Let's finish Mishnayos in memory of those who were murdered in Israel.
Pledge Mishnayos
Mishnah.org Logo

Mishnayos Chullin Perek 4 Mishnah 5

חולין פרק ד׳ משנה ה׳


In the case of one who slaughtered an animal and found within it an eight-month-old fetus, i.e., one that was not full term, whether it was alive or dead, or a nine-month-old fetus, i.e., one that was full term, that was dead, that fetus is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of its mother, as it is considered part of its mother. Therefore, its blood is considered part of its mother’s blood and is prohibited, so one must tear the fetus and remove its blood before it may be consumed. If he found within it a live nine-month-old fetus, it requires its own slaughter, as it is considered an independent full-fledged animal, and if one slaughters both the mother and fetus on the same day, one is liable for violating the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring on the same day; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Even when the fetus is nine months old, it is still considered part of its mother, and the slaughter of its mother renders it permitted for consumption. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: Even if the fetus emerged alive and is now five years old and plowing in the field, the earlier slaughter of its mother rendered it permitted and it does not require slaughter before it is eaten. But if one tore an animal, i.e., he killed it without slaughtering it, and inside he found a live nine-month-old fetus, everyone agrees that the fetus requires its own slaughter because its mother was not slaughtered.

הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה וּמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן שְׁמֹנָה חַי אוֹ מֵת, אוֹ בֶן תִּשְׁעָה מֵת, קוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ. מָצָא בֶן תִּשְׁעָה חַי, טָעוּן שְׁחִיטָה, וְחַיָּב בְּאוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, שְׁחִיטַת אִמּוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁזוּרִי אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ בֶן שְׁמֹנֶה שָׁנִים וְחוֹרֵשׁ בַּשָּׂדֶה, שְׁחִיטַת אִמּוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ. קְרָעָהּ וּמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה חַי, טָעוּן שְׁחִיטָה, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחֲטָה אִמּוֹ:


ומוציא את דמו – and its fat alone is permitted, as it is taught in Torat Kohanim (i.e., the Midrash Halakha on the Book of Leviticus), when it states, the fat and the two kidneys with a guilt-offering (see Leviticus 7:4: “the two kidneys and the fat that is on them at the loins”), and we don’t need to say that from an a fortiori we would derive it, for just as regarding an offering of well-being–peace offering that anything of their species requires the fat-tail, for they require the fat and two kidneys. The guilt offering, that all of its species requires the tail, is it not the law that it requires the fat and the two kidneys? And what does the inference teach us, but rather to tell us that just as fat and the two kidneys that are stated with the guilt offering is removed from the general category of the embryo, for you are not able to state that the fat of the embryo that is found in a guilt offering should be offered with a female animal, even all, even the sacrifices that come from a female, the fat that is mentioned regarding them one removes from the category of the embryo. But since the fat of the embryo is not offered with all the sacrifices, it is permitted for consumption. But its blood is not worse than the blood of the limbs and we hold that in the Tractate Keritot that the blood of the limbs one violates a negative commandment.

טעון שחיטה – for newborns indirectly to compare an animal by itself, and to nt to be included–to be derived by implication with all the cattle that you may eat.

וחייב באותו את בנו – that you should not slaughter it on the date that you ritually slaughter its mother.

וחכמים אומרים שחיטת אמו מטהרתו – that the newly born and giving birth is the cause of it.

ר' שמעון שזורי כו' – to the words of the Sages, since that it (i.e., the animal) walked on the ground, it requires ritual slaughter according to the Rabbis. For one might exchange it in order to eat an animal without ritual slaughter. Burt Rabbi Shimon Shezuri permits even after he it had a parted hoof on the

קרעה – [cut into] the animal without ritual slaughter.

ומוציא את דמו. דחלבו בלבד הוא דשרי. כדתניא בתורת כהנים, כשהוא אומר חלב ושתי כליות באשם שאין צריך לומר דמקל וחומר הוה ילפינן לה, ומה שלמים שאין כל מינן טעון אליה, הרי הן טעונים חלב ושתי כליות. אשם שכל מינו טעון אליה, אינו דין שיטענו חלב ושתי כליות, ומה תלמוד לומר, אלא לומר לך מה חלב ושתי כליות האמור באשם מוצא מכלל שליל, שאינך יכול לומר חלב שליל הנמצא באשם יקריב, שהרי אין אשם בא נקבה, אף כל אפילו בקרבנות הבאים נקבה, חלב האמור בהן מוצא מכלל שליל. וכיון דאין חלב שליל קרב בכל הקרבנות, שרי באכילה. אבל דמו לא גרע מדם האיברים דקיימא לן במסכת כריתות דם האיברים עובר בלא תעשה:

טעון שחיטה. דחדשים גרמי לשוייה בהמה באנפי נפשה ולא אתרבי מכל בבהמה תאכלו:

וחייב באותו ואת בנו. שלא ישחטנו ביום ששחט את אמו:

וחכמים אומרים שחיטת אמו מטהרתו. דחדשים ולידה גרמי:

ר׳ שמעון שזורי כו׳ לדברי חכמים כיון שהלך על גבי קרקע טעון שחיטה מדרבנן, דאתי לאחלופי לאכול בהמה בלא שחיטה. ור׳ שמעון שזורי מתיר אפילו לאחר שהפריס על גבי קרקע. והלכה כחכמים:

קרעה. לבהמה בלא שחיטה: