Chullin 17

Chapter 17

א מעילאי נמי קרמא איכא

1 is there not a membrane above [the fat]?1

ב איידי דממשמשא ידא דטבחא מפתת

2 - [This membrane,] since it is handled by the butcher, crumbles away.

ג ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב

3 Again Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: A scholar must learn three things, viz. : writing, shechitah, and circumcision.

ד תלמיד חכם צריך שילמוד ג' דברים

4 R'Hanania B'Shelemia said in the name of Rab, He must also learn the art of forming the knot of the Tefillin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. When properly tied the knot in the Tefillin worn on the head forms the shape of the Hebrew letter Daleth and that of the letter Yod in the Tefillin worn on the hand.');">2

ה כתב שחיטה ומילה

5 the benedictions recited at the marriage ceremony,3

ו ורב חנניא בר שלמיא משמיה דרב אמר

6 and the art of binding the Zizith.4

ז אף קשר של תפילין וברכת חתנים וציצית ואידך

7 And the other [Rab Judah]? - [He says], These are frequent.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the latter three acquirements. These being matters of common knowledge, it is not the special duty of a scholar to learn them. According to another explanation. 'these' refers to the accomplishments enumerated by Rab Judah. A scholar should particularly acquire these arts because he will be frequently called upon to practise them.');">5

ח הני שכיחן

8 Rab Judah stated in the name of Samuel: One may not eat of the slaughtering of any butcher who does not know the rules of shechitah.

ט ואמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל

9 And these are the rules of shechitah:6

י כל טבח שאינו יודע הלכות שחיטה אסור לאכול משחיטתו ואלו הן הלכות שחיטה

10 [the rules as to] pausing,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. There should be no pause or interruption while the slaughtering is being performed. The knife should be kept in continuous motion, forward and backward, until the organs or the greater part of them are cut through. V. infra 32a. vxrs');">7

יא שהייה דרסה חלדה הגרמה ועיקור

11 pressing,8

יב מאי קמ"ל

12 thrusting,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. During the act of slaughtering the whole of the knife must be visible. If e.g., one thrust the knife into the side of the throat and thus cut the organs, the slaughtering would be invalid, since the knife would have been covered either by the organs or the skin of the throat. V. infra 32a. vnrdv');">9

יג כולהו תנינהו

13 deflecting,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. The slaughtering must be performed within a certain prescribed region in the throat of the animal. If the knife cut anywhere outside this region the slaughtering would be invalid. V. infra 18a. ruehg');">10

יד לא צריכא ששחט לפנינו ב' וג' פעמים ושחט שפיר

14 and tearing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. Various interpretations have been suggested as to the meaning of this term. According to Rashi it means: tearing out the windpipe after having cut through the gullet; V. infra 32a. According to Halakoth Gedoloth it means: cutting through the organs after the uvkuf windpipe has been dislocated or torn out of its position; v, infra 85a. According to Tosaf. s.v. it means: slaughtering with a notched knife, which tears and does not cut the organs. V. article by Dr. S. Daiches in Hazafeh vol. 12, pp. 255-8 where it is shown that the Halakoth Gedoloth in fact agrees with Rashi.');">11

טו מהו דתימא

15 Why is it necessary to teach us this?

טז מדאידך שחט שפיר האי נמי שחט שפיר קמ"ל

16 Have we not learnt about each of these [elsewhere]? - It is only necessary for the case where one [not knowing the rules] slaughtered two or three times in our presence correctly.

יז כיון דלא גמר זימנין דשהי ודריס ולא ידע

17 You might argue that since on those occasions he slaughtered correctly so now, too, he will slaughter correctly.

יח ואמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל

18 It is therefore necessary to teach you that [he may not slaughter because,] since he does not know the rules, it may sometimes happen that he will pause or press, and will not know [that it is wrong to do so].

יט הטבח צריך שיבדוק בסימנים לאחר שחיטה

19 Again Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The butcher must examine the organs of the throat after slaughtering.12

כ אמר רב יוסף

20 R'Joseph remarked: We have learnt the same [in a Mishnah]:13

כא אף אנן נמי תנינא ר"ש אומר

21 R'Simeon says.

כב אם שהה כדי ביקור

22 If one paused for the time taken to examine.

כג מאי לאו כדי ביקור סימנין

23 .13

כד א"ל אביי

24 Now does it not mean the time taken to examine the organs [of the throat]? - Abaye replied: No; thus did R'Johanan say: It means the time taken for the Sage to examine [the knife].

כה לא הכי א"ר יוחנן

25 If this is the meaning, then the rule would vary according to circumstances?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It would depend upon whether the Sage was close by or far away; in the latter case the time for examination must, of necessity, be longer than in the former case.');">14

כו כדי ביקור חכם

26 - Rather [the meaning is]: The time taken for a butcher [who is himself] a Sage to examine [the knife].

כז א"כ נתת דבריך לשיעורים

27 If one did not examine [the organs of the throat after slaughtering], what is the law? - R'Eliezer B'Antigonus ruled in the name of R'Eliezer son of R'Jannai: The animal is trefah15

כח אלא כדי ביקור טבח חכם

28 and may not be eaten.

כט לא בדק מאי

29 In a Baraitha it was taught: The animal is nebelah15

ל ר' אליעזר בן אנטיגנוס משום רבי אלעזר בר' ינאי אמר

30 and defiles one who carries it.

לא טרפה ואסורה באכילה

31 On what principle do they differ? - On the principle laid down by R'Huna, who said: An animal while alive is presumed to be forbidden<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it is not permitted to eat a limb or flesh cut off from a living animal. This being so, the animal retains its status of being forbidden food until we have definite proof that it has been properly slaughtered. Once, however, we know that an animal has been ritually slaughtered the presumption that it is permitted food will not be rebutted without proof that some internal defect has made it trefah.');">16

לב במתניתא תנא

32 [and, therefore, remains forbidden when dead] until it becomes known to you that it was ritually slaughtered; once ritually slaughtered, it is presumed to be permitted until it becomes known to you how it became trefah.

לג נבלה ומטמאה במשא

33 The one17

לד במאי קמיפלגי

34 reasons thus: It is presumed to be forbidden, and now that it is dead [it is nebelah and therefore defiles].18

לה בדרב הונא דאמר

35 The other19

לו בהמה בחייה בחזקת איסור עומדת עד שיודע לך במה נשחטה נשחטה הרי היא בחזקת היתר עד שיודע לך במה נטרפה

36 reasons thus: The presumption holds good20

לז מר סבר

37 only in respect of the prohibition [to be eaten], but there is no presumption in respect of defilement.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Eliezer's argument is: The animal is now forbidden only because of the presumption which arose during its lifetime. Now, during its lifetime the animal was forbidden only to be eaten; it certainly could not defile. The effect, therefore, of the presumption can only be to render the animal forbidden to be eaten and not that it should defile.');">21

לח בחזקת איסור קיימא והשתא מתה היא ומר סבר

38 The text [above stated]: R'Huna said: An animal while alive is presumed to be forbidden [and, therefore, remains forbidden when dead] until it becomes known to you that it was ritually slaughtered; once ritually slaughtered, it is presumed to be permitted until it becomes known to you how it became trefah'.

לט בחזקת איסור אמרינן בחזקת טומאה לא אמרינן

39 Should he not [simply] have said: 'Once ritually slaughtered it is permitted'?22

מ גופא אמר רב הונא

40 - He teaches you this: That even if something happened to the animal to impair its status<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if some defect or disorder is now found in the animal, and there is a doubt whether it was there before the slaughtering or not, the animal is permitted because of the principle stated by R. Huna.');">23

מא בהמה בחייה בחזקת איסור עומדת עד שיודע לך במה נשחטה נשחטה בחזקת היתר עומדת עד שיודע לך במה נטרפה

41 [it is nevertheless permitted].

מב ולימא

42 For example, the question which was put to R'Huna by R'Abba: If a wolf came and carried away the intestines [of a slaughtered animal], what is the law?

מג נשחטה הותרה

43 [You ask] 'carried away'! Then they are not here!24

מד הא קמ"ל דאע"ג דאיתיליד בה ריעותא

44 - Rather, say: 'and perforated the intestines'.'

מה כדבעא מיניה רבי אבא מרב הונא

45 Perforated the intestines'! Then it is evident that the wolf did it! Rather say: 'carried away the intestines and brought them back perforated' - Now, what is the law?

מו בא זאב ונטל בני מעים מהו

46 Are we to apprehend that the wolf inserted [its teeth] in a perforation that was there previously,25

מז נטל

47 or not? - R'Huna replied: We do not apprehend that it inserted [its teeth] in a perforation.26

מח הא ליתנהו

48 [R'Abba] thereupon raised an objection [from the following Baraitha]: If one saw a bird nibbling at a fig or a mouse nibbling at a melon,

מט אלא נקב בני מעים מהו

נ נקב

נא הא קא חזינן דהוא נקבינהו

נב אלא נטלן והחזירן כשהן נקובין מהו

נג מי חיישי' שמא במקום נקב נקב או לא

נד א"ל

נה אין חוששין שמא במקום נקב נקב

נו איתיביה

נז ראה צפור המנקר בתאנה ועכבר המנקר באבטיחים

Previous Chapter Next Chapter