Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Chulin, 33

1) EATING THE LUNG AND INTESTINES IMMEDIATELY AFTER SHECHITAH

QUESTION: The Gemara (32b) quotes Reish Lakish who rules that when the trachea was cut, and then the lung became punctured before the esophagus was cut, the Shechitah nevertheless is valid. Since the lung depends on the air flow from the trachea, once the trachea has been cut the lung is rendered useless, and thus a puncture in the lung cannot make the animal a Tereifah at that point.

The Gemara here quotes Rav Acha bar Yakov who infers from the words of Reish Lakish that the intestines of an animal that has been slaughtered (and is still "Mefarkeses," twitching) are permitted for a Jew to eat, but are prohibited for a Nochri to eat. RASHI (DH mid'Reish Lakish) explains that we may not give intestines to a Nochri to eat, "because of the lung which is considered detached from the animal" once the trachea is cut, and therefore it is forbidden to a Nochri as Ever Min ha'Chai. With regard to a Nochri, the animal is considered to be alive after Shechitah until it stops moving entirely, and therefore he may not eat the lung immediately after the Shechitah, because it is considered as though the lung is being taken from a live animal, and it is thus forbidden as Ever Min ha'Chai. With regard to a Jew, though, the animal is permitted to eat once the Shechitah is completed, even if the animal is still twitching.

Why does Rashi specifically discuss the *lung* here when the Gemara is discussing the "Benei Me'ayim," the intestines? The same logic that prohibits the lung to the Nochri applies to the intestines; the intestines are considered detached from the animal once the esophagus is cut!

The MAHARAM suggests that while this reasoning prohibits the intestines in a case in which the animal is still twitching after the esophagus is cut, perhaps Rashi specifically mentions the lung, because the animal is *never* dead after the trachea alone is cut. The lung is therefore *always* Ever Min ha'Chai for a Nochri, while the intestines are not always prohibited because of Ever Min ha'Chai for a Nochri (such as when the animal stopped twitching). (Z. Wainstein)

QUESTION: The Gemara quotes Rav Acha bar Yakov who infers from the words of Reish Lakish (32b) that the intestines of an animal that has been slaughtered (and is still "Mefarkeses," twitching) are permitted for a Jew to eat, but are prohibited for a Nochri to eat. With regard to a Nochri, the animal is considered to be alive after Shechitah until it stops moving entirely, and therefore he may not eat the intestines immediately after the Shechitah, because they are considered to have been taken from a live animal and are thus forbidden as Ever Min ha'Chai. With regard to a Jew, though, the animal is permitted to eat once the Shechitah is completed, even if the animal is still twitching.

The RASHBA (Toras ha'Bayis 2:3; see Insights to Chulin 32:2) maintains that when the Gemara (32b) earlier says that after the trachea is cut, the lung is considered to be detached from the animal, it does not mean that it is literally detached. Rather, it means that we view the lung as detached only with regard to the laws of Tereifos. Since the lung is no longer connected to its life-source, it cannot cause the animal to become a Tereifah. However, in order to permit it to be eaten, both Simanim of the animal must be cut. If the lung was removed before the Shechitah was completed, it is prohibited.

According to the Rashba, why should the intestines be prohibited to a Nochri immediately after Shechitah? Even though they are considered to be detached from the animal, there should be enough life in them in order for the death of the animal to permit them, in the same way that the lung has enough life in it to be permitted to a Jew by the cutting of the esophagus!

ANSWER: The CHAZON ISH (3:19) answers based on the Gemara later in Chulin. The Gemara later (73b) says that when an animal is slaughtered while it has a limb hanging from it ("Ever ha'Meduldal"), the Shechitah is valid, and it also permits the limb to be eaten. However, this applies only to permit the limb to a Jew. This Heter does not apply to a Nochri, because when the animal dies, the limbs that were loosely attached to it are viewed to have fallen off at the same time that the animal died ("Misah Osah Nipul"), and they are considered to be Ever Min ha'Chai and not Neveilah, and are thus prohibited to a Nochri (see RASHI DH she'Misah).

Accordingly, when an animal dies, any limb that was an "Ever ha'Meduldal" is considered to have fallen off of a live animal and is prohibited to a Nochri as Ever Min ha'Chai. The intestines have the same status, and are prohibited to the Nochri as Ever Min ha'Chai.

In contrast, the intestines are permitted to a Jew, because Shechitah does not cause the limbs to be viewed as though they have fallen off (see TOSEFES BI'UR on Toras ha'Bayis). (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)

OPINIONS: Rav Acha bar Yakov maintains that an animal that twitches (Mefarkeses) after being slaughtered with a valid Shechitah is considered alive with regard to the prohibition of Ever Min ha'Chai for a Nochri. A Nochri who eats a limb of the animal during that stage transgressed the Isur of Ever Min ha'Chai. Rav Papa argues, asking, "Is there anything that is permitted for a Jew but is prohibited to a Nochri!"

Which opinion does the Halachah follow?

(a) The RIF quotes the conclusion of the Gemara that quotes a Beraisa that says, "One who wants to eat meat from an animal before it dies [after it is slaughtered properly] should cut a piece of meat from the area of the Shechitah, salt it well, rinse it well, and wait for the animal to die, and then he may eat it. Both a Nochri and a Jew may eat it."

The RAN explains that even though a Nochri may not eat from an animal that he slaughters until the animal dies, a Nochri may eat from an animal that a Jew slaughters (after following the procedure of the Beraisa), because of the principle of Rav Papa.

(b) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Melachim 9:12) seems to argue with the Rif. He rules that even when two Simanim of an animal are cut, it is still Ever Min ha'Chai for a Nochri while the animal is Mefarkeses. The KESEF MISHNEH suggests a source for the Rambam's ruling, but is in doubt about it.

HALACHAH: The TUR (YD 27) rules like the RIF and writes that it is permissible to give a Nochri a piece of meat that was cut from an animal that was Mefarkeses as long as the animal was slaughtered correctly. (Z. Wainstein)

33b

QUESTION: The Gemara quotes a Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua in the Mishnah in Taharos (2:2). Rebbi Eliezer maintains that a person becomes Tamei with the same degree of Tum'ah as the food that he eats, whether he eats food that is Tamei with Rishon, Sheni, or Shelishi l'Tum'ah. Rebbi Yehoshua argues and maintains that when a person eats food that is Tamei with Rishon l'Tum'ah or Sheni l'Tum'ah, he becomes Tamei with Sheni l'Tum'ah. When he eats a Shelishi l'Tum'ah, he becomes Tamei with Sheni with regard to eating Kodesh.

The Gemara in Shabbos explains (14a) that the reason why the Rabanan decreed that a person who eats a Tamei food becomes Tamei is because of a safeguard to protect the Taharah of Terumah. We are afraid that one who is eating food or drink that is Tamei might put an item of Terumah into his mouth, and cause the Terumah to become Tamei. RASHI there explains that the person would be in violation of the Mitzvah to guard Terumah from becoming Tamei, as the Torah states, "Es Mishmeres Terumosi" -- "the guard of my Terumos" (Bamidbar 18:8).

If the purpose of this decree is to prevent Terumah from becoming Tamei, then why did the Rabanan have to decree that the person who eats food that is Tamei becomes Tamei with Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah? It would suffice to decree that he becomes Tamei with Shelishi l'Tum'ah (even when he eats a Rishon or Sheni), since one who is a Shelishi l'Tum'ah is prohibited from eating Terumah. (MAHARSHA)

ANSWERS:

(a) The MAHARSHA answers that since the decree applies to food of *Chulin* that is Tamei, the Rabanan cannot decree that the person who eats the food becomes Tamei with Shelishi l'Tum'ah, since Shelishi does not apply to Chulin (Chulin can become Tamei only with Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah). (Only when the person eats food that is Terumah, and that became Tamei with Shelishi, does he become Tamei with Shelishi.)

(b) The Maharsha in MAHADURA BASRA and the RASHASH answer that in order to make the Gezeirah effective, it was necessary to decree that the person becomes Tamei with Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah. Had the Rabanan decreed that he becomes Tamei only with Shelishi when he eats a food that is Tamei (with any degree of Tum'ah), there still would have been a concern that he would forget and eat Terumah with that food, causing the Terumah to become Tamei. A person who is Tamei with Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah, however, is not only prohibited from eating Terumah, he is also prohibited from *touching* Terumah. Therefore, by making him Tamei with Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah, the Rabanan ensure that he will keep a distance from Terumah when eating foods that are Tamei, and thus he will not inadvertently place Terumah food into his mouth. (However, it was not necessary to make the person a Sheni when he eats a Shelishi, because a Shelishi will not be Metamai Terumah.) (See also following Insight.) (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)

QUESTION: The Gemara quotes a Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua in the Mishnah in Taharos (2:2). Rebbi Eliezer maintains that a person becomes Tamei with the same degree of Tum'ah as the food that he eats, whether he eats food that is Tamei with Rishon, Sheni, or Shelishi l'Tum'ah. Rebbi Yehoshua argues and maintains that when a person eats food that is Tamei with Rishon l'Tum'ah or Sheni l'Tum'ah, he becomes Tamei with Sheni l'Tum'ah. When he eats a Shelishi l'Tum'ah, he becomes Tamei with Sheni with regard to eating Kodesh.

The Gemara later (34a) quotes Rebbi Yochanan who says that Rebbi Eliezer's reason for arguing with Rebbi Yehoshua is that we find that the Torah itself gives more stringent laws to the person who eats a Tamei food than it gives to the Tamei food itself (that is, in the case of Nivlas Of Tahor). Accordingly, it is only fitting that the Gezeirah of the Rabanan make the person at least *equal* to the Tamei food.

Why, though, according to Rebbi Eliezer's reasoning, did the Rabanan not make their decree entirely consistent with the Torah's precedent! They should have decreed that the person who eats a food that is a Rishon l'Tum'ah becomes Tamei with Av ha'Tum'ah, and one who eats a Sheni l'Tum'ah becomes Tamei with *Rishon* l'Tum'ah!

ANSWER: The answer, based on the words of TOSFOS (DH ha'Ochel), is that when it is not necessary for the Gezeirah, the Rabanan preferred to avoid increasing Tum'ah in the world. Since the Gezeirah is effective by making the person become Tamei with Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah, the Rabanan did not follow the precedent of the Torah to make the person's Tum'ah more stringent than the food's Tum'ah. However, if it is true that the Rabanan do not add Tum'ah when it is not necessary, then why did they decree that a person who eats a food that is a Rishon l'Tum'ah becomes Tamei with Rishon l'Tum'ah? It would have sufficed to make him a Sheni l'Tum'ah!

Tosfos answers as follows. As we mentioned above (in the previous Insight), it was necessary to decree that the person who eats Tamei food becomes at least a Sheni l'Tum'ah, in order for the Gezeirah to be effective. Making him a Sheni not only prevents him from eating Terumah, but it also prevents him from touching Terumah. According to Rebbi Eliezer, there is logical grounds to decree Sheni l'Tum'ah upon a person who eats a food that is a Sheni, since the Torah itself treats the Tum'ah of a person more stringently than the Tum'ah of the food that he eats. Since it is logical, Rebbi Eliezer is consistent and makes a person who eats a Rishon l'Tum'ah become Tamei with Rishon l'Tum'ah (even though, for the purposes of the Gezeirah itself, it would have sufficed to make him a Sheni). (See also TOSFOS YOM TOV.)

Rebbi Yehoshua holds that the opposite is true. He argues that the Torah usually treats the Tamei food more stringently than the person who eats it (as the Gemara on 34a describes). Accordingly, one who eats a Rishon becomes a Sheni, and one who eats a Sheni becomes a Sheni, not because the person is equated with the food that he eats, but because of a different reason -- we find that Sheni causes something else to become a Sheni when the Tum'ah is transferred through Mashkin (liquid), and thus we have a basis to decree that the person who eats a Sheni becomes a Sheni, as the Gemara on 34a describes.

However, we may ask that according to Rebbi Yehoshua, why do we need a special reason to make the person who eats a Sheni become a Sheni himself? As we have explained, the Rabanan found it necessary to decree that the person who eats Tamei food becomes Tamei with at least Sheni l'Tum'ah in order for the Gezeirah to be effective (to prevent the person from even *touching* Terumah)! Why, then, does Rebbi Yehoshua need to prove that a Sheni can cause another object to become a Sheni (through Mashkin)?

TOSFOS (34a, DH Sheni) answers that Rebbi Yehoshua maintains that if the Rabanan had no precedent for a Sheni l'Tum'ah making another object become Tamei with Sheni l'Tum'ah, then they would not have been able to decree that a person who eats a Sheni becomes Tamei with Sheni l'Tum'ah. It would have looked too comical. Once there is a precedent for a Sheni making another object into a Sheni, then the Rabanan could decree that the person who eats a Sheni becomes Tamei with Sheni l'Tum'ah. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)