Chullin

There is no comparison [between the two]. For there it is impossible to drink and say Grace simultaneously.1 but here it is possible to slaughter with one hand and to cover up the blood with the other.2 MISHNAH. IF A PERSON SLAUGHTERED AND DID NOT COVER UP THE BLOOD. AND ANOTHER PERSON SAW IT, THE OTHER MUST COVER IT UP. IF HE COVERED IT UP AND IT BECAME UNCOVERED, HE NEED NOT COVER IT UP AGAIN. IF THE WIND COVERED IT UP,3 HE MUST COVER IT UP AGAIN. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: [It is written,] He shall pour out . . . and cover it:4 that is, he who poured out the blood shall cover it up. If he slaughtered and did not cover it and another person saw it, whence do we know that the other person must cover it up? It therefore says: Therefore I said unto the children of Israel,5 this is a warning to all the children of Israel. Another [Baraitha] taught: He shall pour out . . . and cover it: that is, with that with which he poured it out he shall cover it.6 He must not cover it with his foot, so that precepts be not treated with contempt by him. Another [Baraitha] taught: ‘He shall pour out . . . and cover it’: that is, he who poured it out shall cover it up. It once happened that a person slaughtered but another anticipated him and covered up the blood, and R. Gamaliel condemned the latter to pay ten gold coins.7 The question was raised: Was this the reward for [being deprived of the performance of] the commandment or for [being deprived of] the Benediction? But where would there be any practical difference [between these two views]? In the case of the Grace after meals.8 If you say that it was the reward for [being deprived of the performance of] the commandment, then here there is also but one [commandment]; but if you say that it was the reward for [being deprived of] the Benediction, then here the reward should be forty gold coins. What is the answer then? — Come and hear from the following incident. A certain min9 once said to Rabbi, ‘He who formed the mountains did not create the wind, and he who created the wind did not form the mountains, for it is written: For, lo, He that formeth the mountains and createth the wind’.10 He replied. ‘You fool, turn to the end of the verse: The Lord, [the God] of hosts, is His name’. Said the other: ‘Give me three days’ time and I will bring back an answer to you’. Rabbi spent those three days in fasting; thereafter, as he was about to partake of food he was told. ‘There is a inn waiting at the door’. Rabbi exclaimed, ‘Yea they put poison into my food.’11 Said he [the min]. ‘My Master, I bring you good tidings; your opponent could find no answer and so threw himself down from the roof and died’. He said: ‘Would you dine with me?’ He replied. ‘Yes’. After they had eaten and drunk, he [Rabbi] said to him, ‘Will you drink the cup of wine over which the Benedictions of the Grace [after meals] have been said, or would you rather have forty gold coins?’ He replied: ‘I would rather drink the cup of wine’. Thereupon there came forth a Heavenly Voice and said: The cup of wine over [which] the Benedictions [of Grace have been said] is worth forty gold coins. R. Isaac said: The family [of that min] is still to be found amongst the notables of Rome and is named ‘The family of Bar Luianus IF HE COVERED IT UP AND IT BECAME UNCOVERED [HE NEED NOT COVER IT UP AGAIN]. R. Aha the son of Raba said to R. Ashi: In what way is this different from the obligation to return lost property? For the Master has said,’ Thou shalt return’12 implies even a hundred times!13 — He replied. In that case there is no limiting qualification, but here there is written a limiting qualification, [namely]: And he shall cover it.14 IF THE WIND COVERED IT UP [HE MUST COVER IT UP AGAIN]. Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Johanan: This is the rule only if it had become uncovered, but if it had not become uncovered he need not cover it up. But what should it matter even if it had become uncovered? Has not the precept suffered a disability?15 — R. Papa answered: This proves that the law of disability does not apply to precepts.16 And why is it different from the following which was taught: If a person slaughtered and the blood was absorbed in the earth he must nevertheless cover it up?17 — In that case there were traces of it visible. 18 MISHNAH. IF THE BLOOD BECAME MIXED WITH WATER AND IT STILL HAS THE COLOUR OF BLOOD, IT MUST BE COVERED UP. IF IT BECAME MIXED WITH WINE, [THE WINE] IS TO BE REGARDED AS THOUGH IT WAS WATER.19 IF IT BECAME MIXED WITH THE BLOOD OF CATTLE20 more is brought to the table there must be made over it a special Benediction. add: ‘At last it was found that it was not the same but another min’. up, hence by the first covering up the precept has been fulfilled and so discharged. he must cover it up. cover it up. appearance of the blood, it must then be covered up.