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 12
1) WHEN ONE NEED NOT RELY ON THE MAJORITY
(a) (Rav Kahana or Rav Simi): All these proofs are in cases
where there is no alternative, we must rely on the
majority; perhaps, when there is an alternative, we do
not rely on the majority!
2) DO MOST SLAUGHTERERS KNOW THE LAWS?
1. If you will not say so - according to R. Meir, who
is concerned for the minority, it should be
forbidden to eat meat (lest the animal had a hole
where it was slaughtered).
i. Suggestion: Perhaps R. Meir indeed says, one
may not eat meat!
2. We must say that R. Meir relies on the majority when
there is no alternative;
ii. Rejection: We know that some meat is permitted
- the Korban Pesach and other Korbanos!
3. Likewise, perhaps Chachamim rely on the majority
only when there is no alternative!
(a) (Rav Nachman): If Reuven saw Shimon slaughter from the
beginning until the end, he may eat from the slaughter;
if not, not.
(b) Question: What is the case?
1. Suggestion: If Reuven knows that Shimon knows the
laws of slaughter, why must he see the entire
(c) Answer: Really, Reuven knows that Shimon does not know
the laws; the case is, he saw Shimon cut one Siman.
2. Suggestion: If Reuven knows that Shimon does not
know the laws, obviously, he must see the entire
3. Suggestion: Reuven is unsure whether or not Shimon
knows the laws.
4. Objection: We should say, most people that slaughter
know the laws (it should be permitted, even if
Reuven did not see the slaughter)!
i. (Beraisa): If a slaughtered chicken was found
in the market, or if Levi told a Shali'ach to
slaughter, and Levi (Rashi, according to Shitah
Mekubetzes; Tosfos - the Shali'ach) found the
animal slaughtered, we assume that it was
ii. We assume that the slaughterer knows the laws,
since those that do not know do not slaughter!
1. One might have thought, since he cut one properly,
we may assume that he cut the second properly.
(d) Question (Rav Dimi bar Yosef): If Reuven asked a
messenger to slaughter for him and later found the animal
slaughtered, what is the law?
2. Rav Nachman teaches that this is not so, he must see
both Simanim cut - perhaps he happened to cut the
first Siman properly, but he paused or Daras while
cutting the second Siman.
(e) Answer (Rav Nachman): He may assume that it was
(f) Question (Rav Dimi bar Yosef): If Reuven asked a
messenger to take Ma'aser for him and later found the
Ma'aseros separated, what is the law?
(g) Answer (Rav Nachman): He may not assume that the
Ma'aseros were separated properly.
(h) Objection (Rav Dimi bar Yosef): This is inconsistent!
1. If Chazakah says that a Shali'ach fulfills his
mission, we should also assume that Ma'aseros were
(i) Answer (Rav Nachman): Really, there is no such Chazakah;
2. If there is no such Chazakah, why may we assume that
the animal was slaughtered properly?
1. Regarding slaughter, even if someone (Ploni)
overheard Reuven command the Shali'ach (and Ploni
slaughtered the animal), most people that slaughter
(j) Suggestion: Tana'im argue whether or not most people that
slaughter know the laws.
know the laws, we assume Ploni is from the majority;
2. Regarding Ma'aser, if Ploni overheard and took
Ma'aser for Reuven, it is invalid, for Ma'aser
cannot be taken without the owner's request.
1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): Reuven lost his goats and
chickens, and found them slaughtered - it is
forbidden to eat them;
(k) Rejection (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): No, all agree that
most who slaughter know the laws;
2. R. Chanina, son of R. Yosi ha'Galili permits them;
3. Rebbi: R. Yehudah's opinion is Nir'eh (correct) when
he found them in a trash heap; R. Chanina's opinion
is Nir'eh when he finds them in the house.
4. Suggestion: R. Yehudah holds, we do not say that
most who slaughter know the laws; R. Chanina says,
most who slaughter know the laws
1. If the slaughtered animals are found in the house,
all agree that they are permitted; when found in a
trash heap in the market, all agree that they are
(l) (Beraisa - Rebbi): R. Yehudah's opinion is Nir'eh when he
found them in a trash heap...
2. They argue when they are found in a trash heap in
i. R. Yehudah holds, a person often casts a
Neveilah in a trash heap in his house; R.
Chanina holds, he does not.
(m) Question: To which trash heap does he refer?
1. He cannot mean a trash heap in the market - Rav
Nachman bar Yitzchak said, they do not argue in that
(n) Answer: Rather, he refers to a trash heap in the house.
(o) Question (end of the Beraisa - Rebbi): R. Chanina's
opinion is Nir'eh when he finds them in the house.
1. Question: In what part of the house did he find
i. Suggestion: In the house proper.
2. Answer: Rather, he found them in a trash heap in the
ii. Rejection: Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak sad, they
do not argue in such a case!
3. Contradiction: In the beginning of the Beraisa,
Rebbi agreed with R. Yehudah in this case; in the
end of the Beraisa, he sides with R. Chanina!
(p) Answer: Rebbi meant, R. Yehudah's opinion is Nir'eh
(appears correct) *to R. Chanina* (i.e. R. Chanina agrees
with him) regarding a trash heap in the market (they are
3) SLAUGHTER WITHOUT INTENT
1. They only argue regarding a trash heap in the house,
and in this case, R. Chanina's opinion is Nir'eh (to
(a) (Mishnah): Except for a deaf person, lunatic or minor,
lest they will slaughter improperly.
4) CAN A MINOR HAVE INTENT?
1. It does not say, lest they *slaughtered* improperly,
rather lest they *will* slaughter improperly.
(b) (Mishnah): If any of them slaughtered while others looked
on, the slaughter is Kosher.
2. (Rava): This teaches, l'Chatchilah it is forbidden
to let them slaughter Chulin.
(c) Question: Who is the Tana of our Mishnah, who holds that
slaughter of Chulin does not require intent?
(d) Answer (Rava): R. Noson.
1. (Beraisa - R. Noson): If a man threw a knife so it
should stick into a wall, and as it went it
slaughtered normally, the slaughter is valid;
(e) Question: But to slaughter, one must draw the knife back
and forth (unless it is a long knife)!
2. Chachamim say, it is invalid.
3. (Oshiya Ze'ira of Chavriya): The law is like R.
(f) Answer: Indeed, the knife bounced off the wall and cut in
the reverse direction as well.
(a) Version #1 (R. Chiya Bar Aba citing R. Yochanan)
Question: Does intent of a minor take effect?
(b) R. Ami: He should ask whether a minor's actions take
1. Surely, he knew the Mishnah that teaches that a
minor's actions take effect - the same Mishnah
teaches that his intent does not take effect!
i. (Mishnah): A child hollowed out an acorn,
pomegranate or nut to measure dirt, or to use
in a balance scale - this makes them vessels to
Mekabel Tum'ah, because a minor's actions take
effect, his intent does not.