More Discussions for this daf
1. The Shechitah of an idolater 2. Eating from Achav's Shechitah 3. Mumar l'Chalel Shabbos l'Te'avon
4. Tosfos DH Raban Gamliel 5. רש״י ד״ה ישראל מעליא הוא
DAF DISCUSSIONS - CHULIN 5

shragie edelstein asked:

1)The gemora refutes Reb Anan who says that one may eat the shechita of an oved A"Z from the braisa that says we do not accept the korbon oleh of an oved A"Z. Why is this a problem, maybe his korbon is not acceptable but his shecitah is still kosher?

2)Reb Anan did want to use the rayuh from the braisa that a mumer loso davar could shecht because keivan dedush beh kehetairah dami. We don't see Rabah arguing with this sevureh. Or do we?

3) From Chatas on amud beis we see only those who commit beshogeg have their korbonos accepted. Implying, those who commit bemaized, including a mumer leteyavon are not. This is very different from the oleh on amud alef who only excludes an oved A"Z and mechalel shabbos. What's the gemores question of Mei beneihoo?

shragie edelstein, NYC, USA

The Kollel replies:

1) The Gemara is not refuting Rav Anan from the Halachah of Olah, but rather it is refuting Rav Anan from the Beraisa of Olah. From the fact that the Beraisa differentiates between a Mumar l'Davar Echad whose Korban is accepted, and a Mumar l'Nasech whose Korban is not, we see that a Mumar l'Avodah Zarah is not like a Mumar l'Davar Echad, but rather like a Mumar l'Kol ha'Torah, and therefore his Shechitah will also be Pasul, like the Shechitah of a Mumar l'Kol ha'Torah.

2) Rav Anan said his Halachah independently, and not as an explanation of the Beraisa. The Gemara is looking for a different Perush of "Mumar" other than the Perush of Mumar l'Davar Echad, because Mumar l'Davar Echad is included in "Arel." The Gemara suggests that "Mumar" refers to a Mumar l'Oso Davar, which would follow Rava who says that Mumar l'Oso Davar is Kasher for Shechitah. The Gemara is Docheh this, and says that perhaps the Shechitah of a Mumar l'Oso Davar is actually Pasul, *unlike* Rava, because of the logic of "k'Heteira Dami." Rava must argue on this logic, for he relies on the logic of "Lo Shavak Heteira," and if an Isur has become like a Heter to this Mumar, that logic falls away. Therefore, the Gemara must offer a different expalnation for "Mumar," which is not included in "Arel" (Mumar l'Davar Echad) and is also not a Mumar l'Oso Davar. Accordingly, the Gemara suggests that it refers to a Mumar l'Avodah Zarah, which will follow Rav Anan.

3) The question of the Gemara (here and in Horayos) of "Mai Beinaihu" is what is the difference between the Man d'Amar that learns from "m'Am ha'Aretz" (which is a Mi'ut regarding the person himself who is a Mumar) that he may not bring a Korban, and the Man d'Amar that learns from "v'Ashem," which is a Mi'ut on the bringing of the Chatas, teaching that it must be a case of Shav m'Yedi'aso, which, in practice, a Mumar is not.

D. Zupnik