Chullin 78a:1-4חולין ע״ח א:א׳-ד׳
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Chullin 78a:1-4"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
78aע״ח א

דניכחוש חיליה אלא סוקרו בסיקרא אמאי כי היכי דליחזיוה אינשי וליבעי רחמי עילויה

that the tree’s strength will lessen. It is possible that the tree shed its fruits prematurely due to excessive blossoming. It taxes the tree to sustain these blossoms, and this may render the tree incapable of sustaining the fruits that subsequently grow from the blossoms. Stones were used to weaken the tree during blossoming, thereby reducing the number of blossoms that it needed to nourish. But with regard to painting it with red paint, for what benefit is it performed that makes it permitted despite the fact that this was the practice of the Amorites? The Gemara explains: One does so in order that people will see the tree and pray for it.

כדתניא (ויקרא יג, מה) וטמא טמא יקרא צריך להודיע לרבים ורבים מבקשים עליו רחמים וכן מי שאירע בו דבר צריך להודיע לרבים ורבים מבקשים עליו רחמים

As it is taught in a baraita: It is derived from the verse: “And he will cry: Impure, impure” (Leviticus 13:45), that a leper must publicize the fact that he is ritually impure. He must announce his pain to the masses, and the masses will pray for mercy on his behalf. And likewise, one to whom any unfortunate matter happens must announce it to the masses, and then the masses will pray for mercy on his behalf.

אמר רבינא כמאן תלינן כובסא בדיקלא כמאן כי האי תנא:

Ravina said: In accordance with whose opinion do we hang bunches of unripe dates on a palm tree that casts off its dates, despite the fact that this is the practice of the Amorites? It is in accordance with the opinion of this tanna of the baraita just cited, who states that one must announce such occurrences to the masses so that they will pray for mercy.



הדרן עלך בהמה המקשה

מתני׳ אותו ואת בנו נוהג בין בארץ בין בח"ל בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית בחולין ובמוקדשין

MISHNA: The prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, both in the presence, i.e., the time, of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and it applies with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals.

כיצד השוחט אותו ואת בנו חולין בחוץ שניהם כשרים והשני סופג את הארבעים

How so? In the case of one who slaughters an animal itself and its offspring, both of which are non-sacred, and slaughters them outside the Temple courtyard, both of the animals are fit for consumption, but for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs [sofeg] the forty lashes for violating the prohibition: “You shall not slaughter it and its offspring both in one day” (Leviticus 22:28).

קדשים בחוץ הראשון חייב כרת ושניהם פסולים ושניהם סופגים את הארבעים

If both animals were sacrificial animals slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, then for slaughtering the first animal, one is liable to receive excision from the World-to-Come [karet]. For slaughtering the second animal one is not liable to receive karet. The second animal was not fit for sacrifice, since one may not slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day. And both animals are disqualified for use as offerings, and for the slaughter of both of them, one incurs forty lashes apiece: The first being a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard and the second being the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day.

חולין בפנים שניהם פסולין והשני סופג את הארבעים קדשים בפנים הראשון כשר ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול

If both animals were non-sacred and slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, both of them are unfit to be sacrificed, being non-sacred animals slaughtered in the courtyard. And for slaughter of the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day. If both animals were sacrificial animals slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice, and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. But for slaughter of the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and it is unfit for sacrifice, because one was not allowed to slaughter it on that day.

חולין וקדשים בחוץ הראשון כשר ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול

If the first animal was non-sacred and the second a sacrificial animal, and both were slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for consumption and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. But for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice.

קדשים וחולין בחוץ הראשון חייב כרת ופסול והשני כשר ושניהם סופגים את הארבעים

If the first animal was a sacrificial animal and the second was non-sacred and both were slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, for the first animal, one is liable to receive karet for slaughtering a sacrificial animal outside the courtyard, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice. And the second is fit for consumption; and for the slaughter of both of them one incurs forty lashes apiece: The first being a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard and the second being the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day.

חולין וקדשים בפנים שניהם פסולין והשני סופג את הארבעים קדשים וחולין בפנים הראשון כשר ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול

If the first animal was non-sacred and the second was a sacrificial animal and both were slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, both of them are unfit for sacrifice. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes. If the first animal was a sacrificial animal and the second was non-sacred and both were slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice, as it is non-sacred.

חולין בחוץ ובפנים הראשון כשר ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול

If both animals were non-sacred, and one slaughters them, the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for consumption and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice as it is non-sacred.

קדשים בחוץ ובפנים הראשון חייב כרת ושניהם סופגים את הארבעים ושניהם פסולים

If both animals were sacrificial animals, and one slaughters them, the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside the Temple courtyard, for slaughtering the first animal one is liable to receive karet, and for slaughtering both of them one incurs forty lashes apiece. One set of lashes is given because the first was a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard, and the second set of lashes is given because the second animal is the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. And both of them are unfit for sacrifice.

חולין בפנים ובחוץ הראשון פסול ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים וכשר קדשים בפנים ובחוץ הראשון כשר ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול:

If both animals were non-sacred, and one slaughters them, the first inside the Temple courtyard and the second outside the Temple courtyard, the first is unfit for sacrifice, as it is non-sacred, and the one who slaughters it is exempt. And for the second, one incurs the forty lashes and the animal is fit for consumption. If both animals were sacrificial animals, and one slaughters them, the first inside the Temple courtyard and the second outside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice and one who slaughters it is exempt. And for the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice because its requisite time has not yet arrived.

גמ׳ ת"ר מנין לאותו ואת בנו שנוהג במוקדשין תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כב, כז) שור או כשב או עז כי יולד וכתיב בתריה (ויקרא כב, כח) ושור או שה אותו ואת בנו לא תשחטו ביום אחד לימד על אותו ואת בנו שנוהג במוקדשין

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring in a single day applies to sacrificial animals? It is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “When a bull, or a sheep, or a goat, is born…but from the eighth day and forward it may be accepted for an offering…to the Lord” (Leviticus 22:27), and it is written in the following verse: “And whether it be a bull or a sheep, you shall not slaughter it and its offspring both in one day.” The juxtaposition of the verses teaches with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring that it applies to sacrificial animals as well.

ואימא במוקדשין אין בחולין לא שור הפסיק הענין

The Gemara challenges: But since this prohibition is taught in the context of other halakhot of consecrated animals, perhaps I will say: Yes, it applies to sacrificial animals, but it does not apply to non-sacred animals. The Gemara explains: The repetitive phrase “and whether it be a bull or a sheep” in the second verse, when those types of animals, i.e., bulls and sheep, were already mentioned in the first verse, interrupted the topic, clarifying that the second verse is not referring to sacrificial animals.

ואימא בחולין אין במוקדשין לא כתיב ושור וי"ו מוסיף על ענין ראשון

The Gemara challenges: But if so, I will say: Yes, the prohibition applies to non-sacred animals, but it does not apply to sacrificial animals. The Gemara explains: Since in that verse it is written: “And whether it be a bull…you shall not slaughter it and its offspring,” the conjunction “and” adds the prohibition stated in the second verse to the first matter, including sacrificial animals as well.

אי מה קדשים כלאים לא אף אותו ואת בנו כלאים לא אלמה תניא אותו ואת בנו נוהג בכלאים ובכוי

The Gemara challenges: If this prohibition also applies to sacrificial animals, perhaps just as with regard to sacrificial animals, the offspring of diverse kinds is not included, e.g., the offspring of a ewe and a goat is unfit to be an offering, so too with regard to the prohibition of: A mother and its offspring, the offspring of diverse kinds should not be included, so that in the case of the offspring of a ewe and a goat, it would be permitted to slaughter the mother and offspring on the same day. Why, then, is it taught in a baraita (see Tosefta 5:1): The prohibition of: A mother and its offspring, applies to the offspring of diverse kinds and to a koy, a kosher animal with characteristics of both domesticated and undomesticated animals?

ועוד שה כתיב ואמר רבא

And additionally, why should the prohibition of: A mother and its offspring, apply to the offspring of diverse kinds? “A sheep,” is written in the verse with regard to that prohibition, and Rava said