Source Sheet for Mishnayos Mesechtas Chullin Part 2

Part of this source sheet, which includes introductory sources and sources for the first Perek, can be found here.

Chapter 2

Chapter 2 has four main topics. The first two lay out the more intricate details of the Shechitah process. Namely, how much of the pipes need to be severed and identifying four additional actions that will disqualify a Shechita.

The third topic, is how to properly determine that the animal, despite a proper Shechitah, died because of the Shechitah and not some other, unrelated health or physical issue.

Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion on the proper intent one must have when Sheching an animal, even if not a Korban.

Sources for Mishnah 2:1

Our Mishnah, as explained by the Gemara and Meforshim, really requires the full severing of both pipes, but allows for the fact that severing the majority of one pipe in a bird and both in an animal suffices. In Yoma 3:4 we allow the Kohein Gadol to only sever the majority of pipes (allowing another to complete the process) so that he can undertake the other required actions he is obligated to perform.

(ד) פֵּרְסוּ סָדִין שֶׁל בּוּץ בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין הָעָם. פָּשַׁט, יָרַד וְטָבַל, עָלָה וְנִסְתַּפֵּג. הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ בִגְדֵי זָהָב, וְלָבַשׁ וְקִדֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו. הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ אֶת הַתָּמִיד. קְרָצוֹ, וּמֵרַק אַחֵר שְׁחִיטָה עַל יָדוֹ. קִבֵּל אֶת הַדָּם וּזְרָקוֹ. נִכְנַס לְהַקְטִיר קְטֹרֶת שֶׁל שַׁחַר, וּלְהֵטִיב אֶת הַנֵּרוֹת, וּלְהַקְרִיב אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְאֶת הָאֵבָרִים וְאֶת הַחֲבִתִּין וְאֶת הַיָּיִן:

(4) They spread out a linen sheet between him and the people. He stripped off [his clothes], went down and immersed himself, came up and dried himself. They brought him the golden garments, he put them on and sanctified his hands and feet. They brought him the tamid. He made the required cut and some one else finished it for him. He received the blood and sprinkled it. He went inside to smoke the morning incense and to trim the lamps; And to offer up the head and the limbs and the griddle cakes and the wine.

Sources for Mishnah 2:2

Our Mishnah uses the words "Shnayim Ochazin." The most famous use of this term can be found in Bava Metziya 1:1.

(א) שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּטַלִּית, זֶה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי מְצָאתִיהָ וְזֶה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי מְצָאתִיהָ, זֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי וְזֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי, זֶה יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵחֶצְיָהּ, וְזֶה יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵחֶצְיָהּ, וְיַחֲלֹקוּ. זֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי וְזֶה אוֹמֵר חֶצְיָהּ שֶׁלִּי, הָאוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי, יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלשָׁה חֲלָקִים, וְהָאוֹמֵר חֶצְיָהּ שֶׁלִּי, יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵרְבִיעַ. זֶה נוֹטֵל שְׁלשָׁה חֲלָקִים, וְזֶה נוֹטֵל רְבִיעַ:

(1) If two people are grasping a cloak: One says, “I found it” and the other says, “I found it”, or one says “It’s all mine”, and the other says, “It’s all mine”, they each swear that they don’t own more than half of the cloak and they split the cloak. one says, “It’s all mine” and the other says, “It’s half mine”, the one who says, “It’s all mine” swears that he doesn’t own less than ¾ and the one who says “It’s half mine” swears that he doesn’t own less than ¼, and the former takes ¾ and the latter takes ¼.

Sources for Mishnah 2:3

Our Mishnah uses the term "Hitiz" which connotes chopping off of the head (see Taharos 1:4) but in our Mishnah seems to mean severing the wind and food pipes by pressing down rather than slicing.

(ד) וּבַבְּהֵמָה, הָעוֹר וְהָרֹטֶב וְהַקִּפָּה וְהָאֲלָל וְהָעֲצָמוֹת וְהַגִּידִים וְהַקַּרְנַיִם וְהַטְּלָפַיִם, מִצְטָרְפִין לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, אֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ, הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לְנָכְרִי וְהִיא מְפַרְכֶּסֶת, מְטַמְּאָה טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, אֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת, עַד שֶׁתָּמוּת אוֹ עַד שֶׁיַּתִּיז אֶת רֹאשָׁהּ. רִבָּה לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, מִמַּה שֶּׁרִבָּה לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת:

(4) The hide, meat juice, sediment, dried-up meat, bones, sinews, horns and hooves join together [to make up the minimum quantity in order] to convey food-uncleanness, but not to [make up the minimum quantity in order to] convey nevelah-uncleanness. Similarly, if a man slaughtered an unclean animal for a Gentile and it still has convulsions, it can convey food-uncleanness, but it conveys nevelah-uncleanness only after it is dead, or its head has been chopped off. [Scripture] has [thus] made more cases that convey food-uncleanness than those that convey nevelah-uncleanness.

Our MIshnah uses identifes an "izmal" as a small knife. We find this utensil mentioned in Keilim 13:4.

(ד) מַגְרֵפָה שֶׁנִּטְּלָה כַפָּהּ, טְמֵאָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כְקֻרְנָס, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים מְטַהֲרִין. מְגֵרָה שֶׁנִּטְּלוּ שִׁנֶּיהָ אַחַת מִבֵּינְתַיִם, טְהוֹרָה. נִשְׁתַּיֵּר בָּהּ מְלֹא הַסִּיט בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, טְמֵאָה. הַמַּעֲצָד וְהָאִזְמֵל וְהַמַּפְסֶלֶת וְהַמַּקְדֵּחַ, שֶׁנִּפְגְּמוּ, טְמֵאִים. נִטַּל חִסּוּמָן, טְהוֹרִין. וְכֻלָּן שֶׁנֶּחְלְקוּ לִשְׁנַיִם, טְמֵאִים, חוּץ מִן הַמַּקְדֵּחַ. וְהָרוּקְנִי בִפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ, טְהוֹרָה:

(4) An ash-shovel whose spoon was missing is still susceptible to impurity, since it is still like a hammer, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages rule that it is clean. A saw whose teeth are missing one in every two is clean. But if a hasit length of consecutive teeth remained it is susceptible to impurity. An adze, scalpel, plane, or drill that was damaged remains susceptible to impurity, but if its steel edge was missing it is clean. In all these cases if it was split into two parts both remain susceptible to impurity, except for the drill. The block of a plane by itself is clean.

Our Mishnah lists a number of circumstances which might cause a person to delay the Shechitah process midstream. The Tosfos Yom Tov notes that the reference to multiple cases is merely to emphasize the point and not to add any new details. He notes that the RASH in Keilim 5:4 makes the same observation.

(ד) תַּנּוּר שֶׁהֻסַּק מֵאֲחוֹרָיו, אוֹ שֶׁהֻסַּק שֶׁלֹּא לְדַעְתּוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁהֻסַּק בְּבֵית הָאֻמָּן, טָמֵא. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנָּפְלָה דְלֵקָה בְתַנּוּרֵי כְפַר סִגְנָה, וּבָא מַעֲשֶׂה לְיַבְנֶה, וְטִמְּאָן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל:

(4) An oven that was heated from its outside, or one that was heated without the owner's knowledge, or one that was heated while still in the craftsman's house is susceptible to impurity. It once happened that a fire broke out among the ovens of Kefar Signah, and when the case was brought up at Yavneh Rabban Gamaliel ruled that they were unclean.

Our Mishnah teaches that while specific intent to Shecht is not needed, the Schechita action must begin with a conscious action and not the result of an accident. In other words, I can drop the knife and, if it serendipitously slices an animal’s neck, the Shechitah is valid. If the knife accidently drops and slices the animal’s neck, then the Shechita is invalid. We find a similar concept in Parah 6:1 regarding how the ash makes its way into the vessel to make the Mei Chattas.

(א) הַמְקַדֵּשׁ וְנָפַל הַקִּדּוּשׁ עַל יָדוֹ אוֹ עַל הַצַּד וְאַחַר כָּךְ נָפַל עַל הַשֹּׁקֶת, פָּסוּל. נָפַל מִן הַשְּׁפוֹפֶרֶת לַשֹּׁקֶת, פָּסוּל. נָטַל מִשְּׁפוֹפֶרֶת וְכִסָּה, אוֹ שֶׁהֵגִיף אֶת הַדֶּלֶת, הַקִּדּוּשׁ כָּשֵׁר, וְהַמַּיִם פְּסוּלִים. זְקָפָהּ בָּאָרֶץ, פָּסוּל. לְתוֹךְ יָדוֹ, כָּשֵׁר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר:

(1) If one was about to mix the ashes with the water and the ashes fell upon his hand or upon the side of the trough and then fell into the trough, the mixture is invalid. If they fell from the tube into the trough, the mixture is invalid. If he took the ashes from the tube and then covered it, or shut a door, the ashes remain valid but the water becomes invalid. If he put it up erect on the ground, the water becomes invalid. If in his hand, the water is valid, since it is impossible [otherwise]

Sources for Mishnah 2:4

Our Mishnah relates that although Rabi Akiva initially disagreed with Rabi Y'shaveiv, he ultimately conceded to his ruling. That is not always the case when it comes to Rabi Akiva. The Mishna in Eduyos 2:6 tells us that Rabi Yishmael said three rulings and Rabi Akiva would not agree.

(ו) שְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְלֹא הוֹדָה לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. הַשּׁוּם וְהַבֹּסֶר וְהַמְּלִילוֹת שֶׁרִסְּקָן מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם, שֶׁרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר, יִגְמֹר מִשֶּׁתֶּחְשָׁךְ, וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִגְמֹר:

(6) Rabbi Yishmael said three things, and Rabbi Akiba disagreed with him.Garlic or unripe grapes or green ears of grain were being crushed [on the eve of the Sabbath] while it is yet day: Rabbi Yishmael says: “He may finish crushing after it grows dark.” But Rabbi Akiba says: “He may not finish.”

Sources for Mishnah 2:5

Our Mishnah uses the term "Huchshar" to describe the process by which a food item becomes susceptible to potentially becoming (receiving) Tamei. Typically, this is caused when the food item is wetted by any one of seven enumerated liquids (i.e., wine, blood, oil, milk, dew, honey and water see Machshirin 6:4).

This is the usual context of this term. We find two other uses of this term. In the second Perek of Meilia (2:1) it is used to connote the moment when a Korban is primed to becoming Tamei from a low level of Tumah (i.e., Tevul Yom). And in Zevachim 13:7 it is used to describe when a person violates the proscription on bringing a Korbon outside the Beis HaMikdash.

The Mishnah teaches that because, in the absence of the blood, according to the Tana Kama, the meat is not susceptible to becoming Tamei, a person may eat the meat even if he had not washed his hands. We find this term "Yadayim M'soavos ina number of places, e.g. Chagiga 3:3 and Tevul Yom 2:2.

(ד) שִׁבְעָה מַשְׁקִין הֵן. הַטַּל וְהַמַּיִם, הַיַּיִן וְהַשֶּׁמֶן, וְהַדָּם, וְהֶחָלָב, וּדְבַשׁ דְּבוֹרִים. דְּבַשׁ צְרָעִים, טָהוֹר, וּמֻתָּר בַּאֲכִילָה:

(4) There are seven liquids: dew, water, wine, oil, blood, milk and bees’ honey. Hornets’ honey does not cause susceptibility to uncleanness and may be eaten.

(א) חַטַּאת הָעוֹף, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ מִשֶּׁהֻקְדְּשָׁה. נִמְלְקָה, הֻכְשְׁרָה לְהִפָּסֵל בִּטְבוּל יוֹם וּבִמְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים וּבְלִינָה. הֻזָּה דָמָהּ, חַיָּבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, נוֹתָר וְטָמֵא, וְאֵין בָּהּ מְעִילָה:

(1) The law of sacrilege applies to the hatat of a bird from the moment of its dedication. With the pinching of its neck it becomes susceptible to be disqualified through contact with a tevul yom or one who still requires atonement, or by remaining overnight. Once its blood has been sprinkled it is subject to [the laws of] piggul, notar and defilement, but the law of sacrilege no longer applies to it.

(ז) הַמּוֹלֵק אֶת הָעוֹף בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, חַיָּב. מָלַק בַּחוּץ וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, פָּטוּר. הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הָעוֹף בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, פָּטוּר. שָׁחַט בַּחוּץ וְהֶעֱלָה בַחוּץ, חַיָּב. נִמְצָא, דֶּרֶךְ הֶכְשֵׁרוֹ מִבִּפְנִים, פְּטוּרוֹ בַחוּץ. דֶּרֶךְ הֶכְשֵׁרוֹ בַחוּץ, פְּטוּרוֹ בִפְנִים. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כֹּל שֶׁחַיָּבִין עָלָיו בַחוּץ, חַיָּבִין עַל כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ בִפְנִים, שֶׁהֶעֱלָהוּ בַחוּץ, חוּץ מִן הַשּׁוֹחֵט בִּפְנִים וּמַעֲלֶה בַחוּץ:

(7) If one nips a bird [offering] inside and offers it up outside, he is liable; If one nips it outside and offers it up outside, he is exempt. If one slaughters a bird inside and offers it up outside, he is exempt. If one slaughters [it] outside and offers [it] up outside, he is liable. Thus its prescribed rite inside exempts him [if he does it] outside, while its prescribed rite outside exempts him [if he does it] inside. Rabbi Shimon says: whatever he is liable for outside, he is liable in similar circumstances inside when one [subsequently] offers it up outside; except when one slaughters [a bird] inside and offers [it] up outside.

(ג) אוֹכְלִין אֳכָלִים נְגוּבִין בְּיָדַיִם מְסֹאָבוֹת בַּתְּרוּמָה, אֲבָל לֹא בַּקֹּדֶשׁ. הָאוֹנֵן וּמְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים צְרִיכִין טְבִילָה לַקֹּדֶשׁ, אֲבָל לֹא לַתְּרוּמָה:

(3) They may eat dry foods with impure hands when it comes to terumah, but not when it comes to sacred things. The one who has not yet buried his dead (an onen) and one who lacks atonement require immersion for sacred things but not for terumah.

(ב) קְדֵרָה שֶׁהִיא מְלֵאָה מַשְׁקִים וְנָגַע בָּהּ טְבוּל יוֹם, אִם הָיָה מַשְׁקֵה תְרוּמָה, הַמַּשְׁקִין פְּסוּלִין וְהַקְּדֵרָה טְהוֹרָה. וְאִם הָיָה מַשְׁקֵה חֻלִּין, הַכֹּל טָהוֹר. וְאִם הָיוּ יָדָיו מְסֹאָבוֹת, הַכֹּל טָמֵא. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּיָּדַיִם מִבִּטְבוּל יוֹם. וְחֹמֶר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם מִבַּיָּדַיִם, שֶׁסְּפֵק טְבוּל יוֹם פּוֹסֵל אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה, וְהַיָּדַיִם סְפֵקָן טָהוֹר:

(2) A pot which was full of liquid and a tevul yom touched it: If it is terumah, the liquid is disqualified, but the pot is clean. But if the liquid is non-sacred [hullin] then all remains clean. If his hands were defiled [and he touched the liquids in the pot], all becomes unclean. This is a case defiled hands are treated more stringently than a tevul yom. But a greater stringency is applied to a tevul yom than to defiled hands, since a doubtful tevul yom disqualifies terumah, but doubts with regard to defiled hands are clean.

In our Mishnah, Rabi Shimon says that its not the blood that makes the meat susceptible to Tumah, rather it is the Shechitah itself. Meaning, if Shechitah has the power to allow the food to be eated, it certainly can make it susceptible to Tumah. See Chullin 9:7 where Rai Shimon seems to be in line with his and see YACHIN there.

(ז) הָאֵבָר וְהַבָּשָׂר הַמְדֻלְדָּלִין בִּבְהֵמָה, מְטַמְּאִין טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין בִּמְקוֹמָן, וּצְרִיכִין הֶכְשֵׁר. נִשְׁחֲטָה בְהֵמָה, הֻכְשְׁרוּ בְדָמֶיהָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, לֹא הֻכְשָׁרוּ. מֵתָה הַבְּהֵמָה, הַבָּשָׂר צָרִיךְ הֶכְשֵׁר. הָאֵבָר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֵבָר מִן הַחַי וְאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֵבַר נְבֵלָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר:

(7) Limbs or pieces of flesh which hang loose from a [living] animal are susceptible to food uncleanness while they are in their place. And [in order to become unclean] they must be first rendered susceptible to uncleanness. If the animal was slaughtered, they have by the blood [of the slaughtering] become susceptible to uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says: they have not become susceptible to uncleanness. If the animal died, the hanging flesh must be rendered susceptible to uncleanness. The limb is unclean as a limb severed from a living creature, but is not unclean as the limb of a nevelah (carcass), the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon declares it clean.

Sources for Mishnah 2:6

Our Mishnah discusses the propriety of Shechting a sick or old animal. Oftentimes, people hurried to Shecht these animals lest it die. The Mishnah in Beitza 3:3 teaches that one should not Shecht such an animal on Yom Tov unless there is at least a possibility that one can eat some of the meat prior to the end of Yom Tov. This is so, even if you do not expect to eat he meat on Yom Tov. (A healthy animal should not be Shechted unless you need the meat on Yom Tov).

(ג) בְּהֵמָה מְסֻכֶּנֶת לֹא יִשְׁחֹט, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן יֵשׁ שָׁהוּת בַּיּוֹם לֶאֱכֹל מִמֶּנָּה כַּזַּיִת צָלִי. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ כַזַּיִת חַי מִבֵּית טְבִיחָתָהּ. שְׁחָטָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה, לֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה בְמוֹט וּבְמוֹטָה. אֲבָל מֵבִיא בְיָדוֹ אֵבָרִים אֵבָרִים:

(3) One may not slaughter [on Yom Tov] an animal which is about to die unless there is time enough on that day to eat from it as much as an olive of roasted flesh. Rabbi Akiva says: even [if there is only time to eat] as much as an olive of raw flesh [taken] from the place of slaughter. If he slaughtered it in the field, he may not bring it in on a pole or a barrow, but he may bring it in piece by piece in his hand.

Our Mishna sees the post-mortem convulsions as a sign of vitality in the animal prior to its death. The Mishna in Ohalos (1:6) makes clear, however, that these movements should not be mistaken for signs of life.

Also notable, is that in our Mishna, when characterizing the movement of the tail, the Mishnah uses the term "תְּכַשְׁכֵּשׁ " but when characterizing the movement of other limbs, it uses "תְּפַרְכֵּס ." In Ohalos, however, the Mishnah uses the term תְּפַרְכֵּס in describing the tail.

(ו) אָדָם אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא, עַד שֶׁתֵּצֵא נַפְשׁוֹ. וַאֲפִלּוּ מְגֻיָּד, וַאֲפִלּוּ גוֹסֵס. זוֹקֵק לַיִּבּוּם וּפוֹטֵר מִן הַיִּבּוּם, מַאֲכִיל בַּתְּרוּמָה וּפוֹסֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה. וְכֵן בְּהֵמָה וְחַיָּה אֵינָן מְטַמְּאִין, עַד שֶׁתֵּצֵא נַפְשָׁם. הֻתְּזוּ רָאשֵׁיהֶם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּפַרְכְּסִים, טְמֵאִים, כְּגוֹן זָנָב שֶׁל לְטָאָה שֶׁהִיא מְפַרְכָּסֶת:

(6) A person does not defile [as a corpse] until he dies. Even he is cut up or even if he is about to die, he [still] makes levirate marriage obligatory and exempts from levirate marriage, he feeds [his mother] terumah and disqualifies [his mother] from eating terumah. Similarly in the case of cattle or wild animals, they do not defile until they die. If their heads have been cut off, even though they are moving convulsively, they are unclean, like a lizard's tail, which moves convulsively.

Rabi Shimon, in referring to the ruling of Rabi Eliezer, uses the term "K'midas." This is unique phraseology and is found only one other time, in Menachos 3:4.

(ד) נִטְמְאוּ שְׁיָרֶיהָ, נִשְׂרְפוּ שְׁיָרֶיהָ, אָבְדוּ שְׁיָרֶיהָ, כְּמִדַּת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, כְּשֵׁרָה. וּכְמִדַּת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, פְּסוּלָה. שֶׁלֹּא בִכְלִי שָׁרֵת, פְּסוּלָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַכְשִׁיר. הִקְטִיר קֻמְצָהּ פַּעֲמַיִם, כְּשֵׁרָה:

(4) If the remainder of the minhah became unclean or was burnt or lost: According to the rule of Rabbi Eliezer it is valid [to burn the fistful], But according to the rule of Rabbi Joshua it is invalid. If [he did] not [put the fistful] into a ministering vessel it is invalid; But Rabbi Shimon declares it valid. If he burnt the handful twice, it is valid.

Sources for Mishnah 2:7

Our Mishnah discusses the propriety of Shechting an animal owned by a non-Jew and whether there is any concerns that the Non-Jew is intending that this animal or meat be used as part of his idol worship. In Avodah Zarah 2:3, the Mishnah presumes that non-Jewish meat is not prohibited until after it enters their Houses of Worship. The Talmud notes that is likely not in accordance with Rabi Eliezer of our Mishnah.

(ג) אֵלּוּ דְבָרִים שֶׁל גּוֹיִם אֲסוּרִין וְאִסּוּרָן אִסּוּר הֲנָאָה. הַיַּיִן, וְהַחֹמֶץ שֶׁל גּוֹיִם שֶׁהָיָה מִתְּחִלָּתוֹ יַיִן, וְחֶרֶס הַדְרִיָּנִי, וְעוֹרוֹת לְבוּבִין. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַקֶּרַע שֶׁלּוֹ עָגוֹל, אָסוּר. מָשׁוּךְ, מֻתָּר. בָּשָׂר הַנִּכְנָס לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, מֻתָּר. וְהַיּוֹצֵא, אָסוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְזִבְחֵי מֵתִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. הַהוֹלְכִין לַתַּרְפּוּת, אָסוּר לָשֵׂאת וְלָתֵת עִמָּהֶם. וְהַבָּאִין, מֻתָּרִין:

(3) The following things belonging to non-Jews are forbidden [for Jews to use] and the prohibition extends to any benefit that may be derived from them: wine, or a non-Jew’s vinegar that was formerly wine, Hadrianic earthenware, skins pierced at the animal’s heart. Rabban Shimon Gamaliel says: when its tear is round, [the skin] is forbidden, but if oblong it is permitted. Meat which is being brought into a place of idol worship is permitted, but that which is brought out is forbidden, because it is like a sacrifice to the dead, this is the opinion of Rabbi Akiba. With non-Jews going on a pilgrimage [to worship idols] it is forbidden to have any business transactions, but with those returning it is permitted.

Rabi Eliezer in our MIshnah rules strictly that even if all the non-Jew wants is a small piece of the liver, the "Chatzar Kaved," that is enough to invalidate the Shechita. We find a reference to the Chatzar Kaved in Yoma 8:6 where it is mentioned as a cure for someone bitten by a rabid dog.

(ו) מִי שֶׁאֲחָזוֹ בֻלְמוּס, מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ אֲפִלּוּ דְבָרִים טְמֵאִים, עַד שֶׁיֵּאוֹרוּ עֵינָיו. מִי שֶׁנְּשָׁכוֹ כֶלֶב שׁוֹטֶה, אֵין מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ מֵחֲצַר כָּבֵד שֶׁלוֹ, וְרַבִּי מַתְיָא בֶן חָרָשׁ מַתִּיר. וְעוֹד אָמַר רַבִּי מַתְיָא בֶן חָרָשׁ, הַחוֹשֵׁשׁ בִּגְרוֹנוֹ, מַטִּילִין לוֹ סַם בְּתוֹךְ פִּיו בְּשַׁבָּת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סְפֵק נְפָשׁוֹת, וְכָל סְפֵק נְפָשׁוֹת דּוֹחֶה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת:

(6) If one is seized by a ravenous hunger, they feed him even unclean things until his eyes light up [and he returns to health]. If one was bit by a mad dog, they do not feed him the lobe of its liver. But Rabbi Matia ben Harash permits it. Moreover Rabbi Matia ben Harash said: if one has pain in his throat, they may drop medicine into his mouth on Shabbat, because it is a possibility of danger to human life and every potential danger to human life overrides Shabbat.

Like in our Mishnah, in Zevachim 4:6, Rabi Yose likewise rules that we need not be concerned with the owner's intent and, rather, we focus on the person performing the actual physical actions.

(ו) לְשֵׁם שִׁשָּׁה דְבָרִים הַזֶּבַח נִזְבָּח, לְשֵׁם זֶבַח, לְשֵׁם זוֹבֵחַ, לְשֵׁם הַשֵּׁם, לְשֵׁם אִשִּׁים, לְשֵׁם רֵיחַ, לְשֵׁם נִיחוֹחַ. וְהַחַטָּאת וְהָאָשָׁם, לְשֵׁם חֵטְא. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אַף מִי שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְלִבּוֹ לְשֵׁם אַחַד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ, כָּשֵׁר, שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין, שֶׁאֵין הַמַּחֲשָׁבָה הוֹלֶכֶת אֶלָּא אַחַר הָעוֹבֵד:

(6) The sacrifice is slaughtered for the sake of six things:For the sake of the sacrifice, For the sake of the sacrificer, For the sake of the [Divine] Name, For the sake of fire-offerings, For the sake of fragrance, For the sake of pleasing; And a hatat and an asham for the sake of sin. Rabbi Yose said: even if one did not have any of these purposes in his heart, it is valid, because it is a regulation of the court. Since the intention is determined only by the worshipper.

Rabi Yose uses a “Kal V’Chomer” to buttress his argument. We find similar use of this Midrashic tool throughout Mishnayos. see https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/204283

Rabi Yose's Kal V'Chomer starts by laying the foundation that "Pigul," the improper intent to perform or act upon a Korban in the wrong time, can only be accomplished by the person performing the actions. A list of prohibited actions can be found in Zevachim 2:2-3.

(ב) הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַזֶּבַח לִזְרֹק דָּמוֹ בַחוּץ אוֹ מִקְצָת דָּמוֹ בַחוּץ, לְהַקְטִיר אֶת אֵמוּרָיו בַּחוּץ אוֹ מִקְצָת אֵמוּרָיו בַּחוּץ, לֶאֱכֹל בְּשָׂרוֹ בַחוּץ אוֹ כַזַּיִת מִבְּשָׂרוֹ בַחוּץ אוֹ לֶאֱכֹל כַּזַּיִת מֵעוֹר הָאַלְיָה בַחוּץ, פָּסוּל וְאֵין בּוֹ כָרֵת. לִזְרֹק דָּמוֹ לְמָחָר אוֹ מִקְצָת דָּמוֹ לְמָחָר, לְהַקְטִיר אֵמוּרָיו לְמָחָר אוֹ מִקְצָת אֵמוּרָיו לְמָחָר, לֶאֱכֹל בְּשָׂרוֹ לְמָחָר אוֹ כַזַּיִת מִבְּשָׂרוֹ לְמָחָר אוֹ כַּזַּיִת מֵעוֹר הָאַלְיָה לְמָחָר, פִּגּוּל וְחַיָּבִין עָלָיו כָּרֵת:

(ג) זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְהַמְקַבֵּל וְהַמְהַלֵּךְ וְהַזּוֹרֵק, לֶאֱכֹל דָּבָר שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל, לְהַקְטִיר דָּבָר שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לְהַקְטִיר, חוּץ לִמְקוֹמוֹ, פָּסוּל וְאֵין בּוֹ כָרֵת. חוּץ לִזְמַנּוֹ, פִּגּוּל וְחַיָּבִין עָלָיו כָּרֵת, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיִּקְרַב הַמַּתִּיר כְּמִצְוָתוֹ:

(2) One who slaughters a sacrifice [intending]: To sprinkle its blood outside [the Temple] or part of its blood outside; To burn its innards or part of its innards outside; To eat its flesh or as much as an olive of its flesh outside, Or to eat as much as an olive of the skin of the fat-tail outside, It is invalid, but it does not involve karet. [One he slaughters a sacrifice intending]: To sprinkle its blood or part of its blood the next day, To burn its innards or part of its innards on the next day; To eat its flesh or as much as an olive of its flesh on the next day; Or to eat as much as an olive of the skin of its fat-tail on the next day, It is piggul, and involves kareth.

(3) This is the general rule: anyone who slaughters or receives [the blood], or carries [it] or sprinkles [it] [intending] to eat as much as an olive of that which is normally eaten or to burn [on the altar] as much as an olive of that which is normally burned outside its prescribed place, [the sacrifice] is invalid, but it does not involve karet; [Intending to eat or burn] after its designated time, it is piggul and it involves karet. Provided that the mattir is offered in accordance with the law.

The Talmud posits two understandings of Rabi Yose's Kal V'CHomer. Each, however, are not obvious from the text of the Mishnah itself. Rather, they require significant interpolations into the text to help explain Rabi Yose's point. Albeck suggests a more simple reading of the Mishnah. Focusing on the fact that intent does,in fact, make a difference when it comes to idolatry, he suggests that the Mishnah is really focusing on the word "Pasul" and distinguishing between a Korban and Chullin. Albeck argues that the term Pasul arising from wrongful intent is a concept unique to the former and has no parallel when it comes to Chullin. Unlike, a Korban where a designation as Pasul condemns the Korban to being burned (see Temurah 7:6), if Chullin is deemed idolatrous, then it is prohibited to derive benefit but it is not "Pasul." (See Chullin 2:8 and 5:1-2, where the term Pasul is used in connection with Chullin being Shechted (i.e., an action) for an idolatrous purpose or in the Azarah or a violation of killing the mother and child animal on the same day).

Surveying other Kal V'chomer's in the Mishnah (see https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/204283) suggests that they can (and were) read more simply further supporting Albeck's suggested understanding of the Kal V'Chomer.

(ו) כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ חוּץ לִזְמַנָּן וְחוּץ לִמְקוֹמָן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִשָּׂרְפוּ. אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, יִשָּׂרֵף. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יִקָּבֵר. חַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, תִּשָּׂרֵף. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יְטִילֶנָּה לָאַמָּה. כָּל הַנִּשְׂרָפִין לֹא יִקָּבְרוּ, וְכָל הַנִּקְבָּרִים לֹא יִשָּׂרְפוּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רָצָה לְהַחֲמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ לִשְׂרֹף אֶת הַנִּקְבָּרִים, רַשַּׁאי. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינוֹ מֻתָּר לְשַׁנּוֹת:

(6) All dedicated animals which were slaughtered [with the intention of being eaten] after their set time or outside of their set place must be burned. An asham offered by one in doubt [as to whether he has transgressed] is to be burned. Rabbi Judah says: it is to be buried. A hatat of a bird that is brought for a doubt is burned. Rabbi Judah says: it is cast into the sewer. All things which must be buried must not be burned, and all things which must be burned must not be buried. Rabbi Judah says: if one wishes to be stringent with himself, to burn things which are buried, he is permitted to do so. They said to him: he is not allowed to change.

Sources for Mishnah 2:8

Our Mishnah teaches that if a person Shechts an animal intending to sacrifice it to a natural phenomenon, such as a mountain or the sea, the Shechita is Paul and the meat cannot be eaten. It is not prohibited from deriving benefit, since these natural phenomenon cannot themselves be Idols. See Avodah Zara 3:5.

If, however, his intent is to slaughter these animals to a "higher" power governing these phenomenon, than the meat would be wholly prohibited.

(ה) הַגּוֹיִם הָעוֹבְדִים אֶת הֶהָרִים וְאֶת הַגְּבָעוֹת, הֵן מֻתָּרִין וּמַה שֶּׁעֲלֵיהֶם אֲסוּרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ז) לֹא תַחְמֹד כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב עֲלֵיהֶם וְלָקַחְתָּ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר, (שם יב) אֱלֹהֵיהֶם עַל הֶהָרִים, וְלֹא הֶהָרִים אֱלֹהֵיהֶם. אֱלֹהֵיהֶם עַל הַגְּבָעוֹת, וְלֹא הַגְּבָעוֹת אֱלֹהֵיהֶם. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אֲשֵׁרָה אֲסוּרָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ תְּפִיסַת יָד אָדָם, וְכֹל שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ תְּפִיסַת יְדֵי אָדָם אָסוּר. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אֲנִי אוֹבִין וְאָדוּן לְפָנֶיךָ. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁאַתָּה מוֹצֵא הַר גָּבוֹהַּ וְגִבְעָה נִשָּׂאָה וְעֵץ רַעֲנָן, דַּע שֶׁיֶּשׁ שָׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה:

(5) If idolaters worship mountains and hills these are permitted; but what is upon them is prohibited, as it is says, “you shall not covet the silver or the gold that is on them and take them” (Deut. 7:25). Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: [it says] “their gods on the mountains” (Deut. 12:, not their mountains which are their gods; “their gods on the hills” (ibid.), not their hills which are their gods. And why is an asherah prohibited? Because there was manual labour connected with it, and whatever has manual labour connected with it is prohibited. Rabbi Akiba said: let me expound and decide [the interpretation] before you: wherever you find a high mountain or elevated hill or green tree, know that an idolatrous object is there.

The Mishnah teaches that if two people undertake the Shechita act together and one of them has a wrongful intent, the Shechita is Pasul. There is a discussion as to why this is the case since, we typically, say that a third-party cannot normally prohibit that which doesn't belong to him. See Kelayim 7:4 and the discussion there and the Tosfos Yom Tov on our Mishnah.

(ד) הַמְסַכֵּךְ אֶת גַּפְנוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי תְבוּאָתוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה קִדֵּשׁ, וְחַיָּב בְּאַחֲרָיוּתוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים, אֵין אָדָם מְקַדֵּשׁ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ:

(4) One who causes his vine to overhang his fellow’s grain, behold he has caused the grain to be prohibited and he is responsible for it. Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon say: a person does not prohibit [as kilayim] that which is not his own.

Sources for Mishnah 2:9

That the Chachomim,as evidenced in our Mishnah, were familiar with pagan ritual and practices is not surprising. For a survey of their familiarity, see S. Lieberman, Hellenism in Jewish Palestine, pp. 128-138, esp. 134. He cites, among other sources, Mishnah Sanhedrin 7:6, which enumerates the panoply of Egyptian cult rites.

(ו) הָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אֶחָד הָעוֹבֵד, וְאֶחָד הַזּוֹבֵחַ, וְאֶחָד הַמְקַטֵּר, וְאֶחָד הַמְנַסֵּךְ, וְאֶחָד הַמִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶה, וְאֶחָד הַמְקַבְּלוֹ עָלָיו לֶאֱלוֹקַּ, וְהָאוֹמֵר לוֹ אֵלִי אָתָּה. אֲבָל הַמְגַפֵּף וְהַמְנַשֵּׁק וְהַמְכַבֵּד וְהַמְּרַבֵּץ וְהַמַּרְחִיץ, הַסָּךְ, הַמַּלְבִּישׁ וְהַמַּנְעִיל, עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. הַנּוֹדֵר בִּשְׁמוֹ וְהַמְקַיֵּם בִּשְׁמוֹ, עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. הַפּוֹעֵר עַצְמוֹ לְבַעַל פְּעוֹר, זוֹ הִיא עֲבוֹדָתוֹ. הַזּוֹרֵק אֶבֶן לְמַרְקוּלִיס, זוֹ הִיא עֲבוֹדָתוֹ:

(6) He who engages in idol-worship [is executed]. This includes the one whoserves it, sacrifices, offers incense, makes libations, bows to it, accepts it as a god, or says to it, “You are my god.” But he who embraces, kisses it, sweeps or sprinkles the ground before it, washes it, anoints it, clothes it, or puts shoes on it, he transgresses a negative commandment [but is not executed]. He who vows or swears by its name, violates a negative commandment. He who uncovers himself before Baal-Peor [is guilty and is to be stoned for] this is how it is worshipped. He who casts a stone on Merculis [is guilty and is to be stoned for] this is how it is worshipped.

Sources for Mishnah 2:10

Our Mishnah places the Asham Talui KOrban in the category ofvoluntary Korbonos. This is inline with Rabi Eliezer in Kerisus 6:3 who allows for voluntary Asham Talui's.

(ג) רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, מִתְנַדֵּב אָדָם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם וּבְכָל שָׁעָה שֶׁיִּרְצֶה, וְהִיא נִקְרֵאת אֲשַׁם חֲסִידִים. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל בָּבָא בֶן בּוּטִי, שֶׁהָיָה מִתְנַדֵּב אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם, חוּץ מֵאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים יוֹם אֶחָד. אָמַר, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, אִלּוּ הָיוּ מַנִּיחִים לִי, הָיִיתִי מֵבִיא, אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לִי, הַמְתֵּן עַד שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לְסָפֵק. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם תָּלוּי אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת וְשִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת:

(3) Rabbi Eliezer says: one may freely offer an asham talui every day and at any time he pleases and such a sacrifice is called the asham of the pious. They said of Bava ben Buti that he used to freely offer an asham talui every day, except on the day after Yom Kippur. He declared: By this temple! Had they allowed me, I would have offered one even then, but they said to me, wait until you have come to a state of doubt.” But the sages say one may not bring an asham talui except for a sin that [is punished by] karet [when done intentionally and for which one brings a hatat [when done unwittingly.

Rabi Shimon in our Mishnah validates a Shechita made in the name of a Korbon. The common understanding is that Rabi Shimon is unconcerned with what people might think and their potential confusion that a Korban may be brought outside the Beis HaMikdash (I.e., No Maris Ayin"). Tosfos, however, ties Rabi Shimon to his other rulings in Menachos 12:3 and 13:10, that violating bringing a Korban outside the Beis HaMikdash it must first be consecrated exactly as if it were to be an actual Korban. Any deviation, will render the intended "Korban" unconsecrated.

(ג) הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחָה מִן הַשְּׂעֹרִין, יָבִיא מִן הַחִטִּים. קֶמַח, יָבִיא סֹלֶת. בְּלֹא שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה, יָבִיא עִמָּהּ שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה. חֲצִי עִשָּׂרוֹן, יָבִיא עִשָּׂרוֹן שָׁלֵם. עִשָּׂרוֹן וּמֶחֱצָה, יָבִיא שְׁנָיִם. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר, שֶׁלֹּא הִתְנַדֵּב כְּדֶרֶךְ הַמִּתְנַדְּבִים:

(3) [If one said,] “I take upon myself to bring a minhah of barley,” he must bring one of wheat. “Of coarse flour,” he must bring it of fine flour. “Without oil and without frankincense,” he must bring it with oil and frankincense. “Half a tenth,” he must bring a whole tenth. “A tenth and a half,” he must bring two. Rabbi Shimon declares him exempt, because he did not make his offering in the manner in which people usually make their offerings.

(י) הֲרֵי עָלַי עוֹלָה, יַקְרִיבֶנָּה בַמִּקְדָּשׁ. וְאִם הִקְרִיבָהּ בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, לֹא יָצָא. שֶׁאַקְרִיבֶנָּה בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, יַקְרִיבֶנָּה בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. וְאִם הִקְרִיבָהּ בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, יָצָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אֵין זוֹ עוֹלָה. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר, יְגַלַּח בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. וְאִם גִּלַּח בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, לֹא יָצָא. שֶׁאֲגַלַּח בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, יְגַלַּח בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. וְאִם גִּלַּח בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, יָצָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אֵין זֶה נָזִיר. הַכֹּהֲנִים שֶׁשִּׁמְּשׁוּ בְּבֵית חוֹנְיוֹ, לֹא יְשַׁמְּשׁוּ בַמִּקְדָּשׁ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר לְדָבָר אַחֵר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלכים ב כג), אַךְ לֹא יַעֲלוּ כֹּהֲנֵי הַבָּמוֹת אֶל מִזְבַּח יי בִּירוּשָׁלָיִם כִי אִם אָכְלוּ מַצּוֹת בְּתוֹךְ אֲחֵיהֶם, הֲרֵי הֵם כְּבַעֲלֵי מוּמִין, חוֹלְקִין וְאוֹכְלִין, אֲבָל לֹא מַקְרִיבִין:

(10) [If one said,] “I take upon myself to offer an olah,” he must offer it in the Temple. And if he offered it in the Temple of Onias, he has not fulfilled his obligation. [If one said,] “I take upon myself to offer an olah but I will offer it in the Temple of Onias,” he must offer it in the Temple, yet if he offered it in the Temple of Onias he has fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Shimon says: this is not an olah. [If one said,] “I will be a nazirite,” he must bring his offerings and shave his hair in the Temple. And if he brought them and shaved his hair in the Temple of Onias he has not fulfilled his obligation. [If he said,] “I will be a nazirite but I will bring my offerings and shave my hair in the Temple of Onias,” he must bring them in the Temple, yet if he brought them and shaved his hair in the Temple of Onias he has fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Shimon says: such a one is not a nazirite. The priests who served in the Temple of Onias may not serve in the Temple in Jerusalem; and needless to say [this is so of priests who served] something else; for it is said, “The priests of the shrines, however, did not ascend the altar of the Lord in Jerusalem. But they did eat unleavened bread along with their kinsmen” (II Kings 23:9). Thus they are like those that had a blemish: they are entitled to share and eat [of the holy things] but they are not permitted to offer sacrifices.