Study Bava Kamma folio 77B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And Reish Lakish says, in explanation of R' Shimon’s statement: R' Shimon would say that the red heifer can be redeemed with money even when it has already been slaughtered upon its pyre, i.e., for the sake of purification. For this reason R' Shimon claimed that the meat had a time when it was fit
The Talmud discusses the relative merits of the answers provided by R' Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish: Granted, R' Yoḥanan did not state an answer in accordance with that of R' Shimon ben Lakish, i.e., Reish Lakish, that the Mishnah is referring to a blemished animal, because he wants to interpret the Mi
Reish Lakish could have said to you that the verse states: “If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it” (Exodus 21:37). This verse compares slaughtering to selling, thereby indicating that anywhere that the fourfold or fivefold payment is applicable for the sale of a particular
And these two rabbis follow their own lines of reasoning. As it was stated: According to the statement of R' Shimon that an act of slaughter that is not fit for accomplishing its full ritual purpose is not considered an act of slaughter at all and does not entail liability to pay the fourfold or fiv
The Talmud elaborates: R' Yoḥanan says that he is liable, as even though the fourfold or fivefold payment is not applicable for the slaughter of a tereifa according to the opinion of R' Shimon, as its meat may not be eaten, nevertheless, it is applicable for its sale. And Reish Lakish says that the