Chullin 142a — the Talmud in English

And

if

we are speaking

of

the eve of

Yom Tov,

and Rav Yehuda came to ask Shmuel how he should act so that they would not be muktze on Yom Tov—for behold,

by standing and saying: “This one and this one,”

this egg or this chick,

I shall take

tomorrow,

it suffices!

For through this it is not muktze.

The Gemara explains: Those

eggs

were new offspring,

for the mother had never stood above them,

and Levi bar Simon himself had not acquired them,

for it is forbidden to acquire them so long as the mother is upon them.

And this is what

Shmuel

said to him: Go and bang on the nest, so that the mothers will rise,

and

then

then

Levi bar Simon will acquire

the eggs.

And afterward, let Levi bar Simon acquire them

for you

through a

acquisition of a

cloth.

Mishna:

A person may not take the mother with the young even

in order

to purify the leper.

And if concerning an easy mitzva, which is like an issar,

which involves no loss of money except a small amount like an issar,

the Torah said, “So that it will be good for you and you will lengthen your days,” how much more so concerning the stringent mitzvot of the Torah 1.

.

Gemara:

It was taught: The school of Rabbi Yaakov says: There is not a single mitzva among the mitzvot of the Torah for which

it is

written that its reward is stated alongside it,

meaning that adjacent to its command in the Torah its reward is also stated,

in which the revival of the dead does not depend.

And he explained its source in the Torah: for

concerning honoring father and mother it is written, “So that your days may be lengthened and so that it will be good for you,” and concerning sending away the nest it is written, “So that it will be good for you and you will lengthen your days.”

Thus, concerning these two mitzvot, their reward is stated alongside them.

If his father said to him: Go up to the tower [a large house]

a large building

and bring me fledglings,

and the son went

up

to the tower,

and sent away the mother and took the young,

he has fulfilled two mitzvot whose reward is stated alongside them,

and

it happened that

on his return he fell and died. Where is the length of his days, and where is the good of this one?

Rather,

necessarily, this is the meaning of the verse:

“So that your days may be lengthened,” in a world that is entirely long. “And so that it will be good for you,” in a world that is entirely good.

That is, after the revival of the dead, when there is then neither harm nor suffering, but only goodness.

And the Gemara asks:

Perhaps “so that it will be good for you and you will lengthen your days” means in this world, and in truth,

never

was it so,

that is, there was never an event of this kind, in which a person fulfilled the mitzvot of honoring father and mother and sending away the nest and died on his return?

The Gemara answers:

Rabbi Yaakov

such an event

saw

with his own eyes, and for that reason he proved that the meaning of the verse is the World to Come.

And the Gemara asks:

Perhaps he was contemplating a transgression,

and for that reason he died?

The Gemara rejects this:

God does not combine an evil thought with an act,

and he is not considered to have transgressed.

The Gemara still asks:

Perhaps he was contemplating idolatry, for it is written, “In order to seize the House of Israel in their hearts.” And Rav Acha bar Yaakov said: This is the thought of idolatry!

For the Holy One, blessed be He, combines it with an act, and it is considered as though he worshipped idolatry?!

The Gemara explains:

This is what

Rabbi Yaakov

said: If indeed there is reward for mitzvot in this world, the mitzva should benefit him

and

protect him so that he does not come to contemplation of

a transgression and through contemplation of a transgression

be harmed! Rather,

against your will,

there is no reward for mitzvot in this world.

And the reward stated in the Torah was said concerning the World to Come.

The Gemara asks: How did that son die,

for Rabbi Elazar said: Those sent to perform a mitzva are not harmed!

He was surely a messenger of a mitzva?

The Gemara answers: Rabbi Elazar’s words—that they are not harmed—were said only while they are going to perform the mitzva.

But

on their return

from performing the mitzva,

it is different,

for they can then be harmed.

And the Gemara asks: And

we find that Rabbi Elazar stated his words also concerning their return, for

Rabbi Elazar said: Those sent to perform a mitzva are not harmed, neither on their going nor on their return?

The Gemara explains: The ladder on which that son climbed to bring down the fledglings

was a rickety ladder

and liable to fall from it.

And where harm is fixed and

common,

it is different. For it is written,

when God commanded Samuel to go to anoint David as king,

“And Samuel said: How shall I go, and Saul will hear and kill me.”

It is proven that even though Samuel went as the agent of the Omnipresent and was a messenger of a mitzva, he feared that he might be killed because harm was common, for Saul would certainly wish to kill him for anointing another man as king.

Rav Yosef said: Had “Acher” not expounded this verse

“so that it will be good for you and so that your days will be lengthened”

as Rabbi Yaakov, son of his daughter, did, he would not have sinned.

What did he see,

Acher?

Some say: He saw an event like this,

in which the son died on his return.

And some say: The tongue [his tongue]

tongue

of Rabbi Chutzpit the Interpreter

who was killed by the authorities

he saw lying in a garbage dump. He said

Acher:

“A mouth that uttered pearls—shall it lick dust?!”

And he did not know

the true meaning of the verse,

that “so that it will be good for you” means in a world that is entirely good, and “so that your days will be lengthened” means in a world that is entirely long.

We shall return to you, chapter “Sending Away the Nest,” and the tractate Chullin is concluded.