Chullin

whereupon R. Johanan said to him, ‘As long as it sucks’;1 or Ulla meant ‘Throughout its first year’, whether it still was sucking or not, whereupon R. Johanan said to him, ‘Throughout its first year and provided it was still sucking?’ — Come and hear: ‘R. Johanan said: As long as it sucks’ — Now if it were the case [that R. Johanan required both]2 he should have said, provided it still sucks. This proves it. Resh Lakish enquired of R. Johanan: ‘Can the skin of the head of a young calf convey uncleanness or not?’ — He replied: ‘It cannot’ — ‘But’, said the other, ‘you, our teacher have taught us, "IN THE FOLLOWING CASES THE SKIN IS CONSIDERED AS FLESH: . . . THE SKIN OF THE HEAD OF A YOUNG CALF"’. — He replied: ‘Do not weary me [with your arguments], for I taught that [Mishnah] as the opinion of an individual.3 For it was taught:4 If a man slaughtered a burnt-offering purposing to burn an olive's bulk of its skin from under the fat tail at the improper place,5 the sacrifice is invalid, and he is not liable to the punishment of kareth,’6 but [if he purposed to burn it] at the improper time, it would be piggul,6 and he would be liable to the punishment of kareth. Eleazar b. Judah of Ablum7 stated in the name of R. Jacob, similarly R. Simeon b. Judah of Kefar ‘Ikum8 stated in the name of R. Simeon, [If a man while slaughtering a burnt-offering intended to burn] either the skin around the hoofs, or the skin of the head of a young calf, or the skin from under the fat tail, or any of the skins9 enumerated by the Sages in connection with the law of uncleanness VIZ., IN THE FOLLOWING CASES THE SKIN IS ACCOUNTED AS FLESH, meaning to include the skin of the pudenda10 — at the improper place the sacrifice is invalid, and he is not liable to the punishment of kareth; but at the improper time, it would be piggul, and he would be liable to the punishment of kareth’. THE SKIN AROUND THE HOOFS. What is the meaning of AROUND THE HOOFS? — Rab said: It means actually around the hoofs. R. Hanina said: It means the [skin upon the nethermost] limb11 which is usually sold with the head. THE SKIN OF THE HEDGEHOG. Our Rabbis taught: ‘The unclean’12 includes their skins, which are to be regarded as their flesh. I might then say that this is so with regard to then, all,13 the verse therefore states These.12 But does not the expression ‘These’ refer to all [reptiles mentioned]?14 — Rab said: The phrase After its kinds15 interrupts the subject matter. And why is not the mole also reckoned?16 — R. Samuel b. Isaac said: Rab is himself a Tanna and he [in his Mishnah] includes the mole. But why does not our Tanna [of our present Mishnah] include the mole? — R. Shesheth the son of R. Idi said: Our Tanna agrees with R. Judah that it depends upon the feel [of the skin],17 but he differs with him18 about the feel of the [skin of the] lizard.19 IF ANY OF THESE SKINS WAS TANNED etc. Only if trampled upon does it [become clean], but if not trampled upon it does not [become clean]; but R. Hiyya has taught [to the contrary], viz., If a man patched up his basket with the ear of an ass it becomes clean!20 — If he patched up something with it, then it becomes clean even though it had not been trampled upon; but if he had not patched up anything with it, then if trampled upon it does [become clean], but if not trampled upon it does not [become clean]. How much [trampling] would be sufficient for tanning? — R. Huna said in the name of R. Jannai, [The equivalent of a] four mils [distance]. R. Abbahu said in the name of Resh Lakish: For kneading,21 for prayer,22 and for washing the hands,23 the standard is four mils. R. Nahman b. Isaac said: only invalidate the sacrifice if the proposed service relates to matters which are usually so served and performed. E.g., an intention, expressed during the slaughtering of the sacrifice, of eating at the improper time or place, such parts which are not usually eaten, as the hide, does not invalidate the sacrifice. It is evident, therefore, that the skin from under the fat tail is regarded as edible inasmuch as the sacrifice is rendered invalid by the wrongful intention with regard to it. therefore regarded as flesh, whereas the first Tanna (with whom R. Johanan is in agreement) considers only the skin under the fat tail as edible. case of a burnt-offering which is a male and not a female animal. after its kinds, (v. 30) and the hedgehog, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole. (v. 31) These are the unclean amongst all the creeping things. interpretation of the aforementioned verses but from practical observation. It depends entirely upon the feel of the skin. If the skin of the reptile feels soft and fleshy it is regarded as flesh, but if hard and scaly it is not regarded as flesh. and not even trampled upon. owner's vessels are unclean, must go even a distance of four miles, if that is the nearest mikweh, in order to immerse the vessels, but no further. For other explanations v. Tosaf. s.v. kcdk. away, must continue his journey till he reaches that Synagogue in order to pray there. it before making a meal.