## Chullin Daf 20b

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

אֲבָל לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יֵשׁ שְׁחִיטָה לָעוֹף מִן הַתּוֹרָה, יֵשׁ עִיקּוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But according to the one who says: There is** a source for the **slaughter of a bird in the Torah, there is** disqualification for **ripping** *simanim* in a bird as well.


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

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַדְּרַבָּה, אִיפְּכָא מִסְתַּבְּרָא! לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יֵשׁ שְׁחִיטָה לָעוֹף מִן הַתּוֹרָה, אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר דְּהָכִי אַגְמְרֵיהּ דְּאֵין עִיקּוּר, וַאֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר כִּבְהֵמָה, לְעִנְיַן עִיקּוּר לָא לֶיהֱוֵי כִּבְהֵמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi **said to him: On the contrary, the opposite is reasonable. According to the one who says: There is** a source for the **slaughter of a bird in the Torah,** the *halakhot* of slaughter are not explicit and were transmitted to Moses orally, and **it can be said that this is what** God **taught him, that there is no** disqualification for **ripping** *simanim*. **And even according to the one who says** that the halakhic status of a bird is **like** that of **an animal,** as the *halakhot* of the slaughter of a bird are derived from the *halakhot* of the slaughter of an animal, perhaps God taught Moses that with regard **to the matter of ripping** *simanim* **it will not be like an animal.**


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

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: אֵין שְׁחִיטָה לָעוֹף מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים, מֵהֵיכָא גְּמִירִי לַהּ? מִבְּהֵמָה, כּוּלַּהּ מִילְּתָא כִּבְהֵמָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But according to the one who says: There is no** source for the **slaughter of a bird in the Torah,** but **rather** it is **by rabbinic law, from where are** the *halakhot* of the slaughter of a bird **learned?** They are learned **from** the *halakhot* of the slaughter of **an animal;** consequently, **the entire matter** of the slaughter of a bird is **like** that of **an animal.**


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

אָמַר רָבִינָא, אָמַר לִי רָבִין בַּר קִיסִי: הָא דְּתָנֵי רָמֵי בַּר יְחֶזְקֵאל, אֵין עִיקּוּר סִימָנִין בָּעוֹף – לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא בִּמְלִיקָה, אֲבָל בִּשְׁחִיטָה יֵשׁ עִיקּוּר. וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כׇּל הַכָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ בָּעוֹרֶף כָּשֵׁר בִּמְלִיקָה, הָא פָּסוּל – פָּסוּל! הָהִיא פְּלִיגָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said: Ravin bar Kisi said to me:** With regard to **that which Rami bar Yeḥezkel teaches,** i.e., that **there is no** disqualification for **ripping *simanim* in a bird, we say** it **only with regard to pinching, but with regard to slaughter, there is** disqualification for **ripping** *simanim*. The Gemara objects: **But doesn’t Rabbi Yirmeya say** that **Shmuel says: Any** place **that is valid for slaughter** on the throat **is correspondingly valid for pinching on the nape, but** that which is **not valid** for slaughter is **not valid** for pinching. The Gemara explains: **That** *halakha* **disagrees** with this statement of Shmuel.


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

אָמַר זְעֵירִי: נִשְׁבְּרָה מַפְרֶקֶת וְרוֹב בָּשָׂר עִמָּהּ – נְבֵלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Ze’eiri says:** If **the neck bone** of an animal or a bird **was broken and most of the** surrounding **flesh** was cut **with it,** the status of the animal or the bird is that of **an unslaughtered carcass.** It is dead and can no longer be rendered fit by slaughter.


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

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא, מָלַק בְּסַכִּין – מְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים אַבֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה, וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ טְרֵפָה הָוְיָא, מְלִיקָתָהּ זוֹ הִיא שְׁחִיטָתָהּ – תַּהֲנֵי לַהּ סַכִּין לְטַהֲרָהּ מִידֵי נְבֵלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ḥisda said** that **we learn** this in a mishna (*Zevaḥim* 68a) as well: If **one pinched** a bird offering **with a knife** and not with his thumbnail, the bird **renders the garments** of one who swallows it **impure** when it is **in the throat,** which is the *halakha* in the case of an unslaughtered carcass of a kosher bird. **And if you would say** that if the neck bone of an animal or a bird was broken and most of the surrounding flesh was cut with it, the bird is not an unslaughtered carcass but **it is a *tereifa*,** then since with regard to a bird offering **its pinching is its slaughter, let** pinching with **a knife be effective to purify** the bird **from** the impurity of **an unslaughtered carcass,** as a *tereifa* does not transmit impurity when slaughtered properly. From the *halakha* that pinching with a knife does not render the bird pure it is evident that when its neck bone is broken the bird is rendered an unslaughtered carcass.


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

אָמְרִי: הָתָם מִשּׁוּם דְּלָאו שְׁחִיטָה הִיא כְּלָל. מַאי טַעְמָא? רַב הוּנָא אָמַר: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַחְלִיד, רָבָא אָמַר: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא דּוֹרֵס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **say** in response: **There,** pinching with a knife is ineffective in rendering it pure not because the breaking of the neck bone renders the bird an unslaughtered carcass. Rather, it is **because it is not slaughter at all.** The Gemara asks: **What is the reason? Rav Huna says:** It is **because he conceals** the knife and performs an inverted slaughter, which invalidates the slaughter. **Rava says:** It is **because he presses** the knife.


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

מַאן דְּאָמַר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַחְלִיד, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא דּוֹרֵס? קָסָבַר: מוֹלִיךְ וּמֵבִיא בִּמְלִיקָה כָּשֵׁר. וּמַאן דְּאָמַר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא דּוֹרֵס, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַחְלִיד? אָמַר לָךְ: חֲלָדָה הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? כְּחוּלְדָּה הַדָּרָה בְּעִיקְּרֵי בָתִּים דְּמִכַּסְּיָא, הָכָא הָא מִיגַּלְּיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: With regard to **the one who says: Because he conceals** the knife and performs an inverted slaughter, **what is the reason** that **he does not say: Because he presses** the knife? The Gemara answers: It is because **he holds** that **drawing back and forth in pinching is valid.** The Gemara asks: **And the one who says: Because he presses** the knife, **what is the reason** that **he does not say: Because he conceals [*maḥlid*]** the knife? The Gemara answers that **he** could have **said to you: What are the circumstances of concealing** the knife? It is **like a rat [*ḥulda*] that resides in the foundations of houses that are concealed. Here,** when he begins cutting from the nape of the neck, **that** knife **is exposed.**


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

אָמַר רָבָא: אִי קַשְׁיָא לִי הָא קַשְׁיָא לִי, וְכִי מֵתָה עוֹמֵד וּמוֹלֵק?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: If** that which Ze’eiri said: If the neck bone of an animal or a bird was broken and most of the surrounding flesh was cut with it, the status of the animal or the bird is that of an unslaughtered carcass, is **difficult for me, this** is **difficult for me:** How does pinching a bird offering prepare it for sacrifice? Since pinching involves breaking the neck bone and cutting most of the surrounding flesh with it before cutting the *simanim*, what significance is there to pinching the *simanim*? **And does he stand and pinch a dead** bird? If it is dead, of what use is the pinching?


###### Chullin 20b:10
[Chullin 20b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20b:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: וְתִקְשֵׁי לָךְ עוֹלַת הָעוֹף, דְּבָעֲיָא שְׁנֵי סִימָנִין, וְכִי מֵתָה עוֹמֵד וּמוֹלֵק? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָתָם כְּדֵי לְקַיֵּים בָּהּ מִצְוַת הַבְדָּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: And** even without the statement of Ze’eiri, **let** the case of **a bird burnt offering be difficult for you, as** it **requires** cutting of **two *simanim*.** Since slaughter of a non-sacred bird requires cutting of one *siman*, once one *siman* is cut the bird is considered dead for all intents and purposes, **and does he stand and pinch a dead** bird? Rava **said to him: There,** he continues pinching **in order to fulfill through it the mitzva of separation** between the head and the body in the bird burnt offering.


###### Chullin 20b:11
[Chullin 20b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20b:11)

אִי הָכִי, עוֹר נָמֵי! כׇּל הַמְעַכֵּב בִּשְׁחִיטָה מְעַכֵּב בְּהַבְדָּלָה, וְכֹל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְעַכֵּב בִּשְׁחִיטָה אֵינוֹ מְעַכֵּב בְּהַבְדָּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so,** there should be an obligation to cut the **skin** of the bird **as well** in order to fulfill the mitzva of separation. Abaye answers: **Any** element **that invalidates slaughter invalidates separation, and any** element **that does not invalidate slaughter does not invalidate separation.** Failure to cut the skin does not invalidate slaughter.


###### Chullin 20b:12
[Chullin 20b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/20b:12)

וְהָא מִיעוּט סִימָנִין לְרַבָּנַן, דְּלָא מִעַכְּבִי בִּשְׁחִיטָה, וּמְעַכְּבִי בְּהַבְדָּלָה! אֶלָּא אֵימָא: כֹּל שֶׁיֶּשְׁנוֹ בִּשְׁחִיטָה יֶשְׁנוֹ בְּהַבְדָּלָה, וְכֹל שֶׁאֵינוֹ בִּשְׁחִיטָה אֵינוֹ בְּהַבְדָּלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But isn’t** there **the minority of the *simanim* according to the Rabbis, which do not invalidate slaughter,** as, if one slaughtered a majority of the *simanim* and a minority remained uncut, the slaughter is valid, **and** they hold that **they invalidate separation?** The Gemara clarifies: **Rather, say: Any** element **that is** in effect **with regard to slaughter is** in effect **with regard to separation, and any** element **that is not** in effect **with regard to slaughter is not** in effect **with regard to separation.** The two *simanim*, although they do not invalidate slaughter, are part of the mitzva of slaughter, while the skin is not part of the mitzva of slaughter.