Study Chullin folio 87A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud rejects this: How can these cases be compared? There, in the incident involving the students of Rav, it is impossible to drink and recite a blessing simultaneously. Accordingly, by requesting a cup over which to recite the blessing of Grace after Meals, they demonstrated their desire to
Mishnah: If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal or bird and did not cover the blood, and another person saw the uncovered blood, the second person is obligated to cover the blood. If one covered the blood and it was then uncovered, he is exempt from covering it again. If the wind blew earth o
Talmud: A baraita states: The verse states: “And he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth” (Leviticus 17:13), indicating that the one who poured out its blood, i.e., slaughtered the animal, shall cover it. If one slaughtered the animal or bird and did not cover the blood, and another pe
It is taught in another baraita: The verse states: “And he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth,” indicating that with that which he poured out the blood he shall cover it, i.e., he must use his hand, and he may not cover it with his foot, so that mitzvot will not be contemptible to him
A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: Are these 10 gold coins compensation for the stolen mitzva or are they compensation for the stolen blessing recited over the mitzva? The Talmud elaborates: What is the practical difference? The difference is with regard to a similar case involving Grace after