Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Why is the Gemara (Talmud) Chulin which talks about Ritual slaughter of animals not having to do with sacrifices in the Beis Hamikdash (temple) in the SEDER (order) of Kodshim which is talks about Temple sacrifices?

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Rambam (in the introduction to his Commentary on the Mishnah) says that it is because the Torah itself introduces the concept of slaughtering for nonsacred purposes immediately following the rules about sacrifices (Deut. 12:11, 15).

It may also be due to the fact that kosher slaughter is basically an optional mitzvah (you don't have to eat meat), except in the case of sacrifices - so the topic naturally fits here more than anywhere else.

share|improve this answer
1  
To boot, your second paragraph alludes to the fact that the maseches, despite its name, pertains largely to ritual slaughter in general, rules of which apply to both the consecrated and the personal. So although the question is a good one and more than a pun, one need not assume that this book's placement in this context is a contradiction. –  WAF Jun 29 '11 at 21:47
add comment

I would add as an answer, that perhaps, as the Torah describes within the context of wandering in the desert, animal slaughter without the context of sacrifice should be looked down upon.

See Vayikra Chapter 17:

1 And HaShem spoke unto Moses, saying:

2 Speak unto Aaron, and unto his sons, and unto all the children of Israel, and say unto them: This is the thing which HaShem hath commanded, saying:

3 What man soever there be of the house of Israel, that killeth an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp, or that killeth it without the camp,

4 and hath not brought it unto the door of the tent of meeting, to present it as an offering unto HaShem before the tabernacle of HaShem, blood shall be imputed unto that man; he hath shed blood; and that man shall be cut off from among his people.

So in essence, I would answer that Chulin, really is Kodshin. There are some chasidic stories regarding the holy purpose raising an animal by eating it as well.

share|improve this answer
    
Bamidbar or Vayikra? –  Isaac Moses Jun 30 '11 at 17:47
    
@IsaacMoses: Vayikra 17:1-9 and Devarim 12:20-21. @avi see my answer here that it was only in the Desert that animals were not eaten when not sacrificed. Once the Jews entered the land, that no longer applied: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/3660/… –  Menachem Jun 30 '11 at 18:04
    
Right, that's what I meant by in Bamidbar. And yet, the law was written in the forever binding Chumash, and not left as oral tradition within the desert itself. Thats all my point was. I'll edit the answer to be a bit more clear. –  avi Jun 30 '11 at 18:07
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.