Chullin

its [productive] strength be weakened,1 but why may it be painted with red paint?2 — The purpose is that people will observe it and pray for its recovery. As it was taught: [It is written:] And he shall cry: Unclean, unclean,3 that is to say, he shall make known [his affliction] to his fellow men that they may pray for him. Likewise, he upon whom a calamity has befallen should make known [his trouble] to his fellow men that they may pray for him. Rabina said: According to whom is it that we suspend a cluster [of dates] on a tree [which casts its fruit]?4 — It is in accordance with the above Tanna. MISHNAH. [THE LAW OF] IT AND ITS YOUNG5 IS IN FORCE BOTH WITHIN THE LAND OF ISRAEL AND OUTSIDE IT, BOTH DURING THE EXISTENCE OF THE TEMPLE AND AFTER IT, IN RESPECT OF BOTH UNCONSECRATED AND CONSECRATED ANIMALS. THUS, IF ONE PERSON SLAUGHTERED AN ANIMAL AND [ANOTHER]6 ITS YOUNG, BOTH ANIMALS BEING UNCONSECRATED, [AND THEY SLAUGHTERED THEM] OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY, THEY ARE BOTH VALID,7 BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES.8 IF BOTH ANIMALS WERE CONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE SLAUGHTERED] OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY, [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE FIRST INCURS THE PENALTY OF KARETH,9 BOTH ANIMALS ARE INVALID, AND EACH INCURS FORTY STRIPES.10 IF BOTH ANIMALS WERE UNCONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE SLAUGHTERED] INSIDE THE SANCTUARY, BOTH ANIMALS ARE INVALID,11 AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES.12 IF BOTH ANIMALS WERE CONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE SLAUGHTERED] INSIDE THE SANCTUARY, THE FIRST IS VALID AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED IT IS] NOT CULPABLE, BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES,12 AND IT IS INVALID.13 IF [THE FIRST ANIMAL WAS] UNCONSECRATED AND [THE SECOND] CONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE BOTH SLAUGHTERED] OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY, THE FIRST IS VALID AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED IT IS] NOT CULPABLE, BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES AND IT IS INVALID. IF [THE FIRST WAS] CONSECRATED AND [THE SECOND] UNCONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE BOTH SLAUGHTERED] OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY, [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE FIRST INCURS THE PENALTY OF KARETH AND IT IS INVALID, AND THE SECOND [ANIMAL] IS VALID, AND EACH INCURS FORTY STRIPES.14 IF [THE FIRST WAS] UNCONSECRATED AND [THE SECOND] CONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE BOTH SLAUGHTERED] INSIDE THE SANCTUARY, THEY ARE BOTH INVALID, AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES.12 IF [THE FIRST WAS] CONSECRATED AND [THE SECOND] UNCONSECRATED [AND THEY WERE BOTH SLAUGHTERED] INSIDE THE SANCTUARY, THE FIRST ANIMAL IS VALID AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED IT IS] NOT CULPABLE, BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES12 AND IT IS INVALID. IF [THE FIRST WAS SLAUGHTERED] OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY AND [THE SECOND] INSIDE, BOTH BEING UNCONSECRATED ANIMALS, THE FIRST IS VALID AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED IT IS] NOT CULPABLE, BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES AND IT IS INVALID. IF [THE FIRST WAS SLAUGHTERED] OUTSIDE THE SANCTUARY AND [THE SECOND] INSIDE, BOTH BEING CONSECRATED ANIMALS, [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE FIRST INCURS THE PENALTY OF KARETH, EACH INCURS FORTY STRIPES,15 AND BOTH ANIMALS ARE INVALID. IF [THE FIRST WAS SLAUGHTERED] INSIDE THE SANCTUARY AND [THE SECOND] OUTSIDE, BOTH BEING UNCONSECRATED ANIMALS, THE FIRST IS INVALID AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED IT IS] NOT CULPABLE, BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES16 AND IT IS VALID. IF [THE FIRST WAS SLAUGHTERED] INSIDE THE SANCTUARY AND [THE SECOND] OUTSIDE, BOTH BEING CONSECRATED ANIMALS, THE FIRST IS VALID AND [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED IT IS] NOT CULPABLE, BUT [HE WHO SLAUGHTERED] THE SECOND INCURS FORTY STRIPES16 AND IT IS INVALID. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: Whence do we know that the law of ‘It and its young’ applies to consecrated animals? Because the verse states: When a bullock or a sheep or a goat is brought forth . . . [thenceforth it may be accepted for an offering],17 and there immediately follows the verse: And whether it be an ox or a sheep, ye shall not kill it and its young both in one day,18 thus indicating that the law of ‘It and its young’ applies to consecrated animals. Perhaps then it applies only to consecrated animals and not to unconsecrated animals! — [This cannot be, for] the word ‘ox’ interrupts the subject matter.19 Perhaps then it applies to unconsecrated animals only and not to consecrated animals! — Since it is written: ‘And . . . an ox’, the conjunction ‘and’ connects it with the previous subject. It should then follow, should it not, that as a hybrid cannot be a consecrated animal, so the law of ‘It and its young’ should not apply to a hybrid? Wherefore has it been taught: The law of ‘It and its young’ applies to a hybrid20 and to a koy?21 And [there is] also [this difficulty] for it is written here, sheep, and Raba has declared, superstitious practice. only to the cow or ewe and her young or also to the bull or ram and his young, is a question disputed in the Gemara infra. same, however, if both animals were slaughtered by the same person; moreover, it is immaterial whether the dam was slaughtered first and then the young or vice versa. XVII, 4. For Kareth v. Glos. He who slaughtered the second animal is not liable to this penalty for what he slaughtered, though consecrated, was not fit for a sacrifice at the time, since its dam had been slaughtered previously on the same day. been said that he is liable to the penalty of Kareth, if he was warned before the commission of the act that he would be liable to the punishment of stripes, he would suffer that punishment (so according to the view of R. Akiba in Mak. 13b); and the second for the infringement of the prohibition of ‘It and its young’. slaughtered them has not incurred the penalty of stripes, for the prohibition thereof is not expressly stated in the Torah, but is deduced from the verse in Deut. XII, 21. time’, either too young or for some other reason temporarily disqualified. not have repeated the words ‘ox or sheep’ since these are mentioned in the preceding verse The fact that the words ‘ox or sheep’ are repeated indicates that the law applies generally. cattle or of wild beasts. Probably a cross between a goat and some species of gazelle. V. infra 79b and 80a.