## Chullin Daf 21a

###### Chullin 21a:1
[Chullin 21a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:1)

מִכׇּל מָקוֹם קַשְׁיָא! אָמַר רָבָא, אֵימָא: וְכֵן הוּא עוֹשֶׂה – חוֹתֵךְ שִׁדְרָה וּמַפְרֶקֶת בְּלֹא רוֹב בָּשָׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In any case,** the statement of Ze’eiri remains **difficult.** What is the significance of pinching a dead bird? **Rava said: Say** in explanation: **And likewise he does** when he pinches, **he cuts** the spinal **column and** the **neck bone without a majority of** the surrounding **flesh** and then he pinches the *simanim*.


###### Chullin 21a:2
[Chullin 21a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:2)

כִּי סָלֵיק רַבִּי זֵירָא, אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ לְרַבִּי אַמֵּי דְּיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר לַהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְכִי מֵתָה עוֹמֵד וּמוֹלֵק? אֶשְׁתּוֹמַם כְּשָׁעָה חֲדָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֵימָא, כָּךְ הוּא עוֹשֶׂה: חוֹתֵךְ שִׁדְרָה וּמַפְרֶקֶת בְּלֹא רוֹב בָּשָׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **When Rabbi Zeira ascended** from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, **he found Rabbi Ami sitting and saying this *halakha*** that Ze’eiri said, and Rabbi Zeira **said to him: And does one stand and pinch a dead** bird? Rabbi Ami **was astonished [*eshtomam*] for a moment** (see Daniel 4:16), and thought about it and **said to** Rabbi Ami: **Say** that **this is what he does: He cuts** the spinal **column and** the **neck bone without a majority of** the surrounding **flesh.**


###### Chullin 21a:3
[Chullin 21a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:3)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: כֵּיצַד מוֹלְקִין חַטַּאת הָעוֹף? חוֹתֵךְ שִׁדְרָה וּמַפְרֶקֶת בְּלֹא רוֹב בָּשָׂר עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לַוֶּושֶׁט אוֹ לַקָּנֶה; הִגִּיעַ לַוֶּושֶׁט אוֹ לַקָּנֶה, חוֹתֵךְ סִימָן אֶחָד אוֹ רוּבּוֹ וְרוֹב בָּשָׂר עִמּוֹ, וּבְעוֹלָה שְׁנַיִם אוֹ רוֹב שְׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**That is also taught** in a *baraita*: **How does one pinch** the nape of **a bird sin offering? He cuts** the spinal **column and** the **neck bone without a majority of** the surrounding **flesh until he reaches the gullet or the windpipe.** Once **he has reached the gullet or the windpipe, he cuts one *siman* or its majority and a majority of** the surrounding **flesh with it; and in a burnt offering** he cuts **two** *simanim* **or the majority of two** *simanim*.


###### Chullin 21a:4
[Chullin 21a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:4)

מַנִּי? אִי רַבָּנַן – הָא אָמְרִי: שְׁנַיִם דַּוְקָא! אִי כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן – הָאָמַר: רוֹב שְׁנַיִם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Who is** the *tanna* whose opinion is cited in the *baraita*? **If** you say it is **the Rabbis, don’t they say** that one must cut **specifically two** *simanim* and not their majority? **If** it is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, doesn’t he say** that one must cut only **a majority of** the **two** *simanim* and no more, in which case why does the *baraita* specify two *simanim* or the majority of two *simanim*?


###### Chullin 21a:5
[Chullin 21a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:5)

אֵימָא: שְׁנַיִם – לְרַבָּנַן, רוֹב שְׁנַיִם – לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וּמַאי שְׁנַיִם – שֶׁדּוֹמִין לִשְׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Say** that when the *baraita* says **two,** it is according **to the Rabbis;** when it says **a majority of two,** it is according **to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. And if you wish, say** instead: **Both this,** two, **and that,** a majority of two, are in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, and what** is the meaning of **two?** It does not mean two *simanim* in their entirety; rather, it means that one must cut a significant majority of the *simanim* **that is similar to two** entire *simanim*.


###### Chullin 21a:6
[Chullin 21a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:6)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: נִשְׁבְּרָה מַפְרֶקֶת וְרוֹב בָּשָׂר עִמָּהּ – מְטַמֵּא בְּאֹהֶל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says:** If the **neck bone** of a person **was broken and a majority of** the surrounding **flesh with it** was cut, that person **imparts impurity in a tent,** i.e., if one is beneath the same roof with him he becomes impure, as his halakhic status is that of a corpse even though he is still twitching.


###### Chullin 21a:7
[Chullin 21a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:7)

וְאִם תֹּאמַר: אוֹתוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה דְּעֵלִי, מַפְרֶקֶת בְּלֹא רוֹב בָּשָׂר הֲוַאי! זִקְנָה שָׁאנֵי, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי כְּהַזְכִּירוֹ אֶת אֲרוֹן הָאֱלֹהִים וַיִּפֹּל מֵעַל הַכִּסֵּא אֲחֹרַנִּית בְּעַד יַד הַשַּׁעַר וַתִּשָּׁבֵר מַפְרַקְתּוֹ וַיָּמֹת כִּי זָקֵן הָאִישׁ וְכָבֵד וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say that** the **incident** of the death **of Eli,** the High Priest, whose death is described: “And his neck bone broke, and he died” (I Samuel 4:18), **was** one where the **neck bone** broke **without the majority of** the surrounding **flesh** being cut, and nevertheless he died immediately, the Gemara responds: **Old age is different, as it is written: “And it came to pass, when he made mention of the Ark of God, that he fell from off his seat backward by the side of the gate, and his neck broke, and he died; for he was an old man, and heavy;** and he had judged Israel forty years” (I Samuel 4:18).


###### Chullin 21a:8
[Chullin 21a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:8)

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: קְרָעוֹ כַּדָּג – מְטַמֵּא בְּאֹהֶל. אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יִצְחָק: וּמִגַּבּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** If **one ripped** a person **like** one cuts **a fish,** lengthwise, the halakhic status of the ripped person is that of a corpse even though he is still convulsing, and he **imparts impurity in a tent. Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak says: And** that is specifically if he was ripped **from his back.**


###### Chullin 21a:9
[Chullin 21a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:9)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: עֲשָׂאָהּ גִּיסְטְרָא – נְבֵלָה. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: נִיטַּל הַיָּרֵךְ וְחָלָל שֶׁלָּהּ (נִיכָּר) – נְבֵלָה. הֵיכִי דָּמֵי חָלָל שֶׁלָּהּ (נִיכָּר)? אָמַר רָבָא: כֹּל שֶׁרְבוּצָה וְנִרְאֵית חֲסֵרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara resumes discussions of the *halakhot* of an animal. **Shmuel says:** If **one rendered** the animal like **a shard [*gistera*]** by cutting it in two widthwise, its halakhic status is that of **an unslaughtered carcass** even though it is still convulsing. **Rabbi Elazar says:** If **the thigh,** the hind leg of the animal, **was removed and its recess is obvious,** it is **an unslaughtered carcass** and it imparts impurity even if it remains alive. The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances of its recess** being **obvious? Rava said:** It is **any** situation **where** the animal **is collapsed and** even so its hind leg **is visibly lacking.**


###### Chullin 21a:10
[Chullin 21a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:10)

תְּנַן הָתָם: הוּתְּזוּ רָאשֵׁיהֶן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּפַרְכְּסִין – טְמֵאִים, כִּזְנַב הַלְּטָאָה שֶׁמְּפַרְכֶּסֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**We learned** in a mishna **there** (*Oholot* 1:6) with regard to creeping animals whose carcasses are ritually impure: **If their heads were removed, even if they are convulsing, they are impure like the tail of a lizard** that was severed **that convulses** even though it is not alive.


###### Chullin 21a:11
[Chullin 21a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:11)

מַאי הוּתְּזוּ? רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: הוּתְּזוּ מַמָּשׁ, רַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי: כְּהַבְדָּלַת עוֹלַת הָעוֹף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the meaning of the term: **Were removed? Reish Lakish said:** They were **actually removed. Rabbi Asi** said that **Rabbi Mani said:** It is **like the separation of** the head of **the bird burnt offering.**


###### Chullin 21a:12
[Chullin 21a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה לְרַבִּי אַסִּי: כְּהַבְדָּלַת עוֹלַת הָעוֹף לְרַבָּנַן, וְלָא פְּלִיגִיתוּ, אוֹ דִלְמָא כְּהַבְדָּלַת עוֹלַת הָעוֹף לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וּפְלִגִיתוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yirmeya said to Rabbi Asi:** Do you mean **like the separation of** the head of **the bird burnt offering** according **to the Rabbis,** who hold that in addition to the neck bone and the surrounding flesh, one also completely severs the *simanim*, **and** then **you** and Reish Lakish **do not disagree,** as it is just like breaking the neck of the animal, since nothing remains other than the skin? **Or perhaps** you mean **like the separation of** the head of **the bird burnt offering** according **to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,** who says that one cuts the majority of two *simanim*, **and you** and Reish Lakish **disagree,** as Reish Lakish holds that the animal imparts impurity only when it is completely beheaded.


###### Chullin 21a:13
[Chullin 21a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כְּהַבְדָּלַת עוֹלַת הָעוֹף לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וּפְלִיגִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Asi **said to** Rabbi Yirmeya: I mean **like the separation of** the head of **the bird burnt offering** according **to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,** who says that one cuts the majority of two *simanim*, **and we disagree.**


###### Chullin 21a:14
[Chullin 21a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:14)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: הוּתְּזוּ מַמָּשׁ, רַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי: כְּהַבְדָּלַת עוֹלַת הָעוֹף לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרוֹב שְׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** that **Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said:** They were **actually removed. Rabbi Asi** said that **Rabbi Mani said:** It is **like the separation of** the head of **the bird burnt offering** according **to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,** who holds that one suffices **with** cutting **a majority of two** *simanim*.


###### Chullin 21a:15
[Chullin 21a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:15)

מַאי רַבָּנַן וּמַאי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן? דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְאֶת הַשֵּׁנִי יַעֲשֶׂה עֹלָה כַּמִּשְׁפָּט״ – כְּמִשְׁפַּט חַטַּאת בְּהֵמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks: **What** is the opinion of **the Rabbis, and what** is the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon?** The dispute is **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to a sliding-scale offering, in which a poor person who cannot afford an animal sin offering brings two doves or two pigeons, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering, it is written: **“And he shall prepare the second as a burnt offering, according to the ordinance”** (Leviticus 5:10), which means **according to the ordinance of an animal sin offering** in whose stead the offering was brought.


###### Chullin 21a:16
[Chullin 21a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/21a:16)

אַתָּה אוֹמֵר כְּמִשְׁפַּט חַטַּאת בְּהֵמָה, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא כְּמִשְׁפַּט חַטַּאת הָעוֹף? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְהִקְרִיבוֹ״, חִלֵּק הַכָּתוּב בֵּין חַטַּאת הָעוֹף לְעוֹלַת הָעוֹף, וּמָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״כַּמִּשְׁפָּט״ – כְּמִשְׁפַּט חַטַּאת בְּהֵמָה. מָה חַטַּאת בְּהֵמָה אֵינָהּ בָּאָה

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Do you say** that it is **according to the ordinance of an animal sin offering, or** perhaps **it is only according to the ordinance of a bird sin offering?** The Gemara answers: **When it says** with regard to the bird burnt offering brought as a gift offering: **“And** the priest **shall bring it** to the altar” (Leviticus 1:15), meaning that it shall be sacrificed in a unique manner, **the verse distinguished between a bird sin offering and a bird burnt offering. And** if so, **how do I realize** the meaning of the term **“according to the ordinance”?** It means **according to the ordinance of an animal sin offering; just as an animal sin offering comes only**