Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE INTENT OF A MINOR

(a) R. Chiya Bar Aba: R. Yochanan had no doubt about mere intent (it has no effect, like the Mishnah clearly says).

1. He was unsure about intent recognized through his actions, e.g. if an Olah was in the south part of the Azarah, and he took it to the north (where it must be slaughtered) and slaughtered it.

i. Do we say, this proves that he intended to slaughter it as a Korban?
ii. Or, perhaps he just did not find room to slaughter in the south?

(b) Question: But R. Yochanan already taught the law of intent recognized through actions!

1. (Mishnah): If Reuven took his produce up to the roof so the mites should leave it, and dew came on it, since he did not intend for it to get wet, it is not Huchshar (susceptible to Tum'ah);
2. If he wanted it to get wet, it is Huchshar.
3. If a deaf person, lunatic or minor took it up, even if he intended, it is not Huchshar.

i. (R. Yochanan): If he flipped the produce over so the other side should also get wet, it is Huchshar.

(c) Answer: He was unsure if it takes effect mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan.
(d) Version #2 - Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak - (R. Chiya Bar Aba citing R. Yochanan) Question: Does the action of a minor take effect?

1. Question (R. Ami): He should ask whether a minor's intent takes effect!

i. Surely, he knew the Mishnah that teaches that a minor's intent has no effect; the same Mishnah teaches that his actions take effect!

2. Answer: He was unsure if his actions take effect mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan.

(e) Answer (R. Yochanan): His actions take effect mid'Oraisa; his intent has no effect, even mid'Rabanan;

1. When his intent is recognized through actions, this only has effect mid'Rabanan.

(f) Question (Shmuel): What is the source that if Kodshim are slaughtered without intent, they are Pesulim?
(g) Answer (Rav Huna): "He will slaughter the bull" - when slaughtering, he must intend for the bull.
(h) Question (Shmuel): I knew that; I ask, how do we know that b'Diavad, it is Pasul?
(i) Answer (Rav Huna): "You will slaughter it willingly" - you will slaughter it knowingly (the extra verse teaches that b'Diavad, it is Pasul).

(a) (Mishnah): If a Nochri slaughters, the animal is a Neveilah, it has Tum'as Masa (one who moves it becomes Tamei).
(b) (Gemara) Question: It is Neveilah, but it is not forbidden to benefit from it - like whom is our Mishnah?
(c) Answer (R. Chiya b'Rebbi Aba): It is not like R. Eliezer, he holds that (we assume that) a Nochri is always thinking about idolatry (his slaughter is for the sake of idolatry).
(d) (R. Ami): The Mishnah says, if a Nochri slaughters, the animal is a Neveilah - but if a priest (of idolatry) slaughtered, the animal is (assumed to be) an offering to idolatry.

1. From our Mishnah, we derive the same law like a Beraisa.
2. (Beraisa): If a priest (of idolatry) slaughters, the animal is an offering to idolatry;

i. His bread is forbidden like bread of Kusim; his wine is Yayin Nesech (a libation to idolatry); if he wrote Seforim (of Torah and the prophets) they are like the prophecies of idolaters; his produce is (assumed to be) Tevel;

ii. Some say, his children are Mamzerim.
iii. The first Tana holds that he does not allow his wife to have relations with others.

(e) Question (Mishnah): If a Nochri slaughters, the animal is a Neveilah (but one may benefit from it);

1. We should be concerned, perhaps he is a priest!

(f) Answer (Rav Nachman): There are not priests among the Nochrim.
(g) Objection: But we see that there are!
(h) Correction: Rather, most Nochrim are not priests.

1. Rav Nachman holds like R. Chiya Bar Aba.
2. (R. Chiya Bar Aba): Nochrim in Chutz La'aretz are not true idolaters - they merely continue the customs of their ancestors.

(i) (Rav Yosef bar Minyomi): There are not priests among the Nochrim.
(j) Question: Regarding what law was this taught?

1. Suggestion: Regarding slaughter.
2. Rejection: Even a Yisrael that is a priest to idolatry, his slaughter is forbidden - all the more so, a Nochri priest!

(k) Answer #1: We do not push him into a pit when the opportunity arises.
(l) Rejection: We push even a Yisrael that is a priest to idolatry, all the more so, a Nochri priest!
(m) Answer #2: (Rav Ukva bar Chama): We accept Korbanos from him.

1. (Beraisa): "*From* you" - not from all of you, to exclude a Mumar; "From *you* (Yisrael)" - within Yisrael, there is a distinction (from whom we take Korbanos), but not among Nochrim.

(n) Question: Perhaps the verse teaches that we take Korbanos from Tzadikim within Yisrael, not from the wicked, but we do not take from any Nochri!
(o) Answer: (Beraisa): "A man, a man" - this includes Nochrim, that they may vow and bring Nedarim and Nedavos like Yisrael.

(a) (Mishnah): It has Tum'as Masa.
(b) Question: This is obvious, every Neveilah has Tum'as Masa!
(c) Version #1 - Answer (Rava): The Mishnah teaches that *this* animal has Tum'as Masa, implying that another case has Tum'as Ohel, i.e. something offered to idolatry, according to R. Yehudah ben Beseirah.
(d) Version #2 - Answer (Rava): The Mishnah teaches that slaughter of a Nochri only has Tum'as Masa, it lacks Tum'as Ohel, even if it was slaughtered to idolatry - this is unlike R. Yehudah ben Beseirah.

1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah ben Beseirah): How do we know that something offered to idolatry has Tum'as Ohel? "They clung to Ba'al Pe'or, and ate of the Korbanos to the dead" - the verse equates idolatry and the dead;
2. Just like a corpse has Tum'as Ohel, also offerings to idolatry.

(a) (Mishnah): If one slaughters at night, or if a blind person slaughters, it is Kosher.
(b) (Gemara): 'If one slaughters' - this is b'Diavad.
(c) Contradiction (Beraisa): One may slaughter anytime, anywhere - by day or night, on the roof or the head of a ship.
(d) Answer (Rav Papa): It is permitted at night by the light of a torch.
(e) Support (Rav Ashi): In the Mishnah, the case of at night resembles the other case, a blind person, who cannot see;

1. In the Beraisa, the case of at night resembles the other case, by day, he can see.