## Chullin Daf 9a

###### Chullin 9a:1
[Chullin 9a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:1)

מֵעִילַּאי נָמֵי קְרָמָא אִיכָּא? אַיְּידֵי דִּמְמַשְׁמְשָׁא יְדָא דְּטַבָּחָא מִפַּתַּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**from above too there is a membrane** that should prevent the forbidden fat from flowing onto the piece of meat even if the forbidden fat is placed directly upon it. The Gemara explains: **Since the hand of the slaughterer touches** the upper membrane, that membrane **disintegrates** and the forbidden fat flows onto the meat.


###### Chullin 9a:2
[Chullin 9a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:2)

וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: תַּלְמִיד חָכָם צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּלְמוֹד שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים: כְּתָב, שְׁחִיטָה, וּמִילָה. וְרַב חֲנַנְיָא בַּר שֶׁלֶמְיָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמַר: אַף קֶשֶׁר שֶׁל תְּפִילִּין, וּבִרְכַּת חֲתָנִים, וְצִיצִית. וְאִידַּךְ – הָנֵי שְׁכִיחָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **And Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says: A Torah scholar is required to learn** the requisite skills to perform **three matters: Writing,** so that he will be able to write texts on various occasions, **ritual slaughter, and circumcision. And Rav Ḥananya bar Shelamya says in the name of Rav:** He must **also** learn to tie **the knot of the phylacteries, and** to recite **the blessing of the grooms** by heart and with the traditional intonation, **and** to tie **ritual fringes** to the corners of a garment. The Gemara notes: **And the other** *amora*, Rav Yehuda, holds that **those** skills **are commonplace** and do not require special training.


###### Chullin 9a:3
[Chullin 9a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:3)

וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כׇּל טַבָּח שֶׁאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ הִלְכוֹת שְׁחִיטָה אָסוּר לֶאֱכוֹל מִשְּׁחִיטָתוֹ, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הִלְכוֹת שְׁחִיטָה: שְׁהִיָּיה, דְּרָסָה, חֲלָדָה, הַגְרָמָה, וְעִיקּוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **And Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says:** With regard to **any slaughterer who does not know the *halakhot* of ritual slaughter,** it is **prohibited to eat from his slaughter. And these are the *halakhot* of ritual slaughter: Interrupting** the slaughter, **pressing** the knife, **concealing** the knife under the windpipe or the gullet in the course of an inverted slaughter, **diverting** the knife from the place of slaughter, **and ripping** the *simanim* from their place before cutting them.


###### Chullin 9a:4
[Chullin 9a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:4)

מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן? כּוּלְּהוּ תְּנִינְהוּ! לָא צְרִיכָא, שֶׁשָּׁחַט לְפָנֵינוּ שְׁתַּיִם וְשָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים וּשְׁחַט שַׁפִּיר; מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: מִדְּאִידַּךְ שְׁחַט שַׁפִּיר, הַאי נָמֵי שְׁחַט שַׁפִּיר, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: כֵּיוָן דְּלָא גְּמִר, זִימְנִין דְּשָׁהֵי וְדָרֵיס וְלָא יָדַע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the novelty in what Rav is **teaching us? We learned all of them** in the *mishnayot* in the second chapter of this tractate, and therefore it is obvious that a slaughterer who does not know these *halakhot* is not qualified. The Gemara answers: **No,** it is **necessary** in a case **where** the slaughterer **slaughtered before us twice or three times and slaughtered well. Lest you say: From** the fact **that he slaughtered the other** animals **well, this** animal **he also slaughtered well;** therefore, Rav **teaches us: Since he did not learn** the *halakhot*, **sometimes** it happens **that he interrupts** the slaughter **or presses** the knife, **and he does not know** that he invalidated the slaughter.


###### Chullin 9a:5
[Chullin 9a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:5)

וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הַטַּבָּח צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּבְדּוֹק בַּסִּימָנִים לְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אִם שָׁהָה כְּדֵי בִּיקּוּר. מַאי לָאו כְּדֵי בִּיקּוּר סִימָנִין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **And Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says: The slaughterer must examine the *simanim*,** the windpipe and the gullet, **after** completing the **slaughter. Rav Yosef said: We learn** in a mishna (32a) **as well: Rabbi Shimon says:** The slaughter is not valid **if he interrupted** the slaughter for an interval **equivalent** to the duration of **an examination. What, is it not** an interval **equivalent** to the duration of **an examination of the *simanim*?** Apparently, one is obligated to examine the *simanim*.


###### Chullin 9a:6
[Chullin 9a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:6)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: לָא, הָכִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּדֵי בִּיקּוּר חָכָם. אִם כֵּן, נָתַתָּ דְּבָרֶיךָ לְשִׁיעוּרִים! אֶלָּא, כְּדֵי בִּיקּוּר טַבָּח חָכָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: No, this** is what **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** It is an interval **equivalent** to the duration of **an examination** of the knife, as the Sages instituted that one must take the knife to be examined by a Torah **scholar** prior to slaughtering the animal. Rav Yosef said to him: **If so, you have rendered your statement** subject **to circumstances,** as sometimes the Torah scholar is near and sometimes the Torah scholar is far, and the time required for examination varies accordingly. **Rather,** it is an interval **equivalent** to the duration of **an examination** performed by **a slaughterer** who is a Torah **scholar.** In that case, the travel time is not factored, just the time of the examination, which does not vary.


###### Chullin 9a:7
[Chullin 9a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:7)

לֹא בָּדַק, מַאי? רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי אָמַר: טְרֵפָה, וַאֲסוּרָה בַּאֲכִילָה. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: נְבֵלָה, וּמְטַמְּאָה בְּמַשָּׂא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If the slaughterer **did not examine** the *simanim* after completing slaughter of the animal, **what** is the *halakha*? **Rabbi Eliezer ben Antigonus says in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yannai:** The halakhic status of the slaughtered animal is that of **a *tereifa*, and it is forbidden for consumption,** but it does not impart impurity. **It was taught in a *baraita*:** Its halakhic status is that of **an unslaughtered carcass, and it imparts impurity by means of carrying** it.


###### Chullin 9a:8
[Chullin 9a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:8)

בְּמַאי קָמִיפַּלְגִי? בִּדְרַב הוּנָא, דְּאָמַר: בְּהֵמָה בְּחַיֶּיהָ בְּחֶזְקַת אִיסּוּר עוֹמֶדֶת, עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע לָךְ בַּמֶּה נִשְׁחֲטָה. נִשְׁחֲטָה – הֲרֵי הִיא בְּחֶזְקַת הֶיתֵּר, עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע לָךְ בַּמֶּה נִטְרְפָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **With regard to what** principle **do they disagree?** The Gemara answers: They disagree **with regard to** the application of the *halakha* stated by **Rav Huna, who says: An animal during its lifetime exists with the presumptive status of prohibition,** as it is prohibited to eat a living animal, and it continues to have this status even after its death **until it will become known to you in what** manner **it was slaughtered,** i.e., whether it was properly slaughtered. Once the animal **was slaughtered,** it exists **with the presumptive status of permissibility until it will become known to you in what** manner **it was rendered a *tereifa*.**


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

מָר סָבַר: בְּחֶזְקַת אִיסּוּר קָיְימָא, וְהַשְׁתָּא מֵתָה הִיא; וּמָר סָבַר: בְּחֶזְקַת אִיסּוּר אָמְרִינַן, בְּחֶזְקַת טוּמְאָה לָא אָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is with regard to the application of this *halakha* that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yannai, and the *tanna* of the *baraita* disagree in a case where the slaughterer did not examine the *simanim* after completing the slaughter. One **Sage holds:** Since it has not been verified that the animal was slaughtered properly, the animal **exists with the presumptive status of prohibition, and** since **now it is dead,** it assumes the status of an unslaughtered carcass and imparts impurity. **And** one **Sage holds: With** regard to **the presumptive status of prohibition, we say** that the animal is forbidden until it is verified that it was slaughtered properly; **with regard to the presumptive status of ritual impurity we do not say** that the animal is impure, as a living animal is not ritually impure.


###### Chullin 9a:10
[Chullin 9a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:10)

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: בְּהֵמָה בְּחַיֶּיהָ בְּחֶזְקַת אִיסּוּר עוֹמֶדֶת עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע לָךְ בַּמֶּה נִשְׁחֲטָה, נִשְׁחֲטָה – בְּחֶזְקַת הֶיתֵּר עוֹמֶדֶת עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע לָךְ בַּמֶּה נִטְרְפָה. וְלֵימָא: ״נִשְׁחֲטָה הוּתְּרָה״! הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיתְיְלִיד בַּהּ רֵיעוּתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara proceeds to analyze **the** matter **itself. Rav Huna says: An animal during its lifetime exists with the presumptive status of prohibition until it will become known to you in what** manner **it was slaughtered.** Once the animal **was slaughtered, it exists with the presumptive status of permissibility until it will become known to you in what** manner **it was rendered a *tereifa*.** The Gemara challenges this: **And let us say** that once the animal **was slaughtered, it became permitted,** instead of saying that it exists with the presumptive status of permissibility. The Gemara explains: **This teaches us that even if a flaw developed in** the animal that raises uncertainty with regard to its permitted status, it retains its presumptive status of permissibility.


###### Chullin 9a:11
[Chullin 9a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:11)

כְּדִבְעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא מֵרַב הוּנָא: בָּא זְאֵב וְנָטַל בְּנֵי מֵעַיִם, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As Rabbi Abba raised a dilemma before Rav Huna:** If **a wolf came and took** the **innards** of a slaughtered animal, **what is** the *halakha*?


###### Chullin 9a:12
[Chullin 9a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:12)

נָטַל?! הָא לֵיתַנְהוּ, אֶלָּא נָקַב בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים מַהוּ? נָקַב?! הָא קָא חָזֵינַן דְּהוּא נַקְבִינְהוּ! אֶלָּא נְטָלָן וְהֶחְזִירָן כְּשֶׁהֵן נְקוּבִין, מַהוּ? מִי חָיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא בִּמְקוֹם נֶקֶב נָקַב, אוֹ לָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Took?** In that case the innards **are not** there, and therefore there is no way of seeing an indication of a flaw. **Rather,** the dilemma is: In a case where a wolf **perforated the innards** of a slaughtered animal, **what is** the *halakha*? The Gemara challenges: **Perforated? We see that** the wolf **perforated them** and in that case too there is no indication of a flaw. **Rather,** the dilemma is: In a case where a wolf **took** the innards **and returned them when they are perforated, what is** the *halakha*? **Are we concerned** that **perhaps** the wolf **perforated** the innards **in the place of** a preexisting **perforation** and the animal was a *tereifa* from the outset, **or** is that possibility **not** a concern?


###### Chullin 9a:13
[Chullin 9a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין שֶׁמָּא בִּמְקוֹם נֶקֶב נָקַב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Huna **said to** Rabbi Abba: **One is not concerned** that **perhaps** the wolf **perforated** the innards **in the place of** a preexisting **perforation,** because one relies on the presumptive status of permissibility.


###### Chullin 9a:14
[Chullin 9a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/9a:14)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ: רָאָה צִפּוֹר הַמְנַקֵּר בִּתְאֵנָה וְעַכְבָּר הַמְנַקֵּר בָּאֲבַטִּיחִים,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Abba **raised an objection to** the opinion of Rav Huna: If **one saw a bird pecking at a fig or a mouse gnawing at melons,**