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 101
CHULIN 101-102 - Sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor.
Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and
prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.
1) DOUBLE LIABILITY FOR EATING THE "GID"
(a) (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): One who eats the Gid ha'Nasheh of
a Tamei animal is lashed twice (two sets of lashes);
2) "KOLEL ISURIM"
(b) R. Shimon says, he is not lashed.
(c) Question: No matter how R. Shimon holds, he should
obligate at least once!
1. If he holds Isur Chal Al Isur, he should obligate
lashes for eating from a Tamei animal, and for
eating a Gid;
(d) Answer (Rava): Indeed, he holds that the Gid has no
2. If he holds Ein Isur Chal Al Isur, he should
obligate lashes for the first Isur, Tamei!
3. If he holds that the Gid has no taste (so the Isur
Tamei does not apply), he should obligate for eating
1. The Isur Gid does not apply, since it says
"Therefore Benei Yisrael do not eat Gid ha'Nasheh",
the Isur applies only when the rest of the meat is
(e) (Rav Yehudah): If one eats Gid ha'Nasheh of a Neveilah,
R. Meir obligates him twice, Chachamim obligate him once.
1. Chachamim agree that for eating the Gid of an Olah
or of Shor ha'Niskal (an ox sentenced to be stoned),
he is lashed twice.
(a) Question: Chachamim hold Ein Isur Chal Al Isur, even if
the new Isur is Kolel (it also forbids things which were
otherwise permitted, e.g. when an animal becomes
Neveilah, all the meat (not just the Gid) becomes
1. However, if the Kolel Isur is Chamur (more severe
than the first Isur, e.g. it is forbidden to benefit
from an Olah or Shor ha'Niskal), it takes effect;
(b) Answer (Rava): It is like R. Yosi ha'Galili:
2. Like whom is this?
1. (Mishnah): If a Tamei (person) ate Kodshim, whether
the Kodshim were Tahor or Tamei, he is Chayav (Kares
if he was Mezid, Chatas if he was Shogeg);
(c) Question: Seemingly, R. Yosi ha'Galili is refuted!
2. R. Yosi ha'Galili says, he is liable only if he ate
Tahor Kodshim, not if they were Tamei.
3. Chachamim: Even when he eats Tahor Kodshim, he makes
them Tamei once he touches them (so how can you
distinguish the cases)?!
(d) Answer (Rava): If the person became Tamei before the
Kodshim became Tamei, all agree that he is liable, the
Isur Kares (for a Tamei to eat Kodshim) came first;
1. They argue when the Kodshim became Tamei before the
(e) Question: Granted, R. Yosi ha'Galili holds that Ein Isur
Kolel Chal Al Isur if the old Isur is more severe - would
he say this if the new Isur is Chamur?!
2. Chachamim hold that since a Kolel Isur forbids
things which were otherwise permitted (when he
becomes Tamei, he becomes forbidden to Tahor
Kodshim), it also takes effect on what was already
forbidden (Tamei Kodshim);
3. R. Yosi ha'Galili disagrees - Ein Isur Chal Al Isur.
1. For a Tamei to eat Kodshim is Chamur, since he is
(f) Answer (Rav Ashi): He can say that the Isur to eat Tamei
Kodshim is Chamur, since this can never be permitted by
immersion (a Tamei person can become Tahor, Tamei food
(g) Question: Does R. Yosi ha'Galili really hold that Ein
Isur Kolel Chal Al Isur?!
3) OTHER "ISURIM" THAT APPLY TO "TAMEI" ANIMALS
1. (Beraisa - R. Yosi ha'Galili): "It is Shabbos", "It
is Yom Kipur" - these teaches that if Yom Kipur
falls on Shabbos and one did Melachah (b'Shogeg), he
brings a Chatas for each;
(h) Answer: Ravin sent a message to Bavel that the opinions
must be switched.
2. R. Akiva says, he brings only one Chatas.
(i) (Rav Yitzchak bar Yakov): According to R. Yosi ha'Galili
(after the opinions are switched), if one did Melachah,
forgetting that it was Shabbos but knowing that it was
Yom Kipur, he is liable; if he knew that it was Shabbos
but forgot that it was Yom Kipur, he is exempt.
(j) Question: Why is this?
(k) Answer #1 (Abaye): Shabbos is unvarying; Yom Kipur is
determined by Beis Din (when they declare the new month),
so it is considered to come later.
(l) Objection (Rava): Still, the Isurim take effect at the
(m) Version #1 (Rashi) Answer #2 (Rava): Rav Yitzchak bar
Yakov's teaching was not said about Yom Kipur that
(truly) falls on Shabbos;
1. Rather, it refers to an incident in which Nochrim
forbade keeping Yom Kipur;
(n) Version #2 (Ramban) Answer #2 (Rava): Rav Yitzchak's
teaching was mistaken.
2. Since we could not observe Yom Kipur, Chachamim of
Eretz Yisrael enacted that people should conduct on
a Shabbos with the restrictions of Yom Kipur (so Yom
Kipur would not be forgotten. Rav Yitzchak exempts
one who did Melachah, forgetting that the day should
be treated as Yom Kipur.)
1. (Ravin's message to switch the opinions was only a
ruse.) Nochrim had decreed against Mitzvos;
(o) Ravin and everyone that came from Eretz Yisrael to Bavel
agreed with Rava.
2. (In Eretz Yisrael, Rosh Hashanah was Mekudash on
Thursday; Yom Kipur would be on Shabbos). To
secretly inform the community in Bavel, Ravin sent
the (altered) Beraisa in which R. Akiva discusses
Yom Kipur falling on Shabbos (the Halachah usually
follows R. Akiva.) Rav Yitzchak (like Abaye) did not
know it was only a ruse. (End of Version #2)
(a) (Mishnah - R. Yehudah): The Gid was forbidden to Yakov's
(b) (Beraisa - Chachamim): The Torah does not forbid Benei
*Yakov* to eat the Gid, rather, "Benei Yisrael" - and
they are not called Benei Yisrael until the Torah was
given at Sinai!
1. Rather, the Mitzvah was given at Sinai; the Torah
wrote it in the appropriate place, to teach why we
don't eat it.
(c) Question (Rava): "Benei Yisrael carried their father
Yakov" (they are called Benei Yisrael before Sinai)!
(d) Answer: After Hash-m called Yakov by the name Yisrael,
his children are called Benei Yisrael.
(e) Question (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): Chachamim should admit
that after that (when they are called Benei Yisrael), the
Gid was forbidden to them!
(f) Answer (Rav Ashi): The Torah was not given piecemeal!
1. Since this was not the time the Torah was given, nor
was it the time when Yakov's Gid was wounded (the
source of the Mitzvah), the Mitzvah did not begin to