Chullin, Chapter 5, Mishnah 1. With this chapter the masechet takes up a fresh issur bound up with shechita: oto ve'et beno, the ban on taking the life of a dam and her young within a single day. The mishnah begins by charting the boundaries of this prohibition, where it is binding, in what era, and over which animals, and it then examines what results when this issur collides with the rules governing where sanctified and unsanctified animals may be slaughtered.
The Torah's words are the source: "veshor o seh", a bull, or a seh (a term that covers both a sheep and a goat), and concerning such animals the Torah instructs "lo tishchatu beyom echad", they are not to be slaughtered within one day, "oto ve'et beno", the animal together with its young. So a cow, a ewe or a goat may not be brought to shechita on the same date as its child. Although the verse speaks of a "son", the issur reaches every offspring, female no less than male.
Several details follow from this. The order does not matter: whether the mother was killed first and the offspring afterward, or the reverse, the prohibition is the same. It also does not matter whether one person performed both acts of shechita or two different people did. The one who slaughters the second of the pair transgresses a prohibition from the Torah itself, de'orayta, and is liable to malkut, lashes. The animals themselves, however, are not forbidden as food; once slaughtered properly, they may be eaten.
The Scope of the Prohibition
The mishnah rules that oto ve'et beno is "noheg bein ba'aretz", operative within Eretz Yisrael, "bein bechutza la'aretz", and equally operative beyond its borders. "Bifnei habayit veshelo bifnei habayit": it holds while the Beit Hamikdash stands, and it holds when it lies in ruins. "Bachulin uvamukdashin": it governs chullin, animals bearing no sanctity, and just as fully animals set aside as korbanot.
Because animals bearing sanctity are included in this issur, the present mishnah and the one that follows examine what emerges when three factors meet: the ban of oto ve'et beno, whether the animal is sanctified or ordinary, and the location in which the shechita was carried out.
Three Separate Prohibitions
To follow the mishnah's cases, we need three distinct prohibitions clearly in mind, each with its own consequences:
- Taking the life of a dam together with her young within one day, oto ve'et beno: the slaughterer receives malkut, yet the meat remains permitted for eating.
- Slaughtering a sanctified animal beyond the azarah, the Temple courtyard: this brings both malkut and karet, and not the slightest use may be made of the animal.
- Slaughtering chullin within the azarah: no malkut and no karet are incurred, but here too the animal is barred from every use.
The question the mishnah now raises is what happens when these prohibitions overlap: an oto ve'et beno pair that is consecrated and slaughtered outside the courtyard, or unconsecrated and slaughtered inside it. "Keitzad", how so? The mishnah introduces the cases with "hashochet oto ve'et beno", one who slaughters an animal and its offspring, and then runs through the possible combinations, both animals consecrated, both unconsecrated, and (in the coming mishnah) one of each.
Case One: "Chulin Bachutz"
Both animals here bear no sanctity, and both were killed beyond the azarah, which is precisely where ordinary animals belong. Nothing has gone wrong apart from the issur itself. "Shenehem kesheirim": each carcass is valid and may be consumed. The mishnah continues, "vehasheini sofeig et ha'arba'im": whoever performed the later shechita absorbs the forty lashes for violating oto ve'et beno.
Case Two: "Kodashim Bachutz"
Here both animals bear sanctity, and both were killed beyond the azarah, whereas kodashim may be slaughtered nowhere except within the Temple courtyard itself. "Harishon chayav karet": karet falls upon the man who carried out the first shechita, since he took the life of a sanctified animal away from its permitted place. "Ushnehem pesulin": neither carcass retains any validity and no use may be made of either one, for an animal killed in a forbidden location can never serve as a korban. "Ushnehem sofgin et ha'arba'im": lashes are incurred by both men.
Notice how the liabilities divide. The first slaughterer receives karet for offering a sacred animal outside its designated place, and he also receives malkut for that very same prohibition of slaughtering kodashim outside the courtyard. The second slaughterer receives malkut only for oto ve'et beno.
At first glance the second slaughterer should also be liable for karet and for a second set of lashes, since his animal too was consecrated and was killed outside the courtyard. The answer is that once the first of the pair was slaughtered (say, the mother), the second animal could no longer be brought as a korban at all. It could not have been slaughtered even inside the courtyard, because that would be a transgression of oto ve'et beno. From the moment of the first shechita the second animal was already pasul as a korban, and therefore slaughtering it outside the Beit Hamikdash carries neither karet nor lashes on that account.
Case Three: "Chulin Bifnim"
Both animals here are chullin, and both were killed within the azarah, a place into which animals lacking sanctity have no business being brought. "Shenehem pesulin": neither is valid, and one may not derive the least benefit from them. The mishnah then teaches "vehasheini sofeig et ha'arba'im": forty lashes for the man who carried out the later shechita.
This follows the principle laid out above: chullin brought into the azarah and slaughtered there does not render the slaughterer liable to lashes, even though the animal is thereafter forbidden for any purpose whatever. Hence both carcasses are pesulin, while the lashes incurred here are on account of oto ve'et beno alone, and not on account of the place where the shechita occurred.
Case Four: "Kodashim Bifnim"
Here both animals bear sanctity, and both were killed within the azarah, exactly where they belong. "Harishon kasher upatur": the animal killed first stands as a fit korban, and the man who slaughtered it bears no punishment whatever. He acted entirely properly, taking a sanctified animal and slaughtering it in the very place sanctified animals are meant to be slaughtered, inside the Beit Hamikdash, and he took no part in the second shechita that was to follow, nor did he know of it.
The mishnah concludes: "vehasheini sofeig et ha'arba'im", and further, "upasul". The man who carried out the second shechita absorbs the forty lashes for oto ve'et beno, and that second animal is disqualified, so that no use of any kind may be made of it. It cannot be offered on the mizbeach, because its shechita was performed be'issur, at an hour when slaughtering it was forbidden, its mother having already been slaughtered earlier that same day.