Chullin Daf 116

All right Zion this is Monday's daf. So the gumar was discussing the mocker for the bos. We know the famous one from Ton Bishmo and it says of Bashel three times but yesterday we were discussing Yehuda's mahal because according two-step process because number one the israil comes from shave from parhat and so you have the trav. So now how do I know is so we learned that from that just like had no a done to it but yet it's still going to be so that you did the is going to be yeah but the gar had asked that ara is more because it never had a shasaker whereas had a shasaker so to that the gumar introduced because that did have a shasaker so it's this tag team of but then the gar says you can't make the kahimer with this tag team because of the kares that exist by pesak that you don't have by bosov so whereas typically the garra would still stay within And these two different lily mudim the garam now introduces a third factor which is kakaram because klayakaram is not in a circar but yet it's still banana. So you see that kis is not the factor that makes it. So the Gammer wants to know why in the world we even need exer shovel learn the whole thing from the kavmer from Arla because we had an original khmer from that we were comfortable with. So do away with our original just rely on the kavmer from to take care of both is and is which was the fromba that even though there was a vera they are still mutter afterwards. So let's roll back now a little bit and pick it up again inside at the last skinny line before the lines get wide. the garly which is one of the steps the gar brought in to show that is not the why did have to bring in this third party new of that you see you don't need to come on to making something because just by using we should be able to make the because they all have the same characteristics meaning and should cover our bases has the components of being. But now that we also introduced that tag team will stand. that you're trying to compare that they have unique characteristics that don't also exist by that target thing that you're learning to you don't bring a third party kind of outside that's not the way you slug up so now we go back to original question so why don't we learn from why even have to introduce to show that is going to be which the answers there's a uniqueness that these things grow from the ground and even though is not a reason to create an isra But it is different than and therefore to help it all by bringing for when you're trying to slug up a you need is a uniqueness at all and that uniqueness is that and have the same nuda of growing from the ground which is not the case by boser but loyim amit which is the name of another kind of alim which doesn't use a you can shug it up with you can't just show au distinction that's not going to be enough to undo the loy so had we learned out the of only through we would have been able to with just this uniqueness but now that we learn from kim it's not coming from it's coming from and therefore you need to have a stronger kahr for let's up all three and kim that malaku They all have that unique characteristic. And for the eluri moving over to when one thing is being learned from another singular thing like for example the first step of that is learned from that's how we started this you can show me either ara or a ka that's connected that target lemwood and we can therefore slug it up. In such a case, if there is a or that we want to learn, then you'll try to slug that up. But so when was originally saying that we learn from that, you couldn't just simply say that is different than because it grows from the ground. That's just a and that won't be enough against a but once introduced that and is going to be the [clears throat] when we now said as well and we're going to be to go in this loop of even if you find a uniqueness that's just au it will shrug it up but if it's not going to be this cycle of mahhatads going around and around so because according to Yehuda we introduced this third den of Kleha to show that thera of the is by is not the factor so we didn't find any inherent to that doesn't also exist by and therefore we didn't have to repeat the whole and we don't need to come out of the so you can't just use the of the fact that it grows from the ground that's shared by all three of these things and he can't shrug it up just simply by finding the iv why doesn't have a problem with the lemud from mallayam which creates a kumra by kakaram because the assumption in the garra right now is that the actual seeds don't become user it's only the product of what grows becomes which the gar now says from the fact didn't this must be the actual seeds even before this becomes meaning those seeds that get planted together becomes had a kaisher before they took root Mosa asks from the mission in the seventh per of someone's moving a pot that has a hole in it through the vineyard. If it grows 1/200th more while it's moving through then it's going to become because takes place 1 to 200 but it sounds like only infle so clearly that which grows as kine becomes user and not the original plant. So how are you telling me that the originals rain become asseri? You got two different legaba which sounds like only that new growth is going to be what's user and you also have which sounds like even those that you planted also become user. So that said, how do you reconcile that? Zorua, if it was planted already, then bahasha that seed becomes and takes root. Zorua, but if it was planted and continues to grow after being brought into the vineyard just aging my mochum on this idea of the mosaim because we're working in that with an idea of ble. Once you have a 1/200th of growth, it won't be bottle but any less it will be bottle. So Zman wants to know whatever happened to this is the same min. So how is bal going to be understood in such a context and I didn't see the salmon inside but it sounds like from the way I heard it in the sharment has the same idea as the huda about being you have this concept of when things are not independent and they grow within the taru and there's two different kinds of that you have two independent things that never saw the light of day outside of each other like for example when the yama spits and the reich yama has dam in it so the dham and the reich are two independent objects but they never existed independently outside of her body. So because of that you'll never say ble. That's one kind of nobaru. The other kind of nobaru exists is when the msbatal exists already and the mavatal grows within it. The classic examples mashkin shavu. If you have this juice and more paras are inside the juice and some new juice leak out of it into the existing juice that was already there beforehand. So the new pairs that leak out and I believe it's going to be either yantifas where there's a sh of mukt nad those things will be ble because they are born into the do that's being matal them and even though it's matern you'll always say bal and why do you always say bal it's because it's the kind of naru that's always is bottle because it never had its own identity so it kind of only exists inside of the mavatal and therefore will always be bottle that that zakisman is what this is talking about because you have the do matal here this plant and the dover that's being bottle is growing within it. So it never has its own independent identity and therefore it will immediately be bottle as opposed to when the muvatal and the misbattle come into existence at the same time then it will never be bottle because then it's a combination. It's like a combination of rake and dam by the aama and there's no matal mbat for it to never have an existence. Okay, not quite the sug but another application of that concept. Okay, so now we spent the past day talking about the muk for the is and that that also ass but that is not 100% muskim. There is no because that was and remember is not. So the same thing was also not according to this. Okay. Okay. The mission center that according to there is no so now we already use these drawers for the remember from yesterday and two days ago that we used one of these and one for the one to so what are you going to do with all these if you're using it up there's no problem because he holds and therefore I don't need a for and A and Schlil is giu and the unborn fetus of the animal also doesn't need a dasha because that's just a regular gad. It's just unborn but it's still a gadu. So therefore all of these are available for and therefore that's how will use it any right that's the so whatever is going to be now because both and are both from and for the is going to really maybe even actual but amazingly according to it's going to be and you could just cook your chicken with your milk even we also have a bryce to this effect that how you ate some lasses baril they would knock down the trees Chavis in order to be able to make the form because they needed the coals in order to fashion the metal. And now we have a story Ley came to the trapper. They gave Ley this kind of a bird's head in milk. He didn't even give them a hard time for eating. When Ley came back to Rebi to tell the story, Rebby said to him, "Why did you put him in for crying out loud?" He was eating. He was the town of And I thought maybe he holds Omar that he is with because it's not part of the since there's no mother's milk for these birds. But anyway, you see that even in he wasn't concerned about for of course we hold it is but this is a viable the which over here doesn't technically mean the stomach. It means the enzyme the renet that's inside that stomach that you can make cheese with it. So that renet of an animal of an orela you're not allowed to eat these things because they have the same status as the animal it came from and let's say you actually put the milk inside the physical stomach of this animal and as Rashi points out this is actual fleshix turning over to Bam if there is enough actual flesh of this ca to actually be nice to the cheese and har zuura but it sounds like if there isn't nice then you're allowed to do it. Why? because it'll be forgi to which says a major important that there is no because the way understands it is that you only say when you have a but if it's not nice then there's no here there's no necessity to be matal anything because there's no tom of baser v to the mishna let's see if a kosher animal. It was actually from a traura. So it's renit is going to be and why because the ren is just inside of it because the milk turned renet in this traa is not traya milk. It's actually kusher milk because it came from a kusher animal. The fact it's located currently inside the tray doesn't make it user because it wasn't produced by the traa. just gathered there. Getting back to that first is going to be to eat. So, so why is the mission breaking this into two cases is also going to be the same as why is the mission to break this into we're talking about where the cava was bought from a and then the reason why the ren is because we're that maybe this gadi was y from a traa so now the renet that we're finding inside this gadi which was perhaps yik while it was still in possession of the came from a tra and therefore it's gonna have a dinner of tray for milk. The Bryce says you can buy eggs from we go arrive by these eggs and say they were laid by birds that were not tra so we should go arrive and assume that this was from an animal that wasn't afraid from a non-coser animal. There's no more of a kash for an animal that's toa and for the gmorf but is it's actually more common for a behemoth and therefore an arami there is what is for well frankly more if you're telling me that non-casher animals are then why is the Mishna only answering the renet of the animal bought from the gabon even our not buying from you should always be afraid they were yik from nusher animals therefore you should asser the renet that's within them for the we stay away from ncusher animals and we see our being from a non-cusher animal we would stop that from happening. We would take them away from the kosher animals. So therefore therefore we're not going to but we're not stopping their from being animal they're not going to stop it from happening in that case the mission is only telling us one and this is how you learn it is that renet of an animal that was by has a therefore it's all one say this that the renit of a is considered like the animal itself And therefore it's going to have a this is the why did they put it inside the actual stomach of the noa meaning they put it with the actual buser of the noa but it's only the buser that's user but it sounds like the actual renet would be mut. So how are we supposed to understand that like in our Mishna we were saying this sack of Yeshua before his meaning before he was to say that the renet that's inside the noa is considered like it's part of the noa butazar but's explanation that the isser of the chief of the is because it was put into the nea which sounds like the renet is going to be okay that was going to be after Yeshua's okay the next part of the mission said that if an animal is yik from a traa Ren it's going to be user whereas if a traa was yanic from a kasher animal it's going to be mut because the milk is just gathered inside of it the first part of the told us that so so too that renet that's inside of the traa should also be considered part of the animal itself and should be considered a tradesh but the latter part of the mishna where the renet is found inside a traa animal it doesn't have the sur of noa because you did a proper it just happened to been a traa Isn't that a bigger [clears throat] which inherently is disgusting? It's most if you want to be m it's rened inside o's going to eat the nea itself. So you're still going to say that ren is going to be oer to make your cheese with it. So which is not nearly as most and if you're mi I have a real reason to be concerned that people might actually eat the tr like should certainly be user. Hello kosha. Let's have a whole different mahal here. The difference between the renet in the cava and the renet found in the cava is [laughter] inami the earlier of the had already been inside the finalized is we didn't change the of the but the bottom line is we hold that that renet that's found inside the cava is mut just like it is by the tra and we never change the of that mishna and here's where we're going to call it and pick it up for tomorrow's F.