There is story highlighting the struggles of power between the rabbis of Israel and Babylonia at the beginning of the time period of the Amoraim – a story with Rabbi Yochanan, Reish Lakish and a student of Rav. The mishna lists which problems do not render an animal a treifa. If there is a list of what is and a list of what isn’t a tereifa, what about items that are not included in either list?
Chullin 54
01.20.2019 | י״ד בשבט תשע״ט
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Chullin 54
וֶושֶׁט נְקוּבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. קָנֶה נְקוּבָתוֹ בִּכְאִיסָּר, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּכַמָּה? בָּתַר דְּבַעְיָא הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. מַאי טַעְמָא? זִיהֲרֵיהּ מִקְלָא קָלֵי וְאָזֵיל.
If the gullet is perforated in any amount, the animal is a tereifa, as taught in the mishna (42a). Therefore, if the gullet is clawed and any amount of its flesh reddens, the animal is a tereifa as well. But a perforation of the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa only where it is the size of an issar. If clawed, what amount of its flesh must redden in order to render it a tereifa? After he raised the dilemma he then resolved it: Both this and that render the animal a tereifa if any amount of its flesh reddened. What is the reason for this? It is because its venom burns continuously around the circumference of the hole and widens it.
יָתֵיב רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara relates: Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta sat before Rav Naḥman, and he was sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which the Sages said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines to see that the flesh has not reddened. Rav Naḥman said to him: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected over its entire body, from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh.
מַאי כַּפָּא? אִילֵּימָא כַּפָּא דִּידָא – הַיְינוּ כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים, אֶלָּא מִכַּפָּא דְּמוֹחָא עַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the hollow? If we say that it is the hollow of the foreleg, i.e., its shoulder, then the area between it and the thigh is the same as the area adjacent to the intestines, and Rav Naḥman has said nothing new. Rather, Rav Naḥman referred to the area from the hollow of the brain, i.e., the skull, to the thigh.
כִּי סְלֵיק רַב חִיָּיא בַּר יוֹסֵף, אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ דְּיָתְבִי וְקָאָמְרִי: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. אֲמַר לְהוּ: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מַנּוּ רַב וּמַנּוּ רַב? וְלָא יָדַעְנָא לֵיהּ!
The Gemara relates that when Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish were sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which they said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines. Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef said to them: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh. Reish Lakish said to him: Who is this Rav, and who is this Rav? I do not know who he is.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וְלָא נְהִירָא לֵיהּ לְאוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אֶת רַבִּי רַבָּה, וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא? וְהָאֱלֹהִים! כׇּל אוֹתָן שָׁנִים שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד בִּישִׁיבָה, אֲנִי שִׁמַּשְׁתִּי בַּעֲמִידָה, וּמַאן גְּבַר? הוּא גְּבַר בְּכוֹלָּא.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: But don’t you remember that student who served the great Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya and studied under them? But by God! All those years that this student served in the yeshiva, he was held to be one of the most important students and was allowed to sit during study, while I held a lower status and served while standing up. And who was greater? He was greater in all things, in Torah and piety.
מִיָּד פָּתַח רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ וַאֲמַר: בְּרַם זָכוּר אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ לַטּוֹב, שֶׁאָמְרוּ שְׁמוּעָה מִפִּיו: שְׁמוּטָה וּשְׁחוּטָה – כְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Immediately, Reish Lakish began to speak and said: Indeed [beram], that man, Rav, is remembered for the good, as they said this halakha in his name: If an animal’s windpipe is dislocated from the throat, and it has already been slaughtered, and it is uncertain whether it was dislocated before or after slaughter, the animal is kosher, as it is impossible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered. A dislocated windpipe would have slipped away from the knife, and therefore the animal must have been slaughtered while it was still attached.
וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר: יָבִיא וְיַקִּיף.
And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This is not certain; rather, one should bring the windpipe, make a new slit in it, and compare the two slits. If they are similar, then the first slit by the slaughtering knife was also made after the windpipe was dislocated, and the animal is a tereifa. If they are different, then the slaughter preceded the dislocation of the windpipe and the animal is kosher.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים, אֲבָל תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים וְשָׁחַט – אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Rav Naḥman said: The Sages taught that it is impossible to slaughter a dislocated windpipe only in cases where he did not grip the simanim during slaughter. But if he gripped the simanim and slaughtered the animal, then it is possible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered, since it will not slip away from the knife.
זֶה הַכְּלָל, לְאֵתוֹיֵי מַאי? לְאֵתוֹיֵי שַׁב שְׁמַעְתָּתָא.
§ The mishna states: This is the principle: Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live for an extended period is a tereifa. The Gemara asks: What case does this principle add that was not previously mentioned? The Gemara responds: It was stated to add seven halakhot of tereifot taught by amora’im and not listed in the mishna. These cases are enumerated on 42b.
דְּבֵי יוֹסֵף רִישְׁבָּא מָחוּ בְּגִידָא נַשְׁיָא וְקָטְלִי, אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
The Gemara recounts: The men of the house of Yosef the hunter would strike the sciatic nerve of an animal with an arrow and kill it that way. In other words, the animal would die from that wound. They came before Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira to ask if an animal with an injured sciatic nerve is a tereifa, which is relevant if the animal was slaughtered before it died. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted, and the Sages mentioned no such tereifa.
רַב פָּפָּא בַּר אַבָּא רִישְׁבָּא, מָחוּ בְּכוּלְיָא וְקָטְלִי. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַבָּא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
Likewise, the men of Rav Pappa bar Abba the hunter would strike an animal in the kidney with an arrow and kill it that way. They came before Rabbi Abba to ask if such an animal is a tereifa. Rabbi Abba said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted.
וְהָא קָא חָזֵינַן דְּקָא מֵתָה! גְּמִירִי דְּאִי בָּדְרִי לַהּ סַמָּא, חַיָּיא.
The Gemara objects: But we see that they die. Isn’t this an indication that the animal is a tereifa? The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that in all these cases, if one were to scatter medicine on the wound, the animal would live. An animal is not considered a tereifa unless it cannot be healed.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה, נִיקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה. עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: עַד כְּאִיסָּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. נִפְחֲתָה הַגּוּלְגּוֹלֶת וְלֹא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ, נִיקַּב הַלֵּב וְלֹא לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, נִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁדְרָה וְלֹא נִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, נִיטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּיר הֵימֶנָּה כְּזַיִת.
MISHNA: And these, despite their condition, are kosher in an animal: If its windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise. How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. If the skull was fractured but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, it is kosher. If the heart was perforated and the perforation did not reach its chamber, or if the spinal column was broken but its cord was not cut, or if the liver was removed and an olive-bulk of it remained, it is kosher.
הֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת, שֶׁנִּיקְּבוּ זֶה לְתוֹךְ זֶה. נִיטַּל הַטְּחוֹל, נִיטְּלוּ הַכְּלָיוֹת, נִיטַּל לֶחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן, נִיטְּלָה הָאֵם שֶׁלָּהּ, וַחֲרוּתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. הַגְּלוּדָה – רַבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין.
Additionally, it is kosher if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated one into the other. If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys were removed, or if its lower jaw was removed, or if its womb was removed, or if its lung shriveled by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. In the case of an animal whose hide was removed, Rabbi Meir deems it kosher, and the Rabbis deem it a tereifa and unfit for consumption.
גְּמָ׳ אִתְּמַר: רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ דַּוְקָא.
GEMARA: The mishna begins: And these are kosher, while the previous mishna begins: These are tereifot. With regard to this, it was stated that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The tanna intended the phrase: These are tereifot, specifically, teaching that an animal is kosher in another case. The list of kosher cases here is therefore not exhaustive. And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says that the tanna intended the phrase: These are kosher, specifically, teaching that an animal is a tereifa in another case. The list of tereifot at the beginning of the chapter is therefore not exhaustive.
בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? בִּדְרַב מַתְנָא, דְּאָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״,
The Gemara explains: With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree with regard to the statement of Rav Mattana, as Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who says that the phrase: These are tereifot, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot and taught afterward: This is the principle, to add cases that were not stated explicitly;
וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּאָתְיָא בְּזֶה הַכְּלָל, מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּדָמְיָא לִנְטוּלֵי. תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּטְרֵפָה, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא כְּשֵׁרָה.
and the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana, where the end of the thigh is dislocated, ostensibly comes under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it renders the animal a tereifa as well. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is similar to the cases of removed organs that render the animal a tereifa. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are tereifot, at the beginning of the mishna, to emphasize that it is only these that render an animal a tereifa, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is kosher.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּלָא אָתְיָא בְּ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, מַאי טַעְמָא? לָאו לִנְקוּבֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלָא לִפְסוּקֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלִנְטוּלֵי נָמֵי לָא דָּמְיָא, תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּכְשֵׁרוֹת, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא טְרֵפָה.
And according to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who says that the phrase: These are kosher, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot, and taught afterward that this is the principle. And the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana ostensibly does not come under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it does not render the animal a tereifa. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is not similar to cases of perforated organs, and it is not similar to cases of cut organs, such as the windpipe, and it is not similar to cases of removed organs. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are kosher, to emphasize that it is only these that are kosher, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is a tereifa.
גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה, וְרָבָא אָמַר: כְּשֵׁרָה, וְאִי אִיפְּסִיק נִיבֵיהּ – טְרֵפָה. וְהִלְכְתָא: אִיפְּסִיק נָמֵי כְּשֵׁרָה, עַד דְּמִתְעַכְלָא אִתְעֲכוֹלֵי.
The Gemara addresses the matter itself: Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. And Rava said: The animal is kosher, but if its sinew holding the bone in place is cut, it is a tereifa. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is: Even if the sinew is cut, the animal is still kosher, unless the sinew decomposed, in which case the animal is a tereifa.
עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? אָמַר זְעֵירִי: אַתּוּן דְּלָא מִיתְחֲמֵי לְכוֹן שִׁיעוּרָא, שִׁיעוּרֵיהּ בְּדִינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה, וְהָוֵי כִּפְשִׁיטָא זוּטַרְתִּי, וּמִשְׁתַּכְחָא בֵּינֵי פְּשִׁיטֵי דְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. Ze’eiri, who came from Eretz Yisrael, said with regard to this: You, who are not familiar with the measure of an Italian issar, because it is not used in Babylonia, should estimate its measure as a Kurdish dinar. And it is like a small peruta coin and can be found among the perutot of Pumbedita.
אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָא פָּתוּרָאָה: עִילָּא מִינַּאי הֲוָה קָאֵי בַּר נַפָּחָא, וּבְעָא מִינַּי דִּינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה לְשַׁעוֹרֵי בֵּיהּ טְרֵיפְתָא, וּבְעַי לְמֵיקָם מִקַּמֵּיהּ וְלָא שְׁבַקְנִי. אָמַר לִי: שֵׁב בְּנִי שֵׁב, אֵין בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת רַשָּׁאִין לַעֲמוֹד מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעֲסוּקִין בִּמְלַאכְתָּם.
Rabbi Ḥana the money changer said: Bar Nappaḥa, i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, was standing over me, and he requested of me a Kurdish dinar with which to measure tereifot, in accordance with the statement of Ze’eiri. And I wanted to rise before him out of respect, but he did not let me. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to me: Sit, my son, sit. Tradesmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars when they are engaged in their work.
וְלָא? וְהָתְנַן: כׇּל בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת עוֹמְדִים מִפְּנֵיהֶם, וְשׁוֹאֲלִין בִּשְׁלוֹמָן, וְאוֹמְרִין לָהֶם: אַחֵינוּ אַנְשֵׁי מְקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי בּוֹאֲכֶם בְּשָׁלוֹם!
The Gemara asks: And are tradesmen not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Bikkurim 3:3): When the pilgrims bring their first fruits to Jerusalem, all the tradesmen stand before them, and greet them, and say to them: Our brothers from such and such place, welcome?
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה חֲבִיבָה מִצְוָה בִּשְׁעָתָהּ, שֶׁהֲרֵי מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Yes, they stand before those bringing first fruits, but they do not stand before Torah scholars. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin says: Come and see how beloved is a mitzva performed in its proper time, as the tradesmen stand before those who brought first fruits, while they do not stand before Torah scholars.
מִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא נִמְצָא מַכְשִׁילָן לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא.
The Gemara rejects the statement of Rabbi Yosei bar Avin: From where does one know that they rise out of respect? Perhaps the tradesmen stand only in order not to cause those bringing first fruits to fail and sin in the future. That is, if the tradesmen do not treat those bringing the first fruits with great respect, they may not make the effort to travel to Jerusalem in a subsequent year.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: כְּסֶלַע – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּסֶלַע, כְּאִיסָּר – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּאִיסָּר.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. With regard to this, Rav Naḥman says: Whenever the Sages specify the measure as that of a sela, e.g., with regard to a damaged skull for purposes of tereifot, they mean that even an area exactly the size of a sela is treated as more than a sela. Likewise, when they specify the measure as that of an issar, they mean that an area exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were more than an issar.
אַלְמָא קָסָבַר רַב נַחְמָן: ״עַד״, וְלֹא עַד בַּכְּלָל.
Since Rav Naḥman holds that a perforation exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were larger than an issar, he must hold that such a perforation in the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa. The Gemara therefore infers: Apparently, Rav Naḥman holds that whenever the Sages use the word: Until, it means until and not including the measure, as the mishna states that an animal with a perforated windpipe is kosher until the perforation reaches the size of an issar.
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: חֶבֶל הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַמִּטָּה עַד חֲמִשָּׁה טְפָחִים – טָהוֹר. מַאי לָאו חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַטָּה? לֹא, חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naḥman from a mishna (Kelim 19:2): The end of a rope that extends from a rope bed is not susceptible to ritual impurity until it is five handbreadths long. If the bed becomes impure, the rope remains pure, because it has no use and is therefore not considered part of the bed. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly five handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that amount? If so, the word: Until, means until and including the exact measure. The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly five handbreadths long is like a rope whose length is above that amount.
תָּא שְׁמַע: מֵחֲמִשָּׁה וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה – טָמֵא. מַאי לָאו עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַטָּה? לָא, עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the continuation of the mishna: If the end of the rope was of any length from five handbreadths until ten, it is susceptible to impurity. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that? The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated like a rope whose length is above that, and it is not susceptible to impurity.
תָּא שְׁמַע: הַדַּקִּין שֶׁבִּכְלִי חֶרֶס, הֵן וְקַרְקְרוֹתֵיהֶן וְדוֹפְנוֹתֵיהֶם, יוֹשְׁבִין שֶׁלֹּא מְסוּמָּכִין –
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from another mishna (Kelim 2:2): With regard to the smallest of earthenware vessels, if they, or even their broken-off bases or sides, can sit, i.e., remain upright, without being supported,
Follow 
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.
I started learning Daf Yomi inspired by תָּפַסְתָּ מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַסְתָּ, תָּפַסְתָּ מוּעָט תָּפַסְתָּ. I thought I’d start the first page, and then see. I was swept up into the enthusiasm of the Hadran Siyum, and from there the momentum kept building. Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur gives me an anchor, a connection to an incredible virtual community, and an energy to face whatever the day brings.
Medinah Korn
בית שמש, Israel
I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!
Roslyn Jaffe
Florida, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi in January 2020 after watching my grandfather, Mayer Penstein z”l, finish shas with the previous cycle. My grandfather made learning so much fun was so proud that his grandchildren wanted to join him. I was also inspired by Ilana Kurshan’s book, If All the Seas Were Ink. Two years in, I can say that it has enriched my life in so many ways.
Leeza Hirt Wilner
New York, United States
I began my journey with Rabbanit Michelle more than five years ago. My friend came up with a great idea for about 15 of us to learn the daf and one of us would summarize weekly what we learned.
It was fun but after 2-3 months people began to leave. I have continued. Since the cycle began Again I have joined the Teaneck women.. I find it most rewarding in so many ways. Thank you
Dena Heller
New Jersey, United States
I’ve been learning since January 2020, and in June I started drawing a phrase from each daf. Sometimes it’s easy (e.g. plants), sometimes it’s very hard (e.g. korbanot), and sometimes it’s loads of fun (e.g. bird racing) to find something to draw. I upload my pictures from each masechet to #DafYomiArt. I am enjoying every step of the journey.
Gila Loike
Ashdod, Israel
I attended the Siyum so that I could tell my granddaughter that I had been there. Then I decided to listen on Spotify and after the siyum of Brachot, Covid and zoom began. It gave structure to my day. I learn with people from all over the world who are now my friends – yet most of us have never met. I can’t imagine life without it. Thank you Rabbanit Michelle.
Emma Rinberg
Raanana, Israel
I started my journey on the day I realized that the Siyum was happening in Yerushalayim and I was missing out. What? I told myself. How could I have not known about this? How can I have missed out on this opportunity? I decided that moment, I would start Daf Yomi and Nach Yomi the very next day. I am so grateful to Hadran. I am changed forever because I learn Gemara with women. Thank you.
Linda Brownstein
Mitspe, Israel
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!
Debbie Engelen-Eigles
Minnesota, United States
I went to day school in Toronto but really began to learn when I attended Brovenders back in the early 1980’s. Last year after talking to my sister who was learning Daf Yomi, inspired, I looked on the computer and the Hadran site came up. I have been listening to each days shiur in the morning as I work. I emphasis listening since I am not sitting with a Gamara. I listen while I work in my studio.
Rachel Rotenberg
Tekoa, Israel
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
Marsha Wasserman
Jerusalem, Israel
I start learning Daf Yomi in January 2020. The daily learning with Rabbanit Michelle has kept me grounded in this very uncertain time. Despite everything going on – the Pandemic, my personal life, climate change, war, etc… I know I can count on Hadran’s podcast to bring a smile to my face.
Deb Engel
Los Angeles, United States
I started learning when my brother sent me the news clip of the celebration of the last Daf Yomi cycle. I was so floored to see so many women celebrating that I wanted to be a part of it. It has been an enriching experience studying a text in a language I don’t speak, using background knowledge that I don’t have. It is stretching my learning in unexpected ways, bringing me joy and satisfaction.
Jodi Gladstone
Warwick, Rhode Island, United States
I read Ilana Kurshan’s “If All the Seas Were Ink” which inspired me. Then the Women’s Siyum in Jerusalem in 2020 convinced me, I knew I had to join! I have loved it- it’s been a constant in my life daily, many of the sugiyot connect to our lives. My family and friends all are so supportive. It’s incredible being part of this community and love how diverse it is! I am so excited to learn more!
Shira Jacobowitz
Jerusalem, Israel
I started with Ze Kollel in Berlin, directed by Jeremy Borowitz for Hillel Deutschland. We read Masechet Megillah chapter 4 and each participant wrote his commentary on a Sugia that particularly impressed him. I wrote six poems about different Sugiot! Fascinated by the discussions on Talmud I continued to learn with Rabanit Michelle Farber and am currently taking part in the Tikun Olam course.
Yael Merlini
Berlin, Germany
As Jewish educator and as a woman, I’m mindful that Talmud has been kept from women for many centuries. Now that we are privileged to learn, and learning is so accessible, it’s my intent to complete Daf Yomi. I am so excited to keep learning with my Hadran community.
Sue Parker Gerson
Denver, United States
I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!
Dena Lehrman
אפרת, Israel
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!
Silke Goldberg
Guildford, United Kingdom
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Patti Evans
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
My Daf journey began in August 2012 after participating in the Siyum Hashas where I was blessed as an “enabler” of others. Galvanized into my own learning I recited the Hadran on Shas in January 2020 with Rabbanit Michelle. That Siyum was a highlight in my life. Now, on round two, Daf has become my spiritual anchor to which I attribute manifold blessings.
Rina Goldberg
Englewood NJ, United States
When I began learning Daf Yomi at the beginning of the current cycle, I was preparing for an upcoming surgery and thought that learning the Daf would be something positive I could do each day during my recovery, even if I accomplished nothing else. I had no idea what a lifeline learning the Daf would turn out to be in so many ways.
Laura Shechter
Lexington, MA, United States
Chullin 54
וֶושֶׁט נְקוּבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. קָנֶה נְקוּבָתוֹ בִּכְאִיסָּר, דְּרוּסָתוֹ בְּכַמָּה? בָּתַר דְּבַעְיָא הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. מַאי טַעְמָא? זִיהֲרֵיהּ מִקְלָא קָלֵי וְאָזֵיל.
If the gullet is perforated in any amount, the animal is a tereifa, as taught in the mishna (42a). Therefore, if the gullet is clawed and any amount of its flesh reddens, the animal is a tereifa as well. But a perforation of the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa only where it is the size of an issar. If clawed, what amount of its flesh must redden in order to render it a tereifa? After he raised the dilemma he then resolved it: Both this and that render the animal a tereifa if any amount of its flesh reddened. What is the reason for this? It is because its venom burns continuously around the circumference of the hole and widens it.
יָתֵיב רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara relates: Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta sat before Rav Naḥman, and he was sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which the Sages said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines to see that the flesh has not reddened. Rav Naḥman said to him: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected over its entire body, from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh.
מַאי כַּפָּא? אִילֵּימָא כַּפָּא דִּידָא – הַיְינוּ כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים, אֶלָּא מִכַּפָּא דְּמוֹחָא עַד אַטְמָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the hollow? If we say that it is the hollow of the foreleg, i.e., its shoulder, then the area between it and the thigh is the same as the area adjacent to the intestines, and Rav Naḥman has said nothing new. Rather, Rav Naḥman referred to the area from the hollow of the brain, i.e., the skull, to the thigh.
כִּי סְלֵיק רַב חִיָּיא בַּר יוֹסֵף, אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ דְּיָתְבִי וְקָאָמְרִי: דְּרוּסָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ – צְרִיכָה בְּדִיקָה כְּנֶגֶד בְּנֵי מֵעַיִים. אֲמַר לְהוּ: הָאֱלֹהִים! מוֹרֵי בַּהּ רַב מִכַּפָּא וְעַד אַטְמָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מַנּוּ רַב וּמַנּוּ רַב? וְלָא יָדַעְנָא לֵיהּ!
The Gemara relates that when Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish were sitting and saying: A clawed animal, about which they said one must be concerned, requires inspection adjacent to the intestines. Rav Ḥiyya bar Yosef said to them: By God! Rav would teach that it must be inspected from the flesh around the hollow to that of the thigh. Reish Lakish said to him: Who is this Rav, and who is this Rav? I do not know who he is.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וְלָא נְהִירָא לֵיהּ לְאוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אֶת רַבִּי רַבָּה, וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא? וְהָאֱלֹהִים! כׇּל אוֹתָן שָׁנִים שֶׁשִּׁימֵּשׁ אוֹתוֹ תַּלְמִיד בִּישִׁיבָה, אֲנִי שִׁמַּשְׁתִּי בַּעֲמִידָה, וּמַאן גְּבַר? הוּא גְּבַר בְּכוֹלָּא.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: But don’t you remember that student who served the great Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya and studied under them? But by God! All those years that this student served in the yeshiva, he was held to be one of the most important students and was allowed to sit during study, while I held a lower status and served while standing up. And who was greater? He was greater in all things, in Torah and piety.
מִיָּד פָּתַח רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ וַאֲמַר: בְּרַם זָכוּר אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ לַטּוֹב, שֶׁאָמְרוּ שְׁמוּעָה מִפִּיו: שְׁמוּטָה וּשְׁחוּטָה – כְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Immediately, Reish Lakish began to speak and said: Indeed [beram], that man, Rav, is remembered for the good, as they said this halakha in his name: If an animal’s windpipe is dislocated from the throat, and it has already been slaughtered, and it is uncertain whether it was dislocated before or after slaughter, the animal is kosher, as it is impossible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered. A dislocated windpipe would have slipped away from the knife, and therefore the animal must have been slaughtered while it was still attached.
וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר: יָבִיא וְיַקִּיף.
And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This is not certain; rather, one should bring the windpipe, make a new slit in it, and compare the two slits. If they are similar, then the first slit by the slaughtering knife was also made after the windpipe was dislocated, and the animal is a tereifa. If they are different, then the slaughter preceded the dislocation of the windpipe and the animal is kosher.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים, אֲבָל תָּפַס בְּסִימָנִים וְשָׁחַט – אֶפְשָׁר לַשְּׁמוּטָה שֶׁתֵּיעָשֶׂה שְׁחוּטָה.
Rav Naḥman said: The Sages taught that it is impossible to slaughter a dislocated windpipe only in cases where he did not grip the simanim during slaughter. But if he gripped the simanim and slaughtered the animal, then it is possible for an animal with a dislocated windpipe to be slaughtered, since it will not slip away from the knife.
זֶה הַכְּלָל, לְאֵתוֹיֵי מַאי? לְאֵתוֹיֵי שַׁב שְׁמַעְתָּתָא.
§ The mishna states: This is the principle: Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live for an extended period is a tereifa. The Gemara asks: What case does this principle add that was not previously mentioned? The Gemara responds: It was stated to add seven halakhot of tereifot taught by amora’im and not listed in the mishna. These cases are enumerated on 42b.
דְּבֵי יוֹסֵף רִישְׁבָּא מָחוּ בְּגִידָא נַשְׁיָא וְקָטְלִי, אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
The Gemara recounts: The men of the house of Yosef the hunter would strike the sciatic nerve of an animal with an arrow and kill it that way. In other words, the animal would die from that wound. They came before Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira to ask if an animal with an injured sciatic nerve is a tereifa, which is relevant if the animal was slaughtered before it died. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted, and the Sages mentioned no such tereifa.
רַב פָּפָּא בַּר אַבָּא רִישְׁבָּא, מָחוּ בְּכוּלְיָא וְקָטְלִי. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַבָּא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְהוֹסִיף עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ? אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִים!
Likewise, the men of Rav Pappa bar Abba the hunter would strike an animal in the kidney with an arrow and kill it that way. They came before Rabbi Abba to ask if such an animal is a tereifa. Rabbi Abba said to them: And is it possible to add to the list of tereifot? You have only what the Sages counted.
וְהָא קָא חָזֵינַן דְּקָא מֵתָה! גְּמִירִי דְּאִי בָּדְרִי לַהּ סַמָּא, חַיָּיא.
The Gemara objects: But we see that they die. Isn’t this an indication that the animal is a tereifa? The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that in all these cases, if one were to scatter medicine on the wound, the animal would live. An animal is not considered a tereifa unless it cannot be healed.
מַתְנִי׳ וְאֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה, נִיקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה. עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: עַד כְּאִיסָּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. נִפְחֲתָה הַגּוּלְגּוֹלֶת וְלֹא נִיקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ, נִיקַּב הַלֵּב וְלֹא לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, נִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁדְרָה וְלֹא נִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, נִיטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּיר הֵימֶנָּה כְּזַיִת.
MISHNA: And these, despite their condition, are kosher in an animal: If its windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise. How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. If the skull was fractured but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, it is kosher. If the heart was perforated and the perforation did not reach its chamber, or if the spinal column was broken but its cord was not cut, or if the liver was removed and an olive-bulk of it remained, it is kosher.
הֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת, שֶׁנִּיקְּבוּ זֶה לְתוֹךְ זֶה. נִיטַּל הַטְּחוֹל, נִיטְּלוּ הַכְּלָיוֹת, נִיטַּל לֶחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן, נִיטְּלָה הָאֵם שֶׁלָּהּ, וַחֲרוּתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. הַגְּלוּדָה – רַבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין.
Additionally, it is kosher if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated one into the other. If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys were removed, or if its lower jaw was removed, or if its womb was removed, or if its lung shriveled by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. In the case of an animal whose hide was removed, Rabbi Meir deems it kosher, and the Rabbis deem it a tereifa and unfit for consumption.
גְּמָ׳ אִתְּמַר: רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ דַּוְקָא.
GEMARA: The mishna begins: And these are kosher, while the previous mishna begins: These are tereifot. With regard to this, it was stated that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The tanna intended the phrase: These are tereifot, specifically, teaching that an animal is kosher in another case. The list of kosher cases here is therefore not exhaustive. And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says that the tanna intended the phrase: These are kosher, specifically, teaching that an animal is a tereifa in another case. The list of tereifot at the beginning of the chapter is therefore not exhaustive.
בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? בִּדְרַב מַתְנָא, דְּאָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״,
The Gemara explains: With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree with regard to the statement of Rav Mattana, as Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who says that the phrase: These are tereifot, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot and taught afterward: This is the principle, to add cases that were not stated explicitly;
וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּאָתְיָא בְּזֶה הַכְּלָל, מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּדָמְיָא לִנְטוּלֵי. תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּטְרֵפָה, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא כְּשֵׁרָה.
and the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana, where the end of the thigh is dislocated, ostensibly comes under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it renders the animal a tereifa as well. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is similar to the cases of removed organs that render the animal a tereifa. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are tereifot, at the beginning of the mishna, to emphasize that it is only these that render an animal a tereifa, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is kosher.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר: אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת דַּוְקָא, תְּנָא טְרֵפוֹת, וּתְנָא ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, וְחַזְיַיהּ לִדְרַב מַתְנָא דְּלָא אָתְיָא בְּ״זֶה הַכְּלָל״, מַאי טַעְמָא? לָאו לִנְקוּבֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלָא לִפְסוּקֵי דָּמְיָא, וְלִנְטוּלֵי נָמֵי לָא דָּמְיָא, תְּנָא ״אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרוֹת״ – הָנֵי הוּא דִּכְשֵׁרוֹת, הָא דְּרַב מַתְנָא טְרֵפָה.
And according to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who says that the phrase: These are kosher, is meant specifically, the tanna taught the list of tereifot, and taught afterward that this is the principle. And the tanna then saw that the case of Rav Mattana ostensibly does not come under the heading of: This is the principle, and one might assume that it does not render the animal a tereifa. What is the reason for this? It is because a dislocated thigh is not similar to cases of perforated organs, and it is not similar to cases of cut organs, such as the windpipe, and it is not similar to cases of removed organs. Therefore, he taught the phrase: These are kosher, to emphasize that it is only these that are kosher, but in the case of Rav Mattana, the animal is a tereifa.
גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב מַתְנָא: הַאי בּוּקָא דְּאַטְמָא דְּשָׁף מִדּוּכְתֵּיהּ – טְרֵפָה, וְרָבָא אָמַר: כְּשֵׁרָה, וְאִי אִיפְּסִיק נִיבֵיהּ – טְרֵפָה. וְהִלְכְתָא: אִיפְּסִיק נָמֵי כְּשֵׁרָה, עַד דְּמִתְעַכְלָא אִתְעֲכוֹלֵי.
The Gemara addresses the matter itself: Rav Mattana says: This head of the femur that was completely dislocated renders the animal a tereifa. And Rava said: The animal is kosher, but if its sinew holding the bone in place is cut, it is a tereifa. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is: Even if the sinew is cut, the animal is still kosher, unless the sinew decomposed, in which case the animal is a tereifa.
עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר? אָמַר זְעֵירִי: אַתּוּן דְּלָא מִיתְחֲמֵי לְכוֹן שִׁיעוּרָא, שִׁיעוּרֵיהּ בְּדִינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה, וְהָוֵי כִּפְשִׁיטָא זוּטַרְתִּי, וּמִשְׁתַּכְחָא בֵּינֵי פְּשִׁיטֵי דְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. Ze’eiri, who came from Eretz Yisrael, said with regard to this: You, who are not familiar with the measure of an Italian issar, because it is not used in Babylonia, should estimate its measure as a Kurdish dinar. And it is like a small peruta coin and can be found among the perutot of Pumbedita.
אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָא פָּתוּרָאָה: עִילָּא מִינַּאי הֲוָה קָאֵי בַּר נַפָּחָא, וּבְעָא מִינַּי דִּינָרָא קוּרְדִּינָאָה לְשַׁעוֹרֵי בֵּיהּ טְרֵיפְתָא, וּבְעַי לְמֵיקָם מִקַּמֵּיהּ וְלָא שְׁבַקְנִי. אָמַר לִי: שֵׁב בְּנִי שֵׁב, אֵין בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת רַשָּׁאִין לַעֲמוֹד מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעֲסוּקִין בִּמְלַאכְתָּם.
Rabbi Ḥana the money changer said: Bar Nappaḥa, i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, was standing over me, and he requested of me a Kurdish dinar with which to measure tereifot, in accordance with the statement of Ze’eiri. And I wanted to rise before him out of respect, but he did not let me. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to me: Sit, my son, sit. Tradesmen are not permitted to stand before Torah scholars when they are engaged in their work.
וְלָא? וְהָתְנַן: כׇּל בַּעֲלֵי אוּמָּנִיּוֹת עוֹמְדִים מִפְּנֵיהֶם, וְשׁוֹאֲלִין בִּשְׁלוֹמָן, וְאוֹמְרִין לָהֶם: אַחֵינוּ אַנְשֵׁי מְקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי בּוֹאֲכֶם בְּשָׁלוֹם!
The Gemara asks: And are tradesmen not permitted to stand before Torah scholars? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Bikkurim 3:3): When the pilgrims bring their first fruits to Jerusalem, all the tradesmen stand before them, and greet them, and say to them: Our brothers from such and such place, welcome?
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה חֲבִיבָה מִצְוָה בִּשְׁעָתָהּ, שֶׁהֲרֵי מִפְּנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִין, מִפְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים אֵין עוֹמְדִין.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Yes, they stand before those bringing first fruits, but they do not stand before Torah scholars. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin says: Come and see how beloved is a mitzva performed in its proper time, as the tradesmen stand before those who brought first fruits, while they do not stand before Torah scholars.
מִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא נִמְצָא מַכְשִׁילָן לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא.
The Gemara rejects the statement of Rabbi Yosei bar Avin: From where does one know that they rise out of respect? Perhaps the tradesmen stand only in order not to cause those bringing first fruits to fail and sin in the future. That is, if the tradesmen do not treat those bringing the first fruits with great respect, they may not make the effort to travel to Jerusalem in a subsequent year.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: כְּסֶלַע – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּסֶלַע, כְּאִיסָּר – כְּיָתֵר מִכְּאִיסָּר.
§ The mishna states: How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as an Italian issar. With regard to this, Rav Naḥman says: Whenever the Sages specify the measure as that of a sela, e.g., with regard to a damaged skull for purposes of tereifot, they mean that even an area exactly the size of a sela is treated as more than a sela. Likewise, when they specify the measure as that of an issar, they mean that an area exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were more than an issar.
אַלְמָא קָסָבַר רַב נַחְמָן: ״עַד״, וְלֹא עַד בַּכְּלָל.
Since Rav Naḥman holds that a perforation exactly the size of an issar is treated as though it were larger than an issar, he must hold that such a perforation in the windpipe renders the animal a tereifa. The Gemara therefore infers: Apparently, Rav Naḥman holds that whenever the Sages use the word: Until, it means until and not including the measure, as the mishna states that an animal with a perforated windpipe is kosher until the perforation reaches the size of an issar.
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: חֶבֶל הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַמִּטָּה עַד חֲמִשָּׁה טְפָחִים – טָהוֹר. מַאי לָאו חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַטָּה? לֹא, חֲמִשָּׁה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naḥman from a mishna (Kelim 19:2): The end of a rope that extends from a rope bed is not susceptible to ritual impurity until it is five handbreadths long. If the bed becomes impure, the rope remains pure, because it has no use and is therefore not considered part of the bed. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly five handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that amount? If so, the word: Until, means until and including the exact measure. The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly five handbreadths long is like a rope whose length is above that amount.
תָּא שְׁמַע: מֵחֲמִשָּׁה וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה – טָמֵא. מַאי לָאו עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַטָּה? לָא, עֲשָׂרָה כִּלְמַעְלָה.
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the continuation of the mishna: If the end of the rope was of any length from five handbreadths until ten, it is susceptible to impurity. What, is it not teaching that a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated as though its length were below that? The Gemara responds: No, a rope exactly ten handbreadths long is treated like a rope whose length is above that, and it is not susceptible to impurity.
תָּא שְׁמַע: הַדַּקִּין שֶׁבִּכְלִי חֶרֶס, הֵן וְקַרְקְרוֹתֵיהֶן וְדוֹפְנוֹתֵיהֶם, יוֹשְׁבִין שֶׁלֹּא מְסוּמָּכִין –
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from another mishna (Kelim 2:2): With regard to the smallest of earthenware vessels, if they, or even their broken-off bases or sides, can sit, i.e., remain upright, without being supported,
Follow
