meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.txt"}
text: Mishnah Chullin
  משנה חולין
  Sefaria Community Translation
  
  
  Mishnah Chullin
  
  
  
  
  
  Anyone [may] slaughter -  and his slaughter is valid - except for a deaf-mute, a <i>shoteh</i> [a person who exhibits signs demonstrating a lack of ability to think clearly], or a minor, lest they spoil the slaughter. But all who slaughter while others are watching them: their slaughter is valid. The slaughter of a non-Jew is a <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] and renders impure through carrying. One who slaughters at night, and so too a blind person who slaughters, his slaughter is valid. One who slaughters on Shabbat, or on Yom Kippur, even though he is liable for death, his slaughter is valid.
  If one slaughters with a hand sickle, a flint stone, or with a reed, his slaughter is valid. All [may] slaughter, they may slaughter at any time, and they may slaughter with anything, except a reaping sickle, a saw, teeth, or a finger nail, because they strangle. One who slaughters with a reaping sickle along the direction [of the teeth], Beit Shammai invalidates, but Beit Hillel validated. If its teeth were smoothed, it is like a knife.
  One who slaughters through the ring of the windpipe and left on it a thread's breadth around the whole of it [the circumference], his slaughter is valid. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Yehuda says, "[Even] a thread's breadth around the majority of it."
  One who slaughters from the sides, his slaughter is valid. One who performs <i>melikah</i> [a slaughtering method used for bird sacrifices, employing the thumbnail instead of a knife] from the sides, his <i>melikah</i> is invalid. One who slaughters from the back of the neck, his slaughter is invalid. One who performs <i>melikah</i> from the back of the neck, his <i>melikah</i> is valid. One who slaughters from the throat, his slaughter is valid. One who performs <i>melikah</i> from the throat, his <i>melikah</i> is invalid, for the entire back of the neck is valid for <i>melikah</i>, and the entire throat is valid for slaughtering. As a result, [that which is] valid regarding slaughter is invalid regarding <i>melikah</i> and [that which is] valid regarding <i>melikah</i> is invalid regarding slaughter.
  [That which is] valid regarding pigeons is invalid regarding turtle-doves. [That which is] valid regarding turtle-doves is invalid regarding pigeons. [At] the beginning of yellowing [of the feathers] with either this or that, they [become] invalid [as sacrifices].
  [That which is] valid for the red heifer  is invalid for the <i>eglah arufah</i> [a calf whose neck is broken to atone for an unsolved murder]. [That which is] valid for the <i>eglah arufah</i> is invalid for the red heifer. [That which is] valid for <i>Kohanim</i> [member of the priestly caste, a subgroup of tribe of Levi, which is uniquely responsible for maintaining and carrying out the sacrificial services in the Temple] is invalid for Levites. [That which is] valid regarding Levites is invalid regarding <i>Kohanim</i>. [That which is] pure for earthenware vessels is impure for all the [other] vessels. [That which is] pure for all the [other] vessels is impure for earthenware vessels. [That which is] pure for wooden vessels is impure for metal vessels. [That which is] pure for metal vessels, is impure for wooden vessels. The [conditions] which obligate bitter almonds [for tithes], exempt for sweet ones. Those which obligate for sweet almonds, exempt for bitter ones.
  An infusion of grape by-products, while it has not yet fermented, is not purchased with the money of <i>ma'aser [sheni]</i> [the second tithe of produce, which must be taken to Jerusalem and consumed there] and invalidates a <i>mikveh</i> [water collected by natural means used to cleanse ritual impurity]. From the time that it has fermented, it may be purchased with the money of <i>ma'aser [sheni]</i>, and does not invalidate a <i>mikveh</i>. Brothers who are partners, when they are obligated for the <i>kalbon</i> [a surcharge added to the half a shekel given to the Temple due to exchanging a full shekel], they are exempt regarding <i>ma'aser behemah</i> [the tithe of every tenth animal from the flock or cattle, which is brought as a sacrifice]. When they are obligated for <i>ma'aser behemah</i> they are exempt for the <i>kalbon</i>. Any place there is a right of sale [for a father with his daughter], there are no fine [for raping or seducing the daughter].  And any place there is a fine, there is no  right of sale. Any place there is <i>mi'un</i> [the refusal of a marriage by a fatherless child married off by her mother or brother , retroactively annulling the marriage], there is no <i>chalitzah</i> [the ceremony performed to release a widow of a childless man from the obligation of Levirate marriage].  And any place where there is <i>chalitzah</i>, there is no <i>mi'un</i>. Any place where there is a [shofar] blast [on the eve of Shabbat], there is no <i>havdalah</i> [ceremony marking the transition from sacred time to secular or less sacred time]. And any place where there is <i>havdalah</i>, there is no blast. [For] a festival which falls out on the eve of the Shabbat, we sound a blast and do not make <i>havdalah</i>. [If it falls out] at the end of Shabbat, <i>havdalah</i> is said, but the blast is not sounded. How is <i>havdalah</i> said [when a festival falls out on the day after Shabbat]? "Who makes a distinction between holy and holy." Rabbi Dosa says, "Between heavy holiness and light holiness."
  
  
  
  One who slaughters one [of either the trachea or esophagus] for a bird, and both for cattle, his slaughter is valid. The majority of one [of the trachea or esophagus] is like [all of] it. Rabbi Yehuda says, "[Not] until he cuts the jugular veins." [If he cut] one half of one for a bird, and one and a half for cattle, his slaughter is unfit. [If he cut] the majority of one for a bird, and the majority of two for cattle, his slaughter is valid.
  One who slaughters two heads in one, his slaughter is valid. When two hold the knife and slaughter, even if one [held it] at the top and one at the bottom, their slaughter is valid.
  [If] one decapitated the head in one blow, it is invalid. [If] one was slaughtering and one decapitated the head in one blow: if the knife has a neck's width [outside of the neck], it is valid. [If] one was slaughtering and cut off two heads in one blow, if the knife has a neck's width [outside of the cut necks], it is valid. What case is being discussed? At a time when one extends [the knife] but does not bring it back [down the throat], or one brings it back but does not extend. But, if one extended and brought it back, any amount [of knife], even with a surgeon's knife, it is valid. A knife that falls and slaughters, even if it slaughtered in its [proper] manner, [the slaughter] is invalid. For it is said "Then you shall slaughter and then you shall eat," (Deuteronomy 27:7). That which you slaughter, you eat. If the knife fell and he picked it up; or his clothes fell and he picked them up; or he sharpened the knife and became weary; and then his fellow came and slaughtered: if he delayed the amount of time it takes to slaughter, [the slaughter] is invalid. Rabbi Shimon said, "If he delayed the amount of time it takes to investigate [the knife]."
  [If] he cut the esophagus and tore the trachea; or cut the trachea and tore the esophagus; or cut one of the them and left it until it dies; or he hid the knife under the second and ripped it: Rabbi Yishbav says, “It is a <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species].” Rabbi Akiva says, “It is a <i>tereifah</i>  [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year]. A general principle said by Rabbi Yishbav in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua: “Anything invalidated in its slaughtering is a <i>nevelah</i>; anything where its slaughtering is proper but another issue caused it to become invalid is a <i>terefah</i>.” Then Rabbi Akiva agreed with him.
  One who slaughters cattle, a wild animal, or a bird, and no blood came out, they are valid and are eaten with unclean hands for they are not made fit to contract impurity by blood. Rabbi Shimon says, they are made fit by the slaughter.
  One who slaughters a gravely ill animal, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, “As long as it struggles with its fore and hind leg.” Rabbi Eliezer says, “It is sufficient if it squirts [blood].” Said Rabbi Shimon, “Even one who slaughters at night and the next day gets up and finds the walls covered in blood, it is valid, for it squirted [blood] and is like the principle of Rebbi Eliezer.” The Sages say, “Until it struggles with either its fore or hind leg, or until shakes its tail, whether for small cattle or big cattle.” Small cattle which extended its fore leg but did not withdraw it is invalid, for that is only the leaving of its life. What case is being discussed? When it is previously held to be gravely ill. But if it was previously held to be healthy, even if did not have one of these signs, it is valid.
  One who slaughters for a non-Jew, his slaughtering is valid. And Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Said Rabbi Eliezer, “Even if  he slaughtered it so that the non-Jew will eat from the edge of its liver, it is invalid, for the usual thought of a non-Jew is towards  idolatry.” Said Rabbi Yose, “These matters are [solved by] an a fortiori argument. Just as in a place where thought invalidates for <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] everything only follows the work, in a place where thought does not invalidate for <i>chulin</i> [produce or food permitted for general consumption], should it not be the rule that everything only follows the slaughtering?”
  One who slaughters for the sake of mountains, for the sake of valleys, for the sake of seas, for the sake of rivers, for the sake of deserts, his slaughter is invalid. [If] two grasp the knife and slaughter, one for the sake of one from all of these and one for the sake of something fitting, his slaughter is invalid.
  We may not slaughter into seas, nor into rivers, nor into vessels. But one may slaughter into a pool of water, and onto vessels [when] on a boat. We do not slaughter into a pit at all, but one makes a pit within his house so that the blood will go into it. But in the marketplace, one may not do as such so as to not imitate the heretics.
  One who slaughters for the sake of an <i>olah</i> [offering that is entirely burnt], for the sake of other sacrifices, for the sake of an <i>asham talui</i> [an offering brought to expiate a sin one is unsure of committing], for the sake of the <i>pesach</i> sacrifice, or for the sake of a thanksgiving offering, his slaughtering is invalid; and Rabbi Shimon validates. [If] two hold the knife and slaughter, one for the sake of one of these and one for the sake of something fitting, his slaughter is unfit. One who slaughters for the sake of a sin offering, for the sake of a guilt offering, for the sake of a first born offering, for the sake of a tithe, for the sake of <i>temurah</i> [an animal which has been substituted, wrongfully, for a sacrificial animal, and which thereby becomes sanctified for certain purposes], his slaughter is permitted. This is the general principle: anything which is vowed or voluntarily offered, when one slaughters for its sake, it is prohibited. For that which is neither vowed or voluntarily offered, when one slaughters for its sake, it is permitted.
  
  
  
  These are the <i>terefot</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year] for cattle: a puncture of the esophagus; and a split [width-wise] of the trachea; the membrane of the brain is perforated; the heart chamber is perforated; the spine is broken and its cord is split; the liver is removed and none of it remains; the lung which is punctured or missing - Rabbi Shimon says, "Only when it is punctured through the bronchial tubes;" the stomach was pierced; the abomasum was pierced; the gall-bladder was pierced; the small intestines were pierced; the inner rumen was pierced; or if the majority of the outer was ripped - Rabbi Yehuda says, "[For] the larger [animals] a <i>tefach</i> [a specific unit of length] and for the smaller [animals] the majority; the omasum or reticulum which were punctured to the outside; fallen from a roof; most of its ribs were fractured; or clawed by a wolf. Rabbi Yehuda says, "Clawed by a wolf for small cattle and clawed by a lion for large cattle. Clawed by a hawk for a small bird and clawed by a large bird for a large bird." This is the general rule: anything where something similar to it cannot live is a <i>terefah</i>.
  These are permitted for cattle: the trachea was perforated or if it was split [lengthwise]. Up to how much can it lack? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, "Up to an Italian <i>issar</i> [a specific unit of money]." The skull is chipped but the membrane of the brain is not perforated; the heart is perforated but not through to its chamber; the spine is broken but its cord is not split; the liver is removed but an olive's size of it remains; the omasum and reticulum which we perforated from this to the other; the spleen is removed; the kidneys are removed; the lower jaw is removed; its womb is removed; or dried up [lungs] at the hands of Heaven. The flayed [animal]: Rabbi Meir declares valid, but the Sages invalidate.
  These are the <i>terefot</i> for a bird: a puncture of the esophagus; a split [width-wise] of the trachea; a weasel hit it on the head in a place that makes it a <i>terefah</i>; the gizzard is perforated; the small intestines are perforated; it fell into a fire and its intestines were scorched - if they are green, they are invalid, if they are red they are valid; or [if it was] trampled on, torn on a wall, or cattle ran over it and it jerks and then waits twenty-four hours and one slaughtered it, it is valid.
  The following are permitted for a bird: the trachea was perforated or it was split [length-wise]; a weasel hit it on its head in a place which does not make it a <i>terefah</i>; the crop was perforated - Rebbi says, "Even if it was removed;" its insides came out but they were not perforated; its wing was broken; its leg was broken; or its wing feathers were plucked. Rabbi Yehuda says, "If the down was removed, it is invalid."
  Congestion of blood, one that inhaled smoke, one that became sick from cold; one that ate oleander; or one that ate chicken feces or drank poor water is fit. [If] it ate poison or a snake bit it, it is permissible in regards to [the category of] <i>terefah</i>, and forbidden in regards [to the category of] endangering lives.
  The signs of cattle and a wild animal are stated from the Torah, but the signs of a bird are not stated. But the Sages said, "Any bird which attacks [prey] is prohibited. Any that has an extra digit, a crop, and gizzard that peels [away] is permitted." Rabbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Tzadok says, "Every bird which parts its toes is prohibited."
  And for locusts, any which has four legs, four wings, and jointed legs, and its wings cover the majority of it [is permitted]. Rabbi Yose says, "And [if] its name is [the] 'Arbeh.'" And for fish, any which has a fin and scales. Rabbi Yehuda says, "Two scales and one fin." These are they [types] of scales: those attached to it. And fins: the ones by which it swims. 
  
  
  
  [If] an animal has difficulty giving birth, and the fetus protruded its fore-leg and withdrew it, [the fetus] is permitted for eating. [If] it protruded its head, even if it withdrew it, it is as if it were born. A cut piece from the fetus in its womb is permitted for eating; from the spleen or kidney [of the mother] is forbidden for eating. This is the general rule is: anything which is part of its [the animal giving birth’s] body is forbidden. That which is not of its body is permitted.
  [For] an animal pregnant with its firstborn which is having difficulty giving birth, one [may] cut limb by limb [from the fetus] and cast it to the dogs. [If] the majority of it protruded, it must be buried and [the mother] is exempt from [laws regarding] the firstborn. 
  An animal whose fetus died within its womb and the shepherd placed his hand inside and touched it, whether it is an impure animal or pure animal, he is pure. Rabbi Yose Ha'Gelilli says, “For an impure [animal], he is impure, but for a pure [animal], he is pure.”  A woman whose fetus died in her womb and the midwife placed her hand inside and touched it, the midwife is impure with a seven day impurity, and the mother is pure until the fetus comes out.
  “[For] an animal that has difficulty giving birth, and the fetus protruded its fore-leg, someone cut it off, and afterward slaughtered its mother, the flesh [removed from the fetus] is pure. [If] someone slaughtered its mother and afterwards cut [the fore-leg off], the flesh [has the impurity level] of touching a <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species],” in the words of Rabbi Meir. The Sages say, "[The impurity level] of touching a slaughtered <i>terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year]. Just as we find for a <i>terefah</i> that its slaughtering purifies it, so too the slaughtering of an animal purifies the [protruding] limb.” Rabbi Meir said to them, "Not so, for if the slaughtering of a <i>terefah</i> renders clean that which is part of its body, does it render clean the limb which is not of its body?” From where is it derived for a <i>terefah</i> that its slaughtering purifies it? An unfit animal is forbidden for eating [and] so too a <i>terefah</i> is forbidden for eating. Just as an impure animal is not purified by its slaughter, so should a <i>terefah</i> not be purified by its slaughter? No. If you say [so] about an unfit animal which did not have a moment of validity, would you say [as such] about a <i>terefah</i> which had a time of validity? Take away what [the argument] you brought. Behold, if it is born as a <i>terefah</i> from the womb, from where would we derive this? [Rather], no. If you say about an unclean animal that for its kind is not [affected] by slaughtering, would you say it for a <i>terefah</i> whose kind [affecting] by slaughtering? Born alive at eight [months], its slaughtering does not render it pure, for its kind is not [affected] by slaughtering.
  "One who slaughtered an animal and found within it an eight month old fetus - alive or dead, or a nine month old dead fetus, one tears it up so the blood comes out. If one found a nine month old live fetus, it requires slaughtering, and is under the obligation of it and its offspring [the prohibition against killing an animal and its child on the same day]," in the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, "The slaughtering of the mother permits it [the fetus without slaughter]." Rabbi Shimon Shazuri says, "Even [if the fetus reached the age of] eight years and is plowing in the field, the slaughtering of its mother permits it." [If] one ripped apart [an animal] and found in it a nine-month old [fetus], it requires slaughter, for its mother was not slaughtered.
  An animal whose legs were cut off from the knee and below is permitted; from the knee and above it is prohibited, and so too when the junction of the sinews is interrupted. [If] the bone was broken, if most of the flesh is extant, its slaughter permits it. But if not, its slaughter does not permit.
  [If] one slaughtered an animal and found a placenta inside of it, a hearty person may eat it. And it does not contract impurity as food, nor as the impurity of <i>nevelot</i>. [If] one regarded it [as edible], it contracts impurity as food, but not the impurity of <i>nevelot</i>. A placenta, some of which protruded, is forbidden to be eaten. It [the protruding placenta] is the sign of an offspring for a woman and the sign of an offspring for an animal. [For] an animal which has never given birth and miscarried a placenta, [the placenta] is cast to the dogs. For <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] it is buried. And we do not bury it at a cross roads and we do not hang it up in a tree due [to the prohibition against following] the ways of the Amorites.
  
  
  
  <i>Oto ve'et beno</i> [the prohibition against killing an animal and its offspring on the same day] applies whether in the land [of Israel] or outside the land, during the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, with <i>chulin</i> [animals or food permitted for general consumption] or <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. How [does this work]? One who slaughters it and its offspring as <i>chulin</i> outside [of the Temple courtyard], both [slaughters] are valid, and the [slaughterer of the] second receives forty lashes. [As]  <i>kodashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] outside [of the Temple courtyard]: the first [slaughterer] is liable for <i>karet</i> [Divinely imposed punishment consisting in severance from Heaven and/or the Jewish people], both [of the animals] are invalid, and both [slaughterers] receive forty lashes. [As] <i>kodashim</i> inside [the Temple courtyard]: the first [animal] is fit and [the first slaughterer] exempt, and the second [slaughterer] receives forty lashes and [the slaughter] is unfit.
  [As] <i>chulin</i> and [then] <i>kodashim</i>  outside: the first is fit and is exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit. <i>kodashim</i> and [then] <i>chulin</i>  outside:  the first is liable for <i>karet</i> and is unfit, the second is fit. <i>Chulin</i> and  <i>kodashim</i> inside: both are invalid and the second receives forty. <i>Kodashim</i> and <i>chulin</i> inside: the first is fit and is exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit. <i>Chulin</i> outside and inside: the first is fit and is exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit. <i>Kodashim</i> outside and inside: the first is liable for <i>karet</i>, both are unfit, and both receive forty. <i>Chulin</i> inside and outside: the first is unfit and exempt, and the second receives forty and is fit. <i>Kodashim</i> inside and outside: the first is fit and exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit.
  One who slaughters [as part of <i>oto ve'et beno</i>] and it is found <i>terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], one who slaughters for idolatry, one who slaughters the  red heifer, or a an ox which is to be stoned [because it killed a person], or an <i>eglah arufah</i> [a calf whose neck is broken by elders of the closest town to atone for an unsolved murder], Rabbi Shimon exempts and the Sages obligate. One who slaughters [as part of <i>oto ve'et beno</i>] and it becomes a <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] by his hand, one who [kills by] stabbing, one who tears off [the trachea or esophagus] is exempt from [violation of] <i>oto ve'et beno</i>. Two who purchased an animal and its offspring, whoever purchased first slaughters first. If the second went ahead, he is gains the right. One who slaughtered a cow and after that its two offspring, he receives eighty [lashes]. One who slaughtered its two offspring and after that slaughtered it, receives forty. One who slaughtered it and its grand daughter, and after its daughter, receives forty. Sumkhus says, in the name of Rabbi Meir, "He receives eighty." At four periods during the year one who sells an animal to his fellow needs to inform him [either], "Its mother I sold for slaughter," [or], "Its offspring I sold for slaughter." These are them: the eve of Shemini Atseret, the eve of the first day of Pesach, the eve of Shavuot, and the eve of Rosh Hashanah. And in the words of Rabbi Yose HaGelili, even the eve of Yom Kippur in the Galilee. Said Rabbi Yehudah, "When? At a time when [the seller] doesn't have a gap [between the sales]. But if he has a gap, he does not need to inform him [the buyer]." And Rabbi Yehudah agrees when one sells the mother to a groom and the offspring to the bride that one needs to inform him, since it is known that both will slaughter on one day. 
  During these four periods we force the butcher to slaughter against his will. Even an ox worth one thousand <i>dinarim</i> [a specific unit of money], and he only has a buyer for one <i>dinar</i>, we force him to slaughter. Therefore, if it dies, the death [is a monetary loss] for the purchaser. But for the other days of the year, this is not so, and therefore if it dies, the death [is a monetary loss] for the seller.
  The one day spoken about for <i>oto ve'et beno</i>, the day follows after the night. This Shimon ben Zoma expounded, "It says in the story of Creation,'One day' (Genesis 1:5), and it says for <i>oto ve'et beno</i>, 'One day' (Leviticus 22:28). Just as for the 'one day' mentioned in the story of Creation the day follows after the night, so too for the 'one day' mentioned in <i>oto ve'et beno</i> the day follows after the night.
  
  
  
  [The law of] covering the blood [after the slaughter of fowl or wild animals] applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, during the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, for <i>chulin</i> [animals or food permitted for general consumption] but not for <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. It applies for wild animals and fowl, whether in possession or not in possession. And it applies to a <i>koi</i> [an animal whose domesticated status is ambiguous], since it is in doubt. And we do not slaughter it on a holiday. And if one did slaughter it, we do not cover its blood.
  One who slaughters and it is found to be a <i>terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within a year], one who slaughters for idolatry, one who slaughters <i>chulin</i> inside [the Temple courtyard] or <i>kodashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] outside [of the Temple courtyard], or a wild animal or bird which was stoned [for killing a person by goring or similar means, which is forbidden from consumption even if slaughtered before the stoning], Rabbi Meir obligates [the covering of the blood], and the Sages exempt. One who slaughters and it became a <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] by his hand,  one who [kills by] stabbing, and one who tears off [the trachea or esophagus] is exempt from having to cover.
  A deaf-mute, a <i>shoteh</i> [a person who exhibits signs which demonstrate mental deficiency], or a minor who slaughtered and others watched them, are obligated to cover. [If one of them slaughtered] among themselves, he is exempt [from having to] cover. So too in the matter of <i>oto ve'et beno</i> [the prohibition against killing an animal and its offspring on the same day], where they slaughtered and others watched them, it is forbidden to slaughter [the mother or the offspring] after them. Among themselves, Rabbi Meir permits slaughtering after them, but the Sages prohibit. But they agree that if one slaughtered, one does not receive forty [lashes].
  [If one] killed one hundred wild animals in one place, [one may use] one covering for all of them; one hundred fowl in one place, [one may use] one covering for all of them; a wild animal and a bird in one place, [one may use] one covering for all of them. Rabbi Yehuda says, "[If] one slaughtered a wild animal, he covers it [the blood], and after slaughters the fowl." [If] one slaughtered a wild animal and didn't cover and another saw him, [the other] is obligated to cover. [If] one covered it and it became uncovered, he is exempt from covering [again]. If the wind covered it, one is [still] obligated to cover. 
  Blood which was mixed with water, if it has the appearance of blood, one is obligated to cover [it]. If it was mixed with wine, we view it [the wine] as if it were water. If it was mixed with the blood of a domesticated animal or the blood of a wild animal, we view it as if it [the second blood] were water. Rabbi Yehuda says, "Blood cannot neutralize blood."
  Blood which squirted out and is on the knife one is obligated to cover. Said Rabbi Yehuda, "When [is this the case]? At a time when there is no blood but that. But when there is blood which is not that, he is exempt from covering [the blood on the knife]."
  With what may we cover and with what may we not cover? We cover with fine manure, with fine sand, with plaster, with clay, and with brick or with sealing clay that was crushed. But we may not cover with bulky manure, nor bulky sand, nor brick or sealing clay which was not crushed. And one may not turn a vessel over on it. A general principle said [by] Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, "A thing in which plants grow, we may cover with it. And in which plants do not grow, we do not cover with it."
  
  
  
  [The prohibition against eating] the sciatic nerve applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, during the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, for <i>chulin</i> [animals or food permitted for general consumption] and for <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption].  And it applies to domesticated and wild animals, for the right thigh and the left thigh. But it does not apply to a bird since it does not have a spoon [shaped hip]. And it applies to a fetus. Rabbi Yehuda says, "It does not apply for a fetus. And its <i>chelev</i> [fats around the stomach, intestines, and kidneys of some animals which are forbidden for eating] is permissible." "And the butchers are not believed regarding [the removal] of the sciatic nerve," in the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, "They are believed about it and about <i>chelev</i>."
  A person [may] send a thigh to a non-Jew with the sciatic nerve inside of it, since its location is recognized. One who removes the sciatic nerve needs to remove all of it. Rabbi Yehuda says, "In order to fulfill the commandment of removal."
  One who eats an olive-sized [volume] from the sciatic nerve receives forty [lashes]. [If] he ate from it but it did not have an olive-sized [volume], he is liable. [If] he ate from this one an olive size and from this an olive size, he receives eighty [lashes]. Rabbi Yehuda says, "He only receives forty." 
  A thigh in which the sciatic nerve was cooked, if it has [enough] to give flavor [to the thigh], this [thigh] is forbidden. How do we measure it? Like meat [cooked] with a turnip.
  A sciatic nerve that was cooked with other nerves, at a time when one [still] recognizes it, [the standard for forbidding] is when it gives flavor. If [it is] not [recognized], all of it is forbidden. And [in] broth, when it gives flavor. And so too with a piece of a <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species], and so too with a piece of prohibited fish which was cooked with [other] pieces: at a time when one recognized them, [the standard] is when it gives flavor; and if [it is] not [recognized], they are all forbidden. And for the broth [the standard] is when it gives flavor. 
  [The prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve] applies for permitted [animals] but does not apply for prohibited ones. Rabbi Yehuda says, "Even for prohibited ones." Said Rabbi Yehuda,"For from the [time of] the sons of Ya'akov the sciatic nerve was forbidden, and prohibited animals were still permitted to them." They said to him, "[The prohibition] was stated at Sinai, but it was written [about] in its place."
  
  
  
  All meat is forbidden to cook with milk, except for the meat of fish and locusts. And it is forbidden to place it with cheese on the table, except for the meat of fish and locusts. One who vows [to abstain] from meat, is permitted to [eat] fish and locusts. "A bird may go on with cheese on the table, but is not eaten," in the words of Beit Shammai. And Beit Hillel says, "It does not go and it is not eaten." Said Rabbi Yose, "This is [one] of the lenient rulings of Beit Shammai and stringent rulings of Beit Hillel." About which table were they speaking? About a table on which one eats. But for a table where one sets dishes on it, one puts this next to this and does not worry.
  A person may bundle meat and cheese in one napkin, a long as they do not touch one another. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, "Two lodgers [may] eat on one table - this one [eating meat] and this one cheese, and we are not troubled."
  A drop of milk which fell on a piece [of meat], if there is enough of it to give flavor into that piece, it is forbidden. [If] one stirred the pot, if there is enough of it to give flavor to the [contents] of that pot, it is forbidden. The udder: one tears it open and removes its milk. [If] one did not tear it, one does not transgress through it. The heart: one tears it and removes its blood. [If] one did not tear it, one does not transgress through it. One who places a bird with cheese on the table does not transgress on a negative precept.
  [A mixture of] the meat of a permitted animal with the milk of a permitted animal is forbidden to cook and forbidden from benefit. [A mixture of] the meat of a permitted animal with the milk of a prohibited animal, [or] [a mixture] of the meat of a prohibited animal with the milk of a permitted animal is permissible to cook and permissible for benefit. Rabbi Akiva says, "Wild animals and birds are not [forbidden in mixtures with milk] from the Torah, as it says, 'You may not cook a kid in its mother's milk,' three times. It exempts the wild animal, the bird, and the prohibited domesticated animal." Rabbi Yose HaGelili says, "It is stated, 'You may not eat any <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species],' (Deuteronomy 14:21) and it is stated, 'You may not cook a kid in its mother's milk,' (Ibid.). That which [may become] forbidden as <i>nevelah</i> is forbidden to cook with milk. A bird, which [may become] forbidden as a <i>nevelah</i>, one might think that it should be forbidden to cook with milk, [but] the Torah says, "In its mother's milk." This excludes a bird, which does not have mother's milk.
  [Milk in] the stomach of [an animal slaughtered] by a non-Jew and of a <i>nevelah</i> is forbidden. One who curdles [milk] in the skin of the stomach of a valid animal, if it [the stomach] has [a sufficient amount] to give flavor, it [the milk] is forbidden. A valid animal which nursed from a <i>terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], [the milk in] its stomach is forbidden. A <i>terefah</i> which nursed from a valid animal, [the milk in] its stomach is permitted since it is collected in its insides.
  The stringency of <i>chelev</i> [fats around the stomach, intestines, and kidneys of some animals which are forbidden for eating] over blood and the stringency of blood over <i>chelev</i>: the stringency of <i>chelev</i> is that one may commit <i>me'ilah</i> [misuse of consecrated property] with it, and one is liable for it [under the laws] of <i>piggul</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit, due to the intention of the officiating priest, while offering it, to consume it after its permitted time], <i>notar</i> [a sacrifice that becomes unfit, due to being left unconsumed until after the time limit for its consumption], and impurity, which is not the case with blood. The stringency of blood is that [the prohibition of eating] blood applies to a domesticated animal, a wild animal, and a bird, whether permitted or prohibited, while [the prohibition of eating] <i>chelev</i> only applies to permitted, domesticated animals.
  
  
  
  The hide, the juice, the sediment, the offal, the bones, the sinews, the horns, and the hooves combine [to become the minimum size] to render food impure, but not to impart <i>nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] impurity. Similarly, one who slaughters an unclean animal for a non-Jew and it is [still] kicking, it renders food impure. But it does not impart <i>nevelah</i> impurity until it dies or its head is cut off. [The Torah] increased those which render food impure over the amount it increased those which impart <i>nevelah</i> impurity. Rabbi Yehuda says, "Offal which combines, if it has an olive's volume in one place, one is liable for it [for <i>nevelah</i> impurity]."
  [For] these their skin is like their flesh [in regards to impurity]: the skin of a person and the skin of a domestic pig. Rabbi Yose says, "Even the skin of a wild pig." And the skin of the hump of a soft camel, the skin of the head of a soft calf, the skin of the hooves, the skin of the genitals, the skin of the fetus, the skin under the tail, and the skin of the gecko, the crocodile, the lizard, and the sand-lizard [four of the eight types of <i>sherets</i>, small animals, such as insects, reptiles, or rodents, which move by scurrying, creeping, slithering, etc., the vast majority of which are prohibited for consumption]. Rabbi Yehuda says, "The lizard is like a weasel." And all of them which one dressed, or one trampled on for the sake of dressing, are pure, except for the skin of a person. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says, "The eight <i>sheratsim</i> have skin [not like their flesh]."
  [If] one flays a domesticated animal or a wild animal -whether permitted [to eat] or prohibited, small or large - to [use as a] cover , [until] enough to grip [is flayed, it is regarded as connected to the body]. For a waterskin, until one flays the breast.  [If] one flays from the limbs, it is all [considered] connected [for matters] of impurity, becoming impure, and imparting impurity. The skin which is on the neck, Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says, "It is not connected." But the Sages say, "It is connected, until one flays all of it." 
  [For] skin which has on it an olive's volume of flesh, one who touches some fluff coming out from it, or a hair opposite it is impure. "If it had two half-olive's volume [pieces] on it, it causes impurity through carrying but not touched," in the words of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says, "Neither through carrying nor through touching." But Rabbi Akiva agrees for two half olive's volume [pieces] where one places a wood chip under them and removes them, that the person is impure. So for what [reason] did Rabbi Akiva declare pure [for the case] of skin? Because the skin renders them void.
  The thigh-bone of a corpse or thigh-bone of <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption], one who touches them, whether stopped up or pierced, is impure. The thigh-bone of a <i>nevelah</i> or the thigh-bone of a <i>sherets</i> one who touches them when they are stopped up is pure. [If] they are are pierced at all, they render impure through touch. From where [do we learn they render impure] even through carrying? The Scripture says, "The one who touches," (Leviticus 11:24), and, "The one who carries," (Leviticus 11:25). That which comes under the regime of touching [impurity] comes under the regime of carrying [impurity]. If it does not come under the regime of touching, it does not come under the regime of carrying.
  The developed egg of a <i>sherets</i> is pure. If it is pierced at all, it is impure. A mouse which is half flesh and half dirt, one who touches the flesh is impure; the dirt, [the person] is pure. Rabbi Yehuda says, "Even one who touches the dirt which is opposite the flesh is impure." 
  The limb and the flesh which are loosely connected to an animal impart food impurity in their place, and require being made fit [to contract impurity]. "[If] the animal was slaughtered, it is made fit through its blood," in the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says, "[The blood] does not make them fit." If the animal died, the meat requires being made fit. "A limb renders impure due to [the regime of] 'a limb from a a living animal,' but does not render impure due to the limb of a <i>nevelah</i>," in the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Shimon declares pure.
  A limb and flesh which are loosely connected to a person are pure. [If] the person died, the flesh is pure. "A limb renders impure due to 'a limb from a living animal,' but does not render impure due to the limb from a corpse," in the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Shimon declares pure.
  
  
  
  The shoulder, the cheeks, and the stomach [which must be given as gifts to the <i>kohen</i> [member of priestly caste, subgroup of tribe of Levi, uniquely responsible for maintaining and carrying out the sacrificial services in the Temple]] apply in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, at the time of Temple and not at the time of the Temple, for <i>chulin</i> [produce or food permitted for general consumption], but not for <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. For it would have been by a fortiori argument: just a with <i>chulin</i> which are not obligated in [gifts of the] breast and thigh, for <i>kodashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] should they not have a rule of the gifts [of the shoulder, cheeks and stomach]? [So] the Scripture says, "I have given them to Aharon the <i>Kohen</i>, and his sons as a statute forever," (Leviticus 7:34). It only [has an obligation] for what is stated in the passage.
  All <i>kodashim</i> for whom a fixed wound precedes their sanctification,  and they were redeemed, are liable as a first-born [to be sanctified as such] and for the gifts. And they emerge as <i>chulin</i> [for purposes of] being sheared and being worked. And their offspring and their milk are permitted after their redemption, and one who slaughters them outside [the Temple courtyard] is exempt. And one may not perform <i>temurah</i> [an animal which has been substituted, wrongfully, for a sacrificial animal, and which thereby becomes sanctified for certain purposes] with them, and if they died they may be redeemed, aside from the first born and the tithe. All for whom their sanctification precedes their blemish, or a passing blemish [precedes] their sanctification, and after that a permanent blemish occurs in them and they are redeemed, are exempt from [liability as a first-born] and from the gifts. And they do not emerge as <i>chulin</i> [for purposes of] being sheared and being worked. And their offspring and their milk are forbidden after their redemption. And one who slaughters them outside is liable, and one uses [them for] <i>temurah</i>. And if they died, they are buried.
  A first-born [animal] which was mixed-up with one hundred: at a time when one hundred slaughter all of them, it exempts them all. [If] one slaughters all of them, one is exempt for him. One who slaughters for a <i>kohen</i> or for a non-Jew, is exempt from the gifts. One who partners with them, needs to mark them [the animals]. And if he said [in a sale from a <i>kohen</i>], "Except for the gifts," he is exempt from the gifts. [If] he said, "Sell me the innards of a cow," and within them are the gifts, he gives them to the <i>kohen</i> and he does not deduct for him from the price. If he purchased from him by weight, he gives them to the <i>kohen</i> and deducts it from the price.
  A non-Jew who converted and had a cow: if it was slaughtered when he had not yet converted, it is exempt [from the gifts]. [If  it was slaughtered] from when he converted, it is obligated. [If] it is in doubt, it is exempt, for one who extracts from his fellow, upon his is the [burden] of proof. Which is the shoulder? From the joint until the shoulder. And that is [the same] for a <i>nazir</i> [a person who swears abstention from all grape products like wine, from cutting his hair, and avoidance of corpse impurity]. And opposite it on the leg is the thigh. Rabbi Yehuda says, "The thigh is from the joint until the calf of the leg." Which is the cheek? From the joint of the jaw until the protruding cartilage of the trachea.
  
  
  
  The [law of giving] the first sheared fleece applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, at the time of the Temple and not at the time of the Temple, for <i>chulin</i> [produce or food permitted for general consumption], but not for <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. The stringency of [giving gifts of] the shoulder, the cheeks, and the stomach over the first sheared fleece is that the shoulder, the cheeks and the stomach apply for cattle and for flock, for many or a for a few. But the first sheared fleece only applies for sheep, and only applies for many.
  And how many is "many?" Beit Shammai says, "Two sheep, as it says, 'A man will raise a calf and two sheep,' (Isaiah 7:21)." And Beit Hillel says, "Five, as it says, 'Five prepared sheep,' (2 Samuel 25:18)." Rabbi Dosa ben Hurkinos says, "Five sheep, [from which] their fleece is a <i>maneh</i> [a specific unit of weight] and a half, are obligated in the first shearing." But the Sages say, "Five sheep of any amount [of fleece]." And how much do we give to him [the <i>kohen</i>]? The weight of five <i>sela'im</i> [a specific unit of weight] in Judah - which are ten <i>sela'im</i> in the Galilee - whitened and not dirty, in order to make from it a small garment. As it says, "give to him," (Deuteronomy 18:4), that there will be [enough] in it for a gift [the words for "gift" and "give" coming from the same root]. [If] one did not succeed to give it to him by the time one colored it, one is exempt. If one whitened it and did not color it, one is obligated. One who purchases the fleece of a sheep of a non-Jews is exempt from [the law] of first sheared fleece. One who purchases the shearing of a sheep of his fellow, if [the seller] keeps some, the seller is obligated [for the first shearing]. [If the seller] did not keep some, the buyer is obligated.  [If] one had two types, gray and white, and sold to another gray but not white [fleece], [or] male but not female, this one gives for himself and this one gives for himself.
  
  
  
  [The law of] sending [away the mother bird from] the nest [before taking the eggs] applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, at the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, for <i>chulin</i> [produce or food permitted for general consumption] but not for for <i>mukdashim</i> [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. The stringency of [the law] of covering the blood over sending [the mother bird from] the nest is that covering the blood applies for wild animals and birds, for those in possession and not in possession. And sending [the mother bird from] the nest only applies for a bird, and only applies when it is not in possession. Which one is not in possession? For example, geese and chickens which nested in the field. But if they nested in the house, and also Herodian doves, one is exempt from sending them.
  A bird prohibited [from eating] is exempt from sending. [If] a prohibited bird is sitting on the eggs of a permitted bird, or a permitted one is sitting on the eggs of a prohibited bird, it is exempt from sending. The male partridge [which nests]: Rabbi Eliezer obligates [sending it away], but the Sages exempt.
  [If] it was flying, at the time when its wings touch the nest, one is obligated to send it away. [If] its wings do not touch the nest, one is exempt from sending. If there is only one young bird or one egg, one is obligated to send, as it says, "Nest," (Deuteronomy 22:6) in any case. [If] there were young birds flying or damaged eggs, one is exempt from sending, as it says, "And the mother is sitting on the young birds or on the eggs," (Deuteronomy 22:6). Just as young birds are viable, so too [the] eggs [must be] viable [to fall under the law], excluding damages ones. Just as eggs need their mother, so too the young birds [must] need their mother, which excludes ones which fly. If one sent her away and she returned, sent her away and she returned - even four or five times - one is obligated [to send her away again], as it says, "Send you shall send," (Deuternomy 22:7). [If] one said, "Here I take the mother and send off the offspring," one is [still] required to send, as it says, "Send you shall send the mother," (Deuteronomy 22:7). [If] one took the offspring and then returned them to the nest, and after the mother returned to them, one is exempt from sending. 
  One who took a mother with the offspring, Rabbi Yehuda says, "He is lashed and does not send [the mother away]." But the Sages say, "He sends away and is not lashed." This is the general rule: any negative commandment that has a proactive positive [part], one is not lashed for it.
  A person may not take a mother with its offspring, even to purify the leper. And just as a light commandment that is like an <i>issar</i> [a specific, small, unit of money], the Torah said [about it], "In order to be good for you and you will lengthen your days," (Deuteronomy 22:7), a fortiori for weighty commandments which are in the Torah.