Study Chullin folio 113B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
One may infer that here, since this verse specifies that it is referring to a kid of the goats, consequently, anywhere the word “kid” is stated without specification, it means even a cow or a ewe. Accordingly, the prohibition of meat cooked in milk applies to all kosher livestock.
The Talmud asks: But why not derive from that verse that in general, every instance of the word “kid” is referring to a goat, including the prohibition of meat cooked in milk? The Talmud answers: This cannot be, as another verse is written: “And the skins of the kids of the goats” (Genesis 27:16). T
The Talmud objects: But let us derive from this verse as well that on the contrary, the word “kid” is always referring to a goat. The Talmud explains: These two examples are two verses that come as one, i.e., to teach the same matter, and as a rule, any two verses that come as one do not teach thei
The Talmud asks: This works out well according to the one who says this principle that two verses that come as one do not teach their common element to other cases, but according to the one who says that two verses that come as one do teach their common element to other cases, what is there to say?
§ Shmuel says: Each of the Torah’s 3 mentions of the prohibition of not cooking a kid in its mother’s milk serves to include a different case. The first mention of the word “kid” serves to include liability for cooking in milk and eating forbidden fats, beyond the liability for eating forbidden fa