Chullin 48a (מח.) — the Talmud in English

Was removed

the bladder

of the mother

itself,

in which the fetus lies—

it is kosher.

Her liver became worm-infested; this actually occurred, and the people of Beit Asiah went up to Yavneh for three pilgrimage festivals.

They deliberated the matter, but during the first two pilgrimage festivals they did not tell them anything.

For the third pilgrimage festival

the Sages took a vote, and those who permitted it were the majority; then

they permitted it to them.

Rav Yosef bar Minyomi said that Rav Naḥman said: A lung that is adjacent

that is, attached

to the chest wall, there is no concern regarding it

that it may have been punctured. Rather, we attribute its attachment to the chest wall to an injury that had been present in the chest wall; and when the injury healed, it caused the lung to adhere to the chest wall.

But if

the lung developed

on it

growths

[wounds or blisters] around the place where it was attached to the chest wall,

there is concern regarding it, and we attribute the injury to the lung.

and we attribute the wound to the lung.

Mar Yehuda said in the name of Avimi: In both this case and that case—

there is concern regarding it.

What do we do,

how do we examine a lung that has adhered?

Rava said: Ravin bar Sheva explained it to me,

how it is examined:

We bring a knife whose blade is thin,

that is, whose edge is sharp,

and we separate it

the lung from the animal’s chest wall, to which it had adhered. And we see:

If there is a defect in the chest wall, we attribute it to the chest wall,

and the animal is kosher.

But if not,

if no defect is found in the chest wall, we attribute it

to the lung, and it is trefa.

Rav Neḥemya, son of Rav Yosef, examined it,

after they separated the lung and found that the injury was in the chest wall,

in lukewarm water,

by inflating the lung in a basin of water; and if it bubbled, this was an indication that it had been punctured, and it was trefa.

Mar Zutra, son of Rav Huna, son of Rav Pappi, said to Ravina: As for this statement of Rav Neḥemya, son of Rav Yosef, you teach it with regard to this case.

Whereas

we, on the contrary, teach it with regard to the following case.

As Rava said: These two lobes of a lung that are adhered to one another,

by a membrane that formed between them,

have no examination that can render them kosher.

Rav Neḥemya, son of Rav Yosef, examined it

the two lobes that had adhered to one another,

in lukewarm water.

Rav Ashi raised an objection to this: This

examination in lukewarm water with regard to attached lobes—

what

is its purpose?!

Granted, here,

in the case where the lung adhered to the chest wall, there is a reason for an examination: If it does not bubble,

we attribute

the injury

to the chest wall,

and we do not say that the lung was punctured and then sealed,

and it is kosher.

But there,

what purpose does the examination serve? After all, this adhesion is a membrane that formed as a result of an injury and sealed it; what difference does it make to us in which lobe it was punctured and sealed?! After all,

if this one was punctured, it is trefa, and if that one was punctured, it is trefa.

We raised this matter:

And did Rav Naḥman say this,

that there is concern only if the lung developed growths? From this you infer that if it is certain that the lung was punctured, sealing it is ineffective!?

But didn’t Rav Yosef bar Minyomi say that Rav Naḥman said: If a lung was punctured and the chest wall seals it—

it is kosher?!

And we answer:

This is not difficult.

There,

where Rav Naḥman said that if the chest wall seals it, the sealing is effective, he was speaking

of the place of growth—

that is, the place where the lung and the chest wall grow together in close contact with one another. That adhesion which formed between them never separates, and the puncture is tightly sealed; therefore, it is kosher.

Here,

where Rav Naḥman expresses concern, it is in a case where the adhesion formed

not in the place of growth—

above, across the width of the cavity, opposite the large lobe. There the lung is distant from the chest wall, and there is concern that the sealing will come apart.

And where

is

the place of growth?

At the place of

the divisions of the lobes,

which is adjacent to the neck.

The substance of the matter: Rav Yosef bar Minyomi said that Rav Naḥman said: If a lung was punctured and the chest wall seals it—

it is kosher.

Ravina said: And this is so when it is entangled in flesh.

The lung must become entangled with and hold fast to the flesh between the two ribs, as this is a strong seal that does not come apart. But if the lung adhered to the ribs themselves, this is not a lasting adhesion.

Rav Yosef said to Ravina: And if it is not entangled

in flesh,

what

is the halakha?

It is trefa. This indicates that we say—

trefa. Thus, we say—

It is punctured.

If so, when it is also entangled

in flesh, its sealing should likewise be ineffective.

For it is taught in a beraita: If

a person’s organ is punctured,

that person is disqualified

from entering the congregation because he is one with crushed genitals,

because it drips,

as his semen does not shoot like an arrow but drips, and he is incapable of fathering children. If

it is sealed,

the organ,

he is fit

to enter the congregation

because he can father children. And this is a case of disqualification that returns to fitness!

Rav Yosef analyzes the wording:

“And this”—what does it exclude? Is it not intended to exclude a case like this,

that if the lung was punctured, sealing it is ineffective in rendering it kosher, even if the sealing was in flesh, analogous to the organ?! Ravina said to him:

No! It is intended to exclude a membrane that formed in the lung as a result of an injury, since it is not a membrane.

But a chest-wall seal in flesh is an effective seal.

Rav Ukva bar Ḥama raised an objection to this: If the chest wall itself were punctured together with it,

opposite the puncture in the lung,

what would be the halakha? It would be

trefa, because from that point onward the lung’s seal has been nullified.

If so,

let the Mishna teach

in the Mishna

“a punctured chest wall”?!

And we answer:

And according to your reasoning, consider that which Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: If the gallbladder was punctured and the liver seals it, it is kosher.

But

if the liver itself were punctured together with the gallbladder, what would be the halakha?

It would be

trefa.

And if so,

let it teach

in the Mishna

“a punctured liver”?!

Rather,

what can you say?

When it is punctured

with a puncture

that does not itself render it trefa, it is not taught.

For once the liver is punctured, it is not rendered trefa by its puncture; rather, it is trefa because the sealing of the gallbladder was nullified when the liver was punctured. And if so, in the case of a punctured chest wall,

here too, since it is not itself what renders it trefa,

but rather the nullification of the seal over the lung’s puncture, therefore

it is not taught.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana asked Shmuel: If

the lung adjacent to the chest wall

developed growths—

what is the halakha?

He said to him: It is kosher.

He said to him: I too say so! However, the students stammer

and hesitate

about the matter. As Rav Mattana said: A lung

that is

full of pus

[and this is what is meant by growths]—

it is trefa. Clear water—

it is kosher. He said to him

Shmuel:

That statement—

was stated with regard to a kidney

in the case of a kidney

.

Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Yosef was walking behind Rabbi Yirmeya in the butchers’ market. They saw those lungs that were standing there, covered with growth after growth.

Rabbi Yitzḥak said to Rabbi Yirmeya:

Does the Master not want a piece of meat?!

He wanted to know whether Rabbi Yirmeya would declare it kosher.

He said to him,

Rabbi Yirmeya:

I have no money!

Rabbi Yirmeya was evading answering his question.

He said to him,

Rabbi Yitzḥak:

I will have it charged to my account!

The butchers will charge it to me, as they trust me.

He said to him,

Rabbi Yirmeya:

What can I do for you? When cases come before Rabbi Yoḥanan

to ask about lungs that developed growths,

he sends them before Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Shimon, who rules leniently concerning it in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. But he,

Rabbi Yoḥanan himself,

does not hold accordingly.

He would not declare them kosher, but neither would he declare them trefa, because he had not heard the matter from his teacher.