Because each body part has its own definition regarding how much of a perforation renders it a treifa, the gemara demarcates the boundaries of some of the body parts.
This month’s learning is sponsored by Beth Balkany in honor of their granddaughter, Devorah Chana Serach Eichel. “May she grow up to be a lifelong learner.”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
English
עברית
0:00
0:00
0:00
0:00
This month’s learning is sponsored by Beth Balkany in honor of their granddaughter, Devorah Chana Serach Eichel. “May she grow up to be a lifelong learner.”
Chullin 45
אתייקורי הוא דמתייקרו בי
It is an honor for them to honor me. My attendance is not for my benefit but for theirs.
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ניקבה כנפה מצטרפים לרובא
§ With regard to the halakha that a cut windpipe renders the animal a tereifa, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If the windpipe was perforated with a series of small holes around its circumference like a sieve, the small holes join together to constitute a majority of the circumference. Therefore, if their collective size is a majority of the circumference, the windpipe is considered cut.
מתיב רב ירמיה ובגולגולת שיש בה נקב אחד ארוך אפילו יש בה נקבים הרבה מצטרפים למלא מקדח אלמא כיון דשיעורה מלא מקדח למלא מקדח מצטרפין ה”נ כיון דשיעוריה כאיסר לכאיסר מצטרפין
Rav Yirmeya raises an objection: The mishna teaches (Oholot 2:3) that if a skull of a corpse has a round hole at least the size of a drill bit used for surgery, then the skull does not impart ritual impurity in a tent. With regard to this, a baraita states: And in a skull that contains one long hole, or even if it has many small holes, the areas of the holes join together to constitute the size of a drill hole. Evidently, since the requisite measure is the size of a drill hole, the small holes join together to constitute the size of a drill hole, and not another measure. If so, here, too, in the case of the windpipe, since the requisite measure of a hole to render the animal a tereifa is the size of an issar (see 54a), the small holes should join together to constitute the size of an issar. Why must they constitute the majority of the circumference?
אישתמיטתיה הא דאמר רבי חלבו אמר רב חמא בר גוריא אמר רב נקבים שיש בהן חסרון מצטרפין לכאיסר ושאין בהן חסרון מצטרפין לרובא
The Gemara notes: It escaped him, i.e., Rav Yirmeya, that which Rabbi Ḥelbo says that Rav Ḥama bar Gurya says that Rav says: Perforations that are a deficiency, i.e., holes of significant area, join together to constitute the size of an issar, and perforations that are not a deficiency, but are as small as the holes of a sieve, must join together to constitute a majority of the circumference, which is the measure of a cut windpipe. Since the holes are not substantial in area, the windpipe cannot be said to be missing a piece, but it may be considered cut.
אמר רבה בר בר חנה א”ר יהושע בן לוי ניטלה הימנה רצועה מצטרפת לכאיסר בעא מיניה רבי יצחק בר נחמני מרבי יהושע בן לוי ניקבה כנפה מהו אמר ליה הרי אמרו נקבים שיש בהן חסרון מצטרפין לכאיסר ושאין בהן חסרון מצטרפין לרובא
Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: If a strip of the windpipe was removed from it, its area joins to constitute the size of an issar, even if the strip itself is narrower than an issar. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: If the windpipe was perforated like a sieve, what is the halakha? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: The Sages said with regard to this case: Perforations that are a deficiency join together to constitute the size of an issar, and perforations that are not a deficiency join together to constitute a majority of the circumference.
בעופא מאי
The Gemara raises a question: The measure of an issar for missing flesh in the windpipe applies only to animals. In birds, this cannot be the measure, as the entire width of the windpipe is less than the diameter of an issar. What, then, is the measure with regard to a bird?
אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מפרשא לי מיניה דרבי אלעזר מקפלו ומניחו על פי הקנה אם חופה את רוב הקנה טרפה ואם לאו כשרה אמר רב פפא וסימניך נפיא
Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani said: It was explained to me personally by Rabbi Elazar: One severs the perforated tissue, folds and lays it over the opening of the windpipe. If it covers the majority of the windpipe, the animal is a tereifa; and if not, the animal is kosher. Rav Pappa said: And your mnemonic for this halakha should be a sieve. If the tissue is perforated like a sieve, one must place it over the opening of the windpipe as if it were a sieve.
נפחתה כדלת אמר רב נחמן כדי שיכנס איסר לרחבו נסדקה אמר רב אפילו לא נשתייר בה אלא חוליא אחת למעלה וחוליא אחת למטה כשרה
The Gemara continues: If the windpipe was missing a piece so that its appearance was like a door, where the missing flesh was partially attached as though on a hinge, Rav Naḥman said: If the missing piece is so large that an issar can enter the hole widthwise, i.e., it is wider and taller than an issar, the animal is a tereifa. If the windpipe was cracked along its length, Rav said: Even if only one undamaged segment remains in the windpipe above the crack and one segment below it, the animal is kosher.
אמרוה קמיה דרבי יוחנן אמר מה חוליא ומה חוליא דקאמר רב אלא אימא אפילו לא נשתייר בה אלא משהו למעלה ומשהו למטה כשרה
The Sages said this statement before Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said: What is this segment and what is that segment that Rav says? Segments are immaterial to the matter. Rather, say: Even if any amount remained intact in the windpipe above the crack, and any amount below, the animal is kosher.
אמרוה קמיה דרבי יוחנן משמיה דרבי יונתן הכי אמר להו ידעין חברין בבלאי לפרושי כי האי טעמא
The Sages said this statement in Eretz Yisrael before Rabbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rabbi Yonatan the Babylonian, i.e., that any amount of undamaged tissue above and below the crack renders the animal kosher. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to them, excitedly: Do our Babylonian friends know how to interpret in accordance with this explanation? He was happy that Rabbi Yonatan interpreted it the same way he did.
תנא רבי חייא בר יוסף קמיה דרבי יוחנן כל הצואר כולו כשר לשחיטה מטבעת הגדולה עד כנפי ריאה התחתונה אמר רבא תחתונה שהיא עליונה שאני אומר כל שפושטת צוארה ורועה ובלבד שלא תאנס
§ Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef taught before Rabbi Yoḥanan: The entire neck is fit for slaughter, from the large uppermost ring of the windpipe downward until the lower edges of the lung. Rava says that the phrase: Lower edges of the lung, is referring to an animal hung by the feet; that is, it actually denotes the upper edges nearest the head. As I say that the area fit for slaughter is all the length of the neck that an animal extends in order to graze, provided that it is not forced to extend its neck further than it wishes. Consequently, the very bottom of the neck is not a location fit for slaughter.
בעי רב חנינא ואיתימא רב חנניה אנסה עצמה מהו תיקו יתיב רבי יוחנן ורשב”ל נפק מילתא מבינייהו אנס בסימנים ושחט פסולה ניקב הקנה למטה מן החזה נידון כריאה
Rav Ḥanina, and some say Rav Ḥananya, raises a dilemma: If the animal forced itself and extended its neck, what is the halakha with regard to the additional area? The Gemara responds: The question shall stand unresolved. The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish sat together, and a matter emerged from between them: If the slaughterer forced the animal to extend the simanim by stretching the neck and slaughtered the animal at the lower end of the neck, the slaughter is not valid. And if the windpipe was perforated below the breast, it is considered to be like a perforated lung, which renders the animal a tereifa no matter the size of the perforation. A perforation in the upper windpipe must be the size of an issar to render the animal a tereifa (see 54a).
תנו רבנן איזהו חזה זה הרואה את הקרקע למטה עד הצואר למעלה עד הכרס חותך שתי צלעות משתי דפנות אילך ואילך וזהו חזה הניתן לכהנים:
The Gemara elaborates: The Sages taught in a baraita: Which is the breast that must be given to the priests as a gift from every peace offering (see Leviticus 7:31)? This is the section that faces the ground, not the ribbed area on the sides. And lengthwise it extends below, when the animal is hung from the legs, until the neck, and above until the rumen. One cuts the two ribs nearest the head from the two sides of the animal from both directions, and this is the breast that is given to the priests.
ניקב קרום של מוח: רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו קרמא עילאה אע”ג דלא אינקיב תתאה ואמרי לה עד דאינקיב תתאה אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני וסימניך חייתא דמתנח ביה מוחא
§ The mishna states: If the membrane of the brain was perforated, the animal is a tereifa. The Gemara cites Rav and Shmuel, who both say: The brain is covered by two membranes, a thick outer membrane adjacent to the skull and a thin inner membrane adjacent to the brain. The animal is a tereifa if the outer membrane was perforated, even if the inner membrane was not perforated. And some say that the animal is not a tereifa unless the inner membrane was perforated as well. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says: And this is your mnemonic to remember the halakha: The bag in which the brain rests, i.e., the inner membrane.
אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי כנגדו בביצים ניכר א”ר שמעון בן פזי אמר ריב”ל משום בר קפרא מוח כל מה שבקדירה נדון כמוח התחיל למשוך נדון כחוט השדרה ומהיכן מתחיל לימשך אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מיפרשא לי מיניה דרבי יהושע בן לוי כמין שני
Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Even though the inner membrane of the brain is very thin and not easily visible, its equivalent in the testicles, which are also enclosed in a thin membrane, is conspicuous, as it has an appearance different from the testicles themselves. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says in the name of bar Kappara: With regard to the brain, everything inside the skull is considered part of the brain. From the point where it begins to extend like a cord out of the base of the skull, it is considered the spinal cord. And from where does it begin to be extended? Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani said: It was explained to me personally by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi himself: Protrusions similar to two
פולין יש מונחין על פי הקדרה מן הפולין ולפנים כלפנים מן הפולין ולחוץ כלחוץ ופולין עצמן איני יודע ומסתברא כלפנים
beans lie at the opening of the skull, where the spinal cord exits. From the beans inward, the nerve tissue is considered like the inside, i.e., the brain. Therefore, if its membrane is perforated, even minimally, the animal is a tereifa. From the beans outward, the nerve tissue is considered like the outside, i.e., the spinal cord. A perforation of the membrane in this area renders the animal a tereifa only if the spinal cord is mostly cut. And with regard to the area of the beans themselves, I do not know what the halakha is; but it stands to reason that it is considered like the inside.
רבי ירמיה בדק בעופא ואשכח כמין שני פולין מונחין על פי הקדרה:
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yirmeya inspected a bird and found protrusions similar to two beans lying on the opening of the skull.
ניקב הלב לבית חללו: בעי רבי זירא לבית חלל קטן או לבית חלל גדול א”ל אביי מאי תיבעי לך מי לא תנן ר”ש אומר עד שתנקב לבית הסמפונות ואמר רבה בר תחליפא אמר רבי ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב עד שתנקב לסמפון גדול
§ The mishna states: If the heart was perforated to its chamber, the animal is a tereifa. Rabbi Zeira raises a dilemma: Is the mishna referring to the small chamber within the heart or to the large chamber? Abaye said to him: What is your dilemma? Didn’t we learn in the mishna with regard to the lung: Rabbi Shimon says: It is not a tereifa unless it is perforated through to the bronchi? And Rabba bar Taḥlifa says that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba says that Rav says: Rabbi Shimon means that it is not a tereifa unless it is perforated through to the large bronchus. If so, it may be presumed that the mishna is referring to the large chamber of the heart as well.
הכי השתא התם לבית הסמפונות קתני להיכא דשפכי סמפונות כולהו והכא לבית חללו קתני מה לי חלל גדול מה לי חלל קטן
The Gemara responds: How can these cases be compared? There, the mishna teaches: To the bronchi [simponot], in the plural form, i.e., the one bronchus into which all the bronchi [simponot] empty out. But here, with regard to the heart, it teaches: To the chamber. What is it to me if this is a large chamber and what is it to me if it is a small chamber? The language does not indicate one or the other.
קנה הלב רב אמר במשהו ושמואל אמר ברובו
§ With regard to the aorta, the chief artery exiting the heart, Rav says: Like the heart itself, if it is perforated in any amount the animal is a tereifa. And Shmuel says: The animal is a tereifa only if the aorta is perforated in its majority.
הי ניהו קנה הלב אמר רבה בר יצחק אמר רב חלב שעל גבי דפנות דפנות סלקא דעתך אלא שעל גבי דופני ריאה
The Gemara asks: Which blood vessel is the aorta? Rabba bar Yitzḥak says that Rav says: This is the artery found in the fat on the sides. The Gemara asks: Can it enter your mind to say that this is referring to the sides of the animal, i.e., the ribs, which are not adjacent to the heart? Rather, this is referring to the artery covered in fat that exits the heart and passes on the sides of the lung.
אמר אמימר משמיה דרב נחמן תלתא קני הוו חד פריש לליבא וחד פריש לריאה וחד פריש לכבדא דריאה כריאה דכבדא ככבדא דליבא פליגי
Ameimar says in the name of Rav Naḥman: There are three ducts adjacent to one another in an animal’s chest. One separates to the heart, and one separates to the lung, and one separates to the liver. The duct of the lung is treated like the lung, and renders the animal a tereifa if perforated in any amount. The duct of the liver is treated like the liver, and only if it is completely missing does it render the animal a tereifa, in accordance with the mishna. As for the duct of the heart, the aorta, Rav and Shmuel disagree as to the measure of its perforation, as mentioned above.
מר בר חייא מתני איפכא דריאה ככבדא דכבדא כריאה דליבא פליגי
Mar bar Ḥiyya teaches the opposite: The duct of the lung is treated like the liver and renders the animal a tereifa only if it is completely missing. The duct of the liver is treated like the lung, and a perforation of any amount renders the animal a tereifa. And with regard to the duct of the heart, Rav and Shmuel disagree.
אזל רבי חייא בר יוסף אמרה לשמעתא דרב קמיה דשמואל א”ל אי הכי אמר אבא לא ידע בטרפות ולא כלום:
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef went and stated the halakha of Rav, that an aorta perforated in any amount renders an animal a tereifa, before Shmuel. Shmuel said to him: If Abba, i.e., Rav, actually said so, he knows nothing at all about tereifot.
נשבר השדרה: ת”ר חוט השדרה שנפסק ברובו דברי רבי רבי יעקב אומר אפילו ניקב
§ The mishna states: If the spinal column was broken and its cord was cut, the animal is a tereifa. With regard to this the Sages taught: If the spinal cord was cut in its majority, the animal is a tereifa. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Ya’akov says: It is a tereifa even if the spinal cord was only perforated.
הורה רבי כרבי יעקב אמר רב הונא אין הלכה כרבי יעקב
The Gemara notes: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi ruled in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya’akov that even a small perforation of the spinal cord renders the animal a tereifa. Rav Huna says: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya’akov.
וכמה רובו רב אמר רוב עורו ואמרי לה רוב מוחו
The Gemara asks: And how much is considered a majority of the spinal cord to render the animal a tereifa? Rav says: A majority of the circumference of its surrounding membranes, the meninges. And some say a majority of the nerve tissue of the spinal cord itself. In other words, even if the meninges are intact, the animal is a tereifa if a majority of the nerve tissue is cut.
מאן דאמר רוב מוחו כ”ש רוב עורו למאן דאמר רוב עורו רוב מוחו מאי
The Gemara notes: According to the one who says that the animal is a tereifa if a majority of the nerve tissue is severed, all the more so if a majority of the meninges is cut, since if the meninges, the protective membranes, are damaged, the nerve tissue itself will certainly be damaged soon thereafter. But according to the one who says that a tear in a majority of the meninges renders it a tereifa, what is the halakha in a case where only a majority of the nerve tissue was cut? Perhaps the intact membranes will keep the damage from spreading.
ת”ש דאמר ניולי אמר רב הונא רובו שאמרו רוב עורו מוח זה לא מעלה ולא מוריד
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof: As Nayyoli says that Rav Huna says: The majority of the spinal cord, which they said renders the animal a tereifa if cut, is the majority of the meninges. But this nerve tissue makes no difference.
רב נתן בר אבין הוה יתיב קמיה דרב בדק ברוב עורו וקא בדיק ברוב מוחו א”ל אם רוב עורו קיים מוח זה אינו מעלה ואינו מוריד
The Gemara relates that Rav Natan bar Avin was sitting before Rav. Rav Natan first checked the spinal cord to make sure that a majority of the meninges was intact, and then was checking to see that a majority of its nerve tissue was intact. Rav said to him: If a majority of the meninges is intact, this nerve tissue makes no difference.
אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי נתמרך פסול נתמסמס פסול איזוהי המרכה ואיזוהי המסמסה המרכה כל שנשפך כקיתון מסמסה כל שאינו יכול לעמוד
§ Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: If the spinal cord was liquefied [nitmareikh], the animal is unfit for consumption. Even if it softened [nitmasmeis], the animal is unfit, i.e., a tereifa. What is liquefaction, and what is softening? Liquefaction is any case in which the nerve tissue becomes liquid, and if the membrane is punctured it can be poured out like water from a jug. Softening is any case in which the nerve tissue cannot stand upright on its own and sags when it is not being supported.
בעי רבי ירמיה אינו יכול לעמוד מפני כבדו מאי תיקו בי רב אמרי נתמסמס פסול נתמזמז כשר מיתיבי רשב”א אומר בהמה שנתמזמז מוחה טרפה ההיא נתמסמס איתמר
Rabbi Yirmeya raises a dilemma: In a case where the spinal cord became unusually heavy such that it cannot stand upright due to its weight, but not due to softening or melting, what is the halakha? The Gemara responds: The question shall stand unresolved. In the study hall they say: If the spinal cord softened due to disease, the animal is unfit for consumption. But if some of its tissue softened and was emptied from the spinal cord, the animal remains kosher. The Gemara raises an objection based on a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: An animal whose nerve tissue was emptied [nitmazmez] from the spinal cord is a tereifa. The Gemara responds: That version of the baraita is incorrect. In fact, the word softened [nitmasmes] was stated, not the word emptied.
איני והא לוי הוה יתיב בי מסותא חזייא לההוא גברא דטרייה לרישיה אמר נתמזמז מוחיה דדין לאו דלא חיי אמר אביי לא לומר שאינו מוליד
The Gemara asks: Is that so, that an animal whose nerve tissue has dissolved is kosher? But didn’t it happen that Levi was sitting in the bathhouse, where he saw a certain man who banged his head severely, whereupon he said: This man’s nerve tissue has softened and been emptied? Is it not that Levi meant that the man cannot live? If so, the softening and emptying of the nerve tissue should render an animal a tereifa. Abaye said: No, he intended to say that the man cannot reproduce, since head trauma might lead to infertility.
עד היכן חוט השדרה אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל עד בין הפרשות
§ The Gemara asks: Until where does the spinal cord extend downward, such that if it is cut above that point the animal is a tereifa? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: Until the point between the branches of the spinal cord that split off behind the thighs.
רב דימי בר יצחק הוה קא בעי למיזל לבי חוזאי אתא לקמיה דרבי יהודה אמר ליה ליחוי לי מר בין הפרשות היכא א”ל זיל אייתי לי גדי ואחוי לך אייתי ליה גדי שמינה א”ל בליעה טפי ולא ידיע אייתי ליה כחוש א”ל בליטן טפי ולא ידיע
The Gemara recounts: Rav Dimi bar Yitzḥak wanted to go to Bei Ḥozai. He came before Rabbi Yehuda and said to him: Master, show me, where is the area between the branches to which Shmuel referred? Rabbi Yehuda said to him: Go bring me a kid and I will show you. Rav Dimi bar Yitzḥak brought him a choice kid with much fat. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: The location is buried very deep in the fat and is not recognizable. He brought Rabbi Yehuda a lean kid. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: The bones jut out very far, and the location is not recognizable.
א”ל תא אגמרך גמרא הכי אמר שמואל עד אחת טרפה שלישית כשרה שניה איני יודע
Rabbi Yehuda said to him: Come, I will teach you a tradition without showing you: This is what Shmuel said: There are three successive points around the same bone behind the pelvis at which branches diverge from the spinal cord. If the spinal cord is cut anywhere until the first gap between these branches, the animal is a tereifa. If it is severed anywhere after the third gap, i.e., after the third branch, the animal is kosher. If it was severed within the second gap, i.e., between these areas, I do not know the halakha.
Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, raises a dilemma:
Follow
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
פיגול- דף משלהן
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
10.18.2025 | כ״ו בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 33: The Heavy Laying on of Hands
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.17.2025 | כ״ה בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 31: It’s a Measure of Time: Half a Loaf of Bread
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.16.2025 | כ״ד בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 32: The Surprising Leniencies and Leeway of Sacrifices
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.16.2025 | כ״ד בתשרי תשפ״ו
May a Woman Schecht Sacred Animals? – Gefet
Rabbanit Yael Shimoni
10.16.2025 | כ״ד בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 30: An Olive’s Measure of Intent
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.15.2025 | כ״ג בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 29: More Ways to Offer Offerings Right
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.13.2025 | כ״א בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 28: Beyond Place, Beyond Time
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.12.2025 | כ׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 27: Hindrances to Atonement
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.12.2025 | כ׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
A Daf Of Their Own –Schita By a Woman
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
10.12.2025 | כ׳ בתשרי תשפ״ו
נשים שוחטות- דף משלהן
Rabbanit Shira Marili Mirvis and Rabbanit Hamutal Shoval
10.11.2025 | י״ט בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 26: When a Father Corrects His Rabbi-Son
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.10.2025 | י״ח בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 25: Knife Technique and Troubleshooting
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.09.2025 | י״ז בתשרי תשפ״ו
Zevahim 24: Between the Floor and the Foot
Anne Gordon and Yardaena Osband
10.08.2025 | ט״ז בתשרי תשפ״ו
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!
Roslyn Jaffe
Florida, United States
As Jewish educator and as a woman, I’m mindful that Talmud has been kept from women for many centuries. Now that we are privileged to learn, and learning is so accessible, it’s my intent to complete Daf Yomi. I am so excited to keep learning with my Hadran community.
Sue Parker Gerson
Denver, United States
My curiosity was peaked after seeing posts about the end of the last cycle. I am always looking for opportunities to increase my Jewish literacy & I am someone that is drawn to habit and consistency. Dinnertime includes a “Guess what I learned on the daf” segment for my husband and 18 year old twins. I also love the feelings of connection with my colleagues who are also learning.
Diana Bloom
Tampa, United States
I began learning with Rabbanit Michelle’s wonderful Talmud Skills class on Pesachim, which really enriched my Pesach seder, and I have been learning Daf Yomi off and on over the past year. Because I’m relatively new at this, there is a “chiddush” for me every time I learn, and the knowledge and insights of the group members add so much to my experience. I feel very lucky to be a part of this.
Julie Landau
Karmiel, Israel
I began my Daf Yomi journey on January 5, 2020. I had never learned Talmud before. Initially it struck me as a bunch of inane and arcane details with mind bending logic. I am now smitten. Rabbanit Farber brings the page to life and I am eager to learn with her every day!
Lori Stark
Highland Park, United States
I began my journey with Rabbanit Michelle more than five years ago. My friend came up with a great idea for about 15 of us to learn the daf and one of us would summarize weekly what we learned.
It was fun but after 2-3 months people began to leave. I have continued. Since the cycle began Again I have joined the Teaneck women.. I find it most rewarding in so many ways. Thank you
Dena Heller
New Jersey, United States
I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!
Rochel Cheifetz
Riverdale, NY, United States
I had never heard of Daf Yomi and after reading the book, The Weight of Ink, I explored more about it. I discovered that it was only 6 months before a whole new cycle started and I was determined to give it a try. I tried to get a friend to join me on the journey but after the first few weeks they all dropped it. I haven’t missed a day of reading and of listening to the podcast.
Anne Rubin
Elkins Park, United States
I started to listen to Michelle’s podcasts four years ago. The minute I started I was hooked. I’m so excited to learn the entire Talmud, and think I will continue always. I chose the quote “while a woman is engaged in conversation she also holds the spindle”. (Megillah 14b). It reminds me of all of the amazing women I learn with every day who multi-task, think ahead and accomplish so much.
Julie Mendelsohn
Zichron Yakov, Israel
Robin Zeiger
Tel Aviv, Israel
I had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Terri Krivosha
Minneapolis, United States
Hadran entered my life after the last Siyum Hashaas, January 2020. I was inspired and challenged simultaneously, having never thought of learning Gemara. With my family’s encouragement, I googled “daf yomi for women”. A perfecr fit!
I especially enjoy when Rabbanit Michelle connects the daf to contemporary issues to share at the shabbat table e.g: looking at the Kohen during duchaning. Toda rabba
Marsha Wasserman
Jerusalem, Israel
I learned Mishnayot more than twenty years ago and started with Gemara much later in life. Although I never managed to learn Daf Yomi consistently, I am learning since some years Gemara in depth and with much joy. Since last year I am studying at the International Halakha Scholars Program at the WIHL. I often listen to Rabbanit Farbers Gemara shiurim to understand better a specific sugyiah. I am grateful for the help and inspiration!
Shoshana Ruerup
Berlin, Germany
When I started studying Hebrew at Brown University’s Hillel, I had no idea that almost 38 years later, I’m doing Daf Yomi. My Shabbat haburah is led by Rabbanit Leah Sarna. The women are a hoot. I’m tracking the completion of each tractate by reading Ilana Kurshan’s memoir, If All the Seas Were Ink.
Hannah Lee
Pennsylvania, United States
My first Talmud class experience was a weekly group in 1971 studying Taanit. In 2007 I resumed Talmud study with a weekly group I continue learning with. January 2020, I was inspired to try learning Daf Yomi. A friend introduced me to Daf Yomi for Women and Rabbanit Michelle Farber, I have kept with this program and look forward, G- willing, to complete the entire Shas with Hadran.
Lorri Lewis
Palo Alto, CA, United States
Ive been learning Gmara since 5th grade and always loved it. Have always wanted to do Daf Yomi and now with Michelle Farber’s online classes it made it much easier to do! Really enjoying the experience thank you!!
Lisa Lawrence
Neve Daniel, Israel
I started learning Daf Yomi inspired by תָּפַסְתָּ מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַסְתָּ, תָּפַסְתָּ מוּעָט תָּפַסְתָּ. I thought I’d start the first page, and then see. I was swept up into the enthusiasm of the Hadran Siyum, and from there the momentum kept building. Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur gives me an anchor, a connection to an incredible virtual community, and an energy to face whatever the day brings.
Medinah Korn
בית שמש, Israel
I had never heard of Daf Yomi and after reading the book, The Weight of Ink, I explored more about it. I discovered that it was only 6 months before a whole new cycle started and I was determined to give it a try. I tried to get a friend to join me on the journey but after the first few weeks they all dropped it. I haven’t missed a day of reading and of listening to the podcast.
Anne Rubin
Elkins Park, United States
I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.
Jenifer Nech
Houston, United States
The start of my journey is not so exceptional. I was between jobs and wanted to be sure to get out every day (this was before corona). Well, I was hooked after about a month and from then on only looked for work-from-home jobs so I could continue learning the Daf. Daf has been a constant in my life, though hurricanes, death, illness/injury, weddings. My new friends are Rav, Shmuel, Ruth, Joanna.
Judi Felber
Raanana, Israel
Chullin 45
אתייקורי הוא דמתייקרו בי
It is an honor for them to honor me. My attendance is not for my benefit but for theirs.
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ניקבה כנפה מצטרפים לרובא
§ With regard to the halakha that a cut windpipe renders the animal a tereifa, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If the windpipe was perforated with a series of small holes around its circumference like a sieve, the small holes join together to constitute a majority of the circumference. Therefore, if their collective size is a majority of the circumference, the windpipe is considered cut.
מתיב רב ירמיה ובגולגולת שיש בה נקב אחד ארוך אפילו יש בה נקבים הרבה מצטרפים למלא מקדח אלמא כיון דשיעורה מלא מקדח למלא מקדח מצטרפין ה”נ כיון דשיעוריה כאיסר לכאיסר מצטרפין
Rav Yirmeya raises an objection: The mishna teaches (Oholot 2:3) that if a skull of a corpse has a round hole at least the size of a drill bit used for surgery, then the skull does not impart ritual impurity in a tent. With regard to this, a baraita states: And in a skull that contains one long hole, or even if it has many small holes, the areas of the holes join together to constitute the size of a drill hole. Evidently, since the requisite measure is the size of a drill hole, the small holes join together to constitute the size of a drill hole, and not another measure. If so, here, too, in the case of the windpipe, since the requisite measure of a hole to render the animal a tereifa is the size of an issar (see 54a), the small holes should join together to constitute the size of an issar. Why must they constitute the majority of the circumference?
אישתמיטתיה הא דאמר רבי חלבו אמר רב חמא בר גוריא אמר רב נקבים שיש בהן חסרון מצטרפין לכאיסר ושאין בהן חסרון מצטרפין לרובא
The Gemara notes: It escaped him, i.e., Rav Yirmeya, that which Rabbi Ḥelbo says that Rav Ḥama bar Gurya says that Rav says: Perforations that are a deficiency, i.e., holes of significant area, join together to constitute the size of an issar, and perforations that are not a deficiency, but are as small as the holes of a sieve, must join together to constitute a majority of the circumference, which is the measure of a cut windpipe. Since the holes are not substantial in area, the windpipe cannot be said to be missing a piece, but it may be considered cut.
אמר רבה בר בר חנה א”ר יהושע בן לוי ניטלה הימנה רצועה מצטרפת לכאיסר בעא מיניה רבי יצחק בר נחמני מרבי יהושע בן לוי ניקבה כנפה מהו אמר ליה הרי אמרו נקבים שיש בהן חסרון מצטרפין לכאיסר ושאין בהן חסרון מצטרפין לרובא
Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: If a strip of the windpipe was removed from it, its area joins to constitute the size of an issar, even if the strip itself is narrower than an issar. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: If the windpipe was perforated like a sieve, what is the halakha? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: The Sages said with regard to this case: Perforations that are a deficiency join together to constitute the size of an issar, and perforations that are not a deficiency join together to constitute a majority of the circumference.
בעופא מאי
The Gemara raises a question: The measure of an issar for missing flesh in the windpipe applies only to animals. In birds, this cannot be the measure, as the entire width of the windpipe is less than the diameter of an issar. What, then, is the measure with regard to a bird?
אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מפרשא לי מיניה דרבי אלעזר מקפלו ומניחו על פי הקנה אם חופה את רוב הקנה טרפה ואם לאו כשרה אמר רב פפא וסימניך נפיא
Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani said: It was explained to me personally by Rabbi Elazar: One severs the perforated tissue, folds and lays it over the opening of the windpipe. If it covers the majority of the windpipe, the animal is a tereifa; and if not, the animal is kosher. Rav Pappa said: And your mnemonic for this halakha should be a sieve. If the tissue is perforated like a sieve, one must place it over the opening of the windpipe as if it were a sieve.
נפחתה כדלת אמר רב נחמן כדי שיכנס איסר לרחבו נסדקה אמר רב אפילו לא נשתייר בה אלא חוליא אחת למעלה וחוליא אחת למטה כשרה
The Gemara continues: If the windpipe was missing a piece so that its appearance was like a door, where the missing flesh was partially attached as though on a hinge, Rav Naḥman said: If the missing piece is so large that an issar can enter the hole widthwise, i.e., it is wider and taller than an issar, the animal is a tereifa. If the windpipe was cracked along its length, Rav said: Even if only one undamaged segment remains in the windpipe above the crack and one segment below it, the animal is kosher.
אמרוה קמיה דרבי יוחנן אמר מה חוליא ומה חוליא דקאמר רב אלא אימא אפילו לא נשתייר בה אלא משהו למעלה ומשהו למטה כשרה
The Sages said this statement before Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said: What is this segment and what is that segment that Rav says? Segments are immaterial to the matter. Rather, say: Even if any amount remained intact in the windpipe above the crack, and any amount below, the animal is kosher.
אמרוה קמיה דרבי יוחנן משמיה דרבי יונתן הכי אמר להו ידעין חברין בבלאי לפרושי כי האי טעמא
The Sages said this statement in Eretz Yisrael before Rabbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rabbi Yonatan the Babylonian, i.e., that any amount of undamaged tissue above and below the crack renders the animal kosher. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to them, excitedly: Do our Babylonian friends know how to interpret in accordance with this explanation? He was happy that Rabbi Yonatan interpreted it the same way he did.
תנא רבי חייא בר יוסף קמיה דרבי יוחנן כל הצואר כולו כשר לשחיטה מטבעת הגדולה עד כנפי ריאה התחתונה אמר רבא תחתונה שהיא עליונה שאני אומר כל שפושטת צוארה ורועה ובלבד שלא תאנס
§ Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef taught before Rabbi Yoḥanan: The entire neck is fit for slaughter, from the large uppermost ring of the windpipe downward until the lower edges of the lung. Rava says that the phrase: Lower edges of the lung, is referring to an animal hung by the feet; that is, it actually denotes the upper edges nearest the head. As I say that the area fit for slaughter is all the length of the neck that an animal extends in order to graze, provided that it is not forced to extend its neck further than it wishes. Consequently, the very bottom of the neck is not a location fit for slaughter.
בעי רב חנינא ואיתימא רב חנניה אנסה עצמה מהו תיקו יתיב רבי יוחנן ורשב”ל נפק מילתא מבינייהו אנס בסימנים ושחט פסולה ניקב הקנה למטה מן החזה נידון כריאה
Rav Ḥanina, and some say Rav Ḥananya, raises a dilemma: If the animal forced itself and extended its neck, what is the halakha with regard to the additional area? The Gemara responds: The question shall stand unresolved. The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish sat together, and a matter emerged from between them: If the slaughterer forced the animal to extend the simanim by stretching the neck and slaughtered the animal at the lower end of the neck, the slaughter is not valid. And if the windpipe was perforated below the breast, it is considered to be like a perforated lung, which renders the animal a tereifa no matter the size of the perforation. A perforation in the upper windpipe must be the size of an issar to render the animal a tereifa (see 54a).
תנו רבנן איזהו חזה זה הרואה את הקרקע למטה עד הצואר למעלה עד הכרס חותך שתי צלעות משתי דפנות אילך ואילך וזהו חזה הניתן לכהנים:
The Gemara elaborates: The Sages taught in a baraita: Which is the breast that must be given to the priests as a gift from every peace offering (see Leviticus 7:31)? This is the section that faces the ground, not the ribbed area on the sides. And lengthwise it extends below, when the animal is hung from the legs, until the neck, and above until the rumen. One cuts the two ribs nearest the head from the two sides of the animal from both directions, and this is the breast that is given to the priests.
ניקב קרום של מוח: רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו קרמא עילאה אע”ג דלא אינקיב תתאה ואמרי לה עד דאינקיב תתאה אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני וסימניך חייתא דמתנח ביה מוחא
§ The mishna states: If the membrane of the brain was perforated, the animal is a tereifa. The Gemara cites Rav and Shmuel, who both say: The brain is covered by two membranes, a thick outer membrane adjacent to the skull and a thin inner membrane adjacent to the brain. The animal is a tereifa if the outer membrane was perforated, even if the inner membrane was not perforated. And some say that the animal is not a tereifa unless the inner membrane was perforated as well. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says: And this is your mnemonic to remember the halakha: The bag in which the brain rests, i.e., the inner membrane.
אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי כנגדו בביצים ניכר א”ר שמעון בן פזי אמר ריב”ל משום בר קפרא מוח כל מה שבקדירה נדון כמוח התחיל למשוך נדון כחוט השדרה ומהיכן מתחיל לימשך אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מיפרשא לי מיניה דרבי יהושע בן לוי כמין שני
Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Even though the inner membrane of the brain is very thin and not easily visible, its equivalent in the testicles, which are also enclosed in a thin membrane, is conspicuous, as it has an appearance different from the testicles themselves. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says in the name of bar Kappara: With regard to the brain, everything inside the skull is considered part of the brain. From the point where it begins to extend like a cord out of the base of the skull, it is considered the spinal cord. And from where does it begin to be extended? Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani said: It was explained to me personally by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi himself: Protrusions similar to two
פולין יש מונחין על פי הקדרה מן הפולין ולפנים כלפנים מן הפולין ולחוץ כלחוץ ופולין עצמן איני יודע ומסתברא כלפנים
beans lie at the opening of the skull, where the spinal cord exits. From the beans inward, the nerve tissue is considered like the inside, i.e., the brain. Therefore, if its membrane is perforated, even minimally, the animal is a tereifa. From the beans outward, the nerve tissue is considered like the outside, i.e., the spinal cord. A perforation of the membrane in this area renders the animal a tereifa only if the spinal cord is mostly cut. And with regard to the area of the beans themselves, I do not know what the halakha is; but it stands to reason that it is considered like the inside.
רבי ירמיה בדק בעופא ואשכח כמין שני פולין מונחין על פי הקדרה:
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yirmeya inspected a bird and found protrusions similar to two beans lying on the opening of the skull.
ניקב הלב לבית חללו: בעי רבי זירא לבית חלל קטן או לבית חלל גדול א”ל אביי מאי תיבעי לך מי לא תנן ר”ש אומר עד שתנקב לבית הסמפונות ואמר רבה בר תחליפא אמר רבי ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב עד שתנקב לסמפון גדול
§ The mishna states: If the heart was perforated to its chamber, the animal is a tereifa. Rabbi Zeira raises a dilemma: Is the mishna referring to the small chamber within the heart or to the large chamber? Abaye said to him: What is your dilemma? Didn’t we learn in the mishna with regard to the lung: Rabbi Shimon says: It is not a tereifa unless it is perforated through to the bronchi? And Rabba bar Taḥlifa says that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba says that Rav says: Rabbi Shimon means that it is not a tereifa unless it is perforated through to the large bronchus. If so, it may be presumed that the mishna is referring to the large chamber of the heart as well.
הכי השתא התם לבית הסמפונות קתני להיכא דשפכי סמפונות כולהו והכא לבית חללו קתני מה לי חלל גדול מה לי חלל קטן
The Gemara responds: How can these cases be compared? There, the mishna teaches: To the bronchi [simponot], in the plural form, i.e., the one bronchus into which all the bronchi [simponot] empty out. But here, with regard to the heart, it teaches: To the chamber. What is it to me if this is a large chamber and what is it to me if it is a small chamber? The language does not indicate one or the other.
קנה הלב רב אמר במשהו ושמואל אמר ברובו
§ With regard to the aorta, the chief artery exiting the heart, Rav says: Like the heart itself, if it is perforated in any amount the animal is a tereifa. And Shmuel says: The animal is a tereifa only if the aorta is perforated in its majority.
הי ניהו קנה הלב אמר רבה בר יצחק אמר רב חלב שעל גבי דפנות דפנות סלקא דעתך אלא שעל גבי דופני ריאה
The Gemara asks: Which blood vessel is the aorta? Rabba bar Yitzḥak says that Rav says: This is the artery found in the fat on the sides. The Gemara asks: Can it enter your mind to say that this is referring to the sides of the animal, i.e., the ribs, which are not adjacent to the heart? Rather, this is referring to the artery covered in fat that exits the heart and passes on the sides of the lung.
אמר אמימר משמיה דרב נחמן תלתא קני הוו חד פריש לליבא וחד פריש לריאה וחד פריש לכבדא דריאה כריאה דכבדא ככבדא דליבא פליגי
Ameimar says in the name of Rav Naḥman: There are three ducts adjacent to one another in an animal’s chest. One separates to the heart, and one separates to the lung, and one separates to the liver. The duct of the lung is treated like the lung, and renders the animal a tereifa if perforated in any amount. The duct of the liver is treated like the liver, and only if it is completely missing does it render the animal a tereifa, in accordance with the mishna. As for the duct of the heart, the aorta, Rav and Shmuel disagree as to the measure of its perforation, as mentioned above.
מר בר חייא מתני איפכא דריאה ככבדא דכבדא כריאה דליבא פליגי
Mar bar Ḥiyya teaches the opposite: The duct of the lung is treated like the liver and renders the animal a tereifa only if it is completely missing. The duct of the liver is treated like the lung, and a perforation of any amount renders the animal a tereifa. And with regard to the duct of the heart, Rav and Shmuel disagree.
אזל רבי חייא בר יוסף אמרה לשמעתא דרב קמיה דשמואל א”ל אי הכי אמר אבא לא ידע בטרפות ולא כלום:
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef went and stated the halakha of Rav, that an aorta perforated in any amount renders an animal a tereifa, before Shmuel. Shmuel said to him: If Abba, i.e., Rav, actually said so, he knows nothing at all about tereifot.
נשבר השדרה: ת”ר חוט השדרה שנפסק ברובו דברי רבי רבי יעקב אומר אפילו ניקב
§ The mishna states: If the spinal column was broken and its cord was cut, the animal is a tereifa. With regard to this the Sages taught: If the spinal cord was cut in its majority, the animal is a tereifa. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Ya’akov says: It is a tereifa even if the spinal cord was only perforated.
הורה רבי כרבי יעקב אמר רב הונא אין הלכה כרבי יעקב
The Gemara notes: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi ruled in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya’akov that even a small perforation of the spinal cord renders the animal a tereifa. Rav Huna says: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya’akov.
וכמה רובו רב אמר רוב עורו ואמרי לה רוב מוחו
The Gemara asks: And how much is considered a majority of the spinal cord to render the animal a tereifa? Rav says: A majority of the circumference of its surrounding membranes, the meninges. And some say a majority of the nerve tissue of the spinal cord itself. In other words, even if the meninges are intact, the animal is a tereifa if a majority of the nerve tissue is cut.
מאן דאמר רוב מוחו כ”ש רוב עורו למאן דאמר רוב עורו רוב מוחו מאי
The Gemara notes: According to the one who says that the animal is a tereifa if a majority of the nerve tissue is severed, all the more so if a majority of the meninges is cut, since if the meninges, the protective membranes, are damaged, the nerve tissue itself will certainly be damaged soon thereafter. But according to the one who says that a tear in a majority of the meninges renders it a tereifa, what is the halakha in a case where only a majority of the nerve tissue was cut? Perhaps the intact membranes will keep the damage from spreading.
ת”ש דאמר ניולי אמר רב הונא רובו שאמרו רוב עורו מוח זה לא מעלה ולא מוריד
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof: As Nayyoli says that Rav Huna says: The majority of the spinal cord, which they said renders the animal a tereifa if cut, is the majority of the meninges. But this nerve tissue makes no difference.
רב נתן בר אבין הוה יתיב קמיה דרב בדק ברוב עורו וקא בדיק ברוב מוחו א”ל אם רוב עורו קיים מוח זה אינו מעלה ואינו מוריד
The Gemara relates that Rav Natan bar Avin was sitting before Rav. Rav Natan first checked the spinal cord to make sure that a majority of the meninges was intact, and then was checking to see that a majority of its nerve tissue was intact. Rav said to him: If a majority of the meninges is intact, this nerve tissue makes no difference.
אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי נתמרך פסול נתמסמס פסול איזוהי המרכה ואיזוהי המסמסה המרכה כל שנשפך כקיתון מסמסה כל שאינו יכול לעמוד
§ Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: If the spinal cord was liquefied [nitmareikh], the animal is unfit for consumption. Even if it softened [nitmasmeis], the animal is unfit, i.e., a tereifa. What is liquefaction, and what is softening? Liquefaction is any case in which the nerve tissue becomes liquid, and if the membrane is punctured it can be poured out like water from a jug. Softening is any case in which the nerve tissue cannot stand upright on its own and sags when it is not being supported.
בעי רבי ירמיה אינו יכול לעמוד מפני כבדו מאי תיקו בי רב אמרי נתמסמס פסול נתמזמז כשר מיתיבי רשב”א אומר בהמה שנתמזמז מוחה טרפה ההיא נתמסמס איתמר
Rabbi Yirmeya raises a dilemma: In a case where the spinal cord became unusually heavy such that it cannot stand upright due to its weight, but not due to softening or melting, what is the halakha? The Gemara responds: The question shall stand unresolved. In the study hall they say: If the spinal cord softened due to disease, the animal is unfit for consumption. But if some of its tissue softened and was emptied from the spinal cord, the animal remains kosher. The Gemara raises an objection based on a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: An animal whose nerve tissue was emptied [nitmazmez] from the spinal cord is a tereifa. The Gemara responds: That version of the baraita is incorrect. In fact, the word softened [nitmasmes] was stated, not the word emptied.
איני והא לוי הוה יתיב בי מסותא חזייא לההוא גברא דטרייה לרישיה אמר נתמזמז מוחיה דדין לאו דלא חיי אמר אביי לא לומר שאינו מוליד
The Gemara asks: Is that so, that an animal whose nerve tissue has dissolved is kosher? But didn’t it happen that Levi was sitting in the bathhouse, where he saw a certain man who banged his head severely, whereupon he said: This man’s nerve tissue has softened and been emptied? Is it not that Levi meant that the man cannot live? If so, the softening and emptying of the nerve tissue should render an animal a tereifa. Abaye said: No, he intended to say that the man cannot reproduce, since head trauma might lead to infertility.
עד היכן חוט השדרה אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל עד בין הפרשות
§ The Gemara asks: Until where does the spinal cord extend downward, such that if it is cut above that point the animal is a tereifa? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: Until the point between the branches of the spinal cord that split off behind the thighs.
רב דימי בר יצחק הוה קא בעי למיזל לבי חוזאי אתא לקמיה דרבי יהודה אמר ליה ליחוי לי מר בין הפרשות היכא א”ל זיל אייתי לי גדי ואחוי לך אייתי ליה גדי שמינה א”ל בליעה טפי ולא ידיע אייתי ליה כחוש א”ל בליטן טפי ולא ידיע
The Gemara recounts: Rav Dimi bar Yitzḥak wanted to go to Bei Ḥozai. He came before Rabbi Yehuda and said to him: Master, show me, where is the area between the branches to which Shmuel referred? Rabbi Yehuda said to him: Go bring me a kid and I will show you. Rav Dimi bar Yitzḥak brought him a choice kid with much fat. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: The location is buried very deep in the fat and is not recognizable. He brought Rabbi Yehuda a lean kid. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: The bones jut out very far, and the location is not recognizable.
א”ל תא אגמרך גמרא הכי אמר שמואל עד אחת טרפה שלישית כשרה שניה איני יודע
Rabbi Yehuda said to him: Come, I will teach you a tradition without showing you: This is what Shmuel said: There are three successive points around the same bone behind the pelvis at which branches diverge from the spinal cord. If the spinal cord is cut anywhere until the first gap between these branches, the animal is a tereifa. If it is severed anywhere after the third gap, i.e., after the third branch, the animal is kosher. If it was severed within the second gap, i.e., between these areas, I do not know the halakha.
Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, raises a dilemma:
Follow
