ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 38
CHULIN 37-40 - sponsored by Dr. Lindsay A. Rosenwald of Lawrence NY, in
honor of his father, David ben Aharon ha'Levy Rosenwald of blessed memory.
(a) Rav's Talmidim told Shmuel that they had learned from Rav three new
definitions of Pirchus in the case of a Mesukenes: that the animal lows or
defecates - or twitches its ear during the Shechitah.
(b) Shmuel reacted to this information - with surprise, because he
considered the third case obvious.
(c) According to him, anything that an animal does not normally do in its
death-throes is considered Pirchus. To explain this, Rav Anan draws a
distinction between a Mesukenes that withdraws its stretched-out leg during
the Shechitah - which is a natural reaction, and one that initially
stretches out its leg - which is not (and is therefore considered Pirchus).
(a) We can extrapolate from our Mishnah 'Beheimah Dakar she'Pashtah Yadah
ve'Lo Hichzirah, Pesulah' - 'Ha Hichzirah, Kesheirah'.
(b) Shmuel is coming to teach us - that even if the animal withdraws its
leg, it is considered Pirchus (whereas the Mishnah is speaking about an
animal that first stretches it out and then withdraws it).
1. Rebbi Yossi in the name of Rebbi Meir, rules in a Beraisa that if a
Mesukenes lows whilst it is being Shechted, it is not considered Pirchus.
(b) To reconcile Rav with ...
2. Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yossi adds in his name - that the same will apply
even if it defecates or swishes its tail.
1. ... Rebbi Yossi - we establish the latter when the animal lows in a thin
voice, whereas he is speaking when it lows full blast.
2. ... Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yossi - we establish the latter when the dung
falls next to its body, whereas he is speaking when the animal ejects it
with force and it falls rests distance away from its body.
(a) According to Rav Chisda, the Pirchus must take place at the end of the
Shechitah, by which he means - (not the beginning, but) the middle.
(b) And he tries to prove it from our Mishnah 'Beheimah Dakar she'Pashtah
Yadah ... ' - because if it was at the end, it is unlikely that at that late
stage, stretching out its leg would not suffice to prove that it was not
dead, until it withdrew it too.
(c) Rava refutes Rav Chisda's proof however - on the grounds that if the
animal is unable to stretch out its leg and withdraw it at the end of the
Shechitah, it is a sign that it died already in the middle (as we explained
in our Mishnah).
(a) According to Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, a Mesukenes requires Pirchus only
at the beginning of the Shechitah. Otherwise, assuming it was required in
the middle, when Rebbi Shimon says in our Mishnah 'ha'Shochet ba'Laylah
u'le'Machar Matza Koslim Me'le'im Dam, Kesheirah, she'Zinkah ... ' - how can
one know that the blood did not spurt out at the beginning of the Shechitah.
(b) This proof is only valid according to Shmuel however, who interprets
'Koslim' as the neck of the animal? Had 'Koslim' meant the walls of the
abattoir - then the Kashya would have been non-existent, since if the Zinuk
took place at the beginning of the Shechitah, then the blood would have
reached the top of the wall from the force; whereas if it reached only the
lower part of the wall, then it must have taken place in the middle of the
(c) We refute the suggestion that Zinuk is a stronger kind of Pirchus (and
that other forms of Pirchus must indeed take place in the middle of the
Shechitah), from Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah 'Dayah im Zinkah' - which
implies that if anything, Zinuk is weaker than other forms of Pirchus, and
(d) When we suggest that maybe it is weaker than the Pirchus of Raban
Gamliel, but stronger than that of the Rabbanan - we mean that whereas Zinuk
is indeed weaker than Raban Gamliel's Pirchus (of moving both the fore and
the hind legs), but Rebbi Eliezer is referring to the Pirchus of the
Rabbanan (who require either the one or the other). Consequently, he
requires Pirchus only at the beginning of the Shechitah, but the Chachamim
may well require it in the middle.
(a) Ravina, citing Sama bar Chilka'i, knocks out this last suggestion too,
from the Lashon of the Chachamim in our Mishnah 'ad she'Tefarches be'Yad O
be'Regel' - which implies that their Pirchus is stronger than that of Rebbi
(b) The Chachamim cannot be referring to Raban Gamliel - because if they
were, they should have said (not '*ad she'Tefarches* be'Yad O be'Regel',
but) '*Keivan she'Pirchesah* be'Yad O be'Regel'.
(c) We have now proved - that Pirchus will suffice at the beginning of the
Shechitah, even according to Rebbi Eliezer, and certainly, according to
Raban Gamliel and the Rabbanan.
(d) Sama bar Chilka'i in turn, was actually citing either the brother, or
the father of bar Abubras - alias Abubras ...
(e) ... whom did he not quote by his own name, because he was known by his
more famous son or brother.
(a) Rava, the most stringent of all, requires the Pirchus to take place - at
the end of the Shechitah.
(b) And he bases his opinion on a Beraisa. From the Pasuk "Shor *O* Kesev",
the Tana precludes an animal of Kil'ayim - a baby born from a ewe and a
(c) *O* Eiz" comes to preclude a 'Nidmeh' (a baby born to a she-goat from a
he-goat that resembles a lamb), and the Tana learns from "ki Yivaled" -that
is born by means of a cesarean section is precluded too.
(d) "Shiv'as Yamim" precludes an animal under eight days old from being
brought on the Mizbe'ach. And the Tana learns from "Tachas Imo" - that it
must not be an orphan.
(a) 'P'rat le'Yasom' cannot come to preclude an animal whose mother died
any time ...
1. ... after its birth - because it is illogical to expect the mother to
live until after its child has been Shechted.
(b) What it therefore means is - that the mother died just as the baby was
2. ... before it is born - because that would then be synonymous with the
earlier D'rashah from "Ki Yivaled" (since it would also entail extracting it
by cesarean section).
(c) Neither can the Pasuk be coming to teach us that the mother needs to be
alive on the eighth day, to enable the baby to be brought as a Korban -
because Rebbi Yossi Hagelili in the Toras Kohanim learns that, despite the
Pasuk in Mishpatim "Shiv'as Yamim Yihy'eh Im Imo ... ", "Tachas Imo" teaches
us that the mother does not need to be alive for the entire seven days, and
from " ... Im Imo ... ", that it must not die before the baby is born (he
Din of 'Yasom').
(d) And Rava extrapolates from this Beraisa that the Pirchus of a Mesukenes
needs to take place at the end of the Shechitah - from this last D'rashah
(from "Tachas Imo"), because if it took place earlier, we would be able to
ask once again that we know that already from "Ki Yivaled", since it would
mean that the animal died before the baby was born.
(a) The Beraisa requires a small animal to stretch out its foreleg and to
withdraw it, but if it performs just one of these acts, it is considered a
Mefarcheses. The Tana rules however, that if ...
1. ... it merely stretches out its hind leg - it is a Mefarcheses, as is ...
(b) We query why Rava finds it necessary to rule like this Beraisa - when
all its rulings concerning a small and large animal are already contained in
2. ... a large animal that perform either of the two acts.
3. ... a bird - either twitches its ear or shakes its tail, it is a
(c) And we answer - that its rulings concerning a bird are not.
(a) The Tana Kama of our Mishnah validates a Shechitah that one performs on
behalf of a Nochri. Rebbi Eliezer declares it Pasul - even if the Nochri
will only receive the diaphragm.
(b) Rebbi Eliezer's reason is - because he takes for granted that a Nochri
has the intention that his animal (or whatever he owns in it) is being
Shechted for his Avodah-Zarah ('S'tam Machsheves Nochri
(c) Rebbi Yossi learns a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Mukdashin, where a Machshavah
renders Pasul, yet we do not contend with the Machshavah of the owner (only
the Shochet), how much more so will that be the case by Chulin, where a
Machshavah does not render Pasul.
(a) Assuming that both the Tana Kama and Rebbi Eliezer concur with the
opinion of Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Yossi, who holds in a Beraisa that the
Machsheves Pigul of the owner of a Korban renders it Pigul, the basis of
their Machlokes is - whether 'S'tam Machsheves Nochri la'Avodas-Kochavim'
(Rebbi Eliezer) or not (the Chachamim).
(b) The Chachamim will concede however, that the Shechitah is Pasul - if the
Nochri actually declares that his animal is being Shechted to his
(c) Rebbi Yossi disagrees even with that - because he does not hold of the
concept 'Zeh Mechashev, ve'Zeh Oved' (that a Korban can become Pigul through
the Machshavah of someone other than the Shochet, even the owner).
(a) Assuming that the Tana Kama argues with Rebbi Eliezer even in a case
where they actually heard the Nochri specifically mention 'Le'shem
Avodah-Zarah', the basis of their Machlokes will be - whether we learn Chutz
(Chulin) from P'nim (Kodshim [Rebbi Eliezer]) or not (the Chachamim).
(b) Whereas Rebbi Yossi holds - that even by Kodshim we do not say 'Zeh
Mechashev, ve'Zeh Oved'.
(c) We learn that the Shechitah of a Shochet is considered 'Zivchei Meisim'
from the words "*Zivchei* Meisim" (since the word 'Zevach' means Shechitah).
(d) And Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Yossi learns 'Zeh Mechashev ve'Zeh Oveid' by
Kodshim - from the Pasuk in Korach "Vehikriv ha'Makriv" (which refers to the