10/23/11

Talmud Bavli Hullin 119a-b - translation by Tzvee


[119a] How does this conform with the view of Rab? If he deems [the bone] a handle, then the first text [of C] is a problem [because it then implies there is a handle for less than an olive's bulk]. And if he deems [the bone] a protector, then the last text is a problem [because it then implies that there is no protector for less than an olive's bulk and Rab says that for more than the bulk of a pulse there is a protector].

E.            If you prefer it makes sense to deem it a protector. Or if you prefer it makes sense to deem it a handle. If you prefer it makes sense to deem it a handle and he [Rab] states his view in accord with the view of Judah b. Naqosa [that there is a protector for less than an olive's bulk]. Or if you prefer it makes sense to deem it a protector and he [Rab] states his view in accord with the view of the first Tanna [in T., i.e., there is no handle for less than an olive's bulk].

F.             And R. Yohanan would say all views [in T.] deem it a handle and he states his view in accord with the first Tanna [in T., i.e., there is a handle for less than an olive's bulk].

I.6
A.            Come and take note: R. Judah says, “A thigh-bone on which is an olive's bulk of meat, it leads the whole to [become] susceptible to uncleanness.” And sages [b. here: others] say, “Even though there is on it only so much as a bean, it leads the whole thing to become susceptible to uncleanness [T. 2:5 A-B].

B.            How does this conform with the view of Rab? If he deems [the bone] a handle, then the last text [of A] is a problem [because it then implies there is a handle for less than an olive's bulk]. And if he deems [the bone] a protector, then the first text is a problem [because it then implies that there is no protector for less than an olive's bulk and Rab says that for more than the bulk of a pulse there is a protector].

C.            If you prefer it makes sense to deem it a handle and he [Rab] states his view in accord with the view of Judah b. Neqosah. Or if you prefer it makes sense to deem it a protector and he [Rab] states his view in accord with the view of the others.

D.            And R. Yohanan would say all views [in T.] deem it a protector and he states his view in accord with the others. [But how can this be?] The others state their view that [the rule applies to] “so much as a bean” [contrary to the view of R. Yohanan]. Since the first Tanna stated a quantity for his view, they also stated a quantity for their view. [But it need not be the size of a bean.]

E.            Raba said, “You may derive as well from the way it was taught that we are dealing [in T.] with [the rule for a] protector. For it taught, “a thigh-bone” [which ordinarily is a protector for the marrow contained within it]. We may derive this conclusion.

I.7
A.            It was stated: R. Hanina said, “This [bean-bulk in T. above] is the minimum quantity.” And R. Yohanan, said, “This is not the minimum quantity.” [But how can you say,] “This is not the minimum quantity”? Lo it teaches, “As much as a bean.” Since the first Tanna stated a quantity for his view, they also stated a quantity for their view. [But it need not be the size of a bean.]

B.            Come and take note: R. Eleazar b. Azariah declares [a pod] clean in the case of that of the bean, and declares [a pod] unclean in the case of [other] pulse, because one wants [to make use of them] in handling them [M. Uqsin 1:5 J-K]. [This implies that there are protectors for less than an olive's bulk.] In accord with what R. Aha the son of Raba said [elsewhere], “The rule refers to] the stalk and it is [unclean] because it serves as a handle.” Here too [we can say], “[The rule in M. refers to] the stalk and it is [unclean] because it serves as a handle.” What then does it mean by, “[to make use of them] in handling them”? [It means, “to make use of them] in carrying them.”

C.            Come and take note: For taught the House of R. Ishmael: “[And if any part of their carcass falls upon] any seed for sowing that is to be sown, [it is clean]” (Lev. 11:37). [This implies they become unclean when they are found] in the manner in which people take them out for planting: a grain of wheat with its husk, a grain of barley with its husk, a lentil with its husk. [Apparently the husks serve as protectors for the grains. Hence there are protectors for less than an olive's bulk.] [The rule regarding a complete] object [i.e., a grain or lentil] is different.

I.8
A.            R. Oshaia posed a question: [119b] Do two protectors combine [to form a minimum quantity]? What is the situation? If you say one [protector] on top of the other, do we hold the view that one protector on top of the other [is susceptible to uncleanness]?

B.            But lo, it was taught in the Mishnah on Tannaite authority: R. Judah says, “There are three skins in an onion: (1) The inner one, whether whole or perforated, joins together; (2) the middle one, when whole, joins together, and when perforated, does not join together; (3) and the outer one, one way or the other, is insusceptible to uncleanness.” [M. Uqsin 2:4 B-E]. [The outermost is a protector on top of a protector and is not susceptible.]

C.            R. Oshaia posed a question concerning the protector of a food that [partially] split. Since this part does not protect the other part [of the food], and the other part does not protect this part [do we say that] they do not combine [together with the food to constitute the minimum quantity for uncleanness]? Or perhaps, since this part protects one part [of the food], and the other part protects its part [of the food], they do combine together.

D.            [As above I.8 B-C:] Come and take note: R. Eleazar b. Azariah declares [a pod] clean in the case of that of the bean, and declares [a pod] unclean in the case of [other] pulse, because one wants [to make use of them] in handling them [M. Uqsin 1:5 J-K]. [This implies that protectors combine together.] In accord with what R. Aha the son of Raba said [elsewhere], “[The rule refers to] the stalk and it is [unclean] because it serves as a handle.” [Here too we can say, “The rule in M. refers to the stalk and it is unclean because it serves as a handle.”] What then does it mean by, “[to make use of them] in handling them”? [It means, “to make use of them] in carrying them.”

E.            Come and take note: For taught the House of R. Ishmael: “[And if any part of their carcass falls upon] any seed for sowing that is to be sown, [it is clean]” (Lev. 11:37). [This implies they become unclean when they are found] in the manner in which people take them out for planting: a grain of wheat with its husk, a grain of barley with its husk, a lentil with its husk. [This implies that protectors combine together.] In accord with what R. Aha the son of Raba said [elsewhere], “[The rule refers to] the stalk and it is [unclean] because it serves as a handle.” Here too [we can say], “[The rule refers to] the [wheat] stem and it is [unclean] because it serves as a protector.”

F.             This makes perfect sense if we refer to the upper grains because they need the lower [to protect them]. But do the lower grains need the upper ones [to protect them]? [This could be a case of a stem with] one row. But can there be an egg's bulk of food in one row [of wheat grains]? [There could be] in the [giant] wheat of Simeon b. Shetah [cf. b. Taan. 23a]. Let us consider then, as long as we have come this far, [that we refer to a case] of one grain of [the giant] wheat of Simeon B. Shetah.

I.9
A.            Reverting to the body of the prior text [I.5 C]: Two bones and on them [at one end] are two half-olive's bulks, and one brought their tips [at the other end] inside, and the house overshadows them, the house is unclean. Judah b. Naqosa says in the name of R. Jacob, “[Even if both of them are attached by Heaven, the house is clean,] for two bones do not join together to form two half-olive's bulks” [T. Ahilot 4:8 A-B].

B.            Said Resh Laqish, “They taught this matter only with regard to a bone, that it may be deemed a handle. But hair is not deemed a handle.” And R. Yohanan said, “Even hair may be deemed a handle.”

C.            R. Yohanan raised an objection to Resh Laqish: Hide on which is an olive's bulk of [carrion] meat — that which touches the shred which juts forth from it, or hair which is on the opposite side, is unclean [M. 9:4 A-B]. Is it not the case [that it is unclean] on account of it [the hair] being deemed a handle? No [it is unclean] on account of it being deemed a protector. But do we recognize a protector on top of a protector [i.e., that the hair on top of the hide can be deemed a protector with regard to uncleanness]? [This must refer to a case where the hair] penetrates [through to the flesh, so it is deemed to be one protector with regard to uncleanness].

D.            R. Aha bar Jacob posed by way of contradiction to this: But on this basis we should infer that there is no way that we can write [proper] tefillin. For lo we need to have perfect writing and this is lacking [because the holes where the hair was penetrate the parchment].

E.            [Aha] must have forgotten this [teaching]: They said in the West, “Any hole over which the ink passes, is not deemed to be a hole [to invalidate the writing].”

F.             And if you prefer [another possible explanation, going back to C]: It is entirely [possible that the hair is deemed] a handle. In accord with what R. Ila said, “A bristle among bristles.” Here too you may refer to a hair among hairs.

G.            And concerning what did R. Ila make his statement? Concerning this: And the outer husks of ears of corn, lo, these contract uncleanness and impart uncleanness but do not join together [M. Uqsin 1:3 K-L]. How can one husk serve [as a handle? It will break right off.] Said R. Ila, “[It refers to a case of] a bristle among bristles.” [Where one grasps many together they do not break off.]

H.           Another version: Here too it makes more sense to conclude that it is deemed a protector. For if you concluded in accord with the view that holds it is deemed a handle, then what purpose can one hair serve? In accord with what R. Ila said, “A bristle among bristles.” Here too you may refer to a hair among hairs.

I.              And concerning what did R. Ila make his statement? Concerning this: And the outer husks of ears of corn, lo, these contract uncleanness and impart uncleanness but do not join together [M. Uqsin 1:3 K-L]. How can a husk serve [as a handle? It will break right off.] Said R. Ila, “[It refers to a case of] a bristle among bristles.” [Where one grasps many together they do not break off.]

BRL-verify-7987

No comments: