Avodah Zarah, Daf Lamed Daled, Part 5

 

Introduction

The mishnah prohibits one from deriving benefit from Bithynian cheese. Our sugya discusses why.

 

וגבינת בית אונייקי: ארשב"ל מפני מה אסרו גבינת אונייקי מפני שרוב עגלים של אותה עיר נשחטין לעבודת כוכבים

 

And Bithynian cheese etc.

R. Shimon b. Lakish said: Why did they forbid Bithynian cheese? Because the majority of calves of that place are slaughtered [as sacrifices] to idols.

 

The fact that it is prohibited to derive benefit from Bithynian cheese is probably what leads R. Shimon ben Lakish to posit that most of the calves there are used as sacrifices. If the issue was simply non-kosher ingredients, then it should have been prohibited to eat the cheese but permitted to derive benefit from it.

 

מאי איריא רוב עגלים אפילו מיעוט נמי דהא ר"מ חייש למיעוטא

אי אמרת רוב איכא מיעוט אלא אי אמרת מיעוט כיון דאיכא רוב עגלים דאין נשחטין לעבודת כוכבים ואיכא נמי שאר בהמות דאין נשחטין לעבודת כוכבים ה"ל מיעוטא דמיעוטא ומיעוטא דמיעוטא לא חייש ר"מ

 

Why specifically the majority of calves ? Even if it were the minority it would have been prohibited, since R. Meir is concerned about the minority!

When you say the majority [of calves] there really is only a minority [of cattle].

But if you were to say a minority, since a majority of calves are not slain for idolatry, and there are also other cattle that are not slaughtered for idolatry, this would be a minority of a minority, and even R. Meir does not take a minority of a minority into consideration.

 

The problem with Resh Lakish s statement is that even if only a minority of calves were slaughtered for sacrifice, the cheese would still be prohibited, for R. Meir does not follow the majority status. He is also concerned about the minority.

The answer is that if only a minority of calves were slaughtered for idolatry, we would have two minorities here. The second minority is that the cheese may be made from animals besides calves. Thus only some of the cheese is made from calves, and only a minority of calves are slaughtered for idolatry. If this were true, R. Meir would not prohibit the cheese. Therefore, Resh Lakish had to conclude that a majority of the calves were slaughtered for idolatry.

 

א"ל ר"ש בר אליקים לר"ש בן לקיש כי נשחטין לעבודת כוכבים מאי הוי והא את הוא דשרי דאתמר השוחט את הבהמה לזרוק דמה לעבודת כוכבים להקטיר חלבה לעבודת כוכבים רבי יוחנן אמר אסורה קסבר מחשבין מעבודה לעבודה וילפינן חוץ מפנים ורשב"ל אמר מותרת

 

R. Shimon b. Elyakim said to R. Shimon b. Lakish: Even if they are slaughtered for idolatry, what does it matter, for you yourself permit [something similar]? For it has been stated: If one slaughters an animal with the intention of sprinkling its blood for idolatry, or offering its fat for idolatry, R. Yohanan says that the animal is forbidden, for he holds that we compare the one sacrificial process to another, and that we learn slaughtering outside the sanctuary from within; But R. Shimon b. Lakish says it is permitted!

 

R. Shimon b. Elyakim points out to Resh Lakish that his statement here seems to contradict a different statement that he made. Elsewhere, R. Yohanan and Resh Lakish argue over whether an animal slaughtered with the intention of using its blood or fat for idolatry is prohibited. Resh Lakish says it is not. So how come here he says that it is.

 

א"ל תרמינך שעתך באומר בגמר זביחה הוא עובדה:

 

He replied: You have indeed raised a good difficulty. [Here, where I prohibit] refers to a case where he says that its very slaughtering is its worship.

 

Resh Lakish here distinguishes between two situations. If one slaughters an animal in order to use its blood or fat for idolatry, the very act of slaughtering does not yet render the animal prohibited. Only inside the Temple would his intention to perform an ancillary act for idolatrous purposes effect the status of the animal. But if he slaughters the animal itself for idolatry, then the animal is prohibited. It was to this case that Resh Lakish referred when explaining the prohibition of Bithynian cheese.