## Chullin Daf 137a

###### Chullin 137a:1
[Chullin 137a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:1)

בִּקְדוּשָּׁה, וּמְכִירָה – וְהָנָךְ נְפִישִׁין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further states that the matter **of consecration** applies neither to the mitzva of the first sheared wool nor to the firstborn animal. The firstborn is consecrated from the womb, while the first sheared wool is non-sacred. By contrast, the animal tithe is consecrated by the owner when passed under the rod. **And** finally, the option of **sale** by the priest applies to the first sheared wool and the firstborn animal after the priest receives them, whereas the animal tithe may not be sold. The Gemara adds: **And these** *halakhot* common to the first sheared wool and the firstborn are **more numerous** than the *halakhot* shared by the first sheared wool and the animal tithe. Therefore, Rabbi Shimon should derive the verbal analogy between the first sheared wool and the firstborn.


###### Chullin 137a:2
[Chullin 137a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:2)

פָּשׁוּט מִפָּשׁוּט עֲדִיף לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Even so, Rabbi Shimon **prefers** to derive the *halakhot* of the first sheared wool, which apply to **an ordinary** non-firstborn animal, **from** those of animal tithe, which also apply to **an ordinary** animal. Rabbi Shimon maintains that the shared factor that the first sheared wool and the animal tithe apply to all animals, not only the first to emerge from the womb, is decisive and overrides the other shared *halakhot*.


###### Chullin 137a:3
[Chullin 137a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:3)

רֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בִּרְחֵלִים. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אָתְיָא גִּיזָּה גִּיזָּה, כְּתִיב הָכָא ״רֵאשִׁית גֵּז צֹאנְךָ תִּתֶּן לוֹ״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם ״וּמִגֵּז כְּבָשַׂי יִתְחַמָּם״, מָה לְהַלָּן כְּבָשִׂים, אַף כָּאן כְּבָשִׂים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states: **The first sheared wool is in effect only with regard to sheep.** The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived? **Rav Ḥisda said:** It is **derived** by means of a verbal analogy between **shearing** mentioned in this context and **shearing** mentioned elsewhere. It is **written here: “The first sheared wool of your flock [*tzonekha*], shall you give him”** (Deuteronomy 18:4), **and** it is **written there** that Job says concerning the needy: **“And he was warmed with the shearing of my sheep [*kevasai*]”** (Job 31:20). **Just as there,** the verse is referring specifically to the shearing of **sheep,** as the term *keves* is used only with regard to a sheep, **so too here,** with regard to the first sheared wool, the verse is referring to **sheep,** despite the fact that the term *tzon* can be interpreted as referring also to goats.


###### Chullin 137a:4
[Chullin 137a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:4)

וְנֵילַף ״גִּיזָּה״ ״גִּיזָּה״ מִבְּכוֹר, דְּתַנְיָא: ״לֹא תַעֲבֹד בִּבְכֹר שׁוֹרֶךָ וְלֹא תָגֹז בְּכוֹר צֹאנֶךָ״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא שׁוֹר בַּעֲבוֹדָה וְצֹאן בְּגִיזָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But derive** instead a verbal analogy concerning **shearing** mentioned in this context **from shearing** mentioned in the case of the **firstborn** animal: Just as the prohibition against shearing the firstborn also applies to a firstborn ox, so too, the *halakhot* of the first sheared wool should also apply to oxen. It is prohibited to shear a firstborn ox, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“You shall do no work with the firstborn of your ox, and you shall not shear the firstborn of your flock”** (Deuteronomy 15:19). From a straightforward reading of the verse, **I have** derived **only** that a firstborn **ox** may not be used **for labor and** that a firstborn of an animal from the **flock** may not be used **for shearing.**


###### Chullin 137a:5
[Chullin 137a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:5)

מִנַּיִן לִיתֵּן הָאָמוּר שֶׁל זֶה בָּזֶה, וְאֶת הָאָמוּר שֶׁל זֶה בָּזֶה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״לֹא תַעֲבוֹד וְלֹא תָגוֹז״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **From where** is it derived **to apply** the prohibition **that was stated about that** animal **to this** one, **and** the prohibition **that was stated about this** animal **to that** one? **The verse states: “You shall do no work…and you shall not shear.”** The conjunction “and” indicates that the two parts of the verse apply to both animals.


###### Chullin 137a:6
[Chullin 137a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:6)

אָמַר קְרָא: ״תִּתֵּן לוֹ״, וְלֹא לְשַׂקּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: One cannot say that oxen are subject to the mitzva of first sheared wool, as the **verse states** with regard to this mitzva: **“Shall you give him,”** which indicates that the shearing is given to the priest himself, i.e., for him to wear, **and not for** use as **his sack.** The shearing of oxen is fit for use only as sackcloth, not as clothing.


###### Chullin 137a:7
[Chullin 137a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:7)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, נוֹצָה שֶׁל עִזִּים לִיחַיַּיב? בָּעֵינַן גִּיזָּה, וְלֵיכָּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **If that is so, let** one be obligated in the mitzva of the first sheared wool in the case of **goats’ hair,** as it too can be used for clothing. The Gemara explains: To be obligated in the first sheared wool **we require** an act of **shearing, and** goats’ hair is plucked, **not** sheared.


###### Chullin 137a:8
[Chullin 137a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:8)

מַאן שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ הַאי סְבָרָא? רַבִּי יוֹסֵי – הָא מוֹדֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּמִידֵּי דְּאוֹרְחֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Who did you hear** who accepts **this reasoning** that only an act of shearing renders one obligated in the mitzva of the first sheared wool? This is the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei,** which the Gemara will soon cite. But **Rabbi Yosei concedes** that the obligation does exist without the act of shearing **in a case where the** usual **manner of** removing the wool is not by shearing. Since goats’ hair is not commonly shorn, the obligation of the first sheared wool should apply.


###### Chullin 137a:9
[Chullin 137a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:9)

אֶלָּא, כִּדְאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: ״לַעֲמוֹד לְשָׁרֵת״ – דָּבָר הָרָאוּי לְשֵׁירוּת, הָכָא נָמֵי – דָּבָר הָרָאוּי לְשֵׁירוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the Gemara provides a different source for the mishna’s statement. The reason that the mitzva of first sheared wool applies only to sheep is **as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said:** It is stated in the verse following the source for the mitzva of first sheared wool: “For the Lord your God has chosen him out of all your tribes, **to stand to serve** in the name of the Lord, he and his sons forever” (Deuteronomy 18:5). The term “to serve” indicates that the first sheared wool that is given to the priest must consist of **a matter fit for** the Temple **service,** i.e., its size must be large enough for use for the priestly garments. **Here too,** the first sheared wool must be of **a matter fit for** Temple **service,** i.e., sheep’s wool, from which the priestly garments are woven.


###### Chullin 137a:10
[Chullin 137a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:10)

אֶלָּא ״גִּיזָּה״ ״גִּיזָּה״ לְמַאי אֲתָא? לְכִדְתָנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, דְּתָנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: כְּבָשִׂים שֶׁצַּמְרָן קָשֶׁה פְּטוּרִים מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וּמִגֵּז כְּבָשַׂי יִתְחַמָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** if so, **for what** purpose does the verbal analogy between **shearing** mentioned with regard to the first sheared wool and **shearing** mentioned with regard to the flock **come?** The Gemara answers: It is necessary **for that which was taught** in **the school of Rabbi Yishmael. As the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught:** In the case of **sheep whose wool is hard,** the owner is **exempt from the first sheared wool, as it is stated: “And he was warmed with the shearing of my sheep”** (Job 31:20). Since hard wool does not provide warmth, the mitzva of the first sheared wool does not apply to this wool.


###### Chullin 137a:11
[Chullin 137a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:11)

תָּנֵי חֲדָא: גּוֹזֵז אֶת הָעִזִּים וְשׁוֹטֵף אֶת הָרְחֵלִים – פָּטוּר, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: הַגּוֹזֵז אֶת הָעִזִּים – פָּטוּר, וְשׁוֹטֵף אֶת הָרְחֵלִים – חַיָּיב. לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא רַבָּנַן, וְהָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It **is taught** in **one** *baraita*: If one **shears goats, or washes sheep,** which causes some of their wool to be detached, he is **exempt** from the obligation of first sheared wool with regard to this wool. **And** it **is taught** in **another** *baraita*: **One who shears goats is exempt but** one who **washes the sheep** is **obligated** to separate the first sheared wool from the wool that was washed off. The Gemara resolves this apparent contradiction: It is **not difficult,** as **this** *baraita*, which requires one to separate the first sheared wool from the washed-off wool, is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis, and that** *baraita*, which exempts the washed off wool, is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei.**


###### Chullin 137a:12
[Chullin 137a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:12)

דְּתַנְיָא: ״לֶקֶט קְצִירְךָ״ – וְלֹא לֶקֶט קִיטּוּף. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵין לֶקֶט אֶלָּא הַבָּא מֵחֲמַת קָצִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites the source of this dispute. **As it is taught** in a *baraita* with regard to the verse: “And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not completely remove the corner of your field when you reap, and you shall not gather the gleaning of your harvest; you shall leave them for the poor” (Leviticus 23:22). The phrase **“the gleaning of your harvest”** indicates that only such a gleaning is included, **and not gleaning from picking.** If one picks the crop by hand rather than harvesting it using agricultural tools, he is exempt from the mitzva to leave the gleanings for the poor. **Rabbi Yosei says: Gleanings** are **only** those **that come due to harvesting** using agricultural tools.


###### Chullin 137a:13
[Chullin 137a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:13)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַיְינוּ תַּנָּא קַמָּא? כּוּלָּהּ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הִיא, וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: שֶׁרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין לֶקֶט אֶלָּא הַבָּא מֵחֲמַת קָצִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara expresses puzzlement at this *baraita*: The opinion of **Rabbi Yosei is** identical to the opinion of **the first *tanna*.** The Gemara explains: The **entire** *baraita* **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, and this** is what the *baraita* **is teaching:** The phrase “the gleaning of your harvest” teaches that crops picked by hand are exempt from the mitzva, **as Rabbi Yosei says: Gleanings** are **only** those **that come due to harvesting.** The Gemara infers that just as Rabbi Yosei interprets the term “harvest” as exempting crops that were picked by hand, so too he derives from the term “shearing” that the mitzva of the first sheared wool does not apply to fleece that was washed off. The Rabbis, who disagree with Rabbi Yosei with regard to the gleanings, likewise disagree with regard to the first sheared wool.


###### Chullin 137a:14
[Chullin 137a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:14)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּמִידֵּי דְּאוֹרְחֵיהּ, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: ״קָצִיר״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא קָצִיר, עוֹקֵר מִנַּיִן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: Rabbi Yosei concedes** that the mitzva of gleanings applies **to a case where the** usual **manner** of harvesting is by picking, **as it is taught** in a *baraita* with regard to the verse cited above that **Rabbi Yosei says:** From the term **“harvest” I have** derived **only** the obligation of gleanings with regard to **harvest. From where** do I derive the obligation of gleanings with regard to one who **uproots** the crop?


###### Chullin 137a:15
[Chullin 137a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:15)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״לִקְצוֹר״, תּוֹלֵשׁ מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בְּקוּצְרֶךָ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The verse states:** “And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not completely remove the corner of your field by reaping, and you shall not gather the gleaning of your harvest” (Leviticus 19:9). The superfluous term **“by reaping”** includes uprooting the crop. **From where** is it derived that the obligation extends to one who **picked** the crop by hand? **The verse states: “When you reap”** (Leviticus 23:22), which is also superfluous. It is derived from here that the mitzva applies to all ways of gathering the crop, provided they are the usual manner of harvesting that particular crop.


###### Chullin 137a:16
[Chullin 137a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבִינָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: מַלְבְּנוֹת בְּצָלִים שֶׁבֵּין הַיָּרָק, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: פֵּאָה מִכׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: מֵאַחַת עַל הַכֹּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said to Ravi Ashi: We learn as well** in a mishna (*Pe’a* 3:4) that discusses the mitzva to leave produce in the corner of the field for the poor [*pe’a*]: If one has **garden beds of onions that are among the vegetables, Rabbi Yosei says** that one leaves separate ***pe’a* from each and every one** of the beds. **And the Rabbis say** that one leaves *pe’a* **from one** garden bed **for all** of them. This indicates that Rabbi Yosei concedes that one is obligated to leave *pe’a* and gleanings from onions, despite the fact that they are picked by hand rather than harvested with tools. The reason is that this is the usual manner of gathering onions.


###### Chullin 137a:17
[Chullin 137a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:17)

וְכַמָּה הוּא מְרוּבֶּה? בִּשְׁלָמָא לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי – תַּרְתֵּי נָמֵי אִיקְּרוֹ ״צֹאן״, אֶלָּא לְבֵית הִלֵּל – מַאי טַעְמָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states: **And how many is numerous?** Beit Shammai say: It is at least two sheep, and Beit Hillel say: It is at least five sheep. The Gemara objects: **Granted,** according **to** the opinion of **Beit Shammai, two** sheep are **also called *tzon*,** as in the verse cited by Beit Shammai: “That a man shall rear a young cow and two sheep [*tzon*]” (Isaiah 7:21). Since the mitzva of the first sheared wool is written with regard to *tzon*, it is logical that it applies to two sheep. **But what is the reasoning of Beit Hillel,** who hold that the mitzva applies only to five sheep, due to the verse: “And five sheep [*tzon*] made” (I Samuel 25:18)? Why do they not apply the obligation using the broader criterion of two sheep, as the verse quoted by Beit Shammai clearly indicates that two sheep are also called *tzon*?


###### Chullin 137a:18
[Chullin 137a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:18)

אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: אָמַר קְרָא ״עֲשׂוּיוֹת״, שֶׁעוֹשׂוֹת שְׁתֵּי מִצְוֹת: רֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז וּמַתָּנוֹת. אֵימָא בְּכוֹרָה וּמַתָּנוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Kahana said:** The **verse states:** “Five sheep **made [*asuyot*],”** in plural. The plural form indicates **that two mitzvot** have been **made,** i.e., performed, with them. The two mitzvot are **the first sheared wool and** the **gifts** of the priesthood, a mitzva that applies to a single animal. If the two mitzvot have been performed only when there are five sheep, evidently the mitzva of the first sheared wool applies only to five sheep. The Gemara asks: Why can’t one **say** that the two mitzvot are the **firstborn** animal **and** the **gifts** of the priesthood?


###### Chullin 137a:19
[Chullin 137a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:19)

בְּכוֹרָה, חֲדָא מִי לָא מִיחַיְּיבָא? וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, מַתָּנוֹת, חֲדָא מִי לָא מִיחַיְּיבָא? אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: ״עֲשׂוּיוֹת״ – שֶׁמְּעַשּׂוֹת אֶת בַּעֲלֵיהֶן, וְאוֹמְרוֹת לוֹ: ״קוּם עֲשֵׂה מִצְוָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The other mitzva cannot be the firstborn animal, as with regard to the **firstborn, isn’t one** animal **obligated,** i.e., doesn’t one animal render its owner obligated? Yet the verse states that one performs the two mitzvot only with five sheep. The Gemara asks: **And according to your reasoning,** with regard to the **gifts** of the priesthood, **isn’t one** animal **obligated,** i.e., doesn’t one animal render its owner obligated?**Rather, Rav Ashi says:** The term **“made”** should be understood as meaning **that** five sheep **make their owner** perform the first sheared wool **and** figuratively **say to him: Stand** and **fulfill a mitzva,** whereas less than five sheep do not obligate their owner in the mitzva of first sheared wool.


###### Chullin 137a:20
[Chullin 137a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:20)

תַּנְיָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם אָבִיו: אַרְבַּע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאַרְבַּע צֹאן תַּחַת הַשֶּׂה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It **was taught** in a *baraita* **of the school of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei,** that he **says in the name of his father:** The obligation of the first sheared wool applies to one who owns **four** sheep, since a verse calls four sheep *tzon*, **as it is stated:** “If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or sells it, he shall pay five oxen for the ox, **and four sheep [*tzon*] for a sheep”** (Exodus 21:37).


###### Chullin 137a:21
[Chullin 137a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:21)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי: אִלְמָלֵא דִּבְרֵיהֶן דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, וְדִבְרֵי בְּרִיבִּי קַבָּלָה – אֲנַן דִּבְרֵי בְּרִיבִּי שׁוֹמְעִין, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן שֶׁדִּבְרֵיהֶם דִּבְרֵי קַבָּלָה, וְדִבְרֵי בְּרִיבִּי דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It **is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: Had their statements,** i.e., the opinions of Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, been based on **statements of the Torah, and the statement of the Distinguished One [*Beribbi*],** Rabbi Yosei, based on the texts of the **tradition [*kabbala*],** the Prophets and Writings, even so **we** would **listen** to **the statement of the Distinguished One,** Rabbi Yosei. **All the more so** now **that their statements** are based on **texts of the tradition,** as both Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel derived their rulings from verses from the Prophets, while **the statement of the Distinguished One,** Rabbi Yosei, is based on **the statements of the Torah.**


###### Chullin 137a:22
[Chullin 137a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/137a:22)

וְהָאָמַר מָר: אֵין הַכְרָעָה שְׁלִישִׁית מַכְרַעַת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But didn’t the Master say: The decision** of **a third** opinion that compromises between the first two opinions is **not** considered **decisive** if it is based on considerations that were not mentioned by the other two opinions. Although Rabbi Yosei’s opinion is a compromise between the opinions of Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, it is based on a different source.