(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_________________________________________________________________
THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________
Sanhedrin 079: The unknown Shor ha'Niskal
Rob Shorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked:
In the case of a shor that has been nigmar din and is awaiting s'killa that
beomes mixed up with other animals that are innocent we learn that they are
all stoned or locked up and allowed to die.
Why don't we say according to the opinion that they are put in a cell and
allowed to die that we go basar rov and that the first one to die was the
one that was nigmar din and the others are then puter and should be released?
We do do this with issure v heter by mixtures. So why not here?
Rob Shorr Ph.D., D.I.C.
Edison, NJ
----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:
Your question touches upon two issues: (1) Bitul, and (2) Tolin. If there
is one Shor ha'Niskal which is Chayav Misah, and one of the bulls in the
mixture dies, we should follow Rov and say that one of the Rov (i.e. a
Mutar Shor) died. On the other hand, the concept of Bitul should work to
say that the Asur Shor becomes Batel in all of the Mutar ones *mid'Oraisa*,
while mid'Rabanan there is still an Asur Shor among them. Hence, when one
of the bulls then dies, we should apply the principle of "Tolin" to say
that it was the Shor that was Asur (*mid'Rabanan*) that died.
The answer is that we do not apply Bitul here, because "Ba'alei Chaim Einam
Betelim" -- a living animal cannot become Batel. Regarding the rule of
"Tolin" see Zevachim 74a.
D. Zupnik
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with this text in the body of the message:
unsubscribe daf-discuss
