ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 57
CHULIN 57-58 - sponsored by Dr. Lindsay A. Rosenwald of Lawrence NY, in
honor of his father, David ben Aharon ha'Levy Rosenwald of blessed memory.
(a) The basket of birds that was brought before Rava - contained Shechted
birds with broken leg-bones, some above the knee, some below.
(b) He declared the birds Kasher following an examination of their Tzomes
ha'Gidin - which is the junction (below the knee), where sixteen nerves
meet, to see if they were all intact (which he found them to be).
(c) He would have declared them Tereifah on account of the broken
leg-bones - had the broken bones protruded into the body (as we will learn
in 'Beheimah Hamaksheh').
(d) The Ge'onim define the Inkuri bird - as a black water-bird with white
spots on its forehead (as 'Inkuri' means spotted).
(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav declares the dislocated fore-leg of an animal -
(b) He declares Tereifah ...
1. ... the dislocated thigh-bone of a bird - provided its sinews have
(c) Both Shmuel and Rebbi Yochanan disagree with Rav's latter ruling.
According to them - it is possible to examine the bird by placing a straw
into its Kaneh and blowing up the lung, and then seeing if the air escapes.
2. ... a dislocated wing - because we are afraid that, due to the combined
pressure of the lung inside the rib-cage and the thinness of the lung's
membrane, it (the wing) will tear away part of the membrane and lung with
(a) Initially, we reject the literal interpretation of Chizkiyah's
statement 'Ein Re'ah le'Of' - because everybody can see that a bird does
have a lung.
(b) Indeed, Rebbi Yochanan states - that it does, and that it is shaped like
a rose petal and nestles between the bird's wings.
(a) Neither can we interpret Chizkiyah's words to mean that a bird's lung
is not subject to Tereifus, because of the Beraisa quoted by Levi (that we
already cited above), which says - that (with the exception of the Tereifus
of a dislocated wing), the Tereifos of a bird and of an animal are
(b) So we try to interpret Chizkiyah's statement to mean that when examining
the innards of a bird that fell from the roof or that fell into a fire, it
is not necessary to examine the lung, because, as Rav Chanah explains - it
is protected by the ribs (due to their broad shape and the angle in which
they are attached to the chest.
(c) We reject this explanation too however - because Rebbi Yochanan's
statement that a bird does have a lung implies that Chizkiyah holds that it
(d) We finally explain Chizkiyah with a quote by Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi
Chanina - who said sarcastically, that from Chizkiyah's statement it appears
that he hardly ever ate chickens (in other words, he really believed that a
chicken did not possess a lung).
(e) We refer to Chizkiyah as 'b'Rivi' - because he was (as the title
implies) one of the great men of his generation.
(a) Rabah bar Rav Huna queried his father, who quoted Rav as saying that a
bird with a dislocated thigh is Kasher, from the Rabbanan of Pumbedisa in
the name of Rav Yehudah - who permits Shemutas Yerech be'Of (as we just
(b) Rav Huna replied 'Nahara Nahara u'Pashteih', which means ...
1. ... literally - that even two tributaries of the same river are different
(one is turbulent, the other, calm).
(c) Rav really holds that it is Kasher. However, when he arrived in
Pumbedisa, not wanting to contravene local Minhag, he forbade it ...
2. ... figuratively, in this context - different places (e.g. Pumbedisa and
the rest of Bavel) had different Minhagim. Consequently, it is not
surprising if in Pumbedisa they forbade 'Shemutas Yerech be'Of', whereas in
the rest of Bavel, they permitted it.
(d) ... and it was Rav Yehudah, who resided in Pumbedisa. who misquoted
him - thinking that Rav's ruling was based on his personal opinion.
(a) When Rebbi Aba found Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba examining the Tzomes
ha'Gidin, he queried him from Rav Huna Amar Rav - who considers a missing
Tzomes ha'Gidin, Kasher.
(b) In reply, the latter quoted him a Mishnah in 'Beheimah ha'Maksheh',
which declares an animal with its legs amputated below the knee, Kasher,
above the knee, Tereifah - and Tereifah, if the Tzomes ha'Gidin is cut.
(c) And Rav commented there - 've'Chein be'Of' ...
(d) ... which appears to contradict to contradict the ruling of Rav Huna in
his name 'Shemutas Yerech be'Of Kesheirah'.
(a) When Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba remained silent, Rebbi Aba himself resolved
the contradiction - by differentiating between a dislocated leg (which is
Kasher) and an amputated one, (which is Tereifah).
(b) Rebbi Yirmiyah objected to Rebbi Aba giving this answer - in his own
name, without referring to Rav himself who drew this distinction.
(c) Based on the principle - 'Chutchah mi'Ka'an u'Meisah ve'Chutchah
mi'Ka'an ve'Chaysah' (from which we extrapolate that one cannot compare one
Tereifus to another), it should come as no surprise that. on the one hand,
if the entire leg is removed, the animal is Kasher, whilst on the other, if
only the Tzomes ha'Gidin has been cut, it is Tereifah.
(a) When Rebbi Aba arrived in Eretz Yisrael (some time after Rebbi Zeira) -
he was surprised to hear the latter quote Rav Huna citing Rav 'Shemutas
Yerech be'Of Tereifah' ...
(b) ... and he commented to Rebbi Zeira - that he personally had had
occasion to ask Rav Huna about Shemutas Yerech be'Of, and that the latter
had specifically quoted Rav as saying 'Kasher'.
(c) And he further supported his opinion - by repeating the previous Sugya,
where Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba also cited Rav Yehudah Amar Rav in this way.
(d) When Rebbi Aba asked Rebbi Zeira what he thought about the matter, he
cited Rav Chiya bar Ashi Amar Rav and Rav Ya'akov bar Idi Amar Rebbi
Yochanan - who both ruled Tereifah.
(a) According to Rebbi Ya'akov bar Idi, had Rebbi Yochanan been present when
the Chaverim permitted Shemutas Yerech be'Of - he would not have dared to
'flap a wing' (i.e. to protest), because they were great men.
(b) Rebbi Chanina quoted - Rebbi in that ruling.
(c) After Rebbi permitted the chicken in question - Rebbi Chanina salted it
and kept it to demonstrate Rebbi's ruling to the Talmidim.
(d) He salted that chicken - in order to preserve it (so that he should be
able to teach more Talmidim).
(a) At the end of the day however, the Halachah is like Rebbi Yehoshua ben
Levi, who, when Rebbi Yossi ben Nehora'i asked him for the Shi'ur that
renders 'a skylight' that is cut into the Kaneh a Tereifah - with the
Mishnah 'ad ke'Isar ha'Italki'.
(b) Rebbi Yossi ben Nehora'i queried this ruling however - based on the
splinter of cane that they used to close the 'skylight' of a lamb that was
defected in this way, and the wound healed.
(c) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi's counter argument was based on the ruling
'Shemutas Yerech be'Of Tereifah, and the story of Rebbi Shimon ben
Chalafta's chicken whose thigh-bone became dislocated, which they seemingly
cured - by tying the tube of a cane in the area of the dislocation to which
they attached the dislocated thigh-bone (as a kind of splint).
(d) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi's is bringing a proof from there that a Tereifah
cannot be cured (even if initially appears that it can) - since he knew for
a fact that in Rebbi Shimon ben Chalafta's case, the chicken's wound
appeared to heal at first, but it died within twelve months. So he assumed
that that is what happened to Rebbi Yossi ben Nehora'i's lamb too.
(a) When Rebbi Shimon ben Chalafta's chicken lost its fluff, in order to
disprove Rebbi Yehudah, who maintains in our Mishnah that such a chicken is
Tereifah - he first placed it in the oven to heat up, then he covered it
with a cloth that is used by coppersmiths ...
(b) ... which is exceptionally warm, due to a. its thickness, and b. because
the copper which it wraps gives the cloth a permanent warmth.
(c) This prove - that a bird that has lost its fluff is not a Tereifah,
because, even assuming that Rebbi Yehudah holds that a Tereifah improves -
that would hardly pertain to the limb or area which caused it to become a
(d) They referred to Rebbi Shimon ben Chalafta as 'Askan bi'Devarim' (an
activist) because he applied his theories practically. Rav Mesharshaya found
it necessary to bring a second incident to support this title - because, as
we already learned, a person does not earn a title because of only one
(a) Shlomoh Hamelech in Mishlei sings the praise of an ant, which prepares
its food in the summer for the winter months ahead - even though it has no
"captain, policeman or ruler (to enforce the law)".
(b) When, on one hot summer's day, Rebbi Shimon ben Chalafta, after
spreading his coat over an ant's nest (to create shade), he spotted a single
ant leaving its nest - he marked the ant to be able to identify it, he
waited for the other ants (who had just been informed that there was shade
outside) to emerge from the nest.
(c) He set out to prove Shlomoh right from there - by removing his coat and
witnessing how the other ants (believing they had been tricked) set upon it
and killed it, a proof that ants live in a state of anarchy; otherwise they
would have first consulted the king.
(d) Rav Acha b'rei de'Rava however, rejected this proof, for any one of
three reasons. Perhaps, he argued, the king was present and had issued the
order to kill it, or perhaps there was a royal edict in effect sentencing to
death any ant that tricked his fellow ants - or perhaps, the king had died,
as we learned in Shoftim "In those days, there was no king in Yisrael, and
each man did as he pleased".
(e) We know that Shlomoh Hamelech was right - because we can trust him,
bearing in mind that he possessed Ru'ach ha'Kodesh.
(a) We query Rav Huna, who states that if an animal survives twelve months,
it cannot be a Tereifah, from a Beraisa. The Tana Kama holds that not having
babies is a sign that an animal is a Tereifah. Raban Shimon ben Gamliel
gives the sign by which we know that an animal ...
1. ... is not a Tereifah - as the fact that it becomes stronger.
(b) When Rebbi gave the maximum survival as thirty days, the Chachamim
retorted - that there have been known to be Tereifos that survive two or
2. ... is a Tereifah - as the fact that it deteriorates.
(c) In any event - there is no opinion in the Beraisa that gives the maximum
life-span of a Tereifah as twelve months, a Kashya on Rav Huna.
(d) We answer - that this is in fact a Machlokes Tana'im, and that there is
an opinion that supports Rav Huna's ruling (as we shall now see).
(a) We already learned that the Shi'ur of a hole that negates the Tum'as
Ohel of a skull, and that makes a live animal a Tereifah, is the size of the
head of a doctor's awl. And the same will apply where there are many small
holes in a skull that add up to that Shi'ur.
(b) Rebbi Yossi ben ha'Meshulam related the story of a man from Inbul -
whose skull was broken and contained holes to that Shi'ur, yet when they
covered them with a piece of dry gourd, he survived (apparently disproving
(c) Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar however, countered - that this operation took
place n the summer, and by the time winter came to an end, he had died, a
proof for Rav Huna (that a Tereifah cannot survive two or three years, like
the Chachamim in the previous Beraisa).
(d) Rav Acha bar Ya'akov says - that it is possible for a Tereifah to bear
children and to become stronger (not like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel).