Chullin 58a (נח.) — the Talmud in English

This is

the first series,

the series of eggs that was within it at the time it became a tereifa —

forbidden.

For the fetus is considered its mother's thigh, and the eggs themselves are considered to have become tereifa when the event that rendered it tereifa occurred.

But as for the eggs that were formed within it

from that point onward, this is a case of “two causes,”

[as they were formed through the female chicken and the male chicken that fertilized the eggs],

and they are permitted.

Rav Ashi raised an objection to Ameimar

from that which we learned in tractate Eduyot [5:1]:

And they agree,

Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis, who dispute the status of the offspring of a tereifa animal,

with regard to the egg of a tereifa —

that it is forbidden, because it grew through a forbidden process?!

And we answer:

There,

the case concerns an egg that was not fertilized by a male chicken, but rather

one that was warmed by the earth,

as the female warmed herself on the ground. Consequently, only it is the cause of the egg's formation.

And we challenge this:

Let him answer him

that there the case concerns

the first series,

which was within it when it became a tereifa and is therefore forbidden?! And we answer:

If so,

what is the meaning of “because it

grew

through a forbidden process”? This implies that all its growth took place through a forbidden process. But it should have said:

“It was completed

through a forbidden process,”

which is what was necessary to say.

And we challenge this: According to your statement, that everyone agrees that the egg of a tereifa that was warmed by the earth is forbidden, and that they disagree only with regard to a case of two causes—

Rather, what of that which was taught in a beraita: An offspring

born from a

tereifa —

Rabbi Eliezer says: It may not be brought near the altar. And Rabbi Yehoshua says: It may be brought near the altar.

With regard to what do they disagree?

It must necessarily be

that the animal became a tereifa and afterward conceived.

And they disagree with regard to a case of two causes.

Rabbi Eliezer holds: A case of two causes is forbidden.

And Rabbi Yehoshua holds: A case of two causes is permitted!

If so, rather than their disputing the matter with regard to the altar, let them dispute it with regard to ordinary use.

And we answer:

This is to inform you of the force of Rabbi Yehoshua's position—that even with regard to the altar it is also permitted.

And we challenge this:

Let them dispute it with regard to ordinary use, to inform you of the force of Rabbi Eliezer's position—that even with regard to ordinary use it is also forbidden?!

And we answer:

The force of the lenient ruling is preferable to state.

And they agree with regard to the egg of a tereifa that it is forbidden —

when it was warmed by the earth, as there is only one cause.

Rav Aḥa follows the view of Rav Aḥa bar Ya'akov, and teaches Ameimar's statement as we have said.

For with regard to these eggs of a tereifa, one must distinguish between the first series and the subsequent series, even in the case of an animal that is certainly a tereifa.

Ravina does not follow the view of Rav Aḥa bar Ya'akov, and teaches Ameimar's statement in the following formulation:

Ameimar said: With regard to these eggs, of an animal of uncertain tereifa status, from the first series, we wait for them.

If it subsequently recovers and lays eggs,

if it again produces eggs, it is not a tereifa; therefore, the earlier eggs as well are

permitted. But if not —

they are forbidden.

Rav Ashi raised an objection to Ameimar: And they agree

Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis

with regard to the egg of a tereifa that it is forbidden, because it grew through a forbidden process?!

He said to him: There, the case concerns an egg from the first series.

And he challenged him:

If so,

what is the meaning of

“grew

through a forbidden process”? But it should have said:

“It was completed

through a forbidden process”

?!

And he answered him:

Indeed,

teach

and you should read:

“It was completed.”

And we challenge this:

Rather, what of that which we learned

in tractate Temura [31b]:

The offspring of a tereifa —

Rabbi Eliezer says: It may not be brought near the altar.

Rabbi Yehoshua says: It may be brought near the altar. With regard to what do they disagree? When it conceived and afterward became a tereifa.

Rabbi Eliezer holds that the fetus is its mother's thigh. And Rabbi Yehoshua holds that the fetus is not its mother's thigh.

If so, rather than their disputing the matter with regard to the altar, let them dispute it with regard to ordinary use?!

To inform you of the force of Rabbi Yehoshua's position!

But let them dispute it with regard to ordinary use, to inform you of the force of Rabbi Eliezer's position?!

The force of the lenient ruling is preferable to state.

And they certainly agree that the egg of a tereifa is forbidden when it is from the first series.

What is the reason?

It is part of its body!

For the fetus is its mother's thigh.

And the halakha is:

With regard to a male,

an animal of uncertain tereifa status that survives

a full twelve months

is certainly not a tereifa

! With regard to a female —

any one that does not give birth.

But if it gives birth, it is certainly not a tereifa!

Rav Huna said:

Every

creature that has no bone does not survive twelve months.

A creeping creature or worm whose formation began within a fruit, and which did not crawl upon the ground, is not forbidden to eat. However, if it formed while the fruit was still attached to the tree, and therefore attached to the ground, its formation within the fruit is considered as though it had formed upon the ground, and it is consequently forbidden to eat.

Rav Pappa said: Learn from Rav Huna with regard to

the

following

law

stated by Shmuel: A cucumber in which a worm developed while it was still on the vine,

while it was attached,

is forbidden

to eat the worm [that is, the worm's crawling within the cucumber, while it was attached to the ground, is considered as though it had formed upon the ground] —