Me’ilah 4a

מעילה ד׳ ע״א

Meilah 4a

Learn Me’ilah 4a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Me’ilah 4a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Does wrong intent at שחיטה alone create full פיגול? Challenges from עולא, אילפא and the תודה loaves, and a suggested proof for רב גידל from a ברייתא about מעילה.

Overview

This amud continues a discussion of רב גידל's view: wrong intent during שחיטה alone does not create full פיגול. The גמרא first challenges this from עולא's קל וחומר about the קמיצה, and answers that עולא meant only an איסורא leading toward פיגול. Next, רבינא challenges רב אשי from אילפא, whose case of two סימנים cut with different wrong intentions seems to show that שחיטה alone makes פיגול. רב אשי answers that the final status is decided only once the blood is sprinkled. The גמרא then asks why the תודה loaves become holy at the שחיטה, and explains that 'קדש' there only means they can become פסול and need שריפה. Finally, the גמרא tries to support רב גידל from a ברייתא: 'פיגול is always subject to מעילה.' Two attempts to push off this proof are each challenged as making the ברייתא teach something obvious. First, it might be a case where the blood was not sprinkled. Second, it might be about an עולה. The discussion continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (11)

1. ChallengeChallenge from עולא's own קל וחומר
2. ResolutionHere too it means a prohibition leading toward פיגול
3. Challengeרבינא's challenge from אילפא's two-סימנים case
4. ResolutionOnce the blood is sprinkled, the picture becomes clear
5. ChallengeThen the תודה loaves should also wait for the sprinkling
6. Resolution'Holy' only means the loaves can become פסול
7. ProofA ברייתא that seems to support רב גידל
8. RejectionMaybe the blood was not sprinkled yet
9. ChallengeThen the ברייתא would be teaching something obvious
10. RejectionThe blood was sprinkled, but the case is an עולה
11. ChallengeAn עולה would also be obvious