• Machlokes if עגלה ערופה becomes prohibited while it is alive

The Mishnah lists shechting an עגלה ערופה as a שחיטה שאינה ראויה. The Gemara objects from thea Mishnah: that if the murderer iswas found before the calf isעגלה was decapitated, it returns to the flock and , because the עגלה remains permitted, implying that shechitah until its decapitation. If so, shechting it should permit it. in consumption!? Reish Lakish, quoting quotes Rebbe Yannai, therefore suggests removing  saying that עגלה ערופה should be removed from the Mishnah. The Gemara rejects this attribution: Rebbe Yannai held that an עגלה ערופה becomes prohibited upon its descent to the נחל איתן, allowing him to explain the Mishnah after that point, and Reish Lakish derives the prohibition of מצורע birds while alive from עגלה ערופה. The Gemara therefore concludes that it was Rebbe Yochanan who removed עגלה ערופה from the MishnahMishnah’s text. However, the Gemara disproves this attribution. Rebbe Yannai said: גבול שמעתי בה ושכחתי – I heard what is the cutoff line for when [an עגלה ערופה] becomes forbidden, but I forgot what it is, and it was determined that ירידתה לנחל איתן אוסרתה – its descent to the hard valley is what prohibits it. Therefore, Rebbe Yannai could have interpreted our Mishnah to refer to shechting an עגלה ערופה after its descent to the נחל איתן. Reish Lakish derives the prohibition of צפורי מצורע – birds used for the מצורע’s purification משעת לקיחה – from the time of their taking for צפורי מצורע, from עגלה ערופה, which is likewise forbidden while alive. Therefore, the Gemara concludes that it is Rebbe Yochanan who removed "עגלה ערופה" from our Mishnah.

• Multiple violations of אותואותו ואת בנו with a single shechitah

The Mishnah teachesstates that one who who shechts a cow and its then its two calves the same day incurs two sets of malkus, while one who first shechts, but one who shechted the two calves and then the mother incurs only one, since both(which was forbidden for two reasons), incurs only one. If one shechted a cow, its daughter, and its daughter’s daughter, he incurs two sets of malkus, but if he shechted a cow and its “granddaughter” first, and then its daughter (thereby violating two prohibitions occur simultaneously. Likewise,), the Tanna Kamma obligates one set of malkus, but סומכוס obligates two sets. [סומכוס would also argue in the רישא and say that one who shechts a cow, its daughter, and its granddaughter receivestwo calves and then the mother receives two sets of malkus, whereas if he shechts the grandmother and granddaughter first and then the middle generation, the Tanna Kamma gives.] The Mishnah clearly assumes one set of malkus and Sumchos, citing Rebbe Meir, gives two. The is liable for shechting offspring and then its mother, and the Gemara asks that the TorahTorah only forbidsforbids shechting a parent before"אותו ואת בנו" – it and its offspring., but not "בנו ואותו" – its offspring and it!? It answers that the plural phrase "לא תשחטו, in the plural, includes liability where different" – you shall not shecht implies that two people perform the prohibited shechitos, includingcan be liable for shechting the, i.e., where a cow was shechted, and then one shechted its mother after, and another shechted its offspring.

• אכל שני זיתי חלב בהעלם אחד

Abaye asks whether Sumchos obligates two sets of malkus because he also holds that eating two kezaysim of cheilev during one העלם requires two chataos, or whether his ruling is unique here because the violations involve separate animals. Rav Yosef answers that Sumchos indeed holds that two kezaysim of cheilev in one העלם require two chataos, although the Gemara ultimately rejects every proof for this position.Abaye asked Rav Yosef why Sumchos obligates two sets of malkus for shechting the daughter after shechting the “grandmother” and “granddaughter.” Does he hold אכל שני זיתי חלב בהעלם אחד חייב שתי חטאות – if one ate two כזיתים of חלב in one lapse of awareness, he is liable to two חטאות (and similarly, two intentional transgressions of the same prohibition in one act obligates two sets of malkus)? Or, does Sumchos agree that one who eats two כזיתים of חלב in one העלם is only liable to one חטאת, and he obligates two sets of malkus in the Mishnah הואיל וגופין מוחלקין – because the multiple transgressions result from acts in separate bodies (i.e., shechting the daughter violates shechting it the same day as its mother, and shechting it the same day as its daughter)? Rav Yosef replied that סומכוס indeed holds that eating two כזיתים of חלב in one העלם obligates two חטאות. However, every proof to this assertion is deflected.