POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Chulin 79
CHULIN 79 (20 Nisan) - Today's Daf has been sponsored by Martin Fogel of
Carlsbad, California in memory of his father, Yaakov ben Shlomo Fogel, on
the day of his Yahrzeit.
1) WHOM DOES THE HALACHAH FOLLOW?
(a) (Shmuel): The Halachah follows Chananyah.
2) THE OPINION OF R. YEHUDAH
1. This is consistent with another teaching of Shmuel.
(b) (Mishnah - R. Yehudah): One may work or mate together
offspring of a female horse, even if the fathers were
(c) A mule born from a (female) horse is forbidden with one
born from a (female) donkey.
1. (Shmuel): This is R. Yehudah's opinion - he holds,
we are not concerned for the seed of the father;
Chachamim say, all mules are one species (and are
permitted with each other.)
2. Question: Who are the Chachamim he refers to?
3. Answer: He refers to Chananyah, who says that we are
concerned for the seed of the father;
i. Every mule is a half-donkey, half-horse.
(a) Question: Is R. Yehudah certain that we are not concerned
for the seed of the father, or is he in doubt?
1. If he is certain, even a hybrid child is the same
species as its mother, and is permitted with its
(b) Answer #1 (Mishnah - R. Yehudah): One may work or mate
together offspring of a female horse, even if the fathers
2. If he is in doubt, a hybrid child is forbidden with
its mother's species.
1. Question: What is the case?
(c) Rejection: Really, the fathers of both offspring were
i. If the fathers of both offspring were donkeys,
there is no need to teach that they are
2. Answer: Rather, a mule from a female horse is
permitted with the child of two horses - this shows
that R. Yehudah is certain.
1. One might have thought that they are forbidden
together, because we view it the donkey side of each
animal like (working or mating with) the horse side
of the other - he teaches that this is not so.
(d) Answer #2 (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): If a mule desires to
mate, we may not mate it with a horse or donkey, only
with its own kind.
1. If R. Yehudah was certain, he should permit mating
it with its mother's species!
(e) Answer #3 (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): All agree that
a mule is forbidden with its mother.
2. Rejection: The case is, we do not know what its
3. Question: But the Beraisa says, we may (only) mate
it with its own kind, implying that we know what its
4. Answer: The Beraisa means, because we do not know
what its mother was, we may not mate it with a horse
nor with a donkey, since it may only be mated with
its own kind.
5. Objection: There are signs to tell what a mule's
i. (Abaye): If it has a thick voice, its mother
was a horse; if not, it was born to a donkey.
6. Answer: The case is, the mule lost its ears and tail
and is mute (so we cannot determine the mother.)
ii. (Rav Papa): A mule from a (female) donkey has
big ears and a small tail, a mule born from a
horse is vice-versa.
1. We conclude, R. Yehudah was in doubt.
(f) R. Aba told his servant, if you lead my wagon with mules,
check that they have the same mothers.
(g) Inference: He holds that we are not concerned for the
seed of the father; he also holds that we may rely on the
3) "OSO V'ES BENO" WHEN SLAUGHTERING "KIL'AYIM"
(a) (Koy is a Kosher animal, it is not known whether it is a
Chayah or Behemah. Our Sugya discusses Koyimborn from a
goat and deer.)
(b) Beraisa): Oso v'Es Beno applies to Kil'ayim and to a Koy;
(c) R. Eliezer says, it applies to Kil'ayim born from a goat
and sheep, but not to a Koy.
(d) (Rav Chisda): They refer to a Koy born from a male goat
and a female deer.
(e) Question: What is the case?
1. Suggestion: Such a Koy had a child, and one
slaughtered the Koy and its child on the same day.
(f) Answer #1: Rather, a Koy from a male deer and a female
goat had a child; the Koy and its child were slaughtered
on the same day.
2. Rejection: Rav Chisda said, in such a case all agree
that he is exempt!
i. The Torah forbids a Seh and its child, not a
deer and its child.
(g) Rejection: Rav Chisda said, in such a case all agree that
he is liable!
1. The Torah forbids a Seh and its child, no matter
what the child is!
(h) Answer #2: Really, a male goat and a female deer had a
daughter, and the daughter had a son; the daughter and
her son were slaughtered on the same day.
1. Chachamim are Mechayev - we are concerned for the
seed of the father, the Torah forbids a Seh and its
son, even a partial Seh;
(i) Question: Why don't they (directly) argue in the case of
Chananyah and Chachamim, whether or not we are concerned
for the seed of the father?
2. R. Eliezer exempts - we are not concerned for the
seed of the father, so the Koy is not even a partial
(j) Answer: If so, one might have thought that Chachamim
would exempt in our case, we would not know that the
Torah forbids even a partial Seh.
(k) (The following question is based on the final
understanding of a Mishnah.)
(l) Question (Mishnah): One may not slaughter a Koy on Yom
Tov (perhaps it is a Chayah, its blood must be covered;
perhaps it is a Behemah, its blood need not (and
therefore, on Yom Tov may not) be covered);
1. If it was slaughtered, he may not do Kisuy (cover
(m) Answer: Really, also R. Eliezer is unsure whether or not
we are concerned for the seed of the father.
2. Question: What is the case?
i. Suggestion: The Koy was born from a male goat
and a female deer.
3. Answer #1: Rather, it is the child of a female goat
and a male deer.
ii. Rejection: If so, all would permit to slaughter
it and do Kisuy on Yom Tov - Kisuy applies even
to a partial deer (Chayah)!
4. Rejection: If so, all would permit slaughtering it!
i. Chachamim hold that the blood must certainly be
covered; R. Eliezer holds, it certainly is
5. Answer #2: Really, it is the child of a female goat
and a male deer; Chachamim are unsure whether or not
we are concerned for the seed of the father.
6. Inference: If so, R. Eliezer (who argues) must be
certain that we are not concerned for the seed of
7. (Development of question - Beraisa): Matanos (the
foreleg, jaw and stomach) of a Koy or (other)
hybrids must be given to a Kohen;
8. R. Eliezer says, Matanos must be given from a
crossbreed of a goat and sheep, but not from a Koy.
9. Question: What is the case?
10. Answer #1: The Koy is from a male goat and a female
i. R. Eliezer exempts from Matanos, they do not
apply to a partial Seh.
11. Rejection: Why would Chachamim obligate?
i. Surely, they do not obligate full Matanos (it
is at most a half-Seh);
12. Answer #2: The Koy is from a female goat and a male
ii. He should be exempt even from half Matanos, for
the Kohen cannot prove that we are concerned
for the seed of the father (Chachamim
themselves are unsure!)
13. We understand Chachamim - they obligate half Matanos
(since it is at least a half-Seh.)
14. Summation of question: R. Eliezer should obligate
(n) Question: If so, what do they argue about?
(o) Answer: They argue whether or not a partial Seh is called
a Seh - Chachamim say that it is, R. Eliezer says that it