(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 46

CHULIN 46 - dedicated by Avi Berger of Queens, N.Y. in memory of his father, Reb Pinchas ben Reb Avraham Yitzchak, on the day of his Yahrzeit.


(a) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua asks whether 'ad (bein ha'Parshos)' is inclusive or exclusive.
What exactly, is his She'eilah?

(b) Assuming that Rav Yehudah means 'ad ve'Lo ad bi'Chelal', how will we have to explain his statement 'Sheniyah Eini Yode'a'?

(c) Then why did he mention specifically 'ad Sheniyah' and not 'Rishonah'?

(d) What She'eilah does ...

  1. ... Rav Papa ask, assuming that 'ad ve'Lo ad bi'Chelal'?
  2. ... Rebbi Yirmiyah ask assuming that 'ad ve'ad bi'Chelal'?
(a) How do we try to resolve Rebbi Yirmiyah's She'eilah from the Beraisa 'ha'Parshah Teidan ke'Basar' (meaning that it is not subject to Tereifus)?
What must we presume regarding the corresponding bein ha'Parshos?

(b) How do we establish the Beraisa, in order to refute that proof?

(c) Alternatively, we interpret 'bein ha'Parshos' as the small ribs of the tail, and the 'Parshos', as the strip of flesh that separates them. What will then be the Din regarding the area on the spinal cord to which we referred until now?

(d) Which great authority supports the first explanation?

(a) According to Rebbi Yanai, the spinal cord of a bird is subject to Tereifus up to a point beyond the wings.
What does Resh Lakish say?

(b) Ula was once standing before ben Pazi who was inspecting the spinal cord of a bird.
How far had he inspected when the Nasi called for him?

(c) At that point, he got up and left.
What was now Ula's Safek?

(a) The Din in our Mishnah 'Nitlah ha'Kaved ve'Lo Nishtayar Heimenu K'lum' implies that if even a Mashehu of the liver remains, the animal is Kasher. What problem do we have with that?

(b) How does Rav Yosef reconcile the two Mishnahs?

(c) When an animal came to hand, whose liver was missing, and of which less than a k'Zayis remained, what would ...

  1. ... Rebbi Chiya do with it?
  2. ... Rebbi Shimon b'Rebbi do with it?
(d) What is the significance of the 'Si'man' 'Ashirim Mekamtzin'?
(a) On what grounds do we reject the current interpretation of Rebbi Chiya and Rebbi Shimon bar Rebbi's actions? What ought we to have said, had we been referring to a liver with a piece missing?

(b) So what are we referring to.
What was it that Rebbi Chiya rejected and Rebbi Shimon b'Rebbi ate?

(c) If liver is not considered meat, on what grounds would Rebbi Shimon bar Rebbi eat it?

(d) How will that explain their respective opinions regarding a missing liver?

(a) Why did Rabah and Rav Yosef run away from Pumbedisa?

(b) When Rebbi Zeira met them, he told them that the k'Zayis of liver that remains for the animal to be Kasher had to be located in the vicinity of the gall-bladder.
What did Rav Ada bar Ahavah say?

(c) What does Rav Papa conclude, based on these two opinions?

(d) What might 'k'Zayis be'Makom she'Hi Chayah' mean?

(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah asked whether the animal will be Kasher if the k'Zayis of liver is Mislaket or is shaped like a strap.
What does 'Mislaket' mean?

(b) Rav Ashi asked what the Din will be if the k'Zayis has been flattened. What must Rav Ashi assume in the two previous cases?

(c) Rebbi Zerika asked Rebbi Ami about 'Nidaldelah Kaved u'me'Avrah be'Tarpe sha' (the diaphragm).
What did he mean by that.

(d) Rebbi Ami did not understand the She'eilah.
Why not?

(a) Our Mishnah lists a hole in the lung among the Tereifos. According to Rav, Shmuel and Rav Asi, this pertains to the lung's the upper membrane (even though the lower membrane remains intact.
What do others say (see Tosfos DH 've'Amri Lah' and Maharam)?

(b) What does Rav Yosef bar Minyumi Amar Rav Nachman mean when he refers to 'a red (like a rose) shirt which encases the lungs'?

Answers to questions



(a) To what does Rava compare a lung whose upper membrane has been peeled off?

(b) What do we prove from there? What is obvious?

(c) What She'eilah does this prompt us to ask?

(d) We reply that Rav Acha and Ravina argue over this point.
What is the Halachah?

(a) The previous ruling is based on a statement by Rav Yosef, who discusses a lung that emits a noise that sounds as if air is escaping from it.
What does he say one should do if one is ...
  1. ... able to pinpoint the exact location of the noise?
  2. ... unable to pinpoint it?
(b) Why should one not use ...
  1. ... hot water?
  2. ... cold water?
(c) In the cases where we declare the animal Kasher, to what do we then attribute the noise?

(d) What have we now proved?

(a) Rava declares Kasher a lung that has been peeled, as we learned earlier.
What distinction does Rava draw between a lung that turned partially red and one that turned completely red?

(b) Ravina objects to Rava's distinction, based on a Beraisa in connection with vermin.
What does the Tana say regarding someone who wounded on Shabbos, vermin not of the eight species that are Tamei?

(c) What does he prove with that?

(d) We try to counter this by comparing the skin of the lung to the eight Sheratzim.
What does the Beraisa say about someone who bruises one of the eight Sheratzim, even though no blood actually emerged?

(a) On what grounds do we reject the equation of the lung to the eight Sheratzim?

(b) So what is the conclusion regarding a liver that has turned red?

(a) Rava also declares a lung part of which has dried, a Tereifah.
How does Rav Papi citing Rava himself, define 'dried'?

(b) This is the opinion of Rebbi Yossi ben Hameshulam in a Beraisa that discusses an animal's ear.
In what context is the Beraisa speaking?

(c) The Tana Kama is more stringent.
How does he define 'dried'?

(d) How do we reconcile Rava with the Tana Kama? Why might the latter concede that a dried lung is not Tereifah until it reaches the stage that it snaps easily when handled?

(a) What does Rava say about a lung that is full of ulcers or black or colored spots?

(b) What is the basis of the Safek Tereifus, caused by a punctured blister on a lung (which was not handled by the Shochet)?

(c) What does Ameimar mean when, citing Rava, he says 'Ein Makifin be'Bu'i'?

(d) Why is that, bearing in mind that one does compare two defected lungs to determine whether the Safek is Tereifah or not?

(a) What causes an adhesion (a Sircha) on the lung?

(b) Why is the animal not Kasher, seeing as the hole is now blocked?

(c) Rava says that if two lobes of the lung have fused, it cannot be examined.
Why not?

(d) He qualifies this however, by confining it to two lobes that are not next to each other (e.g. the first and the third lobes). It does not apply to the first and the second, or the second and third lobes.
Why is that?

(a) Rava only mentions a Sircha between two Unos (the cranial lobes), but not one between an Unah and the Umah (the large, outer caudal lobe).
Why might this be Tereifah even if the adhesion is between it and the adjoining lobe?

(b) What support do we have for this opinion?

(c) If on the other hand, sue to the fact that Rava's reason for being Machshir a Sircha between two adjoining Unos applies equally to the Umos (and the reasoning by the Sircha between the Una or the Uma and wall of the chest is slightly different), why does Rava refer only to the Unos and not the Umos?

(d) What is the Din regarding a Sircha between the Inunisa de'Varda (the intermediate lobe) and any of the other lobes?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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