| 84a. וליפרקינהו וליכסינהו בעינן העמדה והערכה,וכמאן אי כר"מ דאמר הכל היו בכלל העמדה והערכה האמר שחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה,אי כר' שמעון דאמר שחיטה שאינה ראויה לא שמה שחיטה האמר לא היו בכלל העמדה והערכה,אמר רב יוסף רבי היא ונסיב לה אליבא דתנאי בשחיטה שאינה ראויה סבר לה כר' שמעון בהעמדה והערכה סבר לה כר"מ,ואיבעית אימא כולה ר"ש היא ושאני הכא דאמר קרא (ויקרא יז, יג) ושפך וכסה מי שאינו מחוסר אלא שפיכה וכסוי יצא זה שמחוסר שפיכה פדייה וכסוי,והשתא דאתית להכי אפילו תימא קדשי מזבח מי שאינו מחוסר אלא שפיכה וכסוי יצא זה שמחוסר שפיכה גרירה וכסוי,מר בר רב אשי אמר אמר קרא (ויקרא יז, יג) חיה או עוף מה חיה אינה קדש אף עוף אינו קדש,אי מה חיה שאין במינו קדש אף עוף שאין במינו קדש אוציא תורין ובני יונה שיש במינן קדש,לא כחיה מה חיה לא חלקת בה אף עוף לא תחלוק בו,אמר ליה יעקב מינאה לרבא קי"ל חיה בכלל בהמה לסימנין אימא נמי בהמה בכלל חיה לכסוי,אמר ליה עליך אמר קרא (דברים יב, טז) על הארץ תשפכנו כמים מה מים לא בעי כסוי אף האי נמי לא בעי כסוי,אלא מעתה יטבילו בו אמר קרא (ויקרא יא, לו) אך מעין ובור מקוה מים יהיה טהור הני אין מידי אחרינא לא,ואימא ה"מ למעוטי שאר משקין דלא איקרו מים אבל דם דאיקרי מים ה"נ,תרי מיעוטי כתיבי מעין מים ובור מים,אימא אידי ואידי למעוטי שאר משקין חד למעוטי זוחלין וחד למעוטי מכונסין,תלתא מיעוטי כתיבי מעין מים ובור מים מקוה מים,ת"ר (ויקרא יז, יג) אשר יצוד אין לי אלא אשר יצוד נצודין ועומדין מאליהן מנין כגון אווזין ותרנגולים,ת"ל ציד מ"מ א"כ מה ת"ל אשר יצוד למדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא יאכל אדם בשר אלא בהזמנה הזאת,ת"ר (דברים יב, כ) כי ירחיב ה' אלהיך את גבולך למדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא יאכל אדם בשר אלא לתאבון,יכול יקח אדם מן השוק ויאכל ת"ל (דברים יב, כא) וזבחת מבקרך ומצאנך יכול יזבח כל בקרו ויאכל כל צאנו ויאכל ת"ל מבקרך ולא כל בקרך מצאנך ולא כל צאנך,מכאן אמר רבי אלעזר בן עזריה מי שיש לו מנה יקח לפסו ליטרא ירק עשרה מנה יקח לפסו ליטרא דגים חמשים מנה יקח לפסו ליטרא בשר מאה מנה ישפתו לו קדרה בכל יום ואינך אימת מערב שבת לערב שבת,אמר רב צריכין אנו לחוש לדברי זקן א"ר יוחנן אבא ממשפחת בריאים הוה אבל כגון אנו מי שיש לו פרוטה בתוך כיסו יריצנה לחנווני א"ר נחמן כגון אנו לווין ואוכלין,(משלי כז, כו) כבשים ללבושך מגז כבשים יהא מלבושך (משלי כז, כו) ומחיר שדה עתודים לעולם ימכור אדם שדה ויקח עתודים ואל ימכור אדם עתודים ויקח שדה (משלי כז, כז) ודי חלב עזים דיו לאדם שיתפרנס מחלב גדיים וטלאים שבתוך ביתו,(משלי כז, כז) ללחמך ללחם ביתך לחמך קודם ללחם ביתך (משלי כז, כז) וחיים לנערותיך אמר מר זוטרא בריה דרב נחמן תן חיים לנערותיך מיכן למדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא ילמד אדם את בנו בשר ויין,אמר רבי יוחנן | 84a. The Gemara challenges: bButeven if the mishna is dealing with birds consecrated for Temple maintece, blet one redeem themafter they were slaughtered bandthen bcover theirblood. The Gemara responds: This is not feasible, because in order to redeem a consecrated animal bwe require setting and valuating,i.e., the animal must be stood before a priest in order to evaluate it and only then is it redeemed (see Leviticus 27:11–12). A slaughtered bird cannot be stood before the priest; consequently, it cannot be redeemed.,The Gemara asks: bButif the mishna is dealing with birds consecrated for Temple maintece, bin accordance with whoseopinion is the mishna? bIfone suggests the mishna is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Meir, who says: Everything,i.e., animals consecrated both for the altar and for Temple maintece, bwas included inthe requirement of bsetting and valuating,and therefore the slaughtered birds may not be redeemed, this cannot be so. bDoesn’t healso bsaythat bslaughter that is not fitto render the meat permitted bisnevertheless bconsidereda halakhic act of bslaughterthat requires the covering of the blood? If so, one should be obligated to cover the blood of the bird even if it is not redeemed.,The Gemara continues: And bifone suggests the mishna is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Shimon, who says: Slaughter that is not fitto render the meat permitted bis not considereda halakhic act of bslaughterand therefore the bird would require redemption in order to cover its blood, this cannot be so. bDoesn’the also bsaythat animals consecrated for Temple maintece bwere not included inthe requirement of bsetting and valuating?If so, let one redeem the slaughtered birds and cover their blood., bRav Yosef saidin reconciliation of this dilemma: The mishna’s ruling bis in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbiYehuda HaNasi, band he formulatesthe mishna bin accordance withthe opinions of different itanna’im /i: With regard tothe status of an act of bslaughter that is not fitto render the meat permitted bhe holds in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Shimon,while bwith regard tothe requirement of bsetting and valuating he holds in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Meir.Therefore, since one cannot redeem a bird that was consecrated for Temple maintece once it has been slaughtered, there is no obligation to cover its blood, as the slaughter was not fit to render the meat permitted., bAnd if you wish, sayinstead that bthe entiremishna bisin accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Shimon,who holds that birds consecrated for Temple maintece may be redeemed even after their slaughter. bAndalthough it would seem that their slaughter is fit to render the meat permitted and that one should therefore be obligated in the mitzva of covering the blood, it is bdifferent here, as the verse states: “And he shall pour outits blood band coverit” (Leviticus 17:13). By juxtaposing “pour out” to “cover,” the verse indicates that the obligation to cover the blood applies only to blood bthat is lacking only pouring and covering,without any intervening step. bExcludedis bthisblood of birds consecrated for Temple maintece, bwhich is lacking pouring, redeeming, and covering. /b,The Gemara notes: bAnd now that you have arrived at thisexplanation, byoumay beven saythat the mishna is referring to birds bconsecrated for the altar.As for the question asked earlier: Why not let one scrape the blood from the altar and then cover it? The verse states: “And he shall pour out its blood and cover it,” indicating that the obligation to cover the blood applies only to blood that is blacking only pouring and covering,without any intervening step. bExcludedis bthisblood of bird offerings, bwhich is lacking pouring, scraping, and covering. /b,The Gemara cites another source for the exclusion of consecrated animals from the requirement of covering their blood: bMar bar Rav Ashi saidthat bthe verse stateswith regard to the mitzva of covering the blood: b“An undomesticated animal or bird”(Leviticus 17:13). The juxtaposition of these two species intimates an analogy between them: bJust asthe bundomesticated animalreferred to in the verse bis not consecrated,as undomesticated animals are never fit for sacrifice, bso too,the bbirdreferred to in the verse bis not consecrated. /b,The Gemara asks: bIfit is so that the ihalakhotof slaughtering a bird are derived from those of an undomesticated animal, then say: bJust asthe verse is referring to ban undomesticated animal, whose species cannot be consecratedas an offering, bso too,the verse is referring only to ba bird whose species cannot be consecratedas an offering. Therefore, bI will excludeeven non-sacred bdoves and pigeons, whose species can be consecrated. /b,The Gemara rejects this possibility: bNo,the juxtaposition indicates that the ihalakhawith regard to the slaughter of birds is entirely blikethat of ban undomesticated animal.Therefore, bjust asin the case of ban undomesticated animal, you did not differentiatebetween its various species and all non-sacred animals are included in the mitzva, bso too,with regard to the bbirdmentioned in the verse, byou should not differentiatebetween its various species.,§ Concerning the ihalakhathat covering the blood does not apply to a domesticated animal, the Gemara says that bYa’akov the heretic said to Rava: We maintainthat ban undomesticated animal,e.g., a deer, is bincludedin the category of ba domesticated animal with regard tothe bcharacteristicsnecessary to determine whether the animal is kosher, i.e., it chews its cud and has split hooves (see Deuteronomy 14:4–6). If so, bI will also saythat ba domesticated animal is includedin the category of ban undomesticated animal with regard tothe mitzva of bcoveringthe blood.,Rava bsaid to him: With regard to yourclaim, bthe verse statesin reference to the blood of a domesticated animal: “You may slaughter of your cattle and of your sheep…but be strong not to eat the blood… byou shall pour it out on the ground, like water”(Deuteronomy 12:21–24). Accordingly, bjust as water does not require covering, so too, thisblood of a domesticated animal bdoes not require covering. /b,The Gemara asks: bIf that is so,that the verse equates the blood of a domesticated animal with water, then let one bimmerseritually impure items bin itto purify them, just as he can immerse them in water. The Gemara responds: bThe verse states: “But a spring or a cistern, or a gathering of water shall be pure”(Leviticus 11:36). The exclusionary term: “But,” indicates that only concerning bthesebodies of water, byes,they render pure an impure item, while bsomething else,e.g., blood, does bnot. /b,The Gemara challenges: bButperhaps one can bsaythat bthis matter,i.e., the exclusionary term in the verse, serves only bto exclude other liquids that are not called water. Butwith regard to bblood, which is called water,as the verse states: “You shall pour it out on the ground, like water,” one may bindeedimmerse ritually impure items in it.,The Gemara responds: bTwo exclusions are writtenin the verse discussing ritually purifying waters: bA spring of water, and: A cistern of water.The term “water” is understood as being attached to each of the bodies mentioned in the verse. The additional exclusion serves to exclude blood.,The Gemara challenges: bSaythat both bthisphrase, a spring of water, band thatphrase, a cistern of water, serve bto exclude other liquids,and not blood, whereby bonephrase is bto exclude flowingliquids that are not water from having the status of a spring, which renders an item ritually pure even when it is flowing; band onephrase serves bto exclude gatheredliquids that are not water from having the status of a ritual bath, which renders an item pure only when the water in the ritual bath is gathered.,The Gemara responds: bThree exclusions are writtenin the verse: bA spring of water,to exclude flowing liquids; band: A cistern of water,to exclude gathered liquids; band: A gathering of water,to exclude blood.,§ bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: The verse states with regard to covering the blood: “And any man of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, bwho trapsa trapping of an undomesticated animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth” (Leviticus 17:13). bI havederived bonlythat one is obligated to cover the blood of an undomesticated animal or bird bthat one traps. From whereis it derived that undomesticated animals or birds that are balreadyconsidered btrapped on their own, such as geese and chickensthat do not roam freely, are also included in the mitzva of covering the blood?, bThe verse states “a trapping”to indicate that bin any case,one is obligated to cover the blood of an undomesticated animal. bIf so, whatis the meaning when bthe verse states: “Who traps,”if it is not to be understood literally? The ibaraitaexplains: bThe Torah taughtthat it is ba desired mode of behavior that a person should consume meat only with this mode of preparation.That is, just as the meat that one traps is not readily available, so too, one should not become accustomed to consuming meat.,In a similar vein, bthe Sages taughtin a ibaraitathat the verse states: b“When the Lord, your God, expands yourboundary…according to every craving of your soul you may eat meat” (Deuteronomy 12:20). bThe Torah taughtthat it is ba desired mode of behavior that a person should consume meat due only to appetite.That is, one should consume meat only when he feels a need to eat it.,The ibaraitacontinues: One bmighthave thought that ba person may purchasemeat bfrom the marketplace and consumeit. Therefore, bthenext bverse states: “And you may slaughter of your cattle and of your flock,”indicating that one should consume the meat of animals of his own flock, not those purchased in the marketplace. One bmighthave thought that a person bmay slaughter all of his cattle,i.e., his only cow, band consumethe meat, or slaughter ball of his flock,i.e., his only sheep, band consumethe meat. Therefore, bthe verse states: “of your cattle,”indicating some, bbut not all of, your cattle; “of your flock,” but not all of your flock. /b, bFrom here, Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria said: One who has one hundreddinars bshould purchase a ilitraof vegetables for his stewpot [ ilefaso /i];one who has bone thousanddinars bshould purchase a ilitraof fish for his stewpot;one who has bfive thousanddinars bshould purchase a ilitraof meat for his stewpot;and if one has bten thousanddinars, his servants bshould place a potof meat on the stove bfor him every day.The Gemara asks: bAndwith regard to btheseother individuals mentioned by Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria, bwhen,i.e., how often, should they consume meat? The Gemara responds: bEvery Shabbat eve. /b, bRav says: We must be concerned for the statement of the elder,i.e., Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria, and be thrifty with our expenditure on food items. bRabbi Yoḥa says: Abba,i.e., Rav, bwas from a family ofparticularly bhealthyindividuals, and was able to subsist on the modest diet suggested by Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria. bButwith regard to people bsuch as us,who are not as healthy, bone who haseven bone iperutain his pocket should hastenwith bit to the storekeeperand purchase food. Two generations later, bRav Naḥman said:With regard to people bsuch as us,who are physically weaker than those in previous generations, not only do we not delay the purchase of food items, we even bborrowmoney to purchase food band eat. /b,The Gemara continues its discussion with regard to one’s livelihood: The verse states: “The lambs will be for your clothing, and goats the worth of a field. And there will be goats’ milk enough for your food, for the food of your household; and sustece for your maidens” (Proverbs 27:26–27). b“The lambs will be for your clothing”indicates that byour clothing should beproduced bfrom the shearings of lambs,i.e., purchase lambs from whose wool you can produce clothing. b“And goats the worth of a field”indicates that ba person should alwaysseek to bsell a field and purchase goatsin order to benefit from their milk, wool, and offspring, band a person should not sell goats and purchase a fieldinstead. b“And there will be goats’ milk enough”indicates that bit is sufficient for a person that he be sustained from the milk of kids and lambs that are in his house. /b, b“For your food, for the food of your household”indicates that byour food comes before the food of your household,i.e., one must first ensure that he has food for himself before providing for others. With regard to the phrase: b“And sustece for your maidens,” Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said:The verse indicates that you must bgive sustece to your youth,i.e., to your children. bFrom here, the Torah taughtthat it is ba desired mode of behavior that a person should not accustom his sonto eat bmeat anddrink bwine;rather, he should teach his children to eat less expensive foods., bRabbi Yoḥa says: /b |
