## Pesachim Daf 23b

###### Pesachim 23b:1
[Pesachim 23b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:1)

מַאי לָאו בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי, דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי סָבַר: ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ״ מַשְׁמַע בֵּין אִיסּוּר אֲכִילָה בֵּין אִיסּוּר הֲנָאָה, וְכִי אֲתָא קְרָא לְמִישְׁרְיַיהּ לִנְבֵילָה — בַּהֲנָאָה הוּא דַּאֲתָא. וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא סָבַר: אִיסּוּר אֲכִילָה — מַשְׁמַע, אִיסּוּר הֲנָאָה לָא מַשְׁמַע. וְכִי אֲתָא קְרָא — לְטוּמְאָה וְטׇהֳרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What, is it not that they disagree about this,** the following issue? **Rabbi Yosei HaGelili holds: “You shall not eat” indicates both the prohibition of eating and the prohibition of** deriving **benefit;** therefore, one may not derive benefit from an animal carcass. **And when the verse came** and said: “For any other service,” **it came to permit** one to derive **benefit** from **an animal carcass. And Rabbi Akiva holds: “You shall not eat” indicates** that there is only **a prohibition of eating; it does not indicate a prohibition of** deriving **benefit.** Therefore, no verse is necessary to learn that it is permitted to derive benefit from an animal carcass. **When the verse came** and said: “For any other service,” **it came** to teach about the *halakhot* of **ritual purity and impurity.** Apparently, there is a tannaitic dispute about the meaning of the words: “You shall not eat.”


###### Pesachim 23b:2
[Pesachim 23b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:2)

לָא, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ״ מַשְׁמַע בֵּין אִיסּוּר אֲכִילָה בֵּין אִיסּוּר הֲנָאָה. וְהָכָא בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי סָבַר: כְּשֶׁהוּתְּרָה נְבֵילָה — הִיא הוּתְּרָה, חֶלְבָּהּ וְגִידָהּ — לֹא הוּתְּרוּ. וְכִי אִיצְטְרִיךְ קְרָא — לְהֶיתֵּר הֲנָאָה הוּא דַּאֲתָא. וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא סָבַר: כְּשֶׁהוּתְּרָה נְבֵילָה — חֶלְבָּהּ וְגִידָהּ נָמֵי הוּתְּרוּ. וְכִי אִיצְטְרִיךְ קְרָא — לְטוּמְאָה וְטׇהֳרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this assumption. **No,** it is possible to say **that everyone** holds that **“You shall not eat” indicates both a prohibition of eating and a prohibition of** deriving **benefit. And here, they disagree about this: Rabbi Yosei HaGelili holds that when it was permitted** to derive benefit from **an animal carcass,** the carcass itself **was permitted;** however, **its fat and its sinews were not permitted. And the** phrase “for any other service” in the **verse is necessary to permit** one to derive **benefit** from this fat. However, **Rabbi Akiva holds: When it was permitted** to derive benefit **from an animal carcass, it was also permitted** to derive benefit from **its fat and sinews.** Therefore, the phrase “for any other service” in **the verse is necessary for** the issue of **purity and impurity.**


###### Pesachim 23b:3
[Pesachim 23b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:3)

וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, אַשְׁכְּחַן חֵלֶב דְּשַׁרְיֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא בַּהֲנָאָה, אֶלָּא גִּיד נֵימָא דְּאָסוּר! אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָכִי נָמֵי דְּאָסוּר. אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא, מַיְיתֵי לַהּ בְּקַל וָחוֹמֶר: וּמָה חֵלֶב שֶׁעָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת — מוּתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה, גִּיד שֶׁאֵינוֹ עָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת — לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** according to the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, we find that the Merciful One** explicitly **permits** one to derive **benefit from fat; however, let us say** that **the sinew** of the sciatic nerve **is prohibited.** The Gemara answers: **If you wish, say** that **it is indeed so that it is prohibited** to derive benefit from the sciatic nerve. And **if you wish, say** instead that one is permitted to derive benefit from the sciatic nerve, and Rabbi Yosei HaGelili **derives that** the sciatic nerve is permitted **through** an ***a fortiori*** inference: **If** with regard to forbidden **fat, for which one is punished with *karet*** if he eats it intentionally, **it is permitted** to derive **benefit,** with regard to the sciatic **nerve,** for which **the punishment** for one who eats it **is not *karet*, all the more so** is it **not** clear that it is permitted to derive benefit?


###### Pesachim 23b:4
[Pesachim 23b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:4)

וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דְּאָסַר? אִיכָּא לְמִיפְרַךְ, מָה לְחֵלֶב שֶׁכֵּן הוּתַּר מִכְּלָלוֹ אֵצֶל חַיָּה, תֹּאמַר בְּגִיד שֶׁלֹּא הוּתַּר מִכְּלָלוֹ אֵצֶל חַיָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** why does **Rabbi Shimon, who prohibits** deriving benefit from the sciatic nerve, not accept this *a fortiori* inference? The Gemara answers: This inference **can be refuted,** as it is possible to say: **What** is unique **to fat?** It is **that it is released from its general** prohibition **with regard to non-domesticated animals,** as the prohibition only applies to the fats of kosher domesticated animals. **Can you say** the same **with regard to the** sciatic **nerve, which is not released from its general** prohibition **with regard to non-domesticated animals** and remains prohibited? Apparently, in some ways the prohibition of the sciatic nerve is more stringent than that of fat.


###### Pesachim 23b:5
[Pesachim 23b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:5)

וְאִידַּךְ? בִּבְהֵמָה קָאָמְרִינַן — בִּבְהֵמָה מִיהַת לָא אִישְׁתְּרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** how does **the other** Sage, Rabbi Yosei, who permits one to derive benefit from the sciatic nerve based on this *a fortiori* inference, respond? The Gemara says: When **we state** this *a fortiori* inference, it is **with regard to a domesticated animal; in any case, with regard to a domesticated animal** its fat **is not permitted.** Since with regard to a domesticated animal the prohibition of fat is more stringent than that of the sciatic nerve, the *a fortiori* inference is valid.


###### Pesachim 23b:6
[Pesachim 23b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:6)

מִכְּדֵי אוֹתְבִינְהוּ כׇּל הָנֵי קְרָאֵי וְשַׁנִּינְהוּ. חִזְקִיָּה וְרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ בְּמַאי פְּלִיגִי! בְּחָמֵץ בַּפֶּסַח וְאַלִּיבָּא דְרַבָּנַן, בְּשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּדִבְרֵי הַכֹּל. חִזְקִיָּה נָפֵיק לֵיהּ מִ״לֹּא יֵאָכֵל״, וְרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ נָפֵיק לֵיהּ מִנְּבֵילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
After discussing numerous cases that involve prohibitions of eating and deriving benefit, the Gemara asks: **Since we raised objections from all of these verses and answered them,** and in every case it is apparent that despite the fact that the verse said: “You shall not eat” there was no dispute as to whether or not one may derive benefit from these items, then **with regard to what** issue **do Ḥizkiya and Rabbi Abbahu disagree?** The Gemara answers: They disagree **with** regard to **leavened bread on Passover, in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who prohibit one to derive benefit from it; and they disagree **with** regard to **an ox that is stoned, in accordance with everyone.** The Gemara explains: **Ḥizkiya derived** that it is prohibited to derive benefit in this case **from** the words: **“It shall not be eaten,” and Rabbi Abbahu derived** that it is prohibited **from** the fact that the Torah explicitly had to permit one to derive benefit in the case of **an animal carcass.**


###### Pesachim 23b:7
[Pesachim 23b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:7)

מִכְּדִי בֵּין לְמָר וּבֵין לְמָר אֲסוּרִין בַּהֲנָאָה, מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ חוּלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָּעֲזָרָה. חִזְקִיָּה סָבַר: ״לֹא יֵאָכֵל״ — לְמַעוֹטֵי הָנֵי, ״אֹתוֹ״ — לְמַעוֹטֵי חוּלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בַּעֲזָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Now, both according to** the one **Master and according to** the other **Master, it is prohibited** to derive **benefit** from these items. The fact that they disagree about the source of this *halakha* notwithstanding, **what is** the practical difference **between them?** The Gemara answers: The practical difference **between them is** with regard to **non-sacrificial animals that were slaughtered in the** Temple **courtyard. Ḥizkiya holds: “It shall not be eaten”** comes **to exclude these** cases of leavened bread and the ox that is stoned. Although in most cases a prohibition against eating does not extend to a prohibition against deriving benefit, the language of the verse in these cases indicates that there is a prohibition against deriving benefit as well. Furthermore, **“It** shall be thrown to the dog” comes **to exclude non-sacrificial animals slaughtered in the** Temple **courtyard,** indicating that it is prohibited to derive benefit from them.


###### Pesachim 23b:8
[Pesachim 23b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:8)

רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ סָבַר: ״אֹתוֹ״ — לְמַעוֹטֵי הָנֵי, חוּלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בַּעֲזָרָה לָאו דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא נִינְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, **Rabbi Abbahu holds** that according to Rabbi Yehuda, who maintained that the prohibition against eating an animal carcass cannot be used to derive the prohibition against deriving benefit: **“It** shall be thrown to the dog” comes **to exclude these** two cases, leavened bread and an ox that is stoned, where deriving benefit is prohibited. And the prohibition to derive benefit from **non-sacrificial animals slaughtered in the** Temple **courtyard is not by Torah law,** as there is no source from which to derive this prohibition. Therefore, the only practical difference between them is whether the prohibition of deriving benefit from non-sacrificial animals slaughtered in the Temple courtyard is by Torah law or by rabbinic law.


###### Pesachim 23b:9
[Pesachim 23b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:9)

יָתֵיב הָהוּא מֵרַבָּנַן קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: מִנַּיִן לְכׇל אִיסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה דְּכִי הֵיכִי דַּאֲסוּרִין בַּאֲכִילָה הָכִי נָמֵי אֲסוּרִין בַּהֲנָאָה? וּמַאי נִיהוּ — חָמֵץ בַּפֶּסַח וְשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל. מִנַּיִן?! תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִ״לֹּא יֵאָכֵל״! ״לֹא יֵאָכֵל״, אִיסּוּר אֲכִילָה — מַשְׁמַע לֵיהּ, אִיסּוּר הֲנָאָה — לָא מַשְׁמַע לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **One of the Sages sat before Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani, and he sat and said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: From where is it derived** with regard **to all the prohibitions in the Torah that just as it is prohibited to eat them, so too, it is prohibited to benefit from them? And what are** the prohibited objects to which this statement refers? They are **leavened bread on Passover and an ox that is stoned.** The Gemara asks: Why ask **from where? Derive** the prohibition from the phrase: **“It shall not be eaten.”** The Gemara answers that **he derived a prohibition of eating** this item from: **“It shall not be eaten”;** however, **he did not derive a prohibition of** deriving **benefit** from this phrase.


###### Pesachim 23b:10
[Pesachim 23b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:10)

תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִנְּבֵילָה?! סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר: דְּבָרִים כִּכְתָבָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **Derive** this general prohibition against deriving benefit **from** the fact that the Torah had to explicitly permit one to benefit from an **animal carcass.** The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who said** with regard to an animal carcass: The **matters are as they are written,** and the words in the verse do not indicate anything beyond their simple meaning.


###### Pesachim 23b:11
[Pesachim 23b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:11)

אִי סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מֵהֵיכָא דְּנָפְקָא לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, מִ״לַּכֶּלֶב תַּשְׁלִיכוּן אֹתוֹ״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **If he holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda,** then **let him derive** this *halakha* **from where Rabbi Yehuda derives it,** i.e., **from** the verse: “And you shall be sacred men unto Me; therefore you shall not eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; **you shall cast it to the dog”** (Exodus 22:30). Rabbi Yehuda expounded that one may throw it to a dog, but one may not throw any of the other prohibited items mentioned in the Torah to a dog. From this he infers that it is prohibited to derive benefit from leavened bread on Passover or from other similar items.


###### Pesachim 23b:12
[Pesachim 23b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:12)

קָסָבַר: חוּלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָּעֲזָרָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. מִנַּיִן, דִּכְתִיב: ״כׇּל חַטָּאת אֲשֶׁר יוּבָא מִדָּמָהּ וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: This Sage **holds** that the prohibition to derive benefit from **non-sacrificial animals that were slaughtered in the** Temple **courtyard is by Torah law,** and that it is the word “it” in the verse that indicates they are prohibited. And **from where** is it derived that this prohibition against deriving benefit applies to leavened bread and to an ox that is stoned as well? **As it is written: “And no sin-offering, of which any of the blood is brought** into the Tent of Meeting to make atonement in the sacred place, shall be eaten; it shall be burnt with fire” (Leviticus 6:23).


###### Pesachim 23b:13
[Pesachim 23b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/23b:13)

שֶׁאֵין תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בָּאֵשׁ תִּשָּׂרֵף״, וּמָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בָּאֵשׁ תִּשָּׂרֵף״? אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָן לְגוּפוֹ, דִּכְתִיב ״וְהִנֵּה שֹׂרָף״, תְּנֵהוּ עִנְיָן לְכׇל אִיסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As** there is **no** need for **the verse to state: “It shall be burnt with fire”; And** for **what** purpose then does **the verse state: “It shall be burnt with fire”? If it does not** apply to the subject **matter itself** in its context, **as it is** already **written:** “And Moshe diligently inquired about the goat of the sin-offering, **and, behold, it was burnt”** (Leviticus 10:16), **apply it to the matter of all the prohibitions in the Torah.**