## Chullin Daf 130a

###### Chullin 130a:1
[Chullin 130a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:1)

מַתְנִי׳ **הַזְּרוֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם** וְהַקֵּבָה נוֹהֲגִין בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בַּחוּלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בַּמּוּקְדָּשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** The mitzva to give **the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw** of slaughtered animals to the priests, known as the gifts of the priesthood, **applies** both **in Eretz** Yisrael **and outside of Eretz** Yisrael, **in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple,** and it applies **to non-sacred** animals, **but not to sacrificial** animals.


###### Chullin 130a:2
[Chullin 130a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:2)

שֶׁהָיָה בַּדִּין, וּמָה אִם הַחוּלִּין, שֶׁאֵינָן חַיָּיבִים בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק – חַיָּיבִים בְּמַתָּנוֹת, קָדָשִׁים, שֶׁחַיָּיבִים בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק – אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁחַיָּיבִים בְּמַתָּנוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is necessary to emphasize that it does not apply to sacrificial animals, **as by right it should be** inferred *a fortiori*: **If non-sacred** animals, **which are not obligated to** have the **breast and thigh** taken from them and given to the priest, **are obligated to** have **gifts** of the priesthood given from them, then with regard to **sacrificial** animals, **which are obligated to** have the **breast and thigh** given from them, **is it not right that** they should be **obligated to** have **gifts** of the priesthood given from them?


###### Chullin 130a:3
[Chullin 130a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:3)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וָאֶתֵּן אֹתָם לְאַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וּלְבָנָיו לְחׇק עוֹלָם״ – אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁאָמוּר בָּעִנְיָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Therefore, **the verse states:** “For the breast of waving and the thigh of giving I have taken of the children of Israel from the sacrifice of the peace offerings, **and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as a due forever** from the children of Israel” (Leviticus 7:34), from which it is derived that the priest **has only that which is stated with regard to** that **matter,** i.e., the breast and the thigh, and not the foreleg, the jaw and the maw.


###### Chullin 130a:4
[Chullin 130a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:4)

כׇּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁקָּדַם מוּם קָבוּעַ לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן, וְנִפְדּוּ – חַיָּיבִין בַּבְּכוֹרָה וּבַמַּתָּנוֹת, וְיוֹצְאִין לְחוּלִּין לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד, וּוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן מוּתָּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**All sacrificial** animals in **which a permanent blemish preceded their consecration** do not assume inherent sanctity, and only their value is consecrated. **And** once **they were redeemed,** they **are obligated in** the mitzva of **a firstborn,** i.e., their offspring are subject to being counted a firstborn, **and in the gifts** of the priesthood, **and they can emerge** from their sacred status and assume **non-sacred** status **with regard to being shorn and with regard to being utilized for labor,** as it is prohibited to shear animals with sacred status or utilize them for labor. **And their offspring and their milk are permitted after their redemption.**


###### Chullin 130a:5
[Chullin 130a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:5)

וְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר, וְאֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, וְאִם מֵתוּ – יִפָּדוּ, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And one who slaughters** these animals **outside** the Temple courtyard is **exempt** from *karet*, **and** those animals **do not render** an animal that was **a substitute** for them consecrated. **And if** these animals **died** before they were redeemed, **they may be redeemed** and fed to dogs. Although typically sacrificial animals that were redeemed may not be fed to the dogs, in this case it is permitted. This is the *halakha* with regard to all animals **except for the firstborn** animal **and the** animal **tithe,** whose sanctity is inherent, even when a permanent blemish preceded their consecration.


###### Chullin 130a:6
[Chullin 130a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:6)

כֹּל שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּשָׁן אֶת מוּמָן, אוֹ מוּם עוֹבֵר קוֹדֵם לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן, וּלְאַחַר מִכָּאן נוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם קָבוּעַ, וְנִפְדּוּ – פְּטוּרִין מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה וּמִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת, וְאֵינָן יוֹצְאִין לְחוּלִּין לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **all** sacrificial animals **whose consecration preceded their blemish, or** who had **a temporary blemish prior to their consecration and afterward developed a permanent blemish and they were redeemed, they are exempt from** the mitzva of **a firstborn, and from the gifts** of the priestood, **and they do not emerge** from their sacred status and assume **non-sacred** status **with regard to being shorn and with regard to being utilized for labor.**


###### Chullin 130a:7
[Chullin 130a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:7)

וּוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן, וְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ – חַיָּיב, וְעוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, וְאִם מֵתוּ – יִקָּבֵרוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And their offspring,** which were conceived prior to redemption, **and their milk, are prohibited after their redemption. And one who slaughters them outside** the Temple courtyard is **liable** to receive *karet*, **and** those animals **render** an animal that was **a substitute** for them consecrated. **And if** these animals **died** before they were redeemed, they may not be redeemed and fed to dogs; rather, **they must be buried.**


###### Chullin 130a:8
[Chullin 130a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:8)

**גְּמָ׳** טַעְמָא דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״אוֹתָם״, הָא לָאו הָכִי הֲוָה אָמֵינָא קָדָשִׁים חַיָּיבִין בְּמַתָּנוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that the verse: “And have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons” (Leviticus 7:34), indicates that only the breast and thigh, which are the subject of that verse, are given from sacrificial animals to the priest, but gifts of the priesthood are not given from sacrificial animals. The Gemara infers: The **reason** sacrificial animals are not included in the mitzva of gifts of the priesthood is due to the fact **that the Merciful One writes: “Them,”** in reference to the breast and the thigh of sacrificial animals. **But** were it **not** for **this, I would say** by *a fortiori* inference that **sacrificial** animals are **obligated to** have **gifts** of the priesthood given from them.


###### Chullin 130a:9
[Chullin 130a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:9)

אִיכָּא לְמִיפְרַךְ: מָה לְחוּלִּין שֶׁכֵּן חַיָּיבִין בִּבְכוֹרָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why is it necessary to derive this *halakha* from a verse? The *a fortiori* inference **can be refuted** as follows: **What** is unique **about non-sacred** animals? They are unique **in that** they **are obligated** in the mitzva of **a firstborn,** whereas sacrificial animals are exempt. Therefore, the *a fortiori* inference stated in the mishna should not apply.


###### Chullin 130a:10
[Chullin 130a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:10)

תֵּיתֵי מִזְּכָרִים – מָה לִזְכָרִים, שֶׁכֵּן חַיָּיבִין בְּרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: One could **derive** that the mitzva to give the gifts of the priesthood applies to sacrificial animals through an *a fortiori* inference **from** non-sacred **male** animals, which do not give birth to offspring and whose owners are therefore exempt from counting their offspring a firstborn, and nevertheless are subject to the giving of the gifts of the priesthood. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: **What** is unique **about** non-sacred **male** animals? They are unique **in that** they are **obligated to** have **the first sheared wool** given to the priest from them.


###### Chullin 130a:11
[Chullin 130a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:11)

מִתְּיָישִׁים – מָה לִתְיָישִׁים, שֶׁכֵּן נִכְנָסִין לַדִּיר לְהִתְעַשֵּׂר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara persists: One can derive that the obligation applies to sacrificial animals by an *a fortiori* inference **from male goats,** whose owners are exempt from counting their offspring a firstborn as well as from the first sheared wool, and yet are subject to the obligation of gifts of the priesthood. The Gemara rejects this claim as well: **What** is unique **about male goats?** They are unique **in that they enter the pen to be tithed** for the animal tithe, whereas sacrificial animals are not subject to the animal tithe.


###### Chullin 130a:12
[Chullin 130a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:12)

מִזְּקֵנִים – מָה לִזְקֵנִים, שֶׁכֵּן נִכְנְסוּ לְדִיר לְהִתְעַשֵּׂר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests that one can derive the obligation of sacrificial animals having the breast and thigh given from them by *a fortiori* inference **from old** male goats, which have already entered the pen in order to be tithed. Consequently, the obligation of the animal tithe, the obligation of counting the offspring a firstborn, and the first sheared wool do not apply. The Gemara rejects this suggestion as well: **What** is unique **about old** male goats? They are unique **in that they** have **entered the pen to be tithed,** which is not the case with regard to sacrificial animals.


###### Chullin 130a:13
[Chullin 130a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:13)

מִלָּקוּחַ וְיָתוֹם – מָה לְלָקוּחַ וְיָתוֹם, שֶׁכֵּן נִכְנָסִין בְּמִינָן לַדִּיר לְהִתְעַשֵּׂר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara again suggests that perhaps one can derive the obligation of giving gifts of the priesthood with regard to sacrificial animals by an *a fortiori* inference **from a purchased** animal, to which the obligation of the animal tithe never applies. **Or** perhaps it can be derived from **an orphaned** animal, born after the death of its mother, which is also not subject to the obligation of animal tithe. The Gemara rejects this claim: **What** is unique **about a purchased** animal **or an orphaned** animal? They are unique **in that** although they themselves do not enter the pen, animals **of their type enter the pen to be tithed.**


###### Chullin 130a:14
[Chullin 130a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:14)

בְּמִינָן קָאָמְרַתְּ? קֳדָשִׁים נָמֵי, בְּמִינָן נִכְנָסִין לַדִּיר לְהִתְעַשֵּׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **You say** that it is significant that animals **of their type** enter the pen? With regard to **sacrificial** animals **as well,** non-sacred animals **of their type enter the pen to be tithed.** Accordingly, one can claim *a fortiori* that the mitzva to give the gifts applies to sacrificial animals, and it is only due to the verse that they are exempt.


###### Chullin 130a:15
[Chullin 130a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:15)

וְיִהְיוּ חוּלִּין חַיָּיבִין בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר: וּמָה קָדָשִׁים, שֶׁאֵין חַיָּיבִים בְּמַתָּנוֹת, חַיָּיבִין בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק; חוּלִּין, שֶׁחַיָּיבִין בְּמַתָּנוֹת, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁחַיָּיבִין בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara challenges: **And** now that it has been established that the obligation of the gifts of the priesthood does not apply to sacrificial animals, **non-sacred** animals **should be obligated to** have the **breast and thigh** given from them **by an *a fortiori*** inference: **If sacrificial** animals, **which are not obligated to** have **gifts** of the priesthood given from them, are nevertheless **obligated to** have the **breast and thigh** given from them, then with regard to **non-sacred** animals, **which are obligated to** have **gifts** of the priesthood given from them, **is it not right that** they should be **obligated to** have the **breast and thigh** given from them?


###### Chullin 130a:16
[Chullin 130a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:16)

אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְזֶה יִהְיֶה מִשְׁפַּט הַכֹּהֲנִים״, ״זֶה״ – אִין, מִידֵּי אַחֲרִינָא – לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds that the **verse states: “And this shall be the priests’ due** from the people, from them that perform a slaughter, whether it be an ox or sheep, that they shall give to the priest the foreleg, and the jaw, and the maw” (Deuteronomy 18:3). The verse indicates that **“this,”** the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw, **yes,** is given to the priests, but **another item,** i.e., the breast and thigh, is **not** given to the priests from non-sacred slaughtered animals.


###### Chullin 130a:17
[Chullin 130a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/130a:17)

אֶלָּא טַעְמָא דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זֶה״, הָא לָאו הָכִי הֲוָה אָמֵינָא חוּלִּין חַיָּיבִין בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק? וְהָא בָּעֵי תְּנוּפָה, הֵיכָא לִינוּפִינְהוּ? אִי אַבָּרַאי – ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״ כְּתִיב,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **But** this derivation indicates that the **reason** the giving of the breast and thigh does not apply to non-sacred animals is that **the Merciful One writes “this,”** from which it may be inferred if **not** for **this, I would say** that one is **obligated to** give the **breast and thigh** from **non-sacred** animals. **But** the procedure for giving the breast and thigh **requires waving,** and **where would one wave** the breast and thigh of a non-sacred animal? **If** it is suggested that one wave them **outside** the Temple, that cannot be done, as **it is written:** “That the breast may be waved for a wave offering **before the Lord”** (Leviticus 7:30), indicating that they must be waved inside the Temple.