Temurah 31a

תמורה ל״א ע״א

Learn Temurah 31a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Temurah 31a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Offspring and nursing of a טרפה, redeeming holy animals that became טרפה, and the start of the משנה contrasting קדשי מזבח with קדשי בדק הבית

Overview

The משנה says רבי אליעזר forbids the offspring of a טרפה on the מזבח, while the חכמים allow it. The גמרא explains the case in two ways. If a טרפה can give birth, the argument is about זה וזה גורם. If it cannot, the argument is about whether a fetus is part of its mother (עובר ירך אמו). רב הונא says even the חכמים forbid a chick from a טרפה's egg, and רבא tries to support him from a ברייתא about worms. אביי reads that ברייתא the other way and brings an explicit ברייתא that even רבי אליעזר permits the chick, and רבא accepts it. Next, the גמרא explains that a kosher animal that nursed from a טרפה is unfit only when it lived on that milk a full day at a time. It then brings the source for not redeeming holy animals that became טרפה just to feed dogs, along with a second version that allows it. The פרק ends, and a new משנה begins listing rules that apply to קדשי מזבח but not to קדשי בדק הבית, starting with תמורה and with פיגול, נותר and טומאה.

Opening lines

The steps (20)

1. StatementFirst view: the טרפה became pregnant after becoming a טרפה
2. StatementThe argument is about two causes, one forbidden and one permitted
3. StatementSecond view: the animal became a טרפה while pregnant
4. Statementרב הונא: the חכמים agree about a chick from a טרפה's egg
5. QuestionWhy do the חכמים agree here?
6. ResponseA fetus grows in its own space, but an egg grows from the hen's body
7. Proofרבא supports רב הונא from the case of worms
8. Rejectionאביי turns the worm proof the other way
9. ChallengeA ברייתא says outright that the chick is permitted
10. Conclusionרבא accepts the ברייתא
11. QuestionWhy does רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס disqualify the nursing animal?
12. ChallengeFattening can't be the reason, because of the idol-feed case
13. ResolutionThe real case: the animal lived a full day at a time on the טרפה's milk
14. QuestionAsking for the source that holy animals which became טרפה are not redeemed
15. ResponseA ברייתא learns from a פסוק that holy animals are not redeemed to feed dogs
16. StatementA second version reads the פסוק differently and allows redeeming for dogs
17. ConclusionHadran — Closing the פרק כל האסורין
18. StatementNew משנה: Two Kinds of Holy Items Have Different Rules
19. StatementOnly Altar Animals Can Create a Substitute
20. StatementOnly Altar Animals Bring Liability for פיגול, נותר, and טומאה