Chullin 127a — the Talmud in English

The verse says:

“And this is for you the impure among the creeping creatures”

that creeps

“upon the earth,” and we expound from the surplus word “that creeps” [which could have written “among the creeping creatures upon the earth”], that

every place that

it

creeps,

that is, crawls and moves, renders impure. And if so, it is impossible to exclude from “upon the earth” that it should not render impure when it is in the sea, for there too it swims and moves; and necessarily “upon the earth” comes to exclude the species of mouse that is in the sea.

Or does it not say “that creeps”

to include every place where it creeps,

but “that creeps”

comes to exclude that specifically

everything that propagates

which is formed through the reproduction of a father and mother [as in the expression “be fruitful and swarm”]

renders impure.

But

that which does not propagate shall not render impure.

I would exclude

from the general category of mouse the

mouse that is half flesh and half earth

which does not

it

reproduce and multiply,

for it was not formed through the reproduction of a mouse, but was formed spontaneously from the earth.

And if so, the question has returned to its place: should we exclude from “upon the earth” the mouse when it descended into the sea, and not the species of mouse that is in the sea?

And it is a logical inference

that we should not exclude the mouse that is half flesh and half earth.

For

He rendered the weasel impure, and He rendered the mouse impure: just as with the weasel—

everything called a weasel

is impure—

so too with the mouse, everything called a mouse

is impure.

I will include

within this

the mouse that is half flesh and half earth.

Or go along this path: just as the weasel reproduces and multiplies, so too the mouse reproduces and multiplies,

and we will exclude a mouse that is half flesh and half earth, which does not reproduce and multiply, as not rendering impure!? And since in the wording of the verse “that creeps” it is more strongly implied that it reproduces and multiplies, we will exclude a mouse that comes from the earth.

The verse says:

“And this is for you the impure”

among the creeping creatures

“that creeps upon the earth,” and this entire verse is superfluous, for afterward it is written, “These are the impure ones for you among every creeping creature,” and we expound from it to include the mouse that is half flesh and half earth.

And necessarily, the verse “that creeps” comes to include every place where it creeps, even if it descended into the sea. And the verse “upon the earth” comes to exclude the species of mouse that is in the sea.

One of the Sages said to Rava: Say that “among the creeping creatures” comes to include the mouse that is half flesh and half earth

as we said in the beraita. But as for that which the beraita includes from “that creeps,” the one that descends into the sea, and excludes from “upon the earth” the species of mouse that is in the sea, this is difficult; for let us say the opposite: that the verse

“that creeps”

comes to include

everything that creeps,

that crawls and moves,

even

the species of

mouse that is in the sea. And if because of “upon the earth,”

let us say that it comes to exclude that specifically while it is

upon the earth it renders impure,

but if it

descended into the sea it does not render impure!?

He said to him

Rava: It is not reasonable to expound the verses in this manner. For

once you have made the sea

a

place of impurity

by rendering the sea-mouse impure, then

what difference is there here,

where the mouse is found upon the earth,

what difference is there here,

where it is found in the sea? After all, the sea too is a place of impurity!? And necessarily one must say that the sea-mouse does not render impure, whereas the land-mouse renders impure even when it descended into the sea.

We raise an objection against the beraita:

But

this

“upon the earth” is needed

for another exposition:

to exclude,

to exclude

a doubt concerning “floating impurity,”

for if the creeping creature is floating upon the water, and a doubt arose for a person whether he touched the creeping creature floating upon the water or perhaps did not touch it, he is pure because of the doubt, even in the private domain. [Although everywhere a doubt concerning impurity in the private domain is impure, in a doubt concerning floating impurity the doubt is pure].

As Rabbi Isaac bar Avdimi said:

“Upon the earth” implies specifically when the creeping creature is lying upon the earth, and not when it is floating upon water. On the other hand, it is written “that creeps,” whose meaning is that it is in every place where it creeps, even when it is floating upon the water! How so? Rather, “that creeps” comes to include that if he certainly touched floating impurity, he is impure. And

“upon the earth”

comes to exclude a doubt concerning floating impurity 178.

And if so, from where do we expound also to exclude the mouse that is in the sea?

And we answer:

Two instances of “upon the earth” are written

in the passage, in order to expound both of them.

The Sages taught:

It is written

“the tortoise according to its kinds,”

and we expound from “according to its kinds”

to include

the

wild ass

that was born from a tortoise and a snake, for it is considered a species of tortoise and renders impure with the impurity of creeping creatures.

And likewise the nefilim and the salamandra

which are creeping creatures of the tortoise species, they too render impure with the impurity of creeping creatures, like the tortoise.

And when Rabbi Akiva would reach this verse,

he would

say: “How abundant are Your works, O Lord!”

You have creatures

that

grow in the sea,

such as fish of the sea,

and you have creatures

that

grow on dry land,

those

of the sea, if

[they]

went up onto dry land, immediately

they

would die.

And those

on dry land, if

[they]

descended into the sea, immediately

they

would die.

And likewise,

you have creatures

that

grow in light—

in fire, like the salamandra, which is of the tortoise species [and therefore Rabbi Akiva said this when he reached the verse “the tortoise according to its kinds,” for from this verse the salamandra is included].

And you have creatures

that

grow in the air.

Those

in the fire, if they went up into the air, they would immediately die!

For they have no existence except in fire.

And those

in the air, if they descended into the fire, they would immediately die.

For they would be burned.

You must say,

say:

“How abundant are Your works, O Lord!”

The Sages taught: Every

living creature

that exists on dry land also exists

in its likeness

in the sea, except for the weasel.

Rabbi Zeira said: What is the verse,

where is it hinted?

For it is written

“Hearken, all inhabitants of the world,”

that is, all inhabitants of dry land; and dry land is called “world,” because weasels exist only there, and not in the sea, in which species of weasels do not exist.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: The creatures of Narash,

the living creatures that grow in the water pools in the region of Narash—

are not of the inhabited world.

They grow only in water.

Rav Pappa said: The people of

Narash

should be under a ban,

for they are wicked.

Their udder, their hide, and their tail,

the milk and the skin together with the flesh and the tail.

It is a proverb, meaning that all of them—from the smallest to the greatest—are wicked, and should be under a ban.

It is written in Jeremiah:

“Land, land, land—

hear the word of the Lord.”

Rav Pappa said: Narash did not desire to hear the word of the Lord.

For all of them are wicked.

Rav Giddel said in the name of Rav: If a man of Narash kisses you

—if one of the people of Narash kisses you—

count your teeth!

Count your teeth to ascertain whether any of them is missing. This is to say to you that they are all thieves.

And if one of the inhabitants of

Nehar Pekuoda accompanies you

on the road—

“The fine cloak that I see upon you!”

He did this because he saw you wearing a fine garment, and he wishes to steal it from you.

And if one of the men of

Pumbedita accompanies you—

“Change your lodging!”

Change your lodging so that he will not know where you are staying, for they are expert thieves.

Rav Huna bar Torata said: Once I went to Vaad,

a place of wicked people where forbidden mixtures were matched,

and I saw a snake coiled around a tortoise,

which always dwelled with it, and mated with it.

After some time, a wild ass emerged from between them,

which bites human beings and kills them.

And when I came before Rabbi Shimon the Pious, he said to me:

The Holy One, blessed is He, said: They,

the people of that place,

brought

into the world a creature of forbidden mixture, which is

a creature that I did not create in My world,

by mating forbidden species;

so too I will bring upon them

the wild ass, which is

a creature that I did not create in My world.

And we raise an objection:

But the Master said: Every

creature

whose mating and gestation are alike—

that they mate either both face to face, like a human being, or face to rear, like an animal, and the duration of their gestation is alike—only they

give birth and raise one from the other,

meaning that one becomes pregnant from the other and each nurses the other’s offspring.

But any whose mating and gestation are not alike do not give birth and raise one from the other,

and yet the snake and the tortoise do not have equal gestation periods: the snake’s gestation is seven years, while the tortoise’s is six months. How, then, could a wild ass have emerged from them?

And we answer:

Rav said: It was a miracle within a miracle

that occurred. [The first miracle was that it abandoned its own species and mated with a different species; and the second miracle was that they gave birth from one another even though their gestation periods were not equal—Shita Mekubetzet].

And we raise an objection:

This is “punishment,”

so how does he call it a miracle?

And we answer:

What does “a miracle within a miracle” mean?—

for punishment!

In order to punish the wicked!

Mishna:

The flesh of an animal after its death renders impure with the impurity of a carcass in the measure of an olive. But if the flesh separated from the animal before its death, it does not render impure at all, unless it contains an entire limb, that is, flesh, sinews, and bones. For a limb that separated from an animal while it was alive renders impure with severe impurity, like a carcass.

The limb

[which contains flesh, sinews, and bones]

and the flesh

[alone]

that are dangling from the animal,

which were torn from the animal but still remain loosely attached to it—these

render impure with the impurity of food in their place.

For even while they are still attached in their place to the animal, they already have the status of “food,” and are fit to receive the impurity of food from a creeping creature and to render another food impure.

And this is on condition that he had in mind to feed them to a person, for since they are forbidden in consumption even to a gentile because of a limb from a living animal, they are not presumed to be “food” until he explicitly intends that the gentile eat them.

And they require

the limb and the flesh dangling from the animal

preparation.

For they do not receive impurity until they are prepared to receive impurity by being moistened [once] with water after they became dangling, like every food that requires preparation as a condition for receiving impurity.

But with regard to the impurity of “a limb from a living animal,” they are considered attached, and they do not render impure with severe impurity; only with regard to the impurity of food are they considered detached.