Study Chullin folio 81B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
But even if one slaughtered the offspring as a burnt offering and sprinkled its blood, and afterward slaughtered the non-sacred mother, he is exempt. The reason is that the slaughter of the first animal is not an act of slaughter subject to consumption, as a burnt offering is entirely burned upon
And R' Ya’akov says that R' Yoḥanan says: Consumption by the altar is considered consumption. What is the reason? The reason is that the verse states with regard to an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time [piggul]: “And if any of the flesh of the sacr
The repetitive expression “he’akhol ye’akhel” teaches that the verse is speaking of two types of consumption: One is human consumption, and the other one is consumption by the altar, and both are considered consumption with regard to piggul and other matters. Therefore, the slaughter of a burnt off
Mishnah: With regard to one who slaughters an animal and its offspring and one of them is discovered to be an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within 12 months [tereifa] and may not be eaten, or one who slaughters one of the animals for the sake of idol worship, from which deri
All agree that one who slaughters an animal and it becomes a carcass by his hand because the slaughter was invalid, or one who stabs an animal, or one who uproots the windpipe and the gullet, is exempt with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering a mother and its offspring, as it is written: