Chullin 54b (נד:) — the Talmud in English

And he saw it:

the tanna of our Mishna saw

that of Rav Mattana

—what Rav Mattana said: “The head of the thighbone that has slipped from its socket is a tereifa”—

that it too comes

also

under ‘This is the general rule.’

That is, we would have said that it too is included under “This is the general rule,” and it is a tereifa, in accordance with the statement of Rav Mattana. Therefore, the tanna was compelled to state the exclusion, “These are tereifot.”

And the Gemara explains:

What is the reason

that we would have included Rav Mattana’s case under the Mishna’s “This is the general rule” [had it not been for the exclusion]? Because

it resembles

this head of the thighbone that has slipped from its socket

, the case of one removed,

a type of tereifa called “removed,” since it has been removed from its place.

Therefore,

the tanna stated, “These are tereifot,”

to teach us that only

these are tereifot; but that case of Rav Mattana is kosher.

And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said:

“These are kosher” -

specifically.

For

when he taught,

the tanna initially taught, “These are

tereifot,” and he also taught

“This is the general rule,” and

he saw

the tanna

that case of Rav Mattana—

that it does not come under ‘This is the general rule.’

For we would not have included it under “This is the general rule.”

What is the reason?

Because this head of the thighbone that has slipped from its socket

, does not resemble a perforated organ, nor does it resemble a severed organ, and it does not resemble a removed organ either.

For it was not completely removed; rather, it merely shifted from its place.

Therefore,

the tanna stated, “These are kosher,”

to tell us that only

these are kosher,

but

that case of Rav Mattana—

is a tereifa.

The substance of the matter! Rav Mattana said: This head of the thighbone that has slipped from its socket—

is a tereifa!

And Rava said: It is kosher!

And if its tendon was severed,

the tendon that connects the head of the thighbone to the pelvic bone—

it is a tereifa!

And the halakha is—

if its tendon was severed

as well,

it is kosher until it completely decomposes,

until it rots.

We learned in the Mishna: How much of the windpipe must be missing

for the animal to be deemed a tereifa?

Ze’iri said: You, who have never seen

the

measure

of an Italian issar in your lives—

its measure is a dinar kordina’ah,

from the Ararat region, which they were familiar with.

And its

circumference is

like a small peshita,

like a small peruta,

and it is found among the peshitei

that are current

in Pumbedita.

Rabbi Hanna Paturaya said,

who was a money changer, with many coins before him, and who earned money that other people deposited with him in order to trade with it and receive half the profit:

Above me

upstairs

stood bar Nappaḥ, and he asked me for

and requested from me

a dinar kordina’ah

in order

to measure a tereifa with it.

And I wanted to stand before bar Nappaḥ, but he did not allow me! He said to me: ‘Sit, my son, sit!’

For

craftsmen

when they are engaged in the work of others

, are permitted to remain seated before Torah scholars while they are engaged in their work.

And the Gemara is astonished:

But are they not

permitted!?

For we learned

in tractate Bikkurim [3:3]:

All craftsmen stand before them

before those who bring the first fruits,

and they ask after their welfare, and say to them: ‘Our brothers, people of such-and-such a place,’—

‘May you come in peace!’

And we answer:

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They stand before them

in order to make the mitzva dear to them.

Before Torah scholars

they do not

stand.

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: Come and see how dear a mitzva is when performed at its proper time. For before them

before those who bring the first fruits

they stand,

the craftsmen, even when they are engaged in their work, whereas

before Torah scholars they do not stand!

And we reject this:

From where

is it established that this is because the mitzva is dear when performed at its proper time?

Perhaps

they stood before them

so that you would not be found causing them to stumble in the future?!

For if they did not receive those who bring the first fruits with honor, they would refrain in the future from bringing them, because of the hardship of the journey.

Rav Naḥman said:

Wherever the Sages stated a measure

of a sela,

they meant an exactly measured sela; if it is exactly a sela, its status is

like more than a sela.

And likewise, wherever they stated a measure

of an issar,

as, for example, in our Mishna, where they said: “How much of the windpipe may be missing [and the animal remains kosher]? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Up to an issar”—if the windpipe is missing exactly an issar, its status is as though it were missing

more than an issar

and it is a tereifa!

Apparently, Rav Naḥman holds

that what is taught in our Mishna, “How much may be missing and it remains kosher? Up to an Italian issar,” means:

up to

the measure of an issar,

but not including the measure itself.

For when it is exactly the measure of an issar, it is a tereifa.

Rava raised an objection to Rav Naḥman

from what we learned in tractate Kelim [19b]: A bed that was woven with rope, and after the weaving of the bed was completed a small amount of rope remained hanging downward, that

rope extending from the bed,

if the length of the rope was less than

five handbreadths,

it is not fit for anything and is not considered part of the bed. Therefore, if the bed becomes impure, it is

pure.

And Rava infers:

Is it not

if the length of the rope was

five

handbreadths, that it is

like less than

five, and it is pure? This proves that we say, “up to, including the measure itself”!

And we reject this:

No!

If the length of the rope was

five

handbreadths, its status is

like more than

five handbreadths, and it is impure.

Come and hear

from what we learned there: If the length of the rope was

from five up to ten

handbreadths—

it is impure.

But if it was longer than ten and onward, it is pure, since at such a length it is destined to be cut off from the bed.

And Rava infers:

Is it not that ten—

is like less than ten?!

And we reject this:

No!

Ten is

like more than ten!

Come and hear

from what we learned in tractate Kelim [2:2]:

The thin ones among earthenware vessels,

that is, earthenware vessels that are thin,

are

whether they themselves hold only a small amount of oil, sufficient for anointing a child, or whether they broke

and their bases,

the bottoms of the vessels that remained after they broke,

and their sides

that remained, and the fragments can be

placed without support,

without being propped up,