Chullin 117b — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

two ![](pamud.bmp "

")

exclusions are written

in these verses.

Here,

in the removal of the ashes,

it is written, “and he shall place it”,

which implies specifically he and not another. And

there,

in the eglah arufah,

it is written, “the beheaded”.

And since exclusions are written, even the one who says that always two verses that come as one do teach, concedes that here they do not teach, for it implies specifically these and not others.

And we raise an objection:

And three verses,

“for you,” “to atone,” and “it,”

why do I need them concerning blood,

since from one of them we exclude misuse of sacred property?

And we explain:

One

verse—

to exclude

blood from the law of

leftover,

for if blood remained and one ate it, he is not liable on account of leftover.

And one—

to exclude

blood

from misuse of sacred property,

as we said above.

And one—

to exclude it from impurity,

for if he ate the blood in a state of bodily impurity, he is not liable on account of impurity.

But

to exclude blood

from pigul,

that is, he rendered the sacrifice pigul and ate of its blood—

a verse is not needed. For we learned: Everything

thing

that has something permitting it, whether

they permit it

for a person,

such as the flesh of consecrated offerings, which the sprinkling of the blood permits for the priests to eat,

and whether

they permit

for the altar,

such as the limbs of a burnt-offering, which the sprinkling of the blood permits to burn on the altar,

one is liable for it on account of pigul.

But if it has nothing permitting it, one is not liable for it on account of pigul.

And blood

has nothing permitting it, for it

itself is the permitter.

We shall return to you, chapter “All the Flesh”.

Introduction to the chapter “The Skin and the Sauce”

A. Two types of impurity apply to a domesticated animal and a wild animal:

impurity of an unslaughtered carcass,

and impurity of foods.

The details of the laws of these two types of impurity are explained in this chapter.

B.

Impurity of an unslaughtered carcass

is an impurity

inherent

in a domesticated animal or wild animal that died without ritual slaughter according to halakha.

The level of

impurity of the carcass

is

a primary source of impurity,

and the carcass imparts impurity to all who touch it [a person, a utensil, or food], making them a first degree of impurity.

In contrast, the impurity of foods of a domesticated animal or wild animal that was slaughtered is not an inherent impurity. Rather, whenever the domesticated animal or wild animal has been slaughtered according to halakha, and it is permitted to eat it, it henceforth becomes fit

to receive

impurity from an impure thing. And once the impure thing touches it, it becomes impure with the impurity of foods, and it also imparts impurity to other foods with the impurity of foods.

Impurity of foods

is always

a first degree of impurity,

because foods do not become a primary source of impurity, even if they touched a corpse, which is the father of the fathers of impurity.

As stated, the essential distinction between the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass and the impurity of foods is that the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass is an inherent impurity, whereas the impurity of foods is an impurity that the food receives from an impure thing. Therefore, the inherent impurity of the carcass does not require “preparation by liquids” in order to take effect.

And thus it is stated in the Torah, in the Book of Leviticus [11:39]: “And when an animal of which you may eat dies, one who touches its carcass shall be impure until the evening.”

In contrast, in the case of impurity of foods, the food becomes impure only if it was previously “prepared” to receive impurity, by water or liquids being placed upon it.

And thus it is stated in the Torah [there 37–38], in the two verses dealing with impurity of foods: “

And if any of their carcass [of the impure creeping things] falls upon any sowing seed that is to be sown—it is pure.

And if water is put upon seed, and any of their carcass falls upon it—it is impure for you.”

The “seed” mentioned here is a general designation for every item of food. And the verse teaches that everything designated for eating does not receive impurity unless it is first “prepared” to receive impurity, by water [or liquids] being placed upon it.

C. In this chapter two concepts in the laws of impurity will be explained, called

“a handle”

and

“a protective covering.”

We find the concept

“a handle”

both with regard to impurity of an unslaughtered carcass and with regard to impurity of foods, but the concept

“a protective covering”

we find only with regard to impurity of foods, and not with regard to impurity of an unslaughtered carcass. “

The handle of the food”

is a thing attached to the food, but it is not the food itself; rather, it is needed for the food, for example, by means of it one holds the food. “

The protective covering of the food”

is a thing attached to the food that protects the food from becoming spoiled, such as the peel of a fruit.

D. “The protective covering of the food” is more stringent than “the handle of the food,” because although the handle of the food receives impurity, it does not join together to complete the food to the measure of an egg [which is the measure for impurity of foods]. Whereas “the protective covering of the food” not only receives impurity, but also joins the food itself in order to complete it to the measure of an egg.

And as stated above, there is an additional distinction between a handle and a protective covering: the law of “the protective covering of the food” was innovated only with regard to impurity of foods, and not with regard to impurity of unslaughtered carcasses. Therefore, “the protective covering of the carcass” does not join to complete it to the measure of an olive, which is the measure for impurity of unslaughtered carcasses.

But the law of “the handle of the food” also exists with regard to impurity of unslaughtered carcasses. Therefore, if a person touched the handle of the carcass, he became impure from the carcass.

Our Mishna enumerates things that, when they are by themselves and are not attached to food, are not fit to receive impurity of foods, because they are not designated for eating. But when they are attached to food, they receive impurity.

And not only do they receive impurity, but they also join the food in order to complete it to the measure of an egg, which is the measure of impurity of foods, both to receive impurity and to impart impurity to others. Thus, even if the food by itself does not have the measure of an egg, but only together with that thing, they join to the measure, both in order to receive impurity and in order to impart impurity to others .

There are two ways in which a thing by itself does not receive impurity, but when it is attached to food it receives impurity.

The first is “the protective covering of the food,” concerning which it was innovated in the Torah that the protective covering of the food receives impurity and joins the food to the measure of an egg. But if it is standing by itself, it does not receive impurity, since it is not fit for eating.

And the second is the parts of the animal that are not designated for eating by themselves: when they are attached to food, since then people customarily eat them together with the food, they become impure and impart impurity.

Mishna:

The skin

of a domesticated animal after its death, while it is attached to a piece of meat,

and the sauce,

the juice of the meat that emerges from it during cooking, when it has congealed upon the meat,

and the kippah,

a spice that was cooked with the meat, and is not eaten by itself,

and the allel,

small pieces of meat that were cut together with the skin and remained stuck to the skin,

and the bones,

which contain marrow designated for eating,

and the sinews, the horns, and the hooves.

All these things

join

with the meat to complete it to the measure of an egg, with regard to

imparting the impurity of foods.

The skin, the bones, and the hooves join because they are considered a “protective covering” for the meat. Whereas the sauce, the kippah, the allel, the horns, and the sinews join because they are eaten together with the meat .

The Mishna stated that they “join” to impart the impurity of foods because when they are not attached to food they do not receive impurity at all, since they are not designated for eating by themselves.

But

they

do not

join for

the impurity of unslaughtered carcasses,

for if the meat is the meat of an unslaughtered carcass, and it does not contain an olive’s bulk—which is the measure at which an unslaughtered carcass is fit to impart impurity—these things do not join it to complete it to the measure of an olive. This is because, in themselves, the law of an unslaughtered carcass does not apply to them, and the law of a “protective covering” was stated only with regard to impurity of foods, and not with regard to impurity of unslaughtered carcasses.

Even those things that are customarily eaten together with the meat do not join, because they are not considered an “unslaughtered carcass”; rather, they are considered merely ordinary food. And the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass was stated only with regard to the meat of the carcass itself, as it is stated in the Torah, “the one who touches its carcass,” and not with regard to food eaten with the carcass .

Similarly

we find a thing to which the impurity of foods applies but to which the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass does not apply.

For example: an Israelite

who slaughters an impure animal for

the sake of

a gentile, and

the animal is still

twitching

[moving], even though the animal is forbidden to eat, nevertheless it is already considered food at this point, and it

imparts the impurity of foods,

[even before it dies and becomes impure on account of being an unslaughtered carcass].

Because when an Israelite slaughters a pure animal, the act of slaughtering permits it to be eaten immediately, even while it is still twitching, and therefore it also immediately receives the impurity of foods, since it is considered food fit for eating even while it is twitching,

and therefore, also when an Israelite slaughtered an impure animal [which is forbidden for an Israelite to eat] for the sake of a gentile, the thought that he entertains at the time of slaughter—that he is slaughtering it so that the gentile will eat it—is effective to cause the designation of food to take effect upon it immediately, even while it is twitching .

This law applies under two conditions: the first condition is that the animal will die through valid ritual slaughter, for if the animal died through hacking, or through slaughter that is not valid, such as if he delayed or pressed during the slaughtering, it is not considered food while it is twitching, since we find that the twitching animal is considered food only through valid ritual slaughter.

The second condition is that the animal was slaughtered for the sake of a gentile. Had it been slaughtered for the sake of an Israelite, his thought that he had thought for the purpose of eating would not be effective to give the animal the designation of food, since it is forbidden to eat it, and his thought is nullified.

But

it

does not

impart

the impurity of unslaughtered carcasses,

as long as it is twitching,

until it dies, or until he severs its head,

at which point it is considered dead even if it is still twitching. For with regard to the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass it is stated, “And when an animal dies,” to teach that the animal does not impart impurity until it dies.

This distinction applies only to an impure animal, for one who slaughters a pure animal with valid ritual slaughter does not impart the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass at all, even after it dies.

And if so, we find that

the verse increased

the cases

for imparting the impurity of foods

more

than it increased the cases for imparting the impurity of unslaughtered carcasses.

Rabbi Judah says: The allel

small pieces of meat that remained stuck to the skin after the skinning [which are subordinate to the skin and are not considered meat],

that has been gathered,

that is, he gathered them into one place—then

if there is an olive’s bulk in one place,

and they are the meat of an unslaughtered carcass, the designation of the meat of an unslaughtered carcass applies to it, so that if a person touched it and entered the Temple or ate sacred food in impurity, he

is liable for it

extirpation.

Since he gathered them and gave them importance, they are not subordinate to the skin; rather, they are like all meat. And even by Torah law it is considered the meat of an unslaughtered carcass, and therefore he is liable for this for extirpation.

And Rabbi Judah came to dispute with the Rabbis, for according to their words the allel never imparts impurity as an unslaughtered carcass, even when he gathered it into one place.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna that the skin does not join with the meat to complete the measure of an olive for the impurity of unslaughtered carcasses, even though it is a protective covering for the meat.

And we say:

We learned

in the Mishna

that which the Sages taught

in a beraita:

The law of

protective coverings

is that they join with the food protected by them to complete the measure of the food only with regard

to lesser impurity,

that is, “impurity of foods,” which is a lesser impurity [since impure food imparts impurity only to other food, and does not impart impurity to a person or utensils], so that if there is the measure of an egg in the food together with the protective covering, they impart the impurity of foods.

And not

was the law of joining of

protective coverings

stated with regard

to more severe impurity,

that is, “impurity of an unslaughtered carcass,” which is a more severe impurity [since it also imparts impurity to a person and utensils], so that if there is the measure of an olive in the unslaughtered carcass together with the protective covering, they do not impart the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass.

And we explain:

Protective coverings

that join with regard

to lesser impurity—

from where do we know this?

For the school of Rabbi Ishmael taught:

It is stated in the verse that teaches about impurity of foods, “And if it falls from their carcass [of the impure creeping things]

upon every sowing seed that is to be sown,”

and we expound “from that which is sown”: foods impart impurity

in the manner in which people remove

the seed to the field

for sowing.

That is,

wheat in its husk

5 , and barley in its husk,

and lentils in their husks. This teaches that in the manner in which wheat is sown, so does it impart impurity; therefore, the husk also joins to the measure of an egg for impurity of foods .

Although the verse says, “Regarding every seed of a sown plant, it is pure,” nevertheless we learn from here the law of impurity concerning the fruit’s shomer, because the reason the Torah said, “it is pure,” is only that the seed had not been prepared with water to receive impurity. But had the seed been prepared, it would indeed become impure in this manner, when the wheat is in its husk.

And regarding that which we say:

and shomrim do not join with the food

in relation

to severe impurity—

from where do we derive this?

For the Sages taught:

It is stated in the Torah concerning the impurity of an animal carcass: “One who touches

its carcass

shall become impure until evening,” and we expound: specifically one who touches the carcass itself becomes impure,

but not

one who touches

skin upon which there is not an olive-bulk of flesh,

for it does not become impure, even if the skin completes the flesh to the measure of an olive-bulk. And from here we learned that a shomer [such as skin] does not join for the impurity of a carcass.