if it enters your mind that Rabbi Zeira did not accept from Rabbi Yaโakov bar Idi that Rabban Gamliel prohibited eating from the slaughter of a Samaritan even when a Jew was standing over him, let Rabbi Zeira resolve the matter for himself in a different manner: Here, where Rabbi Yoแธฅanan ate from the slaughter of a Samaritan, it was when a Jew was standing over him; there, where Rabban Gamliel prohibited eating from the slaughter of a Samaritan, it was when a Jew was not standing over him. Rather, must one not conclude from it that Rabbi Zeira accepted the response from Rabbi Yaโakov bar Idi. The Gemara affirms: Indeed, learn this from it.
ืื”ื ืืืจื ืืื ืจืื ื ืื ืื ืืจ”ืฉ ืื ืืืขืืจ ืฉืืจืื ืจ”ื ืืืชืืื ืืืจื ืืื ืืืชืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ืกืื ื”ื (ืืฉืื ืื, ื) ืืฉืืช ืกืืื ืืืืขื ืื ืืขื ื ืคืฉ ืืชื ืืื ืจ”ืฉ ืื ืืืขืืจ ืืกืคืจ ืืืจืื ืืคื ื ืจ”ื ืืืืจ ืขืืืื
ยง The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that the Sages, Rabban Gamliel and his court, issued a decree rendering it prohibited to eat from the slaughter of Samaritans? The Gemara answers: It is like that case involving Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, in which Rabbi Meir dispatched him to bring wine from the area of the Samaritans. A certain elder found him and said to him: โAnd put a knife to your throat, if you are a man given to appetiteโ (Proverbs 23:2),as a warning to distance himself from them and not to drink their wine, because they were not reliable. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar went and related those matters before Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Meir issued a decree against them.
ืืื ืืขืื ืืืจ ืจื ื ืืื ืืจ ืืฆืืง ืืืืช ืืื ื ืืฆืื ืืื ืืจืืฉ ืืจ ืืจืืืื ืฉืืื ืขืืืืื ืืืชื ืืจ”ื ืืืขืืื ืืืืืฉ ืืืืขืืื ืืืืจ ืจืืื ืืื ืืืขืืื ืืจืื ืืืืืื ืืืืช ืืื ื ื ืื ืืจ”ื ืกืืืจื ืืื
What is the reason that the Samaritans are deemed unreliable? Rav Naแธฅman bar Yitzแธฅak said: At the peak of Mount Gerizim they found the image of a dove, which the Samaritan residents of Mount Gerizim would worship; and Rabbi Meir issued the decree according to his line of reasoning that he takes the minority into consideration, and therefore, despite the fact that the majority of Samaritans did not live on Mount Gerizim, he issued a decree rendering meat slaughtered by the majority forbidden due to the minority that worshipped that idol. And Rabban Gamliel and his court also hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.
ืคืฉืืื ืืงืจื ืืืื ืืชืื ืืชืืืื ืืืืฉื ืืคื ื ืจืื ืืชื ื ืจืื ืืืื (ืืฉืื ืื, ื) ืื ืชืฉื ืืืืื ืืช ืืืฉื ืืื ืชืืื ืืช ืืฉืจ ืืคื ืื ืืฉืืช ืกืืื ืืืืขื ืื ืืขื ื ืคืฉ ืืชื
The Gemara asks: As to the plain meaning of that verse: โAnd put a knife to your throat, if you are a man given to appetite,โ with regard to what matter is it written? The Gemara answers: It is written with regard to a student who is sitting before his teacher, as he must consider his words carefully. As Rabbi แธคiyya teaches a baraita interpreting the verses: โWhen you sit to eat with a ruler, consider well [bin tavin] him that is before you; and put a knife to your throat, if you are a man given to appetiteโ (Proverbs 23:1โ2).
ืื ืืืืข ืชืืืื ืืจืื ืฉืืืืข ืืืืืืจ ืื ืืขื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืชืืื ืืช ืืฉืจ ืืคื ืื ืืฉืืช ืกืืื ืืืืขื ืื ืืขื ื ืคืฉ ืืชื ืคืจืืฉ ืืืื ื
The tanna explains the verse: If a student knows about his teacher that he knows to respond to him with a reasoned answer, seek wisdom [bin] from him. And if the student believes that the teacher is not capable of doing so, understand [tavin] who is sitting before you, and put a knife to your throat and refrain from embarrassing him with questions that he cannot answer. And if you are a man given to appetite and you seek an answer to your question, distance yourself from him.
ืจืื ืืฆืืง ืื ืืืกืฃ ืฉืืจืื ืจืื ืืืื ืืืชืืื ืืืจื ืืื ืืืชืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ืกืื ื”ื ืืืช ืืื ืฉืืืจื ืชืืจื ืืื ืจืื ืืฆืืง ืืกืคืจ ืืืจืื ืืคื ื ืจืื ืืืื ืืืื ืจืื ืืืื ืืกืคืจ ืืืจืื ืืคื ื ืจืื ืืื ืืจืื ืืกื ืืื ืืื ืืฉื ืขื ืฉืขืฉืืื ืขืืืื ืืืืืื ืืืืจืื
Rabbi Abbahu dispatched Rabbi Yitzแธฅak ben Yosef to bring wine from the area of the Samaritans. A certain elder found him and said to him: The people here are not keepers of the Torah. Rabbi Yitzแธฅak went and related the matters before Rabbi Abbahu, and Rabbi Abbahu went and related the matters before Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, and they did not move from there until they rendered the Samaritans full-fledged gentiles.
ืืืื ืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ื ืกื ืืืชื ืืืจื ืืื ืจืื ื ืืื ืื ืืืืจ ืืื ืงืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืชื ืจืื ืืื ืืจืื ืืกื ืืืจื ืืงืืื ืืื ืืืื
The Gemara asks: For what matters did those Sages render them full-fledged gentiles? If it was to prohibit eating from their slaughter and to render their wine as wine used for a libation in idol worship, these prohibitions were issued previously. From there, from the generations of Rabbi Meir and Rabban Gamliel, the Sages issued a decree prohibiting them. The Gemara answers: They issued a decree, and the people did not accept it from them. Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi came and issued a decree, and the people accepted it from them.
ืืื ืขืืืื ืืืืืื ืืืืจืื ืืืจ ืจ”ื ืืจ ืืฆืืง ืืืื ืจืฉืืช ืืืืชื ืจืฉืืช
The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of full-fledged gentiles? Rav Naแธฅman bar Yitzแธฅak said: It means that the halakhic status of a Samaritan is like that of a gentile with regard to renouncing his domain in a jointly-owned courtyard on Shabbat and to transferring his domain in the courtyard to residents of that courtyard.
ืืืืชื ืื ืืฉืจืื ืืืืจ ืืฉืืจ ืฉืืชื ืืฉืืง ืืืื ืจืฉืืช ืื ืืชื ืจืฉืืช ืืฉืืื ื ืืฉืืจ ืฉืืชื ืืฉืืง ืืื ื ืืืื ืจืฉืืช ืื ืืชื ืจืฉืืช
And this is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a Jewish transgressor who nevertheless observes his Shabbat in the marketplace, i.e., in public, if he failed to establish a joining of houses in a courtyard before Shabbat, his halakhic status is that of an observant Jew, and he may renounce his domain in the courtyard and transfer his domain in the courtyard. But a transgressor who does not observe his Shabbat in the marketplace may neither renounce his domain in the courtyard nor transfer his domain in the courtyard.
ืืคื ื ืฉืืืจื ืืฉืจืื ื ืืชื ืจืฉืืช ืืืืื ืจืฉืืช ืืืขืืื ืืืืืื ืขื ืฉืืฉืืืจ
This is because the Sages said: Only a Jew may verbally transfer rights in his domain or renounce his rights in his domain, but with regard to a gentile, the other residents cannot establish a joining of courtyards unless the residents of the courtyard lease his domain from him. The halakhic status of one who publicly desecrates Shabbat is that of a gentile.
ืืืฆื ืืืจ ืื ืจืฉืืชื ืงื ืืื ืื ืจืฉืืชื ืืืืืืช ืื ืงื ื ืืืื ื ืฆืจืื ืืืืืช
How does a Jew transfer or renounce his domain? If a Jew says to his neighbor: My domain is transferred to you or my domain is renounced to you, his neighbor has acquired his domain, and it is not necessary for him to grant it to his neighbor by means of one of the standard modes of acquisition.
ืจืื ืืืจื ืืจื ืืกื ืืืงืืขื ืืคืื ืืงื ืืืื ืืืืชื ืืงืืืืื ืืืฆืื ืืืฆืืืงืืช ืืืื ืจืื ืืืจื ืื ืืื ืืจื ืืกื ืืื ื”ื ืจืื ืืืจื ืืจื ืืกื ืืื ืืืืฉ ืืจ ืืชืขืจืืืช ืืืื ื”ื ืืื ืืืขืชืื
ยง The Gemara revisits the statement that the righteous would not experience mishaps. Rabbi Zeira and Rav Asi happened to come to the inn of the town of Yaโei. In the inn, they brought before these Sages eggs that shriveled after being cooked in wine. Rabbi Zeira did not eat the eggs, and Rav Asi ate them. Rabbi Zeira said to Rav Asi: And is the Master not concerned about the possibility that the dish is a mixture containing wine that is doubtfully tithed produce [demai]? Rav Asi said to him: It did not enter my mind.
ื”ืจ ืืืจื ืืคืฉืจ ืืืจื ืขื ืืชืขืจืืืช ืืืื ืืืกืชืืืขื ืืืืชื ืืจื ืืกื ืืืืื ืืืกืืจื ืืฉืชื ืืืืชื ืฉื ืฆืืืงืื ืืื ืืงื”ื ืืืื ืชืงืื ืขื ืืื ืฆืืืงืื ืขืฆืื ืื ืื ืฉืื
Rabbi Zeira said to himself: Is it possible that the Sages issued a decree on a mixture containing demai and the matter eventuated that Rav Asi ate forbidden food? Now, since even with regard to the animals of the righteous, the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not generate mishaps through them, is it not all the more so true that the righteous themselves would not experience mishaps?
ื ืคืง ืจืื ืืืจื ืืง ืืืฉืื ืืชื ื ืืืืงื ืืื ืืชืช ืืชืื ืืืืจืืืก ืื ืืชืื ืืืืื ืชืืช ืืจืฉืื ืื ืืขืฉืืช ืืื ืืืื ืื ืขืืฉืื ืืขืฉืืช ืืื ืจืกืืกืื ืืืื ืืฉืื ืืืื ืืืื ืฆืจืื ืืืืจ ืืฉืื ืืืื
Rabbi Zeira emerged, analyzed, and found that no mishap was generated through Rav Asi, as we learned in a baraita (Tosefta, Demai 1:24): In the case of one who purchases wine to place into fish gravy [hamorayes] or into aluntit, a beverage in which wine is mixed, or one who purchases vetch to prepare grist from it, or lentils to prepare groats from it, if it is uncertain whether what he purchased is tithed, e.g., he bought it from one who is unreliable with regard to tithes [am haโaretz], one is obligated to tithe it, due to the fact that it is demai. And needless to say, if it is certain that what he purchased is not tithed, he is obligated to tithe it due to the fact that it is certain that it is untithed produce.
ืืื ืขืฆืื ืืืชืจืื ืืคื ื ืฉืื ืชืขืจืืืช
And they themselves, the gravy, aluntit, grist, and groats that one purchased from an am haโaretz, are permitted, because they are a mixture. Since only one element of the mixture must be tithed, the food is permitted.
ืืื ืืืจื ืขื ืชืขืจืืืช ืืืื ืืืชื ืื ืื ืืชื ืืฉืื ืชื ืขืืกื ืืืคืืช ืืงืืืจื ืืืฉื ืืื ื ืืืฉืฉ ืืฉืืืจ ืืชืืืื ืฉืื ืื ืืฉืื ืฉืืืขืืช ืืื ืืฉืื ืืขืฉืจ
The Gemara asks: And is it so that the Sages did not issue a decree on a mixture containing demai? But isnโt it taught in a baraita: With regard to one who gives his neighbor, who is an am haโaretz, dough to bake and gives her leaven for the dough to rise, or gives her a pot of food and the spices to cook in it, he need not be concerned about the leaven and the spices that are in the dough and the pot respectively, that perhaps she replaced them with her own, neither with regard to the possibility that they are Sabbatical Year produce nor with regard to the possibility that tithe was not separated.
ืืื ืืืจ ืื ืขืฉื ืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืฉืฉ ืืฉืืืจ ืืชืืืื ืฉืื ืืฉืื ืฉืืืขืืช ืืืฉืื ืืขืฉืจ
And if he says to her: Prepare the dough or the food for me with your own leaven and spices, he must be concerned about the leaven and the spices that are in the dough and the pot respectively, with regard to the possibility that they are Sabbatical Year produce and with regard to the possibility that tithe was not separated, even though it is a mixture containing demai.
ืฉืื ื ืืชื ืืืืื ืืงืืืจ ืื ืขืฉื ืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ืืขืจืื ืืืืื ืืื ืจืคืจื ืืืจ ืฉืื ื ืฉืืืจ ืืชืืืื ืืืืขืื ืขืืื ืืืขืื ืื ืืืื
The Gemara answers: It is different there, as, since he said to her: Prepare the dough or the food for me from your own, it is like one who mixed it by direct action. Rafram said: Leaven and spices are different, as each of them is made for the purpose of adding taste to the mixture, and taste is not nullified in a mixture.
ืืืืืืคื ืื ืืืืฉืื ื ืืืชื ื ืื ืืชื ืืืืืชื ืืขืฉืจ ืืช ืฉืืื ื ืืชื ืื ืืืช ืฉืืื ื ืืื ืืื ื ืืคื ื ืฉืืฉืืื ืืืืคืช ืืืชืงืืงื ืืชื ืืืชื ืื ืืขืื ื”ืจ ืืืืื ืจืืฆื ืืื ืืชืงื ืช ืืชื ืืืืฉื ืืืชื ื
The Gemara asks: And are we not concerned about replacement of the ingredients that he gave his neighbor with her own? But didnโt we learn in a mishna (Demai 3:6): One who gives dough to his mother-in-law, who is suspect with regard to tithing, so that she will prepare it for him, must tithe everything that he gives her and everything that he takes back from her. This is because she is suspected of replacing an ingredient that spoils. The Gemara answers: There, the reason is like it is taught explicitly in that mishna, that Rabbi Yehuda said: The mother-in-law desires her daughterโs well-being and wants to ensure that she eats quality food, and is reticent to tell her son-in-law that she replaced the ingredients that spoiled.
ืืืขืืื ืื ืืืืฉืื ื ืืืชื ื ืื ืืชื ืืคืื ืืงืืช ืฉืื ืืขืฉืจ ืืช ืฉืืื ื ืืชื ืื ืืืช ืฉืืื ื ืืื ืืืื ื ืืคื ื ืฉืืฉืืื ืืืืคืช ืืชื ื ืื ืืืจืื ืืืืจื ืืจ ืื ืจื ืืืืื ืืืืื ืืื ื ืืืืื ืงืจืืจื
The Gemara asks: And in general, in a case not involving oneโs mother-in-law, are we not concerned about the possibility of replacement? But didnโt we learn in a mishna (Demai 3:5): One who gives dough or a pot of food to his innkeeper [pundakit] who is an am haโaretz to bake or cook, tithes what he gives her and tithes what he takes back from her, due to the fact that she is suspected of replacing the ingredients? The Gemara answers: There too, her intentions are good, as the innkeeper rationalizes her deception and says: Let the student of Torah eat my hot food and I will eat his cold food.
ืืืืืืคื ืื ืืืืฉืื ื ืืืชื ืื ืืฉืช ืืืจ ืืืื ืช ืขื ืืฉืช ืขื ืืืจืฅ ืืืื ืฉืืื ืืืื ืืื ืื ืืืื ืฉืืื ืืืืจื
The Gemara asks: And are we not concerned about replacement of the ingredients? But isnโt it taught in a baraita: The wife of a แธฅaver, one devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, especially the halakhot of ritual purity, teruma, and tithes,grinds grain with the wife of an am haโaretz when the wife of the แธฅaver is ritually impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. In that case, there is no concern that she will eat her counterpartโs untithed produce, as, since she is impure she will refrain from touching the grain so that she will not render it impure. But she may not do so when she is ritually pure, due to the concern that she will eat the untithed produce.
ืจืื ืฉืืขืื ืื ืืืขืืจ ืืืืจ ืืฃ ืืืื ืฉืืื ืืืื ืื ืชืืืื ืืคื ื ืฉืืืืจืชื ื ืืชื ืช ืื ืืืืืืช
Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even when she is impure, the wife of the แธฅaver may not grind grain together with the wife of the am haโaretz, due to the fact that her counterpart gives her grain and she eats it without touching the rest of the grain.
ืืฉืชื ืืืืื ืืืื ืืืืคื ืืืืขืื ืืืจ ืจื ืืืกืฃ ืืชื ื ืื ืืืจืื ืืืืจื ืชืืจื ืืืืฉืื ืงืืืื
The Gemara infers: Now that there is suspicion that the wife of the am haโaretz steals from her husbandโs grain and gives it to her counterparts, is it necessary to say that she is suspect with regard to replacing ingredients? Rav Yosef said: There too there are special circumstances, as the wife of the am haโaretz rationalizes her behavior and says metaphorically: The ox eats from its threshing, and believes that the wife of the แธฅaver is entitled to some of the grain that she is grinding.
ืืขืื ืจืื ืืืืฉืข ืื ืืจืื ืื ืืืื ืฉื ืจืื ืืืืจ ืืคื ื ืจืื ืขื ืจ”ื ืฉืืื ืขืื ืฉื ืืจืง ืืืืช ืฉืื ืืืชืืจ ืจืื ืืช ืืืช ืฉืื ืืืื ืขื ืืื
ยง The Gemara resumes its discussion of the statement that the righteous would not experience mishaps. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Zeruz, son of the father-in-law of Rabbi Meir, testified before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi about Rabbi Meir that he ate the leaf of a vegetable in Beit Sheโan without tithing or separating teruma, as he holds that Beit Sheโan is not part of Eretz Yisrael and therefore is not sacred with its sanctity. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted all the produce of Beit Sheโan on the basis of his testimony.
ืืืจื ืขืืื ืืืื ืืืืช ืืืื ืืืจื ืื ืืงืื ืฉืืืืชืื ืืืืืช ืืืืชืื ื ืืื ืื ืืืกืืจ ืืชื ืชื ืืื ืื ืืืชืจ
His brothers and his fatherโs household united against him and said to him: In a place where your fathers and the fathers of your fathers treated untithed produce as forbidden, will you treat it as permitted?
ืืจืฉ ืืื ืืงืจื ืื (ืืืืื ื ืื, ื) ืืืชืช ื ืืฉ ืื ืืฉืช ืืฉืจ ืขืฉื ืืฉื ืื ืขื ืืืืื ืืืื ืืื ืื ื ืืฉืจืื ืืงืืจืื ืื ืืืงืจื ืื ื ืืืฉืชื ืืคืฉืจ ืื ืืกื ืืื ืืืขืจื ืื ืืืืฉืคื ืืื ืืืขืจื ืืืื ืื ืขืืืื ืืจื ืฉืืขืืื ืืกื ืืืืืฉืคื ืืืขืจืื
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi interpreted this verse to them: โAnd he broke in pieces the copper serpent that Moses had made; for until those days the children of Israel burned incense to it; and it was called Nehushtanโ (IIย Kings 18:4). Is it possible that they burned incense to it and Asa, a righteous king, came and did not eradicate it, and Jehoshaphat, a righteous king, came and did not eradicate it, and it remained until the time of Hezekiah? But didnโt Asa and Jehoshaphat eradicate all objects of idol worship in the world?
Follow
