Introduction: This paper examines the debate surrounding the requirement for slaughtering poultry according to Jewish law. The discussion centers around whether the obligation for slaughtering a bird is a biblical mandate (d'oraita) or a rabbinic decree (d'rabbanan). Rebbi Yehudah HaNasi's opinion, that bird slaughter is required by Torah law, faces significant opposition, including from prominent Tannaim such as Elazar HaKappar, R' Yosei b. Rabbi Chanina*, and R' Pinchas (a tanna; See Sefer HaTerumah, Psakim Shechita (1) Sifaria), with many later Rabbi's still disagreeing with Rebbi—Rashi, Ri, and R' Meir of Rothenburg, who argue that this requirement is only rabbinic. In general, since a final rule was never settled and remained continuously in dispute, we rule stringently on matters of biblical legal doubt, that fowls need slaughter (Rashi on Chullin 20b:4; Ohr Zarua, Vol. I 379:1)
However, the law is only accepted according to R' Yehudah HaNasi when he argues with another Tanna, but not when arguing against multiple Tannaim. Rashi Chullin 20b below, and many Tosafist rule it is a rabbinic decree (Sefer HaTeruma id citing his teacher the Ri ha-Zaken and Meir of Rothenburg below). An additional issue is when the slaughter, when done by a righteous gentile, is only prohibited rabbinically. Such a scenario introduces another safek d'rabbanan (uncertainty under rabbinic law). In general, we rule leniently when there are multiple halachic doubts (see Teshuvot by R. Akiva Eiger, 37, sefaria page 38-39), which further supports a lenient approach in cases involving strong need (like Rosh on Yoma 8 below).
*Not like Munich manuscripts. Tosafot Nazir 29a (reading R. Chanina, possibly student of Rebbi, buried together with Rebbi in Beit She'arim—See Seder HaDorot, Tanaim and Amoraim (entry) 1944 (beis) on Sefaria; J. Talmud Nazir 4:6 (6).
*Not like Munich manuscripts. Tosafot Nazir 29a (reading R. Chanina, possibly student of Rebbi, buried together with Rebbi in Beit She'arim—See Seder HaDorot, Tanaim and Amoraim (entry) 1944 (beis) on Sefaria; J. Talmud Nazir 4:6 (6).
דתניא ר"א הקפר ברבי אומר מה ת"ל (דברים יב, כב) אך כאשר יאכל את הצבי וגו' וכי מה למדנו מצבי ואיל מעתה הרי זה בא ללמד ונמצא למד מקיש צבי ואיל לפסולי המוקדשין מה פסולי המוקדשין בשחיטה אף צבי ואיל בשחיטה ועוף אין לו שחיטה מדברי תורה אלא מדברי סופרים
"He [the speaker] stated according to the opinion of this Tanna, as it is taught in a Baraita: Rabbi Eliezer HaKappar says, 'What does the verse (Deuteronomy 12:22) mean by stating, "However, as the gazelle is eaten..."? What can we learn from gazelles and deer now?' This comes to teach but ultimately becomes learned from: it compares the gazelle and deer to blemished offerings (that were consecrated but became unfit). Just as blemished offerings require slaughter, so too the gazelle and deer require slaughter. And for birds, there is no biblical requirement for slaughter; rather, it is a rabbinic enactment."
Kiddushin 71a:5 - The story involving R' Pinchas (tanna) indicates that his position is that bird slaughter is not a biblical requirement, according to Babylonian Rabbis:
בִּימֵי רַבִּי פִּנְחָס בִּקְּשׁוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת בָּבֶל עִיסָּה לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. אָמַר לָהֶם לַעֲבָדָיו: כְּשֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר שְׁנֵי דְבָרִים בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ טְלוּנִי בַּעֲרִיסָה וְרוּצוּ. כִּי עָיֵיל אָמַר לָהֶם: אֵין שְׁחִיטָה לָעוֹף מִן הַתּוֹרָה.
The Gemara further relates: In the days of Rabbi Pineḥas*, they sought to establish the lineage of Babylonia as muddled relative to Eretz Yisrael. He said to his servants: When I have said two statements in the house of study, pick me up on a stretcher and run, so that I will not be attacked. When he entered the house of study he said to those studying there: Slaughter of a bird is not obligatory by Torah law.
(Tanna; See Sefer HaTerumah, Psakim Shechita (1) Sifaria)
(Tanna; See Sefer HaTerumah, Psakim Shechita (1) Sifaria)
אמר להם אין שחיטה לעוף - דבר שהוא תימה להם ולא גלה להם טעמו כדי שיהו טרודים בסברא הראשונה ולא יחזרו אחר טעם השניה עד שיפטר מהם וטעם דאין שחיטה לעוף מן התורה בשחיטת חולין (דף כז:) יליף מושפך את דמו בשפיכה בעלמא:
תוספות [חוליןכ״ז ב:] ואפילו לר' מאיר דיליף...(חולין פה.) דשחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה דגמר שפיכה שפיכה משחוטי חוץ מכל מקום אין מקרא יוצא מידי פשוטו:
תוספות [חוליןכ״ז ב:] ואפילו לר' מאיר דיליף...(חולין פה.) דשחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה דגמר שפיכה שפיכה משחוטי חוץ מכל מקום אין מקרא יוצא מידי פשוטו:
He said to them, "There is no requirement for slaughter for a bird"—something that was perplexing to them, but he did not reveal the reason to them, so that they would be occupied with the first reasoning and would not pursue the reason for the second matter until he departed from them. The reason that there is no requirement for slaughter for a bird from the Torah is derived in the Shechitat Chullin (page 27b), where it is learned from "he shall pour out its blood," meaning just general slaughter.
Tosafot: the plain meaning of the Torah is that birds do not need slaughtering. [See Rambam, Ritual Slaughter 1:1 below, who disagrees.]
Tosafot: the plain meaning of the Torah is that birds do not need slaughtering. [See Rambam, Ritual Slaughter 1:1 below, who disagrees.]
אמר רב יהודה משום ר' יצחק בן פנחס אין שחיטה לעוף מן התורה שנאמר ושפך בשפיכה בעלמא סגי
On the matter of slaughtering birds, Rav Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Pineḥas: Slaughter of a bird is not obligatory by Torah law, as it is stated: “And whatever man there be of the children of Israel…traps any undomesticated animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall spill its blood, and cover it in earth.” (Leviticus 17:13). This indicates that mere spilling of its blood is sufficient.
אין שחיטה לעוף מן התורה - והיקשא דזאת תורת לאקושי בהמה למליקת העוף שתהא שחיטתה מן הצואר כדאמרינן לעיל ואפילו מתורה שבעל פה מהלכה למשה מסיני אין לו אלא מדברי סופרים ואין נבלת עוף קרויה נבלה אלא אם כן מתה מאליה או הרגה במכה שלא על ידי סימנים אבל נחירה או עיקור סימנין כשר בו:
"There is no biblical requirement for slaughtering a bird" — The comparison of "This is the law" serves to analogize the slaughter of a domesticated animal to the pinching (melikah) of a bird, so that the slaughtering of a bird should also be done from the neck, as we explained above. Even from the perspective of the Oral Torah, there is no law of bird slaughter except as derived from the words of the Sages. A bird carcass is not considered a carcass (nevelah) unless it died on its own or was killed by a blow that did not involve the proper cutting signs (simanim), but killing it by stabbing or uprooting the signs (simanim) is permitted.
קָסָבַר כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאֵין שְׁחִיטָה לָעוֹף מִן הַתּוֹרָה. וְחוּלִּין בַּעֲזָרָה לָאו דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא.
The Gemara answers: Reish Lakish holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda [Munich manuscript reads son of Chanina, See Tosafot who holds that this was a Tanna], who rules that slaughter of a bird is not obligatory by Torah law, and it was the Sages who decreed that they must be slaughtered. And the prohibition against bringing non-sacred animals for slaughter in the Temple does not apply by Torah law.
Introduction: Below is the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah HaNasi's —that bird slaughter is required by Torah law. Rambam offers an interpretation of Leviticus 17:13 that diverges significantly from the Talmudic and early authorities understanding, and rules that slaughter of a bird is Biblical. According to Rambam, the verse "that will snare a beast or a fowl as prey... and shed its blood" teaches that the shedding of a fowl's blood is analogous to that of a wild beast. This interpretation suggests a stringency, in contrast to the Talmudic view (Chullin 27b; Rashi id) and the plain reading of "shed," that only general slaughter is required. See commentaries on Rambam's position.
מאן תנא דפליג עליה דרבי אלעזר הקפר רבי היא דתניא רבי אומר (דברים יב, כא) וזבחת כאשר צויתיך מלמד שנצטוה משה על הושט ועל הקנה ועל רוב אחד בעוף ועל רוב שנים בבהמה:
Who is the Tanna that disagrees with Rabbi Eliezer HaKappar? It is Rebbi (Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi), as it is taught in a Baraita: Rebbi says, "'And you shall slaughter as I have commanded you' (Deuteronomy 12:21) — this teaches that Moses was commanded regarding the esophagus and the windpipe, and to cut the majority of one for birds and the majority of both for animals."
בְעוֹף הוּא אוֹמֵר (ויקרא יז יג) "אֲשֶׁר יָצוּד צֵיד חַיָּה אוֹ עוֹף" וְגוֹ' (ויקרא יז יג) "וְשָׁפַךְ אֶת דָּמוֹ" מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁפִיכַת דַּם הָעוֹף כִּשְׁפִיכַת דַּם הַחַיָּה:
With regard to a fowl, [Leviticus 17:13] states: "that will snare a beast or a fowl as prey... and shed its blood." This teaches that shedding the blood of a fowl is analogous to shedding the blood of a wild beast (and requires ritual slaughter).
ורבינו מאיר השיב בתשובה על זה והביא דמיון מאוכל נפש ביום טוב דשוחטין ביום טוב דאיכא עשה ולא תעשה באיסור מלאכה ומאכל נבילה דאין בה אלא לאו או לומר לנכרי לנחור עופות דליכא אלא איסור דרבנן דאין שחיטה לעוף מן התורה אלא כיון דהתורה התירה לנו אוכל נפש ביום טוב הוה לדידן כל אוכל נפש ביום טוב כמו בחול. והכי נמי כיון שהתירה תורה פיקוח נפש הוי כל מלאכה שעושה בשבת בשביל חולה שיש בו סכנה כאילו עשאה בחול. והיכא דאיכא תרי איסורי מאכילין אותו הקל....:
And Rabbeinu Meir [Meir of Rothenburg; a Tosafist]responded to this question and brought a comparison from Ochel Nefesh (preparing food) on a festival, where it is permitted to slaughter on the festival, despite the fact that there is both a positive commandment and a prohibition against labor. Regarding eating neveilah (an animal that died without kosher slaughter), there is only a prohibition, or telling a non-Jew to slaughter birds, which is only a rabbinic prohibition [a double rabbinic prohibition, bird and gentile slaughter), since there is no Torah requirement for slaughter for a bird (hence a double safek). Rather, since the Torah permitted us Ochel Nefesh on a festival, for us, all Ochel Nefesh on a festival is like during a weekday. Similarly, since the Torah permitted Pikuach Nefesh (saving a life), all labor performed on Shabbat for a patient whose life is in danger is as if it were done on a weekday. And when there are two prohibitions, we feed him the lesser...
[See Commentary on Sefer Hamitzvot of Rasag
, Appendix 8 regarding this issue as related to the second issue of gentile slaughter.]
The Second Issue: sources below illustrate how halacha treats the issue of gentile involvement in the slaughter of birds.
מתני׳ שחיטת עובד כוכבים [נכרי] נבלה ומטמאה במשא:
MISHNA: Slaughter performed by idolaters (gentiles*) renders the animal a carcass, and the carcass imparts ritual impurity through carrying. (Version of Bomberg and Munich, not Vilna.)
וְגָדֵר גָּדוֹל גָּדְרוּ בַּדָּבָר שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שְׁחִיטָתוֹ נְבֵלָה:
[Our Sages] established a great safeguard concerning this matter, [decreeing] that even [an animal] slaughtered by a gentile who does not serve false deities is a nevelah.
ומ"ש רבינו וגדר גדול גדרו בדבר. נראה שרבינו סובר שכל שאינו עובד ע"ז אינו אלא מדרבנן...:
And what our teacher said, "They established a great safeguard in the matter." It seems that our teacher holds that as long as one is not practicing idolatry, it is only a rabbinic prohibition.
קסבר כותים גרי אריות הן - ושחיטתן פסולה כמו של עובדי כוכבים מוזבחת מה שאתה זובח אתה אוכל כלומר אותו שהוא בר זביחה לאפוקי עובד כוכבים ואוכל נבלות להכעיס ואע"ג דאמר בסוף פ"ב דיבמות (דף כד:) אחד גרי אריות ואחד גרי חלומות כולם גרים גמורים היינו כשמתגייר לגמרי מפחד אריות אבל כותיים לא נתגיירו לגמרי כדכתיב במלכים (ב יז) את יהוה היו יראים ואת אלהיהם היו עובדים ומאן דאמר גרי אמת הן קסבר דשוב נתגיירו לגמרי:
He holds that the Samaritans are lion converts - and their slaughter is invalid like that of idol-worshippers. "That which you slaughter, you may eat," meaning that which is fit for slaughter, to exclude an idol-worshipper and one who eats carrion to provoke. And even though it is said at the end of chapter two of Yevamot (24b), "Both lion converts and dream converts are all complete converts," that refers to when one converts completely out of fear of lions. But the Samaritans did not convert completely, as it is written in Kings (II 17), "They feared the Lord and served their gods." And the one who says they are true converts holds that they later converted completely.
USDA Regulations: How do establishments slaughter live birds? A: The most common slaughter method is cutting the major blood vessels in the neck followed by blood loss. Most poultry slaughter establishments render the live bird insensible to pain prior to making the cut. Some religious dietary requirements preclude rendering the live bird insensible to pain. [Www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-preparation/poultry/poultry-processing-questions-answers]
According to Rambam, the Torah does not exclude a gentile qua gentile from ritual slaughter, but rather excludes a gentile because he is an idolator. The exclusion of the gentile reflects the Torah's concern "lest you eat of his slaughter," i.e., of an animal that has been sacrificed to a pagan deity. Eating meat that an idol-worshipper has slaughtered for his personal needs is likely to lead to partaking also of flesh of an animal that he has sacrificed to an idol. Accordingly, it is only logical that the exclusion should apply with equal force to a Jewish idol-worshipper as well. The meat of any idolatrous offering is forbidden to a Jew regardless of whether the animal was sacrificed by a Jew or by a non-Jew. Hence, the Torah's concern prompting the disqualification of an idol-worshipper from service as a slaughterer serves to disqualify a Jewish idolator as well. Thus it is not at all surprising to find that Halakhah treats a Jewish idolator as a gentile in disqualifying him from serving as a slaughterer.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא — רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר — אָסוּר בְּכׇל מִינֵי בָשָׂר, וְאָסוּר בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרַגְלַיִם וּבַקָּנֶה וּבַכָּבֵד וּבַלֵּב, וּבְעוֹפוֹת, וּמוּתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים.
§ The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in the mishna here? The Gemara answers: It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a dispute in the baraita: For one who vows that meat is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to eat all types of meat, and it is prohibited for him to eat meat of the head, and of the feet, and of the windpipe, and of the liver, and of the heart, although people do not typically eat meat from those parts of the body. And it is prohibited for him to eat meat of birds, as it too is popularly called meat. However, it is permitted for him to eat of the meat of fish and grasshoppers, as their flesh is not called meat.