## Chullin Daf 133b

###### Chullin 133b:1
[Chullin 133b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:1)

הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – דְּיָתֵיב גּוֹי אַמְּסַחְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Here, we are dealing with** a case **where** the **gentile is sitting in the butcher shop** of the Israelite. In such a situation, it is evident that the gentile is in partnership with the Israelite and the animal need not be marked. By contrast, the mishna is referring to a case where the gentile does not sit in the shop.


###### Chullin 133b:2
[Chullin 133b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:2)

דִּכְוָתַהּ גַּבֵּי כֹהֵן, דְּיָתֵיב אַמְּסַחְתָּא, אַמַּאי צָרִיךְ לִרְשׁוֹם? דְּאָמְרִי: בִּשְׂרָא קָא זָבֵין. אִי הָכִי, גּוֹי נָמֵי אָמְרִי: בִּשְׂרָא קָא זָבֵין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, then **in the corresponding** situation **involving a priest,** where the *baraita* teaches that one who enters into partnership with a priest must mark the animal, this must also be referring to a case **where** the priest **sits in the butcher shop. Why,** then, **must one mark** the animal? The Gemara responds: The fact that the priest sits in the shop does not indicate that he is in partnership with the Israelite, **as** people will **say:** He is in the shop because **he is purchasing meat.** The Gemara objects: **If so,** then in the case of the **gentile as well, they** will **say** that he is in the shop because **he is purchasing meat.**


###### Chullin 133b:3
[Chullin 133b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:3)

אֶלָּא הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן, דְּיָתֵיב גּוֹי אַכַּסְפְּתָא. דִּכְוָתַהּ גַּבֵּי כֹּהֵן דְּיָתֵיב אַכַּסְפְּתָא, אַמַּאי צָרִיךְ לִרְשׁוֹם? אָמְרִי: הֵמוֹנֵי הֵימְנֵיהּ, גּוֹי נָמֵי אָמְרִי: הֵמוֹנֵי הֵימְנֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, here we are dealing with** a case **where the gentile sits by the safe** into which the butcher places money received from his customers. In such a situation, it is evident that the gentile is in partnership with the Israelite, and therefore the animal need not be marked. The Gemara asks: If so, then **the corresponding** situation in the *baraita* **involving a priest** must also be a case **where** the priest **sits by the safe. Why,** then, **must one mark** the animal? The Gemara responds: The fact that the priest sits by the safe does not indicate that he is in partnership with the Israelite, **as** people will **say:** The butcher **trusts him** to protect the safe from theft. The Gemara asks: **If so,** then in the case of the **gentile as well, they** will **say** that he sits by the safe because the butcher **trusts him.**


###### Chullin 133b:4
[Chullin 133b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:4)

אֵין אֱמוּנָה בְּגוֹי. אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: סְתַם גּוֹי מִפְּעָא פָּעֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: It is **not** common for a Jew to place his **trust in a gentile. If you wish, say** instead that in both cases of the *baraita* the priest and the gentile sit in the butcher shop, not by the safe. It is evident that the gentile is in partnership with the Israelite, as **an ordinary gentile** partner **yells** at the seller, saying, for example: Do not sell an item for this price but for a different price. By contrast, a priest, even if he sits in the shop, would not question the practices of the salesman, due to his modesty, but would defer to the seller’s expertise. Accordingly, it is not evident that the priest is a partner, and the animal must therefore be marked.


###### Chullin 133b:5
[Chullin 133b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:5)

אָמַר מָר: וּפְסוּלֵי הַמּוּקְדָּשִׁין אֵין צָרִיךְ לִרְשׁוֹם. אַלְמָא מוֹכְחָא מִלְּתָא, וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן: פְּסוּלֵי הַמּוּקְדָּשִׁין נִמְכָּרִים בָּאִיטְלִיז, וְנִשְׁחָטִים בָּאִיטְלִיז, וְנִשְׁקָלִים בְּלִיטְרָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **The Master said** in the *baraita*: **And** the owner of **disqualified consecrated** animals, which were slaughtered after they were redeemed and became non-sacred, is exempt from the obligation to give the gifts, and one **does not need to mark** the animal. The Gemara objects: **Apparently, it is an evident matter** that this is a disqualified consecrated animal, and therefore one need not mark it. **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Bekhorot* 31a): All **disqualified consecrated** animals **are sold in the meat market [*be’itliz*], and are slaughtered in the meat market, and are weighed** and sold **by the *litra*,** in the manner of non-sacred meat? Since disqualified consecrated animals are treated in the same manner as ordinary non-sacred animals, how is it evident that this is a disqualified consecrated animal?


###### Chullin 133b:6
[Chullin 133b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:6)

תַּרְגְּמָא רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא, בְּאוֹתָן הַנִּמְכָּרִים בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Rav Adda bar Ahava interpreted** the *baraita* **before Rav Pappa** as referring **to those** disqualified consecrated animals **that are sold** from **inside the house,** i.e., a firstborn animal and an animal tithe, whose redemption payments belong to their owners, as their value has no sanctity. Since no gain would accrue to the Temple, the Sages prohibited one from selling these animals in the market, despite the fact one could have obtained a higher sale price there due to the high concentration of customers.


###### Chullin 133b:7
[Chullin 133b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:7)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: שׁוּתָּף בָּרֹאשׁ – פָּטוּר מִן הַלֶּחִי, שׁוּתָּף בַּיָּד – פָּטוּר מִן הַזְּרוֹעַ, שׁוּתָּף בִּבְנֵי מֵעַיִין – פָּטוּר מִן הַקֵּבָה. וְחִיָּיא בַּר רַב אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ שׁוּתָּף בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן – פָּטוּר מִכּוּלָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to gifts of the priesthood from animals owned in partnership, **Rav Huna says:** If an Israelite is **a partner** with a priest or gentile **in** only **the head** of the animal, he is **exempt** merely **from** the obligation to give the **jaw,** which is part of the head. He remains obligated to give the foreleg and the maw. If he is **a partner** with a priest or gentile **in the leg and hoof** of the animal, he is **exempt** only **from** the obligation to give **the foreleg.** If he is **a partner** with a priest or gentile **in the innards,** he is **exempt** merely **from** the obligation to give **the maw. And Ḥiyya bar Rav says** that **even** if the priest or gentile is **a partner in** only **one of them,** the Israelite is **exempt from all of** the gifts.


###### Chullin 133b:8
[Chullin 133b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:8)

מֵיתִיבִי: ״הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלִּי וְכוּלָּהּ שֶׁלָּךְ״, וַאֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה בָּרֹאשׁ – פָּטוּר. ״הַיָּד שֶׁלִּי וְכוּלָּהּ שֶׁלָּךְ״, אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה בַּיָּד – פָּטוּר. ״בְּנֵי מֵעַיִין שֶׁלִּי וְכוּלָּהּ שֶׁלָּךְ״, אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה בָּהֶן – פָּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to the opinion of Ḥiyya bar Rav from a *baraita*: If a priest says to an Israelite butcher: Let us enter into a partnership in which **the head** of the animal **is mine and the entire** remainder **is yours, even** if the priest proposes that only **one-hundredth of the head** should be his, the Israelite is **exempt.** Similarly, if the priest offers: Let us enter into a partnership in which **the leg and hoof** of the animal **are mine and the entire** remainder **is yours, even** if the priest suggests that only **one-hundredth of the leg and hoof** will be his, the Israelite is **exempt.** And likewise, if the priest says: Let us enter into a partnership in which **the innards** of the animal **are mine and the entire** remainder **is yours, even** if the priest offers to take only **one-hundredth of the innards,** the Israelite is **exempt.**


###### Chullin 133b:9
[Chullin 133b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:9)

מַאי לָאו: פָּטוּר מִן הַלֶּחִי וְחַיָּיב בְּכוּלָּן, פָּטוּר מִן הַזְּרוֹעַ וְחַיָּיב בְּכוּלָּן, פָּטוּר מִן הַקֵּבָה וְחַיָּיב בְּכוּלָּן? לָא, פָּטוּר מִכּוּלָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the objection: **What, is it not** correct that the *baraita* is teaching that when the priest owns the head the butcher is **exempt from** giving **the jaw, but obligated in** giving **all** the rest, and likewise when the priest owns the leg and hoof, he is **exempt from** giving **the foreleg but obligated in all** the rest, and when the priest owns the innards, he is **exempt from the maw and obligated in all** the rest? This would contradict the opinion of Ḥiyya bar Rav. The Gemara responds: **No;** in each case the *baraita* means that he is **exempt from all** the gifts.


###### Chullin 133b:10
[Chullin 133b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:10)

וְלִיתְנֵי פָּטוּר מִכּוּלָּן! וְעוֹד, תַּנְיָא: הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלִּי וְכוּלָּהּ שֶׁלָּךְ – אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד מִמֵּאָה בָּרֹאשׁ פָּטוּר מִן הַלֶּחִי וְחַיָּיב בְּכוּלָּן. תְּיוּבְתָּא דְּחִיָּיא בַּר רַב, תְּיוּבְתָּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But** if so, **let** the *baraita* **teach** explicitly that he is **exempt from all the** gifts, rather than simply stating that he is exempt. **And furthermore,** it **is taught** in another *baraita* that if a priest says to an Israelite butcher: Let us enter into a partnership in which **the head** of the animal **is mine and the entire** remainder **is yours, even** if the priest suggests that only **one-hundredth of the head** will be his, the butcher is **exempt from** the obligation to give **the jaw but is obligated in** giving **all the** rest. This *baraita* explicitly contradicts the opinion of Ḥiyya bar Rav. The Gemara concludes: **The refutation of** the opinion of **Ḥiyya bar Rav** is indeed **a conclusive refutation.**


###### Chullin 133b:11
[Chullin 133b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:11)

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: הָא מַתְנִיתָא אַטְעִיתֵיהּ לְחִיָּיא בַּר רַב, דְּתַנְיָא: עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע מַתְּנוֹת כְּהוּנָּה הֵן, וְכוּלָּן נִיתְּנוּ לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו בִּכְלָל וּפְרָט וּבְרִית מֶלַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ḥisda said** in explanation of the opinion of Ḥiyya bar Rav: **This *baraita* misled Ḥiyya bar Rav, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **There are twenty-four gifts of the priesthood, and all of them were given** in the Torah **to Aaron and his sons by a generalization and a detail, and** with **a covenant of salt.** The verse states: “And the Lord spoke to Aaron: And I, behold, I have given you the charge of My gifts; of all the consecrated items of the children of Israel to you have I given them for prominence, and to your sons, as an eternal portion” (Numbers 18:8). After this generalization, the Torah proceeds to list the gifts in detail. Finally, after delineating all the gifts of the priesthood, the verse states: “It is an everlasting covenant of salt” (Numbers 18:19), assuring Aaron that just as a covenant of salt is unbreakable, so too, the gifts of the priesthood are eternal.


###### Chullin 133b:12
[Chullin 133b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:12)

כָּל הַמְקַיְּימָן – כְּאִילּוּ קִיֵּים בִּכְלָל וּפְרָט וּבְרִית מֶלַח, וְכׇל הָעוֹבֵר עֲלֵיהֶן – כְּאִילּוּ עוֹבֵר עַל בִּכְלָל וּפְרָט וּבְרִית מֶלַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: Therefore, **anyone who fulfills** the mitzva of giving the gifts of the priesthood is considered **as though he fulfills** all these mitzvot that are derived using the principle of **a generalization and a detail, and** as though he has upheld the **covenant of salt. And anyone who violates** the mitzva of giving the gifts of the priesthood is considered **as though he violates** all of the mitzvot derived by the principle of **a generalization and a detail, and** as though he has not upheld the **covenant of salt.**


###### Chullin 133b:13
[Chullin 133b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:13)

וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: עֶשֶׂר בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ, וְאַרְבַּע בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְעֶשֶׂר בַּגְּבוּלִים. עֶשֶׂר בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ: חַטָּאת, וְחַטַּאת הָעוֹף, אָשָׁם וַדַּאי, וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי, וְזִבְחֵי שַׁלְמֵי צִבּוּר, וְלוֹג שֶׁמֶן שֶׁל מְצוֹרָע, וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם, וְלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים, וּשְׁיָרֵי מְנָחוֹת, וּמִנְחַת הָעוֹמֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And these are** the twenty-four gifts: **Ten** are consumed **in the Temple, and four in Jerusalem, and ten in the boundaries** of Eretz Yisrael. The **ten** gifts consumed only **in the Temple** are an animal **sin offering; and a bird sin offering;** and **a definite guilt offering; and a provisional guilt offering; and communal peace offerings,** i.e., the lambs that accompany the two loaves brought on *Shavuot* and which are considered offerings of the most sacred order; **and** the remainder of **the *log* of oil** that accompanies the guilt offering of a recovered **leper; and the two loaves** offering from the new wheat brought on *Shavuot*; **and the shewbread; and the leftovers of meal offerings; and the *omer* meal offering,** i.e., the measure of barley brought as a communal offering on the sixteenth of Nisan.


###### Chullin 133b:14
[Chullin 133b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:14)

וְאַרְבַּע בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם: הַבְּכוֹרָה, וְהַבִּכּוּרִים, וּמוּרָם מִן הַתּוֹדָה וּמֵאֵיל נָזִיר, וְעוֹרוֹת קָדָשִׁים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** these are the **four** gifts that the priests consume anywhere **in Jerusalem: The** unblemished **firstborn** of kosher animals; **and the first fruits; and the** portions **separated** for the priests **from the thanks offering,** i.e., the breast and thigh and one loaf from each of the four types of loaves brought with a thanks offerings: Cakes, wafers, cakes of fine flour, and leavened bread, **and** the portions separated **from the nazirite’s ram,** i.e., the boiled shoulder, a cake, and a wafer, in addition to the breast and thigh of any peace offering; **and** the **hides of sacrificial** animals brought as burnt offerings, sin offerings, and guilt offerings.


###### Chullin 133b:15
[Chullin 133b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:15)

וְעֶשֶׂר בַּגְּבוּלִים: תְּרוּמָה, וּתְרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר, וְחַלָּה, וְרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז, וּמַתָּנוֹת, וּפִדְיוֹן הַבֵּן, וּפִדְיוֹן פֶּטֶר חֲמוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** these are the **ten** gifts that the priests consume anywhere **in the boundaries** of Eretz Yisrael: ***Teruma*,** i.e., the portion of the produce designated for the priest; **and *teruma* of the tithe; and *ḥalla*; and the first sheared** wool; **and the gifts** of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw; **and** the five *sela* given as **redemption of** the firstborn **son; and** a sheep or goat given as **redemption of the firstborn donkey.**


###### Chullin 133b:16
[Chullin 133b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:16)

וּשְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה, וּשְׂדֵה חֲרָמִים, וְגֶזֶל הַגֵּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues the list: **And a** consecrated **ancestral field** that one did not redeem, which was sold to another by the Temple treasurer and is therefore given to the members of the priestly watch serving during the Jubilee Year; **and a dedicated field; and** payment for the **robbery of a convert** who died without heirs. If one takes an oath that he did not rob from a convert, and after the death of the convert he admits to having taken a false oath, he must pay the principal value of the stolen item and an additional one-fifth of the value, all of which is given to the priests.


###### Chullin 133b:17
[Chullin 133b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:17)

הוּא סָבַר: מִדְּקָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ לְמַתָּנוֹת בַּחֲדָא – חֲדָא נִינְהוּ, וְלָא הִיא! אַטּוּ מוּרָם מִתּוֹדָה וְאֵיל נָזִיר דְּקָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ כַּחֲדָא – מִשּׁוּם דַּחֲדָא נִינְהוּ?! אֶלָּא, כֵּיוָן דְּדָמְיָין לַהֲדָדֵי – חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ כַּחֲדָא, הָכִי נָמֵי: כֵּיוָן דְּדָמְיָין לַהֲדָדֵי – חֲשִׁיב לְהוּ כַּחֲדָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ḥisda explains how the *baraita* misled Ḥiyya bar Rav: **He thought** that **from** the fact **that** the *tanna* of the *baraita* **counts the gifts** of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw **as one** gift, **they are** treated as **one** gift, which means that if one is exempt from one of them he is exempt from all of them. **But it is not so,** as **is that to say** that **the** portions **separated** for the priests **from the thanks offering and** from **the nazirite’s ram, which** the *tanna* **counts as one,** are counted this way **because they are one?** Obviously, these are independent gifts. **Rather, since they are similar to one another** the *tanna* **counts them as one. So too,** with regard to the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw, **since they are similar to one another he counts them as one.**


###### Chullin 133b:18
[Chullin 133b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:18)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלְּךָ וְכוּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי, מַהוּ? בָּתַר חִיּוּבָא אָזְלִינַן, וְחִיּוּבָא גַּבֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא, אוֹ דִלְמָא בָּתַר עִיקַּר בְּהֵמָה אָזְלִינַן, וְעִיקַּר בְּהֵמָה דְּכֹהֵן הוּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to animals owned in partnership with a priest, the Gemara relates that **a dilemma was raised before** the Sages: If a priest says to an Israelite butcher: Let us enter into partnership in ownership of a live animal, in which **the head is yours and the entire** remainder **is mine, what is** the *halakha*? Is the Israelite obligated to give the jaw to a priest when it is slaughtered? The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: Do **we follow the obligation,** i.e., the limbs of the animal which contain the gifts, **and** since **the obligation is** owned **by the Israelite** he is obligated? **Or perhaps, we follow the principal** part of the **animal, and** since **the principal** of the **animal is** in the possession **of the priest,** the Israelite is exempt?


###### Chullin 133b:19
[Chullin 133b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:19)

תָּא שְׁמַע: גּוֹי וְכֹהֵן שֶׁמָּסְרוּ צֹאנָם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לִגְזוֹז – פָּטוּר, הַלּוֹקֵחַ גֵּז צֹאנוֹ שֶׁל גּוֹי – פָּטוּר מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from a *baraita*: With regard to **a gentile or a priest who transferred his sheep to an Israelite** to act as his agent **to shear** it, the Israelite is **exempt** from giving the first sheared wool to a priest. Similarly, **one who purchases** the **shearing** of the **sheep of a gentile,** even before the sheep was actually sheared, is **exempt from** giving **the first sheared** wool.


###### Chullin 133b:20
[Chullin 133b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:20)

וְזֶה חוֹמֶר בִּזְרוֹעַ וּבַלְּחָיַיִם וּבְקֵבָה, יוֹתֵר מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ בָּתַר חִיּוּבָא אָזְלִינַן, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* adds: **And this,** the *halakha* in a case where one purchases an item before the obligation of a certain gift of the priesthood takes effect, **is a stringency** that applies **in** the case of **the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw more so than** in the case of the **first sheared** wool. In other words, one who purchases wool from a priest before it is shorn is exempt from giving first sheared wool, whereas one who purchases part of an animal from a priest before its slaughter is obligated to give any gifts contained within the purchased portion. Since this is the *halakha* even if the portion he purchased is not the principal part, similar to the stated case of one who purchases only the shearing of the sheep of a gentile, one can **conclude from** this *baraita* that **we follow the obligation,** i.e., the limbs of the animal that contain the gifts. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, **conclude from it** that this is correct.


###### Chullin 133b:21
[Chullin 133b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/133b:21)

וְאִם אָמַר לוֹ ״חוּץ מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת״ – פָּטוּר מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And if** a priest sold his animal to an Israelite and **said** that he is selling everything **except for the gifts** with it, the Israelite is **exempt from** the obligation to give **the gifts,** because they are not his.