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 16
CHULIN 16 - This Daf has been sponsored by Dr. and Mrs. Shalom Kelman of
Baltimore, Maryland, USA. May Hashem bless them with long years filled
with Torah, Chidushei Torah, and Nachas!
1) SLAUGHTER WITH AN ATTACHED KNIFE
(a) Question: The two clauses of the Beraisa contradict each
2) SOMETHING DETACHED AND LATER ATTACHED.
(b) Answer: The slaughter is invalid when the knife was
always attached; it is Kosher when the knife was
originally detached and later attached.
(c) (Beraisa): If one slaughters with a (knife on a) wheel,
it is Kosher.
(d) Contradiction (Beraisa): The slaughter is invalid.
(e) Answer #1: It is valid on a potter's wheel (since a
person makes it spin), it is invalid on a wheel turned by
(f) Answer #2: Both discuss a water wheel - it is Kosher if
it was direct Ko'ach (the knife slaughtered right after
the person released the water to start turning the
wheel), it is invalid if it was secondary Ko'ach (it
1. (Rav Papa): Reuven tied up Shimon and directed water
onto him, killing him - Reuven is liable for murder,
for his action killed him.
(g) (Rebbi): "He took the knife" - this teaches that
slaughter requires a detached knife.
i. This is only if his direct Ko'ach killed; if
not, he only *caused* the death, he is exempt.
(h) Question (Rav): How is this learned from the verse?
(i) Response (R. Chiya): Indeed, the verse does not teach
like Rebbi says!
1. Question: If so, what does the verse teach?
2. Answer: It teaches the zealousness of Avraham (he
took a knife with him).
(a) (Rava): I am sure that something detached that was later
attached is considered detached regarding idolatry;
1. It was taught, if one worships his own house, it is
(b) Regarding Hechsher (produce is Mekabel Tum'ah if water
that was willingly detached falls on it), Tana'im argue
whether or not it is considered attached.
2. If a house was considered attached, it would not
become forbidden - "Their gods *on* the mountains",
but the mountains (or anything else attached) are
not (forbidden like) their gods.
1. (Mishnah): If a man placed a bowl on a wall in order
that the bowl should get wet, and water fell on it,
the water is Ki Yutan (it is Machshir any produce it
2. If he placed a bowl so the wall should not get wet,
water that falls on the bowl is not Ki Yutan.
3. Question: The first clause says, if he wanted the
bowl to get wet, the water is Ki Yutan - we infer,
if he wanted the wall to get wet, the water is not
i. The second clause says, if he didn't want the
wall to get wet, the water is not Ki Yutan -
we infer, if he wanted the wall to get wet, the
water would be Ki Yutan!
4. Answer #1 (R. Elazar): We must say, different
Tana'im taught the two clauses.
5. Answer #2 (Rav Papa): One Tana taught both. The
first clause speaks of a wall of a cave (it was
never detached, so it is considered attached); the
second clause speaks of a wall that was built (the
rocks were once detached, so it is considered
6. The Mishnah teaches, if he wanted the bowl to get
wet, the water is Ki Yutan - we infer, if he wanted
the wall to get wet, the water is not Ki Yutan;
i. This applies to a wall of a cave; regarding a
built wall, if he didn't want the wall to get
wet, the water is not Ki Yutan - we infer, if
he wanted the wall to get wet, the water would
be Ki Yutan!
(c) Question (Rava): If an instrument for slaughtering was
detached and then attached, may it be used for slaughter?
(d) Answer #1 (Beraisa): If a rock jut out from the wall, or
a reed grew on its own and one slaughtered with it, it is
(e) Rejection: We cannot learn from there - the Beraisa
discusses a wall of a cave, the rock was never detached.
1. Support: Presumably, this case resembles the case
taught with it, a reed that grew on its own (and was
(f) Answer #2 (Beraisa): If he stuck a knife in the wall and
slaughtered, it is Kosher.
(g) Rejection: That is different - he will not leave the
knife permanently in the wall.
(h) Answer #3 (Beraisa): If one slaughters with something
attached to the ground, it is Kosher.
(i) Rejection: Perhaps this also refers to the case of the
knife; the next clause of the Beraisa (about the knife)
is the explanation of this clause.
1. The Beraisa says, 'What is the case of slaughter
with something attached to the ground (which is
Kosher)? A knife, something a person does not leave
in the wall.'
(j) (Beraisa): If he stuck a knife in the wall and
slaughtered, it is Kosher.
(k) (Rav Anan): This is only if the knife was above the neck,
but if the knife was below the neck, we are concerned
that the neck pressed on the knife, and the slaughter is
invalid (this is Drasah).
(l) Question: But the Beraisa (15B 3:f:1) permits, whether
the knife is above the neck or below it!
(m) Answer #1 (Rav Zvid): Each of these applies in a
1. If the knife is below and the neck is above - the
knife must be detached;
(n) Answer #2 (Rav Papa): The Beraisa discusses a bird, which
is light - there is no concern that its neck will press.
2. If the knife is above and the neck is below - the
knife can even be attached.
(a) (Rav Chisda): Five laws were said regarding reeds:
4) SLAUGHTER IN THE WILDERNESS
1. They are not used to slaughter, nor to circumcise,
nor to cut meat, nor to clean one's teeth, nor to
clean oneself (after eliminating).
(b) Question: They are not used to slaughter - but a Beraisa
teaches, we may slaughter with anything - a rock, glass
(c) Answer (Rav Papa): Only a Simona reed (a hard species)
may be used.
(d) We do not cut meat with reeds - Rav Papa would cut fish
innards, for they are clear (if a chip falls off, it will
be seen); Rabah bar Rav Huna would cut fowl, for it is
soft (chips will not fall off).
(e) Question: One does not use reeds to clean oneself (after
eliminating) - we already know this!
1. It was taught - one who cleans himself with
something that burns easily, his (anal) teeth all
(f) Answer: Rather, Rav Chisda meant that we do not clean a
wound with reeds.
(a) (Mishnah): All slaughter, we always slaughter.
(b) All slaughter - this means, all *is slaughtered*, even
(c) Question: Which Tana taught 'We always slaughter'?
(d) Answer #1 (Rabah): R. Yishmael.
1. (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): "When Hash-m will widen
your border...and you will say, I want to eat meat"
- the verse comes to permit (Chulin) meat that one
desires to eat.
(e) Question #1 (Rav Yosef): If so, why does the Mishnah say
'We always slaughter'? It should say, 'We always
slaughter *and eat*' (this is the Chidush)!
2. In the Midbar, Chulin meat was forbidden; when
Yisrael entered Eretz Yisrael, it was permitted;
after they were exiled, one might have thought that
it is again prohibited - therefore, the Mishnah
teaches that we may slaughter even nowadays.
(f) Question #2 (Rav Yosef): Initially, Chulin was forbidden
because Yisrael were close to the Mishkan (one who wanted
to eat would bring a Korban);
1. Later, Chulin was permitted because they were far
from the Mishkan.
2. All the more so, in exile, one cannot bring a
Korban, Chulin should be permitted (there is no need
to teach this!)