Chullin 39
אמר רבה בר בר חנה
presumably the case where one twisted the organs around to the back of the neck!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case the slaughtering would be valid and the nipping invalid. This case, therefore, exemplifies the first clause of the rule stated, the second clause being added merely for the sake of completeness.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
לא למעוטי שן וצפורן
- Rabbah B'Bar Hannah said: It is not so, but it excludes the use of a tooth or a finger-nail.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The finger-nail is essential in nipping whereas one is not permitted to slaughter with a finger-nail attached to the person. As to whether it is permitted to nip off the head with the teeth or not, v. Tosaf. ad. loc. This case, as explained, exemplifies the second clause of the rule stated.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
למעוטי מוליך ומביא
- Rather, said R'Jeremiah, it excludes the act of moving to and fro.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such movement of the finger.nail, it is assumed, invalidates the nipping, whereas it is essential to do so with the knife in the case of slaughtering. Accordingly the first clause of the rule in our Mishnah is the important one.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
הניחא למ"ד
This is well, however, according to the one who holds that to move [the fingernail] to and fro whilst nipping is not allowed; but according to the one who holds that it is allowed, how is it to be explained? - The sons of R'Hiyya agree with him who holds that to move the fingernail to and fro whilst nipping is not allowed.
בני ר' חייא סברי לה כמ"ד
Whereupon R'Jeremiah said to him: But surely, to move the finger-nail to and fro whilst nipping is most certainly allowed!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For so long as any particular act is not expressly excluded by the law, the more the nipping is made to resemble the slaughtering the better.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
קוצץ ויורד אין מוליך ומביא לא
Can it exclude the case where the organs of the throat had been torn loose?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And implying that just as the slaughtering in such a case is invalid so presumably also the nipping.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
א"ל ר' ירמיה
Surely not! For Rami B'Ezekiel has taught: The fact that the organs of the throat have been torn loose is not a defect in a bird.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Either for slaughtering or for nipping; but v. infra.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
א"ר ירמיה אמר שמואל
and the case is as follows: he commenced to nip at the slope of the head and, moving [his finger-nail] gradually downwards, ended the nipping below.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although the nipping was concluded within the proper region, i.e., at the back of the neck, it is nevertheless invalid according to Samuel.');"><sup>12</sup></span>
הא פסול בשחיטה פסול במליקה למעוטי מאי
For R'Huna said in the name of R'Assi: If one cut a third [of the windpipe] outside the prescribed area [for slaughtering] and then cut two thirds within it, the slaughtering is invalid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 19a');"><sup>13</sup></span>
אילימא למעוטי עיקור סימנין והא תני רמי בר יחזקאל
R'Aha the son of Raba said to R'Ashi: This dictum of Rami B'Ezekiel, namely, the fact that the organs have been torn loose is not a defect in a bird, can be maintained only by him who holds that according to the law of the Torah birds do not require shechitah; [