CHULIN CHART #2
Chulin Daf 132a
THE ARGUMENT BETWEEN REBBI ELIEZER AND THE CHACHAMIM
| (A) REBBI ELIEZER (1) |
(B) CHACHAMIM (2) |
||
| 1a | KISUY HA'DAM FOR THE OFFSPRING OF A MALE DEER AND A FEMALE GOAT |
Chayav | Chayav mi'Safek |
| 1b | KISUY HA'DAM FOR THE OFFSPRING OF A MALE GOAT AND A FEMALE DEER |
Chayav mi'Safek | Chayav |
| 2a | MATANOS FOR THE OFFSPRING OF A MALE DEER AND A FEMALE GOAT |
Patur | Chayav (3) |
| 2b | MATANOS FOR THE OFFSPRING OF A MALE GOAT AND A FEMALE DEER |
Patur | Patur |
===========
FOOTNOTES:
===========
(1) Both Rebbi Eliezer and the Chachamim are in doubt about whether we take into account the animal's father. They argue whether the animal must be a full Seh in order to be Chayav, or whether even a partial Seh is Chayav. Rebbi Eliezer maintains that the Mitzvos of Kisuy ha'Dam and Matanos are done only for a full "Seh," and not for a "Miktzas Seh" ("partial Seh").
(2) The Chachamim maintain that the Mitzvos of Kisuy ha'Dam and Matanos are done only for a Seh and even a Miktzas Seh.
(3) Rav Huna bar Chiya explains that the Chachamim maintain that the owner must give half of the Matanos (for the half of the animal that comes from the female goat; in order for the Kohen to claim the other half of the Matanos, he must bring proof that we do not follow the animal's father).