![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Masechet Chullin Daf 3
Nov. 30th, 2018 08:59 amDaf 3
So it turns out I was right that Rabba bar Ullah's idea that the b'dieved was the case of a tamei shechting a chullin as if it were sanctified is not the end of the story.
In fact, the Gemara reviews SIX different explanations for the double phrasing.
But it turns out there's one more linguistic game from the Mishna they're going to use as a test. After mentioning the three cases, the cheresh, the shoteh, and the katan, who are not able to schecht, the Mishna concluded v'kulan she'shachato va'acherim ro'in otan, shechitatan k'shera. And all those if they shecht while others are watching, their slaughter is kosher.
The natural obvious reading of this line is that the 'all those' referred to are the cheresh, the shoteh, and the katan. The Gemara immediately rejects this because the Mishna was just talking about them, so it should have just said "if THEY shecht while others are watching." By saying "all those" instead of 'they', it implied that the Mishna was talking about some other group besides the cheresh, the shoteh, and the katan. The Gemara is going to use this as a proof test against theories explaining the Mishna: an explanation not only ought to explain the double phrasing of Hakol Shochtin and Ush'chitan k'shera, it also wants that explanation of the double phrasing to offer an internally consistent explanation of v'kulan. Though several of the reconciliations are actually just saying to hold by the natural reading, after all.
The six explanations are: (Artscroll has a handy chart at the bottom of the page summarizing them all, but this is all complicated enough that typing up my own paraphrase helps me make sense of it)
Rabbah bar Ulla: L'chatchila is a tamei person schechting chullin, b'dieved is a tamei person shechting as if he were offering a sacrifice
Abaye: L'chatchila is a Cuthite (sect that lived in Samaria and held by the Torah but not the oral law, and some Rabbinic opinions considered them Jewish and some didn't) when a Jew watches them shecht, b'dieved is a Cuthite who a Jew intermittently supervised while they shechted, but only if afterward the Jew tested them to make sure they were actually willing to eat the meat they shechted.
Rava (when correcting Abaye): L'chatchila is a Cuthite who a Jew intermittently supervised while they shechted, b'dieved is if the Jew only comes after and tests them to make sure they were actually willing to eat the meat they shechted
Rav Ashi: L'chatchila is a non-practicing Jew who is not a hateful apostate, as long as an observant Jew provided them with the razor sharp knife, b'dieved is if the non-practicing Jew supplies the knife but an observant Jew checks immediately afterward to make sure the knife has no nicks in it.
Ravina version 1: L'chatchila is a Jew versed in the laws of shechita, but not established in the community as a shochet, if they have been asked to demonstrate they know the laws, b'dieved is if they shecht and then afterwards are asked to demonstrate they know the laws.
Ravina version 2: L'chatchila is a Jew skilled as a shochet but not established in the community as a shochet, if they have been asked to demonstrate their skill as a shochet beforehand, b'dieved is if they shecht and then afterwards are asked to demonstrate their skill as a shochet.
At the end of the daf they go through all six of these and explain why none of them are universally accepted as the explanation for the weird language in the Mishnah. Everyone sticks with their own opinion except Rava who ends up holding by Rav Ashi's opinion, and the Gemara seems like it's about to move on.
(Also worth noting the timeline:
Rabbah bar Ullah: 4th Generation Amora of Israel (4th Century CE)
Abaye and Rava: 3rd Generation Amoraim of Bavel (4th Century CE)
Ravina and Rav Ashi: 6th Generation Amoraim of Bavel (5th Century CE)
)
So it turns out I was right that Rabba bar Ullah's idea that the b'dieved was the case of a tamei shechting a chullin as if it were sanctified is not the end of the story.
In fact, the Gemara reviews SIX different explanations for the double phrasing.
But it turns out there's one more linguistic game from the Mishna they're going to use as a test. After mentioning the three cases, the cheresh, the shoteh, and the katan, who are not able to schecht, the Mishna concluded v'kulan she'shachato va'acherim ro'in otan, shechitatan k'shera. And all those if they shecht while others are watching, their slaughter is kosher.
The natural obvious reading of this line is that the 'all those' referred to are the cheresh, the shoteh, and the katan. The Gemara immediately rejects this because the Mishna was just talking about them, so it should have just said "if THEY shecht while others are watching." By saying "all those" instead of 'they', it implied that the Mishna was talking about some other group besides the cheresh, the shoteh, and the katan. The Gemara is going to use this as a proof test against theories explaining the Mishna: an explanation not only ought to explain the double phrasing of Hakol Shochtin and Ush'chitan k'shera, it also wants that explanation of the double phrasing to offer an internally consistent explanation of v'kulan. Though several of the reconciliations are actually just saying to hold by the natural reading, after all.
The six explanations are: (Artscroll has a handy chart at the bottom of the page summarizing them all, but this is all complicated enough that typing up my own paraphrase helps me make sense of it)
Rabbah bar Ulla: L'chatchila is a tamei person schechting chullin, b'dieved is a tamei person shechting as if he were offering a sacrifice
Abaye: L'chatchila is a Cuthite (sect that lived in Samaria and held by the Torah but not the oral law, and some Rabbinic opinions considered them Jewish and some didn't) when a Jew watches them shecht, b'dieved is a Cuthite who a Jew intermittently supervised while they shechted, but only if afterward the Jew tested them to make sure they were actually willing to eat the meat they shechted.
Rava (when correcting Abaye): L'chatchila is a Cuthite who a Jew intermittently supervised while they shechted, b'dieved is if the Jew only comes after and tests them to make sure they were actually willing to eat the meat they shechted
Rav Ashi: L'chatchila is a non-practicing Jew who is not a hateful apostate, as long as an observant Jew provided them with the razor sharp knife, b'dieved is if the non-practicing Jew supplies the knife but an observant Jew checks immediately afterward to make sure the knife has no nicks in it.
Ravina version 1: L'chatchila is a Jew versed in the laws of shechita, but not established in the community as a shochet, if they have been asked to demonstrate they know the laws, b'dieved is if they shecht and then afterwards are asked to demonstrate they know the laws.
Ravina version 2: L'chatchila is a Jew skilled as a shochet but not established in the community as a shochet, if they have been asked to demonstrate their skill as a shochet beforehand, b'dieved is if they shecht and then afterwards are asked to demonstrate their skill as a shochet.
At the end of the daf they go through all six of these and explain why none of them are universally accepted as the explanation for the weird language in the Mishnah. Everyone sticks with their own opinion except Rava who ends up holding by Rav Ashi's opinion, and the Gemara seems like it's about to move on.
(Also worth noting the timeline:
Rabbah bar Ullah: 4th Generation Amora of Israel (4th Century CE)
Abaye and Rava: 3rd Generation Amoraim of Bavel (4th Century CE)
Ravina and Rav Ashi: 6th Generation Amoraim of Bavel (5th Century CE)
)