Parallel
חולין 128:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
R. Meir says: If by taking hold of the smaller part the greater part comes away with it, it is regarded like it; otherwise it is not regarded like it. Whereupon R. Johanan suggested that he in this case changed his opinion! But what was [R. Johanan's] difficulty? perhaps R. Meir distinguishes between the uncleanness of a tebul yom and other uncleannesses? — [This surely is not the case for] it was taught: Rabbi says: It is all one whether the uncleanness was that of a tebul yom or any other uncleanness. But perhaps Rabbi draws no distinction [between the uncleannesses] but R. Meir does? — Said R. Josiah. This is what R. Johanan meant to say. According to Rabbi's view he [R. Meir] in this case changed his opinion. Raba said: They differ as to whether the law of handles applies only in respect of conveying the uncleanness but not in respect of rendering [the bulk] susceptible to uncleanness [or whether it applies to both]; one holds that the law of handles applies only in respect of conveying the uncleanness but not in respect of rendering [the bulk] susceptible to uncleanness, but the other holds that the law of handles applies both in respect of conveying the uncleanness and of rendering [the bulk] susceptible to uncleanness. R. Papa said: They differ as to the ruling in the case where [the limb] was rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] before any intention [was formed of using it as food]. For it was taught: R. Judah said: R. Akiba used to teach as follows: The forbidden fat of a slaughtered animal, in villages, needs intention [to be used for food], but does not need to be made susceptible to uncleanness, since it has already been made susceptible by the slaughtering. Thereupon I said to him: Master, did you not teach us that if a man gathered endives, washed them for [feeding] cattle, and then determined to use them as food for man, they again need [to be moistened in order] to be rendered susceptible to uncleanness? R. Akiba then retracted and taught according to R. Judah. The one accepts the original [teaching of R. Akiba]. the other [the teaching] after he retracted. R. Aha the son of R. Ika said: They differ in the case where the blood was wiped away [from the limb] between the cutting of the first and second organs [of the throat]; one maintains that the term shechitah applies to the entire process of slaughtering from beginning to end, consequently this [blood that was upon the limb] was the blood of slaughtering; the other maintains that the term shechitah applies only to the last stage of the slaughtering, consequently this [blood that was upon the limb] was the blood of a wound. R. Ashi said: They differ as to whether the slaughtering only and not the blood renders susceptible to uncleanness. Rabbah raised the following question: Can the living animal serve as a handle to the limb or not? — It is undecided. Abaye said: Behold they have said: If a man planted a cucumber in a plant-pot and it grew and spread outside the pot, it is clean. Said R. Simeon: How does this come to be clean? Rather what is unclean remains unclean and what is clean remains clean. Now, asked Abaye, [according to R. Simeon] can it serve as a handle to the rest? — It is undecided. R. Jeremiah said: Behold they have said that if a man bowed down to half a pumpkin he has thereby rendered it forbidden. Now, asked R. Jeremiah,
—