Masechet Chullin Daf 71/72
Feb. 7th, 2019 10:17 amI write a bunch here about Artscroll, the biggest name in Orthodox Jewish publishing. Their Siddur has become the standard in American Orthodox shuls over the past few decades, though in the past five or so it's faced a challenge from a Siddur published by Koren, edited by Rabbi Sacks.
There are many editions of the Artscroll Siddur with different features and page layouts, but in the main Ashkenazi liturgy version of the siddur, there are two main versions: The brown version and the black version.
The brown version is the ostensible standard version, the black version is the RCA edition, issued in partnership with the Rabbinic Council of American, the mainstream Orthodox Rabbinical organization. There are only two differences between the two Siddurim- the Prayer for Israel and the Prayer for the American government only appear in the RCA edition. For some reason the creators of the original Artscroll siddur felt they could not sell it in some charedi communities if it had these prayers in it.
Anyway apparently it was news in the Orthodox text nerd community that a few months ago the RCA retracted its authorization for the Artscroll RCA edition siddur and is presenting a new Siddur, edited by Rabbi Basil Herring and published by Koren as the RCA edition. The new siddur attempts in various small but IMO significant textual ways to be more inclusive of the Orthodox woman's experience, to not make women feel like second class citizens in the synagogue. Artscroll's response was "We already print a women's siddur separately," because Artscroll is first-class at missing the point on women's issues.
I didn't learn any of this until yesterday when Artscroll sent an ad out for its new 'Synagogue Edition' prayerbook, which is the RCA edition minus the word RCA. It was such a strange ad that I had to seek out the story behind it. Here's a version of that story, anyway: https://www.jta.org/2019/01/15/culture/artscroll-prayer-books-have-dominated-in-orthodox-synagogues-for-decades-is-that-ending
I've ordered a copy of the new Siddur, Avodat Halev, and I am looking forward to exploring it. More on that when I've had some time with it.
Daf 71
Having discussed whether a stillborn calf inside its mother's womb transmits tumah if a midwife reaches in and touches it, where it ruled that it does not transmit tumah because of the rule of ben Pekuah, the Mishna discusses the identical case for a human stillborn, which does transmit tumah.
Rabbah cites a general principle of taharah that seems to imply the opposite, called tumah b'luah, enclosed impurity. If you swallow an impure object, the act of handling it before swallowing it may render you tamei, but once you cleanse yourself and become tahor, the swallowed object, even if it is itself still tamei, does not make you impure from the inside.
And likewise the Gemara learns from a kal vachomer that tumah does not transmit outside in- If you are in a room with a corpse and become tamei, the thing you've swallowed that could absorb tumah does not become tamei. How? Since we know that something inside a clay vessel can transmit outward, but can't receive inward, kal vachomer that a stomach which can't transmit outward also can't receive inward.
And Rabbah goes one step further and teaches that two swallowed objects, one tamei and one tahor, do not transmit tumah one to the other inside the stomach. He learns this from a Mishnah that says that if one swallows a tamei object, they are still permitted to eat terumah.
You would think this would apply to the case of the midwife, then. The womb is an enclosed body like the stomach, so even if the stillborn has tumah, it should not transmit it to the hands of the midwife. But the Mishnah teaches that it does. What is the reason? To be continued on Daf 72.
Daf 72
Rava answers in the name of Rav Yosef in the name of Rav Yehuda in the name of Shmuel that this Mishna that the midwife's hands become tamei is d'Rabbanan, so we are more machmir than the straight rule of tumah b'luah. Why did Shmuel make this ruling? Rabbi Hoshaya says it's as a gezeira lest the stillborn exit the womb. Rava says it's as a chumra because Rabbi Akiva thought the hands being impure was a D'oraysa halakha and Rabbi Yishmael thought the hands were tahor. The halakha seems to be that we hold by Rabbi Yishmael as a theoretical matter, but practically hold by Rabbi Akiva since he's more machmir.
There have been a lot of debates in this perek that seem to ultimately root in a broader disagreement between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael about general hermeneutic principles.
Here, Rabbi Yishmael learns from Bamidbar 19:16 "And whoever in the open field touches one who is slain by the sword, or one who dies on his own, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be impure seven days" that the midwife's hands are pure. How? Again from basadeh, like from a couple days ago, but this time it's a kula! Since the pasuk says 'basadeh', the stillborn inside the enclosed womb is not a neveilah that transmits tumah.
Rabbi Akiva learns something else from basadeh, but instead learns that the stillborn in the womb transmits tumah because of the pasuk slightly earlier, Bamidbar 19:13 "Whoever touches of a corpse, of the life of a person that died, he will be impure” Banefesh implies the stillborn since it's a life inside of a person, says Rabbi Akiva. Meanwhile, Rabbi Yishmael learns something else from banefesh.
And... I have caught back up with the daf yomi cycle!
There are many editions of the Artscroll Siddur with different features and page layouts, but in the main Ashkenazi liturgy version of the siddur, there are two main versions: The brown version and the black version.
The brown version is the ostensible standard version, the black version is the RCA edition, issued in partnership with the Rabbinic Council of American, the mainstream Orthodox Rabbinical organization. There are only two differences between the two Siddurim- the Prayer for Israel and the Prayer for the American government only appear in the RCA edition. For some reason the creators of the original Artscroll siddur felt they could not sell it in some charedi communities if it had these prayers in it.
Anyway apparently it was news in the Orthodox text nerd community that a few months ago the RCA retracted its authorization for the Artscroll RCA edition siddur and is presenting a new Siddur, edited by Rabbi Basil Herring and published by Koren as the RCA edition. The new siddur attempts in various small but IMO significant textual ways to be more inclusive of the Orthodox woman's experience, to not make women feel like second class citizens in the synagogue. Artscroll's response was "We already print a women's siddur separately," because Artscroll is first-class at missing the point on women's issues.
I didn't learn any of this until yesterday when Artscroll sent an ad out for its new 'Synagogue Edition' prayerbook, which is the RCA edition minus the word RCA. It was such a strange ad that I had to seek out the story behind it. Here's a version of that story, anyway: https://www.jta.org/2019/01/15/culture/artscroll-prayer-books-have-dominated-in-orthodox-synagogues-for-decades-is-that-ending
I've ordered a copy of the new Siddur, Avodat Halev, and I am looking forward to exploring it. More on that when I've had some time with it.
Daf 71
Having discussed whether a stillborn calf inside its mother's womb transmits tumah if a midwife reaches in and touches it, where it ruled that it does not transmit tumah because of the rule of ben Pekuah, the Mishna discusses the identical case for a human stillborn, which does transmit tumah.
Rabbah cites a general principle of taharah that seems to imply the opposite, called tumah b'luah, enclosed impurity. If you swallow an impure object, the act of handling it before swallowing it may render you tamei, but once you cleanse yourself and become tahor, the swallowed object, even if it is itself still tamei, does not make you impure from the inside.
And likewise the Gemara learns from a kal vachomer that tumah does not transmit outside in- If you are in a room with a corpse and become tamei, the thing you've swallowed that could absorb tumah does not become tamei. How? Since we know that something inside a clay vessel can transmit outward, but can't receive inward, kal vachomer that a stomach which can't transmit outward also can't receive inward.
And Rabbah goes one step further and teaches that two swallowed objects, one tamei and one tahor, do not transmit tumah one to the other inside the stomach. He learns this from a Mishnah that says that if one swallows a tamei object, they are still permitted to eat terumah.
You would think this would apply to the case of the midwife, then. The womb is an enclosed body like the stomach, so even if the stillborn has tumah, it should not transmit it to the hands of the midwife. But the Mishnah teaches that it does. What is the reason? To be continued on Daf 72.
Daf 72
Rava answers in the name of Rav Yosef in the name of Rav Yehuda in the name of Shmuel that this Mishna that the midwife's hands become tamei is d'Rabbanan, so we are more machmir than the straight rule of tumah b'luah. Why did Shmuel make this ruling? Rabbi Hoshaya says it's as a gezeira lest the stillborn exit the womb. Rava says it's as a chumra because Rabbi Akiva thought the hands being impure was a D'oraysa halakha and Rabbi Yishmael thought the hands were tahor. The halakha seems to be that we hold by Rabbi Yishmael as a theoretical matter, but practically hold by Rabbi Akiva since he's more machmir.
There have been a lot of debates in this perek that seem to ultimately root in a broader disagreement between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael about general hermeneutic principles.
Here, Rabbi Yishmael learns from Bamidbar 19:16 "And whoever in the open field touches one who is slain by the sword, or one who dies on his own, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be impure seven days" that the midwife's hands are pure. How? Again from basadeh, like from a couple days ago, but this time it's a kula! Since the pasuk says 'basadeh', the stillborn inside the enclosed womb is not a neveilah that transmits tumah.
Rabbi Akiva learns something else from basadeh, but instead learns that the stillborn in the womb transmits tumah because of the pasuk slightly earlier, Bamidbar 19:13 "Whoever touches of a corpse, of the life of a person that died, he will be impure” Banefesh implies the stillborn since it's a life inside of a person, says Rabbi Akiva. Meanwhile, Rabbi Yishmael learns something else from banefesh.
And... I have caught back up with the daf yomi cycle!