## Chullin Daf 124b

###### Chullin 124b:1
[Chullin 124b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:1)

בִּמְרוּדָּד, הָכָא נָמֵי בִּמְרוּדָּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The reference is **to a thin** layer of flesh attached to the hide. **Here, too,** the Gemara concludes that Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement is referring **to a thin** layer of flesh attached to the hide. When a person severs such a piece of flesh along with the hide, even if the total volume of the flesh is an olive-bulk, or even a much larger measure, it is insignificant and is nullified by the hide.


###### Chullin 124b:2
[Chullin 124b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:2)

הָיוּ עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§The mishna teaches: If **upon** the hide **there were** two half olive-bulks, the hide imparts the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass by means of carrying but not by means of contact with the flesh; this is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.


###### Chullin 124b:3
[Chullin 124b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:3)

אָמַר בַּר פְּדָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא מֵאַחֲרָיו, אֲבָל מִלְּפָנָיו – יֵשׁ נוֹגֵעַ וְחוֹזֵר וְנוֹגֵעַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Bar Padda says:** The Sages **taught** that Rabbi Yishmael holds that that hide does not impart impurity by means of contact **only** with regard to one who touched the hide **on the outside. But** if one directly touched the pieces of flesh **inside** the hide, even though he did not touch any one piece measuring an olive-bulk, he is impure. This is because **there is** a principle that if one **touches** an impure item measuring less than an olive-bulk **and again touches** another impure item measuring less than an olive-bulk, he becomes impure, as the two instances of contact join together to constitute contact with the requisite measure of an olive-bulk.


###### Chullin 124b:4
[Chullin 124b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:4)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵין נוֹגֵעַ וְחוֹזֵר וְנוֹגֵעַ, וְאַזְדָּא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְרַבִּי דּוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס אָמְרוּ דָּבָר אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: There is no** such principle that if one **touches** an impure item **and again touches** another impure item that the two instances of contact join together to constitute contact with the requisite measure of an olive-bulk. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan follows his** line of **reasoning, as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said the same thing,** i.e., maintained the same principle.


###### Chullin 124b:5
[Chullin 124b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:5)

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל – הָא דַּאֲמַרַן; רַבִּי דּוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס – דִּתְנַן: כָּל הַמְטַמְּאִין בְּאֹהֶל, שֶׁנֶּחְלְקוּ וְהִכְנִיסָן לְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת – רַבִּי דּוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס מְטַהֵר, וַחֲכָמִים מְטַמְּאִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The statement of **Rabbi Yishmael is that which we said:** Two instances of contact do not join together to constitute contact with the requisite measure of impurity. The statement of **Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas is** that **which we learned** in a mishna (*Oholot* 3:1): With regard to **any** part of a corpse that **imparts impurity in a tent,** i.e., that imparts impurity to any other item that is under the same roof, if that body part was **divided** into two pieces, each measuring less than an olive-bulk, but together they constitute an olive-bulk, **and one placed** both pieces **inside the house,Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas** rules that the two pieces do not join together to constitute the requisite measure of an olive-bulk. Therefore, he **deems** everything inside the house **pure. And the Rabbis** rule that the two pieces of the corpse join together to constitute an olive-bulk, and therefore they **deem** everything inside the house **impure.**


###### Chullin 124b:6
[Chullin 124b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:6)

לָאו אָמַר רַבִּי דּוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס הָתָם, אֵין מַאֲהִיל וְחוֹזֵר וּמַאֲהִיל, הָכָא נָמֵי אֵין נוֹגֵעַ וְחוֹזֵר וְנוֹגֵעַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Didn’t Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas say** in that mishna **there** that **there is no** such principle that a tent **overlies** an impure item **and again overlies** another impure item such that the two instances join together to constitute the requisite measure for impurity imparted in a tent? **Here, too,** Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas would agree with Rabbi Yishmael that **there is no** such principle that if one **touches** an impure item **and again touches** another impure item that the two instances join together to constitute contact with the requisite measure of an olive-bulk.


###### Chullin 124b:7
[Chullin 124b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:7)

וּמִדְּרַבִּי דּוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס כְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, רַבָּנַן כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא? וְהָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא טַהוֹרֵי קָא מְטַהַר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects to the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan: **Since** the opinion of **Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael,** so too, the opinion of **the Rabbis** who disagree with Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas must be **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva,** who disagrees with Rabbi Yishmael. **But doesn’t Rabbi Akiva** rule more leniently than Rabbi Yishmael, as he **deems** one **pure** in both cases of contact and carrying, whereas the Rabbis rule more stringently than Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas and deem everything in the house impure?


###### Chullin 124b:8
[Chullin 124b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:8)

עַד כָּאן לָא קָא מְטַהַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֶלָּא בְּעוֹר, אֲבָל בְּעָלְמָא מְטַמֵּא, כִּדְקָתָנֵי סֵיפָא: וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא בִּשְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים שֶׁתְּחָבָן בְּקֵיסָם וֶהֱסִיטָן שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְטַהֵר בָּעוֹר? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעוֹר מְבַטְּלָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rabbi Akiva deems** one who touches or carries the pieces of flesh **pure only** because they are nullified **by the hide. But in general** he holds that items join together to **impart impurity, as the latter clause** of the mishna **teaches: And Rabbi Akiva concedes in** the case of **two half olive-bulks where one skewered them with a wood chip and moved them that he is impure. And for what** reason **does Rabbi Akiva deem one ritually pure in** a case where he moved both half olive-bulks with **the hide?** It is **because the hide** separates between them and **nullifies them.**


###### Chullin 124b:9
[Chullin 124b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:9)

מֵתִיב רַב עוּקְבָא בַּר חָמָא: ״בְּנִבְלָתָם״ – וְלֹא בְּעוֹר שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו שְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ukva bar Ḥama raises an objection** to the statement of bar Padda that Rabbi Yishmael maintains that two instances of contact with two pieces measuring less than an olive-bulk join together to constitute contact with the requisite measure of an olive-bulk. His objection is based on that which is taught in a *baraita*: It is written: “And by these you shall become impure; whoever touches **their carcass** shall be impure until evening. And whoever carries the carcass of them shall wash his clothes and be impure until evening” (Leviticus 11:24–25). It is derived from the term “their carcass” that one who touches the carcass itself becomes impure, **but** one who touches **a hide that has upon it two half olive-bulks** of flesh does **not** become impure.


###### Chullin 124b:10
[Chullin 124b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:10)

יָכוֹל אַף בְּמַשָּׂא? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא יִטְמָא״ – דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: ״הַנּוֹגֵעַ״ ״וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא״ – אֶת שֶׁבָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע, בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא; לֹא בָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע, לֹא בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One **might** have thought that a hide that has upon it two half olive-bulks of flesh does not impart impurity **even by means of carrying.** Therefore, the continuation of **the verse states: “And whoever carries** the carcass of them **shall** wash his clothes and **be impure** until evening,” from which it is derived that one who carries a carcass, even by means of the hide, becomes impure; this is **the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says:** The verse juxtaposes **“whoever touches”** with **“and whoever carries,”** indicating that **that which enters the category of** impurity via **contact, enters the category of** impurity via **carrying; that which does not enter the category of** impurity via **contact, does not enter the category of** impurity via **carrying.**


###### Chullin 124b:11
[Chullin 124b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:11)

וְאִם אִיתָא, הֲרֵי בָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע מִלְּפָנָיו?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Based on this *baraita*, one can object to the statement of bar Padda: **And if it is so** that Rabbi Yishmael maintains that two instances of contact with two pieces of flesh measuring less than an olive-bulk join together to constitute contact with the requisite measure of an olive-bulk, then the case of a hide that has upon it two half olive-bulks of flesh also **enters the category of** impurity transmitted by means of **contact** when one directly touches the flesh **inside** the hide. Therefore, why does Rabbi Akiva disagree with Rabbi Yishmael by stating that in this case there is no transmission of impurity by means of carrying because there is no transmission of impurity by means of contact?


###### Chullin 124b:12
[Chullin 124b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:12)

אָמַר רָבָא: הָכִי קָאָמַר, אֶת שֶׁבָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע בְּכׇל צַד – בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא, לֹא בָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע בְּכׇל צַד – לֹא בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said** that **this** is what Rabbi Akiva **is saying: That which enters the category of** impurity via **contact in every manner,** even by touching the hide on the outside, **enters the category of** impurity via **carrying; that which does not enter the category of** impurity via **contact in every manner, does not enter the category of** impurity via **carrying.**


###### Chullin 124b:13
[Chullin 124b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:13)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב אַוְיָא סָבָא מֵרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא: קוּלִית סְתוּמָה, לְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, מַהוּ שֶׁתְּטַמֵּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§The Gemara continues to discuss the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael. **Rav Avya the Elder asked Rabba bar Rav Huna:** The mishna below teaches that with regard to **a sealed thigh bone** of an unslaughtered carcass and of a creeping animal, where the bone is intact to the extent that there is no access to the marrow, which contains marrow inside but no flesh outside, one who touches it remains ritually pure because it does not enter the category of impurity via contact. **According to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael, what is** the *halakha* as to whether it **imparts impurity** via carrying?


###### Chullin 124b:14
[Chullin 124b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:14)

אִית לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: אֶת שֶׁבָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע – בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא, לֹא בָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע – לֹא בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא, וְהָכָא הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא מִשּׁוּם דְּבָא לִכְלַל מַגָּע מִלְּפָנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Perhaps **Rabbi Yishmael maintains** the principle: **That which enters the category of** impurity via **contact, enters the category of** impurity via **carrying; that which does not enter the category of** impurity via **contact, does not enter the category of** impurity via **carrying. And** therefore, **here,** in the *baraita* cited above, **this is the reason** that Rabbi Yishmael taught that one who carries a hide that has upon it two half olive-bulks of flesh becomes impure even though it does not enter the category of impurity via contact if one touched the outside of the hide: It is **because it enters the category of** impurity via **contact** if one directly touched the flesh **inside** the hide. Therefore, a sealed thigh bone, which does not enter the category of impurity via contact in any manner, does not enter the category of impurity via carrying either.


###### Chullin 124b:15
[Chullin 124b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:15)

אוֹ דִלְמָא לֵית לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or perhaps** Rabbi Yishmael **does not maintain** this principle, and he would maintain that one who carries a hide that has upon it two half olive-bulks of flesh becomes impure even if it were not the case that it enters the category of impurity via contact if one directly touched the flesh inside the hide. And therefore, Rabbi Yishmael holds that a sealed thigh bone imparts impurity via carrying even though it does not enter the category of impurity via contact in any manner.


###### Chullin 124b:16
[Chullin 124b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עוֹרְבָא פָּרַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In an effort to evade the question, Rabba bar Rav Huna distracted Rav Avya the Elder and **said to him:** Look, **a raven flies** in the sky.


###### Chullin 124b:17
[Chullin 124b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:17)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא בְּרֵיהּ: וְלָאו הַיְינוּ רַב אַוְיָא סָבָא מִפּוּמְבְּדִיתָא, דִּמְשַׁבַּח לַן מָר בְּגַוֵּיהּ דְּגַבְרָא רַבָּה הוּא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנִי הַיּוֹם ״סַמְּכוּנִי בָּאֲשִׁישׁוֹת״, וּבְעָא מִינַּאי מִילְּתָא דְּבָעֵי טַעְמָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava, son of** Rabba bar Rav Huna, **said to** his father: **But isn’t this Rav Avya the Elder of Pumbedita, whom the Master would praise to us,** saying **that he is a great man?** If so, why did you treat him in that manner and evade his question? Rabba bar Rav Huna **said to him: Today I am** in a state best described by the verse: **“Let me lean against the stout trunks;** let me couch among the apple trees” (Song of Songs 2:5), meaning: I am tired, **and he asked me** about **a matter that requires reasoning** and careful examination, and therefore I could not provide an immediate answer.


###### Chullin 124b:18
[Chullin 124b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:18)

אָמַר עוּלָּא: שְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים שֶׁתְּחָבָן בְּקֵיסָם, אֲפִילּוּ מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא כׇּל הַיּוֹם כּוּלּוֹ – טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§**Ulla says:** With regard to **two half olive-bulks that one skewered with a wood chip, even** if one **moves them back and forth the entire day,** he does not contract impurity via carrying, and **he is pure.**


###### Chullin 124b:19
[Chullin 124b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:19)

מַאי טַעְמָא? כְּתִיב ״וְנִשָּׂא״ וְקָרֵינַן ״נוֹשֵׂא״, בָּעֵינַן ״נוֹשֵׂא״ וְהוּא דְּנִישָּׂא בְּבַת אַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **What is the reason?** With regard to impurity transmitted by carrying **it is written:** “And one who carries [*vahannosei*] its carcass shall wash his clothes and be impure until evening” (Leviticus 11:40). The words “and who carries” in the term “and one who carries” is **written** *vav*, *nun*, *sin*, *alef*, which can be read ***venisa*,** meaning: Is carried; **but** according to the traditional vocalization **we read** the word as ***nosei*,** meaning: Carries. From here it is derived that with regard to impurity transmitted by carrying **we require** that one **carry [*nosei*]** the requisite measure of impurity of a carcass, i.e., an olive-bulk, **and that** that olive-bulk **be capable of being carried [*nissa*] all at once,** without the assistance of a utensil. This requirement is not met with regard to two half olive-bulks that one skewered with a wood chip, which are carried only with the assistance of a utensil.


###### Chullin 124b:20
[Chullin 124b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:20)

תְּנַן: הָיוּ עָלָיו שְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים – מְטַמְּאִין בְּמַשָּׂא וְלֹא בְּמַגָּע, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אַמַּאי? וְהָא לָאו נִישָּׂא הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects to Ulla’s statement: **We learned** in the mishna that if **upon** the hide **there were two half olive-bulks,** the hide **imparts the impurity** of an unslaughtered carcass **by means of carrying but not by means of contact** with the flesh; this is **the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Why** does it impart impurity by means of carrying? **This** case **does not** fulfill the requirement that an olive-bulk of impure flesh **be capable of being carried** all at once without the assistance of a utensil, as the hide is needed to carry them.


###### Chullin 124b:21
[Chullin 124b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:21)

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: בִּמְרוּדָּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa says:** The mishna is discussing a case **where a thin** layer of flesh was attached to the hide. Despite the fact that there is not one piece of flesh the size of an olive-bulk, the two half olive-bulks are connected by a strip of thin flesh which enables the two pieces to be carried at once without the assistance of the hide. Therefore, the pieces impart impurity by means of carrying but not by means of contact.


###### Chullin 124b:22
[Chullin 124b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:22)

תָּא שְׁמַע: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא בִּשְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים שֶׁתְּחָבָן בְּקֵיסָם וֶהֱסִיטָן שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא. אַמַּאי? וְהָא לָאו נִישָּׂא הוּא! הָכִי נָמֵי בִּמְרוּדָּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a refutation to the opinion of Ulla from that which is stated in the mishna: **Rabbi Akiva concedes in** the case of **two half olive-bulks where one skewered them with a wood chip and moved them that he is impure. Why? This** case **does not** fulfill the requirement that an olive-bulk of impure flesh **be capable of being carried** all at once without the assistance of a utensil. The Gemara rejects this refutation: **Here too,** with regard to the statement of Rabbi Akiva, the mishna is discussing a case **of a thin** layer of flesh connecting the two pieces.


###### Chullin 124b:23
[Chullin 124b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:23)

כְּתַנָּאֵי: אֶחָד הַנּוֹגֵעַ וְאֶחָד הַמֵּסִיט, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אַף הַנּוֹשֵׂא. אַטּוּ נוֹשֵׂא לָאו מֵסִיט הוּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: The opinion of Ulla is **like** one side of a dispute between ***tanna’im*,** as it is taught in a *baraita*: With regard to two pieces of flesh, neither of which measures an olive-bulk, both **one who touches and one who moves** the pieces is impure. **Rabbi Eliezer says: Even one who carries** the pieces is impure. The Gemara asks: What is added by the statement of Rabbi Eliezer? **Is that to say** that **carrying is not** the same as **moving?**


###### Chullin 124b:24
[Chullin 124b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:24)

אֶלָּא לָאו הָכִי קָאָמַר: אֶחָד הַנּוֹגֵעַ וְאֶחָד הַמֵּסִיט בְּלֹא נִישָּׂא, וַאֲתָא רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לְמֵימַר: וְהוּא דְּנִישָּׂא, וּמַאי ״אַף״? אֵימָא: וְהוּא דְּנִישָּׂא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, isn’t this** what the *baraita* **is saying:** Both **one who touches and one who moves** pieces of flesh is impure even if an olive-bulk of flesh **is not capable of being carried** without the assistance of a utensil? **And Rabbi Eliezer comes to say:** One becomes impure only if an olive-bulk of flesh **is capable of being carried** without the assistance of a utensil. The Gemara asks: **But** if the intention of Rabbi Eliezer’s statement is to qualify the statement of the Rabbis, **what** is the meaning of the word **even?** Rather, **say** the statement of Rabbi Eliezer differently: One is impure only if an olive-bulk of flesh **is capable of being carried** without the assistance of a utensil.


###### Chullin 124b:25
[Chullin 124b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/124b:25)

**מַתְנִי׳** קוּלִית הַמֵּת

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **the thigh bone of** a human **corpse,**