Chullin 147

Chapter 147

א אין בהן אלא מצות פרוש בלבד
1 In such cases there is only the mere precept to keep aloof.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But there is no prohibition in the Torah even against the eating of this limb; as the foregoing verse is merely an indirect support for the Rabbinic restriction. It is obvious, therefore, that at the slaughtering the limb is not accounted as detached.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
ב יתיב רב יוסף קמיה דרב הונא ויתיב וקאמר אמר רב יהודה אמר רב
2 R'Joseph was sitting before R'Huna and recited as follows: Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: He who eats this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the limb that was hanging loose at the time of the slaughtering of the animal.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ג אכלו לזה לוקה
3 incurs a flogging.
ד אמר ליה ההוא מרבנן
4 Thereupon a certain Rabbi said to him [R'Huna], pay no attention to him [R'Joseph], for thus said R'Isaac B'Samuel B'Martha in the name of Rab: He who eats it does not incur a flogging.
ה לא תציתו ליה הכי אמר רב יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא משמיה דרב
5 R'Huna then said, upon whom should we rely?
ו אכלו לזה אינו לוקה
6 Thereupon R'Joseph turned his face away [in anger] and remarked: What is the difficulty?
ז אמר ליה רב הונא
7 I was speaking of the death [of the animal] when the limb is accounted as detached,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Consequently whosoever eats this limb incurs a flogging provided he was warned beforehand by the appropriate prohibition, namely, against eating a limb detached from a living animal, but not against eating nebelah.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ח אנן אמאן נסמוך
8 but he was speaking of the slaughtering when the limb is not accounted as detached.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case there is merely the precept to keep aloof. kuph o,unc');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ט אהדרינהו רב יוסף לאפיה אמר ליה
9 Raba said: Whence is derived the rule of the Rabbis that at death a loose limb is accounted as detached and at the slaughtering it is not accounted as detached?
י מאי קושיא
10 From the verse.
יא כי אמרי אנא במיתה דעושה ניפול
11 And upon whatsoever any of them, when they are dead, doth fall, it shall be unclean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI, 32. The particular use of the Heb. 'fall' in connection with , lit., 'on their death', suggests the teaching that only death causes the falling off of the limb but not the slaughtering.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
יב כי אמר איהו בשחיטה דאינה עושה ניפול
12 Now what does this verse exclude?
יג אמר רבא מנא הא מלתא דאמור רבנן
13 Should you say it excludes [creeping things] whilst they are alive, but these are expressly excluded by the words 'of their carcass'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 37.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
יד מיתה עושה ניפול שחיטה אינה עושה ניפול
14 It clearly teaches that at death the limb is accounted as detached but not at the slaughtering.
טו דכתיב
15 R'Adda B'Ahaba said to the Raba, But the verse deals with creeping things?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To which slaughtering does not apply; how then can the rule about slaughtering be excluded by inference from this verse? o,unc');"><sup>7</sup></span>
טז (ויקרא יא, לב) וכל אשר יפול עליו מהם במותם יטמא למעוטי מאי
16 - He replied: Since it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the expression , which is manifestly stated in order to exclude the slaughtering.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
יז אילימא למעוטי בחייהם מנבלתם נפקא
17 serves no purpose in the case of creeping things to which slaughtering does not apply, you may refer it to cattle.
יח אלא ש"מ
18 But it is indeed necessary [with regard to creeping things to teach] that they must be 'as at death', that is, they convey uncleanness only when moist but not when dry.
יט מיתה עושה ניפול ואין שחיטה עושה ניפול
19 - The expression, 'when they are dead', occurs twice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 31 and 32. One teaches the rule that only creeping things that are moist can convey uncleanness, and the other the exclusion of slaughtering.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
כ אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה לרבא
20 R'Hisda said: They differ only with regard to the limb of a live<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since to its kind, i.e., living animals, slaughtering applies.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
כא והא קרא בשרצים כתיב
21 foetus, but with regard to the limb of a dead foetus all agree that at the slaughtering the limb is accounted as detached.
כב אמר ליה
22 Rabbah however said: As they differ in the one case so they differ in the other also.
כג אם אינו ענין לשרצים דלאו בני שחיטה נינהו תנהו ענין לבהמה
23 THE SLAUGHTERING OF A LIVE EIGHT MONTHS' BIRTH.
כד ואכתי מבעי ליה כעין מיתה
24 [FOR TO ITS KIND SLAUGHTERING DOES NOT APPLY].
כה לחין מטמאים יבשים אין מטמאים
25 But has it not been taught: The slaughtering of a live eight months' birth could prove [otherwise], for even though slaughtering applies to its kind, the slaughtering does not render it clean? - R'Kahana answered, [It means that] through its dam slaughtering applies to its kind.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For by the slaughtering of the dam the foetus within the womb is rendered permitted to be eaten as if it were itself slaughtered, so that one could say that slaughtering applies to its kind.');"><sup>11</sup></span>
כו תרי במותם כתיבי
26 And our Tanna? - He does not consider as a refutation [the fact that slaughtering applies to it] through its dam.
כז אמר רב חסדא
27 But that Tanna who does consider this a refutation, whence does he derive the rule that the slaughtering of a trefah [animal] renders it clean? - He derives it from the exposition of Rab Judah in the name of Rab.
כח מחלוקת באבר דעובר חי אבל באבר דעובר מת דברי הכל שחיטה עושה ניפול
28 For Rab Judah said in the name of Rab, (others say: It was so taught in a Baraitha) , It is written: And if there dieth of the beasts, that toucheth the carcass thereof shall be unclean,]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI, 39. A literal rendering of the verse.');"><sup>12</sup></span>
כט ורבה אמר
29 that is to say, some of the beasts convey uncleanness and some do not, and which are they?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That do not convey uncleanness.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ל כמחלוקת בזה כך מחלוקת בזה:
30 They are trefah [animals] which have been slaughtered.
לא בן שמנה חי [וכו']:
31 R'Hoshaia raised this question, What is the law if a person put his hand into an animal's womb and slaughtered therein a living nine months' foetus?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It was subsequently delivered by the dam.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
לב והתניא
32 This can be asked according to R'Meir's view and also according to the Sages' view.
לג בן שמנה חי יוכיח שאף על פי שיש במינו שחיטה אין שחיטתו מטהרתו
33 According to R'Meir the question is this, perhaps when R'Meir contended that an animal which was extracted [alive from the womb] must itself be slaughtered he referred only to an animal which came forth [alive] into the world, but whilst within the womb of its dam the slaughtering of it would not render it permitted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it is all the more so according to the Sages, since they maintain that slaughtering does not apply to a foetus.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
לד אמר רב כהנא
34 And on the other hand, perhaps [it is permitted] even according to the view of Rabbis, for the Divine Law permits [the foetus] by [the slaughtering of any two out of] four organs!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the slaughtering either of its own two organs of the throat or of the two organs of the throat of its dam will render the foetus permitted. And it is all the more so according to R. Meir, since he is generally of the opinion that slaughtering applies to a foetus.');"><sup>16</sup></span>
לה יש במינו שחיטה אגב אמו
35 - R'Hananiah said: Come and hear.
לו ותנא דידן מינא דאמיה לא פריך
36 [We have learnt:] WHENCE WOULD WE KNOW THIS OF AN ANIMAL THAT WAS BORN TREFAH FROM THE WOMB?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which was never fit for slaughtering, since from birth is was a trefah.');"><sup>17</sup></span>
לז ולהאי תנא דפריך טרפה דשחיטתה מטהרתה מנא ליה
37 Now if it can be said [that the slaughtering of the foetu in its dam's womb renders it valid], then this also had a time when it was fit [for slaughtering], for a man might put his hand into the womb and slaughter it there [before it was rendered trefah]! - Raba said to him, Render: 'an animal that was formed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., from the very beginning of the development of the embryo it was trefah, e.g. it was formed with five legs which renders it trefah, cf. supra 58b.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
לח נפקא ליה מדרב יהודה אמר רב דאמר רב יהודה א"ר ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא
38 trefah from the womb', and this would be the case when, e.g. , it has five legs.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The additional leg being a hind leg in which case the animal is trefah. Such a defect existed in the animal from the time that it was formed in the womb.');"><sup>19</sup></span>
לט אמר קרא (ויקרא יא, לט) וכי ימות מן הבהמה מקצת בהמה מטמאה ומקצת בהמה אינה מטמאה ואיזו זו זו טרפה ששחטה
39 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF A MAN SLAUGHTERED AN ANIMAL AND FOUND IN IT AN EIGHT MONTHS FOETUS, EITHER LIVING OR DEAD, OR A DEAD NINE MONTHS FOETUS, HE NEED ONLY TEAR IT OPEN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It does not require to be slaughtered ritually for it has already been rendered permitted by the slaughtering of its dam.');"><sup>20</sup></span>
מ בעי רב הושעיא
40 AND LET THE BLOOD FLOW OUT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The blood is forbidden like the blood of its dam, but, unlike its dam, all its fat is permitted; v. infra 75a.');"><sup>21</sup></span>
מא הושיט את ידו למעי בהמה ושחט בן ט' חי מהו
41 IF HE FOUND IN IT A LIVING NINE MONTHS' FOETUS IT MUST BE SLAUGHTERED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Meir who is the author of this view contends that with the completion of nine months of pregnancy the foetus, if it is living, is deemed a separate being and is not rendered permitted by the slaughtering of the dam. The Sages, however, who dispute with him maintain that the nine months' living foetus is deemed a separate animal only on birth, but as long as it is within the womb it is part of the dam and is rendered permitted by the slaughtering of the dam.');"><sup>22</sup></span>
מב תבעי לר"מ ותבעי לרבנן
42 AND HE WOULD THEREBY INCUR THE PENALTY FOR [INFRINGING THE LAW OF] 'IT AND ITS YOUNG':<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If he slaughtered it on the same day as its dam. V. Lev. XXII, 28.');"><sup>23</sup></span>
מג תבעי לר"מ
43 SO R'MEIR'BUT THE SAGES SAY, THE SLAUGHTERING OF ITS DAM RENDERS IT PERMITTED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'clean'.');"><sup>24</sup></span>
מד עד כאן לא קאמר רבי מאיר בן פקועה טעון שחיטה ה"מ היכא דיצא לאויר העולם אבל במעי אמו לא שריא ליה שחיטה
44 
מה או דילמא
45 
מו אפילו לרבנן ד' סימנין אכשר ביה רחמנא
46 
מז אמר רב חנניא ת"ש
47 
מח הרי שנולדה טרפה מן הבטן
48 
מט ואי איתא משכחת לה דהיתה לה שעת הכושר דאי בעי עייל ידיה ושחטה
49 
נ אמר ליה רבא תני
50 
נא שנוצרה טרפה מן הבטן ומשכחת לה בבעלת ה' רגלים:
51 
נב <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> השוחט את הבהמה ומצא בה בן שמנה חי או מת או בן תשעה מת קורעו ומוציא את דמו
52 
נג מצא בן תשעה חי טעון שחיטה וחייב באותו ואת בנו דברי ר"מ
53 
נד וחכמים אומרים
54 
נה שחיטת אמו מטהרתו
55 
Previous ChapterNext Chapter