Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

February 24, 2019 | ื™ืดื˜ ื‘ืื“ืจ ืืณ ืชืฉืขืดื˜

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Chullin 89

The gemara praises humility, esp. in leaders. Why is it permitted to cover blood with dust of a city that all worshipped idols (irย hanidachat)? Two answers are given. What are reasons for the mitzva of covering the blood? Details are brought in the mishnaย regarding the sciatic nerve that is forbidden to be eaten. The gemara questions the line in the mishna regarding that itย is relevant for sacrifices – what is the meaning of that phrase?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

ืื ืžื—ื•ื˜ ื•ืขื“ ืฉืจื•ืš ื ืขืœ ื–ื›ื• ื‘ื ื™ื• ืœืฉืชื™ ืžืฆื•ืช ืœื—ื•ื˜ ืฉืœ ืชื›ืœืช ื•ืจืฆื•ืขื” ืฉืœ ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ

โ€œThat I will not take a thread nor a shoe strap nor anything that is yoursโ€ (Genesis 14:23), distancing himself from anything not rightfully his, his children merited two mitzvot: The thread of sky-blue wool worn on ritual fringes and the strap of phylacteries.

ื‘ืฉืœืžื ืจืฆื•ืขื” ืฉืœ ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืจืื• ื›ืœ ืขืžื™ ื”ืืจืฅ ื›ื™ ืฉื ื”ืณ ื ืงืจื ืขืœื™ืš ื•ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืืœื™ืขื–ืจ ื”ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืื•ืžืจ ืืœื• ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ ืฉื‘ืจืืฉ ืืœื ื—ื•ื˜ ืฉืœ ืชื›ืœืช ืžืื™ ื”ื™ื

The Gemara asks: Granted, the strap of the phylacteries imparts benefit, as it is written: โ€œAnd all the peoples of the earth shall see that the name of the Lord is called upon you; and they shall be afraid of youโ€ (Deuteronomy 28:10). And it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: This is a reference to the phylacteries of the head, upon which the name of God is written. Phylacteries therefore impart the splendor and grandeur of God and are a fit reward. But what is the benefit imparted by the thread of sky-blue wool?

ื“ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ืื•ืžืจ ืžื” ื ืฉืชื ื” ืชื›ืœืช ืžื›ืœ ื”ืฆื‘ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืฉืชื›ืœืช ื“ื•ืžื” ืœื™ื ื•ื™ื ื“ื•ืžื” ืœืจืงื™ืข ื•ืจืงื™ืข ื“ื•ืžื” ืœืื‘ืŸ ืกืคื™ืจ ื•ืื‘ืŸ ืกืคื™ืจ ื“ื•ืžื” ืœื›ืกื ื”ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืจืื• ืืช ืืœื”ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื•ืชื—ืช ืจื’ืœื™ื• ื•ื’ื•ืณ ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื›ืžืจืื” ืื‘ืŸ ืกืคื™ืจ ื“ืžื•ืช ื›ืกื

The Gemara answers: As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: What is different about sky-blue from all other colors such that it was specified for the mitzva of ritual fringes? It is because sky-blue dye is similar in its color to the sea, and the sea is similar to the sky, and the sky is similar to the sapphire stone, and the sapphire stone is similar to the Throne of Glory, as it is stated: โ€œAnd they saw the God of Israel; and there was under His feet the like of a paved work of sapphire stone, and the like of the very heaven for clearnessโ€ (Exodus 24:10). This verse shows that the heavens are similar to sapphire, and it is written: โ€œAnd above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stoneโ€ (Ezekiel 1:26). Therefore, the throne is similar to the heavens. The color of sky blue dye acts as an indication of the bond between the Jewish people and the Divine Presence.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื ืงืฉื” ื’ื–ืœ ื”ื ืื›ืœ ืฉืืคื™ืœื• ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ื’ืžื•ืจื™ื ืื™ื ืŸ ื™ื›ื•ืœื™ืŸ ืœื”ื—ื–ื™ืจื• ืฉื ืืžืจ ื‘ืœืขื“ื™ ืจืง ืืฉืจ ืื›ืœื• ื”ื ืขืจื™ื

The Gemara above mentioned that Abraham refused to accept property that did not belong to him. With regard to this, Rabbi Abba says: Difficult is the return of theft that has been consumed, as even the perfectly righteous are unable to return it, as it is stated: โ€œThat I will not take a thread nor a shoe strap nor anything that is yoursโ€ฆexcept only that which the young men have eaten with meโ€ (Genesis 14:23โ€“24). Even the righteous Abraham was unable to return that which the young men had already consumed.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื‘ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื›ืœ ืžืงื•ื ืฉืืชื” ืžื•ืฆื ื“ื‘ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ืจื‘ื™ ืืœื™ืขื–ืจ ื‘ื ื• ืฉืœ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื”ื’ืœื™ืœื™ ื‘ื”ื’ื“ื” ืขืฉื” ืื–ื ื™ืš ื›ืืคืจื›ืกืช ืœื ืžืจื‘ื›ื ืžื›ืœ ื”ืขืžื™ื ื—ืฉืง ื”ืณ ื‘ื›ื ื•ื’ื•ืณ ืืžืจ ืœื”ื ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืœื™ืฉืจืืœ ื—ื•ืฉืงื ื™ ื‘ื›ื ืฉืืคื™ืœื• ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืื ื™ ืžืฉืคื™ืข ืœื›ื ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืืชื ืžืžืขื˜ื™ืŸ ืขืฆืžื›ื ืœืคื ื™

ยง Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: Any place where you find the statements of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, in reference to aggada, make your ears like a funnel [kaโ€™afarkeset], i.e., be receptive to his words. As Rabbi Eliezer interpreted the verse: โ€œNot because you are more in number than any people did the Lord desire you and choose you, for you were the fewest of all peoplesโ€ (Deuteronomy 7:7), as follows: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: I desire you, since even at a time that I bestow greatness upon you, you diminish, i.e., humble, yourselves before Me.

ื ืชืชื™ ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืœืื‘ืจื”ื ืืžืจ ืœืคื ื™ ื•ืื ื›ื™ ืขืคืจ ื•ืืคืจ ืœืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ืืžืจ ื•ื ื—ื ื• ืžื” ืœื“ื•ื“ ืืžืจ ื•ืื ื›ื™ ืชื•ืœืขืช ื•ืœื ืื™ืฉ

I granted greatness to Abraham, yet he said before Me: โ€œAnd I am but dust and ashesโ€ (Genesis 18:27). I granted greatness to Moses and Aaron, yet Moses said of the two of them: โ€œAnd what are weโ€ (Exodus 16:7). I granted greatness to David, yet he said: โ€œBut I am a worm, and no manโ€ (Psalms 22:7).

ืื‘ืœ ืื•ืžื•ืช ื”ืขื•ืœื ืื™ื ืŸ ื›ืŸ ื ืชืชื™ ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืœื ืžืจื•ื“ ืืžืจ ื”ื‘ื” ื ื‘ื ื” ืœื ื• ืขื™ืจ ืœืคืจืขื” ืืžืจ ืžื™ ื”ืณ ืœืกื ื—ืจื™ื‘ ืืžืจ ืžื™ ื‘ื›ืœ ืืœื”ื™ ื”ืืจืฆื•ืช ื•ื’ื•ืณ ืœื ื‘ื•ื›ื“ื ืฆืจ ืืžืจ ืืขืœื” ืขืœ ื‘ืžืชื™ ืขื‘ ืœื—ื™ืจื ืžืœืš ืฆื•ืจ ืืžืจ ืžื•ืฉื‘ ืืœื”ื™ื ื™ืฉื‘ืชื™ ื‘ืœื‘ ื™ืžื™ื

But the gentile nations of the world are not so. I granted greatness to Nimrod, yet he said: โ€œCome, let us build a city and a tower, with its top in heaven, and let us make for ourselves a nameโ€ (Genesis 11:4). I granted greatness to Pharaoh, yet he said: โ€œWho is the Lordโ€ (Exodus 5:2). I granted greatness to Sennacherib, yet he said: โ€œWho are they among all the gods of the countries that have delivered their country out of my hand, that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem out of my handโ€ (IIย Kings 18:35). I granted greatness to Nebuchadnezzar, yet he said: โ€œI will ascend above the heights of the cloudsโ€ (Isaiah 14:14). I granted greatness to แธคiram, king of Tyre, yet he said: โ€œI sit in the seat of God, in the heart of the seasโ€ (Ezekiel 28:2).

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื ื•ืื™ืชื™ืžื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืฉื ืืžืจ ื‘ืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ื™ื•ืชืจ ืžืžื” ืฉื ืืžืจ ื‘ืื‘ืจื”ื ื“ืื™ืœื• ื‘ืื‘ืจื”ื ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืื ื›ื™ ืขืคืจ ื•ืืคืจ ื•ืื™ืœื• ื‘ืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื ื—ื ื• ืžื” ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื ื•ืื™ืชื™ืžื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื”ืขื•ืœื ืžืชืงื™ื™ื ืืœื ื‘ืฉื‘ื™ืœ ืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ื›ื ื•ื ื—ื ื• ืžื” ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืชื ืชืœื” ืืจืฅ ืขืœ ื‘ืœื™ืžื”

The Gemara relates: Rava says, and some say Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: Greater is that which is stated with regard to Moses and Aaron than that which is stated with regard to Abraham. As with regard to Abraham it is written: โ€œAnd I am but dust and ashes,โ€ while with regard to Moses and Aaron it is written: โ€œAnd what are we,โ€ i.e., we are not even dust and ashes. And Rava says, and some say Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: The world endures only in the merit of Moses and Aaron. It is written here: โ€œAnd what are we,โ€ and it written elsewhere: โ€œHe hangs the earth upon nothingโ€ (Job 26:7). That is, the earth endures in the merit of those who said of themselves that they are nothing, i.e., Moses and Aaron.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื™ืœืขื ืื™ืŸ ื”ืขื•ืœื ืžืชืงื™ื™ื ืืœื ื‘ืฉื‘ื™ืœ ืžื™ ืฉื‘ื•ืœื ืืช ืขืฆืžื• ื‘ืฉืขืช ืžืจื™ื‘ื” ืฉื ืืžืจ ืชืœื” ืืจืฅ ืขืœ ื‘ืœื™ืžื” ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื”ื• ืืžืจ ืžื™ ืฉืžืฉื™ื ืขืฆืžื• ื›ืžื™ ืฉืื™ื ื• ืฉื ืืžืจ ื•ืžืชื—ืช ื–ืจื•ืขื•ืช ืขื•ืœื

With regard to that verse, Rabbi Ileโ€™a says: The world endures only in the merit of one who restrains [shebolem] himself during a quarrel, as it is stated: โ€œHe hangs the earth upon nothing [belima]. Rabbi Abbahu says: The world endures only in the merit of one who renders himself as if he were non-existent, as it is stated: โ€œAnd underneath are the everlasting armsโ€ (Deuteronomy 33:27), i.e., one who considers himself to be underneath everything else is the everlasting arm that upholds the world.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ืฆื—ืง ืžืื™ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืืžื ื ืืœื ืฆื“ืง ืชื“ื‘ืจื•ืŸ ืžื™ืฉืจื™ื ืชืฉืคื˜ื• ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื ืžื” ืื•ืžื ื•ืชื• ืฉืœ ืื“ื ื‘ืขื•ืœื ื”ื–ื” ื™ืฉื™ื ืขืฆืžื• ื›ืืœื ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืืฃ ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ืชื•ืจื” ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืฆื“ืง ืชื“ื‘ืจื•ืŸ ื™ื›ื•ืœ ื™ื’ื™ืก ื“ืขืชื• ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืžื™ืฉืจื™ื ืชืฉืคื˜ื• ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื

Rabbi Yitzแธฅak says: What is the meaning of that which is written: โ€œDo you indeed [haโ€™umnam] speak as a righteous company [elem]? Do you judge with equity [meisharim] the sons of menโ€ (Psalms 58:2)? The verse is interpreted as follows: What should be a personโ€™s occupation [umanut] in this world? He should render himself silent as a mute [ilem]. If so, one might have thought that he should render himself as a mute even with regard to words of Torah. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œSpeak as a righteous company,โ€ indicating that one should speak the righteous words of Torah. If so, he might have thought that one who speaks words of Torah has the right to become arrogant. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œJudge with equity [meisharim] the sons of men.โ€ Even a learned judge must take extra care to judge with equity, and not assume that he will immediately arrive at the correct understanding.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื–ืขื™ืจื ื•ืื™ืชื™ืžื ืจื‘ื” ื‘ืจ ื™ืจืžื™ื” ืžื›ืกื™ืŸ ื‘ืขืคืจ ืขื™ืจ ื”ื ื“ื—ืช ื•ืืžืื™ ืื™ืกื•ืจื™ ื”ื ืื” ื”ื•ื

ยง The Gemara returns to discuss the mitzva of covering the blood: Rabbi Zeira says, and some say Rabba bar Yirmeya says: One may cover the blood of an undomesticated animal or a bird with the dust of an idolatrous city. The Torah states that the city and anything contained therein must be burned (see Deuteronomy 13:17). The Gemara, assuming the statement of Rabbi Zeira refers to the ashes of a burned idolatrous city, asks: But why may one use these ashes to cover the blood? These ashes are items from which deriving benefit is prohibited, as the verse states: โ€œAnd there shall cleave none of the banned property to your handโ€ (Deuteronomy 13:18).

ืืžืจ ื–ืขื™ืจื™ ืœื ื ืฆืจื›ื” ืืœื ืœืขืคืจ ืขืคืจื” ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืืช ื›ืœ ืฉืœืœื” ืชืงื‘ืฅ ืืœ ืชื•ืš ืจื—ื‘ื” ื•ืฉืจืคืช ืžื™ ืฉืื™ื ื• ืžื—ื•ืกืจ ืืœื ืงื‘ื™ืฆื” ื•ืฉืจืคื” ื™ืฆื ื–ื” ืฉืžื—ื•ืกืจ ืชืœื™ืฉื” ืงื‘ื™ืฆื” ื•ืฉืจืคื”

Zeโ€™eiri said: Rabbi Zeira is not referring to the ashes of the burned city, which may not be used. Rather, his statement is necessary only concerning the dust of its dust, i.e., the dust of the ground of the idolatrous city, from which deriving benefit is not prohibited, as it is written: โ€œAnd you shall gather all its spoil into the midst of the broad place thereof, and shall burn with fire the cityโ€ (Deuteronomy 13:17). Accordingly, items lacking only the acts of gathering and burning must be burned. This serves to exclude this dust of the ground, which lacks the acts of removal from the ground, gathering, and burning. The dust must also be removed from the ground before it can be gathered and burned.

ื•ืจื‘ื ืืžืจ ืžืฆื•ืช ืœืื• ืœื™ื”ื ื•ืช ื ื™ืชื ื•

And Rava says: One can even use the ashes from the idolatrous city to cover the blood, despite the fact that it is prohibited to derive any benefit from them. This is because mitzvot were not given for benefit, that is, the fulfillment of a mitzva is not considered deriving benefit, but the fulfillment of a divine decree.

ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ื•ืงืืžืจ ืœื” ืœื”ื ืฉืžืขืชื ืื™ืชื™ื‘ื™ื” ืจื‘ ืจื—ื•ืžื™ ืœืจื‘ื™ื ื ืฉื•ืคืจ ืฉืœ ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ืœื ื™ืชืงืข ื‘ื• ืžืื™ ืœืื• ืื ืชืงืข ืœื ื™ืฆื ืœื ืื ืชืงืข ื™ืฆื

The Gemara relates that Ravina was sitting and saying this halakha, that one may use the ashes of an idolatrous city to cover the blood. Rav Reแธฅumi raised an objection to Ravina from a baraita: With regard to a shofar of idol worship, from which it is prohibited to derive benefit, one may not blow with it. What, is it not that the baraita means to say that if one blew with it he has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara responds: No, the baraita means that one should not use such a shofar ab initio, but if one blew with it he has fulfilled his obligation.

ืœื•ืœื‘ ืฉืœ ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ืœื ื™ื˜ื•ืœ ืžืื™ ืœืื• ืื ื ื˜ืœ ืœื ื™ืฆื ืœื ืื ื ื˜ืœ ื™ืฆื ื•ื”ืชื ื™ื ืชืงืข ืœื ื™ืฆื ื ื˜ืœ ืœื ื™ืฆื

Rav Reแธฅumi persists: It is taught in another baraita that with regard to a lulav of idol worship, one may not take it to perform the mitzva. What, is it not that the baraita means to say that if one took such a lulav he has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara responds: No, the baraita means that one should not use such a lulav ab initio, but if one took it he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: But isnโ€™t it taught in a baraita that if one blew a shofar of idolatry he has not fulfilled his obligation? And isnโ€™t it taught in another baraita that if one took a lulav of idolatry to perform the mitzva he has not fulfilled his obligation?

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ื”ื›ื™ ื”ืฉืชื ื”ืชื

Rav Ashi said in response: How can these cases be compared to the case of covering the blood? There, with regard to a shofar and lulav of idol worship, although the use of such items for a mitzva does not constitute benefit, one cannot fulfill his obligation with them, because

ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ื•ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ื›ืชื•ืชื™ ืžื›ืชืช ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื ื”ื›ื ื›ืœ ืžื” ื“ืžื›ืชืช ืžืขืœื™ ืœื›ืกื•ื™

we require a minimum measure in order to fulfill these mitzvot. A shofar must be large enough that, when grasped, part of it protrudes from both sides of oneโ€™s hand, and a lulav must be at least four handbreadths long. And since an object of idol worship and its effects must be burned, its size as required for the mitzva is seen by halakha as crushed into powder. Since a shofar or lulav of idol worship is destined for burning, it is considered as if it is already burned, and it therefore lacks the requisite measurement for fulfilling the mitzva. By contrast, here, with regard to the ashes used to perform the mitzva of covering the blood, no minimum measure is required to fulfill the mitzva; in fact, the more the ash is crushed, the better it is for the mitzva of covering the blood.

ื”ื“ืจืŸ ืขืœืš ื›ืกื•ื™ ื”ื“ื

 

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื’ื™ื“ ื”ื ืฉื” ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืืจืฅ ื•ื‘ื—ื•ืฆื” ืœืืจืฅ ื‘ืคื ื™ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ื•ืฉืœื ื‘ืคื ื™ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ื‘ื—ื•ืœื™ืŸ ื•ื‘ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื•ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ื‘ื”ืžื” ื•ื‘ื—ื™ื” ื‘ื™ืจืš ืฉืœ ื™ืžื™ืŸ ื•ื‘ื™ืจืš ืฉืœ ืฉืžืืœ ื•ืื™ื ื• ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืขื•ืฃ ืžืคื ื™ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื• ื›ืฃ

MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of, i.e., the time of, the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. And it applies to domesticated animals and to undomesticated animals, to the thigh of the right leg and to the thigh of the left leg. But it does not apply to a bird, due to the fact that the verse makes reference to the sciatic nerve as being โ€œupon the spoon of the thighโ€ (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh.

ื•ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืื™ื ื• ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ื•ื—ืœื‘ื• ืžื•ืชืจ

And the prohibition applies to a late-term animal fetus [shalil] in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus; and similarly, its fat is permitted.

ื•ืื™ืŸ ื”ื˜ื‘ื—ื™ืŸ ื ืืžื ื™ืŸ ืขืœ ื’ื™ื“ ื”ื ืฉื” ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ื ืืžื ื™ืŸ ืขืœื™ื• ื•ืขืœ ื”ื—ืœื‘

And butchers are not deemed credible to say that the sciatic nerve was removed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They are deemed credible about the sciatic nerve and about the forbidden fat.

ื’ืžืณ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืืงื“ืฉื™ื” ืคืงืข ืœื™ื” ืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ืžื™ื ื™ื”

GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to both non-sacred animals and sacrificial animals. The Gemara asks: Is it not obvious that the prohibition applies to sacrificial animals? Would it be reasonable to suggest that because one consecrated it, he has abrogated the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve from it?

ื•ื›ื™ ืชื™ืžื ื™ืฉ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื•ืืชื™ ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื•ื—ื™ื™ืœ ืืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ื”ืื™ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ ืžื™ื‘ืขื™ ืœื™ื” ืืœื ืงืกื‘ืจ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื•ื‘ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ืื™ื›ื ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ืœื™ื›ื

And if you would say that sciatic nerves have the ability to impart flavor, i.e., they possess flavor, and the mishna is teaching that the prohibition of eating meat of sacrificial animals comes and takes effect upon the sciatic nerve despite the fact that it is already subject to the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve, the mishna should have stated: The prohibition of eating meat of sacrificial animals applies to the sciatic nerve. The Gemara suggests: Rather, the tanna of the mishna holds that the sciatic nerve does not have the ability to impart flavor, and the mishna is teaching that with regard to sacrificial animals there is a prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve but there is no additional prohibition of eating the meat of a sacrificial animal.

ื•ืกื‘ืจ ืชื ื ื“ื™ื“ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ื™ืจืš ืฉื ืชื‘ืฉืœ ื‘ื” ื’ื™ื“ ื”ื ืฉื” ืื ื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื”ืจื™ ื–ื• ืืกื•ืจื”

The Gemara challenges this explanation: And does the tanna of our mishna hold that the sciatic nerve does not have the ability to impart flavor? But didnโ€™t we learn in a mishna (96b): In the case of a thigh that was cooked with the sciatic nerve in it, if there is enough of the sciatic nerve in the thigh to impart its flavor to the meat, the entire thigh is forbidden? Consequently, it is clear that the tanna of the mishna holds that the sciatic nerve does possess flavor.

ืืœื ื”ื›ื ื‘ื•ืœื“ื•ืช ืงื“ืฉื™ื ืขืกืงื™ื ืŸ ื•ืงืกื‘ืจ ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ื•ืงืกื‘ืจ ื•ืœื“ื•ืช ืงื“ืฉื™ื ื‘ืžืขื™ ืืžืŸ ื”ืŸ ืงื“ื•ืฉื™ื ื“ืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ื•ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ื“ื™ ื”ื“ื“ื™ ืงืืชื™

Rather, in the mishna here we are dealing with offspring of sacrificial animals. And the tanna holds that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies with regard to a fetus, and he also holds that the offspring of sacrificial animals are consecrated even while they are in the womb of their mother. Consequently, the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve and the prohibition of eating sacrificial animals come into effect at the same time, and therefore both prohibitions apply and one does not say that a prohibition does not take effect where another prohibition already exists.

ื•ืžื™ ืžืฆื™ืช ืžื•ืงืžืช ืœื” ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ื•ื”ื ืžื“ืงืชื ื™ ืกื™ืคื ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ืžื›ืœืœ ื“ืจื™ืฉื ืœืื• ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ืขืกืงื™ื ืŸ ื”ื›ื™ ืงืืžืจ ื“ื‘ืจ ื–ื” ืžื—ืœื•ืงืช ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื•ืจื‘ื ืŸ

The Gemara challenges this explanation: Can you interpret this clause of the mishna as referring to a fetus? From the fact that the latter clause teaches: It applies to a late-term fetus, and Rabbi Yehuda holds that it does not apply to a late-term fetus, it may be inferred that in the first clause we are not dealing with a fetus. The Gemara explains: This is what the tanna of the mishna is saying: This matter that was taught in the first clause is a matter of dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis.

ื•ืžื™ ืžืฆื™ืช ืืžืจืช ื“ืชืจื•ื™ื™ื”ื• ื‘ื”ื“ื™ ื”ื“ื“ื™ ืงืืชื• ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ืขืœ ืืœื• ื˜ื•ืžืื•ืช ื”ื ื–ื™ืจ ืžื’ืœื— ืขืœ ื”ืžืช ื•ืขืœ ื›ื–ื™ืช ืžืŸ ื”ืžืช

The Gemara again challenges the explanation that the first clause of the mishna is referring to a fetus: And how can you say that both prohibitions come into effect at the same time? But didnโ€™t we learn in a mishna (Nazir 49b): A nazirite shaves for having become impure from these sources of ritual impurity: For impurity imparted by a corpse and for impurity imparted by an olive-bulk of a corpse.

ื•ืงืฉื™ื ืœืŸ ืขืœ ื›ื–ื™ืช ืžืŸ ื”ืžืช ืžื’ืœื— ืขืœ ื›ื•ืœื• ืœื ื›ืœ ืฉื›ืŸ ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืœื ื ืฆืจื›ื” ืืœื ืœื ืคืœ ืฉืœื ื ืงืฉืจื• ืื‘ืจื™ื• ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ

And the clause: For impurity imparted by a corpse, is difficult for us, as it seems unnecessary; if a nazirite must shave for impurity imparted by an olive-bulk of a corpse, is it not all the more so true that he must shave for impurity imparted by an entire corpse? And Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: It is necessary only for a miscarried human fetus whose limbs had not yet become joined to its sinews. Since the spine is complete the fetus is considered a full corpse, but as the limbs have not yet joined to the sinews it does not contain an olive-bulk of flesh.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Chullin 89

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Chullin 89

ืื ืžื—ื•ื˜ ื•ืขื“ ืฉืจื•ืš ื ืขืœ ื–ื›ื• ื‘ื ื™ื• ืœืฉืชื™ ืžืฆื•ืช ืœื—ื•ื˜ ืฉืœ ืชื›ืœืช ื•ืจืฆื•ืขื” ืฉืœ ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ

โ€œThat I will not take a thread nor a shoe strap nor anything that is yoursโ€ (Genesis 14:23), distancing himself from anything not rightfully his, his children merited two mitzvot: The thread of sky-blue wool worn on ritual fringes and the strap of phylacteries.

ื‘ืฉืœืžื ืจืฆื•ืขื” ืฉืœ ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืจืื• ื›ืœ ืขืžื™ ื”ืืจืฅ ื›ื™ ืฉื ื”ืณ ื ืงืจื ืขืœื™ืš ื•ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืืœื™ืขื–ืจ ื”ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืื•ืžืจ ืืœื• ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ ืฉื‘ืจืืฉ ืืœื ื—ื•ื˜ ืฉืœ ืชื›ืœืช ืžืื™ ื”ื™ื

The Gemara asks: Granted, the strap of the phylacteries imparts benefit, as it is written: โ€œAnd all the peoples of the earth shall see that the name of the Lord is called upon you; and they shall be afraid of youโ€ (Deuteronomy 28:10). And it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: This is a reference to the phylacteries of the head, upon which the name of God is written. Phylacteries therefore impart the splendor and grandeur of God and are a fit reward. But what is the benefit imparted by the thread of sky-blue wool?

ื“ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ืื•ืžืจ ืžื” ื ืฉืชื ื” ืชื›ืœืช ืžื›ืœ ื”ืฆื‘ืขื•ื ื™ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืฉืชื›ืœืช ื“ื•ืžื” ืœื™ื ื•ื™ื ื“ื•ืžื” ืœืจืงื™ืข ื•ืจืงื™ืข ื“ื•ืžื” ืœืื‘ืŸ ืกืคื™ืจ ื•ืื‘ืŸ ืกืคื™ืจ ื“ื•ืžื” ืœื›ืกื ื”ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืจืื• ืืช ืืœื”ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื•ืชื—ืช ืจื’ืœื™ื• ื•ื’ื•ืณ ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื›ืžืจืื” ืื‘ืŸ ืกืคื™ืจ ื“ืžื•ืช ื›ืกื

The Gemara answers: As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: What is different about sky-blue from all other colors such that it was specified for the mitzva of ritual fringes? It is because sky-blue dye is similar in its color to the sea, and the sea is similar to the sky, and the sky is similar to the sapphire stone, and the sapphire stone is similar to the Throne of Glory, as it is stated: โ€œAnd they saw the God of Israel; and there was under His feet the like of a paved work of sapphire stone, and the like of the very heaven for clearnessโ€ (Exodus 24:10). This verse shows that the heavens are similar to sapphire, and it is written: โ€œAnd above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stoneโ€ (Ezekiel 1:26). Therefore, the throne is similar to the heavens. The color of sky blue dye acts as an indication of the bond between the Jewish people and the Divine Presence.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื ืงืฉื” ื’ื–ืœ ื”ื ืื›ืœ ืฉืืคื™ืœื• ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ื’ืžื•ืจื™ื ืื™ื ืŸ ื™ื›ื•ืœื™ืŸ ืœื”ื—ื–ื™ืจื• ืฉื ืืžืจ ื‘ืœืขื“ื™ ืจืง ืืฉืจ ืื›ืœื• ื”ื ืขืจื™ื

The Gemara above mentioned that Abraham refused to accept property that did not belong to him. With regard to this, Rabbi Abba says: Difficult is the return of theft that has been consumed, as even the perfectly righteous are unable to return it, as it is stated: โ€œThat I will not take a thread nor a shoe strap nor anything that is yoursโ€ฆexcept only that which the young men have eaten with meโ€ (Genesis 14:23โ€“24). Even the righteous Abraham was unable to return that which the young men had already consumed.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื‘ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื›ืœ ืžืงื•ื ืฉืืชื” ืžื•ืฆื ื“ื‘ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ืจื‘ื™ ืืœื™ืขื–ืจ ื‘ื ื• ืฉืœ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื”ื’ืœื™ืœื™ ื‘ื”ื’ื“ื” ืขืฉื” ืื–ื ื™ืš ื›ืืคืจื›ืกืช ืœื ืžืจื‘ื›ื ืžื›ืœ ื”ืขืžื™ื ื—ืฉืง ื”ืณ ื‘ื›ื ื•ื’ื•ืณ ืืžืจ ืœื”ื ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืœื™ืฉืจืืœ ื—ื•ืฉืงื ื™ ื‘ื›ื ืฉืืคื™ืœื• ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืื ื™ ืžืฉืคื™ืข ืœื›ื ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืืชื ืžืžืขื˜ื™ืŸ ืขืฆืžื›ื ืœืคื ื™

ยง Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: Any place where you find the statements of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, in reference to aggada, make your ears like a funnel [kaโ€™afarkeset], i.e., be receptive to his words. As Rabbi Eliezer interpreted the verse: โ€œNot because you are more in number than any people did the Lord desire you and choose you, for you were the fewest of all peoplesโ€ (Deuteronomy 7:7), as follows: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: I desire you, since even at a time that I bestow greatness upon you, you diminish, i.e., humble, yourselves before Me.

ื ืชืชื™ ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืœืื‘ืจื”ื ืืžืจ ืœืคื ื™ ื•ืื ื›ื™ ืขืคืจ ื•ืืคืจ ืœืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ืืžืจ ื•ื ื—ื ื• ืžื” ืœื“ื•ื“ ืืžืจ ื•ืื ื›ื™ ืชื•ืœืขืช ื•ืœื ืื™ืฉ

I granted greatness to Abraham, yet he said before Me: โ€œAnd I am but dust and ashesโ€ (Genesis 18:27). I granted greatness to Moses and Aaron, yet Moses said of the two of them: โ€œAnd what are weโ€ (Exodus 16:7). I granted greatness to David, yet he said: โ€œBut I am a worm, and no manโ€ (Psalms 22:7).

ืื‘ืœ ืื•ืžื•ืช ื”ืขื•ืœื ืื™ื ืŸ ื›ืŸ ื ืชืชื™ ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืœื ืžืจื•ื“ ืืžืจ ื”ื‘ื” ื ื‘ื ื” ืœื ื• ืขื™ืจ ืœืคืจืขื” ืืžืจ ืžื™ ื”ืณ ืœืกื ื—ืจื™ื‘ ืืžืจ ืžื™ ื‘ื›ืœ ืืœื”ื™ ื”ืืจืฆื•ืช ื•ื’ื•ืณ ืœื ื‘ื•ื›ื“ื ืฆืจ ืืžืจ ืืขืœื” ืขืœ ื‘ืžืชื™ ืขื‘ ืœื—ื™ืจื ืžืœืš ืฆื•ืจ ืืžืจ ืžื•ืฉื‘ ืืœื”ื™ื ื™ืฉื‘ืชื™ ื‘ืœื‘ ื™ืžื™ื

But the gentile nations of the world are not so. I granted greatness to Nimrod, yet he said: โ€œCome, let us build a city and a tower, with its top in heaven, and let us make for ourselves a nameโ€ (Genesis 11:4). I granted greatness to Pharaoh, yet he said: โ€œWho is the Lordโ€ (Exodus 5:2). I granted greatness to Sennacherib, yet he said: โ€œWho are they among all the gods of the countries that have delivered their country out of my hand, that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem out of my handโ€ (IIย Kings 18:35). I granted greatness to Nebuchadnezzar, yet he said: โ€œI will ascend above the heights of the cloudsโ€ (Isaiah 14:14). I granted greatness to แธคiram, king of Tyre, yet he said: โ€œI sit in the seat of God, in the heart of the seasโ€ (Ezekiel 28:2).

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื ื•ืื™ืชื™ืžื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืฉื ืืžืจ ื‘ืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ื™ื•ืชืจ ืžืžื” ืฉื ืืžืจ ื‘ืื‘ืจื”ื ื“ืื™ืœื• ื‘ืื‘ืจื”ื ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืื ื›ื™ ืขืคืจ ื•ืืคืจ ื•ืื™ืœื• ื‘ืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื ื—ื ื• ืžื” ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื ื•ืื™ืชื™ืžื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื”ืขื•ืœื ืžืชืงื™ื™ื ืืœื ื‘ืฉื‘ื™ืœ ืžืฉื” ื•ืื”ืจืŸ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ื›ื ื•ื ื—ื ื• ืžื” ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืชื ืชืœื” ืืจืฅ ืขืœ ื‘ืœื™ืžื”

The Gemara relates: Rava says, and some say Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: Greater is that which is stated with regard to Moses and Aaron than that which is stated with regard to Abraham. As with regard to Abraham it is written: โ€œAnd I am but dust and ashes,โ€ while with regard to Moses and Aaron it is written: โ€œAnd what are we,โ€ i.e., we are not even dust and ashes. And Rava says, and some say Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: The world endures only in the merit of Moses and Aaron. It is written here: โ€œAnd what are we,โ€ and it written elsewhere: โ€œHe hangs the earth upon nothingโ€ (Job 26:7). That is, the earth endures in the merit of those who said of themselves that they are nothing, i.e., Moses and Aaron.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื™ืœืขื ืื™ืŸ ื”ืขื•ืœื ืžืชืงื™ื™ื ืืœื ื‘ืฉื‘ื™ืœ ืžื™ ืฉื‘ื•ืœื ืืช ืขืฆืžื• ื‘ืฉืขืช ืžืจื™ื‘ื” ืฉื ืืžืจ ืชืœื” ืืจืฅ ืขืœ ื‘ืœื™ืžื” ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื”ื• ืืžืจ ืžื™ ืฉืžืฉื™ื ืขืฆืžื• ื›ืžื™ ืฉืื™ื ื• ืฉื ืืžืจ ื•ืžืชื—ืช ื–ืจื•ืขื•ืช ืขื•ืœื

With regard to that verse, Rabbi Ileโ€™a says: The world endures only in the merit of one who restrains [shebolem] himself during a quarrel, as it is stated: โ€œHe hangs the earth upon nothing [belima]. Rabbi Abbahu says: The world endures only in the merit of one who renders himself as if he were non-existent, as it is stated: โ€œAnd underneath are the everlasting armsโ€ (Deuteronomy 33:27), i.e., one who considers himself to be underneath everything else is the everlasting arm that upholds the world.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ืฆื—ืง ืžืื™ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืืžื ื ืืœื ืฆื“ืง ืชื“ื‘ืจื•ืŸ ืžื™ืฉืจื™ื ืชืฉืคื˜ื• ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื ืžื” ืื•ืžื ื•ืชื• ืฉืœ ืื“ื ื‘ืขื•ืœื ื”ื–ื” ื™ืฉื™ื ืขืฆืžื• ื›ืืœื ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืืฃ ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ืชื•ืจื” ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืฆื“ืง ืชื“ื‘ืจื•ืŸ ื™ื›ื•ืœ ื™ื’ื™ืก ื“ืขืชื• ืชืœืžื•ื“ ืœื•ืžืจ ืžื™ืฉืจื™ื ืชืฉืคื˜ื• ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื

Rabbi Yitzแธฅak says: What is the meaning of that which is written: โ€œDo you indeed [haโ€™umnam] speak as a righteous company [elem]? Do you judge with equity [meisharim] the sons of menโ€ (Psalms 58:2)? The verse is interpreted as follows: What should be a personโ€™s occupation [umanut] in this world? He should render himself silent as a mute [ilem]. If so, one might have thought that he should render himself as a mute even with regard to words of Torah. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œSpeak as a righteous company,โ€ indicating that one should speak the righteous words of Torah. If so, he might have thought that one who speaks words of Torah has the right to become arrogant. Therefore, the verse states: โ€œJudge with equity [meisharim] the sons of men.โ€ Even a learned judge must take extra care to judge with equity, and not assume that he will immediately arrive at the correct understanding.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื–ืขื™ืจื ื•ืื™ืชื™ืžื ืจื‘ื” ื‘ืจ ื™ืจืžื™ื” ืžื›ืกื™ืŸ ื‘ืขืคืจ ืขื™ืจ ื”ื ื“ื—ืช ื•ืืžืื™ ืื™ืกื•ืจื™ ื”ื ืื” ื”ื•ื

ยง The Gemara returns to discuss the mitzva of covering the blood: Rabbi Zeira says, and some say Rabba bar Yirmeya says: One may cover the blood of an undomesticated animal or a bird with the dust of an idolatrous city. The Torah states that the city and anything contained therein must be burned (see Deuteronomy 13:17). The Gemara, assuming the statement of Rabbi Zeira refers to the ashes of a burned idolatrous city, asks: But why may one use these ashes to cover the blood? These ashes are items from which deriving benefit is prohibited, as the verse states: โ€œAnd there shall cleave none of the banned property to your handโ€ (Deuteronomy 13:18).

ืืžืจ ื–ืขื™ืจื™ ืœื ื ืฆืจื›ื” ืืœื ืœืขืคืจ ืขืคืจื” ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืืช ื›ืœ ืฉืœืœื” ืชืงื‘ืฅ ืืœ ืชื•ืš ืจื—ื‘ื” ื•ืฉืจืคืช ืžื™ ืฉืื™ื ื• ืžื—ื•ืกืจ ืืœื ืงื‘ื™ืฆื” ื•ืฉืจืคื” ื™ืฆื ื–ื” ืฉืžื—ื•ืกืจ ืชืœื™ืฉื” ืงื‘ื™ืฆื” ื•ืฉืจืคื”

Zeโ€™eiri said: Rabbi Zeira is not referring to the ashes of the burned city, which may not be used. Rather, his statement is necessary only concerning the dust of its dust, i.e., the dust of the ground of the idolatrous city, from which deriving benefit is not prohibited, as it is written: โ€œAnd you shall gather all its spoil into the midst of the broad place thereof, and shall burn with fire the cityโ€ (Deuteronomy 13:17). Accordingly, items lacking only the acts of gathering and burning must be burned. This serves to exclude this dust of the ground, which lacks the acts of removal from the ground, gathering, and burning. The dust must also be removed from the ground before it can be gathered and burned.

ื•ืจื‘ื ืืžืจ ืžืฆื•ืช ืœืื• ืœื™ื”ื ื•ืช ื ื™ืชื ื•

And Rava says: One can even use the ashes from the idolatrous city to cover the blood, despite the fact that it is prohibited to derive any benefit from them. This is because mitzvot were not given for benefit, that is, the fulfillment of a mitzva is not considered deriving benefit, but the fulfillment of a divine decree.

ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ื•ืงืืžืจ ืœื” ืœื”ื ืฉืžืขืชื ืื™ืชื™ื‘ื™ื” ืจื‘ ืจื—ื•ืžื™ ืœืจื‘ื™ื ื ืฉื•ืคืจ ืฉืœ ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ืœื ื™ืชืงืข ื‘ื• ืžืื™ ืœืื• ืื ืชืงืข ืœื ื™ืฆื ืœื ืื ืชืงืข ื™ืฆื

The Gemara relates that Ravina was sitting and saying this halakha, that one may use the ashes of an idolatrous city to cover the blood. Rav Reแธฅumi raised an objection to Ravina from a baraita: With regard to a shofar of idol worship, from which it is prohibited to derive benefit, one may not blow with it. What, is it not that the baraita means to say that if one blew with it he has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara responds: No, the baraita means that one should not use such a shofar ab initio, but if one blew with it he has fulfilled his obligation.

ืœื•ืœื‘ ืฉืœ ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ืœื ื™ื˜ื•ืœ ืžืื™ ืœืื• ืื ื ื˜ืœ ืœื ื™ืฆื ืœื ืื ื ื˜ืœ ื™ืฆื ื•ื”ืชื ื™ื ืชืงืข ืœื ื™ืฆื ื ื˜ืœ ืœื ื™ืฆื

Rav Reแธฅumi persists: It is taught in another baraita that with regard to a lulav of idol worship, one may not take it to perform the mitzva. What, is it not that the baraita means to say that if one took such a lulav he has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara responds: No, the baraita means that one should not use such a lulav ab initio, but if one took it he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: But isnโ€™t it taught in a baraita that if one blew a shofar of idolatry he has not fulfilled his obligation? And isnโ€™t it taught in another baraita that if one took a lulav of idolatry to perform the mitzva he has not fulfilled his obligation?

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ื”ื›ื™ ื”ืฉืชื ื”ืชื

Rav Ashi said in response: How can these cases be compared to the case of covering the blood? There, with regard to a shofar and lulav of idol worship, although the use of such items for a mitzva does not constitute benefit, one cannot fulfill his obligation with them, because

ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ื•ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ื›ืชื•ืชื™ ืžื›ืชืช ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื ื”ื›ื ื›ืœ ืžื” ื“ืžื›ืชืช ืžืขืœื™ ืœื›ืกื•ื™

we require a minimum measure in order to fulfill these mitzvot. A shofar must be large enough that, when grasped, part of it protrudes from both sides of oneโ€™s hand, and a lulav must be at least four handbreadths long. And since an object of idol worship and its effects must be burned, its size as required for the mitzva is seen by halakha as crushed into powder. Since a shofar or lulav of idol worship is destined for burning, it is considered as if it is already burned, and it therefore lacks the requisite measurement for fulfilling the mitzva. By contrast, here, with regard to the ashes used to perform the mitzva of covering the blood, no minimum measure is required to fulfill the mitzva; in fact, the more the ash is crushed, the better it is for the mitzva of covering the blood.

ื”ื“ืจืŸ ืขืœืš ื›ืกื•ื™ ื”ื“ื

 

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื’ื™ื“ ื”ื ืฉื” ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืืจืฅ ื•ื‘ื—ื•ืฆื” ืœืืจืฅ ื‘ืคื ื™ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ื•ืฉืœื ื‘ืคื ื™ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ื‘ื—ื•ืœื™ืŸ ื•ื‘ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื•ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ื‘ื”ืžื” ื•ื‘ื—ื™ื” ื‘ื™ืจืš ืฉืœ ื™ืžื™ืŸ ื•ื‘ื™ืจืš ืฉืœ ืฉืžืืœ ื•ืื™ื ื• ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืขื•ืฃ ืžืคื ื™ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื• ื›ืฃ

MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of, i.e., the time of, the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. And it applies to domesticated animals and to undomesticated animals, to the thigh of the right leg and to the thigh of the left leg. But it does not apply to a bird, due to the fact that the verse makes reference to the sciatic nerve as being โ€œupon the spoon of the thighโ€ (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh.

ื•ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืื™ื ื• ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ื•ื—ืœื‘ื• ืžื•ืชืจ

And the prohibition applies to a late-term animal fetus [shalil] in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus; and similarly, its fat is permitted.

ื•ืื™ืŸ ื”ื˜ื‘ื—ื™ืŸ ื ืืžื ื™ืŸ ืขืœ ื’ื™ื“ ื”ื ืฉื” ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ื ืืžื ื™ืŸ ืขืœื™ื• ื•ืขืœ ื”ื—ืœื‘

And butchers are not deemed credible to say that the sciatic nerve was removed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They are deemed credible about the sciatic nerve and about the forbidden fat.

ื’ืžืณ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืืงื“ืฉื™ื” ืคืงืข ืœื™ื” ืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ืžื™ื ื™ื”

GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to both non-sacred animals and sacrificial animals. The Gemara asks: Is it not obvious that the prohibition applies to sacrificial animals? Would it be reasonable to suggest that because one consecrated it, he has abrogated the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve from it?

ื•ื›ื™ ืชื™ืžื ื™ืฉ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื•ืืชื™ ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื•ื—ื™ื™ืœ ืืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ื”ืื™ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ ืžื™ื‘ืขื™ ืœื™ื” ืืœื ืงืกื‘ืจ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื•ื‘ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ืื™ื›ื ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ืœื™ื›ื

And if you would say that sciatic nerves have the ability to impart flavor, i.e., they possess flavor, and the mishna is teaching that the prohibition of eating meat of sacrificial animals comes and takes effect upon the sciatic nerve despite the fact that it is already subject to the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve, the mishna should have stated: The prohibition of eating meat of sacrificial animals applies to the sciatic nerve. The Gemara suggests: Rather, the tanna of the mishna holds that the sciatic nerve does not have the ability to impart flavor, and the mishna is teaching that with regard to sacrificial animals there is a prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve but there is no additional prohibition of eating the meat of a sacrificial animal.

ื•ืกื‘ืจ ืชื ื ื“ื™ื“ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ื™ืจืš ืฉื ืชื‘ืฉืœ ื‘ื” ื’ื™ื“ ื”ื ืฉื” ืื ื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ื‘ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ื”ืจื™ ื–ื• ืืกื•ืจื”

The Gemara challenges this explanation: And does the tanna of our mishna hold that the sciatic nerve does not have the ability to impart flavor? But didnโ€™t we learn in a mishna (96b): In the case of a thigh that was cooked with the sciatic nerve in it, if there is enough of the sciatic nerve in the thigh to impart its flavor to the meat, the entire thigh is forbidden? Consequently, it is clear that the tanna of the mishna holds that the sciatic nerve does possess flavor.

ืืœื ื”ื›ื ื‘ื•ืœื“ื•ืช ืงื“ืฉื™ื ืขืกืงื™ื ืŸ ื•ืงืกื‘ืจ ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ื•ืงืกื‘ืจ ื•ืœื“ื•ืช ืงื“ืฉื™ื ื‘ืžืขื™ ืืžืŸ ื”ืŸ ืงื“ื•ืฉื™ื ื“ืื™ืกื•ืจ ื’ื™ื“ ื•ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืžื•ืงื“ืฉื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ื“ื™ ื”ื“ื“ื™ ืงืืชื™

Rather, in the mishna here we are dealing with offspring of sacrificial animals. And the tanna holds that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies with regard to a fetus, and he also holds that the offspring of sacrificial animals are consecrated even while they are in the womb of their mother. Consequently, the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve and the prohibition of eating sacrificial animals come into effect at the same time, and therefore both prohibitions apply and one does not say that a prohibition does not take effect where another prohibition already exists.

ื•ืžื™ ืžืฆื™ืช ืžื•ืงืžืช ืœื” ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ื•ื”ื ืžื“ืงืชื ื™ ืกื™ืคื ื ื•ื”ื’ ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ืžื›ืœืœ ื“ืจื™ืฉื ืœืื• ื‘ืฉืœื™ืœ ืขืกืงื™ื ืŸ ื”ื›ื™ ืงืืžืจ ื“ื‘ืจ ื–ื” ืžื—ืœื•ืงืช ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื•ืจื‘ื ืŸ

The Gemara challenges this explanation: Can you interpret this clause of the mishna as referring to a fetus? From the fact that the latter clause teaches: It applies to a late-term fetus, and Rabbi Yehuda holds that it does not apply to a late-term fetus, it may be inferred that in the first clause we are not dealing with a fetus. The Gemara explains: This is what the tanna of the mishna is saying: This matter that was taught in the first clause is a matter of dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis.

ื•ืžื™ ืžืฆื™ืช ืืžืจืช ื“ืชืจื•ื™ื™ื”ื• ื‘ื”ื“ื™ ื”ื“ื“ื™ ืงืืชื• ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ืขืœ ืืœื• ื˜ื•ืžืื•ืช ื”ื ื–ื™ืจ ืžื’ืœื— ืขืœ ื”ืžืช ื•ืขืœ ื›ื–ื™ืช ืžืŸ ื”ืžืช

The Gemara again challenges the explanation that the first clause of the mishna is referring to a fetus: And how can you say that both prohibitions come into effect at the same time? But didnโ€™t we learn in a mishna (Nazir 49b): A nazirite shaves for having become impure from these sources of ritual impurity: For impurity imparted by a corpse and for impurity imparted by an olive-bulk of a corpse.

ื•ืงืฉื™ื ืœืŸ ืขืœ ื›ื–ื™ืช ืžืŸ ื”ืžืช ืžื’ืœื— ืขืœ ื›ื•ืœื• ืœื ื›ืœ ืฉื›ืŸ ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืœื ื ืฆืจื›ื” ืืœื ืœื ืคืœ ืฉืœื ื ืงืฉืจื• ืื‘ืจื™ื• ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื™ืŸ

And the clause: For impurity imparted by a corpse, is difficult for us, as it seems unnecessary; if a nazirite must shave for impurity imparted by an olive-bulk of a corpse, is it not all the more so true that he must shave for impurity imparted by an entire corpse? And Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: It is necessary only for a miscarried human fetus whose limbs had not yet become joined to its sinews. Since the spine is complete the fetus is considered a full corpse, but as the limbs have not yet joined to the sinews it does not contain an olive-bulk of flesh.

Scroll To Top