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

Today's Daf Yomi

January 23, 2019 | 讬状讝 讘砖讘讟 转砖注状讟

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Chullin 57

There are conflicting traditions about what Rav said regarding a femur that is dislocated in a bird. The gemara in the end paskens based on a story in which it becomes clear what the prevalent custom was.


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

讘讗讞讜讝转 注讬谞讬诐 讗讬谞讙讬讚 讜讗讬转谞讞 注讜诇 诇诪注讬讬谞讬讛 讜讞讬讬讟讬讛 诇讻专住讬讛

deceptively, i.e., he only pretended to kill the son. The father fainted and went limp. By this movement, his intestines entered his stomach, and the Roman sewed up his stomach, and he recovered.

谞砖转讘专讜 专讙诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 爪谞讗 讚讗讬谞拽讜专讬 讚讗转讬讗 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讘讚拽讬讛 专讘讗 讘爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗讻砖专讬讛

搂 The mishna states: If its legs were broken, the bird remains kosher. The Gemara relates that there was a certain basket of birds with broken legs that came before Rava. Rava inspected each bird at the convergence of sinews in the thigh, and when he found that all its sinews were intact, he deemed it kosher.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬讚 讘讘讛诪讛 讻砖专讛 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘讘讛诪讛 讟专驻讛 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 砖诪讜讟转 讙祝 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 砖诪讗 谞讬拽讘讛 讛专讬讗讛 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 转讬讘讚拽 讜讻谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 转讬讘讚拽

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: A dislocated foreleg in an animal is kosher. A dislocated femur in an animal renders it a tereifa. A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. A dislocated wing in a bird renders it a tereifa, because we must be concerned that perhaps the lung was perforated. The lung is located near the wing鈥檚 attachment to the body, and part of the lung may have been torn out with the wing. And Shmuel says: The lung should be inspected, and if no damage is found, the bird is kosher. And so says Rabbi Yo岣nan: It should be inspected.

讞讝拽讬讛 讗诪专 讗讬谉 专讬讗讛 诇注讜祝 讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讬砖 诇讜 讜讬砖谞讛 讻注诇讛 砖诇 讜讜专讚 讘讬谉 讗讙驻讬诐 诪讗讬 讗讬谉 专讬讗讛 诇注讜祝 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 讻诇诇 讜讛讗 拽讗 讞讝讬谞讗 讚讗讬转 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讚诇讗 诪讬讟专讬祝 讘讬讛 讜讛转谞讬 诇讜讬 讟专驻讜转 砖诪谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讘讘讛诪讛 讻谞讙讚谉 讘注讜祝 讬转专 注诇讬讛谉 注讜祝 谞砖讘专 讛注爪诐 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 谞讬拽讘 拽专讜诐 砖诇 诪讜讞

岣zkiyya, son of Rabbi 岣yya, says: A bird has no lungs. And Rabbi Yo岣nan says: A bird does have lungs, and they are like a rose petal in appearance, thin and red, between the wings. The Gemara asks: What does 岣zkiyya mean when he says that a bird has no lungs? If we say that it has no lungs at all, that is problematic, as don鈥檛 we see that it does have lungs? Rather, say that he means that the bird is not rendered a tereifa by them if they are perforated. But this, too, is problematic, as doesn鈥檛 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? If so, a perforated lung in a bird, as in an animal, renders it a tereifa.

讗诇讗 讗讬谉 诇讜 诇讗 诇讬谞驻诇 讜诇讗 诇讬讞诪专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞谞讛 讛讜讗讬诇 讜专讜讘 爪诇注讜转讬讛 诪讙讬谞讜转 注诇讬讛

Rather, say that 岣zkiyya means that a bird鈥檚 lung has no halakha of falling and no halakha of singeing. If a bird falls, one need not inspect the lungs for damage as he must other organs (see 51b), and if it falls in a fire, one need not inspect the lungs for a change in color as he must other organs (see 56b). What is the reason for this? Rav 岣na said: Since a majority of the bird鈥檚 ribs protect the lungs, one need not be concerned that the lung was damaged.

讜讛讗 诪讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讬砖 诇讜 讜讬砖谞讛 讻注诇讛 砖诇 讜讜专讚 讘讬谉 讗讙驻讬讬诐 诪讻诇诇 讚讞讝拽讬讛 住讘专 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讗诪专讬 讘诪注专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诪讚讘专讬讜 砖诇 讘专讬讘讬 谞讬讻专 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 讘转专谞讙讜诇讬谉

The Gemara asks: But from the fact that Rabbi Yo岣nan says in response: A bird does have lungs, and they are like a rose petal between the wings, by inference one must conclude that 岣zkiyya maintains that it has no lungs at all. Rather, one must say as they say in the West, Eretz Yisrael, in the name of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina: From the statement of the Distinguished, i.e., 岣zkiyya, it is apparent that he is unfamiliar with chickens.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜讛讗 专讘谞谉 讚讗转讜 诪驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗 讗诪专讜 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘专讬 谞讛专讗 谞讛专讗 讜驻砖讟讬讛

Rav Huna said that Rav said: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher. Rabba bar Rav Huna said to Rav Huna: But the Rabbis that came from Pumbedita said that Rav Yehuda says in the name of Rav: A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. Rav Huna said to him: My son, each river and its course, i.e., different communities observe different customs. Although Rav himself held that such a bird is kosher, he ruled for those living in Pumbedita that such a bird is a tereifa, in accordance with their own custom.

讗讝诇 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讚拽讗 讘讚讬拽 讘爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇诪讛 诇讬讛 诇诪专 讻讜诇讬 讛讗讬 讜讛讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讬讚注谞讗 讘讛诪讛 砖谞讞转讻讜 专讙诇讬讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪讟讛 讻砖专讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪注诇讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜讻谉 砖谞讬讟诇 爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗诪专 专讘 注诇讛 讜讻谉 讘注讜祝

The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Abba went and found Rav Yirmeya bar Abba inspecting birds at the convergence of sinews in the thigh. Rabbi Abba said to him: Why must Master do all this? But doesn鈥檛 Rav Huna say that Rav says: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher? If a bird is kosher even when the whole thigh has been removed, all the more so it should be kosher when only the convergence of sinews has been removed. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said to him: I know the mishna (76a): With regard to an animal whose hind legs were severed, if they were severed from the leg joint and below, it is kosher; from the leg joint and above, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption. And likewise an animal whose convergence of sinews in the thigh was removed is a tereifa. And Rav said about this: And likewise with regard to a bird.

讗讬 讛讻讬 拽砖讬讗 讚专讘 讗讚专讘 讗讬砖转讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚诇诪讗 砖谞讬 诇讛 讘讬谉 砖诪讜讟讛 诇讞转讜讻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜讗转 诪驻专砖转 砖诪注转转讬讛 讚专讘 讘驻讬专讜砖 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟讛 讻砖专讛 讞转讜讻讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜讗诇 转转诪讛 砖讛专讬 讞讜转讻讛 诪讻讗谉 讜诪转讛 讞讜转讻讛 诪讻讗谉 讜讞讬转讛

Rabbi Abba responded: If so, this statement of Rav, that a bird whose convergence of sinews was removed is a tereifa, poses a difficulty for that statement of Rav, that a bird with a dislocated femur is kosher. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba was silent and did not respond. Rabbi Abba said to him: Perhaps there is a difference for Rav between a dislocated femur and a severed femur, and while the former does not render a bird a tereifa, the latter does. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said to him: And are you interpreting Rav鈥檚 halakhot based on your own reasoning? Rav said explicitly: A dislocated femur is kosher, while a severed femur renders the animal unfit for consumption. And do not be confounded by this distinction, as one cuts an animal from here, in one place, and it dies, but one cuts it from there, in another place, and it lives.

讻讬 住诇讬拽 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讚讬转讬讘 讜拽讗诪专 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讬讬 讚诪专 诪讬讜诪讗 讚住诇讬拽 诪专 诇讛讻讗

The Gemara recounts: When Rabbi Abba went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found Rabbi Zeira sitting and saying: Rav Huna said that Rav said that a dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. Rabbi Abba said to him: By Master鈥檚 life, since the day that Master came up to here, Eretz Yisrael,

讛讜讛 诇谉 驻转讞讜谉 驻讛 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜砖讗讬诇谞讬讛 讜讗诪专 诇谉 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖讬专讛

we had the opportunity to speak with Rav Huna, and we asked him about this matter, and he said to us: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher.

讜讗砖讻讞转讬讛 谞诪讬 诇专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讚讬转讬讘 讜拽讗 讘讚讬拽 讘爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗拽砖讬 诇讬讛 诇讗 住讘专 诇讛 诪专 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 诇讬 讗谞讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讬讚注谞讗 讘讛诪讛 砖谞讞转讻讜 专讙诇讬讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪讟讛 讻砖专讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪注诇讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜讻谉 砖谞讬讟诇 爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗诪专 专讘 注诇讛 讜讻谉 讘注讜祝

And I also found Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba sitting and inspecting birds at the convergence of sinews in the thigh. And I posed a difficulty to him: Doesn鈥檛 Master maintain in accordance with this statement that Rav Huna says that Rav says: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher? Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said to me: I know the mishna (76a): With regard to an animal whose hind legs were severed, if they were severed from the leg joint and below, it is kosher; from the leg joint and above, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption. And likewise an animal whose convergence of sinews in the thigh was removed is a tereifa. And Rav said about this: And likewise with regard to a bird.

讜讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 拽砖讬讗 讚专讘 讗讚专讘 讗讬砖转讬拽 讜讗拽砖讬 诇讬讛 讜讚诇诪讗 砖谞讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讘讬谉 砖诪讜讟讛 诇讞转讜讻讛 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讜讗转 诪驻专砖转 砖诪注转讬讛 讚专讘 讘驻讬专讜砖 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟讛 讻砖专讛 讞转讜讻讛 驻住讜诇讛

And I said to him: If so, this statement of Rav poses a difficulty for that statement of Rav. Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba was silent. And I challenged him: But perhaps there is a difference for Rav between a dislocated femur and a severed one. And he said to me: And are you interpreting Rav鈥檚 halakha based on your own reasoning? Rav said explicitly: A dislocated femur is kosher, while a severed femur renders the animal unfit for consumption.

讜讗转 诪讛 讘讬讚讱 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗砖讬 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讜讻谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛

Rabbi Abba then asked Rabbi Zeira: And as for you, what is in your hand? What have you heard with regard to this halakha? Rabbi Zeira said to him: This is what Rav 岣yya bar Ashi says that Rav says: A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. And so said Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗讬诇诪诇讬 讛讜讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讗转专讗 讚讗讜专讜 讘讛 讞讘专讜讜转讗 诇讛转讬专讗 诇讗 驻专讻讬住 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讜转专谞讙讜诇转 讛讬转讛 诇讜 诇专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 砖谞砖诪讟讛 讬专讱 砖诇讛 讜讛讘讬讗讛 诇驻谞讬 专讘讬 讜讛转讬专讛 诇讜 讜诪诇讞讛 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讜讛讜讛 诪讜专讬 讘讛 讛诇讻讛 诇转诇诪讬讚讬诐 讝讛 讛转讬专 诇讬 专讘讬 讝讛 讛转讬专 诇讬 专讘讬

And with regard to this, Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi said: If Rabbi Yo岣nan had been in the place where the assembly ruled to permit such a bird, he would not have stirred. In other words, he would not have contested their ruling, because they were the greatest Sages of the previous generation. As Rabbi 岣nina says that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher. And Rabbi 岣nina had a hen whose femur was dislocated, and he brought it before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted it to him, and Rabbi 岣nina salted the hen to preserve it. And he would teach the students the halakha with it, as he would show them the preserved body of the hen and say: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted this to me, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted this to me.

讜诇讬转 讛诇讻转讗 讻讻诇 讛谞讬 砖诪注转转讗 讗诇讗 讻讬 讛讗 讚砖讗诇 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 谞讛讜专讗讬 讗转 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 拽讚讬专转 拽谞讛 讘讻诪讛 讗诪专 诇讜 诪砖谞讛 砖诇诪讛 砖谞讬谞讜 注讚 讻讗讬住专 讛讗讬讟诇拽讬 讗诪专 诇讜 讜讛诇讗 专讞诇 讗讞转 讛讬转讛 讘砖讻讜谞转谞讜 砖谞拽讚专 拽谞讛 砖诇讛 讜注砖讜 诇讛 拽专讜诪讬谉 砖诇 拽谞讛 讜讞讬转讛

The Gemara concludes: But the halakha is not in accordance with any of these statements. Rather, it is in accordance with that which Rabbi Yosei ben Nehorai asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: In what amount must a windpipe be punctured to render the animal a tereifa? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: We learned a full mishna (54a): Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. Rabbi Yosei ben Nehorai said to him: But wasn鈥檛 there a certain ewe in our neighborhood whose windpipe was punctured in a greater amount, and they made a seal for the windpipe out of the shell of a reed and it lived?

讗诪专 诇讜 讜注诇 讚讗 讗转 住诪讬讱 讜讛诇讗 讛诇讻讛 专讜讜讞转 讘讬砖专讗诇 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讜转专谞讙讜诇转 讛讬转讛 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讞诇驻转讗 砖谞砖诪讟讛 讬专讱 砖诇讛 讜注砖讜 诇讛 砖驻讜驻专转 砖诇 拽谞讛 讜讞讬转讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讬 讗讬转 诇讱 诇诪讬诪专 转讜讱 砖谞讬诐 注砖专 讞讚砖 讛讜讛 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 转讜讱 砖谞讬诐 注砖专 讞讚砖 讛讜讛

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: And do you rely on this incident as evidence? But isn鈥檛 it a widespread halakha among the Jewish people that a dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa? And still, Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta had a hen whose femur was dislocated, and they made it a support out of the tube of a reed and it lived. Rather, what have you to say about this case? It must have occurred within twelve months of the dislocation, and afterward the hen died, since no tereifa can live more than twelve months. Here, too, in the case of the punctured windpipe, the episode occurred within twelve months of the injury and the ewe later died.

讗诪专讜 注诇讬讜 注诇 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讞诇驻转讗 砖注住拽谉 讘讚讘专讬诐 讛讬讛 讜讛讬讛 注讜砖讛 讚讘专 诇讛讜爪讬讗 诪诇讘讜 砖诇 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讛讬讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 谞讬讟诇讛 讛谞讜爪讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜转专谞讙讜诇转 讛讬转讛 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讞诇驻转讗 砖谞讬讟诇讛 谞讜爪讛 砖诇讛 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讘转谞讜专 讜讟诇讛 注诇讬讛 讘诪讟诇讬转 砖诇 讟专住讬讬诐 讜讙讬讚诇讛 讻谞驻讬讬诐 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 讬讜转专 诪谉 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐

They said about Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta that he was a researcher of various matters, and he would act to counter the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as Rabbi Yehuda would say: If the down covering a bird鈥檚 body was removed, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption, as stated in the mishna. And Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta had a hen whose down was removed, and he placed it in an oven, a warm place, and he covered it with a bronzers鈥 [tarsiyyim] apron, and its new, i.e., rehabilitated, wings grew even more feathers than the original wings.

讜讚诇诪讗 拽住讘专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讟专驻讛 诪砖讘讞转 讗诐 讻谉 讘诪讬讚讬 讚诪讬讟专驻讗 讘讛 讛讙讚讬诇讛 讻谞驻讬讬诐 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 讬讜转专 诪谉 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐

The Gemara asks: But how does this counter Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 opinion? Perhaps Rabbi Yehuda holds that a tereifa can live and that its health can even improve beyond its previous state. The Gemara responds: Even if this is so, would Rabbi Yehuda say so with regard to the very thing with which it was rendered a tereifa, as is the case here, where it grew new wings with more feathers than the original wings?

诪讗讬 注住拽谉 讘讚讘专讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 诪砖专砖讬讗 讚讻转讬讘 诇讱 讗诇 谞诪诇讛 注爪诇 专讗讛 讚专讻讬讛 讜讞讻诐 讗砖专 讗讬谉 诇讛 拽爪讬谉 砖讟专 讜诪砖诇 转讻讬谉 讘拽讬抓 诇讞诪讛 讗诪专 讗讬讝讬诇 讗讬讞讝讬 讗讬 讜讚讗讬 讛讜讗 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 诪诇讻讗

The Gemara asks: From what episode did Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta earn the title: Researcher of matters? Rav Mesharshiyya said: He saw that it is written: 鈥淕o to the ant, you sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise; which having no chief, overseer, or ruler, provides her bread in the summer鈥 (Proverbs 6:6鈥8). Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta said: I will go and see if it is correct that they have no king.

讗讝诇 讘转拽讜驻转 转诪讜讝 驻专住讬讛 诇讙诇讬诪讬讛 讗拽讬谞讗 讚砖讜诪砖诪谞讬 谞驻拽 讗转讗 讞讚 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗转谞讞 讘讬讛 住讬诪谞讗 注诇 讗诪专 诇讛讜 谞驻诇 讟讜诇讗 谞驻拽讜 讜讗转讜 讚诇讬讬讛 诇讙诇讬诪讬讛 谞驻诇 砖诪砖讗 谞驻诇讜 注诇讬讛 讜拽讟诇讬讛 讗诪专 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诇讬转 诇讛讜 诪诇讻讗 讚讗讬 讗讬转 诇讛讜 讛专诪谞讗 讚诪诇讻讗 诇讗 诇讬讘注讜

He went in the season of Tammuz, i.e., summer. Knowing that ants avoid intense heat, he spread his cloak over an ant hole to provide shade. One of the ants came out and saw the shade. Rabbi Shimon placed a distinguishing mark on the ant. It went into the hole and said to the other ants: Shade has fallen. They all came out to work. Rabbi Shimon lifted up his cloak, and the sun fell on them. They all fell upon the first ant and killed it. He said: One may learn from their actions that they have no king; as, if they had a king, would they not need the king鈥檚 edict [harmana] to execute their fellow ant?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讚诇诪讗 诪诇讻讗 讛讜讛 讘讛讚讬讬讛讜 讗讬 谞诪讬 讛专诪谞讗 讚诪诇讻讗 讛讜讜 谞拽讬讟讬 讗讬 谞诪讬 讘讬谉 诪诇讻讗 诇诪诇讻讗 讛讜讛 讚讻转讬讘 讘讬诪讬诐 讛讛诐 讗讬谉 诪诇讱 讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬砖 讛讬砖专 讘注讬谞讬讜 讬注砖讛 讗诇讗 住诪讜讱 讗讛讬诪谞讜转讗 讚砖诇诪讛

Rav A岣, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: But perhaps the king was with them at the time and gave them permission. Or perhaps they already possessed the king鈥檚 edict giving them license to kill the ant. Or perhaps it was an interregnum between kings, as it is written: 鈥淚n those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own eyes鈥 (Judges 17:6). Rather, rely on the credibility of Solomon, the author of Proverbs, that ants have no king.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 住讬诪谉 诇讟专驻讛 砖谞讬诐 注砖专 讞讚砖 诪讬转讬讘讬 住讬诪谉 诇讟专驻讛 讻诇 砖讗讬谞讛 讬讜诇讚转 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诪砖讘讞转 讜讛讜诇讻转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讛讬讗 讻砖专讛 诪转谞讜讜谞讛 讜讛讜诇讻转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讛讬讗 讟专驻讛 专讘讬 讗讜诪专 住讬诪谉 诇讟专驻讛 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讜讛诇讗 讛专讘讛 诪转拽讬讬诪讜转 砖转讬诐 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐

Rav Huna says: The sign of a tereifa is twelve months. If it is uncertain whether an animal is a tereifa, one may wait twelve months; if the animal survives, it is kosher. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: The sign of a tereifa is any animal that cannot give birth. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If its health improves continuously, it is certainly kosher; if its health deteriorates continuously, it is certainly a tereifa. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The sign of a tereifa is any animal that does not survive thirty days. The Sages said to him: But don鈥檛 many animals that are certainly tereifot survive two or three years? None of the opinions cited in the baraita accord with Rav Huna鈥檚 statement.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讜讘讙诇讙诇转 注讚 砖讬砖 讘讛 谞拽讘 讗讞讚 讗专讜讱 讗驻讬诇讜 谞拽讘讬诐 讛专讘讛 诪爪讟专驻讬诐 诇诪诇讗 诪拽讚讞 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 讛诪砖讜诇诐 诪注砖讛 讘注谞讘讜诇 讘讗讞讚 砖谞驻讞转讛 讙诇讙诇转讜 讜注砖讜 诇讜 讞讬讚讜拽 砖诇 拽专讜讬讛 讜讞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪砖诐 专讗讬讛 讬诪讜转 讛讞诪讛 讛讬讛 讜讻讬讜谉 砖注讘专讜 注诇讬讜 讬诪讜转 讛爪谞讛 诪讬讚 诪转

The Gemara responds: The matter is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: And in a skull that contains one long hole, or even if it has many holes, the areas of the holes join together to constitute the size of a drill hole, and they render the animal a tereifa. Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam said: There was an incident in a place called Inbul involving one whose skull was missing a piece, and they made for him a patch out of the shell of a gourd, and he survived. Therefore, an animal with a missing piece of skull cannot be a tereifa. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said to him: Can you bring proof from there? It was summer then, and once winter came upon him he died immediately. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds that an animal is a tereifa if it does not survive through summer and winter, i.e., one year. Rav Huna鈥檚 statement accords with this opinion.

讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讛诇讻讛 讟专驻讛 讬讜诇讚转 讜诪砖讘讞转 讗诪专 讗诪讬诪专 讛谞讬 讘讬注讬 讚讟专驻讛

Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov says: The halakha is that a tereifa can give birth and its health can even improve. If the animal appears to recover or gives birth, this does not prove it is not a tereifa. Ameimar says: With regard to these eggs of a tereifa bird,

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

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

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

Chullin 57

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Chullin 57

讘讗讞讜讝转 注讬谞讬诐 讗讬谞讙讬讚 讜讗讬转谞讞 注讜诇 诇诪注讬讬谞讬讛 讜讞讬讬讟讬讛 诇讻专住讬讛

deceptively, i.e., he only pretended to kill the son. The father fainted and went limp. By this movement, his intestines entered his stomach, and the Roman sewed up his stomach, and he recovered.

谞砖转讘专讜 专讙诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 爪谞讗 讚讗讬谞拽讜专讬 讚讗转讬讗 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讘讚拽讬讛 专讘讗 讘爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗讻砖专讬讛

搂 The mishna states: If its legs were broken, the bird remains kosher. The Gemara relates that there was a certain basket of birds with broken legs that came before Rava. Rava inspected each bird at the convergence of sinews in the thigh, and when he found that all its sinews were intact, he deemed it kosher.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬讚 讘讘讛诪讛 讻砖专讛 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘讘讛诪讛 讟专驻讛 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 砖诪讜讟转 讙祝 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 砖诪讗 谞讬拽讘讛 讛专讬讗讛 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 转讬讘讚拽 讜讻谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 转讬讘讚拽

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: A dislocated foreleg in an animal is kosher. A dislocated femur in an animal renders it a tereifa. A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. A dislocated wing in a bird renders it a tereifa, because we must be concerned that perhaps the lung was perforated. The lung is located near the wing鈥檚 attachment to the body, and part of the lung may have been torn out with the wing. And Shmuel says: The lung should be inspected, and if no damage is found, the bird is kosher. And so says Rabbi Yo岣nan: It should be inspected.

讞讝拽讬讛 讗诪专 讗讬谉 专讬讗讛 诇注讜祝 讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讬砖 诇讜 讜讬砖谞讛 讻注诇讛 砖诇 讜讜专讚 讘讬谉 讗讙驻讬诐 诪讗讬 讗讬谉 专讬讗讛 诇注讜祝 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 讻诇诇 讜讛讗 拽讗 讞讝讬谞讗 讚讗讬转 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讚诇讗 诪讬讟专讬祝 讘讬讛 讜讛转谞讬 诇讜讬 讟专驻讜转 砖诪谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讘讘讛诪讛 讻谞讙讚谉 讘注讜祝 讬转专 注诇讬讛谉 注讜祝 谞砖讘专 讛注爪诐 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 谞讬拽讘 拽专讜诐 砖诇 诪讜讞

岣zkiyya, son of Rabbi 岣yya, says: A bird has no lungs. And Rabbi Yo岣nan says: A bird does have lungs, and they are like a rose petal in appearance, thin and red, between the wings. The Gemara asks: What does 岣zkiyya mean when he says that a bird has no lungs? If we say that it has no lungs at all, that is problematic, as don鈥檛 we see that it does have lungs? Rather, say that he means that the bird is not rendered a tereifa by them if they are perforated. But this, too, is problematic, as doesn鈥檛 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? If so, a perforated lung in a bird, as in an animal, renders it a tereifa.

讗诇讗 讗讬谉 诇讜 诇讗 诇讬谞驻诇 讜诇讗 诇讬讞诪专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞谞讛 讛讜讗讬诇 讜专讜讘 爪诇注讜转讬讛 诪讙讬谞讜转 注诇讬讛

Rather, say that 岣zkiyya means that a bird鈥檚 lung has no halakha of falling and no halakha of singeing. If a bird falls, one need not inspect the lungs for damage as he must other organs (see 51b), and if it falls in a fire, one need not inspect the lungs for a change in color as he must other organs (see 56b). What is the reason for this? Rav 岣na said: Since a majority of the bird鈥檚 ribs protect the lungs, one need not be concerned that the lung was damaged.

讜讛讗 诪讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讬砖 诇讜 讜讬砖谞讛 讻注诇讛 砖诇 讜讜专讚 讘讬谉 讗讙驻讬讬诐 诪讻诇诇 讚讞讝拽讬讛 住讘专 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讗诪专讬 讘诪注专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诪讚讘专讬讜 砖诇 讘专讬讘讬 谞讬讻专 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 讘转专谞讙讜诇讬谉

The Gemara asks: But from the fact that Rabbi Yo岣nan says in response: A bird does have lungs, and they are like a rose petal between the wings, by inference one must conclude that 岣zkiyya maintains that it has no lungs at all. Rather, one must say as they say in the West, Eretz Yisrael, in the name of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina: From the statement of the Distinguished, i.e., 岣zkiyya, it is apparent that he is unfamiliar with chickens.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜讛讗 专讘谞谉 讚讗转讜 诪驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗 讗诪专讜 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘专讬 谞讛专讗 谞讛专讗 讜驻砖讟讬讛

Rav Huna said that Rav said: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher. Rabba bar Rav Huna said to Rav Huna: But the Rabbis that came from Pumbedita said that Rav Yehuda says in the name of Rav: A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. Rav Huna said to him: My son, each river and its course, i.e., different communities observe different customs. Although Rav himself held that such a bird is kosher, he ruled for those living in Pumbedita that such a bird is a tereifa, in accordance with their own custom.

讗讝诇 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讚拽讗 讘讚讬拽 讘爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇诪讛 诇讬讛 诇诪专 讻讜诇讬 讛讗讬 讜讛讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讬讚注谞讗 讘讛诪讛 砖谞讞转讻讜 专讙诇讬讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪讟讛 讻砖专讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪注诇讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜讻谉 砖谞讬讟诇 爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗诪专 专讘 注诇讛 讜讻谉 讘注讜祝

The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Abba went and found Rav Yirmeya bar Abba inspecting birds at the convergence of sinews in the thigh. Rabbi Abba said to him: Why must Master do all this? But doesn鈥檛 Rav Huna say that Rav says: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher? If a bird is kosher even when the whole thigh has been removed, all the more so it should be kosher when only the convergence of sinews has been removed. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said to him: I know the mishna (76a): With regard to an animal whose hind legs were severed, if they were severed from the leg joint and below, it is kosher; from the leg joint and above, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption. And likewise an animal whose convergence of sinews in the thigh was removed is a tereifa. And Rav said about this: And likewise with regard to a bird.

讗讬 讛讻讬 拽砖讬讗 讚专讘 讗讚专讘 讗讬砖转讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚诇诪讗 砖谞讬 诇讛 讘讬谉 砖诪讜讟讛 诇讞转讜讻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜讗转 诪驻专砖转 砖诪注转转讬讛 讚专讘 讘驻讬专讜砖 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟讛 讻砖专讛 讞转讜讻讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜讗诇 转转诪讛 砖讛专讬 讞讜转讻讛 诪讻讗谉 讜诪转讛 讞讜转讻讛 诪讻讗谉 讜讞讬转讛

Rabbi Abba responded: If so, this statement of Rav, that a bird whose convergence of sinews was removed is a tereifa, poses a difficulty for that statement of Rav, that a bird with a dislocated femur is kosher. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba was silent and did not respond. Rabbi Abba said to him: Perhaps there is a difference for Rav between a dislocated femur and a severed femur, and while the former does not render a bird a tereifa, the latter does. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said to him: And are you interpreting Rav鈥檚 halakhot based on your own reasoning? Rav said explicitly: A dislocated femur is kosher, while a severed femur renders the animal unfit for consumption. And do not be confounded by this distinction, as one cuts an animal from here, in one place, and it dies, but one cuts it from there, in another place, and it lives.

讻讬 住诇讬拽 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讚讬转讬讘 讜拽讗诪专 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讬讬 讚诪专 诪讬讜诪讗 讚住诇讬拽 诪专 诇讛讻讗

The Gemara recounts: When Rabbi Abba went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found Rabbi Zeira sitting and saying: Rav Huna said that Rav said that a dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. Rabbi Abba said to him: By Master鈥檚 life, since the day that Master came up to here, Eretz Yisrael,

讛讜讛 诇谉 驻转讞讜谉 驻讛 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜砖讗讬诇谞讬讛 讜讗诪专 诇谉 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖讬专讛

we had the opportunity to speak with Rav Huna, and we asked him about this matter, and he said to us: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher.

讜讗砖讻讞转讬讛 谞诪讬 诇专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讚讬转讬讘 讜拽讗 讘讚讬拽 讘爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗拽砖讬 诇讬讛 诇讗 住讘专 诇讛 诪专 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 诇讬 讗谞讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讬讚注谞讗 讘讛诪讛 砖谞讞转讻讜 专讙诇讬讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪讟讛 讻砖专讛 诪谉 讛讗专讻讜讘讛 讜诇诪注诇讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜讻谉 砖谞讬讟诇 爪讜诪转 讛讙讬讚讬谉 讜讗诪专 专讘 注诇讛 讜讻谉 讘注讜祝

And I also found Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba sitting and inspecting birds at the convergence of sinews in the thigh. And I posed a difficulty to him: Doesn鈥檛 Master maintain in accordance with this statement that Rav Huna says that Rav says: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher? Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said to me: I know the mishna (76a): With regard to an animal whose hind legs were severed, if they were severed from the leg joint and below, it is kosher; from the leg joint and above, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption. And likewise an animal whose convergence of sinews in the thigh was removed is a tereifa. And Rav said about this: And likewise with regard to a bird.

讜讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 拽砖讬讗 讚专讘 讗讚专讘 讗讬砖转讬拽 讜讗拽砖讬 诇讬讛 讜讚诇诪讗 砖谞讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讘讬谉 砖诪讜讟讛 诇讞转讜讻讛 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讜讗转 诪驻专砖转 砖诪注转讬讛 讚专讘 讘驻讬专讜砖 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟讛 讻砖专讛 讞转讜讻讛 驻住讜诇讛

And I said to him: If so, this statement of Rav poses a difficulty for that statement of Rav. Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba was silent. And I challenged him: But perhaps there is a difference for Rav between a dislocated femur and a severed one. And he said to me: And are you interpreting Rav鈥檚 halakha based on your own reasoning? Rav said explicitly: A dislocated femur is kosher, while a severed femur renders the animal unfit for consumption.

讜讗转 诪讛 讘讬讚讱 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗砖讬 讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讜讻谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛

Rabbi Abba then asked Rabbi Zeira: And as for you, what is in your hand? What have you heard with regard to this halakha? Rabbi Zeira said to him: This is what Rav 岣yya bar Ashi says that Rav says: A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa. And so said Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: A dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗讬诇诪诇讬 讛讜讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讗转专讗 讚讗讜专讜 讘讛 讞讘专讜讜转讗 诇讛转讬专讗 诇讗 驻专讻讬住 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讻砖专讛 讜转专谞讙讜诇转 讛讬转讛 诇讜 诇专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 砖谞砖诪讟讛 讬专讱 砖诇讛 讜讛讘讬讗讛 诇驻谞讬 专讘讬 讜讛转讬专讛 诇讜 讜诪诇讞讛 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讜讛讜讛 诪讜专讬 讘讛 讛诇讻讛 诇转诇诪讬讚讬诐 讝讛 讛转讬专 诇讬 专讘讬 讝讛 讛转讬专 诇讬 专讘讬

And with regard to this, Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi said: If Rabbi Yo岣nan had been in the place where the assembly ruled to permit such a bird, he would not have stirred. In other words, he would not have contested their ruling, because they were the greatest Sages of the previous generation. As Rabbi 岣nina says that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: A dislocated femur in a bird is kosher. And Rabbi 岣nina had a hen whose femur was dislocated, and he brought it before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted it to him, and Rabbi 岣nina salted the hen to preserve it. And he would teach the students the halakha with it, as he would show them the preserved body of the hen and say: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted this to me, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted this to me.

讜诇讬转 讛诇讻转讗 讻讻诇 讛谞讬 砖诪注转转讗 讗诇讗 讻讬 讛讗 讚砖讗诇 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 谞讛讜专讗讬 讗转 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 拽讚讬专转 拽谞讛 讘讻诪讛 讗诪专 诇讜 诪砖谞讛 砖诇诪讛 砖谞讬谞讜 注讚 讻讗讬住专 讛讗讬讟诇拽讬 讗诪专 诇讜 讜讛诇讗 专讞诇 讗讞转 讛讬转讛 讘砖讻讜谞转谞讜 砖谞拽讚专 拽谞讛 砖诇讛 讜注砖讜 诇讛 拽专讜诪讬谉 砖诇 拽谞讛 讜讞讬转讛

The Gemara concludes: But the halakha is not in accordance with any of these statements. Rather, it is in accordance with that which Rabbi Yosei ben Nehorai asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: In what amount must a windpipe be punctured to render the animal a tereifa? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: We learned a full mishna (54a): Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. Rabbi Yosei ben Nehorai said to him: But wasn鈥檛 there a certain ewe in our neighborhood whose windpipe was punctured in a greater amount, and they made a seal for the windpipe out of the shell of a reed and it lived?

讗诪专 诇讜 讜注诇 讚讗 讗转 住诪讬讱 讜讛诇讗 讛诇讻讛 专讜讜讞转 讘讬砖专讗诇 砖诪讜讟转 讬专讱 讘注讜祝 讟专驻讛 讜转专谞讙讜诇转 讛讬转讛 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讞诇驻转讗 砖谞砖诪讟讛 讬专讱 砖诇讛 讜注砖讜 诇讛 砖驻讜驻专转 砖诇 拽谞讛 讜讞讬转讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讬 讗讬转 诇讱 诇诪讬诪专 转讜讱 砖谞讬诐 注砖专 讞讚砖 讛讜讛 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 转讜讱 砖谞讬诐 注砖专 讞讚砖 讛讜讛

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: And do you rely on this incident as evidence? But isn鈥檛 it a widespread halakha among the Jewish people that a dislocated femur in a bird renders it a tereifa? And still, Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta had a hen whose femur was dislocated, and they made it a support out of the tube of a reed and it lived. Rather, what have you to say about this case? It must have occurred within twelve months of the dislocation, and afterward the hen died, since no tereifa can live more than twelve months. Here, too, in the case of the punctured windpipe, the episode occurred within twelve months of the injury and the ewe later died.

讗诪专讜 注诇讬讜 注诇 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讞诇驻转讗 砖注住拽谉 讘讚讘专讬诐 讛讬讛 讜讛讬讛 注讜砖讛 讚讘专 诇讛讜爪讬讗 诪诇讘讜 砖诇 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讛讬讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 谞讬讟诇讛 讛谞讜爪讛 驻住讜诇讛 讜转专谞讙讜诇转 讛讬转讛 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讞诇驻转讗 砖谞讬讟诇讛 谞讜爪讛 砖诇讛 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讘转谞讜专 讜讟诇讛 注诇讬讛 讘诪讟诇讬转 砖诇 讟专住讬讬诐 讜讙讬讚诇讛 讻谞驻讬讬诐 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 讬讜转专 诪谉 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐

They said about Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta that he was a researcher of various matters, and he would act to counter the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as Rabbi Yehuda would say: If the down covering a bird鈥檚 body was removed, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption, as stated in the mishna. And Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta had a hen whose down was removed, and he placed it in an oven, a warm place, and he covered it with a bronzers鈥 [tarsiyyim] apron, and its new, i.e., rehabilitated, wings grew even more feathers than the original wings.

讜讚诇诪讗 拽住讘专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讟专驻讛 诪砖讘讞转 讗诐 讻谉 讘诪讬讚讬 讚诪讬讟专驻讗 讘讛 讛讙讚讬诇讛 讻谞驻讬讬诐 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 讬讜转专 诪谉 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐

The Gemara asks: But how does this counter Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 opinion? Perhaps Rabbi Yehuda holds that a tereifa can live and that its health can even improve beyond its previous state. The Gemara responds: Even if this is so, would Rabbi Yehuda say so with regard to the very thing with which it was rendered a tereifa, as is the case here, where it grew new wings with more feathers than the original wings?

诪讗讬 注住拽谉 讘讚讘专讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 诪砖专砖讬讗 讚讻转讬讘 诇讱 讗诇 谞诪诇讛 注爪诇 专讗讛 讚专讻讬讛 讜讞讻诐 讗砖专 讗讬谉 诇讛 拽爪讬谉 砖讟专 讜诪砖诇 转讻讬谉 讘拽讬抓 诇讞诪讛 讗诪专 讗讬讝讬诇 讗讬讞讝讬 讗讬 讜讚讗讬 讛讜讗 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 诪诇讻讗

The Gemara asks: From what episode did Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta earn the title: Researcher of matters? Rav Mesharshiyya said: He saw that it is written: 鈥淕o to the ant, you sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise; which having no chief, overseer, or ruler, provides her bread in the summer鈥 (Proverbs 6:6鈥8). Rabbi Shimon ben 岣lafta said: I will go and see if it is correct that they have no king.

讗讝诇 讘转拽讜驻转 转诪讜讝 驻专住讬讛 诇讙诇讬诪讬讛 讗拽讬谞讗 讚砖讜诪砖诪谞讬 谞驻拽 讗转讗 讞讚 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗转谞讞 讘讬讛 住讬诪谞讗 注诇 讗诪专 诇讛讜 谞驻诇 讟讜诇讗 谞驻拽讜 讜讗转讜 讚诇讬讬讛 诇讙诇讬诪讬讛 谞驻诇 砖诪砖讗 谞驻诇讜 注诇讬讛 讜拽讟诇讬讛 讗诪专 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诇讬转 诇讛讜 诪诇讻讗 讚讗讬 讗讬转 诇讛讜 讛专诪谞讗 讚诪诇讻讗 诇讗 诇讬讘注讜

He went in the season of Tammuz, i.e., summer. Knowing that ants avoid intense heat, he spread his cloak over an ant hole to provide shade. One of the ants came out and saw the shade. Rabbi Shimon placed a distinguishing mark on the ant. It went into the hole and said to the other ants: Shade has fallen. They all came out to work. Rabbi Shimon lifted up his cloak, and the sun fell on them. They all fell upon the first ant and killed it. He said: One may learn from their actions that they have no king; as, if they had a king, would they not need the king鈥檚 edict [harmana] to execute their fellow ant?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讚诇诪讗 诪诇讻讗 讛讜讛 讘讛讚讬讬讛讜 讗讬 谞诪讬 讛专诪谞讗 讚诪诇讻讗 讛讜讜 谞拽讬讟讬 讗讬 谞诪讬 讘讬谉 诪诇讻讗 诇诪诇讻讗 讛讜讛 讚讻转讬讘 讘讬诪讬诐 讛讛诐 讗讬谉 诪诇讱 讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讬砖 讛讬砖专 讘注讬谞讬讜 讬注砖讛 讗诇讗 住诪讜讱 讗讛讬诪谞讜转讗 讚砖诇诪讛

Rav A岣, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: But perhaps the king was with them at the time and gave them permission. Or perhaps they already possessed the king鈥檚 edict giving them license to kill the ant. Or perhaps it was an interregnum between kings, as it is written: 鈥淚n those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own eyes鈥 (Judges 17:6). Rather, rely on the credibility of Solomon, the author of Proverbs, that ants have no king.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 住讬诪谉 诇讟专驻讛 砖谞讬诐 注砖专 讞讚砖 诪讬转讬讘讬 住讬诪谉 诇讟专驻讛 讻诇 砖讗讬谞讛 讬讜诇讚转 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诪砖讘讞转 讜讛讜诇讻转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讛讬讗 讻砖专讛 诪转谞讜讜谞讛 讜讛讜诇讻转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讛讬讗 讟专驻讛 专讘讬 讗讜诪专 住讬诪谉 诇讟专驻讛 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讜讛诇讗 讛专讘讛 诪转拽讬讬诪讜转 砖转讬诐 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐

Rav Huna says: The sign of a tereifa is twelve months. If it is uncertain whether an animal is a tereifa, one may wait twelve months; if the animal survives, it is kosher. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: The sign of a tereifa is any animal that cannot give birth. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If its health improves continuously, it is certainly kosher; if its health deteriorates continuously, it is certainly a tereifa. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The sign of a tereifa is any animal that does not survive thirty days. The Sages said to him: But don鈥檛 many animals that are certainly tereifot survive two or three years? None of the opinions cited in the baraita accord with Rav Huna鈥檚 statement.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讜讘讙诇讙诇转 注讚 砖讬砖 讘讛 谞拽讘 讗讞讚 讗专讜讱 讗驻讬诇讜 谞拽讘讬诐 讛专讘讛 诪爪讟专驻讬诐 诇诪诇讗 诪拽讚讞 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 讛诪砖讜诇诐 诪注砖讛 讘注谞讘讜诇 讘讗讞讚 砖谞驻讞转讛 讙诇讙诇转讜 讜注砖讜 诇讜 讞讬讚讜拽 砖诇 拽专讜讬讛 讜讞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪砖诐 专讗讬讛 讬诪讜转 讛讞诪讛 讛讬讛 讜讻讬讜谉 砖注讘专讜 注诇讬讜 讬诪讜转 讛爪谞讛 诪讬讚 诪转

The Gemara responds: The matter is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: And in a skull that contains one long hole, or even if it has many holes, the areas of the holes join together to constitute the size of a drill hole, and they render the animal a tereifa. Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam said: There was an incident in a place called Inbul involving one whose skull was missing a piece, and they made for him a patch out of the shell of a gourd, and he survived. Therefore, an animal with a missing piece of skull cannot be a tereifa. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said to him: Can you bring proof from there? It was summer then, and once winter came upon him he died immediately. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds that an animal is a tereifa if it does not survive through summer and winter, i.e., one year. Rav Huna鈥檚 statement accords with this opinion.

讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讛诇讻讛 讟专驻讛 讬讜诇讚转 讜诪砖讘讞转 讗诪专 讗诪讬诪专 讛谞讬 讘讬注讬 讚讟专驻讛

Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov says: The halakha is that a tereifa can give birth and its health can even improve. If the animal appears to recover or gives birth, this does not prove it is not a tereifa. Ameimar says: With regard to these eggs of a tereifa bird,

Scroll To Top