Chullin

Can two protections be reckoned together1 or not? But what is the actual case? If you say that one is over the other, but can it be said that a protection over a protection [has the law of a protection]? Behold we have learnt: R. Judah says: An onion has three skins: the innermost skin, whether it is entire or has holes in it, is reckoned together [with the edible part]; the middle skin, if it is entire, is reckoned together, but if it has holes in it, it is not reckoned together; the outermost skin in either case is clean!2 — R. Oshaia really raised this question: What is the law if the protection of a foodstuff was divided?3 Since this [half of the protection] does not protect the other [half of the foodstuff] and the other [half of the protection] does not protect this [half of the foodstuff] they cannot be reckoned together, or, it may be, since each [half of the protection] protects its own [half of the foodstuff] they can be reckoned together? Come and hear: R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah declares that of the bean clean but that of [other] pulse unclean, since one is pleased with it when handling them!4 — R. Aha the son of Raba answered: It refers to the stalk which is considered as a handle.5 And what is meant by ‘when handling them’? — It means, when moving them about. Come and hear from the following teaching of a Tanna of the school of R. Ishmael: It is written: ‘Upon any sowing seed which is to be sown’,6 that is to say, in the manner in which men take out the seeds for sowing; wheat in its husk, barley in its husk, lentils in their husks! 7 — As R. Aha the son of Raba had suggested [above] that it referred to the stalk which is considered a handle, so here it refers to the stem [of the ear of wheat] which is considered a protection.8 Granted, however, that the upper rows need the lower ones; but do the lower need the upper ones?9 — We are dealing here with one row only.10 But is there ever as much as an egg's bulk of foodstuff in one row? — Yes, in the wheat grains of Simeon b. Shetah.11 And now that you have arrived at this, you may say that it refers to a single grain of wheat, but of the wheat grains of Simeon b. Shetah. [To revert to] the [above] text: If there were two bones [of a corpse] that bore [at one end] a half olive's bulk of flesh and a man brought into a house the other two ends, and the house overshadowed them, the house becomes unclean. Judah b. Nakosa says in the name of R. Jacob: How can two bones [each bearing only a half olive's bulk of flesh at the other end] be reckoned together to make up an olive's bulk’? R. Simeon b. Lakish said: This was taught only with regard to a bone which is considered a handle, but a hair is not considered a handle.12 R. Johanan however said: Even a hair is considered a handle. R. Johanan raised the following objection against R. Simeon b. Lakish: If there was an olive's bulk of [unclean] flesh adhering to the hide and a man touched a shred hanging from it,13 or a hair that was opposite it,14 he becomes unclean. It is, is it not, because it [the hair] is regarded as a handle? — No, it is because it is regarded as a protection. But can there be a protection over another protection?15 — It penetrates right through.16 R. Aha b. Jacob demurred, [saying:] If so, how may we write Tefillin?17 Surely it is necessary that the writing be perfect, and it is not so?18 — [In raising this objection] he must have overlooked the statement [of the Rabbis] in the West, viz., Any hole [in parchment] over which the ink can pass is not considered a hole.19 Or if you wish, you may answer: Each20 is considered a handle, for as R. Ila'a referred [elsewhere] to a bristle among many bristles, so here too it refers to a hair among many hairs.21 And where was this view of R. Ila'a stated? In connection with the following [Mishnah]:22 The bristles23 of ears of corn bring in uncleanness and convey uncleanness,24 but are not included together [with the rest to make up the quantity necessary to convey uncleanness]. Of what use is a bristle?25 R. Ila'a replied: It refers to a bristle among many bristles.26 Another version renders the argument as follows: It is more reasonable to say that it [a hair] is regarded as a protection, for should you say it is regarded as a handle [it will be asked]: Of what use is one hair? — As R. Ila'a referred [elsewhere] to a bristle among many bristles, so here, too, it refers to a hair among hairs. And where was this view of R. Ila'a stated? In connection with the following Mishnah: The bristles of ears of corn bring in uncleanness and convey uncleanness, but are not included together with the rest. Of what use is a bristle? — R. Ila'a replied: It refers to a bristle among many bristles. Some refer it27 therefore can serve as such only when entire, the outermost as a protection over a protection which can in no circumstances be reckoned together with the foodstuff. with the peas within them to make up the quantity of an egg's bulk; it is evident that two protections can be reckoned together. that protections can be reckoned together; likewise, where a foodstuff was divided into two together with the protection upon it, the parts can be reckoned together. corn (in barley and certain species of wheat) is covered by an awn or beard. The suggestion seems to be here that the rachis and the awn together act as one protection to the grains. support, would fall away too; hence from the point of view of the upper rows the entire ear of corn serves as one whole protection. On the other hand, the lower rows can stand without the upper ones for it has its own protection, and the fact that the upper and lower rows in the ear can be reckoned together proves that two protections can be reckoned together. made with the protection that is directly opposite the foodstuff. to the hide, so that it is not a protection over another protection. must be interrupted as the pen passes over these holes, and this invalidates the scroll. maintains, cannot, for it would certainly snap when attempting to lift the bulk by it.