(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Chulin 42

CHULIN 41-43 - sponsored by Dr. Lindsay A. Rosenwald of Lawrence NY, in honor of his father, David ben Aharon ha'Levy Rosenwald of blessed memory.


***** Perek Eilu Tereifos *****


(a) Our Mishnah lists the eighteen Tereifos. An animal becomes Tereifah - through a hole in the Veshet or if the majority of the Gargeres is broken (width-wise).

(b) It lists a hole in the membrane that covers the brain and a hole in the heart. The latter - must penetrate the entire wall through to the hollow.

(c) When the Tana writes 'Nifsekah ha'Shedrah, ve'Nifsak ha'Chut she'Lah' - he really means just that the spinal cord has snapped, adding that the spine is broken, only - because it is unusual for the cord to snap without the spine breaking.

(d) An animal with a missing liver is considered a Tereifah - provided none of it remains.

(a) An animal with - a hole in the lung or with part of the lung missing is Tereifah.

(b) Rebbi Shimon requires the hole to penetrate the Simponos - bronchi (air-tubes, which are surrounded by capillaries, tiny blood vessels, which explains why blood flows from the Simponos, when they are cut).

(c) The Tana then lists a group of three internal organs that are punctured, the Keivah (stomach), the gall-bladder - and the intestines.

(a) The inner Keres (the rumen [one of the stomachs]) renders the animal a Tereifah via the smallest hole, the outer Keres - if most of it became torn.

(b) Rebbi Yehudah agrees with this latter Shi'ur, only as regards a small ox. A large one, he maintains - renders the animal a Tereifah with a tear the size of a Tefach (even though it is less than a majority).

(c) A hole in the Messes (the third stomach of ruminants) or in the Beis ha'Kosos (the paunch) considered a Tereifah - provided it appears in an independent section of the lining, not where the two are joined.

(d) In the ruminants, the food goes from the Beis ha'Kosos to the Messes, from ...

1. ... the Messes to the Keivah, and from ...
2. ... the Keivah to the Dakin (the intestines).
(a) The Tana includes in the list an animal that fell off the roof and that the majority of its ribs are broken - two distinct Tereifos. The first refers even to an animal where no limbs appear to be broken, and the second, even to one that did fall at all.

(b) The former is a Safek Tereifah - and must be considered a Tereifah if one Shechted it immediately (and if it did not stand up after falling).

(c) We consider it Tereifah, even though it does not have any apparent defect - because we suspect that its limbs have shattered or became dislocated.

(d) The source of the Tereifos is - Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai.

(a) 'D'rusas ha'Ze'ev' is - where a wolf clawed the animal, rendering it a Tereifah by means of the poison that it injected into the animal.

(b) The Tana Kama does not differentiate between a small animal and a large one. Rebbi Yehudah however, maintains - that a large animal only becomes a Tereifah if it is clawed by a lion, but not by a wolf (whose poison is too weak to affect a large type animal).

(c) A large bird (a chicken or a goose) requires the claws of a large bird of prey (such as a goshawk [or a falcon, Aruch]) to render it a Tereifah, a small bird (a dove or a pigeon) - even through the claws of a small one (such as a sparrow hawk)

(d) The principle the Tana gives to ascertain that the animal is a Tereifah is - any defect which an animal cannot normally survive (twelve months).

(a) Resh Lakish learns from the Pasuk "Zos ha'Chayah Asher Tocheilu" - that one may only eat an animal that can live, but not a Tereifah (which cannot, as we just explained, as if the Torah had written "Zos Chayah").

(b) We refute the initial version of his question (i.e. where a Tereifah is hinted in the Torah) - by citing the obvious source (the Pasuk in Mishpatim "u'Basar ba'Sadeh Tereifah Lo Socheilu" [based on the principle 'Ein Mikra Yotzei mi'Yedei Peshuto']), even though we learn other things from there, too.

(c) Those who hold that a Tereifah can live (as will be explained later), prove it from the same Pasuk - from "Zos", which is otherwise superfluous, and from which we therefore extrapolate 'This live animal you may eat. There is however, another live animal (a Tereifah) which you may not'.

(a) Those who hold that a Tereifah cannot live interpret "Zos" like Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, who learns from there - that Hashem needed to take hold of each species mentioned in the Torah and Show Moshe exactly what it looked like.

(b) In fact, we conclude, everybody Darshens "Zos" like Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael. And those who hold that a Tereifah can live, derive their opinion from the same source as Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael elsewhere - who learn it from "Bein ha'Chayah ha'Ne'echeles, u'Vein ha'Chayah Asher Lo Se'acheil" (a reference to Tereifos).




(a) We query our Mishnah, which lists only eighteen Tereifos, omitting 'Basgar and 'Shev Shema'atsa'. We confine the Kashya however, to Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, but preclude the Tana Kama. Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael's presentation differs from that of our Mishnah -inasmuch as he specifically mentions the number eighteen (which our Tana does not).

(b) The Kashya does not therefore pertain to our Mishnah - because even if the Tana omits 'Basgar' and Shev Shema'atsa, he includes them in 'Zeh ha'Kelal' in the Seifa.

(c) 'Basgar' is the acronym for the four cases that we are now about to discuss. The 'Beis' represents an animal (Beheimah) whose hind legs have been severed above the knee - which the Tana Kama in a Beraisa considers a Tereifah.

(d) We query the answer that Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael holds like Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, who says that such as animal is able to live (if it is branded at that point, and is therefore not a Tereifah) - on the grounds that, Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael is the one who holds that a Tereifah can live in any case, in which case, Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon's statement does not prove that the animal is not a Tereifah.

(a) Nevertheless, we establish Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael like Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon, who also said that an animal whose hind leg has been severed above the knee is Kasher - which explains why Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael omitted it from his list of Tereifos.

(b) The 'Samech' in Basgar represents 'Chesaron be'Shedrah'. In the Mishnah in Ohalos, Beis Shamai declares it no longer Metamei be'Ohel, if two vertebrae are missing. According to Beis Hillel - even one will suffice.

(c) Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel are arguing over the Shi'ur of Tum'as Ohel, as we just explained. Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel comments - that they repeat the same Machlokes with regard to Tereifos, posing the Kashya on Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, why he omits the case from his Beraisa.

(d) We answer the Kashya - by taking the two Tereifos of the Messes and the Beis ha'Kosos listed in our Mishnah and turning them into one, enabling us to insert 'Chesaron be'Shedrah' instead.

(a) The 'Gimel' in Basgar represents G'ludah, which means - that the entire skin has been removed.

(b) Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael declines to insert it in his list because he holds like Rebbi Meir, who holds - that a G'ludah is Kasher.

(c) The 'Resh' of Basgar is 'Charusa', which means a dried up lung - which is Tereifah only if it dried up due to a noise that frightened the animal that was made by a human being, but not to one caused by a natural phenomenon (such as thunder), which affects the animal only temporary, in which case it is not a Tereifah.

(d) The author of the Halachah 'Nikvah ha'Marah, Tereifah' is - Rebbi Meir (a minority opinion)

(e) This helps us to solve the current problem (concerning why Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael omits Charusa) - since Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael will then omit Nikvah Marah and replace it with Charusa.

(a) We ask why Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael omits Shev Shema'atsa (which we will discuss shortly). They are referred to as 'Shema'atsa' - because (as opposed to 'Basgar', which all refer to statements of Tana'im), they all refer to statements of Amora'im.

(b) The first of the Shev Shema'atsa concerns 'Buka de'Atma', the second 'Laksah Kulya' and the third, 'Nikav ha'Techol'. The meaning of ...

1. ... 'Buka de'Atma' Rav Masna explains as - a thigh-bone that became dislocated.
2. ... 'Laksah be'Kulya', as Rachish bar Papa in the name of Rav explains, is - even one kidney that filled up with puss.
(c) The Mishnah later will declare 'Nital ha'Techol, Kasher', on which Rav Avira Amar Rava commented - that if the T'chol (the spleen) became punctured, it is Tereifah.

(d) Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Shmuel declares 'Simanim she'Nidaldelu be'Rubah' a Tereifah. 'Simanim she'Nidaldelu be'Rubah' means - that the two pipes became disconnected from their source in a number of places, which in total, adds up to a majority.

(a) Rabah bar Rav Shilo ... Amar Shmuel teaches us the last three cases of 'Shev Shema'atsa'. He declares Tereifah ...
1. ... a rib - that has been torn from its location.
2. ... a skull - that has been badly beaten.
3. ... the flesh that covers the majority of the Keres (part of the abdominal wall that covers the paunch) - is torn.
(b) He refers to 'the majority of the Keres' - because the minority, which is contained inside the rib-cage, is not covered by a wall of flesh).

(c) Shmuel clearly disagrees with the Sugya later, which explains our Mishnah 'Rov ha'Chitzonah' to mean 'Basar ha'Chofeh es Rov ha'Chitzonah' - he will explain the Mishnah differently.

(a) We answer the Kashya on Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael by pointing out that there are eight cases of 'Nekuvi' - which we count as one, replacing the other seven with the Shev Shema'atsa.

(b) The problem with this is that ...

1. ... by the same token, there are two cases of 'Pesuki', which must then also be counted as one (leaving us with only seventeen Tereifos).
2. ... the case of Rav Avira (Nikav ha'Techol) in the name of Rava (one of the Shev Shema'atsa) is - that it too, cannot be counted independently, leaving us with only sixteen Tereifos.
(c) We finally resolve the eighteen Tereifos of Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael with 'Basgar' and 'Shev Shema'atsa' by referring to 'Beheimah she'Nechtechah Raglehah' and 'G'ludah' (both of which we previously precluded from Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael's list and) - which we will now reinstate, leaving us with a total of eighteen Tereifos.

(d) We reconcile Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael with the many additional Tereifos of the lung which we will discuss later in the Perek - by incorporating them all either in Rei'ah she'Nikvah or Rei'ah she'Chasrah.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,