Parallel
חולין 9:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
is there not a membrane above [the fat]? — [This membrane,] since it is handled by the butcher, crumbles away. Again Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: A scholar must learn three things, viz.: writing, shechitah, and circumcision. R. Hanania b. Shelemia said in the name of Rab, He must also learn the art of forming the knot of the Tefillin, the benedictions recited at the marriage ceremony, and the art of binding the Zizith. And the other [Rab Judah]? — [He says], These are frequent. Rab Judah stated in the name of Samuel: One may not eat of the slaughtering of any butcher who does not know the rules of shechitah. And these are the rules of shechitah: [the rules as to] pausing, pressing, thrusting, deflecting, and tearing. Why is it necessary to teach us this? Have we not learnt about each of these [elsewhere]? — It is only necessary for the case where one [not knowing the rules] slaughtered two or three times in our presence correctly. You might argue that since on those occasions he slaughtered correctly so now, too, he will slaughter correctly. It is therefore necessary to teach you that [he may not slaughter because,] since he does not know the rules, it may sometimes happen that he will pause or press, and will not know [that it is wrong to do so]. Again Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The butcher must examine the organs of the throat after slaughtering. R. Joseph remarked: We have learnt the same [in a Mishnah]: R. Simeon says. If one paused for the time taken to examine . . . Now does it not mean the time taken to examine the organs [of the throat]? — Abaye replied: No; thus did R. Johanan say: It means the time taken for the Sage to examine [the knife]. If this is the meaning, then the rule would vary according to circumstances? — Rather [the meaning is]: The time taken for a butcher [who is himself] a Sage to examine [the knife]. If one did not examine [the organs of the throat after slaughtering], what is the law? — R. Eliezer b. Antigonus ruled in the name of R. Eliezer son of R. Jannai: The animal is trefah and may not be eaten. In a Baraitha it was taught: The animal is nebelah and defiles one who carries it. On what principle do they differ? — On the principle laid down by R. Huna, who said: An animal while alive is presumed to be forbidden [and, therefore, remains forbidden when dead] until it becomes known to you that it was ritually slaughtered; once ritually slaughtered, it is presumed to be permitted until it becomes known to you how it became trefah. The one reasons thus: It is presumed to be forbidden, and now that it is dead [it is nebelah and therefore defiles]. The other reasons thus: The presumption holds good only in respect of the prohibition [to be eaten], but there is no presumption in respect of defilement. The text [above stated]: ‘R. Huna said: An animal while alive is presumed to be forbidden [and, therefore, remains forbidden when dead] until it becomes known to you that it was ritually slaughtered; once ritually slaughtered, it is presumed to be permitted until it becomes known to you how it became trefah’. Should he not [simply] have said: ‘Once ritually slaughtered it is permitted’? — He teaches you this: That even if something happened to the animal to impair its status [it is nevertheless permitted]. For example, the question which was put to R. Huna by R. Abba: If a wolf came and carried away the intestines [of a slaughtered animal], what is the law? [You ask] ‘carried away’! Then they are not here! — Rather, say: ‘and perforated the intestines’. ‘Perforated the intestines’! Then it is evident that the wolf did it! Rather say: ‘carried away the intestines and brought them back perforated’ — Now, what is the law? Are we to apprehend that the wolf inserted [its teeth] in a perforation that was there previously, or not? — R. Huna replied: We do not apprehend that it inserted [its teeth] in a perforation. [R. Abba] thereupon raised an objection [from the following Baraitha]: If one saw a bird nibbling at a fig or a mouse nibbling at a melon,
—