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 Fred Hochstadter, Ephraim ben Kayla veBaruch on his 18th yahrzeit on ח׳ אלול. “We continue to be inspired by his dedication to daily learning, from the Daf and beyond, to its surrounding philosophical, historical and legal nuances. We miss him greatly and can only strive to emulate his wise, kind and elegant ways.”
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 Fred Hochstadter, Ephraim ben Kayla veBaruch on his 18th yahrzeit on ח׳ אלול. “We continue to be inspired by his dedication to daily learning, from the Daf and beyond, to its surrounding philosophical, historical and legal nuances. We miss him greatly and can only strive to emulate his wise, kind and elegant ways.”
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.
Shortly after the death of my father, David Malik z”l, I made the commitment to Daf Yomi. While riding to Ben Gurion airport in January, Siyum HaShas was playing on the radio; that was the nudge I needed to get started. The “everyday-ness” of the Daf has been a meaningful spiritual practice, especial after COVID began & I was temporarily unable to say Kaddish at daily in-person minyanim.
Wynnewood, United States
It’s hard to believe it has been over two years. Daf yomi has changed my life in so many ways and has been sustaining during this global sea change. Each day means learning something new, digging a little deeper, adding another lens, seeing worlds with new eyes. Daf has also fostered new friendships and deepened childhood connections, as long time friends have unexpectedly become havruta.
Northwest Washington, United States
Blacksburg, United States
I started learning daf yomi at the beginning of this cycle. As the pandemic evolved, it’s been so helpful to me to have this discipline every morning to listen to the daf podcast after I’ve read the daf; learning about the relationships between the rabbis and the ways they were constructing our Jewish religion after the destruction of the Temple. I’m grateful to be on this journey!
Teaneck NJ, United States
Hadran entered my life after the last Siyum Hashaas, January 2020. I was inspired and challenged simultaneously, having never thought of learning Gemara. With my family’s encouragement, I googled “daf yomi for women”. A perfecr fit!
I especially enjoy when Rabbanit Michelle connects the daf to contemporary issues to share at the shabbat table e.g: looking at the Kohen during duchaning. Toda rabba
Jerusalem, Israel
After being so inspired by the siyum shas two years ago, I began tentatively learning daf yomi, like Rabbanut Michelle kept saying – taking one daf at a time. I’m still taking it one daf at a time, one masechet at a time, but I’m loving it and am still so inspired by Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran community, and yes – I am proud to be finishing Seder Mo’ed.
Bet Shemesh, Israel
What a great experience to learn with Rabbanit Michelle Farber. I began with this cycle in January 2020 and have been comforted by the consistency and energy of this process throughout the isolation period of Covid. Week by week, I feel like I am exploring a treasure chest with sparkling gems and puzzling antiquities. The hunt is exhilarating.
Pennsylvania, United States
I had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Minneapolis, United States
I started learning the daf during Covid. I’d always wanted to learn Talmud but that wasn’t an option for girls in the small town I grew up in and I struggled to help my younger kids with Hebrew homework let alone read a Hebrew text. I decided to start small by listening to the daf podcast on the way to work each morning. Then I joined the Long Island WhatsApp group. Now I go to the siyyums.
Long Island, United States
I began daf yomi in January 2020 with Brachot. I had made aliya 6 months before, and one of my post-aliya goals was to complete a full cycle. As a life-long Tanach teacher, I wanted to swim from one side of the Yam shel Torah to the other. Daf yomi was also my sanity through COVID. It was the way to marking the progression of time, and feel that I could grow and accomplish while time stopped.
Givat Zev, Israel
3 years ago, I joined Rabbanit Michelle to organize the unprecedented Siyum HaShas event in Jerusalem for thousands of women. The whole experience was so inspiring that I decided then to start learning the daf and see how I would go…. and I’m still at it. I often listen to the Daf on my bike in mornings, surrounded by both the external & the internal beauty of Eretz Yisrael & Am Yisrael!
Raanana, Israel
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Minnesota, United States
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Minnesota, United States
I am grateful for the structure of the Daf Yomi. When I am freer to learn to my heart’s content, I learn other passages in addition. But even in times of difficulty, I always know that I can rely on the structure and social support of Daf Yomi learners all over the world.
I am also grateful for this forum. It is very helpful to learn with a group of enthusiastic and committed women.
Beit Shemesh, Israel
Oceanside NY, 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
I have joined the community of daf yomi learners at the start of this cycle. I have studied in different ways – by reading the page, translating the page, attending a local shiur and listening to Rabbanit Farber’s podcasts, depending on circumstances and where I was at the time. The reactions have been positive throughout – with no exception!
Guildford, United Kingdom
I heard about the syium in January 2020 & I was excited to start learning then the pandemic started. Learning Daf became something to focus on but also something stressful. As the world changed around me & my family I had to adjust my expectations for myself & the world. Daf Yomi & the Hadran podcast has been something I look forward to every day. It gives me a moment of centering & Judaism daily.
Denver, United States
I was inspired to start learning after attending the 2020 siyum in Binyanei Hauma. It has been a great experience for me. It’s amazing to see the origins of stories I’ve heard and rituals I’ve participated in my whole life. Even when I don’t understand the daf itself, I believe that the commitment to learning every day is valuable and has multiple benefits. And there will be another daf tomorrow!
Jerusalem, Israel
It has been a pleasure keeping pace with this wonderful and scholarly group of women.
Beit Shemesh, 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
