Study Chullin folio 75A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
R' Shimon ben Lakish answers: The baraita is referring to a case where the slaughter of the mother was dry, i.e., where no blood was emitted, and therefore, even the mother was not rendered susceptible to ritual impurity. And the baraita is not in accordance with the opinion of R' Shimon, who main
The Talmud asks: Who is the tanna who taught this baraita: If a ben pekua grew up and passed through a river, it was thereby rendered susceptible to impurity, and therefore if it went from there to a cemetery, it is rendered impure? R' Yoḥanan said: It is the opinion of R' Yosei HaGelili, as it is t
The Talmud notes: And R' Yoḥanan follows his standard line of reasoning, as R' Yoḥanan says that R' Yosei HaGelili and Beit Shammai said the same thing, i.e., they both hold that even a live animal can become impure with the ritual impurity of food.
The opinion of R' Yosei HaGelili is that which we stated in the baraita. The opinion of Beit Shammai is as we learned in a Mishnah (Okatzin 3:8): With regard to fish, from when are they susceptible to impurity as food? Beit Shammai say: From when they are caught in a trap, as at this point they are
The Talmud analyzes that Mishnah: What is the difference between the opinions of R' Akiva and Beit Hillel? R' Yoḥanan said: The difference between them is the case of a convulsing fish. R' Akiva holds that such a fish can already become ritually impure, while Beit Hillel require it to have actuall