תלמוד על עבודה זרה 5:12

In a baraita²⁶The baraita as stated here is not found in any other source except the Yerushalmi parallels Pesaḥim 28c, Avodah Zarah 45b. In Mekhilta Mišpaṭim 19; quoted in Babli Pesaḥim22b, Qiddušin 56b, Baba Qama 41a the text explicitly notes that, since “its meat shall not be eaten” is included in the statement of the sentence to be passed by the court, only after judgment is rendered does slaughter become ineffective. This may also be the rule implied by the Yerushalmi Targum to Ex. 21:28: וְלָא יִתְנְכַס לְמֵיכוּל יַת בִּשְׂרֵיהּ “it should not be slaughtered to make its flesh edible.” Since the Babli follows R. Eleazar, no discussion of the prohibition of usufruct is necessary. one disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “What does one understand from what has been said (Ex. 21:28): ‘The ox shall certainly be stoned’? Do we not know that its meat is forbidden as food²⁷As carcass meat.? Then why does the verse say, ‘its meat shall not be eaten’? To tell you that just as it is forbidden as food so it is forbidden for usufruct.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan do with this? He explained it if the owners slaughtered it before sentence was pronounced²⁸This statement directly contradicts the position of the Babli. R. Yoḥanan will hold that the prescriptive commandment to stone the ox after judgment has been passed automatically makes any slaughter invalid; that would not need a proof from the verse..