Chullin 51bחולין נ״א ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Chullin 51b"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
51bנ״א ב

מטמא בזיבה ואי ס"ד יש בו משום ריסוקי אברים איקרי כאן מבשרו ולא מחמת אונסו

becomes ritually impure if he experiences a gonorrhea-like discharge [ziva]. And if it should enter your mind that a newborn is subject to concern about possible shattered limbs, read here the ruling stated with regard to ziva, that one’s discharge renders one impure only when it issues “out of his flesh” (Leviticus 15:2), but not when it issues due to circumstances beyond his control, e.g., due to illness. Therefore, if one must be concerned that a newborn’s limbs may have shattered during birth, his discharge would not render him impure.

הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שיצא דרך דופן

The Gemara responds: One cannot bring a proof from this baraita, since here we are dealing with a case where the infant left the womb by caesarean section and did not exit through the narrow birth canal. By contrast, after normal births, a newborn’s discharge does not render it impure, since one is concerned about the possibility of shattered limbs.

ת"ש עגל שנולד בי"ט שוחטין אותו בי"ט ה"נ כגון שיצא דרך דופן

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from a baraita: If a calf was born on a Festival, one may slaughter it and eat it on the Festival. One need not wait twenty-four hours before deeming the animal kosher, as one does for an animal that fell from a roof. Apparently, one need not be concerned that its limbs were shattered during the birth. The Gemara responds: Here, too, the baraita is referring to a case where the calf left the womb by caesarean section. But after normal births, one must wait twenty-four hours before slaughtering the calf.

ת"ש ושוין שאם נולד הוא ומומו עמו שזה מן המוכן וכי תימא ה"נ שיצא דרך דופן דרך דופן מי קדוש והא א"ר יוחנן מודה היה ר"ש לענין קדשים שאינו קדוש

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from another baraita: And all agree that if a firstborn animal was born on a Festival and its blemish was born with it, i.e., if it was born with a blemish that removes its sanctity and renders it permitted for consumption, it is considered to be prepared for the Festival and may be eaten. Evidently, one need not wait twenty-four hours before deeming it kosher. And if you would say that here too, the baraita deals with a case where the animal left the womb by caesarean section, one might respond: Is a firstborn animal born by caesarean section sanctified? But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say: Rabbi Shimon would concede with regard to sacrificial animals, e.g., a firstborn, that an animal born by caesarean section is not sanctified? Therefore, the baraita must be referring to an animal born naturally.

הב"ע שהפריס על גבי קרקע

The Gemara responds: Here we are dealing with a firstborn that spread out its legs on the ground and stood up immediately after birth. In such a case the animal is certainly not a tereifa on account of shattered limbs.

ואמר ר"נ בית המטבחים אין בו משום ריסוקי אברים

§ And Rav Naḥman says: If an animal was thrown to the ground in the slaughterhouse in preparation for slaughter, it is not subject to concern for shattered limbs.

ההוא תורא דנפל ואישתמע קל נגיחותיה על רב יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא שקל משופרי שופרי אמרי ליה רבנן מנא לך הא א"ל הכי אמר רב צפרניו נועץ עד שמגיע לארץ

The Gemara relates: A certain bull fell in the slaughterhouse, and its bellowing was audible due to the blow. Still, Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta entered and took from the very best portions of the bull and was not concerned that it may have been a tereifa. The Sages said to him: From where did you learn this? Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta said to them: This is what Rav said: When falling, the bull digs in its hooves until it reaches the earth. Therefore, one need not be concerned that it fell roughly.

א"ר יהודה אמר רב עמדה אינה צריכה מעת לעת בדיקה ודאי בעיא הלכה אינה צריכה בדיקה רב חייא בר אשי אמר אחת זו ואחת זו צריכה בדיקה

§ Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If an animal fell and stood up again, it does not require a twenty-four-hour period mentioned in the mishna (56b) to determine if it may be slaughtered. Nevertheless, it certainly requires inspection after slaughter to determine whether it was injured by the fall and rendered a tereifa. But if it both stood up and walked after the fall, it does not even require inspection after slaughter. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi says: Both in this case and in that case, i.e., even if it walked after the fall, it requires inspection.

אמר רב ירמיה בר אחא אמר רב פשטה ידה לעמוד אע"פ שלא עמדה עקרה רגלה להלך אע"פ שלא הלכה ורב חסדא אמר ניערה לעמוד אע"פ שלא עמדה

Rav Yirmeya bar Aḥa says that Rav says: If the animal stretched out its foreleg to stand, even if it did not actually stand, it is considered to have stood and does not require a twenty-four-hour waiting period. If it raised its leg to walk, even if it did not actually walk, it is considered to have walked and does not require inspection according to Rav. And Rav Ḥisda says: Even if it did not stretch out its foreleg, but simply struggled to stand, even if it did not stand, it is considered to have stood and may be slaughtered that day.

(והלכתא היכא דנפלה מן הגג בדלא ידעה ועמדה ולא הלכה צריכה בדיקה ואינה צריכה מעת לעת ואם הלכה אפילו בדיקה נמי לא צריכה)

The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is: In any case where an animal fell from the roof unawares, i.e., unintentionally, and stood but did not walk, it requires inspection after slaughter but does not require a twenty-four-hour period before slaughter. And if it walked, it does not even require an inspection.

אמר אמימר משמיה דרב דימי מנהרדעא נפולה שאמרו צריכה בדיקה כנגד בני מעיים אמר ליה מר זוטרא הכי אמרינן משמיה דרב פפא צריכה בדיקה כנגד בית החלל כולו

§ Ameimar said in the name of Rav Dimi of Neharde’a: A fallen animal that the Sages said requires inspection must be inspected around the intestines to see whether the organs there have been perforated or torn, rendering the animal a tereifa. Mar Zutra said to him: This is what we say in the name of Rav Pappa: Such an animal requires inspection around the entire space of the body cavity, in case the ribs or spine have been damaged.

א"ל הונא מר בר בריה דרב נחמיה לרב אשי סימנין מאי א"ל סימנין קשין הן אצל נפילה

Huna Mar, grandson of Rav Neḥemya, said to Rav Ashi: What about the two organs that must be severed in ritual slaughter [simanim], i.e., the windpipe and the gullet? Do they require inspection as well? Rav Ashi said to him: The simanim are hard and resistant to damage in falling. Therefore, one need not inspect them.

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל עוף שנחבט על פני המים כיון ששט מלא קומתו דיו ולא אמרן אלא ממטה למעלה אבל מלמעלה למטה מיא הוא דאשפלו ואי מיא קיימי לית לן בה ואי שדא ציבי וקדמיה הא קדמיה

§ With regard to birds that have fallen, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: If a bird fell and hit the surface of the water, once it swims the full length of its body, this is sufficient to indicate that its limbs have not been shattered, similar to an animal that walks after falling. And we said this only in cases where it swam from below to above, i.e., upstream. But if it swam from above to below, i.e., downstream, it is only the water that carried it down, and it must be inspected. And if the water is standing, e.g., in a pond, we have no problem with it, as it is clear that the bird is swimming on its own strength, and it need not be inspected. And even if the bird swims downstream, if straw was scattered in front of it and the bird overtook it with its swimming, then the bird overtook it on its own strength and need not be inspected.

גלימא מתיח חיישינן דלא מתיח לא חיישינן עוף ומעופף לא חיישינן איזלא ומקרבי קיטרי חיישינן לא מקרבי קיטרי לא חיישינן

If the bird fell on a garment spread out taut over poles, we must be concerned that its limbs may have been shattered from the impact. If it fell on a garment that was not taut, we need not be concerned. In any event, if the garment was folded, we need not be concerned, since it presumably was not taut enough to injure the bird. If the bird fell on a net whose knots were woven closely together, we must be concerned that its limbs may have been shattered from the impact. If the knots were not close together, we need not be concerned.

כיתנא דעביד בטוני חיישינן דהאי גיסא ודהאי גיסא לא חיישינן אסורייתא חיישינן כיתנא דדייק ונפיץ לא חיישינן דייק ולא נפיץ חיישינן דעביד ביזרי כיון דאיכא ביה קטרי חיישינן דקתא חיישינן דקדקתא לא חיישינן

If the bird fell directly on to flax arranged into bundles, we must be concerned that its limbs may have been shattered from the impact, because the bundles are hard. If it fell on this side or that side of the bundles, we need not be concerned, because it did not fall directly onto the bundles and the impact was dampened. If it fell on bundles of reeds, we must be concerned. If it fell on beaten and combed flax, with the impurities removed, we need not be concerned, since it is soft. If it fell on flax that was beaten but not combed, we must be concerned due to the residue of flax stalks in the bundles. If it fell on flax that was bundled after it was beaten and combed, since it has knots in it we must be concerned. If the bird fell on flax tow, a coarse bundle of unspun fiber, we must be concerned. If it fell on fine tow, we need not be concerned, because it is soft.

נברא חיישינן תימחתא לא חיישינן קיטמא נהילא חיישינן לא נהילא לא חיישינן

If the bird fell on nevara, the fibers that grow around a palm tree, we must be concerned that its limbs may have been shattered. If it fell on timaḥta, palm bark cut into strips, we need not be concerned. If it fell on sifted ashes, we must be concerned, because the ashes harden. If it fell on unsifted ashes, we need not be concerned, because they are soft and scatter on impact.