There is story highlighting the struggles of power between the rabbis of Israel and Babylonia at the beginning of the time period of the Amoraim – a story with Rabbi Yochanan, Reish Lakish and a student of Rav. The mishna lists which problems do not render an animal a treifa. If there is a list of what is and a list of what isn’t a tereifa, what about items that are not included in either list?
This month’s learning is sponsored by Marci Glazer in loving memory of her teacher and chevruta, Rachel Brodie, Rachel Aviva bat Devora Chana, on her 4th yahrzeit. “She brought her love of Torah to thousands of people in her all-too-short life. A lover of Midrash, she still invited me on this Daf Yomi journey.”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
English
עברית
0:00
0:00
0:00
0:00
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is sponsored by Marci Glazer in loving memory of her teacher and chevruta, Rachel Brodie, Rachel Aviva bat Devora Chana, on her 4th yahrzeit. “She brought her love of Torah to thousands of people in her all-too-short life. A lover of Midrash, she still invited me on this Daf Yomi journey.”
Chullin 54
וֶושֶׁט נְקוּבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. קָנֶה נְקוּבָתוֹ בִּכְאִיסָּר, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּכַמָּה? בָּתַר דְּבַעְיָא הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. מַאי טַעְמָא? זִיהֲרֵיהּ מִקְלָא קָלֵי וְאָזֵיל.
If the gullet is perforated in any amount, the animal is a tereifa, as taught in the mishna (42a). Therefore, if the gullet is clawed and any amount of its flesh reddens, the animal is a tereifa as well. But a perforation of the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa only where it is the size of an issar. If clawed, what amount of its flesh must redden in order to render it a tereifa? After he raised the dilemma he then resolved it: Both this and that render the animal a tereifa if any amount of its flesh reddened. What is the reason for this? It is because its venom burns continuously around the circumference of the hole and widens it.
יָתֵיב רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara relates: Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta sat before Rav Naḥman, and he was sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which the Sages said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines to see that the flesh has not reddened. Rav Naḥman said to him: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected over its entire body, from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh.
מַאי כַּפָּא? אִילֵּימָא כַּפָּא דִּידָא – הַיְינוּ כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים, אֶלָּא מִכַּפָּא דְּמוֹחָא עַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the hollow? If we say that it is the hollow of the foreleg, i.e., its shoulder, then the area between it and the thigh is the same as the area adjacent to the intestines, and Rav Naḥman has said nothing new. Rather, Rav Naḥman referred to the area from the hollow of the brain, i.e., the skull, to the thigh.
כִּי סְלֵיק רַב חִיָּיא בַּר יוֹסֵף, אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ דְּיָתְבִי וְקָאָמְרִי: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. אֲמַר לְהוּ: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מַנּוּ רַב וּמַנּוּ רַב? וְלָא יָדַעְנָא לֵיהּ!
The Gemara relates that when Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish were sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which they said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines. Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef said to them: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh. Reish Lakish said to him: Who is this Rav, and who is this Rav? I do not know who he is.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וְלָא נְהִירָא לֵיהּ לְאוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אֶת רַבִּי רַבָּה, וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא? וְהָאֱלֹהִים! כׇּל אוֹתָן שָׁנִים שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד בִּישִׁיבָה, אֲנִי שִׁמַּשְׁתִּי בַּעֲמִידָה, וּמַאן גְּבַר? הוּא גְּבַר בְּכוֹלָּא.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: But don’t you remember that student who served the great Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya and studied under them? But by God! All those years that this student served in the yeshiva, he was held to be one of the most important students and was allowed to sit during study, while I held a lower status and served while standing up. And who was greater? He was greater in all things, in Torah and piety.
מִיָּד פָּתַח רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ וַאֲמַר: בְּרַם זָכוּר אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ לַטּוֹב, שֶׁאָמְרוּ שְׁמוּעָה מִפִּיו: שְׁמוּטָה וּשְׁחוּטָה – כְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Immediately, Reish Lakish began to speak and said: Indeed [beram], that man, Rav, is remembered for the good, as they said this halakha in his name: If an animal’s windpipe is dislocated from the throat, and it has already been slaughtered, and it is uncertain whether it was dislocated before or after slaughter, the animal is kosher, as it is impossible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered. A dislocated windpipe would have slipped away from the knife, and therefore the animal must have been slaughtered while it was still attached.
וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר: יָבִיא וְיַקִּיף.
And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This is not certain; rather, one should bring the windpipe, make a new slit in it, and compare the two slits. If they are similar, then the first slit by the slaughtering knife was also made after the windpipe was dislocated, and the animal is a tereifa. If they are different, then the slaughter preceded the dislocation of the windpipe and the animal is kosher.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים, אֲבָל תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים וְשָׁחַט – אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Rav Naḥman said: The Sages taught that it is impossible to slaughter a dislocated windpipe only in cases where he did not grip the simanim during slaughter. But if he gripped the simanim and slaughtered the animal, then it is possible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered, since it will not slip away from the knife.
זֶה הַכְּלָל, לְאֵתוֹיֵי מַאי? לְאֵתוֹיֵי שַׁב שְׁמַעְתָּתָא.
§ The mishna states: This is the principle: Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live for an extended period is a tereifa. The Gemara asks: What case does this principle add that was not previously mentioned? The Gemara responds: It was stated to add seven halakhot of tereifot taught by amora’im and not listed in the mishna. These cases are enumerated on 42b.
דְּבֵי יוֹסֵף רִישְׁבָּא מָחוּ בְּגִידָא נַשְׁיָא וְקָטְלִי, אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
The Gemara recounts: The men of the house of Yosef the hunter would strike the sciatic nerve of an animal with an arrow and kill it that way. In other words, the animal would die from that wound. They came before Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira to ask if an animal with an injured sciatic nerve is a tereifa, which is relevant if the animal was slaughtered before it died. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted, and the Sages mentioned no such tereifa.
רַב פָּפָּא בַּר אַבָּא רִישְׁבָּא, מָחוּ בְּכוּלְיָא וְקָטְלִי. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַבָּא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
Likewise, the men of Rav Pappa bar Abba the hunter would strike an animal in the kidney with an arrow and kill it that way. They came before Rabbi Abba to ask if such an animal is a tereifa. Rabbi Abba said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted.
וְהָא קָא חָזֵינַן דְּקָא מֵתָה! גְּמִירִי דְּאִי בָּדְרִי לַהּ סַמָּא, חַיָּיא.
The Gemara objects: But we see that they die. Isn’t this an indication that the animal is a tereifa? The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that in all these cases, if one were to scatter medicine on the wound, the animal would live. An animal is not considered a tereifa unless it cannot be healed.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה, נִיקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה. עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: עַד כְּאִיסָּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. נִפְחֲתָה הַגּוּלְגּוֹלֶת וְלֹא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ, נִיקַּב הַלֵּב וְלֹא לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, נִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁדְרָה וְלֹא נִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, נִיטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּיר הֵימֶנָּה כְּזַיִת.
MISHNA: And these, despite their condition, are kosher in an animal: If its windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise. How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. If the skull was fractured but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, it is kosher. If the heart was perforated and the perforation did not reach its chamber, or if the spinal column was broken but its cord was not cut, or if the liver was removed and an olive-bulk of it remained, it is kosher.
הֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת, שֶׁנִּיקְּבוּ זֶה לְתוֹךְ זֶה. נִיטַּל הַטְּחוֹל, נִיטְּלוּ הַכְּלָיוֹת, נִיטַּל לֶחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן, נִיטְּלָה הָאֵם שֶׁלָּהּ, וַחֲרוּתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. הַגְּלוּדָה – רַבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין.
Additionally, it is kosher if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated one into the other. If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys were removed, or if its lower jaw was removed, or if its womb was removed, or if its lung shriveled by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. In the case of an animal whose hide was removed, Rabbi Meir deems it kosher, and the Rabbis deem it a tereifa and unfit for consumption.
גְּמָ׳ אִתְּמַר: רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ דַּוְקָא.
GEMARA: The mishna begins: And these are kosher, while the previous mishna begins: These are tereifot. With regard to this, it was stated that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The tanna intended the phrase: These are tereifot, specifically, teaching that an animal is kosher in another case. The list of kosher cases here is therefore not exhaustive. And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says that the tanna intended the phrase: These are kosher, specifically, teaching that an animal is a tereifa in another case. The list of tereifot at the beginning of the chapter is therefore not exhaustive.
בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? בִּדְרַב מַתְנָא, דְּאָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״,
The Gemara explains: With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree with regard to the statement of Rav Mattana, as Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who says that the phrase: These are tereifot, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot and taught afterward: This is the principle, to add cases that were not stated explicitly;
וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּאָתְיָא בְּזֶה הַכְּלָל, מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּדָמְיָא לִנְטוּלֵי. תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּטְרֵפָה, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא כְּשֵׁרָה.
and the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana, where the end of the thigh is dislocated, ostensibly comes under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it renders the animal a tereifa as well. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is similar to the cases of removed organs that render the animal a tereifa. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are tereifot, at the beginning of the mishna, to emphasize that it is only these that render an animal a tereifa, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is kosher.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּלָא אָתְיָא בְּ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, מַאי טַעְמָא? לָאו לִנְקוּבֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלָא לִפְסוּקֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלִנְטוּלֵי נָמֵי לָא דָּמְיָא, תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּכְשֵׁרוֹת, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא טְרֵפָה.
And according to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who says that the phrase: These are kosher, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot, and taught afterward that this is the principle. And the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana ostensibly does not come under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it does not render the animal a tereifa. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is not similar to cases of perforated organs, and it is not similar to cases of cut organs, such as the windpipe, and it is not similar to cases of removed organs. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are kosher, to emphasize that it is only these that are kosher, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is a tereifa.
גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה, וְרָבָא אָמַר: כְּשֵׁרָה, וְאִי אִיפְּסִיק נִיבֵיהּ – טְרֵפָה. וְהִלְכְתָא: אִיפְּסִיק נָמֵי כְּשֵׁרָה, עַד דְּמִתְעַכְלָא אִתְעֲכוֹלֵי.
The Gemara addresses the matter itself: Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. And Rava said: The animal is kosher, but if its sinew holding the bone in place is cut, it is a tereifa. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is: Even if the sinew is cut, the animal is still kosher, unless the sinew decomposed, in which case the animal is a tereifa.
עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? אָמַר זְעֵירִי: אַתּוּן דְּלָא מִיתְחֲמֵי לְכוֹן שִׁיעוּרָא, שִׁיעוּרֵיהּ בְּדִינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה, וְהָוֵי כִּפְשִׁיטָא זוּטַרְתִּי, וּמִשְׁתַּכְחָא בֵּינֵי פְּשִׁיטֵי דְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. Ze’eiri, who came from Eretz Yisrael, said with regard to this: You, who are not familiar with the measure of an Italian issar, because it is not used in Babylonia, should estimate its measure as a Kurdish dinar. And it is like a small peruta coin and can be found among the perutot of Pumbedita.
אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָא פָּתוּרָאָה: עִילָּא מִינַּאי הֲוָה קָאֵי בַּר נַפָּחָא, וּבְעָא מִינַּי דִּינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה לְשַׁעוֹרֵי בֵּיהּ טְרֵיפְתָא, וּבְעַי לְמֵיקָם מִקַּמֵּיהּ וְלָא שְׁבַקְנִי. אָמַר לִי: שֵׁב בְּנִי שֵׁב, אֵין בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת רַשָּׁאִין לַעֲמוֹד מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעֲסוּקִין בִּמְלַאכְתָּם.
Rabbi Ḥana the money changer said: Bar Nappaḥa, i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, was standing over me, and he requested of me a Kurdish dinar with which to measure tereifot, in accordance with the statement of Ze’eiri. And I wanted to rise before him out of respect, but he did not let me. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to me: Sit, my son, sit. Tradesmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars when they are engaged in their work.
וְלָא? וְהָתְנַן: כׇּל בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת עוֹמְדִים מִפְּנֵיהֶם, וְשׁוֹאֲלִין בִּשְׁלוֹמָן, וְאוֹמְרִין לָהֶם: אַחֵינוּ אַנְשֵׁי מְקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי בּוֹאֲכֶם בְּשָׁלוֹם!
The Gemara asks: And are tradesmen not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Bikkurim 3:3): When the pilgrims bring their first fruits to Jerusalem, all the tradesmen stand before them, and greet them, and say to them: Our brothers from such and such place, welcome?
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה חֲבִיבָה מִצְוָה בִּשְׁעָתָהּ, שֶׁהֲרֵי מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Yes, they stand before those bringing first fruits, but they do not stand before Torah scholars. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin says: Come and see how beloved is a mitzva performed in its proper time, as the tradesmen stand before those who brought first fruits, while they do not stand before Torah scholars.
מִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא נִמְצָא מַכְשִׁילָן לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא.
The Gemara rejects the statement of Rabbi Yosei bar Avin: From where does one know that they rise out of respect? Perhaps the tradesmen stand only in order not to cause those bringing first fruits to fail and sin in the future. That is, if the tradesmen do not treat those bringing the first fruits with great respect, they may not make the effort to travel to Jerusalem in a subsequent year.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: כְּסֶלַע – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּסֶלַע, כְּאִיסָּר – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּאִיסָּר.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. With regard to this, Rav Naḥman says: Whenever the Sages specify the measure as that of a sela, e.g., with regard to a damaged skull for purposes of tereifot, they mean that even an area exactly the size of a sela is treated as more than a sela. Likewise, when they specify the measure as that of an issar, they mean that an area exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were more than an issar.
אַלְמָא קָסָבַר רַב נַחְמָן: ״עַד״, וְלֹא עַד בַּכְּלָל.
Since Rav Naḥman holds that a perforation exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were larger than an issar, he must hold that such a perforation in the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa. The Gemara therefore infers: Apparently, Rav Naḥman holds that whenever the Sages use the word: Until, it means until and not including the measure, as the mishna states that an animal with a perforated windpipe is kosher until the perforation reaches the size of an issar.
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: חֶבֶל הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַמִּטָּה עַד חֲמִשָּׁה טְפָחִים – טָהוֹר. מַאי לָאו חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַטָּה? לֹא, חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naḥman from a mishna (Kelim 19:2): The end of a rope that extends from a rope bed is not susceptible to ritual impurity until it is five handbreadths long. If the bed becomes impure, the rope remains pure, because it has no use and is therefore not considered part of the bed. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly five handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that amount? If so, the word: Until, means until and including the exact measure. The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly five handbreadths long is like a rope whose length is above that amount.
תָּא שְׁמַע: מֵחֲמִשָּׁה וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה – טָמֵא. מַאי לָאו עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַטָּה? לָא, עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the continuation of the mishna: If the end of the rope was of any length from five handbreadths until ten, it is susceptible to impurity. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that? The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated like a rope whose length is above that, and it is not susceptible to impurity.
תָּא שְׁמַע: הַדַּקִּין שֶׁבִּכְלִי חֶרֶס, הֵן וְקַרְקְרוֹתֵיהֶן וְדוֹפְנוֹתֵיהֶם, יוֹשְׁבִין שֶׁלֹּא מְסוּמָּכִין –
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from another mishna (Kelim 2:2): With regard to the smallest of earthenware vessels, if they, or even their broken-off bases or sides, can sit, i.e., remain upright, without being supported,
Follow 
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
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.
When the new cycle began, I thought, If not now, when? I’d just turned 72. I feel like a tourist on a tour bus passing astonishing scenery each day. Rabbanit Michelle is my beloved tour guide. When the cycle ends, I’ll be 80. I pray that I’ll have strength and mind to continue the journey to glimpse a little more. My grandchildren think having a daf-learning savta is cool!
Wendy Dickstein
Jerusalem, 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
In January 2020 on a Shabbaton to Baltimore I heard about the new cycle of Daf Yomi after the siyum celebration in NYC stadium. I started to read “ a daily dose of Talmud “ and really enjoyed it . It led me to google “ do Orthodox women study Talmud? “ and found HADRAN! Since then I listen to the podcast every morning, participate in classes and siyum. I love to learn, this is amazing! Thank you
Sandrine Simons
Atlanta, United States
I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!
Dena Lehrman
אפרת, Israel
Jill Shames
Jerusalem, Israel
When we heard that R. Michelle was starting daf yomi, my 11-year-old suggested that I go. Little did she know that she would lose me every morning from then on. I remember standing at the Farbers’ door, almost too shy to enter. After that first class, I said that I would come the next day but couldn’t commit to more. A decade later, I still look forward to learning from R. Michelle every morning.
Ruth Leah Kahan
Ra’anana, Israel
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
My Daf journey began in August 2012 after participating in the Siyum Hashas where I was blessed as an “enabler” of others. Galvanized into my own learning I recited the Hadran on Shas in January 2020 with Rabbanit Michelle. That Siyum was a highlight in my life. Now, on round two, Daf has become my spiritual anchor to which I attribute manifold blessings.
Rina Goldberg
Englewood NJ, United States
About a year into learning more about Judaism on a path to potential conversion, I saw an article about the upcoming Siyum HaShas in January of 2020. My curiosity was piqued and I immediately started investigating what learning the Daf actually meant. Daily learning? Just what I wanted. Seven and a half years? I love a challenge! So I dove in head first and I’ve enjoyed every moment!!
Nickie Matthews
Blacksburg, United States
I started learning Jan 2020 when I heard the new cycle was starting. I had tried during the last cycle and didn’t make it past a few weeks. Learning online from old men didn’t speak to my soul and I knew Talmud had to be a soul journey for me. Enter Hadran! Talmud from Rabbanit Michelle Farber from a woman’s perspective, a mother’s perspective and a modern perspective. Motivated to continue!
Keren Carter
Brentwood, California, United States
In early 2020, I began the process of a stem cell transplant. The required extreme isolation forced me to leave work and normal life but gave me time to delve into Jewish text study. I did not feel isolated. I began Daf Yomi at the start of this cycle, with family members joining me online from my hospital room. I’ve used my newly granted time to to engage, grow and connect through this learning.
Reena Slovin
Worcester, United States
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Caroline Ben-Ari
Karmiel, Israel
I’ve been wanting to do Daf Yomi for years, but always wanted to start at the beginning and not in the middle of things. When the opportunity came in 2020, I decided: “this is now the time!” I’ve been posting my journey daily on social media, tracking my progress (#DafYomi); now it’s fully integrated into my daily routines. I’ve also inspired my partner to join, too!
Joséphine Altzman
Teaneck, United States
The first month I learned Daf Yomi by myself in secret, because I wasn’t sure how my husband would react, but after the siyyum on Masechet Brachot I discovered Hadran and now sometimes my husband listens to the daf with me. He and I also learn mishnayot together and are constantly finding connections between the different masechtot.
Laura Warshawsky
Silver Spring, Maryland, United States
I decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.
Yafit Fishbach
Memphis, Tennessee, United States
I LOVE learning the Daf. I started with Shabbat. I join the morning Zoom with Reb Michelle and it totally grounds my day. When Corona hit us in Israel, I decided that I would use the Daf to keep myself sane, especially during the days when we could not venture out more than 300 m from our home. Now my husband and I have so much new material to talk about! It really is the best part of my day!
Batsheva Pava
Hashmonaim, Israel
Attending the Siyyum in Jerusalem 26 months ago inspired me to become part of this community of learners. So many aspects of Jewish life have been illuminated by what we have learned in Seder Moed. My day is not complete without daf Yomi. I am so grateful to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Community.
Nancy Kolodny
Newton, United States
Margo
I started my Talmud journey in 7th grade at Akiba Jewish Day School in Chicago. I started my Daf Yomi journey after hearing Erica Brown speak at the Hadran Siyum about marking the passage of time through Daf Yomi.
Carolyn
I started my Talmud journey post-college in NY with a few classes. I started my Daf Yomi journey after the Hadran Siyum, which inspired both my son and myself.
Carolyn Hochstadter and Margo Kossoff Shizgal
Merion Station, USA
Beit Shemesh, Israel
I started learning at the start of this cycle, and quickly fell in love. It has become such an important part of my day, enriching every part of my life.
Naomi Niederhoffer
Toronto, Canada
תמיד רציתי. למדתי גמרא בבית ספר בטורונטו קנדה. עליתי ארצה ולמדתי שזה לא מקובל. הופתעתי.
יצאתי לגימלאות לפני שנתיים וזה מאפשר את המחוייבות לדף יומי.
עבורי ההתמדה בלימוד מעגן אותי בקשר שלי ליהדות. אני תמיד מחפשת ותמיד. מוצאת מקור לקשר. ללימוד חדש ומחדש. קשר עם נשים לומדות מעמיק את החוויה ומשמעותית מאוד.
Vitti Kones
מיתר, ישראל
Chullin 54
וֶושֶׁט נְקוּבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. קָנֶה נְקוּבָתוֹ בִּכְאִיסָּר, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּכַמָּה? בָּתַר דְּבַעְיָא הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. מַאי טַעְמָא? זִיהֲרֵיהּ מִקְלָא קָלֵי וְאָזֵיל.
If the gullet is perforated in any amount, the animal is a tereifa, as taught in the mishna (42a). Therefore, if the gullet is clawed and any amount of its flesh reddens, the animal is a tereifa as well. But a perforation of the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa only where it is the size of an issar. If clawed, what amount of its flesh must redden in order to render it a tereifa? After he raised the dilemma he then resolved it: Both this and that render the animal a tereifa if any amount of its flesh reddened. What is the reason for this? It is because its venom burns continuously around the circumference of the hole and widens it.
יָתֵיב רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara relates: Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta sat before Rav Naḥman, and he was sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which the Sages said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines to see that the flesh has not reddened. Rav Naḥman said to him: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected over its entire body, from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh.
מַאי כַּפָּא? אִילֵּימָא כַּפָּא דִּידָא – הַיְינוּ כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים, אֶלָּא מִכַּפָּא דְּמוֹחָא עַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the hollow? If we say that it is the hollow of the foreleg, i.e., its shoulder, then the area between it and the thigh is the same as the area adjacent to the intestines, and Rav Naḥman has said nothing new. Rather, Rav Naḥman referred to the area from the hollow of the brain, i.e., the skull, to the thigh.
כִּי סְלֵיק רַב חִיָּיא בַּר יוֹסֵף, אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ דְּיָתְבִי וְקָאָמְרִי: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. אֲמַר לְהוּ: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מַנּוּ רַב וּמַנּוּ רַב? וְלָא יָדַעְנָא לֵיהּ!
The Gemara relates that when Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish were sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which they said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines. Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef said to them: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh. Reish Lakish said to him: Who is this Rav, and who is this Rav? I do not know who he is.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וְלָא נְהִירָא לֵיהּ לְאוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אֶת רַבִּי רַבָּה, וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא? וְהָאֱלֹהִים! כׇּל אוֹתָן שָׁנִים שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד בִּישִׁיבָה, אֲנִי שִׁמַּשְׁתִּי בַּעֲמִידָה, וּמַאן גְּבַר? הוּא גְּבַר בְּכוֹלָּא.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: But don’t you remember that student who served the great Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya and studied under them? But by God! All those years that this student served in the yeshiva, he was held to be one of the most important students and was allowed to sit during study, while I held a lower status and served while standing up. And who was greater? He was greater in all things, in Torah and piety.
מִיָּד פָּתַח רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ וַאֲמַר: בְּרַם זָכוּר אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ לַטּוֹב, שֶׁאָמְרוּ שְׁמוּעָה מִפִּיו: שְׁמוּטָה וּשְׁחוּטָה – כְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Immediately, Reish Lakish began to speak and said: Indeed [beram], that man, Rav, is remembered for the good, as they said this halakha in his name: If an animal’s windpipe is dislocated from the throat, and it has already been slaughtered, and it is uncertain whether it was dislocated before or after slaughter, the animal is kosher, as it is impossible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered. A dislocated windpipe would have slipped away from the knife, and therefore the animal must have been slaughtered while it was still attached.
וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר: יָבִיא וְיַקִּיף.
And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This is not certain; rather, one should bring the windpipe, make a new slit in it, and compare the two slits. If they are similar, then the first slit by the slaughtering knife was also made after the windpipe was dislocated, and the animal is a tereifa. If they are different, then the slaughter preceded the dislocation of the windpipe and the animal is kosher.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים, אֲבָל תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים וְשָׁחַט – אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Rav Naḥman said: The Sages taught that it is impossible to slaughter a dislocated windpipe only in cases where he did not grip the simanim during slaughter. But if he gripped the simanim and slaughtered the animal, then it is possible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered, since it will not slip away from the knife.
זֶה הַכְּלָל, לְאֵתוֹיֵי מַאי? לְאֵתוֹיֵי שַׁב שְׁמַעְתָּתָא.
§ The mishna states: This is the principle: Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live for an extended period is a tereifa. The Gemara asks: What case does this principle add that was not previously mentioned? The Gemara responds: It was stated to add seven halakhot of tereifot taught by amora’im and not listed in the mishna. These cases are enumerated on 42b.
דְּבֵי יוֹסֵף רִישְׁבָּא מָחוּ בְּגִידָא נַשְׁיָא וְקָטְלִי, אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
The Gemara recounts: The men of the house of Yosef the hunter would strike the sciatic nerve of an animal with an arrow and kill it that way. In other words, the animal would die from that wound. They came before Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira to ask if an animal with an injured sciatic nerve is a tereifa, which is relevant if the animal was slaughtered before it died. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted, and the Sages mentioned no such tereifa.
רַב פָּפָּא בַּר אַבָּא רִישְׁבָּא, מָחוּ בְּכוּלְיָא וְקָטְלִי. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַבָּא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
Likewise, the men of Rav Pappa bar Abba the hunter would strike an animal in the kidney with an arrow and kill it that way. They came before Rabbi Abba to ask if such an animal is a tereifa. Rabbi Abba said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted.
וְהָא קָא חָזֵינַן דְּקָא מֵתָה! גְּמִירִי דְּאִי בָּדְרִי לַהּ סַמָּא, חַיָּיא.
The Gemara objects: But we see that they die. Isn’t this an indication that the animal is a tereifa? The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that in all these cases, if one were to scatter medicine on the wound, the animal would live. An animal is not considered a tereifa unless it cannot be healed.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה, נִיקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה. עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: עַד כְּאִיסָּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. נִפְחֲתָה הַגּוּלְגּוֹלֶת וְלֹא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ, נִיקַּב הַלֵּב וְלֹא לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, נִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁדְרָה וְלֹא נִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, נִיטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּיר הֵימֶנָּה כְּזַיִת.
MISHNA: And these, despite their condition, are kosher in an animal: If its windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise. How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. If the skull was fractured but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, it is kosher. If the heart was perforated and the perforation did not reach its chamber, or if the spinal column was broken but its cord was not cut, or if the liver was removed and an olive-bulk of it remained, it is kosher.
הֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת, שֶׁנִּיקְּבוּ זֶה לְתוֹךְ זֶה. נִיטַּל הַטְּחוֹל, נִיטְּלוּ הַכְּלָיוֹת, נִיטַּל לֶחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן, נִיטְּלָה הָאֵם שֶׁלָּהּ, וַחֲרוּתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. הַגְּלוּדָה – רַבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין.
Additionally, it is kosher if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated one into the other. If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys were removed, or if its lower jaw was removed, or if its womb was removed, or if its lung shriveled by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. In the case of an animal whose hide was removed, Rabbi Meir deems it kosher, and the Rabbis deem it a tereifa and unfit for consumption.
גְּמָ׳ אִתְּמַר: רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ דַּוְקָא.
GEMARA: The mishna begins: And these are kosher, while the previous mishna begins: These are tereifot. With regard to this, it was stated that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The tanna intended the phrase: These are tereifot, specifically, teaching that an animal is kosher in another case. The list of kosher cases here is therefore not exhaustive. And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says that the tanna intended the phrase: These are kosher, specifically, teaching that an animal is a tereifa in another case. The list of tereifot at the beginning of the chapter is therefore not exhaustive.
בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? בִּדְרַב מַתְנָא, דְּאָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״,
The Gemara explains: With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree with regard to the statement of Rav Mattana, as Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who says that the phrase: These are tereifot, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot and taught afterward: This is the principle, to add cases that were not stated explicitly;
וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּאָתְיָא בְּזֶה הַכְּלָל, מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּדָמְיָא לִנְטוּלֵי. תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּטְרֵפָה, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא כְּשֵׁרָה.
and the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana, where the end of the thigh is dislocated, ostensibly comes under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it renders the animal a tereifa as well. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is similar to the cases of removed organs that render the animal a tereifa. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are tereifot, at the beginning of the mishna, to emphasize that it is only these that render an animal a tereifa, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is kosher.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּלָא אָתְיָא בְּ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, מַאי טַעְמָא? לָאו לִנְקוּבֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלָא לִפְסוּקֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלִנְטוּלֵי נָמֵי לָא דָּמְיָא, תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּכְשֵׁרוֹת, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא טְרֵפָה.
And according to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who says that the phrase: These are kosher, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot, and taught afterward that this is the principle. And the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana ostensibly does not come under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it does not render the animal a tereifa. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is not similar to cases of perforated organs, and it is not similar to cases of cut organs, such as the windpipe, and it is not similar to cases of removed organs. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are kosher, to emphasize that it is only these that are kosher, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is a tereifa.
גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה, וְרָבָא אָמַר: כְּשֵׁרָה, וְאִי אִיפְּסִיק נִיבֵיהּ – טְרֵפָה. וְהִלְכְתָא: אִיפְּסִיק נָמֵי כְּשֵׁרָה, עַד דְּמִתְעַכְלָא אִתְעֲכוֹלֵי.
The Gemara addresses the matter itself: Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. And Rava said: The animal is kosher, but if its sinew holding the bone in place is cut, it is a tereifa. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is: Even if the sinew is cut, the animal is still kosher, unless the sinew decomposed, in which case the animal is a tereifa.
עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? אָמַר זְעֵירִי: אַתּוּן דְּלָא מִיתְחֲמֵי לְכוֹן שִׁיעוּרָא, שִׁיעוּרֵיהּ בְּדִינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה, וְהָוֵי כִּפְשִׁיטָא זוּטַרְתִּי, וּמִשְׁתַּכְחָא בֵּינֵי פְּשִׁיטֵי דְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. Ze’eiri, who came from Eretz Yisrael, said with regard to this: You, who are not familiar with the measure of an Italian issar, because it is not used in Babylonia, should estimate its measure as a Kurdish dinar. And it is like a small peruta coin and can be found among the perutot of Pumbedita.
אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָא פָּתוּרָאָה: עִילָּא מִינַּאי הֲוָה קָאֵי בַּר נַפָּחָא, וּבְעָא מִינַּי דִּינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה לְשַׁעוֹרֵי בֵּיהּ טְרֵיפְתָא, וּבְעַי לְמֵיקָם מִקַּמֵּיהּ וְלָא שְׁבַקְנִי. אָמַר לִי: שֵׁב בְּנִי שֵׁב, אֵין בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת רַשָּׁאִין לַעֲמוֹד מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעֲסוּקִין בִּמְלַאכְתָּם.
Rabbi Ḥana the money changer said: Bar Nappaḥa, i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, was standing over me, and he requested of me a Kurdish dinar with which to measure tereifot, in accordance with the statement of Ze’eiri. And I wanted to rise before him out of respect, but he did not let me. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to me: Sit, my son, sit. Tradesmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars when they are engaged in their work.
וְלָא? וְהָתְנַן: כׇּל בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת עוֹמְדִים מִפְּנֵיהֶם, וְשׁוֹאֲלִין בִּשְׁלוֹמָן, וְאוֹמְרִין לָהֶם: אַחֵינוּ אַנְשֵׁי מְקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי בּוֹאֲכֶם בְּשָׁלוֹם!
The Gemara asks: And are tradesmen not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Bikkurim 3:3): When the pilgrims bring their first fruits to Jerusalem, all the tradesmen stand before them, and greet them, and say to them: Our brothers from such and such place, welcome?
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה חֲבִיבָה מִצְוָה בִּשְׁעָתָהּ, שֶׁהֲרֵי מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Yes, they stand before those bringing first fruits, but they do not stand before Torah scholars. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin says: Come and see how beloved is a mitzva performed in its proper time, as the tradesmen stand before those who brought first fruits, while they do not stand before Torah scholars.
מִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא נִמְצָא מַכְשִׁילָן לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא.
The Gemara rejects the statement of Rabbi Yosei bar Avin: From where does one know that they rise out of respect? Perhaps the tradesmen stand only in order not to cause those bringing first fruits to fail and sin in the future. That is, if the tradesmen do not treat those bringing the first fruits with great respect, they may not make the effort to travel to Jerusalem in a subsequent year.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: כְּסֶלַע – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּסֶלַע, כְּאִיסָּר – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּאִיסָּר.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. With regard to this, Rav Naḥman says: Whenever the Sages specify the measure as that of a sela, e.g., with regard to a damaged skull for purposes of tereifot, they mean that even an area exactly the size of a sela is treated as more than a sela. Likewise, when they specify the measure as that of an issar, they mean that an area exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were more than an issar.
אַלְמָא קָסָבַר רַב נַחְמָן: ״עַד״, וְלֹא עַד בַּכְּלָל.
Since Rav Naḥman holds that a perforation exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were larger than an issar, he must hold that such a perforation in the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa. The Gemara therefore infers: Apparently, Rav Naḥman holds that whenever the Sages use the word: Until, it means until and not including the measure, as the mishna states that an animal with a perforated windpipe is kosher until the perforation reaches the size of an issar.
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: חֶבֶל הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַמִּטָּה עַד חֲמִשָּׁה טְפָחִים – טָהוֹר. מַאי לָאו חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַטָּה? לֹא, חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naḥman from a mishna (Kelim 19:2): The end of a rope that extends from a rope bed is not susceptible to ritual impurity until it is five handbreadths long. If the bed becomes impure, the rope remains pure, because it has no use and is therefore not considered part of the bed. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly five handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that amount? If so, the word: Until, means until and including the exact measure. The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly five handbreadths long is like a rope whose length is above that amount.
תָּא שְׁמַע: מֵחֲמִשָּׁה וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה – טָמֵא. מַאי לָאו עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַטָּה? לָא, עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the continuation of the mishna: If the end of the rope was of any length from five handbreadths until ten, it is susceptible to impurity. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that? The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated like a rope whose length is above that, and it is not susceptible to impurity.
תָּא שְׁמַע: הַדַּקִּין שֶׁבִּכְלִי חֶרֶס, הֵן וְקַרְקְרוֹתֵיהֶן וְדוֹפְנוֹתֵיהֶם, יוֹשְׁבִין שֶׁלֹּא מְסוּמָּכִין –
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from another mishna (Kelim 2:2): With regard to the smallest of earthenware vessels, if they, or even their broken-off bases or sides, can sit, i.e., remain upright, without being supported,
Follow
