Chullin 32a (לב.) — the Talmud in English

Another animal was slaughtered with it

unintentionally—the cow is not disqualified on account of performing another labor, since he did not intend to slaughter another animal, and there is no distraction of mind,

however,

according to Rabbi Natan—

the

cow is disqualified

but the

animal is fit,

because, in the slaughter of non-sacred animals, intention is not required according to his opinion; and the cow is disqualified because of the disqualification of slaughtering two animals simultaneously. For concerning the red heifer, the Torah says, “And he shall slaughter it” [Numbers 19:3], and we expound: “it,” but not it and another animal.

According to the Sages—

the cow is fit, but the animal is disqualified,

the animal is disqualified, since it was not slaughtered with the requisite intention. Consequently, there is no disqualification with regard to the cow: It is not disqualified on account of performing another labor, since he did not intend to slaughter another animal and there was no distraction of mind; nor is it disqualified on account of slaughtering two animals simultaneously, since the slaughter of the animal is disqualified.

And we challenge this:

Is it obvious?

What law is Rava teaching? Surely it is known that the cow is disqualified by the performance of another labor, and the disqualification of slaughtering two animals simultaneously is likewise not a novelty introduced by Rava!

And we answer: There truly is no novelty in the law that the cow is disqualified if he intentionally slaughtered another animal with it. However, this law—that if an animal

was slaughtered

unintentionally, it is disqualified—

was necessary according to Rabbi Natan. It might have entered your mind to say

that even though

the Merciful One stated, “And he shall slaughter it,” but not it and its companion,

the cow is not disqualified in this case.

And what are the circumstances

in which it is disqualified? In

a case where he slaughtered two red heifers

simultaneously

with one another

[together], since both heifers are consecrated, the rule “it and its companion” applies to them.

But with regard to a non-sacred animal, one might say that it is not included

in the category of “its companion.”

Rava therefore teaches us

that even a non-sacred animal causes disqualification.

Rava continues: If, when he slaughtered a red heifer, he

cut a pumpkin with it,

according to

everyone—it is

disqualified

because of another labor. But if

a pumpkin was cut with it

unintentionally, according to

everyone—it is fit, since it was disqualified neither because of another labor nor because of slaughtering two animals together.

fit, because it was disqualified neither because of another task nor because of two animals being slaughtered together .

Mishna:

This Mishna discusses the law of interruption during slaughter.

If he was slaughtering, and in the middle of the slaughter

his knife fell

from his hand, and he

picked it up

and continued slaughtering; or

his implements fell

[his garments] in the middle of the slaughter,

and he picked them up; or

he

sharpened the knife

before the slaughter,

and became exhausted

[and tired] from this, and after he began slaughtering he stopped because he had no strength, and

his companion came and slaughtered

and completed the slaughter —

if he interrupted

in the interim

for the time required for slaughter —it is disqualified, for this is the measure of time transmitted to Moses from Sinai with regard to interruption.

disqualified, because this is the measure of time for interruption that was given to Moses at Sinai.

Rabbi Shimon says: If he interrupted for the time required to inspect

[the knife], his slaughter is disqualified, for this is the measure of interruption.

Gemara:

We learned in our Mishna: If he interrupted for the time required for slaughter, it is disqualified.

And we clarify:

What is meant by “the time required for slaughter”?

Is it the time required to complete the slaughter that he had already begun, or is it the time required to slaughter from beginning to end?

Rav said: The time required to slaughter another animal

from beginning to end.

Rav Kahana and Rav Asi said to Rav

the following question: Does the measure of interruption vary according to the size of the creature being slaughtered, and is

the time required to slaughter an animal

the measure of interruption

for an animal, and

the time required to slaughter a

bird

is calculated

for a bird

188, or perhaps

there is a fixed measure for every creature being slaughtered? And does

even

the time required to slaughter an

animal

apply

to a bird? He said to them

Rav: I too was uncertain about this when I studied with my uncle, Rabbi Hiyya, but

I was not on sufficiently familiar terms with my beloved teacher to ask him.

[At that time I did not have the closeness with my beloved teacher necessary to ask him this question].

The Gemara brings a dispute concerning this matter between Rav, who stated his view on his own authority, and other amoraim.

It was stated: Rav said: The time required to slaughter an animal applies to an animal, and the time required to slaughter a bird applies to a bird.

And Shmuel said:

It is permitted to calculate

even

according to the time required to slaughter an

animal for a bird.

And likewise, when Ravin came, he said that Rabbi Yohanan said: Even the time required to slaughter an animal applies to a bird.

Rabbi Hanina said:

The measure is not calculated according to the slaughter itself alone, but rather

according to the time required to bring another animal and slaughter it.

And we challenge Rabbi Hanina:

Can he bring it even from elsewhere?

[Can he even bring it from another place?] If so,

you have made your words subject to variable measures,

since sometimes the animal is near the place of slaughter and sometimes it is far away!

Rav Pappa said:

An animal that is at the place of slaughter and

is ready to be cast down

onto the ground—

this is the difference between them 189,

Rabbi Hanina calculates the time required to cast down the animal and slaughter it, whereas Rav, Shmuel, and Rabbi Yohanan calculate only the time required for slaughter itself.

In the West they said in the name of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina:

The measure is calculated according to

the time required to lift it, cast it down, and slaughter it,

in accordance with Rabbi Hanina; and each species is measured according to its own kind, in accordance with Rav — the slaughter of a

small animal for a small animal, and of a large animal for a large animal.

Rava said: One who slaughters with a poor knife

that is not sharp,

even

if he slaughtered

the entire day—

the entire day, his slaughter is

it is fit,

provided that he did not interrupt in the middle for the measure of interruption.

Rava raised a dilemma: Interruptions

in which the slaughterer interrupted two or three times during one act of slaughter—

what is the law as to whether they combine

if the intervals between them were each the measure of slaughter?

And we challenge this:

Can you resolve it from Rava’s own statement

[for it is possible to resolve the dilemma from Rava’s own words], since he said that one who slaughters the entire day—his slaughter is fit, and he evidently means that even if there were several interruptions, they do not combine! And we answer:

There he was not interrupted

at all. Rava’s novelty is that the slaughter need not be performed quickly; rather, there must not be an interruption in the middle.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, raised a dilemma:

If he slaughtered the majority of the two simanim and

interrupted during the slaughter of

a

minority of the simanim, what is the law?

Should we say that once he has slaughtered the majority, he has already rendered the animal permitted, and it does not matter that he interrupted afterward? Or should we say that in any event, the minority is also considered part of the slaughter, and if he performed it improperly, the slaughter is disqualified? And we conclude:

The matter remains unresolved,

and one should be stringent in this matter.

We learned in our Mishna:

Rabbi Shimon says: If he interrupted for the time required to inspect.

And we clarify:

What is meant by “the time required to inspect”?

Rabbi Yohanan said: The time required for a sage to inspect,

since every slaughterer must show the knife with which he slaughters to a sage, so that he can examine it and ascertain that it has no nicks.

And we challenge this:

If so, you have made your words subject to variable measures,

since sometimes the sage is near the slaughterer and sometimes he is far from him, so no fixed measure has been established!

And we answer:

Rather, the time required for a slaughterer’s inspection

when he himself is

a sage,

so that he does not bring the knife to another sage; the measure is calculated only according to the inspection itself.

Mishna:

The Mishna teaches the law concerning an animal whose two simanim have not both been slaughtered properly.

If he slaughtered the esophagus

of an animal,

and severed the windpipe

without a valid knife,

or severed the windpipe and slaughtered

the esophagus,