Chullin Daf 69

Okay, and we ended off yesterday talking about potentially a lea for aarim. It depends on the two different lashes of the mleus ra and but there was a possibility that according to rav when that a comes out of the mother we look at the a as if it had a lea but now we're going to pick it up five lines from the bottom of let's say there is no such thing as a lea for a particular but let's say the animal sticks out its foot and it pulls it back into the mother animal but it did that let's say with the right leg now it puts out another leg and brings it back in so one By one it's sticking out its avum and bringing it back into the mother animal. So the question is is it cumulative ultimately the entire body went out one piece at a time out of the mother. So of the animal has now come out and therefore now leisenborn once it went back in and that wasn't called a lea even though by the time you're finished the story the entire animal had come out in pieces but it never had aim and it's not called a what? Let's say the animal stuck out its foot and then you chop it off while it's outside and then it does it again with other limbs until of the body has now come out the mina most of this has come out. Now we look at the rev is born because of it has now stayed outside the body of the mother has been has to come out all at the same time spring arrive from our Mishna moving over to because and that was the end of our Mishna that's something that's not part of the mother animal's body but rather is an uber that's found inside is going to be mut so what's that of something that's not part of the mother animal's body is going to be mut what's the must be talking about that kind of a case where The avarim went out one at a time and then we're maybe we're and cut off until re of the body has come out. And therefore the mission is telling us that that mute of the uber of this dismembered uber that has remained inside the mother is not called a lea but rather is mut which says we're talking about that mutant cow that was inside the mother cow that's a cullet meaning we're calling it a cow because it came from the mother cow but lice it doesn't resemble the cow. It doesn't have the split hooves like it's supposed to for and we're going according the caller but where such a cow is born that's when it doesn't have but the way we're learning our Mishna is the according to even though it's even though it's missing but since it came out of the mother and was inside the mother during its therefore our can't be brought as a riyah for our shila about the Azora. Let's say you have an animal that's headdish for a carbon and the Uber sticks its leg out inside the azor and then the mother was gash and Rashi says what kind of kachum we're talking about? We're talking about a schlam because a schlam could be zera. The ivid says really we also could be talking about a carbon kas which could be an ava. I mean obviously it has to be ava if it's having a uber inside of it is the uber is bazor. So mahu what's going to be with that a that was stuck out of the animal since the makita the walls of the azor is its makita kchim maybe that's also considered the makita the heter of the uber and therefore it can be eaten because you eat the kachum within this makita so that's going to be the rules for this kind of a para and therefor this a because even though it was stuck out of the mother but it's still within the walls of the azara or maybe the other way to look at it is the walls of the of of the Bamed have no sh to defining whether or not the was on this a what's the wall what's the for the it's not going to be the walls of the mdash it's going to be the mother is going to be those back you can expand the sh and talk about that need to be consumed in your not going to think that the walls of the mother are going to bite the So abai is bringing a raya from Jerusalem that would seem nonsensical to say the im would say you haven't been pirates the makita if you're anywhere in your same thing will be by the azara question is arguing with aaya about a difference between and the makita let's say between the sim between the that's when the uber stuck its yacht out so ma me of sim shen and therefore it will be one completed mita to what and nea and therefore that a won't have tummus na because remember the serves two purposes it's moderate from tus and it also says there's noa so maybe now that both have been cut of the mother animal maybe even that protruded a will have from that's because once it's with the second sim it's mater both the mother and the Uber for a soa certainly it should help. We don't look at these two different sim as two different things, but rather they're mitarif. So there certainly won't be noa on this a boy. Let's say the a gets stuck out of the mother. What about the kash of the zera? Now what are we talking about here? We're talking about a living animal now that came out of a mother that was gash and therefore does not require right. That's the ben pakua. But this ben pakua had one aver that came out before theita. So now is that a of the ben pakua as we had said that that aver is going to be user to eat. So you have this mudna mat of an entire animal that does not even need but that particular aver is going to be user. So now the shila is going to be the ben pakua that has one aver of it that is user and now it mates with another animal and has a new little baby animal. That little baby animal might have the isser in it because it came from a father Ben pakua that has one aver that's user. And now the gar wants to break down the actual case. If you tell me this Ben Pakua was with a regular healthy animal and then had a little baby animal which is how we touched the original question. So my area is why is asking about this mudna case of a benua that stuck out a limb because it was and therefore it became a benami even a regular case of Ben pakua that has a baby also should have the same of being if you are always going to be concerned about the from this baby this animal that has two parents one is a ben pakua which does not require Shita and this new mother which is a regular healthy animal and therefore would require shita that ironically has no takana. So now the product of that union is going to create an animal that ironically has no takana because even though one parent doesn't require since the other parent will require won't even work. Now why won't work? Because we look at it as if those are already gash and therefore when you come to do the you can't just be mahm and do the because those are already gashim. It does really seem like Rashi's taking sides in that about if a Ben pakua has a den of its gashan already or if it doesn't require a here. Rashi seems to be saying that it already has a so the gar is asking that really if this ben pakua is now living with another animal producing a new animal that animal is in taka and therefore it wouldn't be a sh when it sticks out a neighbor. So I talked to Ben Paku Kavas. We're talking about this wild case of a benqua that stuck an aver out before that subsequently born got married and lived happily ever after with another ben paka that stuck in a out before its own before its mother's. And now we've got these two ben pakuas with a varm that are respectively user being moled a new little baby. So my aver do we say that one a corresponds to the new a so let's say both of them stuck out that right leg. So good. The baby's right leg will also be er and therefore if I cut off that one problematic a I'll be okay the parents mixed up inside the new vlad and therefore it's not about that a being there is is inside this baby throughout and therefore the whole baby is going to be also later on he waser whoever the he is a little bit who's talking here at this point in the garra but the way we need to look at a is that it's bable of the zera of the parents because if you wouldn't say that and you would say that one avert gets transferred to the aver of the vlad. It doesn't work physiologically. Suma yuma or yol or the fact that it can't walk and it's lame will transfer to the kids. It's not true. We see it's not the case. Clearly the whole parent is a chant in the going to be our every mother animal that gives birth always has two in it. There's always going to be which is user and there's dam which is user and the baby animal is a product of the entirety of the mother and there's and dam in there. So in the same way we don't transfer the iser of the dam into the entirety of the animal that is born from it and therefore if there's a particular a that's of the mother because it was a ben that was that is also won't get transferred down to the childur maybe there's only two isurum meaning that's what will be mater with the new birth of the new animal but we're not going to say if there three is meaning of and this maybe we won't be m that funny kind There will be two not three. It's interesting that we don't pick on ganosha. The miri says that's only because it's not really an issue of course but that's going to be our shila. Now who is this shila according to who doesn't really hold of the benu as we're going to see more later on. So you do have the is from the father of that gets mixed in but there's no of something that went because doesn't hold that the ben because doesn't really hold of this for in the first place of there's going to be of something went outside but there's no in the father's body because we learned in because this is a different that there is an existing Get by a fetus that comes out of the mother after of this blood. But if you take an unborn fetus after there is no in that animal. So the gar is proving that you're never going to have a mativ of three is of dam and this is of the a either like or like hello what's the sh of really mean anything that comes something else is not going to have the same status as that source that's a going to be mut and therefore the ofen pakua that had that was certainly going to be mut so what was it going to be can I drink the milk of a ben pakua that had one of these aar that came out and it has milk that comes out of it. will that be mutar in general milk we don't say is even though it's coming out of something that's still alive and therefore it should be right regular milk that comes out of a normal animal you always have the option of it and therefore being and that's why we don't look at it as a is unable it's always going to be and therefore maybe the milk that comes out of such a ben paku should be user also and to that is tu then the mission said if you cut off part of the uber that's still in the mother animal it'll be mut and how do I know this because as long as it has the simma of a split hoof etc it'll be mut and we dais the animal's kusher even the animal that's within the animal is going to be kosher so this basically tells us the whole rule that a ben pakua that's found inside of a gashak animal is going to be mutar you're telling me that the whole is because babema It is a like an animal that is kosher. So let me take it all the way to its logical end and say you should be able to do tomorrow with an Uber and transfer the kaduca into an Uber. But you can't as we're going to see in the say you can't do a not on the on an Uber. So if you're telling me that an Uber is looked at as a behemoth, you should be able to affect the tumor. But we see you can't. We need a different mucker for Ben. daring anything with inside the behav, but we're saying that is so tell me that the rebu is including all things inside of the mother. So then if you look back at the Mishna from yesterday I feel let's say even if I go in there and I separate the from the mother animal and leave it inside you should also apply the same on those things but it doesn't say that in our mission however is because it's not connected to the mother anymore. So it's not just about this blanket of everything inside. So for the gar we have a different dr that says you're allowed to eat it only when it's whole and if you cut the or the ice it's no longer it's now and therefore the won't apply to that part of the animal but if you tell me is talking about any uber that's found inside of this animal is going to be then let's say you shuck this cow and inside you find this mutated animal that looks like a looks like a dove it should be to eat. So So why isn't that turning over and for the it doesn't have the cautious? It doesn't have the split hooves. Well, that's not true. Then it should be for and we've already established that the mutant animal that doesn't have its split hooves inside the mother is kosher. That shouldn't be for the ton of that bry of was learned according to that even if it doesn't have the split hooves it'll be mut but inami if it doesn't have any feet at all because it looks like a that's worse and therefore it'll be let's go back to our original idea of which we had a kasha from but now wants to say the is our mocker for benakua this that we had a tam that you can't be onto an uber that is gonna be because he makes a miser that so all is good in the world like saying that the mission is going like she despecting how am I allowed to say that that mission in is going like she desper because later on in that mission it says by regularish not I say this leg should be an is the whole thing should be and therefore shoo if I go ahead and I say that this one should be a tamura in the place of this one the whole animal actually becomes a tamura for the one you're being from soci that the tanakami is talking to must hold that there is no hispashtas and the entire animal is not going to be heish the of the single a and therefore you can't do alah so who's your talking to who's this tanakama who argues about the tumor elim mayor of verbuda if you want to say was talking to her mayor and rebuda which we usually assume are the classic does actually hold that the hegdish of one a is npache to the entire animal the that this says that only the park your becomes but it's not insp what do you do with such an animal that has partial kadusha you find somebody who needs to bring a carbon you sell and the money goes back to the owner Except for the value of that one that was dish and it gets spent on the new mayor. Where do I know that the whole thing is rais? So getting back to now who was talking to me is if you're telling me he's talking to her mayor. Do they hold like him that if you're mish one a the entire animal becomes heish? You see not that way. So a lot of it must be that the tana of that Mishna that you can't do with a ver or ubim is ribbon and therefore they're not called a behem. And as Rashi speaks out and the reason why it won't work is because we're messer but our muck for paka could be because the gar says is not going to be a from our wasn't talking to and therefore we have no that would be shim. All right, we're going to call here and pick it up with the Mishna Mashem