This source sheet is part of a series of source sheets providing background for Mishnayos Chullin. The series can be found here.
Chapter 8
Perhaps one of the most distinguishing facets of the "kosher" rules is the prohibition on the mixing of meat and milk. Derived from the thrice repeated words " לֹֽא־תְבַשֵּׁ֥ל גְּדִ֖י בַּחֲלֵ֥ב אִמּֽוֹ " the prohibition, at its core, prohibits the cooking, eating and generally deriving benefit from a mixture of milk and meat.
The eighth chapter of Meseches Chullin lays out many of the details of this prohibition, including:
- Does the prohibition apply to all types of meat?
- Is it limited to kosher animals?
- What secondary precautions must one make to avoid violating the prohibition
- What happens if some milk drips into your meat stew?
- Kashrus in the cheese making process
The final Mishnah, is unrelated to the broader topic, but once earlier Mishnayos differentiated between domestic animals, wild animals and fowl, the Mishnah includes a discussion of certain rules (forbidden fats and blood) that may apply to one and not the other.
Sources for Mishnah 8:1
In discussing whether it is permitted to place fowl and cheese on the same table, our MIshnah teaches that Beish Shammai permits this while Beis Hillel prohibits this action. Rabi Yose says this is one of the instances where Beis Shammai is more lenient then Beis Hillel. We find a list of these in Mesechtas Eduyos.
(ב) רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, שִׁשָּׁה דְבָרִים מִקֻּלֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. הָעוֹף עוֹלֶה עִם הַגְּבִינָה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמָּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ עוֹלֶה וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל. תּוֹרְמִין זֵיתִים עַל שֶׁמֶן, וַעֲנָבִים עַל יַיִן, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמָּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אֵין תּוֹרְמִין. הַזּוֹרֵעַ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת שֶׁבַּכֶּרֶם, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, קִדֵּשׁ שׁוּרָה אַחַת, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, קִדֵּשׁ שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת. הַמְּעִיסָה, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹטְרִין, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מְחַיְּבִין. מַטְבִּילִין בְּחַרְדָּלִית, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמָּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אֵין מַטְבִּילִין. גֵּר שֶׁנִּתְגַּיֵּר עַרְבֵי פְסָחִים, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, טוֹבֵל וְאוֹכֵל אֶת פִּסְחוֹ לָעֶרֶב. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, הַפּוֹרֵשׁ מִן הָעָרְלָה, כְּפוֹרֵשׁ מִן הַקָּבֶר:
(2) Rabbi Yose says: there are six instances of lenient rulings by Beth Shammai and stringent rulings by Beth Hillel.A fowl may be put on a table [together] with cheese but may not be eaten [with it], according to the opinion of Beth Shammai. But Beth Hillel says: it may neither be put on [the table together with it] nor eaten [with it]. Olives may be given as terumah for oil and grapes for wine, according to the opinion of Beth Shammai. But Beth Hillel says: they may not be given. One who sows seed [within] four cubits of a vineyard: Beth Shammai says: he has caused one row [of vines] to be prohibited. But Beth Hillel says: he has caused two rows to be prohibited. Flour paste [flour that had been mixed with boiling water]: Beth Shammai exempts [from the law of hallah]; But Beth Hillel pronounces it liable. One may immerse oneself in a rain-torrent, according to the opinion of Beth Shammai; But Beth Hillel say: one may not immerse oneself [therein]. One who became a proselyte on the eve of Passover: Beth Shammai says: he may immerse himself and eat his Passover sacrifice in the evening. But Beth Hillel says: one who separates himself from uncircumcision is as one who separates himself from the grave.
Our Mishnah mentions that is someone vows not to eat meat, he remains permitted to eat fish since typcially a person does not intend for the word "meat: to include fish. Meaning, when deciphering a person's vows, we must consider context and common usage. We find this concept as well in Nedarim, among a broader discussion of vows.
(א) הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַמְבֻשָּׁל, מֻתָּר בַּצָּלִי וּבַשָּׁלוּק. אָמַר קוֹנָם תַּבְשִׁיל שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֵם, אָסוּר בְּמַעֲשֵׂה קְדֵרָה רַךְ, וּמֻתָּר בְּעָבֶה וּמֻתָּר בְּבֵיצַת טְרָמִיטָא, וּבִדְלַעַת הָרְמוּצָה:
(1) He who vows [not to eat] what is “cooked [mebushal] is permitted what is roasted or seethed. If he says, “Konam if I taste any cooked dish [tabshil]” he is forbidden [to eat] food loosely cooked in a pot, but is permitted [to eat] food solidly-cooked. He may also eat a lightly boiled egg and gourds put in ashes.
Sources for Mishnah 8:2
Our Mishnah mentions that strangers who are guests at the same table may eat meat and milk on the same table. We are not concerned that they will eat from each other's plates. We find this Achsaniya mentioned in the context of Demai as well. A host may feed a guest Demai.
(א) מַאֲכִילִין אֶת הָעֲנִיִּים דְּמַאי, וְאֶת הָאַכְסַנְיָא דְּמַאי. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה מַאֲכִיל אֶת פּוֹעֲלָיו דְּמַאי. גַּבָּאֵי צְדָקָה, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, נוֹתְנִין אֶת הַמְעֻשָּׂר לְשֶׁאֵינוֹ מְעַשֵּׂר, וְאֶת שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְעֻשָּׂר לִמְעַשֵּׂר. נִמְצְאוּ כָל הָאָדָם אוֹכְלִין מְתֻקָּן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, גּוֹבִין סְתָם וּמְחַלְּקִין סְתָם, וְהָרוֹצֶה לְתַקֵּן יְתַקֵּן:
(1) They may feed demai to the poor and to guests (alt. passing troops). Rabban Gamaliel used to feed demai to his workmen. [As for] charity collectors: Bet Shammai says: they should give tithed [produce] to one who doesn’t tithe, and untithed [produce] to one who does tithe. In this way it will turn out that every one will eat [produce] that has been fixed (tithed). But the sages say: they may collect indiscriminately and distribute indiscriminately. And one who wishes to fix [his produce by tithing it], let him fix it.
Most often, guests would find themselves taking lodging and board at inns. These inns were most often managed by women. We find a number of references to female innkeepers in the Mishnah. These references are less than complimentary.
(ה) הַנּוֹתֵן לְפֻנְדָּקִית, מְעַשֵּׂר אֶת שֶׁהוּא נוֹתֵן לָהּ, וְאֶת שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵל מִמֶּנָּה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדָה לַחֲלֹף. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אֵין אָנוּ אַחֲרָאִין לָרַמָּאִין, אֵינוֹ מְעַשֵּׂר אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁהוּא נוֹטֵל מִמֶּנָּה בִּלְבָד:
(5) One who gives [produce] to an innkeeper [to prepare it for food], he must tithe what he gives to her and what he takes back from her, because she is suspected of exchanging it [with her own produce]. Rabbi Yose said: we are not responsible for deceivers. Rather, he must tithe only that which he takes from her.
(ז) אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כְּשֶׁיָּרַדְתִּי לִנְהַרְדְּעָא לְעַבֵּר הַשָּׁנָה, מָצָאתִי נְחֶמְיָה אִישׁ בֵּית דְּלִי, אָמַר לִי, שָׁמַעְתִּי שֶׁאֵין מַשִּׂיאִין אֶת הָאִשָּׁה בְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד, אֶלָּא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בָּבָא. וְנוּמֵתִי לוֹ, כֵּן הַדְּבָרִים. אָמַר לִי, אֱמֹר לָהֶם מִשְּׁמִי, אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִים שֶׁהַמְּדִינָה מְשֻׁבֶּשֶׁת בִּגְיָסוֹת, מְקֻבְּלָנִי מֵרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁמַּשִּׂיאִין אֶת הָאִשָּׁה עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד. וּכְשֶׁבָּאתִי וְהִרְצֵיתִי הַדְּבָרִים לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, שָׂמַח לִדְבָרַי, וְאָמַר, מָצָאנוּ חָבֵר לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בָּבָא. מִתּוֹךְ הַדְּבָרִים נִזְכַּר רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגוּ הֲרוּגִים בְּתֵל אַרְזָא, וְהִשִּׂיא רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶם עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד, וְהֻחְזְקוּ לִהְיוֹת מַשִּׂיאִין עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד. וְהֻחְזְקוּ לִהְיוֹת מַשִּׂיאִין עֵד מִפִּי עֵד, מִפִּי עֶבֶד, מִפִּי אִשָּׁה, מִפִּי שִׁפְחָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמְרִים, אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין אֶת הָאִשָּׁה עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, לֹא עַל פִּי אִשָּׁה, וְלֹא עַל פִּי עֶבֶד וְלֹא עַל פִּי שִׁפְחָה, וְלֹא עַל פִּי קְרוֹבִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מַעֲשֶׂה בִבְנֵי לֵוִי שֶׁהָלְכוּ לְצֹעַר עִיר הַתְּמָרִים, וְחָלָה אַחַד מֵהֶם בַּדֶּרֶךְ, וֶהֱבִיאוּהוּ בְפֻנְדָּק, וּבַחֲזָרָתָם אָמְרוּ לַפֻּנְדָּקִית אַיֵּה חֲבֵרֵנוּ, אָמְרָה לָהֶם מֵת וּקְבַרְתִּיו, וְהִשִּׂיאוּ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, וְלֹא תְהֵא כֹהֶנֶת כַּפֻּנְדָּקִית. אָמַר לָהֶם, לִכְשֶׁתְּהֵא פֻּנְדָּקִית נֶאֱמֶנֶת. הַפֻּנְדָּקִית הוֹצִיאָה לָהֶם מַקְלוֹ וְתַרְמִילוֹ וְסֵפֶר תּוֹרָה שֶׁהָיָה בְיָדוֹ:
(7) Rabbi Akiva said: When I went down to Nehardea to intercalate the year, I met Nehemiah of Bet D’li who said to me, “I heard that in the land of Israel no one, permits a [married] woman to marry again on the evidence of one witness, except Rabbi Judah ben Bava”. “That is so”, I told him. He said to me, “Tell them in my name: ‘You know that this country is in confusion because of marauders. I have received a tradition from Rabban Gamaliel the Elder: that they allow a [married] woman to remarry on the evidence of one witness’”. And when I came and recounted the conversation in the presence of Rabban Gamaliel he rejoiced at my words and exclaimed, “We have found a match for Rabbi Judah ben Bava!” As a result of this talk Rabban Gamaliel remembered that some men were once killed at Tel Arza, and that Rabban Gamaliel the Elder had allowed their wives to marry again on the evidence of one witness, and the law was established that they allow a woman to marry again on the evidence of one witness, and on the testimony of one [who states that he has heard] from another witness, from a slave, from a woman or from a female slave. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua say: a woman is not be allowed to remarry on the evidence of one witness. Rabbi Akiva ruled: [a woman is not allowed to marry again] on the evidence of a woman, on that of a slave, on that of a female slave or on that of relatives. They said to him: It once happened that a number of Levites went to Tsoar, the city of palms, and one of them became ill on the way, and they left him in an inn. When they returned they asked the [female] innkeeper, “Where is our friend?” And she replied, “He is dead and I buried him”, and they allowed his wife to remarry. Should not then a priest’s wife [be believed at least as much] as an innkeeper!” He answered them: When she will [give such evidence] as the innkeeper [gave] she will be believed, for the innkeeper had brought out to them [the dead man’s] staff, his bag and the Torah scroll which he had with him.
(א) אֵין מַעֲמִידִין בְּהֵמָה בְּפֻנְדְּקָאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדִין עַל הָרְבִיעָה. וְלֹא תִתְיַחֵד אִשָּׁה עִמָּהֶן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדִין עַל הָעֲרָיוֹת. וְלֹא יִתְיַחֵד אָדָם עִמָּהֶן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדִין עַל שְׁפִיכַת דָּמִים. בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא תְיַלֵּד אֶת הַנָּכְרִית, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּיַלֶּדֶת בֵּן לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. אֲבָל נָכְרִית מְיַלֶּדֶת בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל. בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא תָנִיק בְּנָהּ שֶׁל נָכְרִית, אֲבָל נָכְרִית מְנִיקָה בְנָהּ שֶׁל יִשְׂרְאֵלִית בִּרְשׁוּתָהּ:
(1) One should not place animals in inns of non-Jews, because they are suspected of bestiality. A woman should not be alone with them, because they are suspected of licentiousness; Nor should a man be alone with them, because they are suspected of shedding blood. A Jewish woman should not act as midwife to a non-Jewish woman, because she would be delivering a child for idolatry. But a non-Jewish woman may act as midwife to a Jewish woman. A Jewish woman should not suckle the child of a non-Jewish woman, But a non-Jewish woman may suckle the child of a Jewish woman in her premises.
Sources for Mishnah 8:3
Our Mishna seemingly implies that the milk remaining in the udder would be permissible to eat once drained from the udders. Safrai discusses both the Mishnah's implications and the development of the practical Halacha as it differs between Eretz Yisroel and Bavel.
Nevertheless, as he points out, the Mishnah in Zevachim 3:5 implies that the mlk is permitted as well.
(ה) הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין לֶאֱכֹל שָׁלִיל אוֹ שִׁלְיָא בַחוּץ, לֹא פִגֵּל. הַמּוֹלֵק תּוֹרִין בִּפְנִים לֶאֱכֹל בֵּיצֵיהֶם בַּחוּץ, לֹא פִגֵּל. חֲלֵב הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין וּבֵיצֵי תוֹרִין, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶן מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל וְנוֹתָר וְטָמֵא:
(5) If one slaughters sacred animals [intending] to eat the fetus or the afterbirth outside [of the place or time where the animal must be eaten], he does not render it piggul. If one plucks off [the necks of] doves, [intending] to eat their eggs outside [of the place or time where the animal must be eaten], he does not render [them] piggul. The milk of sacred animals or the eggs of doves one is not liable for eating them in respect of piggul, remnant, or uncleanness.
Our Mishna advises that prior to cooking the heart you should pierce and drain the blood. The Mishnah in Kerisos teaches that blood of the hear is not subject to the prohibition against eating blood.
(א) דַּם שְׁחִיטָה בִּבְהֵמָה, בְּחַיָּה וּבְעוֹפוֹת, בֵּין טְמֵאִים וּבֵין טְהוֹרִים, דַּם נְחִירָה, וְדַם עִקּוּר, וְדַם הַקָּזָה שֶׁהַנֶּפֶשׁ יוֹצְאָה בוֹ, חַיָּבִים עָלָיו. דַּם הַטְּחוֹל, דַּם הַלֵּב, דַּם בֵּיצִים, דַּם דָּגִים, דַּם חֲגָבִים, דַּם הַתַּמְצִית, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּב בְּדַם הַתַּמְצִית:
(1) If one ate blood of a slaughtered beast, a wild animal or a bird, either clean or unclean, or blood of an animal stabbed in his throat or neck, or of the blood of an animal slaughtered by having his throat ripped, or of the blood of the arteries whereby life-force escapes, he is liable. But [if he ate] the blood of the spleen or of the heart, or blood found in eggs, or blood of fish, or of locusts, or secondary blood, he is not liable. Rabbi Judah says: he is liable for secondary blood.
Sources for Mishnah 8:4
According to our Mishnah, Rabi Yose HaGilili permits cooking fowl and milk together. This is a unique ruling and while followed in his locale, it was not accepted practice. We find a similar issue when it came to Rabi Eliezer and preparations allowed to be made on Shabbos for a Bris Milah. See Shabbos 19:1.
(א) רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אִם לֹא הֵבִיא כְלִי מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, מְבִיאוֹ בְשַׁבָּת מְגֻלֶּה. וּבַסַּכָּנָה, מְכַסֵּהוּ עַל פִּי עֵדִים. וְעוֹד אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, כּוֹרְתִין עֵצִים לַעֲשׂוֹת פֶּחָמִין וְלַעֲשׂוֹת כְּלִי בַרְזֶל. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כָּל מְלָאכָה שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת אֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, וְשֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת:
(1) Rabbi Eliezer says: if one did not bring an instrument [with which to circumcise] on the eve of Shabbat, he must bring it on Shabbat uncovered; but in [times of] danger he hides it on the testimony of witnesses. Rabbi Eliezer said further: one may cut wood to make charcoal to make an iron instrument. Rabbi Akiva stated a general principle: any [manner of] work which could be performed on the eve of Shabbat does not supersede Shabbat; but that which could not be performed on the eve of Shabbat does supersede Shabbat.
Sources for Mishnah 8:5
Like our Mishnah, the Mishnah in Avodah Zara is explicit that cheeses made in the stomachs of animals belonging to non-Jews.
(ה) אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, שָׁאַל רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֶת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, כְּשֶׁהָיוּ מְהַלְּכִין בַּדֶּרֶךְ. אָמַר לוֹ, מִפְּנֵי מָה אָסְרוּ גְבִינוֹת הַגּוֹיִם. אָמַר לוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִין אוֹתָהּ בְּקֵבָה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה. אָמַר לוֹ, וַהֲלֹא קֵבַת עוֹלָה חֲמוּרָה מִקֵּבַת נְבֵלָה, וְאָמְרוּ, כֹּהֵן שֶׁדַּעְתּוֹ יָפָה, שׂוֹרְפָהּ חַיָּה. וְלֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ, אֲבָל אָמְרוּ, אֵין נֶהֱנִין וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. חָזַר, אָמַר לוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִין אוֹתָהּ בְּקֵבַת עֶגְלֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. אָמַר לוֹ, אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה לֹא אֲסָרוּהָ בַהֲנָאָה. הִשִּׂיאוֹ לְדָבָר אַחֵר, אָמַר לוֹ, יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָחִי, הֵיאַךְ אַתָּה קוֹרֵא (שיר השירים א), כִּי טוֹבִים דֹּדֶיךָ מִיָּיִן, אוֹ כִּי טוֹבִים דֹּדַיִךְ. אָמַר לוֹ, כִּי טוֹבִים דֹּדַיִךְ. אָמַר לוֹ, אֵין הַדָּבָר כֵּן, שֶׁהֲרֵי חֲבֵרוֹ מְלַמֵּד עָלָיו, לְרֵיחַ שְׁמָנֶיךָ טוֹבִים:
(5) Rabbi Judah said: Rabbi Ishmael put this question to Rabbi Joshua as they were walking on the way, “Why have they forbidden the cheese of non-Jews?” He replied, because they curdle it with the rennet of a nevelah (an animal that was not properly slaughtered.” He (Rabbi Ishmael) said: “but is not the rennet of a burnt-offering more strictly forbidden than the rennet of a nevelah? [and yet] it was said that a priest who is not fastidious may suck it out raw.” (Though the Sages disagreed with this opinion, and they said that no benefit may be derived from it, although one who consumed it did not trespass [temple property). Rabbi Joshua responded: “The reason then is because they curdle it with the rennet from calves sacrificed to idols.” He (Rabbi Ishmael) said to him: “if that be so, why do they not extend the prohibition to any benefit derived from it?” He (Rabbi Joshua) diverted him to another matter, saying: “Ishmael, how do you read for your [masc.] love is more delightful than wine” or “your [fem.] love etc. (Song of Songs 1:2” He replied: “your [fem.] love is better …” He said to him: this is not so, as it is proved by its fellow [-verse]: your ointments [masc.] have a goodly fragrance … [therefore do the maidens love you] (Song of Songs 1:3).”
Sources for Mishnah 8:6
Our Mishnah uses a commonly found structure to compare two items. i.e., this item has stringencies that are not found in this other item and vice versa. We have many examples of this construct, including, Nazir 9:1 and Temurah 2:3.
(א) הַגּוֹיִם אֵין לָהֶם נְזִירוּת. נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים יֵשׁ לָהֶם נְזִירוּת. חֹמֶר בַּנָּשִׁים מִבָּעֲבָדִים, שֶׁהוּא כוֹפֶה אֶת עַבְדּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ כוֹפֶה אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. חֹמֶר בָּעֲבָדִים מִבַּנָּשִׁים, שֶׁהוּא מֵפֵר נִדְרֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ מֵפֵר נִדְרֵי עַבְדּוֹ. הֵפֵר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ, הֵפֵר עוֹלָמִית. הֵפֵר לְעַבְדּוֹ, יָצָא לְחֵרוּת מַשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ. עָבַר מִכְּנֶגֶד פָּנָיו, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה, וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, יִשְׁתֶּה:
(1) Gentiles are not subject [to the laws] of naziriteship. Women and slaves are subject [to the laws] of naziriteship. The nazirite vow is more stringent in the case of women than in the case of slaves, for a man can compel his slave [to break his vow] but he cannot compel his wife [to do so]. [The nazirite vow] is more stringent in the case of slaves than in the case of women, for he can void the vows of his wife, but he cannot void the vows of his slaves. If he voids his wife’s [vow], it is void for ever, but if he voids his slave’s vow, [if] the slave becomes free he must complete his naziriteship. When [the slave] passes from [his master's] presence: Rabbi Meir says: he may not drink [wine]. Rabbi Yose says: he may drink [wine].
(ג) חֹמֶר בְּקָדָשִׁים מִבִּתְמוּרָה וּבִתְמוּרָה מִבְּקָדָשִׁים. שֶׁהַקֳּדָשִׁים עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה וְאֵין תְּמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה. הַצִּבּוּר וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִין מַקְדִּישִׁים, אֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. וּמַקְדִּישִׁים אֵבָרִים וְעֻבָּרִים, אֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. חֹמֶר בִּתְמוּרָה, שֶׁהַקְּדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ, וְאֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה לְחֻלִּין לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בַּתְּמוּרָה, וְלֹא עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בַּמֻּקְדָּשִׁים. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, הַכִּלְאַיִם, וְהַטְּרֵפָה, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן, טֻמְטוּם, וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, לֹא קְדֵשִׁים וְלֹא מַקְדִּישִׁים:
(3) In some ways [the laws relating to] dedications are more stringent than [that those relating to] a substitute, and in some ways [those relating to] a substitute are more stringent than [those relating to] dedications. In some ways [the laws relating to] dedications are more stringent than [those relating to] a substitute, For dedicated animals can make a substitute whereas a substitute cannot make another substitute. A congregation or partners can dedicate but cannot make a substitute. One can dedicate embryos and limbs, but one cannot make a substitute with them. [The laws relating to] a substitute are more stringent than [those relating to] dedications, since a substitute applies to a permanently blemished animal and it does not become hullin to be sheared or worked. Rabbi Yose son of Rabbi Judah says: they made an error to be the same as intent when it comes to a substitute, but they did not make an error to be the same as intent when it comes to dedication. Rabbi Elazar says: kilayim, terefah, a fetus extracted by means of a cesarean section, a tumtum and a hermaphrodite, cannot become sacred nor can they make sacred.
Our Mishnah teaches that when eating Cheilev, it is possible to also violate additional prohibitions. The Mishnah in Kerisos discusses how it is possible to layer on many Issurim onto one action.
(ד) יֵשׁ אוֹכֵל אֲכִילָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם אֶחָד. טָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַחֵלֶב, וְהָיָה נוֹתָר, מִן מֻקְדָּשִׁים, וּבְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיְתָה שַׁבָּת וְהוֹצִיאוֹ בְפִיו, חַיָּב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינוֹ מִן הַשֵּׁם:
(4) It is possible that by one act of eating a person could become liable to four hatats and one asham:If an unclean person eats forbidden fat, which was at the same time notar of an offering, and [it was on] Yom Kippur. Rabbi Meir says: if it was on Shabbat and he carried it out, he is liable [to yet another hatat]. But they said to him: this is a different name.
Our Mishnah teaches that Me'eila does not apply to the blood of Korbnos. The Mishnah in Yoma teaches, however, that at least on a Rabbinic level, one must be cautious and best practices dictate that one pay the Beis HaMikdash for the use of this blood.
(ו) הִזָּה עַל טָהֳרוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים, וּשְׁיָרֵי הַדָּם הָיָה שׁוֹפֵךְ עַל יְסוֹד מַעֲרָבִי שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן, וְשֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן הָיָה שׁוֹפֵךְ עַל יְסוֹד דְּרוֹמִי. אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ מִתְעָרְבִין בָּאַמָּה וְיוֹצְאִין לְנַחַל קִדְרוֹן, וְנִמְכָּרִין לַגַּנָּנִין לְזֶבֶל, וּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן:
(6) Then he sprinkled the top of the altar seven times. And he would pour out the remainder of the blood at the western base of the outer altar. And [the remainder of the blood sprinkled] on the outer altar he poured out at the southern base. Both mingled in the aqueduct and flowed into Nahal Kidron, and they were sold to gardeners as manure and by using them one transgresses the law of trespass (meilah).
The Mishnah in Zevachim confirms that Blood is not subject to the prohibitions of Noser, Pigul and Tumah.
(ה) קָדְשֵׁי נָכְרִים, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, נוֹתָר וְטָמֵא. וְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ, פָּטוּר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מְחַיֵּב. דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, חַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם נוֹתָר, מִשּׁוּם טָמֵא, חוּץ מִן הַדָּם. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, בְּדָבָר שֶׁדַּרְכָּן לְהֵאָכֵל. אֲבָל כְּגוֹן הָעֵצִים וְהַלְּבוֹנָה וְהַקְּטֹרֶת, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם טֻמְאָה:
(5) The sacrifices of non-Jews: one is not liable on their account for piggul, remnant, or defilement, and if [a priest] slaughters them outside [the Temple], he is not liable, the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Yose declares him liable. The things for which one is not liable on account of piggul, one is liable on account of remnant and defilement except blood. Rabbi Shimon declares one liable for anything which is normally eaten, but for wood, frankincense and incense, one is not liable for [transgressions involving] defilement.