DAF DISCUSSIONS - CHULIN 81

Akiva asks:

According to the Ran and other meforshim of the machloket between R' Yochanan and Reish Lakish, why do we even ask whether the shochet becomes mumar after the first or second shechita? Obviously if he prepared a behema intending to shecht it leshem avodah zarah, it means that he had already accepted upon himself that avodah zarah; according to the Rambam in hilchot avodat hakochavim, even if one is modeh beavodah zarah, he is considered kofer bechol hatorah, cf. Kiddushin 40a that even the thought of avodah zarah is punished. Here too, the fact that he prepared the animal for shechting leshem avodah zarah means that he is already a mumar, so ever before gmar shechita his shechita should be nechira bealma.

Akiva, England

The Kollel replies:

1) This is a very interesting question. However, there is another statement of the Rambam, in Hilchos Avodas ha'Kochavim 5:5, where he writes that if someone enticed people to worship idols and they accepted this persausion and said, "Yes, we will go and worship," even though they have not actually worshipped they are culpable for Avodah Zarah. The Rambam writes that this is derived from the verse, "Do not desire him and do not listen to him" (Devarim 13:9). This implies that if one listens and desires, even without actually worshipping, one is already liable. We see from what the Rambam writes, though, that mere thought is not sufficient to make a person liable. One at least needs to say something.

2) The Achi'ezer (2:5:3, by Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinski zt'l) explains that if someone receives a warning not to pour wine on an idolatrous altar, or is warned not to worship Avodah Zarah, but nevertheless he intends to defy the warning, he is essentially already a Mumar for Avodah Zarah, since Avodah Zarah depends merely on one's thoughts. However, as long as it is still all in the mind, he could always claim that he was merely joking. The difference between Avodah Zarah and other transgressions is that if, afterwards, he actually did worship Avodah Zarah, this means that retroactively he was Kofer b'Chol ha'Torah right from the moment that he decided that he would do so.

3) Therefore, someone who merely prepared the animal for Shechitah l'Shem Avodah Zarah could always claim that he was not serious and was not intending to continue and actually worship Avodah Zarah.

4) I gave further thought to this important question, and to the crux of the matter -- when exactly does a person become a Mumar for Avodah Zarah?

a. There is an important paragraph in the Chazon Ish (Yoreh Deah 2:16, DH v'Ikar). The Chazon Ish cites the Rambam's definition of a Mumara (in Hilchos Teshuvah 3:9). The Ranbam writes that there are two types of Mumar. The first is a Mumar for transgressing one Mitzvah. This is a person who consistently transgresses this particular Mitzvah. The second type of Mumar is one who trangresses the entire Torah. The Rambam writes that this may be a person who changes his religion when the nations pronounce a decree against the Torah. This person clings to the Nochrim and says that it is better to stick with the Nochrim who are strong, rather than with the persecuted Jews.

b. The Chazon Ish points out that it is clear from the Rambam that a Mumar is someone who has become accustomed to this way of life.

I will add my own thought and point out that the word "Mumar" means someone who "changed" his religion. This implies that worshipping the other religion one singe, isolated time would not be sufficient to classify a person as a Mumar.

c. The Chazon Ish writes that this is also the position of the Rashba in a responsum (cited by the Beis Yosef, Yoreh Deah 119:7(2):11). The Rashba writes that one is considered an apostate for Avodah Zarah only if he worshipped Avodah Zarah at least three times. He is not considered a Mumar if he worshipped it only once or twice. The Chazon Ish writes that the Halachah follows the Rashba on this matter.

d. The reasoning behind this is that if someone commits a trangression once or twice, this does not necessarily mean that he has succumbed to that Aveirah. The Yetzer ha'Ra got hold of him once or twice, but he may still be able to regain control of himself and decide never to do it again. It is only if he serves Avodah Zarah three times that we say that he now has a Chazakah for such conduct. He has changed his normal religious affiliation and, sadly, we have to assume that this is his new way of life.

e. According to this explanation, we must say that when the Rambam writes (in Hilchos Avodas Kochavim 2:4) that anyone who agrees to Avoda Zarah is considered as denying the entire Torah, he is referring only to a person who agrees with Avodas Kochavim on a regular basis. If he prepared an animal to slaughter l'Shem Avodah Zarah, this does not mean that he has accepted upon himself to serve that Avodah Zarah regularly, and the door is still open for him to come back to the welcoming arms of the Torah.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

The Kollel adds:

1) I just thought I should make a further comment or two at this stage about the Achi'ezer I cited in my first reply. The Achi'ezer appears to be consistent with the opinion, mentioned in the Rishonim, that the Mumar becomes a Mumar right at the beginning of the slaughtering for Avodah Zarah, but it only becomes apparent at the end that he really was intending to do Avodah Zarah right from the beginning. This is not like the opinion of Tosfos (Chulin 14a) that he is considered a Mumar only on the second slaughtering, and it is certainly not like the opinion of the Rashba that he becomes a Mumar only the third time.

2) One of the phrases the Achi'ezer uses to describe how the person could say he did not really have intention for Avodah Zarah -- even though he told people before the Shechitah that he did -- is "Petumi Mili b'Alma." This is a phrase taken from Bava Metzia (beginning of 66a). Rashi explains that he is saying words simply to "fatten the heart" of the listener. The idea is that merely because someone says something does not always mean that he himself takes seriously what he said. He may just be saying it to show off but does not really intend to worship Avodah Zarah.

Dovid Bloom

The Kollel adds:

1) I just thought I should make a further comment or two at this stage about the Achiezer I cited in my first reply. Achiezer appears to be consistent with the opinion, mentioned in the Rishonim, that the mumar becomes a mumar right at the begiining of the slaughtering for Avoda Zarah, but it only becomes apparent at the end that he really was intending to do avoda zarah right from the beginning. This is not like the opinion of Tosfos Chulin 14a that he is only considered a mumar on the 2nd slaughtering, and it is certainly not like the opinion of the Rashba that he only becomes a mumar the third time.

2) One of the phrases the Achiezer uses to describe how the person could say he did not really have intention for Avoda Zarah; even though he told people before the shechita that he did; is "Petumi Mili b'Alma". This is a phrase taken from Bava Metzia top 66a. Rashi explains that he is saying words simply to "fatten the heart" of the listener. The idea is that merely because someone says something, it does not always mean that he himself takes seriously what he said. He may just be saying it to show off but does not really intend to worship avoda zara.

Dovid Bloom