## Chullin Daf 70b

###### Chullin 70b:1
[Chullin 70b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:1)

**מַתְנִי׳** בְּהֵמָה שֶׁמֵּת עוּבָּרָהּ בְּתוֹךְ מֵעֶיהָ וְהוֹשִׁיט הָרוֹעֶה אֶת יָדוֹ וְנָגַע בּוֹ, בֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה בֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה – טָהוֹר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: בִּטְמֵאָה – טָמֵא, וּבִטְהוֹרָה – טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **an animal whose fetus died in its womb and the shepherd reached his hand** into the womb **and touched** the fetus, **both in** the case of **a non-kosher animal and in** the case of **a kosher animal** the fetus does not have the status of an animal carcass that imparts ritual impurity, and the shepherd remains **ritually pure. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: In** the case of **a non-kosher** animal it is **impure, and in** the case of **a kosher** animal it is **pure.**


###### Chullin 70b:2
[Chullin 70b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:2)

**גְּמָ׳** מַאי טַעְמָא דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: קַל וָחוֹמֶר, אִם הוֹעִילָה אִמּוֹ לְהַתִּירוֹ בַּאֲכִילָה, לֹא תּוֹעִיל לוֹ לְטַהוֹרֵיהּ מִידֵי נְבֵלָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **What is the reason** for the ruling **of the first *tanna*? Rav Ḥisda said:** It is apparent through **an *a fortiori*** inference: **If** being inside **its mother is effective to permit it for consumption** through the slaughter of its mother even if the fetus was found dead inside the womb, then **should** being inside its mother **not** also **be effective to render it pure from** the impurity of **an animal carcass?**


###### Chullin 70b:3
[Chullin 70b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:3)

אַשְׁכְּחַן בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מְנָלַן? אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְכִי יָמוּת מִן הַבְּהֵמָה״ – זוֹ בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, ״אֲשֶׁר הִיא לָכֶם לְאׇכְלָה״ – זוֹ בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, אִיתַּקַּשׁ בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לִבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה: מָה בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה – עוּבָּרָהּ טָהוֹר, אַף בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה – עוּבָּרָהּ טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **We found** a rationale for this *halakha* with regard to **a kosher animal; from where do we** derive that the same applies to **a non-kosher animal?** The Gemara answers that **the verse states:** “And when a domesticated animal dies, of those that you eat, one who touches its carcass shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39). The Gemara interprets the verse as follows: **“And when a domesticated animal dies,” this** is referring to **a non-kosher animal; “of those that you eat,” this** is referring to **a kosher animal.** The verse thereby **juxtaposes a non-kosher animal to a kosher animal** with regard to imparting impurity of a carcass, and teaches that **just as** with regard to **a kosher animal, its fetus** that died in its womb is **pure,** as derived above through an *a fortiori* inference, **so too,** with regard to **a non-kosher animal, its** dead **fetus** is **pure.**


###### Chullin 70b:4
[Chullin 70b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:4)

וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״וְכׇל הוֹלֵךְ עַל כַּפָּיו בְּכׇל הַחַיָּה הַהֹלֶכֶת וְגוֹ׳״ – מְהַלְּכֵי כַּפַּיִם בְּחַיָּה טִמֵּאתִי לָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** as for **Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, what is the reason** for his ruling? **Rabbi Yitzḥak said that the verse states** with regard to non-kosher animals that do not have cloven hooves: **“And whatever walks on its paws, among any [*bekhol*] undomesticated animal [*ḥayya*] that walks** on all fours, they are impure for you; whoever touches their carcass shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:27). Rabbi Yosei HaGelili expounds this verse as follows: Those animals **that walk on** their **paws,** i.e., that do not have cloven hooves, which are **inside** the body of **an animal, I rendered impure for you.** Rabbi Yitzḥak interprets the term *bekhol* as meaning: Inside the body of, and the word *ḥayya* as meaning: A live animal. Accordingly, he understands the verse to be referring to a dead fetus found inside a living animal.


###### Chullin 70b:5
[Chullin 70b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:5)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, קָלוּט בִּמְעֵי פָרָה לִיטַמֵּא, דִּמְהַלְּכֵי כַפַּיִם בְּחַיָּה הוּא? מְהַלְּכֵי כַפַּיִם בִּמְהַלְּכֵי אַרְבַּע, וְהַאי מְהַלְּכֵי אַרְבַּע בִּמְהַלְּכֵי שְׁמֹנֶה הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **If that is so,** then a dead fetus with **non-cloven** hooves found **inside a cow should be impure,** despite the fact that it is from a kosher species, **as it is** an animal that **walks on** its **paws** that is **inside** the body of a kosher **animal.** The Gemara explains: The verse renders impure an animal that **walks upon** its four **paws** that is **inside** an animal **that walks** on **four** paws. **But this is** a case of an animal that **walks** on **four inside** an animal that **walks on eight.** Since the mother cow’s hooves are entirely split into two parts, it actually walks on eight parts and is not the animal referred to by the verse.


###### Chullin 70b:6
[Chullin 70b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:6)

פָּרָה בִּמְעֵי גָמָל לֹא תְּטַמֵּא, דִּמְהַלְּכֵי שְׁמֹנֶה בִּמְהַלְּכֵי אַרְבַּע הוּא, ״הוֹלֵךְ״, ״וְכׇל הוֹלֵךְ״ – לְרַבּוֹת פָּרָה בִּמְעֵי גָמָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises another objection: If that is so, then a dead fetus in the form of **a cow,** which has eight parts to its legs, **inside the womb of a camel,** a non-kosher animal with non-cloven hooves, **should not be impure, as it is** an animal that **walks on eight inside** an animal that **walks on four,** and the verse is not referring to it. The Gemara responds that the verse could have stated: **Walks upon,** but instead states: **“And whatever walks upon,”** i.e., the addition of the word “whatever” serves **to include** a dead **cow** fetus **in the womb of a camel,** teaching that it is impure.


###### Chullin 70b:7
[Chullin 70b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:7)

קָלוּט בִּמְעֵי קְלוּטָה לִיטַמֵּא, דִּמְהַלְּכֵי אַרְבַּע בִּמְהַלְּכֵי אַרְבַּע הוּא! לְהָכִי אַהֲנִי קַל וָחוֹמֶר דְּרַב חִסְדָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: If that is so, then a dead fetus with **non-cloven** hooves **inside the womb of** a cow with **non-cloven** hooves should **be impure, as it is** an animal that **walks on four inside** an animal that **walks on four,** but the *halakha* is that since the mother is a kosher species, it is pure. The Gemara explains: It is **to that** end that the ***a fortiori*** inference of **Rav Ḥisda is effective,** as it renders pure the fetuses of all kosher animals, even if their hooves are not fully cloven.


###### Chullin 70b:8
[Chullin 70b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:8)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אַחָדְבוּי בַּר אַמֵּי: חֲזִיר בִּמְעֵי חֲזִירְתָּא לָא לִיטַמֵּא, דִּמְהַלְּכֵי שְׁמֹנֶה בִּמְהַלְּכֵי שְׁמֹנֶה הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥadvoi bar Ami objects to this** explanation that the verse renders impure only animals that walk on four inside animals that walk on four: If that is so, a dead **pig** fetus **inside the womb of a female pig should not be impure, as** a pig has cloven hooves, and so **it is** an animal that **walks on eight inside** an animal that **walks on eight,** and so the verse is not referring to it.


###### Chullin 70b:9
[Chullin 70b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:9)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, מֵהָכָא: ״נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִגַּע בְּכׇל טָמֵא אוֹ בְנִבְלַת חַיָּה טְמֵאָה אוֹ בְּנִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה אוֹ בְּנִבְלַת שֶׁרֶץ טָמֵא״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said** that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili’s opinion is derived **from here:** The verse states with regard to the sliding-scale offering brought by one who was unaware that he was impure when he ate consecrated food or entered the Temple: **“A person who touched anything impure, or the carcass of a non-kosher undomesticated animal, or the carcass of a non-kosher domesticated animal, or the carcass of an impure creeping animal,** and is guilty, it having being hidden from him that he is impure” (Leviticus 5:2).


###### Chullin 70b:10
[Chullin 70b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:10)

וְכִי נִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מְטַמְּאָה, וּבִטְהוֹרָה לֹא מְטַמְּאָה? אֶלָּא אֵיזֶה זֶה? זֶה עוּבָּר, שֶׁבִּטְמֵאָה טָמֵא, וּבִטְהוֹרָה טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The verse presents a difficulty: **Does** only **a carcass of a non-kosher animal impart impurity, and** that **of a kosher** animal **not impart impurity?** The *halakha* is that both do. **Rather, what is this** animal to which the verse is referring? **This is a fetus, which** if **inside a non-kosher** animal is **impure, and** if **inside a kosher** animal is **pure.**


###### Chullin 70b:11
[Chullin 70b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:11)

וּמֵאַחַר דְּנָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִדְּרַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, דְּרַבִּי יִצְחָק לְמָה לִי? אִי לָאו דְּרַבִּי יִצְחָק, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: כּוּלֵּיהּ לְכִדְרַבִּי הוּא דַּאֲתָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And since** this *halakha* **is derived from** the statement of **Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak, why do I** need the proof **of Rabbi Yitzḥak** from the verse: “And whatever walks on its paws, among any undomesticated animal that walks on all fours” (Leviticus 11:27)? The Gemara explains: **Were it not** for the derivation of **Rabbi Yitzḥak, I would say** that **the entire** verse expounded by Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak **comes to** teach only **that which Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi derived from it, as cited by the Gemara later on. Rabbi Yitzḥak’s statement **teaches us** that the verse is also to be expounded as Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak explained.


###### Chullin 70b:12
[Chullin 70b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:12)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: נַמְתִּי לוֹ לְבֶן עַזַּאי, לָמַדְנוּ נִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה שֶׁמְּטַמְּאָה, וְנִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה שֶׁמְּטַמְּאָה, נִבְלַת חַיָּה טְמֵאָה שֶׁמְּטַמְּאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It **is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yonatan,** a student of Rabbi Yishmael, **says: I said [*namti*] to ben Azzai: We learned that a carcass of a kosher domesticated animal imparts impurity** from the verse: “And when a domesticated animal dies, of those that you eat, one who touches its carcass shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39). **And** we learned that **a carcass of a non-kosher domesticated animal imparts impurity,** and **that a carcass of a non-kosher undomesticated animal imparts impurity,** from the verse: “A person who touched anything impure, or the carcass of a non-kosher undomesticated animal, or the carcass of a non-kosher domesticated animal” (Leviticus 5:2).


###### Chullin 70b:13
[Chullin 70b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:13)

נִבְלַת חַיָּה טְהוֹרָה לֹא לָמַדְנוּ מִנַּיִן? נָם לִי: ״כָּל הוֹלֵךְ עַל כַּפָּיו בְּכׇל הַחַיָּה הַהֹלֶכֶת״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
But **we did not** yet **learn** about **a carcass of a kosher undomesticated animal. From where** is it derived that it imparts impurity? Ben Azzai **said to me** that this is derived from the verse: “And **whatever walks on its paws, among any undomesticated animal that walks** on all fours” (Leviticus 11:27). The inclusive term “among any” serves to include even a carcass of a kosher undomesticated animal among those that impart impurity.


###### Chullin 70b:14
[Chullin 70b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:14)

נַמְתִּי לוֹ: וְכִי נֶאֱמַר ״וְכׇל חַיָּה״? וַהֲלֹא לֹא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא ״בְּכׇל הַחַיָּה״, לִמְהַלְּכֵי כַּפַּיִם בְּחַיָּה הוּא דַּאֲתָא. נָם לִי: וּמָה יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר בְּדָבָר הַזֶּה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yonatan continues. **I said to** ben Azzai: **But does it state: And any undomesticated animal? Isn’t it stated only: “Among any undomesticated animal”?** And as explained earlier, this **comes to** teach **that** a dead fetus in the form of any of the animals that **walk on** their **paws inside an undomesticated animal imparts impurity. He said to me: And what does** Rabbi **Yishmael,** your teacher, **say about this matter?**


###### Chullin 70b:15
[Chullin 70b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:15)

נַמְתִּי לוֹ: ״וְכִי יָמוּת מִן הַבְּהֵמָה״ – זוֹ בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, ״אֲשֶׁר הִיא לָכֶם לְאׇכְלָה״ – זוֹ בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, לָמַדְנוּ חַיָּה בִּכְלַל בְּהֵמָה, וּבְהֵמָה בִּכְלַל חַיָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**I said to him** that Rabbi Yishmael derives all these *halakhot* from the verse: “And when a domesticated animal dies, of those that you eat, one who touches its carcass shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39), as follows: **“And when a domesticated animal [*habehema*] dies,” this** is referring to **a non-kosher animal; “of those that you eat,” this** is referring to **a kosher animal.** And **we learned** that **a *ḥayya* is included** in the category of **a *behema*,** i.e., the term *behema* can also refer collectively to both domesticated and undomesticated animals. **And** likewise, **a *behema* is included** in the category of **a *ḥayya*.**


###### Chullin 70b:16
[Chullin 70b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/70b:16)

חַיָּה טְהוֹרָה בִּכְלַל בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, חַיָּה טְמֵאָה בִּכְלַל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **a kosher *ḥayya* is included** when the Torah makes reference to **a kosher *behema*,** and **a non-kosher *ḥayya* is included** when the Torah makes reference to **a non-kosher *behema*.**