Mishnayos Chullin Perek 9

Color Code: Case: Black; Ruling: Green or Red; Name of Tanna: Gold; Reason: Blue; Condition: Purple; Proof: Grey ; Rule: Fuscia

Chapter 9

Having completed its survey of Halochos pertaining to the Kashrus of animals, the ninth chapter of Chullin returns to a topic first raised back in Mishnah 4:7, namely, the capability of food to both receive and impart impurity, Tumah.

When it comes to meat, there are two potential forms of Tumah. The first is regular Tumah, meaning the meat is not inherently Tamei. Rather, it receives its impurity from another source via one of the relevant modes of transmission. In such an instance, to receive impurity, the meat must be the size of no less than an olive (K'Zayis). To impart Tumah, however, the meat must be at least the size of an egg (K'Beitza).

The second, is called Tumas Niveilah. In this instance, the meat of an un-Shechted animal is considered inherently Tamei and is itself a source of Tumah. Not only does Niveilah transmit its Tumah by touch, but also by carrying (Ma'asah) without actually touching the meat. This Tumah is transmitted if the meat is at least a K'Zayis.

Our Chapter will discuss various topics related to the susceptibility and transmission of these forms of Tumah.

Mishnah 9:1

The first Mishnah in our Perek describes two differences between Tumas Ochlin and Tumas Niveila. Specifically, because of its less stringent character, it is easier for foods to become susceptible to becoming Tamei then it is for them to contract Tumas Niveila.

The first stringency is, when determining whether a particular food item meets the requisite volume needed to convey Tumas Ochlin (i.e., the size of an egg), we are able to combine the actual food with various non-edible portions of the food (i.e., the skin, congealed sauces and spices, sinews). If collectively they are the size of an egg, it can impart Tumah. However, when it comes to transmitting Tumas Niveila, these items do not combine with the core food.

Second, the Mishnah teaches that a non-kosher animal slaughtered by a Jew will convey Tumas Ochlin even while the animal is convulsing--even if not fully dead. However, Tumas Niveila will only be transmitted once the animal is actually dead.

Mishnah 9:2

Our Mishna lists those animals (including humans) for which their skin and flesh are accorded the same rules regarding conveying and receiving Tumah. The general rule is that these skins (other than human) are typically eaten and, therefore, convey Tumas Niveila like the flesh. If, however, they are not going to be eaten but used to make leather, then they no longer will convey Tumah.

Mishnah 9:3

Continuing its discussion of skins, our Mishnah teaches that when considering whether an animal's skin is considered attached to the flesh for purposes of transmitting or imparting Tumah, it will depend on both the method being used to flay the animal and the eventual use of the skin itself.

Mishnah 9:4

When flaying the skin off an animal, some flesh may remain on the skin. Our Mishnah teaches that if the size of the remaining flesh is a K'Zayis then the skin (or a hair protruding from the skin) will convey Tumah. If there were two smaller pieces of flesh attached to the skin, then there is a dispute whether carrying the skin will convey Tumah (all agree that touching the skin will not convey Tumah).

Introduction to 9:5

Continuing the the theme of conveying Tumas Niveila, our Mishnah focuses on the ability of a marrow bone (the marrow considered food for purposes of Tumah) to convey Tumah. Both a human bone and a bone of a Korban will convey Tumah even when whole. Whereas, when it comes to a bone from a Niveila, it makes a difference whether the bone is whole, in which case it does not convey Tumah or if the bone has a hole. In such a case, the bone will convey Tumah both by touch and through carry. This is because we are concerned that, becuase of the hole, he may have touched the marrow itself.

Unlike the prior Mishnah where we distinguished between conveying Tumas Niveila by touch and though carry, our Mishnah teaches that when Niveila imparts Tumah via touch it must, by definition, also convey Tumah through carrying. This may be resolved by the fact that in the prior Mishnah, it was impossible to touch both halves at the same time so Tumas Maggah was simply not applicable in that particular situation but the underlying concept of touching a K'zayis of Niveila remains intact. Therefore, Tumas Massah was applicable.

In our Mishnah, however, touching a sealed bone does not convey Tumah since the food is encapsulated. Therefore, carrying such an item, the Mishnah teaches, can also not convey Tumah.

Introduction to 9:6

Our Mishnah teaches two additional examples where, depending on the circumstances, the item may be able to convey Tumah to a person. The first is the egg of one of the eight Sheratzim that reproduce by laying eggs. If the egg is whole, then it does not convey Tumah. If, however, there is even a tiny hole in the egg, then it will convey Tumah.

The second case, discusses a creature of some notoriety, the half-dirt mouse. If one touches the flesh portion of the mouse, he contract Tumah, whereas, if he touches the dirt portion he would remain pure.

The existence of such a fanciful creature has and continues to be the subject of much controversy in both traditional sources and more recent academic studies. The RAMBAM describes how he heard from many people about this fanciful creature that seemingly spontaneously generates from the dirt, despite the fact that it seems absurd. The Boaz, citing secular scholars, similarly describes their existence (but see Dr. Sid Leiman's critique here). Rabbi Prof. SaulLieberman, in Hellinism in Palestine pp.183, suggests that it was not uncommon for the Chachomim to apply Halachik decision to legendary and fanciful creatures. Thus, whether they believed such creatures actually existed or not, applying Halacha to such matters was well within the bailiwick of the Chachomim.

One of the most searing discussions of this topic surround the banning of various books written by R. Nosson Slifkin. You can find much of the discussion here.

Introduction to 9:7

Our Mishnah discusses the capacity of a limb or flesh severed from the body of an animal, with no hope of reattachment, to convey Tumah. The Mishnah discusses three situations. While the animal remains alive, if the animal is properly Shechted and if the animal dies.

Introduction to 9:8

The final Mishnah of the Perek shifts the discussion to flesh and limbs of human beings and whether, when severed but remain attached, they convey Tumah.