Chullin 132 - September 9, 27 Elul

<div class="container"> <div id="model-response-message-contentr_ae3b9812a77c36e5" class= "markdown markdown-main-panel md-content enable-luminous-fast-follows enable-updated-hr-color tutor-markdown-rendering" dir="ltr" aria-busy="false" aria-live="polite"> <div class="container"> <div id="model-response-message-contentr_ae3b9812a77c36e5" class= "markdown markdown-main-panel md-content enable-luminous-fast-follows enable-updated-hr-color tutor-markdown-rendering" dir="ltr" aria-busy="false" aria-live="polite"> <p data-path-to-node="0">The eligibility of a Kohen's daughter (<em data-path-to-node="0" data-index-in-node="39">kohenet</em>) to receive priestly gifts (<em data-path-to-node="0" data-index-in-node="75">matanot</em>) is disputed between Rava (forbidding) and Ulla (permitting), reflecting a broader Tannaitic disagreement between the academy of Rabbi Yishmael (excluding a <em data-path-to-node="0" data-index-in-node="238">kohenet</em>) and the academy of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov (including her). Following common practice where several amoraim received and ate <em data-path-to-node="0" data-index-in-node="361">matanot</em> on account of their wives, Marimar codifies four definitive rulings: the halakha follows Rav regarding the unenforceability of Levite obligations, Rav Chisda regarding exemption from restitution for destroyed gifts, Ulla permitting gifts to a <em data-path-to-node= "0" data-index-in-node="607">kohenet</em>, and Rav Adda bar Ahava regarding <em data-path-to-node="0" data-index-in-node="650">pidyon haben</em> exemptions for a Levite woman's son.</p> <p data-path-to-node="1">Regarding crossbred animals (<em data-path-to-node="1" data-index-in-node="29">kil'ayim</em>) and a <em data-path-to-node="1" data-index-in-node="45">koy</em>, the Sages obligate <em data-path-to-node="1" data-index-in-node= "69">matanot</em> while Rabbi Eliezer exempts them. Addressing the underlying doubt over paternal seed (<em data-path-to-node="1" data-index-in-node="163">zera ha'av</em>), the Gemara questions why the Sages require full gifts rather than half-gifts, ultimately explaining that the obligation of the rabbis is only for half. However an alternative explanation is brought concluding that explicit scriptural inclusions (<em data-path-to-node="1" data-index-in-node="313">"im shor"</em>, <em data-path-to-node="1" data-index-in-node="324">"im seh"</em>) mandate full obligation. This discussion also establishes Rava's rule that legal recourse for unsepa