## Chullin Daf 32b

###### Chullin 32b:1
[Chullin 32b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:1)

נְקוּבַת הַוֶּושֶׁט וּפְסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
An animal that has **a perforated gullet,** where the perforation goes through the wall of the gullet, **or** one with **a severed windpipe.** According to this mishna, the severed windpipe renders the animal a *tereifa* and not an unslaughtered carcass. If Rabbi Akiva reconsidered his opinion and conceded to Rabbi Yeshevav, in accordance with the opinion of which *tanna* is that mishna?


###### Chullin 32b:2
[Chullin 32b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:2)

אָמַר רָבָא: לָא קַשְׁיָא, כָּאן שֶׁשָּׁחַט וּלְבַסּוֹף פָּסַק, כָּאן שֶׁפָּסַק וּלְבַסּוֹף שָׁחַט. שָׁחַט וּלְבַסּוֹף פָּסַק – נִפְסֶלֶת בִּשְׁחִיטָה הִיא, פָּסַק וּלְבַסּוֹף שָׁחַט – כִּי דָּבָר אַחֵר גָּרַם לָהּ לִיפָּסֵל דָּמְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** This is **not difficult. Here,** the mishna is referring to a case **where one cut** the gullet **and ultimately severed** the windpipe not in the standard manner. **There,** the mishna in the next chapter is referring to a case **where he severed** the windpipe not in the standard manner, **and ultimately cut** the gullet. If he **cut** the gullet **and ultimately severed** the windpipe, the animal **was rendered unfit during its slaughter;** therefore, it assumes the status of an unslaughtered carcass, according to the principle of Rabbi Yeshevav. But if **he severed** the windpipe **and ultimately cut** the gullet, it is **as** though **another matter caused** the animal **to become unfit;** therefore, it assumes the status of a *tereifa*.


###### Chullin 32b:3
[Chullin 32b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:3)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בַּר הוּנָא לְרָבָא: שָׁחַט אֶת הַוֶּושֶׁט וּפָסַק אֶת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, פָּסַק אֶת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת וְאַחַר כָּךְ שָׁחַט אֶת הַוֶּושֶׁט – נְבֵלָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa bar Huna raised an objection to Rava** from a *baraita*: If one **cut the gullet and** then **severed the windpipe,** or if one **severed the windpipe and cut the gullet thereafter,** the animal is **an unslaughtered carcass.** Apparently, contrary to Rava’s statement, the order is irrelevant, and even if the windpipe is severed first, the animal assumes the status of an unslaughtered carcass.


###### Chullin 32b:4
[Chullin 32b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:4)

אֵימָא: וּכְבָר שָׁחַט אֶת הַוֶּושֶׁט מֵעִיקָּרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava said: **Say** that the latter case in the *baraita* means not that he cut the gullet thereafter; rather, it is a case where one severed the windpipe **and had already cut the gullet at the outset.**


###### Chullin 32b:5
[Chullin 32b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שְׁתֵּי תְּשׁוּבוֹת בַּדָּבָר, חֲדָא דְּהַיְינוּ קַמַּיְיתָא, וְעוֹד הָא תְּנַן ״וְאַחַר כָּךְ״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Aḥa bar Huna **said to him:** There are **two refutations of the statement,** i.e., of your attempt to answer the difficulty from the *baraita*: **One** is that if the second case in the *baraita* is one where he initially cut the gullet, then **that is** identical to **the first** case in the *baraita*. **And furthermore, didn’t we learn** explicitly in the *baraita*: Or if one severed the windpipe and cut the gullet **thereafter,** the animal is an unslaughtered carcass?


###### Chullin 32b:6
[Chullin 32b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:6)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרוֹת קָתָנֵי, וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶן נְבֵלוֹת, וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶן טְרֵפוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said:** The use of the term: *Tereifot*, in the mishna in the next chapter is not to the exclusion of unslaughtered carcasses; rather, the *tanna* **teaches** that term in a general sense, meaning: **These** wounds serve to render an animal **forbidden; and there are** some **of them** that are **unslaughtered carcasses,** e.g., an animal with a severed windpipe, **and there are** some **of them** that are ***tereifot*.**


###### Chullin 32b:7
[Chullin 32b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:7)

וְלִיחְשׁוֹב נָמֵי דְּחִזְקִיָּה, דְּאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה: עֲשָׂאָהּ גִּיסְטְרָא – נְבֵלָה, וְלִיחְשׁוֹב נָמֵי דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: נִטְּלָה יָרֵךְ וְחָלָל שֶׁלָּהּ – נְבֵלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects to that interpretation: If the mishna is listing those circumstances that render the animal an unslaughtered carcass, **let** the *tanna* **consider** the circumstance **of Ḥizkiyya as well, as Ḥizkiyya says:** If **one rendered** the animal like **a shard** by cutting it into two widthwise, its halakhic status is that of **an unslaughtered carcass** even while it is convulsing before its death. **And let** the *tanna* **consider** the circumstance **of Rabbi Elazar as well, as Rabbi Elazar said:** If **the thigh,** the hind leg of the animal, **was removed and its recess** is obvious (see 21a), it is **an unslaughtered carcass.**


###### Chullin 32b:8
[Chullin 32b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:8)

כִּי קָתָנֵי נְבֵלָה, דְּלָא מְטַמְּאָה מֵחַיִּים, אֲבָל נְבֵלָה דִּמְטַמְּאָה מֵחַיִּים – לָא קָתָנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **When** the mishna **teaches** the case of **an unslaughtered carcass,** it is a case where the animal **does not** assume that status and **imparts impurity while alive. But** the *tanna* **does not teach** the case of **an unslaughtered carcass** where the animal assumes that status and **imparts impurity while alive,** e.g., the cases of Ḥizkiyya and Rabbi Elazar.


###### Chullin 32b:9
[Chullin 32b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:9)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: כָּאן – שֶׁשָּׁחַט בִּמְקוֹם חֲתָךְ, כָּאן – שֶׁשָּׁחַט שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם חֲתָךְ. שָׁחַט בִּמְקוֹם חֲתָךְ – נִפְסְלָה בִּשְׁחִיטָה הִיא, שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם חֲתָךְ – כִּי דָּבָר אַחֵר גָּרַם לָהּ לִיפָּסֵל דָּמְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish** resolved the apparent contradiction between the mishna here and the mishna on 42a, and **said: Here,** the *tanna* is referring to a case **where one cut** the gullet **in** the same **place** as the initial **cut** in the windpipe. **There,** on 42a, the *tanna* is referring to a case **where he cut** the gullet **not in** the same **place** as the initial **cut** in the windpipe. The reason for the distinction is that if **one cut** the gullet **in** the same **place** as the initial **cut** in the windpipe, it is an animal that **was rendered unfit during its slaughter** and it assumes the status of an unslaughtered carcass. By contrast, if he cut the gullet **not in** the same **place** as the initial **cut** in the windpipe it is **like** a case where **another matter caused** the animal **to become unfit.** Therefore, cutting the gullet renders it a *tereifa* and prevents it from imparting ritual impurity.


###### Chullin 32b:10
[Chullin 32b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:10)

וּמִי אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ הָכִי? וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: שָׁחַט אֶת הַקָּנֶה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִיקְּבָה הָרֵיאָה כְּשֵׁרָה! אַלְמָא כְּמַאן דְּמַנְּחָא בְּדִיקּוּלָא דָּמְיָא, הָכָא נָמֵי כְּמַאן דְּמַנְּחָא בְּדִיקּוּלָא דָּמְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And did Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish say this,** that slaughter can be effective to prevent impurity after the windpipe was severed? **But doesn’t Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish say:** If one **cut the windpipe and the lung was perforated thereafter** before he cut the gullet, the animal is **fit** for consumption? **Apparently,** after cutting the windpipe, the status of the lungs, whose existence is dependent upon the windpipe, **is like** that of an item **that is placed in a basket;** they are irrelevant to the determination of the animal’s status. **Here too,** when the windpipe is severed at the beginning of the slaughter the windpipe should be considered **like** an item **that is placed in a basket** in the sense that the animal is considered to have only one *siman*, the gullet, and cutting of one *siman* does not affect the animal’s status.


###### Chullin 32b:11
[Chullin 32b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:11)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לָא קַשְׁיָא, כָּאן קוֹדֶם חֲזָרָה, כָּאן לְאַחַר חֲזָרָה, וּמִשְׁנָה לֹא זָזָה מִמְּקוֹמָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** The apparent contradiction is **not difficult. There** (42a), where it is stated that an animal with a severed windpipe is a *tereifa*, the mishna presents the opinion of Rabbi Akiva **before retraction** of his opinion. **Here,** the mishna presents the opinion of Rabbi Akiva **after retraction** of his opinion. **And** even though Rabbi Akiva retracted his opinion, **a mishna does not move from its place.** Once this version of the mishna was learned in the study hall, it remained valuable, even though it is no longer current.


###### Chullin 32b:12
[Chullin 32b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:12)

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: שָׁחַט אֶת הַקָּנֶה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִיקְּבָה הָרֵיאָה – כְּשֵׁרָה. אָמַר רָבָא: לָא אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אֶלָּא בְּרֵיאָה, הוֹאִיל וְחַיֵּי רֵיאָה תְּלוּיִן בַּקָּנֶה, אֲבָל בִּבְנֵי מֵעַיִים – לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara discusses **the** matter **itself** that was cited previously. **Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says:** If one **cut the windpipe and the lung was perforated thereafter** before he cut the gullet, the animal is **fit** for consumption. **Rava said: Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish states** this principle **only with regard to a lung, since the function of the lung is dependent upon the windpipe.** Once the windpipe is severed it is as though the lungs were removed from the animal. **But with regard to innards** that were perforated after the windpipe was cut but before the slaughter was completed, **no,** the animal becomes a *tereifa*, because the function of the innards is not dependent on the windpipe.


###### Chullin 32b:13
[Chullin 32b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:13)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא: מֵאַחַר שֶׁנּוֹלְדוּ בָּהּ סִימָנֵי טְרֵפָה הִתַּרְתָּ, מָה לִי בְּרֵיאָה, מָה לִי בִּבְנֵי מֵעַיִים!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira objects to** Rava’s distinction. **Since** when **signs of being a *tereifa* developed** in the animal after the slaughter began, **you permitted** the animal and deemed the slaughter valid, **what** difference is there **to me** if the perforation was **in** the **lung,** and **what** difference is there **to me** if the perforation was **in** the **innards?** In either case, the animal should not be deemed a *tereifa* if the signs developed once the slaughter began.


###### Chullin 32b:14
[Chullin 32b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:14)

וַהֲדַר בֵּיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא, דְּבָעֵי רַבִּי זֵירָא: נִיקְּבוּ בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים בֵּין סִימָן לְסִימָן, מַהוּ? מִי מִצְטָרֵף סִימָן רִאשׁוֹן לְסִימָן שֵׁנִי לְטַהֲרָהּ מִידֵי נְבֵלָה, אוֹ לָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But Rabbi Zeira retracted** his objection, **as Rabbi Zeira raises a dilemma:** If the **innards were perforated between** the cutting of the first ***siman* and** the second ***siman* what is** the *halakha*? **Does the first *siman* join** together **with the second *siman* to purify** the animal **from** the impurity of **an unslaughtered carcass or not?**


###### Chullin 32b:15
[Chullin 32b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/32b:15)

וְאָמְרִינַן: לָאו הַיְינוּ דְּבָעֵי אִילְפָא: הוֹצִיא עוּבָּר אֶת יָדוֹ בֵּין סִימָן לְסִימָן, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And we say: Isn’t this** the **dilemma that Ilfa raises: If a fetus extended its foreleg** outside the womb while the mother was being slaughtered, **between** the cutting of the first ***siman*,** the windpipe, and the second ***siman*,** the gullet, thereby causing the foreleg to have the status of a *tereifa*, **what is** the *halakha*?