Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

January 20, 2019 | ื™ืดื“ ื‘ืฉื‘ื˜ ืชืฉืขืดื˜

  • This monthโ€™s learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. โ€œAnd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.โ€

Chullin 54

There is story highlighting the struggles of power between the rabbis of Israel andย  Babylonia at the beginning of the time period of the Amoraim – a story with Rabbi Yochanan,ย Reishย Lakish and a student of Rav. The mishna lists which problems do not render an animal a treifa. If there is a listย of what is and a list of what isn’t a tereifa, what about items that are not included in either list?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

ื•ื•ืฉื˜ ื ืงื•ื‘ืชื• ื‘ืžืฉื”ื• ื“ืจื•ืกืชื• ื‘ืžืฉื”ื• ืงื ื” ื ืงื•ื‘ืชื• ื‘ื›ืื™ืกืจ ื“ืจื•ืกืชื• ื‘ื›ืžื” ื‘ืชืจ ื“ื‘ืขื™ื ื”ื“ืจ ืคืฉื˜ื” ืื—ื“ ื–ื” ื•ืื—ื“ ื–ื” ื‘ืžืฉื”ื• ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ื–ื™ื”ืจื™ื” ืžืงืœื ืงืœื™ ื•ืื–ื™ืœ

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.

ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืจื‘ ื™ืฆื—ืง ื‘ืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืจ ืžืจืชื ืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื•ื™ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืงืืžืจ ื“ืจื•ืกื” ืฉืืžืจื• ืฆืจื™ื›ื” ื‘ื“ื™ืงื” ื›ื ื’ื“ ื‘ื ื™ ืžืขื™ื™ื ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ืืžืจ ื”ืืœื”ื™ื ืžื•ืจื™ ื‘ื” ืจื‘ ืžื›ืคื ื•ืขื“ ืื˜ืžื

The Gemara relates: Rav Yitzแธฅak bar Shmuel bar Marta sat before Rav Naแธฅman, 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 Naแธฅman 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.

ืžืื™ ื›ืคื ืื™ืœื™ืžื ื›ืคื ื“ื™ื“ื ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื›ื ื’ื“ ื‘ื ื™ ืžืขื™ื™ื ืืœื ืžื›ืคื ื“ืžื•ื—ื ืขื“ ืื˜ืžื

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 Naแธฅman has said nothing new. Rather, Rav Naแธฅman referred to the area from the hollow of the brain, i.e., the skull, to the thigh.

ื›ื™ ืกืœื™ืง ืจื‘ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืืฉื›ื—ื™ื ื”ื• ืœืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื•ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ื“ื™ืชื‘ื™ ื•ืงืืžืจื™ ื“ืจื•ืกื” ืฉืืžืจื• ืฆืจื™ื›ื” ื‘ื“ื™ืงื” ื›ื ื’ื“ ื‘ื ื™ ืžืขื™ื™ื ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ื”ืืœื”ื™ื ืžื•ืจื™ ื‘ื” ืจื‘ ืžื›ืคื ื•ืขื“ ืื˜ืžื ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืžื ื• ืจื‘ ื•ืžื ื• ืจื‘ ื•ืœื ื™ื“ืขื ื ืœื™ื”

The Gemara relates that when Rav แธคiyya bar Yosef went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found that Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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 แธคiyya 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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื•ืœื ื ื”ื™ืจื ืœื™ื” ืœืื•ืชื• ืชืœืžื™ื“ ืฉืฉื™ืžืฉ ืืช ืจื‘ื™ ืจื‘ื” ื•ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ื”ืืœื”ื™ื ื›ืœ ืื•ืชืŸ ืฉื ื™ื ืฉืฉื™ืžืฉ ืื•ืชื• ืชืœืžื™ื“ ื‘ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ืื ื™ ืฉืžืฉืชื™ ื‘ืขืžื™ื“ื” ื•ืžืืŸ ื’ื‘ืจ ื”ื•ื ื’ื‘ืจ ื‘ื›ื•ืœื

Rabbi Yoแธฅanan said to him: But donโ€™t you remember that student who served the great Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi แธคiyya 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.

ืžื™ื“ ืคืชื— ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ื•ืืžืจ ื‘ืจื ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืื•ืชื• ื”ืื™ืฉ ืœื˜ื•ื‘ ืฉืืžืจื• ืฉืžื•ืขื” ืžืคื™ื• ืฉืžื•ื˜ื” ื•ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื” ื›ืฉืจื” ืฉืื™ ืืคืฉืจ ืœืฉืžื•ื˜ื” ืฉืชื™ืขืฉื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื”

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 animalโ€™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.

ื•ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืื•ืžืจ ื™ื‘ื™ื ื•ื™ืงื™ืฃ

And Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ืœื ืฉื ื• ืืœื ืฉืœื ืชืคืก ื‘ืกื™ืžื ื™ื ืื‘ืœ ืชืคืก ื‘ืกื™ืžื ื™ื ื•ืฉื—ื˜ ืืคืฉืจ ืœืฉืžื•ื˜ื” ืฉืชื™ืขืฉื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื”

Rav Naแธฅman 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.

ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ืœืืชื•ื™ื™ ืžืื™ ืœืืชื•ื™ื™ ืฉื‘ ืฉืžืขืชืชื

ยง 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 amoraโ€™im and not listed in the mishna. These cases are enumerated on 42b.

ื“ื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืจื™ืฉื‘ื ืžื—ื• ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื ื ืฉื™ื ื•ืงื˜ืœื™ ืืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื‘ืŸ ื‘ืชื™ืจื ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ื•ื›ื™ ืœื”ื•ืกื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื”ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื™ืฉ ืื™ืŸ ืœืš ืืœื ืžื” ืฉืžื ื• ื—ื›ืžื™ื

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.

ืจื‘ ืคืคื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืจื™ืฉื‘ื ืžื—ื• ื‘ื›ื•ืœื™ื ื•ืงื˜ืœื™ ืืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ื•ื›ื™ ืœื”ื•ืกื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื”ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื™ืฉ ืื™ืŸ ืœืš ืืœื ืžื” ืฉืžื ื• ื—ื›ืžื™ื

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.

ื•ื”ื ืงื ื—ื–ื™ื ืŸ ื“ืงื ืžืชื” ื’ืžื™ืจื™ ื“ืื™ ื‘ื“ืจื™ ืœื” ืกืžื ื—ื™ื™ื

The Gemara objects: But we see that they die. Isnโ€™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.

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื•ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื‘ื‘ื”ืžื” ื ื™ืงื‘ื” ื”ื’ืจื’ืจืช ืื• ืฉื ืกื“ืงื” ืขื“ ื›ืžื” ืชื—ืกืจ ืจื‘ืŸ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ืื•ืžืจ ืขื“ ื›ืื™ืกืจ ื”ืื™ื˜ืœืงื™ ื ืคื—ืชื” ื”ื’ื•ืœื’ื•ืœืช ื•ืœื ื ื™ืงื‘ ืงืจื•ื ืฉืœ ืžื•ื— ื ื™ืงื‘ ื”ืœื‘ ื•ืœื ืœื‘ื™ืช ื—ืœืœื• ื ืฉื‘ืจื” ื”ืฉื“ืจื” ื•ืœื ื ืคืกืง ื”ื—ื•ื˜ ืฉืœื” ื ื™ื˜ืœื” ื”ื›ื‘ื“ ื•ื ืฉืชื™ื™ืจ ื”ื™ืžื ื” ื›ื–ื™ืช

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.

ื”ืžืกืก ื•ื‘ื™ืช ื”ื›ื•ืกื•ืช ืฉื ื™ืงื‘ื• ื–ื” ืœืชื•ืš ื–ื” ื ื™ื˜ืœ ื”ื˜ื—ื•ืœ ื ื™ื˜ืœื• ื”ื›ืœื™ื•ืช ื ื™ื˜ืœ ืœื—ื™ ื”ืชื—ืชื•ืŸ ื ื™ื˜ืœื” ื”ืื ืฉืœื” ื•ื—ืจื•ืชื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ ืฉืžื™ื ื”ื’ืœื•ื“ื” ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ืžื›ืฉื™ืจ ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืคื•ืกืœื™ืŸ

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.

ื’ืžืณ ืืชืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื ื•ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื

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 Yoแธฅanan 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.

ื‘ืžืื™ ืงื ืžื™ืคืœื’ื™ ื‘ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื“ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื”ืื™ ื‘ื•ืงื ื“ืื˜ืžื ื“ืฉืฃ ืžื“ื•ื›ืชื™ื” ื˜ืจืคื” ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื ืชื ื ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื•ืชื ื ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ

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 Yoแธฅanan, 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;

ื•ื—ื–ื™ื™ื” ืœื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื“ืืชื™ื ื‘ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ื“ื“ืžื™ื ืœื ื˜ื•ืœื™ ืชื ื ืืœื• ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื”ื ื™ ื”ื•ื ื“ื˜ืจืคื” ื”ื ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื›ืฉืจื”

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.

ื•ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื ืชื ื ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื•ืชื ื ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ื•ื—ื–ื™ื™ื” ืœื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื“ืœื ืืชื™ื ื‘ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืœืื• ืœื ืงื•ื‘ื™ ื“ืžื™ื ื•ืœื ืœืคืกื•ืงื™ ื“ืžื™ื ื•ืœื ื˜ื•ืœื™ ื ืžื™ ืœื ื“ืžื™ื ืชื ื ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื”ื ื™ ื”ื•ื ื“ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื”ื ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื˜ืจืคื”

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.

ื’ื•ืคื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื”ืื™ ื‘ื•ืงื ื“ืื˜ืžื ื“ืฉืฃ ืžื“ื•ื›ืชื™ื” ื˜ืจืคื” ื•ืจื‘ื ืืžืจ ื›ืฉืจื” ื•ืื™ ืื™ืคืกื™ืง ื ื™ื‘ื™ื” ื˜ืจืคื” ื•ื”ืœื›ืชื ืื™ืคืกื™ืง ื ืžื™ ื›ืฉืจื” ืขื“ ื“ืžืชืขื›ืœื ืืชืขื›ื•ืœื™

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.

ืขื“ ื›ืžื” ืชื—ืกืจ ืืžืจ ื–ืขื™ืจื™ ืืชื•ืŸ ื“ืœื ืžื™ืชื—ืžื™ ืœื›ื•ืŸ ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื™ื” ื‘ื“ื™ื ืจื ืงื•ืจื“ื™ื ืื” ื•ื”ื•ื™ ื›ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื–ื•ื˜ืจืชื™ ื•ืžืฉืชื›ื—ื ื‘ื™ื ื™ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื™ ื“ืคื•ืžื‘ื“ื™ืชื

ยง 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. Zeโ€™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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื ืคืชื•ืจืื” ืขื™ืœื ืžื™ื ืื™ ื”ื•ื” ืงืื™ ื‘ืจ ื ืคื—ื ื•ื‘ืขื ืžื™ื ื™ ื“ื™ื ืจื ืงื•ืจื“ื™ื ืื” ืœืฉืขืจื™ ื‘ื™ื” ื˜ืจื™ืคืชื ื•ื‘ืขื™ ืœืžื™ืงื ืžืงืžื™ื” ื•ืœื ืฉื‘ืงื ื™ ืืžืจ ืœื™ ืฉื‘ ื‘ื ื™ ืฉื‘ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ืขืœื™ ืื•ืžื ื™ื•ืช ืจืฉืื™ืŸ ืœืขืžื•ื“ ืžืคื ื™ ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื—ื›ืžื™ื ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืขืกื•ืงื™ืŸ ื‘ืžืœืื›ืชื

Rabbi แธคana the money changer said: Bar Nappaแธฅa, i.e., Rabbi Yoแธฅanan, was standing over me, and he requested of me a Kurdish dinar with which to measure tereifot, in accordance with the statement of Zeโ€™eiri. And I wanted to rise before him out of respect, but he did not let me. Rabbi Yoแธฅanan said to me: Sit, my son, sit. Tradesmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars when they are engaged in their work.

ื•ืœื ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ื›ืœ ื‘ืขืœื™ ืื•ืžื ื™ื•ืช ืขื•ืžื“ื™ื ืžืคื ื™ื”ื ื•ืฉื•ืืœื™ืŸ ื‘ืฉืœื•ืžืŸ ื•ืื•ืžืจื™ืŸ ืœื”ื ืื—ื™ื ื• ืื ืฉื™ ืžืงื•ื ืคืœื•ื ื™ ื‘ื•ืื›ื ื‘ืฉืœื•ื

The Gemara asks: And are tradesmen not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? But didnโ€™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?

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ื”ื ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื™ืŸ ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืจืื” ื›ืžื” ื—ื‘ื™ื‘ื” ืžืฆื•ื” ื‘ืฉืขืชื” ืฉื”ืจื™ ืžืคื ื™ื”ื ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื™ืŸ ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ

Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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.

ืžืžืื™ ื“ื™ืœืžื ื›ื“ื™ ืฉืœื ืชื”ื ื ืžืฆื ืžื›ืฉื™ืœืŸ ืœืขืชื™ื“ ืœื‘ื

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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื›ืกืœืข ื›ื™ืชืจ ืžื›ืกืœืข ื›ืื™ืกืจ ื›ื™ืชืจ ืžื›ืื™ืกืจ

ยง 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 Naแธฅman 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.

ืืœืžื ืงืกื‘ืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ืขื“ ื•ืœื ืขื“ ื‘ื›ืœืœ

Since Rav Naแธฅman 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 Naแธฅman 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.

ืื™ืชื™ื‘ื™ื” ืจื‘ื ืœืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื—ื‘ืœ ื”ื™ื•ืฆื ืžืŸ ื”ืžื˜ื” ืขื“ ื—ืžืฉื” ื˜ืคื—ื™ื ื˜ื”ื•ืจ ืžืื™ ืœืื• ื—ืžืฉื” ื›ืœืžื˜ื” ืœื ื—ืžืฉื” ื›ืœืžืขืœื”

Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naแธฅman 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.

ืชื ืฉืžืข ืžื—ืžืฉื” ื•ืขื“ ืขืฉืจื” ื˜ืžื ืžืื™ ืœืื• ืขืฉืจื” ื›ืœืžื˜ื” ืœื ืขืฉืจื” ื›ืœืžืขืœื”

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.

ืชื ืฉืžืข ื”ื“ืงื™ืŸ ืฉื‘ื›ืœื™ ื—ืจืก ื”ืŸ ื•ืงืจืงืจื•ืชื™ื”ืŸ ื•ื“ื•ืคื ื•ืชื™ื”ื ื™ื•ืฉื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉืœื ืžืกื•ืžื›ื™ืŸ

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,

  • This monthโ€™s learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. โ€œAnd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.โ€

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Chullin 54

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Chullin 54

ื•ื•ืฉื˜ ื ืงื•ื‘ืชื• ื‘ืžืฉื”ื• ื“ืจื•ืกืชื• ื‘ืžืฉื”ื• ืงื ื” ื ืงื•ื‘ืชื• ื‘ื›ืื™ืกืจ ื“ืจื•ืกืชื• ื‘ื›ืžื” ื‘ืชืจ ื“ื‘ืขื™ื ื”ื“ืจ ืคืฉื˜ื” ืื—ื“ ื–ื” ื•ืื—ื“ ื–ื” ื‘ืžืฉื”ื• ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ื–ื™ื”ืจื™ื” ืžืงืœื ืงืœื™ ื•ืื–ื™ืœ

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.

ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืจื‘ ื™ืฆื—ืง ื‘ืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืจ ืžืจืชื ืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื•ื™ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืงืืžืจ ื“ืจื•ืกื” ืฉืืžืจื• ืฆืจื™ื›ื” ื‘ื“ื™ืงื” ื›ื ื’ื“ ื‘ื ื™ ืžืขื™ื™ื ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ืืžืจ ื”ืืœื”ื™ื ืžื•ืจื™ ื‘ื” ืจื‘ ืžื›ืคื ื•ืขื“ ืื˜ืžื

The Gemara relates: Rav Yitzแธฅak bar Shmuel bar Marta sat before Rav Naแธฅman, 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 Naแธฅman 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.

ืžืื™ ื›ืคื ืื™ืœื™ืžื ื›ืคื ื“ื™ื“ื ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื›ื ื’ื“ ื‘ื ื™ ืžืขื™ื™ื ืืœื ืžื›ืคื ื“ืžื•ื—ื ืขื“ ืื˜ืžื

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 Naแธฅman has said nothing new. Rather, Rav Naแธฅman referred to the area from the hollow of the brain, i.e., the skull, to the thigh.

ื›ื™ ืกืœื™ืง ืจื‘ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืืฉื›ื—ื™ื ื”ื• ืœืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื•ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ื“ื™ืชื‘ื™ ื•ืงืืžืจื™ ื“ืจื•ืกื” ืฉืืžืจื• ืฆืจื™ื›ื” ื‘ื“ื™ืงื” ื›ื ื’ื“ ื‘ื ื™ ืžืขื™ื™ื ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ื”ืืœื”ื™ื ืžื•ืจื™ ื‘ื” ืจื‘ ืžื›ืคื ื•ืขื“ ืื˜ืžื ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืžื ื• ืจื‘ ื•ืžื ื• ืจื‘ ื•ืœื ื™ื“ืขื ื ืœื™ื”

The Gemara relates that when Rav แธคiyya bar Yosef went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found that Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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 แธคiyya 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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื•ืœื ื ื”ื™ืจื ืœื™ื” ืœืื•ืชื• ืชืœืžื™ื“ ืฉืฉื™ืžืฉ ืืช ืจื‘ื™ ืจื‘ื” ื•ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื•ื”ืืœื”ื™ื ื›ืœ ืื•ืชืŸ ืฉื ื™ื ืฉืฉื™ืžืฉ ืื•ืชื• ืชืœืžื™ื“ ื‘ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ืื ื™ ืฉืžืฉืชื™ ื‘ืขืžื™ื“ื” ื•ืžืืŸ ื’ื‘ืจ ื”ื•ื ื’ื‘ืจ ื‘ื›ื•ืœื

Rabbi Yoแธฅanan said to him: But donโ€™t you remember that student who served the great Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi แธคiyya 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.

ืžื™ื“ ืคืชื— ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ื•ืืžืจ ื‘ืจื ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืื•ืชื• ื”ืื™ืฉ ืœื˜ื•ื‘ ืฉืืžืจื• ืฉืžื•ืขื” ืžืคื™ื• ืฉืžื•ื˜ื” ื•ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื” ื›ืฉืจื” ืฉืื™ ืืคืฉืจ ืœืฉืžื•ื˜ื” ืฉืชื™ืขืฉื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื”

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 animalโ€™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.

ื•ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืื•ืžืจ ื™ื‘ื™ื ื•ื™ืงื™ืฃ

And Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ืœื ืฉื ื• ืืœื ืฉืœื ืชืคืก ื‘ืกื™ืžื ื™ื ืื‘ืœ ืชืคืก ื‘ืกื™ืžื ื™ื ื•ืฉื—ื˜ ืืคืฉืจ ืœืฉืžื•ื˜ื” ืฉืชื™ืขืฉื” ืฉื—ื•ื˜ื”

Rav Naแธฅman 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.

ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ืœืืชื•ื™ื™ ืžืื™ ืœืืชื•ื™ื™ ืฉื‘ ืฉืžืขืชืชื

ยง 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 amoraโ€™im and not listed in the mishna. These cases are enumerated on 42b.

ื“ื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืจื™ืฉื‘ื ืžื—ื• ื‘ื’ื™ื“ื ื ืฉื™ื ื•ืงื˜ืœื™ ืืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื‘ืŸ ื‘ืชื™ืจื ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ื•ื›ื™ ืœื”ื•ืกื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื”ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื™ืฉ ืื™ืŸ ืœืš ืืœื ืžื” ืฉืžื ื• ื—ื›ืžื™ื

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.

ืจื‘ ืคืคื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืจื™ืฉื‘ื ืžื—ื• ื‘ื›ื•ืœื™ื ื•ืงื˜ืœื™ ืืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ื•ื›ื™ ืœื”ื•ืกื™ืฃ ืขืœ ื”ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื™ืฉ ืื™ืŸ ืœืš ืืœื ืžื” ืฉืžื ื• ื—ื›ืžื™ื

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.

ื•ื”ื ืงื ื—ื–ื™ื ืŸ ื“ืงื ืžืชื” ื’ืžื™ืจื™ ื“ืื™ ื‘ื“ืจื™ ืœื” ืกืžื ื—ื™ื™ื

The Gemara objects: But we see that they die. Isnโ€™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.

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื•ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื‘ื‘ื”ืžื” ื ื™ืงื‘ื” ื”ื’ืจื’ืจืช ืื• ืฉื ืกื“ืงื” ืขื“ ื›ืžื” ืชื—ืกืจ ืจื‘ืŸ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ืื•ืžืจ ืขื“ ื›ืื™ืกืจ ื”ืื™ื˜ืœืงื™ ื ืคื—ืชื” ื”ื’ื•ืœื’ื•ืœืช ื•ืœื ื ื™ืงื‘ ืงืจื•ื ืฉืœ ืžื•ื— ื ื™ืงื‘ ื”ืœื‘ ื•ืœื ืœื‘ื™ืช ื—ืœืœื• ื ืฉื‘ืจื” ื”ืฉื“ืจื” ื•ืœื ื ืคืกืง ื”ื—ื•ื˜ ืฉืœื” ื ื™ื˜ืœื” ื”ื›ื‘ื“ ื•ื ืฉืชื™ื™ืจ ื”ื™ืžื ื” ื›ื–ื™ืช

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.

ื”ืžืกืก ื•ื‘ื™ืช ื”ื›ื•ืกื•ืช ืฉื ื™ืงื‘ื• ื–ื” ืœืชื•ืš ื–ื” ื ื™ื˜ืœ ื”ื˜ื—ื•ืœ ื ื™ื˜ืœื• ื”ื›ืœื™ื•ืช ื ื™ื˜ืœ ืœื—ื™ ื”ืชื—ืชื•ืŸ ื ื™ื˜ืœื” ื”ืื ืฉืœื” ื•ื—ืจื•ืชื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ ืฉืžื™ื ื”ื’ืœื•ื“ื” ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ืžื›ืฉื™ืจ ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืคื•ืกืœื™ืŸ

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.

ื’ืžืณ ืืชืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื ื•ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื

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 Yoแธฅanan 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.

ื‘ืžืื™ ืงื ืžื™ืคืœื’ื™ ื‘ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื“ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื”ืื™ ื‘ื•ืงื ื“ืื˜ืžื ื“ืฉืฃ ืžื“ื•ื›ืชื™ื” ื˜ืจืคื” ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื ืชื ื ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื•ืชื ื ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ

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 Yoแธฅanan, 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;

ื•ื—ื–ื™ื™ื” ืœื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื“ืืชื™ื ื‘ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ื“ื“ืžื™ื ืœื ื˜ื•ืœื™ ืชื ื ืืœื• ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื”ื ื™ ื”ื•ื ื“ื˜ืจืคื” ื”ื ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื›ืฉืจื”

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.

ื•ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืืžืจ ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื“ื•ืงื ืชื ื ื˜ืจืคื•ืช ื•ืชื ื ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ื•ื—ื–ื™ื™ื” ืœื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื“ืœื ืืชื™ื ื‘ื–ื” ื”ื›ืœืœ ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืœืื• ืœื ืงื•ื‘ื™ ื“ืžื™ื ื•ืœื ืœืคืกื•ืงื™ ื“ืžื™ื ื•ืœื ื˜ื•ืœื™ ื ืžื™ ืœื ื“ืžื™ื ืชื ื ืืœื• ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื”ื ื™ ื”ื•ื ื“ื›ืฉืจื•ืช ื”ื ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื˜ืจืคื”

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.

ื’ื•ืคื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ื”ืื™ ื‘ื•ืงื ื“ืื˜ืžื ื“ืฉืฃ ืžื“ื•ื›ืชื™ื” ื˜ืจืคื” ื•ืจื‘ื ืืžืจ ื›ืฉืจื” ื•ืื™ ืื™ืคืกื™ืง ื ื™ื‘ื™ื” ื˜ืจืคื” ื•ื”ืœื›ืชื ืื™ืคืกื™ืง ื ืžื™ ื›ืฉืจื” ืขื“ ื“ืžืชืขื›ืœื ืืชืขื›ื•ืœื™

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.

ืขื“ ื›ืžื” ืชื—ืกืจ ืืžืจ ื–ืขื™ืจื™ ืืชื•ืŸ ื“ืœื ืžื™ืชื—ืžื™ ืœื›ื•ืŸ ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื ืฉื™ืขื•ืจื™ื” ื‘ื“ื™ื ืจื ืงื•ืจื“ื™ื ืื” ื•ื”ื•ื™ ื›ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื–ื•ื˜ืจืชื™ ื•ืžืฉืชื›ื—ื ื‘ื™ื ื™ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื™ ื“ืคื•ืžื‘ื“ื™ืชื

ยง 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. Zeโ€™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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื ืคืชื•ืจืื” ืขื™ืœื ืžื™ื ืื™ ื”ื•ื” ืงืื™ ื‘ืจ ื ืคื—ื ื•ื‘ืขื ืžื™ื ื™ ื“ื™ื ืจื ืงื•ืจื“ื™ื ืื” ืœืฉืขืจื™ ื‘ื™ื” ื˜ืจื™ืคืชื ื•ื‘ืขื™ ืœืžื™ืงื ืžืงืžื™ื” ื•ืœื ืฉื‘ืงื ื™ ืืžืจ ืœื™ ืฉื‘ ื‘ื ื™ ืฉื‘ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ืขืœื™ ืื•ืžื ื™ื•ืช ืจืฉืื™ืŸ ืœืขืžื•ื“ ืžืคื ื™ ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื—ื›ืžื™ื ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืขืกื•ืงื™ืŸ ื‘ืžืœืื›ืชื

Rabbi แธคana the money changer said: Bar Nappaแธฅa, i.e., Rabbi Yoแธฅanan, was standing over me, and he requested of me a Kurdish dinar with which to measure tereifot, in accordance with the statement of Zeโ€™eiri. And I wanted to rise before him out of respect, but he did not let me. Rabbi Yoแธฅanan said to me: Sit, my son, sit. Tradesmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars when they are engaged in their work.

ื•ืœื ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ื›ืœ ื‘ืขืœื™ ืื•ืžื ื™ื•ืช ืขื•ืžื“ื™ื ืžืคื ื™ื”ื ื•ืฉื•ืืœื™ืŸ ื‘ืฉืœื•ืžืŸ ื•ืื•ืžืจื™ืŸ ืœื”ื ืื—ื™ื ื• ืื ืฉื™ ืžืงื•ื ืคืœื•ื ื™ ื‘ื•ืื›ื ื‘ืฉืœื•ื

The Gemara asks: And are tradesmen not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? But didnโ€™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?

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ื”ื ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื™ืŸ ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื•ืจืื” ื›ืžื” ื—ื‘ื™ื‘ื” ืžืฆื•ื” ื‘ืฉืขืชื” ืฉื”ืจื™ ืžืคื ื™ื”ื ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืžืคื ื™ ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื™ืŸ ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ

Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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.

ืžืžืื™ ื“ื™ืœืžื ื›ื“ื™ ืฉืœื ืชื”ื ื ืžืฆื ืžื›ืฉื™ืœืŸ ืœืขืชื™ื“ ืœื‘ื

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.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื›ืกืœืข ื›ื™ืชืจ ืžื›ืกืœืข ื›ืื™ืกืจ ื›ื™ืชืจ ืžื›ืื™ืกืจ

ยง 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 Naแธฅman 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.

ืืœืžื ืงืกื‘ืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ืขื“ ื•ืœื ืขื“ ื‘ื›ืœืœ

Since Rav Naแธฅman 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 Naแธฅman 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.

ืื™ืชื™ื‘ื™ื” ืจื‘ื ืœืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื—ื‘ืœ ื”ื™ื•ืฆื ืžืŸ ื”ืžื˜ื” ืขื“ ื—ืžืฉื” ื˜ืคื—ื™ื ื˜ื”ื•ืจ ืžืื™ ืœืื• ื—ืžืฉื” ื›ืœืžื˜ื” ืœื ื—ืžืฉื” ื›ืœืžืขืœื”

Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naแธฅman 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.

ืชื ืฉืžืข ืžื—ืžืฉื” ื•ืขื“ ืขืฉืจื” ื˜ืžื ืžืื™ ืœืื• ืขืฉืจื” ื›ืœืžื˜ื” ืœื ืขืฉืจื” ื›ืœืžืขืœื”

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.

ืชื ืฉืžืข ื”ื“ืงื™ืŸ ืฉื‘ื›ืœื™ ื—ืจืก ื”ืŸ ื•ืงืจืงืจื•ืชื™ื”ืŸ ื•ื“ื•ืคื ื•ืชื™ื”ื ื™ื•ืฉื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉืœื ืžืกื•ืžื›ื™ืŸ

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,

Scroll To Top