Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) MAY NOCHRIM LEARN TORAH?

(a) (R. Yochanan): A Nochri that learns Torah is Chayav Misah - "Torah...Morashah" - it is a Morashah (inheritance) for Yisrael, not for Nochrim.
(b) Question: Why is this not included among his seven Mitzvos?
(c) Answer: It is included in theft;

1. According to the opinion that expounds it is as if said Me'orasah (Torah is Mekudeshes to Yisrael), it is included in Arayos.

(d) Question (Beraisa - R. Meir): If a Nochri engages in Torah, he receives reward like a Kohen Gadol - "Asher Ya'aseh Osam *ha'Adam* va'Chai";

1. It does not say that *Yisraelim* will live through the Mitzvos, rather, Adam - this teaches that if a Nochri engages in Torah, he is rewarded like a Kohen Gadol.

(e) Answer: He is rewarded for learning his seven Mitzvos (he is liable for learning anything else in Torah).

(a) (Beraisa): R. Chanina ben Gamliel says, a Nochri is liable even for eating blood of a living animal.
(b) (Beraisa): "Ach Basar b'Nafsho Damo Lo Sochelu" - this refers to a limb of a living animal;
(c) R. Chanina ben Gamliel says, this also includes blood of a living animal.
(d) Question: What is his reason?
(e) Answer: We expound the verse as if it said 'Basar b'Nafsho Lo Sochelu, Damo b'Nafsho Lo Sochelu';

1. Chachamim say, this comes to permit (limbs of living) Sheratzim (this will be explained).

(f) (R. Chanina ben Gamliel): Similarly, blood of a living animal is forbidden to Yisrael - "...Levilti Achol ha'Dam Ki ha'Dam Hu ha'Nefesh" (do not eat blood while it is connected to the soul, i.e. while the animal is alive).

1. Chachamim say, this forbids Dam ha'Nefesh of bloodletting (i.e. the whole time it is flowing).

(a) Question: Why does the Torah forbid blood of a living animal to Benei No'ach, and again to Yisrael?
(b) Answer: This is as R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina taught - any Mitzvah said to Benei No'ach (it appears in the Torah before Ma'amad Har Sinai) and is repeated at (or after) Sinai, it applies to Benei No'ach and Yisrael;

1. Any Mitzvah said to Benei No'ach that is not repeated at Sinai, it applies only to Yisrael;
2. The only example we have is Gid ha'Nasheh, according to R. Yehudah.

(c) Question: Why does he (R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina) say that a Mitzvah said to Benei No'ach and repeated at Sinai applies to Benei No'ach and Yisrael?

1. (Had it not been repeated, we would say that it applies to Benei No'ach and to Yisrael (presumably, we only received more Mitzvos at Sinai, we did not lose Mitzvos) since it was repeated, this should teach that it only applies to Yisrael!

(d) Answer: We find that Nochrim were punished for idolatry (surely, they were commanded), and idolatry was repeated at Sinai - this teaches that such Mitzvos apply to Nochrim and Yisrael.
(e) Question: Why does he say that a Mitzvah said to Benei No'ach and not repeated at Sinai applies only to Yisrael - this should indicate that it only applies to Nochrim!
(f) Answer: We never find something permitted to a Yisrael and forbidden to a Nochri.
(g) Question: Yafes To'ar is permitted to a Yisrael and forbidden to a Nochri!
(h) Answer: This is only because the Parshah does not apply to them;

1. (Yafes To'ar only applies during conquest - ) Nochrim are not permitted to make war to conquer land.

(i) Question: Nochrim are killed for stealing less than the value of a Perutah, a Yisrael is exempt for this!
(j) Answer: Yisraelim are commanded about theft as Nochrim are;

1. They are liable because they do not pardon such an amount; Yisraelim are exempt because we pardon it.

(k) Question: We said that a Mitzvah said to Benei No'ach and repeated applies to both - but Milah was said before Sinai ("V'Ata Es Brisi Tishmor") and after ("Uva'Yom ha'Shemini Yimol"), yet it only applies to Yisrael!

(l) Answer #1: The latter verse is needed to permit Milah on Shabbos.
(m) Question: The Mitzvah to have children was said before Sinai ("Peru u'Rvu") and after ("Shuvu Lachem l'Ahaleichem"), yet it only applies to Yisrael!
(n) Answer: The latter verse is needed to teach that something forbidden by a vote of Beis Din is not permitted until Beis Din votes to permit it (even if they fixed a limited time for the prohibition, similar to Hash-m's prohibition of relations before Ma'amad Har Sinai).
(o) Question: If so, we can say that every Mitzvah repeated after Sinai was repeated for a certain Chidush (and only applies to Yisrael)!
(p) Answer: When the warning not to transgress is repeated, this shows that it applies to Benei No'ach and Yisrael.

(a) Question: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina said that the only Mitzvah (said to Benei No'ach that is not repeated) is Gid ha'Nasheh, according to R. Yehudah;

1. Also Milah and Peru u'Rvu were not repeated!

(b) Answer: They were repeated, but to teach a different matter;

1. Only Gid ha'Nasheh was not repeated at all.

(c) Answer #2 (to Question (k)): Milah was never given to all Benei No'ach, only to Avraham - "V'Ata Es Brisi Tishmor Ata *v'Zar'acha Acharecha*".
(d) Question: If so, also Benei Yishmael should be commanded about Milah, they also descend from Avraham!
(e) "Ki v'Yitzchak Yikarei Lecha Zara" (only Yitzchak's descendants are considered Avraham's seed).
(f) Question: Benei Esav should be commanded about Milah, they also descend from Yitzchak!
(g) Question (R. Oshaya): If so, Benei Keturah (Avraham's children after he remarried Hagar) should not be commanded about Milah, they do not descend from Yitzchak;
(h) Answer: R. Yosi bar Avin taught, "Es Brisi Hefar" comes to include Benei Keturah.

(a) (Rav Yehudah): Adam ha'Rishon was not allowed to (Tosfos - kill animals to) eat meat - "(All vegetation) Lachem Yihyeh l'Achlah ul'Chol Chayas ha'Sadeh" - the animals are not Lachem (for man to eat);

1. After the flood, it was permitted - "K'Yerek Esev Nasati Lachem Es Kol".
2. Suggestion: Perhaps even a limb of a living animal was permitted!
3. Rejection: "Ach Basar b'Nafsho Damo Lo Sochelu".
4. Suggestion: Perhaps even limbs of living Sheratzim are forbidden!
5. Rejection: "Ach".
6. Question: How does this teach that Sheratim are excluded?
7. Answer (Rav Huna): "Damo" - something whose blood is distinguished (in Halachah) from the flesh (the Torah does not do so regarding Sheratzim).

(b) Question: "U'Rdu bi'Dgas ha'Yam";

1. Suggestion: This authorized man to eat fish!

(c) Answer: No, it authorized him to force fish to work for him.

1. Question: Can fish work?
2. Answer: Yes, as evidenced by Rachbah's question.

i. Question (Rachbah): If one harnessed a fish and a goat to pull a wagon together, is he liable (for Kilai Behemah)?

(d) Question: "(U'Rdu...) uv'Of ha'Shamayim";

1. Suggestion: This authorized man to eat birds!

(e) Answer: No, it authorized him to force birds to work for him.

1. Question: Can birds work?
2. Answer: Yes, as evidenced by Rabah bar Rav Huna's question.

i. Question (Rabah bar Rav Huna): According to R. Yosi bar Yehudah (who says that a worker's right to eat (and the prohibition to muzzle an animal) is only when he (or it) works with his feet and hands (forelegs), if one threshes with geese and chickens, what is the law? (Does the right to eat depend on working with four limbs, or that none of the four limbs are idle?)

(f) Question: "(U'Rdu...) uv'Chol Chayah ha'Romeses Al ha'Aretz". (Surely, this authorized man to eat Chayos, one cannot use them to work!)
(g) Answer: No, it authorized him to force snakes to work for him.

1. (Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Menasya): Had the snake not been cursed (and lost its legs), it would have been a great servant; every Yisrael would have had two, to find gems for him, and to fertilize his field.

(h) Question (Beraisa - R. Yehudah ben Teima): In Gan Eden, angels were roasting meat (for him to eat) and straining wine for Adam ha'Rishon; the snake saw Adam's honor and became jealous.
(i) Answer: They brought him meat that fell from Shamayim.
(j) Question: Does meat fall from Shamayim?!
(k) Answer: Yes - R. Shimon ben Chalafta encountered lions; they roared at him (they wanted to eat him). He said "Ha'Kefirim Sho'agim la'Taref" - two pieces of meat came down (from Shamayim). The lions ate one, he took the other to the Beis Medrash and asked if it was Tahor or Tamei.

1. Rabanan: Tamei things do not descend from Shamayim.

(l) Question (R. Zeira): If an animal resembling a donkey descended from Shamayim, what is the law?
(m) Rabanan: We already said, Tamei things do not descend from Shamayim. (Surely, this will not happen; if it did, it would be Tahor.)