Chullin 56a (נו.) — the Talmud in English

to include the skin of the genital area.

If he intended to eat it

outside its designated area, it is disqualified, and there is no liability for karet

if he ate it.

And if he intended to eat it

beyond its designated time—

it is piggul, and one is liable for it

for eating it

with karet:

Mishna:

All the conditions that render an animal a tereifa apply also to a bird. However, there are certain conditions that render an animal a tereifa that the tanna had to repeat with regard to birds, for the reasons that will be explained below:

And these are the conditions that render a bird a tereifa:

A punctured esophagus,

which is mentioned because of the novel ruling concerning a severed windpipe.

And a severed windpipe.

Its novelty is that one might have said that since a bird’s vitality is weak—for it is valid to slaughter it by cutting only one of its required slaughtering organs—the windpipe of a bird should likewise render it a tereifa if punctured by even the slightest amount, as is the case with a punctured esophagus. Therefore, the Mishna states “a severed windpipe,” excluding a punctured windpipe.

If a weasel struck it on the head

in

a manner that renders it a tereifa,

by puncturing the membrane of the brain. One should not say that it becomes a tereifa through fracturing the skull without puncturing the membrane, as we find with a waterfowl, which becomes a tereifa through fracturing the skull alone.

If the gizzard was punctured.

Likewise,

if the intestines were punctured,

i.e., the small intestines. The novelty is due to the latter clause, which states: “If its intestines emerged, it is fit.” That is, one should not say that because a bird’s vitality is weak, it becomes a tereifa when its intestines emerge, even if they were not punctured.

If it fell into a fire, and its intestines contracted,

contracted,

its intestines

and their appearance changed—

If

the heart and the gizzard, which are red, became

green, they are disqualified.

And

if

they remained

red

as they normally are,

they are fit.

If a person trod on it,

a person stepped on a bird with his feet, or if he

rendered it a tereifa,

by striking it

against a wall, or an animal crushed it—

and

it was still

fluttering, and twenty-four hours passed, and he slaughtered it,

it is

fit.

Gemara:

With regard to a bird whose head was bitten by a weasel—

Rav, Shmuel, and Levi say: One inserts his hand inside and examines it,

by pressing upward inside the bird’s palate—

if it protrudes and emerges

from the membrane of the brain through the hole made by the bite—

it is a tereifa.

And if not—

it is fit.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

This works

if this examination is effective

according to the one who says

that an animal does not become a tereifa through the puncture of the membrane unless

the lower and upper membranes are both punctured.

Since the hole passes through, it is possible to examine whether the brain emerges through the hole.

But according to the one who says: If the

upper

membrane is punctured, even though the

lower

membrane is not punctured,

it is a tereifa, if so, what does this examination accomplish?

Let us be concerned that perhaps

only the upper

membrane

was

punctured, while the lower

membrane

was not punctured, and therefore the brain did not emerge?!

The Gemara answers:

If it is indeed the case that the

upper

membrane

was punctured, the

lower

membrane

was also punctured, because

due to its softness, it too ruptures

when the finger is pushed upward.

Ze'iri said: There is no

possibility of

examining

a bite by a

weasel—

because its teeth are thin.

Therefore, sometimes the membrane is punctured, but nevertheless the brain does not emerge through the narrow hole, despite pressing the palate upward with a finger.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

And if its teeth are thin, what of it?

Surely it is impossible that a small amount of the brain will not protrude through the hole?!

The Gemara answers:

Rav Oshaya said: Because its teeth are thin and crooked.

The curvature of the teeth causes the hole in the membrane of the brain and the hole in the skull not to be aligned in a straight line. Therefore, when the brain is pressed and emerges through the hole in the membrane, the skull obstructs it, since the hole in the skull is not aligned with the hole in the membrane. Consequently, this examination is not effective.

When he went up to Neharde'a, he sent them word: The things I said before you were an error on my part. Rather, this is what they said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish: One examines a weasel bite by hand,

by pressing the palate upward,

but not with a nail.

The examiner should not open the skull and move a nail over the membrane of the brain to see whether the nail becomes lodged in a hole in the membrane, because perhaps there was no hole, and the nail will puncture it, with the result that the examiner causes financial loss to a Jew.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

One examines

even with a nail.

And it is the subject of the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya—

one examines by hand, and one examines with a needle.

The one who examines by hand said to the one who examines with a needle: How long will you destroy the property of the Jewish people?!

The one who examines with a needle said to the one who examines by hand: How long will you feed carrion to the Jewish people?!

The Gemara expresses astonishment: Is he actually

feeding carrion

to them?

But it was slaughtered!

Rather, he is feeding them tereifot,

because

perhaps the membrane of the brain was punctured.

It can be concluded that it is Rabbi Yehuda who examines by hand.

As it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: One examines a weasel bite by hand, but not with a nail!

If the bone was fractured,

the skull having been fractured by its bite,

even though the membrane of the brain was not punctured,

it is a tereifa, because it is impossible to examine whether the membrane of the brain was punctured, since the weasel’s teeth are thin.

And we say:

It can be concluded!

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

This matter itself is difficult! You said: One examines a weasel bite by hand, but not with a nail. Apparently, it has

with regard to a weasel bite

an examination.

And then it teaches: If the bone was fractured, even though the membrane of the brain was not punctured. Apparently, it has no examination?!

The Gemara answers:

The latter clause comes to refer to a waterfowl, since it has no membrane!

The Gemara expresses astonishment: Does it enter your mind that

it has no membrane

for the brain?

Could this be what you are thinking?!

The Gemara answers:

Rather, since its membrane

of the waterfowl

is soft,

when the bone is fractured, its soft brain membrane is also injured.

Rav Naḥman said to Rav Anan: Master, Shmuel said—

he examines by hand, and deems it fit.

And our colleague Huna said: Rav—

examines by hand, and deems it fit.

The Gemara objects:

But Levi taught: The conditions that render an animal a tereifa, which the Sages enumerated—

corresponding to them

there are conditions that render a tereifa

in a bird.

A bird has an additional condition,

such that if

the bone was fractured

of the skull,

even though the membrane of the brain was not punctured,

it is a tereifa.

He said to him: That—

refers to a waterfowl, since it has no membrane.

The Gemara expresses astonishment:

Could it enter your mind that it has no membrane?!

The Gemara answers:

Rather, since its membrane is soft.

There was a certain hen that was in the house of Rav Ḥana. He sent it before Rav Mattana.

And that hen

had a fractured bone but no puncture in the membrane of the brain, and Rav Mattana declared it fit. Rav Ḥana said to him:

Rav Ḥana said to him:

But Levi taught: The conditions that render an animal a tereifa, which the Sages enumerated—

corresponding to them in a bird; a bird has an additional condition: if the bone was fractured, even though the membrane of the brain was not punctured?!

He said to him: There—

refers to a waterfowl, since it has no membrane.

The Gemara expresses astonishment:

Could it enter your mind that it has no membrane?!

The Gemara answers:

Rather, say: Since its membrane is soft.

Rav Shizbi examined

the hole in the membrane of the brain

in sunlight,

as he looked at it against the sun.

Rav Yemar examined it with water.

He removed all the brain through the opening at the end of the spinal cord, filled the skull with water, and saw whether the water emerged.

Rav Aḥa bar Ya'akov examined it

tochnoe raspolozhenie stolbtsa")

with a sharpened reed,

as in the examination with a nail mentioned above.