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 68
CHULIN 66-68 - sponsored by Dr. Lindsay A. Rosenwald of Lawrence NY, in
honor of his father, David ben Aharon ha'Levy Rosenwald of blessed memory.
***** PEREK BEHAMAH HA'MAKSHAH *****
1) SLAUGHTER OF AN ANIMAL THAT IS GIVING BIRTH
(a) (Mishnah): If an animal was slaughtered when it was
giving birth, and the fetus stuck out a leg (from the
womb) and returned it, it may be eaten;
1. If it stuck out its head, even if it returned it, it
is as if the fetus was born.
(b) If one cut up a fetus in (a live) mother, it may be
1. If the spleen or kidneys were cut up, it is
(c) (Gemara - Rav Yehudah): The leg which left the womb may
not be eaten.
2. The rule is - something which is part of the animal
is forbidden; if it is not part of the animal, it is
1. "Meat torn in the field you may not eat" - once meat
leaves its proper place, it is forbidden.
(d) Question (Mishnah): If the fetus stuck out a leg and
returned it, *it* may be eaten.
1. Suggestion: 'It' refers to the leg, it may be eaten!
(e) Answer: No, it refers to the rest of the fetus.
(f) Question: The rest of the fetus is permitted even if the
leg was not returned - why did the Mishnah say that the
leg was returned?
(g) Answer: It says that the leg was returned for parallel
structure with the Seifa:
1. (Seifa): If it stuck out its head, even if it
returned it, it is as if it was born.
(h) Question: Why must our Mishnah teach that - another
Mishnah teaches that!
1. (Mishnah): A man can be a Bechor (firstborn)
regarding inheritance (to receive a double portion),
but not a Bechor regarding (the Mitzvah to redeem
him by giving five Shekalim to) a Kohen:
(i) Answer: Really, the Reisha only permits the rest of the
i. This is if he was born after a Nefel
(non-viable baby), even if the Nefel stuck its
head out alive, or after a viable baby (that
had the proper nine months in the womb) that
stuck its head out after it already died.
2. Suggestion: Our Mishnah teaches about animals, that
Mishnah teaches about people.
ii. Inference: If the first baby was viable and
stuck its head out alive (and later died), the
next child would not be a Bechor even regarding
inheritance (because the first child was
i. We cannot learn about people from animals, for
animals do not have a birth canal (perhaps that
is why emergence of the head is like birth)!
3. Rejection: Another Mishnah teaches about animals!
ii. We cannot learn about animals from people, for
a person's face is important.
i. (Mishnah): If a fetal sac partially left the
womb, it is forbidden to eat; just like it
indicates a fetus in a woman, also in an
4. Summation of question: If the leg is permitted in
the Reisha because the fetus drew it back, we can
say that the Seifa discusses returning the head for
5. But if the leg is forbidden whether or not it was
returned (and only the rest of the fetus is
permitted), there was no need to mention returning
(the leg or head) in either clause!
1. It says that the leg returned, for this permits the
place where we cut the leg (i.e. the part that was
even with the edge of the womb but did not leave.)
(j) Question (Beraisa): If an animal was giving birth, the
fetus stuck out a leg and returned it, and then the
mother was slaughtered, it is permitted (to eat it);
2. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak likewise explained that a
Beraisa (below) permits this part of the leg.
1. If it returned the leg after slaughter, it is
2. If the fetus stuck out a leg and it was cut off
before slaughter, what is outside is Tamei and
forbidden, what is inside is Tahor and permitted;
2) MEAT THAT LEAVES ITS PLACE
3. R. Meir says, if the leg was cut off after
slaughter, the rest of the fetus is like meat that
touched a Nevelah;
(k) Answer #1: No, it refers to the rest of the fetus.
4. Chachamim say, it is like meat that touched a
5. Culmination of question - Suggestion: The Reisha
says 'If the fetus stuck out a leg and returned it
before slaughter, *it* is permitted' - this refers
to the leg.
(l) Objection: But the Seifa says, if it returned it after
slaughter, it is forbidden - why should the fetus be
(m) Answer #2: We can answer like Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak
answered another Beraisa - it refers to the place where
we cut the leg.
(n) Question (Beraisa): If it returned "Parsah (a leg)", it
is permitted; if it returned "Perasos", it is permitted.
1. Suggestion: This means, the limbs that were returned
before slaughter may be eaten; but not limbs that
were not returned; the part of the fetus that stayed
inside is permitted.
(o) Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): Returning the limb
permits the place where we cut the leg.
2. Rejection: This cannot be - the rest of the fetus is
permitted even if no limbs were returned!
(p) Question: But the Beraisa expounds two words, Parsah and
1. Suggestion: One permits the place that is cut, the
other permits the limb itself.
(q) Answer: No, one permits the place that is cut, the other
permits a fetus whose hooves are not split, according to
1. (R. Shimon): If an animal with unsplit hooves was
born to a cow, it is forbidden.
i. This is only if the baby was born, but if it
was found inside the cow after slaughter, it is
(a) Version #1 (Ula, citing R. Yochanan): The limb itself is
permitted (if it was returned.)
3) BIRTH OF LIMBS
(b) Rav Yehudah: But Rav and Shmuel say that it is forbidden!
(c) Ula: Rav and Shmuel are so special, we treasure the dirt
they were buried in - nevertheless, the Halachah follows
(d) (R. Yochanan): "U'Vasar ba'Sadeh Treifah Lo Sochelu"
forbids all meat that left its proper place;
1. The Torah teaches that if Basar Chatas left the
Azarah it is forbidden (there is no remedy);
(e) Question (Beraisa): If Ma'aser Sheni or Bikurim left
their proper place (Yerushalayim) and returned, they are
2. We infer, in all other cases, if the meat is
returned to its proper place, it is permitted.
1. One might have thought, also meat that left its
proper place and returned is permitted - "U'Vasar
ba'Sadeh Treifah Lo Sochelu" teaches that this is
(f) Question: The Beraisa permits Ma'aser Sheni and Bikurim
that left Yerushalayim and returned - what is the source
2. Question: How do we learn this from the verse?
3. Answer (Rabah): Just like a Treifah never becomes
permitted, also meat that leaves its proper place.
4. This refutes Ula.
(g) Answer: "You may not eat in your gates Ma'aser..." - but
you may eat it if it left and returned.
(a) Version #2: Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael explained the
argument between Rav and R. Yochanan as follows:
(b) (Rav): A limb that leaves the womb is considered to have
(c) (R. Yochanan): It is not as if it was born.
(d) Question: What do Rav and R. Yochanan argue about (Rif;
Rashi - what is the difference between the two versions
of the argument)?
(e) Answer: If the majority of a limb left the womb, they
argue whether or not the minority left inside becomes
forbidden (in this version, Rav forbids it.)
(f) Question #1: According to R. Yochanan, if the fetus stuck
out limbs and returned them one by one, until the
majority of the fetus was at some point outside, what is
1. Since the majority left, it is born?
(g) Question #2: If we say, once a limb returns, it is as if
it never left - if it stuck out limbs one by one and they
were cut off, until the majority left, what is the law?
2. Or, once a limb returns, it is as if it never left
(and now, only a minority is outside, it is not yet
1. Since the majority left, it is born?
(h) Answer (Mishnah): The rule is - something which is part
of the animal is forbidden; if it is not part of the
animal, it is permitted.
2. Or, perhaps a majority must be outside at one time?
1. Suggestion: The latter clause permits this case (the
limbs were cut one by one.)
(i) Rejection: No, it permits a fetus whose hooves are not
split, according to R. Shimon.
1. He holds that if such a calf was born it is
forbidden, but it is permitted if it was found in a