Masechet Chullin is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the Hadran Community. “During my first cycle of Daf Yomi, just as we began Masechet Chullin, my son was injured while serving in the IDF. Throughout those two and a half months of difficulty and uncertainty, my fellow learners never left my side. With profound gratitude to the community that held me, encouraged me, and ensured I could keep up with the Daf during those trying times.”
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Summary
The Mishna enumerates all the physical defects that cause a bird to be rendered a treifa, as well as those that leave it kosher. If a weasel (chulda) attacks a bird in an area where the brain membrane could have been perforated, the bird is considered a treifa. There are, however, different tests one can perform to ascertain whether the membrane was actually punctured, and the Gemara suggests various methods for this inspection. Conversely, in the case of birds that live in the water, a broken skull creates an absolute presumption that the brain membrane was punctured, meaning that no subsequent test will be effective in permitting the bird.
If a bird was caught in a fire and burned, the Gemara outlines specific ways to determine whether its internal organs were affected to the point of rendering the bird a treifa. This diagnostic procedure relies on checking for a change in color – either from red to green, or from green to red, depending on the specific internal organ being evaluated.
Following the Mishnaic list of kosher conditions in a bird that do not render it a treifa, the Amoraim introduce specific qualifications and limitations to restrict the scope of some of these permitted cases.
Today’s daily daf tools:
Masechet Chullin is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the Hadran Community. “During my first cycle of Daf Yomi, just as we began Masechet Chullin, my son was injured while serving in the IDF. Throughout those two and a half months of difficulty and uncertainty, my fellow learners never left my side. With profound gratitude to the community that held me, encouraged me, and ensured I could keep up with the Daf during those trying times.”
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Today’s daf is sponsored by Emma Rinberg in loving memory of her father, Dr. Eric Glick, Yitzchak Nisan ben Yaacov, who passed away 36 years ago. “Missed by me every day. He would be so proud to see his descendants living in Israel and living a full Jewish life.”
Today’s daf is sponsored by Malka Sime Abraham in loving memory of her father, Chaim ben Moshe z”l on his 4th yahrzeit. “He was always very proud of my accomplishments and encouraged me to continue progressing. May his memory be a blessing.”
Chullin 56
לְהָבִיא עוֹר בֵּית הַבּוֹשֶׁת חוּץ לִמְקוֹמוֹ פָּסוּל וְאֵין בּוֹ כָּרֵת, חוּץ לִזְמַנּוֹ פִּיגּוּל וְחַיָּיבִים עָלָיו כָּרֵת.
including the hide of the vulva, the halakha is the same: If one performs the sacrificial rites with intent to burn one of them outside its designated area, the offering is unfit, but there is no liability for karet for one who partakes of the offering. If he had intent to burn it beyond its designated time, this renders it piggul, and one is liable to receive karet for eating it. This baraita indicates that only Rabbi Shimon holds that the hide of the hooves is treated like its flesh, and that the Sages disagree, as Rabbi Yoḥanan stated.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת בָּעוֹף: נְקוּבַת הַוֶּושֶׁט, וּפְסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, הִכְּתָה חוּלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ מָקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה, נִיקַּב הַקּוּרְקְבָן, נִיקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּין, נָפְלָה לָאוּר וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, אִם יְרוּקִּים – פְּסוּלִים, אִם אֲדוּמִּים – כְּשֵׁרִים. דְּרָסָהּ וּטְרָפָהּ בַּכּוֹתֶל אוֹ שֶׁרִיצְּצַתָּה בְּהֵמָה וּמְפַרְכֶּסֶת, וְשָׁהֲתָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּשְׁחָטָהּ – כְּשֵׁרָה.
MISHNA: And these are tereifot in a bird: One with a perforated gullet, or with a cut windpipe that was cut across its width; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that renders it a tereifa, as one must be concerned that the membrane of the brain was perforated; or if the gizzard was perforated; or if the small intestines were perforated. In a case where a bird fell into the fire and its innards were singed [neḥmeru], if they turned green they are unfit, and the bird is a tereifa, but if they are red the bird is kosher. If a person trampled the bird, or slammed it against a wall, or if an animal crushed it and it is twitching, it is a tereifa because its limbs were shattered. But if the bird lasted for a twenty-four-hour period, and then one slaughtered it, it is kosher.
גְּמָ׳ רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל וְלֵוִי דְּאָמְרִי: מַכְנִיס יָדוֹ לִפְנִים וּבוֹדֵק, אִם מְבַצְבֵּץ וְעוֹלֶה – טְרֵפָה, וְאִם לָאו – כְּשֵׁרָה.
GEMARA: The mishna states: If a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that renders it a tereifa, one must be concerned that the membrane of the brain was perforated. Rav and Shmuel and Levi say: How does one inspect the membrane? After slaughter, one inserts his hand into the mouth of the bird and pushes the nerve tissue with his finger and inspects it. If the nerve tissue emerges and rises out through the hole in the skull, the animal is a tereifa, because this proves that the membrane has been perforated, allowing the nerve tissue through. And if not, the animal is kosher.
הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר עַד דְּמִנְּקִיב קְרָמָא תַּתָּאָה, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אִינְּקִיב עִילָּאָה אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא אִינְּקִיב תַּתָּאָה, נֵיחוּשׁ דִּלְמָא עִילָּאָה אִינְּקִיב תַּתָּאָה לָא אִינְּקִיב? אִי אִיתָא דְּאִינְּקִיב עִילָּאָה, תַּתָּאָה אַגַּב רוּכְּכֵיהּ מִיפְקָע פָּקַע.
The Gemara asks: This works out well according to the one who says (45a) that an animal is not a tereifa unless the inner membrane is perforated as well. But according to the one who says that the animal is rendered a tereifa if the outer membrane was perforated, even if the inner membrane was not perforated, how can one rely on this inspection? Let us be concerned that perhaps the outer membrane was perforated but the inner membrane was not perforated, in which case the animal is a tereifa even if the nerve tissue does not emerge through the hole. The Gemara responds: If it is the case that the outer membrane was perforated, the inner membrane will inevitably burst due to its fragility, allowing the nerve tissue to emerge. If it does not emerge, it is certain that the outer membrane is intact as well.
אָמַר זְעֵירִי: אֵין בְּדִיקָה לְחוּלְדָּה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשִּׁינֶּיהָ דַּקּוֹת. וְכִי שִׁינֶּיהָ דַּקּוֹת מַאי הָוֵי? אָמַר רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשִּׁינֶּיהָ דַּקּוֹת וַעֲקוּמּוֹת.
Ze’eiri says: There is no effective inspection for a bird bitten on the head by a weasel, because the weasel’s teeth are so thin that even if they perforate the membrane, the nerve tissue will not emerge through the perforations. The Gemara asks: And if its teeth are thin, what of it? Certainly a small amount will emerge through the perforation. Rav Oshaya said: There is no inspection because its teeth are fine and crooked. The hole in the skull does not overlap the perforation in the membrane, and nothing will be able to escape.
כִּי סְלֵיק לִנְהַרְדְּעָא, שְׁלַח לְהוּ: דְּבָרִים שֶׁאָמַרְתִּי לִפְנֵיכֶם טָעוּת הֵן בְּיָדִי, בְּרַם כָּךְ אָמְרוּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: בּוֹדְקִין לְחוּלְדָּה בַּיָּד, אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַסְמֵר, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אַף בְּמַסְמֵר.
The Gemara recounts: When Ze’eiri went up to Neharde’a, he sent a message to the Sages: The matters that I stated before you are an error on my part. In fact, they said this in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish: One inspects a bird bitten on the head by a weasel with one’s hand, pressing against the nerve tissue to see if it emerges through the hole, but not with a nail. One may not inspect it by dragging the tip of a nail over the surface of the membrane to see if it catches on a perforation, since the nail itself may perforate the membrane. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: One may even inspect it with a nail.
וּבִפְלוּגְתָּא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה, חַד בָּדֵיק בִּידָא, וְחַד בָּדֵיק בְּמַחְטָא. מַאן דְּבָדֵיק בִּידָא אָמַר לֵיהּ לְמַאן דְּבָדֵיק בְּמַחְטָא: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מְכַלֶּה מָמוֹנָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל? אָמַר לֵיהּ מַאן דְּבָדֵיק בְּמַחְטָא לְמַאן דְּבָדֵיק בִּידָא: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מַאֲכִיל לְיִשְׂרָאֵל נְבֵלוֹת?
The Gemara notes: And this disagreement is also reflected in the dispute of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya, wherein one inspected the bird by hand, and one inspected it with a needle. The one who inspected it by hand said to the one who inspected it with a needle: Until when will you waste the money of the Jewish people by causing them to discard kosher meat? Sometimes the needle itself will perforate a membrane that was initially whole. The one who inspected it with a needle said to the one who inspected it by hand: Until when will you feed carcasses to the Jewish people, as you permit for consumption a bird that might well be forbidden?
נְבֵלוֹת? וְהָא שְׁחוּטָה הִיא! אֶלָּא טְרֵפוֹת, שֶׁמָּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ.
The Gemara asks: Carcasses? But this is a slaughtered animal; even if it is forbidden, it is a tereifa, not a carcass. Rather, he must have said: Until when will you feed tereifot to the Jewish people; perhaps the membrane of the brain was perforated. Inspection by hand is not reliable, since the teeth of the weasel are thin and crooked and the nerve tissue may not escape even if the membrane is perforated.
תִּסְתַּיֵּים דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הוּא דְּבָדֵיק בִּידָא, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: בּוֹדְקִין לְחוּלְדָּה בַּיָּד, אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַסְמֵר. נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ – תִּסְתַּיֵּים.
The Gemara notes: It may be concluded that it is Rabbi Yehuda who inspected it by hand, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda that one may inspect a bird bitten on the head by a weasel with one’s hand, but not with a nail. The baraita continues: If the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated, the animal is a tereifa. The Gemara affirms: Indeed, it may be concluded that Rabbi Yehuda permits inspection only by hand.
הָא גוּפַאּ קַשְׁיָא, אָמְרַתְּ: בּוֹדְקִין לְחוּלְדָּה בַּיָּד אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַסְמֵר. אַלְמָא אִית לֵיהּ בְּדִיקוּתָא, וַהֲדַר תָּנֵי: נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ. אַלְמָא לֵית לֵיהּ בְּדִיקוּתָא! סֵיפָא אֲתָאן לְעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין לוֹ קְרוּם. אֵין לוֹ קְרוּם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא, הוֹאִיל וּקְרוּמוֹ רַךְ.
The Gemara objects: This itself is difficult. You said in the baraita: One may inspect a bird injured by a weasel with one’s hand, but not with a nail; apparently, it has an option of inspection. But you then teach: If the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated, the animal is a tereifa; apparently it has no inspection, because inspecting for a perforation would be pointless. The Gemara responds: In the latter clause, we come to discuss a water bird, which cannot be inspected, since it has no membrane. The Gemara clarifies: Can it enter your mind that it has no membrane? One can see that it does. Rather, the response is: Since its membrane is fragile, it must have ruptured when the skull was broken.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן לְרַב עָנָן: מָר אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל בָּדֵיק בִּידָא וּמַכְשַׁר, וְהוּנָא חַבְרִין אָמַר רַב בָּדֵיק בִּידָא וּמַכְשַׁר. וְהָתָנֵי לֵוִי: טְרֵפוֹת שֶׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים בִּבְהֵמָה – כְּנֶגְדָּן בָּעוֹף, יָתֵר עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹף – נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָהוּא בְּעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין לוֹ קְרוּם. אֵין לוֹ קְרוּם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא, הוֹאִיל וּקְרוּמוֹ רַךְ.
Similarly, the Gemara relates that Rav Naḥman said to Rav Anan: The Master says that Shmuel inspects a bird bitten on the head by a weasel with his hand and deems it kosher if the membrane is not perforated, and our colleague Rav Huna also says that Rav inspects it by hand and deems it kosher. But doesn’t Levi teach: Those tereifot that the Sages enumerated in an animal apply likewise in a bird, and in addition to those, a bird is a tereifa if the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated? If so, how can a bird be permitted through inspection? Rav Anan said to him: That baraita is referring to a water bird, which cannot be inspected since it has no membrane. The Gemara clarifies: Can it enter your mind that it has no membrane? Rather, the response is: Since its membrane is fragile.
הָהִיא תַּרְנְגוֹלְתָּא דַּהֲוַאי בֵּי רַב חָנָא, שַׁדְּרַהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב מַתְנָא. נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם וְלֹא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ הֲוַאי, וְאַכְשְׁרַהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְהָתָנֵי לֵוִי: טְרֵפוֹת שֶׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים בִּבְהֵמָה כְּנֶגְדָּן בָּעוֹף, יָתֵר עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹף – נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָתָם בְּעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין לוֹ קְרוּם. אֵין לוֹ קְרוּם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: הוֹאִיל וּקְרוּמוֹ רַךְ.
Similarly, the Gemara relates: There was a certain hen that was in the house of Rav Ḥana whose skull was injured. He sent it before Rav Mattana, who inspected it and found that the bone of the skull was broken but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, and he deemed it kosher. Rav Ḥana said to Rav Mattana: But doesn’t Levi teach: Those tereifot that the Sages enumerated in an animal hold likewise in a bird, and in addition to those, a bird is a tereifa if the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated? Rav Mattana said to him: That baraita is referring to a water bird, which cannot be inspected since it has no membrane. The Gemara clarifies: Can it enter your mind that it has no membrane? Rather, say that his response was: Since its membrane is fragile.
רַב שֵׁיזְבִי בָּדֵיק בְּשִׁימְשָׁא, רַב יֵימַר בָּדֵיק בְּמַיָּא, רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב בָּדֵיק
The Gemara notes that Rav Sheizvi would inspect the membrane of the brain by the light of the sun. Rav Yeimar would inspect it by pouring water into the skull through the hole, to see if it emerges mixed with nerve tissue. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov would inspect it
בְּגִילָא דְּחִיטְּתָא.
by dragging a wheat straw over the membrane to see if it would catch on a perforation.
אָמַר רַב שֵׁיזְבִי: הָנֵי אֲוָוזֵי דִּידַן כְּעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם דָּמְיָין.
Rav Sheizvi said: Our geese are considered like water birds. If the skull of a goose is broken, even if the membrane is not perforated, it is a tereifa.
נָפְלָה לָאוּר, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: שִׁיעוּר יְרוּקָּתָן כְּשִׁיעוּר נְקוּבָתָן, מָה נְקוּבָתָן בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ – אַף יְרוּקָּתָן בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ.
§ The mishna states: In a case where a bird fell into the fire and its innards were singed, if they turned green the bird is a tereifa; if they are red the bird is kosher. Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Yehoshua: The measure of their turning green is like the measure of their perforation. Just as their perforation in any amount renders them a tereifa, so too their turning green in any amount renders them a tereifa.
בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי מֵרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: הוֹרִיקָה כָּבֵד כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: טְרֵפָה. וְלֹא יְהֵא אֶלָּא נִיטְּלָה! אָמַר רָבָא: כֵּיוָן שֶׁהוֹרִיקָה כָּבֵד כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁנָּפְלָה לָאוּר, וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים, וּטְרֵפָה.
Rav Yosef, son of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: If a liver turned green on the side facing the intestines, what is the halakha? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: The bird is a tereifa. Rav Yosef said to him: But this halakha should be no more stringent than that of a case where the liver was removed and an olive-bulk remained (see 54a), in which case the bird is kosher. Therefore, as long as an olive-bulk remains red, the bird should be kosher. Rava said: Since the liver turned green facing the intestines, it is certain that the bird fell into the fire and the intestines themselves were singed, and this is why the animal is a tereifa, not because of the liver per se.
רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי הַוְיָא לֵיהּ הָהִיא תַּרְנְגוֹלְתָּא, שַׁדְּרֵיהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַקַּפָּר בְּרִיבִּי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יְרוּקִּין הֲווֹ, וְאַכְשְׁרַהּ. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: ״יְרוּקִּין פְּסוּלִין״! לֹא אָמְרוּ ״יְרוּקִּין פְּסוּלִין״ אֶלָּא בַּקּוּרְקְבָן, בַּלֵּב וּבַכָּבֵד. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בְּאֵלּוּ בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים אָמְרוּ – בַּקּוּרְקְבָן, בַּלֵּב וּבַכָּבֵד.
The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi had a certain hen that fell into the fire. After it was slaughtered, he sent it before the distinguished Rabbi Elazar HaKappar and said to him: Its innards were green, and Rabbi Elazar HaKappar deemed it kosher. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked: But didn’t we learn in the mishna: If they turned green they are unfit? Rabbi Elazar HaKappar said to him: The Sages said that if they turned green they are unfit only with regard to the gizzard, the heart, and the liver, which are naturally red. Other innards of a hen, such as the intestines, are naturally green, and a green appearance in them does not render the hen a tereifa. The Gemara notes: This is also taught in a baraita: Concerning which innards did they say that a green appearance renders the bird a tereifa? Only concerning the gizzard, the heart, and the liver.
רַבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף הֲוָה לֵיהּ הָהִוא תַּרְנְגוֹלְתָּא, שַׁדְּרַהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲדוּמִּין הֲווֹ וּטְרֵפָה. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: ״אֲדוּמִּין כְּשֵׁרִים״! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲדוּמִּין שֶׁהוֹרִיקוּ וִירוּקִּין שֶׁהֶאֱדִימוּ – טְרֵפָה, לֹא אָמְרוּ ״אֲדוּמִּין כְּשֵׁרִים״ אֶלָּא בַּלֵּב בַּקּוּרְקְבָן וּבַכָּבֵד.
The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Yosef had a certain hen that fell into the fire. After it was slaughtered, he sent it before Rabbi Abbahu and said to him: Its innards were red, and Rabbi Elazar HaKappar deemed it a tereifa. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Yosef asked: But didn’t we learn in the mishna: If they are red, the bird is kosher? Rabbi Elazar HaKappar said to him: Red innards that turned green and green innards that turned red render the animal a tereifa. The Sages said in the mishna that red innards are kosher only with regard to the heart, the gizzard, and the liver, because these organs are naturally red. Organs that are naturally green, however, render the bird a tereifa if they have turned red.
אָמַר רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר חִיָּיא אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי: אֲדוּמִּין שֶׁהוֹרִיקוּ וּשְׁלָקָן וְחָזְרוּ וְהֶאֱדִימוּ – כְּשֵׁרִין, מַאי טַעְמָא? קוּטְרָא עָיֵיל בְּהוּ. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: אַף אָנוּ נֹאמַר, אֲדוּמִּין שֶׁלֹּא הוֹרִיקוּ וּשְׁלָקָן וְהוֹרִיקוּ – טְרֵפָה, מַאי טַעְמָא? אִיגַּלַּאי בַּהְתַּיְיהוּ. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: הִלְכָּךְ לָא לֵיכוֹל אִינָשׁ אֶלָּא בְּשִׁלְקָא. וְלָא הִיא, אַחְזוֹקֵי רֵיעוּתָא לָא מַחְזְקִינַן.
Rav Shmuel bar Ḥiyya says that Rabbi Mani says: If red organs turned green, and one boiled them and they turned red again, they are kosher. What is the reason? This proves that they were not burned; rather, smoke entered them and changed their color temporarily. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: We, too, will say: If red organs did not turn green, and one boiled them and they then turned green, the animal is a tereifa. What is the reason? Their shame was revealed, i.e., it is evident that they were in fact burned. Rav Ashi said: Therefore, even if a bird’s innards remain red after it fell in a fire, a person may eat it only if it is boiled, to be certain that the innards will not turn green. The Gemara rejects this: But that is not so, since we do not presume the existence of a flaw without evidence.
דְּרָסָהּ וּטְרָפָהּ בַּכּוֹתֶל. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי: אַחַת זוֹ וְאַחַת זוֹ צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה.
§ The mishna states: If a person trampled the bird, or slammed it against a wall, or if an animal crushed it, and it lasted twenty-four hours, and then one slaughtered it, it is kosher. Rabbi Elazar ben Antigonus says in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yannai: Both this and that, i.e., all of the above cases, require inspection after slaughter, to ascertain that there is no injury that would itself render the animal a tereifa.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת בָּעוֹף: נִיקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה, הִכְּתָה חוּלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ מָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה, נִיקַּב הַזֶּפֶק, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ נִיטַּל, יָצְאוּ בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ וְלֹא נִיקְּבוּ, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ גַּפֶּיהָ, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ רַגְלֶיהָ, נִמְרְטוּ כְּנָפֶיהָ, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אִם נִטְּלָה הַנּוֹצָה פְּסוּלָה.
MISHNA: And these are kosher among birds: If a bird’s windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that does not render it a tereifa; or if the crop was perforated. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is kosher even if the crop was removed. If the bird’s intestines emerged from the abdominal wall but were not perforated, or if its wings were broken, or if its legs were broken, or if the feathers on its wings were plucked, the bird is kosher. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the down covering its body was removed, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי סִימַאי וְרַבִּי צָדוֹק שֶׁהָלְכוּ לְעַבֵּר שָׁנָה בְּלוֹד, וְשָׁבְתוּ בְּאוֹנוֹ, וְהוֹרוּ בְּטַרְפַּחַת כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק.
GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving Rabbi Simai and Rabbi Tzadok, who went to intercalate the year in Lod, and they spent Shabbat in the town of Ono. And they ruled with regard to an animal whose womb was removed, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi in the mishna with regard to the crop.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הוֹרוּ בְּטַרְפַּחַת לְאִיסּוּרָא, כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק לְהֶתֵּירָא? אוֹ דִילְמָא: הוֹרוּ בְּטַרְפַּחַת לְהֶתֵּירָא כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק, אֲבָל כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק לָא סְבִירָא לְהוּ? תֵּיקוּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the meaning of the baraita? Is it referring to two different rulings, i.e., that they ruled with regard to the womb to prohibit it, and they also ruled in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to the crop to permit it? Or perhaps it is referring to only one ruling, and it means that they ruled with regard to the womb to permit it, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to the crop, but they do not hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to the crop itself. The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.
אָמַר רַבָּה, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: גַּגּוֹ שֶׁל זֶפֶק נִידּוֹן כְּוֶושֶׁט. הֵיכָא? אָמַר רַב בִּיבִי בַּר אַבָּיֵי: כֹּל שֶׁנִּמְתָּח עִמּוֹ.
Rabba says, and some say it was Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi who says: The roof of the crop is treated like the gullet, i.e., it renders the bird a tereifa if perforated in any amount. The Gemara asks: Where is the roof of the crop? Rav Beivai bar Abaye said: It is any part of the crop that stretches with the gullet.
יָצְאוּ בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא הִיפֵּךְ בָּהֶן, אֲבָל הִיפֵּךְ בָּהֶן – טְרֵפָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״הוּא עָשְׂךָ וַיְכֹנְנֶךָ״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא כּוֹנָנִיּוֹת בָּאָדָם, שֶׁאִם נֶהְפָּךְ (אַחַת) [אֶחָד] מֵהֶן – אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִחְיוֹת.
§ The mishna states: If the bird’s intestines emerged from the stomach wall but were not perforated, the bird is kosher. Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak says: The Sages taught this halakha only in a case where one did not jumble them, but returned them to the stomach in their proper order. But if he jumbled them, the bird is a tereifa, as it is written: “Has He not made you, and established you?” (Deuteronomy 32:6). The verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created established locations for each organ in a person, so that if one of them is switched he cannot live. The same applies to other creatures.
תַּנְיָא, הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: ״הוּא עָשְׂךָ וַיְכֹנְנֶךָ״ – כַּרְכָא דְּכוֹלָּה בֵּיהּ, מִמֶּנּוּ כֹּהֲנָיו, מִמֶּנּוּ נְבִיאָיו, מִמֶּנּוּ שָׂרָיו, מִמֶּנּוּ מְלָכָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מִמֶּנּוּ פִנָּה מִמֶּנּוּ יָתֵד וְגוֹ׳״.
It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say that the verse: “Has He not made you, and established you?” teaches that the Jewish people is a city with everything in it. Out of it come its priests, out of it come its prophets, out of it come its chiefs, out of it come its kings, as it is stated: “Out of them shall come forth the cornerstone, out of them the stake, out of them the battle bow, out of them every master together” (Zechariah 10:4).
הָהוּא רוֹמָאָה דְּחַזְיֵיהּ לְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דִּנְפַל מֵאִיגָּרָא לְאַרְעָא, פְּקַעיה כְּרֵסֵיהּ וּנְפוּק מַעְיָינֵיהּ, אַתְיֵיהּ לִבְרֵיהּ וְשַׁחְטֵיהּ קַמֵּיהּ
The Gemara recounts an incident involving a certain Roman who saw a certain man fall from the roof to the ground, and his stomach ruptured and his intestines emerged. The Roman brought the man’s son and slaughtered him before his father’s eyes
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.
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Haifa, Israel
I learned daf more off than on 40 years ago. At the beginning of the current cycle, I decided to commit to learning daf regularly. Having Rabanit Michelle available as a learning partner has been amazing. Sometimes I learn with Hadran, sometimes with my husband, and sometimes on my own. It’s been fun to be part of an extended learning community.
Honolulu, Hawaii, United States
Philadelphia, United States
I started at the beginning of this cycle. No 1 reason, but here’s 5.
In 2019 I read about the upcoming siyum hashas.
There was a sermon at shul about how anyone can learn Talmud.
Talmud references come up when I am studying. I wanted to know more.
Yentl was on telly. Not a great movie but it’s about studying Talmud.
I went to the Hadran website: A new cycle is starting. I’m gonna do this
Cambridge, United Kingdom
I heard the new Daf Yomi cycle was starting and I was curious, so I searched online for a women’s class and was pleasently surprised to find Rabanit Michelle’s great class reviews in many online articles. It has been a splendid journey. It is a way to fill my days with Torah, learning so many amazing things I have never heard before during my Tanach learning at High School. Thanks so much .
Panama, Panama
A few years back, after reading Ilana Kurshan’s book, “If All The Seas Were Ink,” I began pondering the crazy, outlandish idea of beginning the Daf Yomi cycle. Beginning in December, 2019, a month before the previous cycle ended, I “auditioned” 30 different podcasts in 30 days, and ultimately chose to take the plunge with Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle. Such joy!
HUNTINGTON, United States
Berlin, Germany
Raanana, Israel
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Far Rockaway, United States
Michelle has been an inspiration for years, but I only really started this cycle after the moving and uplifting siyum in Jerusalem. It’s been an wonderful to learn and relearn the tenets of our religion and to understand how the extraordinary efforts of a band of people to preserve Judaism after the fall of the beit hamikdash is still bearing fruits today. I’m proud to be part of the chain!
Raanana, Israel
Philadelphia, 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!
Hashmonaim, Israel
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Far Rockaway, United States
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Hashmonaim, Israel
I started learning on January 5, 2020. When I complete the 7+ year cycle I will be 70 years old. I had been intimidated by those who said that I needed to study Talmud in a traditional way with a chevruta, but I decided the learning was more important to me than the method. Thankful for Daf Yomi for Women helping me catch up when I fall behind, and also being able to celebrate with each Siyum!
Bakersfield, 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.
Karmiel, Israel
When I was working and taking care of my children, learning was never on the list. Now that I have more time I have two different Gemora classes and the nach yomi as well as the mishna yomi daily.
Jerusalem, Israel
Raanana, Israel
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Pittsburgh, United States
I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!
Maale Adumim, Israel
Chullin 56
לְהָבִיא עוֹר בֵּית הַבּוֹשֶׁת חוּץ לִמְקוֹמוֹ פָּסוּל וְאֵין בּוֹ כָּרֵת, חוּץ לִזְמַנּוֹ פִּיגּוּל וְחַיָּיבִים עָלָיו כָּרֵת.
including the hide of the vulva, the halakha is the same: If one performs the sacrificial rites with intent to burn one of them outside its designated area, the offering is unfit, but there is no liability for karet for one who partakes of the offering. If he had intent to burn it beyond its designated time, this renders it piggul, and one is liable to receive karet for eating it. This baraita indicates that only Rabbi Shimon holds that the hide of the hooves is treated like its flesh, and that the Sages disagree, as Rabbi Yoḥanan stated.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת בָּעוֹף: נְקוּבַת הַוֶּושֶׁט, וּפְסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, הִכְּתָה חוּלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ מָקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה, נִיקַּב הַקּוּרְקְבָן, נִיקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּין, נָפְלָה לָאוּר וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, אִם יְרוּקִּים – פְּסוּלִים, אִם אֲדוּמִּים – כְּשֵׁרִים. דְּרָסָהּ וּטְרָפָהּ בַּכּוֹתֶל אוֹ שֶׁרִיצְּצַתָּה בְּהֵמָה וּמְפַרְכֶּסֶת, וְשָׁהֲתָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּשְׁחָטָהּ – כְּשֵׁרָה.
MISHNA: And these are tereifot in a bird: One with a perforated gullet, or with a cut windpipe that was cut across its width; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that renders it a tereifa, as one must be concerned that the membrane of the brain was perforated; or if the gizzard was perforated; or if the small intestines were perforated. In a case where a bird fell into the fire and its innards were singed [neḥmeru], if they turned green they are unfit, and the bird is a tereifa, but if they are red the bird is kosher. If a person trampled the bird, or slammed it against a wall, or if an animal crushed it and it is twitching, it is a tereifa because its limbs were shattered. But if the bird lasted for a twenty-four-hour period, and then one slaughtered it, it is kosher.
גְּמָ׳ רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל וְלֵוִי דְּאָמְרִי: מַכְנִיס יָדוֹ לִפְנִים וּבוֹדֵק, אִם מְבַצְבֵּץ וְעוֹלֶה – טְרֵפָה, וְאִם לָאו – כְּשֵׁרָה.
GEMARA: The mishna states: If a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that renders it a tereifa, one must be concerned that the membrane of the brain was perforated. Rav and Shmuel and Levi say: How does one inspect the membrane? After slaughter, one inserts his hand into the mouth of the bird and pushes the nerve tissue with his finger and inspects it. If the nerve tissue emerges and rises out through the hole in the skull, the animal is a tereifa, because this proves that the membrane has been perforated, allowing the nerve tissue through. And if not, the animal is kosher.
הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר עַד דְּמִנְּקִיב קְרָמָא תַּתָּאָה, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אִינְּקִיב עִילָּאָה אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא אִינְּקִיב תַּתָּאָה, נֵיחוּשׁ דִּלְמָא עִילָּאָה אִינְּקִיב תַּתָּאָה לָא אִינְּקִיב? אִי אִיתָא דְּאִינְּקִיב עִילָּאָה, תַּתָּאָה אַגַּב רוּכְּכֵיהּ מִיפְקָע פָּקַע.
The Gemara asks: This works out well according to the one who says (45a) that an animal is not a tereifa unless the inner membrane is perforated as well. But according to the one who says that the animal is rendered a tereifa if the outer membrane was perforated, even if the inner membrane was not perforated, how can one rely on this inspection? Let us be concerned that perhaps the outer membrane was perforated but the inner membrane was not perforated, in which case the animal is a tereifa even if the nerve tissue does not emerge through the hole. The Gemara responds: If it is the case that the outer membrane was perforated, the inner membrane will inevitably burst due to its fragility, allowing the nerve tissue to emerge. If it does not emerge, it is certain that the outer membrane is intact as well.
אָמַר זְעֵירִי: אֵין בְּדִיקָה לְחוּלְדָּה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשִּׁינֶּיהָ דַּקּוֹת. וְכִי שִׁינֶּיהָ דַּקּוֹת מַאי הָוֵי? אָמַר רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשִּׁינֶּיהָ דַּקּוֹת וַעֲקוּמּוֹת.
Ze’eiri says: There is no effective inspection for a bird bitten on the head by a weasel, because the weasel’s teeth are so thin that even if they perforate the membrane, the nerve tissue will not emerge through the perforations. The Gemara asks: And if its teeth are thin, what of it? Certainly a small amount will emerge through the perforation. Rav Oshaya said: There is no inspection because its teeth are fine and crooked. The hole in the skull does not overlap the perforation in the membrane, and nothing will be able to escape.
כִּי סְלֵיק לִנְהַרְדְּעָא, שְׁלַח לְהוּ: דְּבָרִים שֶׁאָמַרְתִּי לִפְנֵיכֶם טָעוּת הֵן בְּיָדִי, בְּרַם כָּךְ אָמְרוּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: בּוֹדְקִין לְחוּלְדָּה בַּיָּד, אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַסְמֵר, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אַף בְּמַסְמֵר.
The Gemara recounts: When Ze’eiri went up to Neharde’a, he sent a message to the Sages: The matters that I stated before you are an error on my part. In fact, they said this in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish: One inspects a bird bitten on the head by a weasel with one’s hand, pressing against the nerve tissue to see if it emerges through the hole, but not with a nail. One may not inspect it by dragging the tip of a nail over the surface of the membrane to see if it catches on a perforation, since the nail itself may perforate the membrane. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: One may even inspect it with a nail.
וּבִפְלוּגְתָּא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה, חַד בָּדֵיק בִּידָא, וְחַד בָּדֵיק בְּמַחְטָא. מַאן דְּבָדֵיק בִּידָא אָמַר לֵיהּ לְמַאן דְּבָדֵיק בְּמַחְטָא: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מְכַלֶּה מָמוֹנָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל? אָמַר לֵיהּ מַאן דְּבָדֵיק בְּמַחְטָא לְמַאן דְּבָדֵיק בִּידָא: עַד מָתַי אַתָּה מַאֲכִיל לְיִשְׂרָאֵל נְבֵלוֹת?
The Gemara notes: And this disagreement is also reflected in the dispute of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya, wherein one inspected the bird by hand, and one inspected it with a needle. The one who inspected it by hand said to the one who inspected it with a needle: Until when will you waste the money of the Jewish people by causing them to discard kosher meat? Sometimes the needle itself will perforate a membrane that was initially whole. The one who inspected it with a needle said to the one who inspected it by hand: Until when will you feed carcasses to the Jewish people, as you permit for consumption a bird that might well be forbidden?
נְבֵלוֹת? וְהָא שְׁחוּטָה הִיא! אֶלָּא טְרֵפוֹת, שֶׁמָּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ.
The Gemara asks: Carcasses? But this is a slaughtered animal; even if it is forbidden, it is a tereifa, not a carcass. Rather, he must have said: Until when will you feed tereifot to the Jewish people; perhaps the membrane of the brain was perforated. Inspection by hand is not reliable, since the teeth of the weasel are thin and crooked and the nerve tissue may not escape even if the membrane is perforated.
תִּסְתַּיֵּים דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הוּא דְּבָדֵיק בִּידָא, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: בּוֹדְקִין לְחוּלְדָּה בַּיָּד, אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַסְמֵר. נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ – תִּסְתַּיֵּים.
The Gemara notes: It may be concluded that it is Rabbi Yehuda who inspected it by hand, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda that one may inspect a bird bitten on the head by a weasel with one’s hand, but not with a nail. The baraita continues: If the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated, the animal is a tereifa. The Gemara affirms: Indeed, it may be concluded that Rabbi Yehuda permits inspection only by hand.
הָא גוּפַאּ קַשְׁיָא, אָמְרַתְּ: בּוֹדְקִין לְחוּלְדָּה בַּיָּד אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַסְמֵר. אַלְמָא אִית לֵיהּ בְּדִיקוּתָא, וַהֲדַר תָּנֵי: נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ. אַלְמָא לֵית לֵיהּ בְּדִיקוּתָא! סֵיפָא אֲתָאן לְעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין לוֹ קְרוּם. אֵין לוֹ קְרוּם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא, הוֹאִיל וּקְרוּמוֹ רַךְ.
The Gemara objects: This itself is difficult. You said in the baraita: One may inspect a bird injured by a weasel with one’s hand, but not with a nail; apparently, it has an option of inspection. But you then teach: If the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated, the animal is a tereifa; apparently it has no inspection, because inspecting for a perforation would be pointless. The Gemara responds: In the latter clause, we come to discuss a water bird, which cannot be inspected, since it has no membrane. The Gemara clarifies: Can it enter your mind that it has no membrane? One can see that it does. Rather, the response is: Since its membrane is fragile, it must have ruptured when the skull was broken.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן לְרַב עָנָן: מָר אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל בָּדֵיק בִּידָא וּמַכְשַׁר, וְהוּנָא חַבְרִין אָמַר רַב בָּדֵיק בִּידָא וּמַכְשַׁר. וְהָתָנֵי לֵוִי: טְרֵפוֹת שֶׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים בִּבְהֵמָה – כְּנֶגְדָּן בָּעוֹף, יָתֵר עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹף – נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָהוּא בְּעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין לוֹ קְרוּם. אֵין לוֹ קְרוּם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא, הוֹאִיל וּקְרוּמוֹ רַךְ.
Similarly, the Gemara relates that Rav Naḥman said to Rav Anan: The Master says that Shmuel inspects a bird bitten on the head by a weasel with his hand and deems it kosher if the membrane is not perforated, and our colleague Rav Huna also says that Rav inspects it by hand and deems it kosher. But doesn’t Levi teach: Those tereifot that the Sages enumerated in an animal apply likewise in a bird, and in addition to those, a bird is a tereifa if the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated? If so, how can a bird be permitted through inspection? Rav Anan said to him: That baraita is referring to a water bird, which cannot be inspected since it has no membrane. The Gemara clarifies: Can it enter your mind that it has no membrane? Rather, the response is: Since its membrane is fragile.
הָהִיא תַּרְנְגוֹלְתָּא דַּהֲוַאי בֵּי רַב חָנָא, שַׁדְּרַהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב מַתְנָא. נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם וְלֹא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ הֲוַאי, וְאַכְשְׁרַהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְהָתָנֵי לֵוִי: טְרֵפוֹת שֶׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים בִּבְהֵמָה כְּנֶגְדָּן בָּעוֹף, יָתֵר עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹף – נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָתָם בְּעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין לוֹ קְרוּם. אֵין לוֹ קְרוּם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: הוֹאִיל וּקְרוּמוֹ רַךְ.
Similarly, the Gemara relates: There was a certain hen that was in the house of Rav Ḥana whose skull was injured. He sent it before Rav Mattana, who inspected it and found that the bone of the skull was broken but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, and he deemed it kosher. Rav Ḥana said to Rav Mattana: But doesn’t Levi teach: Those tereifot that the Sages enumerated in an animal hold likewise in a bird, and in addition to those, a bird is a tereifa if the bone of the skull was broken, even if the membrane of the brain was not perforated? Rav Mattana said to him: That baraita is referring to a water bird, which cannot be inspected since it has no membrane. The Gemara clarifies: Can it enter your mind that it has no membrane? Rather, say that his response was: Since its membrane is fragile.
רַב שֵׁיזְבִי בָּדֵיק בְּשִׁימְשָׁא, רַב יֵימַר בָּדֵיק בְּמַיָּא, רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב בָּדֵיק
The Gemara notes that Rav Sheizvi would inspect the membrane of the brain by the light of the sun. Rav Yeimar would inspect it by pouring water into the skull through the hole, to see if it emerges mixed with nerve tissue. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov would inspect it
בְּגִילָא דְּחִיטְּתָא.
by dragging a wheat straw over the membrane to see if it would catch on a perforation.
אָמַר רַב שֵׁיזְבִי: הָנֵי אֲוָוזֵי דִּידַן כְּעוֹף שֶׁל מַיִם דָּמְיָין.
Rav Sheizvi said: Our geese are considered like water birds. If the skull of a goose is broken, even if the membrane is not perforated, it is a tereifa.
נָפְלָה לָאוּר, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: שִׁיעוּר יְרוּקָּתָן כְּשִׁיעוּר נְקוּבָתָן, מָה נְקוּבָתָן בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ – אַף יְרוּקָּתָן בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ.
§ The mishna states: In a case where a bird fell into the fire and its innards were singed, if they turned green the bird is a tereifa; if they are red the bird is kosher. Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Yehoshua: The measure of their turning green is like the measure of their perforation. Just as their perforation in any amount renders them a tereifa, so too their turning green in any amount renders them a tereifa.
בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי מֵרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: הוֹרִיקָה כָּבֵד כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: טְרֵפָה. וְלֹא יְהֵא אֶלָּא נִיטְּלָה! אָמַר רָבָא: כֵּיוָן שֶׁהוֹרִיקָה כָּבֵד כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁנָּפְלָה לָאוּר, וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים, וּטְרֵפָה.
Rav Yosef, son of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: If a liver turned green on the side facing the intestines, what is the halakha? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: The bird is a tereifa. Rav Yosef said to him: But this halakha should be no more stringent than that of a case where the liver was removed and an olive-bulk remained (see 54a), in which case the bird is kosher. Therefore, as long as an olive-bulk remains red, the bird should be kosher. Rava said: Since the liver turned green facing the intestines, it is certain that the bird fell into the fire and the intestines themselves were singed, and this is why the animal is a tereifa, not because of the liver per se.
רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי הַוְיָא לֵיהּ הָהִיא תַּרְנְגוֹלְתָּא, שַׁדְּרֵיהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַקַּפָּר בְּרִיבִּי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יְרוּקִּין הֲווֹ, וְאַכְשְׁרַהּ. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: ״יְרוּקִּין פְּסוּלִין״! לֹא אָמְרוּ ״יְרוּקִּין פְּסוּלִין״ אֶלָּא בַּקּוּרְקְבָן, בַּלֵּב וּבַכָּבֵד. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בְּאֵלּוּ בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים אָמְרוּ – בַּקּוּרְקְבָן, בַּלֵּב וּבַכָּבֵד.
The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi had a certain hen that fell into the fire. After it was slaughtered, he sent it before the distinguished Rabbi Elazar HaKappar and said to him: Its innards were green, and Rabbi Elazar HaKappar deemed it kosher. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked: But didn’t we learn in the mishna: If they turned green they are unfit? Rabbi Elazar HaKappar said to him: The Sages said that if they turned green they are unfit only with regard to the gizzard, the heart, and the liver, which are naturally red. Other innards of a hen, such as the intestines, are naturally green, and a green appearance in them does not render the hen a tereifa. The Gemara notes: This is also taught in a baraita: Concerning which innards did they say that a green appearance renders the bird a tereifa? Only concerning the gizzard, the heart, and the liver.
רַבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף הֲוָה לֵיהּ הָהִוא תַּרְנְגוֹלְתָּא, שַׁדְּרַהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲדוּמִּין הֲווֹ וּטְרֵפָה. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: ״אֲדוּמִּין כְּשֵׁרִים״! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲדוּמִּין שֶׁהוֹרִיקוּ וִירוּקִּין שֶׁהֶאֱדִימוּ – טְרֵפָה, לֹא אָמְרוּ ״אֲדוּמִּין כְּשֵׁרִים״ אֶלָּא בַּלֵּב בַּקּוּרְקְבָן וּבַכָּבֵד.
The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Yosef had a certain hen that fell into the fire. After it was slaughtered, he sent it before Rabbi Abbahu and said to him: Its innards were red, and Rabbi Elazar HaKappar deemed it a tereifa. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Yosef asked: But didn’t we learn in the mishna: If they are red, the bird is kosher? Rabbi Elazar HaKappar said to him: Red innards that turned green and green innards that turned red render the animal a tereifa. The Sages said in the mishna that red innards are kosher only with regard to the heart, the gizzard, and the liver, because these organs are naturally red. Organs that are naturally green, however, render the bird a tereifa if they have turned red.
אָמַר רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר חִיָּיא אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי: אֲדוּמִּין שֶׁהוֹרִיקוּ וּשְׁלָקָן וְחָזְרוּ וְהֶאֱדִימוּ – כְּשֵׁרִין, מַאי טַעְמָא? קוּטְרָא עָיֵיל בְּהוּ. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: אַף אָנוּ נֹאמַר, אֲדוּמִּין שֶׁלֹּא הוֹרִיקוּ וּשְׁלָקָן וְהוֹרִיקוּ – טְרֵפָה, מַאי טַעְמָא? אִיגַּלַּאי בַּהְתַּיְיהוּ. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: הִלְכָּךְ לָא לֵיכוֹל אִינָשׁ אֶלָּא בְּשִׁלְקָא. וְלָא הִיא, אַחְזוֹקֵי רֵיעוּתָא לָא מַחְזְקִינַן.
Rav Shmuel bar Ḥiyya says that Rabbi Mani says: If red organs turned green, and one boiled them and they turned red again, they are kosher. What is the reason? This proves that they were not burned; rather, smoke entered them and changed their color temporarily. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: We, too, will say: If red organs did not turn green, and one boiled them and they then turned green, the animal is a tereifa. What is the reason? Their shame was revealed, i.e., it is evident that they were in fact burned. Rav Ashi said: Therefore, even if a bird’s innards remain red after it fell in a fire, a person may eat it only if it is boiled, to be certain that the innards will not turn green. The Gemara rejects this: But that is not so, since we do not presume the existence of a flaw without evidence.
דְּרָסָהּ וּטְרָפָהּ בַּכּוֹתֶל. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי: אַחַת זוֹ וְאַחַת זוֹ צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה.
§ The mishna states: If a person trampled the bird, or slammed it against a wall, or if an animal crushed it, and it lasted twenty-four hours, and then one slaughtered it, it is kosher. Rabbi Elazar ben Antigonus says in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yannai: Both this and that, i.e., all of the above cases, require inspection after slaughter, to ascertain that there is no injury that would itself render the animal a tereifa.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת בָּעוֹף: נִיקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה, הִכְּתָה חוּלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ מָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה, נִיקַּב הַזֶּפֶק, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ נִיטַּל, יָצְאוּ בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ וְלֹא נִיקְּבוּ, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ גַּפֶּיהָ, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ רַגְלֶיהָ, נִמְרְטוּ כְּנָפֶיהָ, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אִם נִטְּלָה הַנּוֹצָה פְּסוּלָה.
MISHNA: And these are kosher among birds: If a bird’s windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that does not render it a tereifa; or if the crop was perforated. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is kosher even if the crop was removed. If the bird’s intestines emerged from the abdominal wall but were not perforated, or if its wings were broken, or if its legs were broken, or if the feathers on its wings were plucked, the bird is kosher. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the down covering its body was removed, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי סִימַאי וְרַבִּי צָדוֹק שֶׁהָלְכוּ לְעַבֵּר שָׁנָה בְּלוֹד, וְשָׁבְתוּ בְּאוֹנוֹ, וְהוֹרוּ בְּטַרְפַּחַת כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק.
GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving Rabbi Simai and Rabbi Tzadok, who went to intercalate the year in Lod, and they spent Shabbat in the town of Ono. And they ruled with regard to an animal whose womb was removed, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi in the mishna with regard to the crop.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הוֹרוּ בְּטַרְפַּחַת לְאִיסּוּרָא, כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק לְהֶתֵּירָא? אוֹ דִילְמָא: הוֹרוּ בְּטַרְפַּחַת לְהֶתֵּירָא כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק, אֲבָל כְּרַבִּי בְּזֶפֶק לָא סְבִירָא לְהוּ? תֵּיקוּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the meaning of the baraita? Is it referring to two different rulings, i.e., that they ruled with regard to the womb to prohibit it, and they also ruled in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to the crop to permit it? Or perhaps it is referring to only one ruling, and it means that they ruled with regard to the womb to permit it, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to the crop, but they do not hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to the crop itself. The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.
אָמַר רַבָּה, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: גַּגּוֹ שֶׁל זֶפֶק נִידּוֹן כְּוֶושֶׁט. הֵיכָא? אָמַר רַב בִּיבִי בַּר אַבָּיֵי: כֹּל שֶׁנִּמְתָּח עִמּוֹ.
Rabba says, and some say it was Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi who says: The roof of the crop is treated like the gullet, i.e., it renders the bird a tereifa if perforated in any amount. The Gemara asks: Where is the roof of the crop? Rav Beivai bar Abaye said: It is any part of the crop that stretches with the gullet.
יָצְאוּ בְּנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא הִיפֵּךְ בָּהֶן, אֲבָל הִיפֵּךְ בָּהֶן – טְרֵפָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״הוּא עָשְׂךָ וַיְכֹנְנֶךָ״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא כּוֹנָנִיּוֹת בָּאָדָם, שֶׁאִם נֶהְפָּךְ (אַחַת) [אֶחָד] מֵהֶן – אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִחְיוֹת.
§ The mishna states: If the bird’s intestines emerged from the stomach wall but were not perforated, the bird is kosher. Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak says: The Sages taught this halakha only in a case where one did not jumble them, but returned them to the stomach in their proper order. But if he jumbled them, the bird is a tereifa, as it is written: “Has He not made you, and established you?” (Deuteronomy 32:6). The verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created established locations for each organ in a person, so that if one of them is switched he cannot live. The same applies to other creatures.
תַּנְיָא, הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: ״הוּא עָשְׂךָ וַיְכֹנְנֶךָ״ – כַּרְכָא דְּכוֹלָּה בֵּיהּ, מִמֶּנּוּ כֹּהֲנָיו, מִמֶּנּוּ נְבִיאָיו, מִמֶּנּוּ שָׂרָיו, מִמֶּנּוּ מְלָכָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מִמֶּנּוּ פִנָּה מִמֶּנּוּ יָתֵד וְגוֹ׳״.
It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say that the verse: “Has He not made you, and established you?” teaches that the Jewish people is a city with everything in it. Out of it come its priests, out of it come its prophets, out of it come its chiefs, out of it come its kings, as it is stated: “Out of them shall come forth the cornerstone, out of them the stake, out of them the battle bow, out of them every master together” (Zechariah 10:4).
הָהוּא רוֹמָאָה דְּחַזְיֵיהּ לְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דִּנְפַל מֵאִיגָּרָא לְאַרְעָא, פְּקַעיה כְּרֵסֵיהּ וּנְפוּק מַעְיָינֵיהּ, אַתְיֵיהּ לִבְרֵיהּ וְשַׁחְטֵיהּ קַמֵּיהּ
The Gemara recounts an incident involving a certain Roman who saw a certain man fall from the roof to the ground, and his stomach ruptured and his intestines emerged. The Roman brought the man’s son and slaughtered him before his father’s eyes
