## Chullin Daf 121a

###### Chullin 121a:1
[Chullin 121a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:1)

וַהֲדַר מַיְיתֵי לַהּ לְעׇרְלָה ״פְּרִי״ ״פְּרִי״ מִבִּכּוּרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And then he derives** the *halakha* **of** liquid that emerges from ***orla* from first fruits** via a verbal analogy between one instance of the word **fruit** and another instance of the word **fruit.** With regard to *orla* the verse states: “And you shall count the fruit thereof as forbidden” (Leviticus 19:23), and with regard to first fruits the verse states: “And you shall take of the first of all the fruit of the ground” (Deuteronomy 26:2). Therefore, just as with regard to first fruits the status of liquid that emerges from the produce is like that of the produce only with regard to grapes and olives, so too with regard to *orla* one receives lashes only for drinking the liquid of grapes and olives, but not for drinking the liquid of other types of produce.


###### Chullin 121a:2
[Chullin 121a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:2)

וְהָאָלָל. מַאי אָלָל? רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מַרְטְקָא, וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: בָּשָׂר שֶׁפְּלָטַתּוּ סַכִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§The mishna teaches that **the *alal*** joins together with the flesh to constitute the requisite egg-bulk to impart the impurity of food, despite not being considered food itself. The Gemara asks: To **what** is the term ***alal*** referring? **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** It is referring to **the nuchal ligament [*marteka*]. And Reish Lakish says:** It is referring to the **meat** residue **that** is attached to the hide after **the knife has flayed** the flesh.


###### Chullin 121a:3
[Chullin 121a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:3)

מֵיתִיבִי: ״וְאוּלָם אַתֶּם טֹפְלֵי שָׁקֶר רֹפְאֵי אֱלִל כֻּלְּכֶם״. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מַרְטְקָא – הַיְינוּ דְּלָאו בַּר רְפוּאָה הוּא, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בָּשָׂר שֶׁפְּלָטַתּוּ סַכִּין – בַּר רְפוּאָה הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to the explanation of Reish Lakish from that which is written: **“But you are plasterers of lies, you are all physicians of no value [*elil*]”** (Job 13:4). The term “no value [*elil*]” stems from the same linguistic root as the word *alal*. **Granted, according to the one who says** that the word *alal* is referring to **the nuchal ligament,** i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, **that is** why Job accused his companions of giving advice without merit by making an analogy to a physician who attempts to heal the nuchal ligament, **which cannot be healed. But according to the one who says** that the word *alal* is referring to the **meat** residue **that** is attached to the hide after **the knife has flayed** the flesh, i.e., Reish Lakish, flesh that is hanging from the hide **is able to be healed.**


###### Chullin 121a:4
[Chullin 121a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:4)

בָּאָלָל דִּקְרָא, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְלִיגִי; כִּי פְּלִיגִי – בָּאָלָל דְּמַתְנִיתִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **With regard to** the term ***elil* in the verse, everyone agrees** that it is referring to the nuchal ligament. **When** Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish **disagree,** it is **with regard to** the definition of the term ***alal*** employed by the Sages **in the mishna.**


###### Chullin 121a:5
[Chullin 121a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: הָאָלָל הַמְכוּנָּס, אִם יֵשׁ כְּזַיִת בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד – חַיָּיבִין עָלָיו, וְאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: וְהוּא שֶׁכִּנְּסוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a resolution from that which is taught in the mishna: **Rabbi Yehuda says:** With regard to **the *alal* that** was **collected, if there is an olive-bulk** of it **in one place** it imparts the impurity of animal carcasses. Therefore, one who eats it or touches it and then eats consecrated food or enters the Temple **is liable** to receive *karet* **for it. And Rav Huna said:** This *halakha* **is** applicable only **when** a halakhically competent person **collected** the *alal* in one place, but not if the *alal* was collected by a child or without human intervention. By collecting it in one place, the person indicates that he considers it to be food.


###### Chullin 121a:6
[Chullin 121a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:6)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בָּשָׂר שֶׁפְּלָטַתּוּ סַכִּין, הַיְינוּ דְּכִי אִיכָּא כְּזַיִת מִיחַיַּיב, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מַרְטְקָא, כִּי אִיכָּא כְּזַיִת מַאי הָוֵי? עֵץ בְּעָלְמָא הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, according to the one who says** that the word *alal* is referring to the **meat** residue **that** is attached to the hide after **the knife has flayed** the flesh, i.e., Reish Lakish, **that is** why Rabbi Yehuda says **that one is rendered liable when there is an olive-bulk** of *alal* collected in one place, because the person who collected it considers it to be food. **But according to the one who says** that the word *alal* is referring to **the nuchal ligament,** i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, even in a case **when there is an olive-bulk** of *alal* collected in one place, **what of it? It is merely wood,** i.e., it is unfit for consumption.


###### Chullin 121a:7
[Chullin 121a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:7)

אַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה לָא פְּלִיגִי, כִּי פְּלִיגִי אַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבָּנַן: רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מַרְטְקָא נָמֵי מִצְטָרֵף, וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: דַּוְקָא בָּשָׂר שֶׁפְּלָטַתּוּ סַכִּין, אֲבָל מַרְטְקָא לָא מִצְטָרֵף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **According to** the opinion **of Rabbi Yehuda,** Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish **do not disagree;** they agree that the term *alal* is referring to the meat residue attached to the hide after the knife has flayed the flesh. **When they disagree,** it is with regard to the definition of the word alal according to the opinion of the Rabbis. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The Rabbis maintain that the nuchal ligament also joins together with the meat to constitute the requisite measure of an egg-bulk to impart the impurity of food. And Reish Lakish says: The Rabbis maintain that **specifically** the **meat** residue **that** is attached to the hide after **the knife has flayed** the meat joins together with the flesh, **but the nuchal ligament does not join together.**


###### Chullin 121a:8
[Chullin 121a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:8)

הַאי בָּשָׂר שֶׁפְּלָטַתּוּ סַכִּין, הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי דְּחַשֵּׁיב עֲלֵיהּ – אֲפִילּוּ בְּאַנְפֵּי נַפְשֵׁיהּ מִיטַּמֵּא, וְאִי דְּלָא חַשֵּׁיב עֲלֵיהּ – בַּטּוֹלֵיה בַּטְּלֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What are the circumstances** of **that** which is taught in the mishna, that the **meat** residue **that** is attached to the hide after **the knife flayed** the flesh joins together with the meat to constitute the measure of an egg-bulk required to impart the impurity of food? **If** it is a case **where one intends** to eat this meat residue, then it **can become impure** not only by joining together with the meat, but **even by itself,** like any other food. **And if** it is a case **where one does not intend** to eat this meat residue, why should it be susceptible to impurity at all? One has completely **nullified** its status as food.


###### Chullin 121a:9
[Chullin 121a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:9)

רַבִּי אָבִין וְרַבִּי מְיָישָׁא, חַד אָמַר: מִקְצָתוֹ חִישֵּׁב עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Avin and Rabbi Meyasha** answered this dilemma. **One said:** It is a case where **one intends** to eat **part of** the meat residue, but it is uncertain which part. Therefore, the meat residue is not susceptible to impurity by itself because it is not entirely considered to be food, but the part that he intends to eat joins together with the meat to constitute the measure of an egg-bulk.


###### Chullin 121a:10
[Chullin 121a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:10)

וְחַד אָמַר: מִקְצָתוֹ פְּלָטַתּוּ חַיָּה, וּמִקְצָתוֹ פְּלָטַתּוּ סַכִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And one said:** It is a case where one does not intend to eat any part of the meat residue. Rather, **an animal severed part of** the meat residue attached to the hide, and therefore that part of the meat residue retains its status as food. **And** the **knife severed part of** the meat residue, and one therefore nullified its status as food with regard to that part. Since it is uncertain which part was severed by a knife and which part by an animal, the meat residue itself is not susceptible to impurity, but the part that was severed by an animal joins together with the meat to constitute the measure of an egg-bulk.


###### Chullin 121a:11
[Chullin 121a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:11)

תְּנַן הָתָם: הַחַרְטוֹם וְהַצִּפׇּרְנַיִם מִיטַּמְּאִין וּמְטַמְּאִין וּמִצְטָרְפִין. חַרְטוֹם – עֵץ בְּעָלְמָא הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§The mishna stated that the horns join together with the flesh to constitute the requisite egg-bulk to impart the impurity of food. The Gemara comments that **we learned** in a mishna **elsewhere** (*Teharot* 1:2): **The beak and the talons** of a bird that come into contact with a creeping animal can **become impure, and transmit impurity** to food, **and join together** with the attached flesh to constitute the requisite measure to impart impurity. The Gemara asks: Why does **a beak** join together with the flesh to impart impurity? **It is merely wood,** i.e., it is unfit for consumption.


###### Chullin 121a:12
[Chullin 121a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:12)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: בְּחַרְטוֹם תַּחְתּוֹן. תַּחְתּוֹן נָמֵי עֵץ בְּעָלְמָא הוּא! אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: תַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁל עֶלְיוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Elazar says:** The mishna is stated **with regard to the lower** half of the **beak,** i.e., the lower mandible. The Gemara objects: **The lower** mandible **is also merely wood. Rav Pappa says:** The mishna is discussing **the lower** section **of the upper** mandible and is referring to the membrane inside the mouth that is attached to the beak.


###### Chullin 121a:13
[Chullin 121a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:13)

צִפׇּרְנַיִם, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מָקוֹם (המובלעים) [הַמּוּבְלָע] בַּבָּשָׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, with regard to the **talons** mentioned in that mishna, **Rabbi Elazar says:** That mishna is not discussing the talons themselves, but rather **the place** at the base of the talon **that is subsumed within the flesh.**


###### Chullin 121a:14
[Chullin 121a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:14)

קַרְנַיִם, אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁחוֹתְכִין וְיוֹצֵא מֵהֶן דָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, with regard to the **horns** mentioned in the mishna, **Rav Pappa says:** The mishna is not discussing the hard substance of the horn, but rather is referring **to the place** at the base of the horns **where one severs** the horns **and blood flows from them.**


###### Chullin 121a:15
[Chullin 121a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:15)

כְּיוֹצֵא בּוֹ, הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§The mishna teaches: **Similarly,** in the case of **one who slaughters** a non-kosher **animal** for a gentile and the animal is still twitching and comes into contact with a source of impurity, it imparts impurity of food, but does not impart impurity of an animal carcass.


###### Chullin 121a:16
[Chullin 121a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:16)

אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: שׁוֹנִין יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּטְמֵאָה, וְגוֹי בִּטְהוֹרָה – צְרִיכִין מַחְשָׁבָה וְהֶכְשֵׁר מַיִם מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Asi says:** Some Sages **teach** that when **a Jew** slaughters **a non-kosher** animal **or a gentile** slaughters **a kosher** animal, in order for it to be susceptible to impurity of food, it is **necessary** that the **intention** of the one performing the slaughter be that the flesh be designated as food while it is still twitching. **And** furthermore, in order for the animal to be **rendered susceptible** to impurity, it requires contact with **water** or another liquid that renders food susceptible to impurity that comes **from another place.** The blood of this slaughter is not considered a liquid that renders food susceptible to impurity because it flowed from a valid slaughter.


###### Chullin 121a:17
[Chullin 121a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:17)

הֶכְשֵׁר לְמָה לִי? סוֹפוֹ לְטַמֵּא טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה, וְכֹל שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לְטַמֵּא טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה – לָא בָּעֵי הֶכְשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need the animal to come in contact with liquid in order for it to be **rendered susceptible** to impurity of food? The flesh of the animal **will eventually become impure** with a more **severe** level of **impurity** when it dies, i.e., impurity of an animal carcass. **And any** food **that will eventually become impure** with a more **severe** level of **impurity does not require** contact with liquid to be **rendered susceptible** to impurity of food.


###### Chullin 121a:18
[Chullin 121a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:18)

דְּתָנֵי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: ״וְכִי יֻתַּן מַיִם עַל זֶרַע״, מָה זְרָעִים שֶׁאֵין סוֹפָן לְטַמֵּא טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה צְרִיכִין הֶכְשֵׁר, אַף כֹּל שֶׁאֵין סוֹפוֹ לְטַמֵּא טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה צָרִיךְ הֶכְשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now explains the source of this principle. **As the school of Rabbi Yishmael teaches:** With regard to rendering food susceptible to impurity through contact with liquid, the verse states: **“But if water is put upon the seed,** and any of the carcass falls on it, it is impure for you” (Leviticus 11:38). **Just as seeds, which will never contract** a more **severe** level of **impurity,** because no form of severe impurity applies to foods other than meat, **require** contact with liquid to **render** them **susceptible** to their less severe level of impurity, **so too any** food **that will never contract** a more **severe** level of **impurity requires** contact with liquid to be **rendered susceptible** to impurity of food. By contrast, any food that will become impure with a more severe level of impurity does not require contact with liquid to be rendered susceptible to impurity of food.


###### Chullin 121a:19
[Chullin 121a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/121a:19)

וְתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ נִבְלַת עוֹף טָהוֹר צְרִיכָה מַחְשָׁבָה וְאֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה הֶכְשֵׁר? מִפְּנֵי

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** similarly, **it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei says: For what** reason **did** the Sages **say** that in order for **the carcass of a kosher bird** to become susceptible to impurity it **requires** that the **intention** of the one performing the slaughter be to designate the animal as food, **but it is not required** for the bird to be **rendered susceptible** to impurity through contact with liquid? The reason is **because**