## Chullin Daf 12b

###### Chullin 12b:1
[Chullin 12b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:1)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: נִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי בְּאַשְׁפָּה שֶׁבַּשּׁוּק, שֶׁאַף רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי לֹא נֶחְלַק עָלָיו אֶלָּא בְּאַשְׁפָּה שֶׁבַּבַּיִת, אֲבָל בְּאַשְׁפָּה שֶׁבַּשּׁוּק מוֹדֵי לֵיהּ, וְנִרְאִין כּוּ׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **This** is what Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **is saying: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda appears** correct **to Rabbi Ḥanina, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili,** in a case where one found them **in a scrap heap that** is **in a marketplace, as Rabbi Ḥanina, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, disagrees with** Rabbi Yehuda **only** in a case where one found them **in a scrap heap that** is **in the house. But** in a case where he found them **in a scrap heap that** is **in a marketplace he concedes to** Rabbi Yehuda. **And** the statement of Rabbi Ḥanina, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, **appears** correct to Rabbi Yehuda in a case where he found them in the house, as he concedes to Rabbi Ḥanina in that case.


###### Chullin 12b:2
[Chullin 12b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:2)

חוּץ מֵחֵרֵשׁ שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן, שֶׁמָּא יְקַלְקְלוּ אֶת שְׁחִיטָתָן. ״שֶׁמָּא קִלְקְלוּ״ לָא קָתָנֵי, אֶלָּא ״שֶׁמָּא יְקַלְקְלוּ״. אָמַר רָבָא: זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת אֵין מוֹסְרִין לָהֶן חוּלִּין לְכַתְּחִלָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna stated: Everyone slaughters an animal, i.e., can perform halakhically valid slaughter, and their slaughter is valid, **except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor, lest they ruin their slaughter.** The Gemara infers: The *tanna* **does not teach:** Due to the concern **that they ruined** their slaughter, in the past tense; **rather,** he teaches: **Lest they ruin** their slaughter, in the future. **Rava says: That is to say** that **one does not give them non-sacred** animals for slaughter ***ab initio*,** even with the supervision of others.


###### Chullin 12b:3
[Chullin 12b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:3)

וְכוּלָּן שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִים רוֹאִים אוֹתָם, שְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה. מַאן תְּנָא דְּלָא בָּעֵינַן כַּוָּונָה לִשְׁחִיטָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: **And** for **all of them, when they slaughtered** an animal **and others see** and supervise **them, their slaughter is valid,** including even a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor, who lack competence and whose intent is not halakhically effective. The Gemara asks: **Who** is the *tanna* who **taught that we do not require intent for slaughter?**


###### Chullin 12b:4
[Chullin 12b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:4)

אָמַר רָבָא: רַבִּי נָתָן הִיא, דְּתָנֵי אוֹשַׁעְיָא זְעֵירָא דְּמִן חַבְרַיָּא: זָרַק סַכִּין לְנוֹעֳצָהּ בַּכּוֹתֶל, וְהָלְכָה וְשָׁחֲטָה כְּדַרְכָּהּ – רַבִּי נָתָן מַכְשִׁיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין. הוּא תָּנֵי לַהּ, וְהוּא אָמַר לַהּ: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי נָתָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** It **is Rabbi Natan, as Oshaya, the youngest of the company** of Sages, **taught** a *baraita*, stating: If **one threw a knife to embed it in the wall, and** in the course of its flight the knife **went and slaughtered** an animal **in its** proper **manner, Rabbi Natan deems** the slaughter **valid, and the Rabbis deem** the slaughter **not valid.** Oshaya **teaches** the *baraita* **and he states about it: The *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Natan** that there is no need for intent to perform a valid act of slaughter.


###### Chullin 12b:5
[Chullin 12b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:5)

וְהָא בָּעֵינַן מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא? שֶׁהָלְכָה וּבָאָה כְּדַרְכָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: How could the slaughter in the *baraita* be valid? **But don’t we require** that the slaughterer **move** the knife **back and forth** on the throat of the animal? When one throws a knife, it goes in one direction and does not return. The Gemara answers: The case in the *baraita* is one **where the knife went** and cut the animal’s throat, caromed off the wall **and came** back to cut the throat again **in its** proper **manner.**


###### Chullin 12b:6
[Chullin 12b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:6)

אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא, בָּעֵי רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: קָטָן יֵשׁ לוֹ מַחְשָׁבָה, אוֹ אֵין לוֹ מַחְשָׁבָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan raises a dilemma:** In matters that require thought and intent, **does a minor have** halakhically effective **thought, or does he not have** halakhically effective **thought?**


###### Chullin 12b:7
[Chullin 12b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:7)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי: וְתִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ מַעֲשֶׂה? מַאי שְׁנָא מַעֲשֶׂה דְּלָא קָא מִבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ – דִּתְנַן: ״יֵשׁ לָהֶן מַעֲשֶׂה״? מַחְשָׁבָה נָמֵי לָא תִּיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ, דִּתְנַן: ״אֵין לָהֶן מַחְשָׁבָה״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ami said to** Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: **And let** Rabbi Yoḥanan **raise this dilemma** with regard to the **action** of a minor, whether the action of a minor that indicates intent is effective. **What is different** about the **action** of a minor **that** Rabbi Yoḥanan **does not raise a dilemma?** Is it due to the fact **that we learned** in a mishna (*Kelim* 17:15): A deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor **have** the capacity to perform **an action** that is halakhically effective? With regard to **thought as well let him not raise this dilemma, as we learned** in the same mishna: **They do not have** the capacity for halakhically effective **thought.**


###### Chullin 12b:8
[Chullin 12b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/12b:8)

דִּתְנַן: הָאַלּוֹן, וְהָרִמּוֹן, וְהָאֱגוֹז שֶׁחֲקָקוּם תִּינוֹקוֹת לָמוֹד בָּהֶן עָפָר, אוֹ שֶׁהִתְקִינוּם לְכַף מֹאזְנַיִם – טְמֵאִין, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן מַעֲשֶׂה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As we learned** in that mishna: With regard to **an acorn, a pomegranate, or a nut, which minors hollowed** in order **to measure dirt with them or that they affixed to a scale,** the halakhic status of those shells is that of vessels, and they are **susceptible to ritual impurity.** By contrast, if the minors merely thought to use the shells for measuring or weighing, unlike adults, they do not thereby render those shells into vessels. The reason for this distinction is **due to** the fact **that they have** the capacity to perform **an action,**