Chullin

and also that the [aforementioned] signs are [reliable by] Biblical law.1 Our Rabbis taught: [The law of] ‘It and its young’ applies to a hybrid and a koy.2 R. Eliezer says. To a hybrid, the offspring of a goat and a ewe, the law of ‘It and its young’ applies; to a koy, the law of ‘It and its young’ does not apply. R. Hisda said: What is the koy about which R. Eliezer and the Rabbis differ? It is the offspring of a he-goat and a hind.3 What are the circumstances? If you suggest that a he-goat covered a hind and [the hind] gave birth to a young, and then one slaughtered the dam and its young; but [this cannot be, for] R. Hisda has also stated that all agree that if the dam was a hind and its young [the offspring of] a he-goat, one is not culpable [for slaughtering the dam and its young on the same day], for the Divine Law says: a sheep . . . and its young,4 and not ‘a hind and its young’. And if you suggest that a hart covered a she-goat and it gave birth to a young and then one slaughtered the dam and its young; but [this, too’ cannot be, for] R. Hisda has further stated that all agree that if the dam was a she-goat and its young [the offspring of] a hart, one is culpable, for the Divine Law says ‘a sheep’; and as for the expression ‘its young’. [it implies any offspring] whatever it is!5 — Indeed, the circumstances are these: a he-goat covered a hind and [the hind] gave birth to a female young; this female young also gave birth to a young, and then one slaughtered the female young and its young [on the same day]. Now the Rabbis are of the opinion that we take into consideration the seed of the male parent, and that the term ‘sheep’ includes even that which is a sheep in part only.6 R. Eliezer, on the other hand, holds that we do not take into consideration the seed of the male parent, nor do we say that the term ‘sheep’ includes that which is a sheep in part only.7 Why not say that they differ on the issue whether or not we take into consideration the seed of the male parent, as is the dispute between Hananiah and the Rabbis?8 — If they were to differ on that issue only. I might have said that in the above case even the Rabbis would agree [that the law of ‘It and its young’ does not apply], for we do not say that the term ‘sheep’ includes that which is a sheep in part only; he therefore teaches us [the above dispute].9 Consider then the following case. We have learnt:10 A person may not slaughter a koy on a festival, and if he did slaughter it he may not cover up its blood.11 Now of what [koy] are we speaking here? If you suggest that a he-goat covered a hind and it gave birth [to the koy], then both according to the Rabbis and R. Eliezer he may slaughter it [on the festival] and cover up its blood, for the law [of covering up the blood] applies to deer and even to that which is deer in part.12 And if you suggest that a hart covered a she-goat and it gave birth [to the koy], then according to the Rabbis he may slaughter it [on the festival] and cover up its blood,13 and according to R. Eliezer he may slaughter it [on the festival] and need not cover the blood!14 — Indeed, the fact was that a hart covered a she-goat, but the Rabbis are undecided whether or not we must take into consideration the seed of the male parent.15 It follows, does it not, that since the Rabbis are undecided on this point. R. Eliezer has no doubts at all about it?16 Consider then the following case. It was taught: The law of The shoulder and the two cheeks and the maw17 applies to a koy and to a hybrid. R. Eliezer says. A hybrid, the offspring of a goat and a ewe, is subject to these dues; a koy is not subject to these dues. Now of what [koy] are we speaking here? If you suggest that a he-goat covered a hind and it gave birth [to the koy], then the view of R. Eliezer that it is not subject [to these dues] is clear, for he is of the opinion that we do not say that the term ‘sheep’ includes that which is a sheep in part only.18 But according to the view of the Rabbis, granting that they hold that the term ‘sheep’ includes even that which is a sheep in part only, it is clear therefore that there is certainly no obligation to give him19 one half [of the dues]20 and even as regards the other half21 he could say to him, ‘Bring proof that we take into consideration the seed of the male parent and then you shall have it’. And if you suggest that a hart covered a she-goat, then according to the Rabbis it is perfectly clear, for by ‘subject’ they meant [subject] to half the dues. But according to R. Eliezer it ought to be subject to the whole of the dues!22 — Indeed the case was that a hart covered a she-goat and it gave birth [to the koy], but R. Eliezer is undecided whether or not we must take into consideration the seed of the male parent. But if the Rabbis are undecided about it and R. Eliezer too is undecided, wherein do they differ? — question raised in B.M. 27a, whether the identification marks in a lost article are legally valid by Biblical or merely by Rabbinic law (Rashi). and its young’, the Torah expressly states: Whether it be an ox or a sheep, which includes the goat but excludes the deer and all wild animals. the male. R. Eliezer it does not apply and according to the Rabbis it does. koy, therefore, since it is part goat and part deer, may not be slaughtered on a festival for there is no absolute duty in regard to it to cover up its blood. covering up the blood will certainly apply to its young, even though its sire might have been a goat. Even according to the Rabbis who maintain that we must take into consideration the seed of the male parent, in this case a goat, there is the obligation to cover up the blood of the offspring. for this law is a positive obligation and will certainly apply to that part of the offspring which represents the deer element in it, and since it applies to part it must apply to the whole too, for the deer and goat elements are indistinguishable in it (v. Tosaf. a.l.). blood must be covered up. the blood does not apply to it. Both according to the Rabbis and R. Eliezer there is no doubt about the covering up of its blood, hence it may be slaughtered on a festival. law of ‘It and its young’ will apply to it, and on the other hand, it is forbidden to be slaughtered on a festival, because of the doubt as to the covering up of its blood. whether it be ox or sheep, that they shall give unto the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw. It is clear that this law does not apply to a wild animal, as a deer. dues’ the Rabbis at most meant, subject to half the dues. therefore subject to the whole of the priests dues.