Chullin 42b — the Talmud in English

Granted, according to the tanna of our Mishna,

who did not write a number of terefot, but only explained them in the Mishna, it is possible to say

that what the tanna taught, he taught,

the terefot that the tanna taught and explained in our Mishna, he taught, whereas the remaining terefot

that he left out,

and did not explain explicitly,

come,

they are learned

through “this is the general rule” [

which the tanna of our Mishna said at the end of his words].

But according to the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael, who said

a number of

eighteen terefot,

it follows from his words that only these eighteen terefot exist,

and there are no more.

And according to his words, this is difficult:

but there is an animal whose legs were severed from above the upper knee joint [

see the illustration in the book Sihat Hulin], which is

a trefa,

and it is not included in the count of the eighteen terefot!?

And we answer: The tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael

holds like Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, who said: It is possible to cauterize it,

that they can make a burn at the place of the cut by means of fire, and through the cauterization it can heal

and live.

But the Gemara asks: What sort of answer have you answered, that the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael holds like Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, that it is possible to cauterize it and for it to live? But

even though it is possible

for it

to be cauterized and live,

it still remains difficult for the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael, for it is a trefa, so why did they not teach it!?

For

according to whom did the answerer say

according to whom did the answerer say that it is possible to cauterize it and for it to live? —

According to the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael!

But

the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael, regarding a trefa

holds that it can live.

And if so, what difference does it make that it can live? Since its legs were severed from above the knee joint, it is a trefa, despite the fact that it can heal and live!?

Furthermore, it is possible that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar himself holds that it is a trefa, but he holds like the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael that although it can heal and live, it is nevertheless a trefa.

And we answer:

Rather,

this is what the earlier answerer said:

the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael holds

the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael

like Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, who said

explicitly [in chapter 3 of the Tosefta], if its legs were severed from above the knee joint,

it is fit.

Therefore he did not include it in the count of the terefot.

And the Gemara continues to challenge the count of eighteen terefot:

but there is deficiency in the spine

which renders the animal a trefa, and it was not taught among the eighteen terefot!?

For we learned in tractate Oholot [2:3]:

in tractate Ohalot 2:3:

A corpse imparts impurity through “impurity of a tent,” meaning that all those who are in the tent of the corpse become impure with corpse impurity, even though they did not touch the corpse itself.

Impurity of a tent applies also to the bones of the corpse, even if no flesh of the corpse remains upon them. This is provided that the bones found in the tent constitute an entire spine of the spinal bones [or an entire skull, or the majority of the number and the majority of the structure of the corpse’s bones].

How much deficiency

will there be

in the spine,

such that from then on it will no longer be called “an entire spine,” and it will not impart impurity in a tent like a corpse?

The House of Shammai say:

when the spine lacks

two vertebrae.

And the House of Hillel say:

when it lacks a bone of

one vertebra.

And Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: And likewise with regard to rendering a trefa.

According to the House of Shammai, the animal does not become a trefa through a deficiency of vertebrae in the spine until two vertebrae are missing from the spine. Whereas according to the House of Hillel, once a bone of one vertebra is missing, it is a trefa.

And it follows that according to everyone it becomes a trefa through a deficiency of vertebrae in the spine. And it is difficult for the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael: Why did he not include this trefa in the count of the terefot? He should have counted nineteen terefot!?

And we answer: Indeed, a deficiency of vertebrae in the spine is a trefa, and it should be included in the count of the terefot. However, there is no need to count “nineteen terefot,” because

the rumen and the reticulum, which you counted as two,

count them as one!

For the rumen and the reticulum are adjacent to each other, and both are adjoining digestive organs, and a deficiency in one of them is like a deficiency in the other. Therefore,

remove one,

remove one of them [the rumen and the reticulum] from being counted separately,

and insert one,

add the deficiency of vertebrae in the spine to the count of the terefot, and the count will again be eighteen terefot, including both the terefot of the rumen and the reticulum and the deficiency of the spinal bones.

And we are still occupied with this:

but there is “one whose skin has been removed,”

which is also a trefa, meaning that the animal’s skin was removed and it was entirely skinned [as it is stated below that the Sages deem it unfit]!?

And we answer:

the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael holds

the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael

like Rabbi Meir, who deems fit

an animal whose skin has been removed.

And we are further occupied with this:

but there is also

a trefa called

“Hiruta,”

whose lung shrank and became hard like palm branches, such that if this shrinking was caused by a person frightening the animal with his voice, there is no remedy for it thereafter, and it does not recover, and it is a trefa!?

And we answer: The matter that we taught in our Mishna in the count of the terefot, “the

gallbladder was punctured,” who teaches it,

according to whom should “the gallbladder was punctured” be taught among the eighteen terefot? — It is

Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda

who holds this way. But he is the sole authority in this matter [in the beraita below, on the next page], whereas the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael does not hold of this trefa. Therefore,

remove,

remove the disqualification of “the

gallbladder

was punctured” from the count of the eighteen terefot,

and insert

in its place the disqualification of

“Hiruta.”

And we are still occupied with this:

but there are also

also

seven teachings,

seven traditions that the amoraim counted among the terefot; so how did the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael establish that the number of the terefot is eighteen בלבד!?

And these are the “seven teachings”:

a.

for Rav Mattana said: This hip joint,

the head of the thigh bone [see the illustration in the book Sihat Hulin]

that slipped from its place,

which jumped from its place [where it is joined to the rump bone], the animal is

a trefa!

b.

And Rakhish bar Pappa said in the name of Rav: If it was afflicted

the animal

in one kidney,

such that one of the animal’s kidneys became filled with pus, and the pus reached the groove inside the kidney, it is

a trefa.

And all the more so when both kidneys were afflicted.

c.

And we learned [below, 55a]

below, on page 55a:

“If the spleen was removed, it is fit.”

And

regarding this

Rav Avira said in the name of Rava: They taught

that if the spleen was removed it is fit

only

when

the spleen was removed

from the body of the animal, since it can continue to live without it.

But

if

the spleen was punctured,

and it was not removed from it—the animal is

a trefa.

d.

And Rabba bar bar Hanna said in the name of Shmuel: The organs,

namely, the windpipe and the esophagus, which are the “organs” that are cut during the slaughter of the animal,

that became detached for the majority of their [length],

meaning that the connection between the organs and the flesh to which they are attached was severed—the animal is

a trefa.

e.

And Rabba bar Rav Sheila said in the name of Rav Mattana in the name of Shmuel: If a rib was uprooted

whole

from the outset,

from the place of its connection to the spinal column [together with half of its vertebra], the animal is

a trefa.

And although we taught in the Mishna that it is a trefa only if the majority of its ribs were broken, here we are dealing with a different case, in which the rib was completely uprooted from its place, and not with a case in which the rib was broken but remained in its place.

f.

and a skull that was crushed,

which was struck with many blows

over the majority

of the skull—the animal is a trefa. g.

and the flesh covering the majority of the rumen

that was torn

over its majority

the animal is

a trefa.

This is the end of the seven teachings.

And we answer: Terefot that are on account of

punctures [

punctures]—

there are eight.

There are eight terefot on account of puncturing the organs, and these are they: a punctured esophagus; the membrane of the brain was punctured; the heart was punctured; a lung that was punctured; the stomach was punctured; the intestines were punctured [the bowels]; the rumen and the reticulum were punctured; the inner rumen was punctured.

He counted them as one,

the tanna considered all eight terefot on account of puncturing the animal’s organs as one trefa, and therefore

remove,

remove now from the count of the eighteen terefot

seven terefot, [

that is, since all eight punctures are counted as one trefa, seven terefot must be subtracted from the count of the terefot, and one trefa must be counted in place of eight terefot],

and insert

in their place

the seven

the seven terefot that the amoraim counted in the seven teachings.

And we challenge:

if so,

that all the terefot of punctures should be counted as one trefa, then

severings,

the severing of the windpipe and the severing of the spinal cord

also, are two

severings

they are,

and if so—

count them as one?!

The two severings should be counted as one trefa, just as we counted the eight terefot of punctures as one trefa, and if so

one is lacking from their number,

one trefa has been subtracted from the count of the terefot, and there are only seventeen terefot!?

And furthermore

there is an additional objection: But there is

that which Rav Avira said in the name of Rava [

teaching three], concerning a punctured spleen—

it too is a puncture,

and it is included in the trefa of punctures. And if so, we should count only six teachings, because a punctured spleen is included among all the punctures, and it follows that there are only seventeen terefot!?