## Chullin Daf 20a

###### Chullin 20a:1
[Chullin 20a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:1)

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ מַחְזִיר דַּוְקָא, מַאי אִירְיָא מוֹלֵק? אֲפִילּוּ שׁוֹחֵט נָמֵי! אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ אַף מַחְזִיר, וּמַתְנִיתִין בִּדְלָא אַהְדַּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if it enters your mind that** the mitzva is **specifically** to **move** the *simanim* behind the nape and pinch them, **why** did the *tanna* say **specifically** that if one **pinches** in this manner it is valid? **Even** if **one slaughters** from the nape in this manner the slaughter would be valid. **Rather,** must one **not conclude from it** that the proper understanding is: One may **even move** the *simanim* behind the nape and pinch, **and the mishna is** referring to a case **where one did not move** the *simanim* behind the nape.


###### Chullin 20a:2
[Chullin 20a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:2)

אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: יְקַבְּלוּ הָרוֹבִין אֶת תְּשׁוּבָתָן, דְּקָתָנֵי: נִמְצָא כָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה – פָּסוּל בִּמְלִיקָה, כָּשֵׁר בִּמְלִיקָה – פָּסוּל בִּשְׁחִיטָה. לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי? לָאו לְמַעוֹטֵי מַחֲזִיר סִימָנִין לַאֲחוֹרֵי הָעוֹרֶף, דְּלָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yannai says: The young ones [*rovin*],** the sons of Rabbi Ḥiyya, **shall receive their response** that rejects their statement from **that** which **is taught** in the mishna: **It is found that** that which is **valid for slaughter** is **not valid for pinching and** that which is **valid for pinching** is **not valid for slaughter. What** does this statement serve **to exclude?** Does it **not** serve **to exclude** the case where **one moves the *simanim* behind the nape,** teaching **that** it is valid only for slaughter and **not** for pinching?


###### Chullin 20a:3
[Chullin 20a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:3)

אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: לָא, לְמַעוֹטֵי שֵׁן וְצִפּוֹרֶן. שֵׁן וְצִפּוֹרֶן בְּהֶדְיָא קָתָנֵי לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: No,** perhaps it serves **to exclude** one who uses **a tooth or a fingernail** that is not detached, which are valid for pinching and not valid for slaughter. The Gemara objects: That could not be, as the *tanna* **teaches explicitly** the case of **a tooth and a fingernail** in a mishna (15b), and there was no need to repeat it.


###### Chullin 20a:4
[Chullin 20a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:4)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: לְמַעוֹטֵי מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא. הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא בִּמְלִיקָה – פָּסוּל, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר כָּשֵׁר, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר? בְּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא סָבְרִי לַהּ כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא בִּמְלִיקָה – פָּסוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rabbi Yirmeya said:** The statement of the mishna: That which is valid for slaughter is not valid for pinching, serves **to exclude drawing back and forth.** One who pinches may not cut the *simanim* by drawing his fingernail back and forth. Rather, he must press and cut them in one motion. The Gemara asks: **This works out well according to the one who says: Drawing back and forth for pinching is not valid, but according to the one who says:** It is **valid, what is there to say?** The Gemara answers: **The sons of Rabbi Ḥiyya hold in accordance with the one who says: Drawing back and forth for pinching is not valid.**


###### Chullin 20a:5
[Chullin 20a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:5)

אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: מִצְוַת מְלִיקָה קוֹצֵץ וְיוֹרֵד, וְזוֹ הִיא מִצְוָתָהּ. סָבַר רַבִּי אָבִין לְמֵימַר: קוֹצֵץ וְיוֹרֵד – אִין, מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא – לָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן דְּמוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא בִּמְלִיקָה כָּשֵׁר, וּמַאי זוֹ הִיא מִצְוָתָהּ? אֵימָא: אַף זוֹ הִיא מִצְוָתָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Kahana says: The mitzva of pinching** is that **one cuts** with his fingernail from the nape **and continues downward, and that is its mitzva. Rabbi Avin thought to say: Cuts and continues downward, yes; draws back and forth, no. Rabbi Yirmeya said to him: All the more so that drawing back and forth for pinching is valid.** The Gemara asks: **And what** is the meaning of the phrase: **That is its mitzva,** which indicates that it is specifically in that manner? The Gemara answers: **Say** that it means: **That too is its mitzva.**


###### Chullin 20a:6
[Chullin 20a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:6)

אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כׇּל הַכָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה – כְּנֶגְדּוֹ בָּעוֹרֶף כָּשֵׁר בִּמְלִיקָה, הָא פָּסוּל בִּשְׁחִיטָה – פָּסוּל בִּמְלִיקָה. לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי? אִילֵּימָא לְמַעוֹטֵי עִיקּוּר סִימָנִין, וְהָא תָּנֵי רָמֵי בַּר יְחֶזְקֵאל: אֵין עִיקּוּר סִימָנִין בָּעוֹף!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabbi Yirmeya says** that **Shmuel says: Any** place **that is valid for slaughter** on the throat **is correspondingly valid for pinching** on the nape. By inference, any place on the throat that **is not valid for slaughter is not valid for pinching.** The Gemara asks: **What** does this statement serve **to exclude? If we say** that it serves **to exclude ripping** the ***simanim*** from their place before cutting them, which is invalid with regard to pinching just as with regard to slaughter, **but didn’t Rami bar Yeḥezkel teach:** There is **no** disqualification of **ripping** the ***simanim* in** the case of **a bird?**


###### Chullin 20a:7
[Chullin 20a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:7)

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לְמַעוֹטֵי רֹאשׁוֹ. רֹאשׁוֹ פְּשִׁיטָא? ״מִמּוּל עׇרְפּוֹ״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, וְלֹא בְּרֹאשׁוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said:** It serves **to exclude** pinching the occipital bone at the back of **its head;** just as it is not the place of slaughter, it is not the place of pinching. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it **obvious** that pinching at the back of **its head** is not valid? **The Merciful One states: “Adjacent to its nape,” and not at its head.**


###### Chullin 20a:8
[Chullin 20a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:8)

מַאי ״רֹאשׁוֹ״? שִׁיפּוּי רֹאשׁוֹ, כְּגוֹן דְּנָקֵט מִשִּׁיפּוּי רֹאשׁוֹ וְהִגְרִים וַאֲזַל עַד דִּמְטָא תַּתַּאי, וְכִדְרַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב אַסִּי, דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב אַסִּי: הִגְרִים שְׁלִישׁ וְשָׁחַט שְׁנֵי שְׁלִישׁ – פְּסוּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **What** is **its head** that is not the place for pinching? It is **the incline of its head,** e.g., in a case **where one began at the incline of its head and diverted and continued until he reached below** to the place of the *simanim*, where he completed the pinching. Since he began the process in the incorrect location, it is invalid, similar to slaughter. **And** this is **in accordance with** the opinion **that Rav Huna** says that **Rav Asi says, as Rav Huna says** that **Rav Asi says:** If **one diverted** the knife upward and cut **one-third** of the windpipe **and** then **cut two-thirds** within the ring, the slaughter is **not valid.**


###### Chullin 20a:9
[Chullin 20a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20a:9)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: הָא דְּתָנֵי רָמֵי בַּר יְחֶזְקֵאל אֵין עִיקּוּר סִימָנִין בָּעוֹף, לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֵין שְׁחִיטָה לָעוֹף מִן הַתּוֹרָה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi:** With regard to **that which Rami bar Yeḥezkel teaches:** There is **no** disqualification for **ripping *simanim* in a bird, we say** it **only according to the one who says: There is no** source for the **slaughter of a bird in the Torah.**