## Chullin Daf 37b

###### Chullin 37b:1
[Chullin 37b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:1)

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ טְרֵפָה הַיְינוּ מְסוּכֶּנֶת, לִכְתּוֹב רַחֲמָנָא ״חֵלֶב נְבֵלָה יֵעָשֶׂה לְכׇל מְלָאכָה וְחֵלֶב טְרֵפָה לֹא תֹאכְלוּהוּ״, וַאֲנָא אָמֵינָא: וּמָה מֵחַיִּים אָתֵי אִיסּוּר טְרֵפָה חָיֵיל אַאִיסּוּר חֵלֶב, לְאַחַר מִיתָה מִיבַּעְיָא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if it enters your mind** to say that the halakhic status of **a *tereifa*** lacking body parts **is** the same as that of an animal **in danger** of imminent death, **let the Merciful One write:** And **the fat of a carcass may be used for any purpose, and the fat of a *tereifa* you shall not eat.** The prohibition against eating the forbidden fat should have been written exclusively with regard to a *tereifa*, **and I would say: If while** an animal is **alive** and in danger of imminent death **the prohibition against** eating **a *tereifa* takes effect upon the prohibition against** eating forbidden **fat, is** it **necessary** to state that **after** its **death** the prohibition against eating an unslaughtered carcass takes effect upon the prohibition against eating forbidden fat?


###### Chullin 37b:2
[Chullin 37b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:2)

אֶלָּא, מִדִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״נְבֵלָה״, מִכְּלָל דִּטְרֵפָה לָאו הַיְינוּ מְסוּכֶּנֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: **Rather, from the fact that the Merciful One writes** that the prohibition against eating **an unslaughtered carcass** takes effect upon the prohibition against eating forbidden fat, one learns **by inference that** the ***tereifa*** in the verse **is not the same as** an animal **in danger** of imminent death. Rather, the *tereifa* in the verse is an animal that was mauled and is lacking body parts, and it is only that animal that is prohibited after slaughter. Eating an animal in danger of imminent death after slaughter is permitted.


###### Chullin 37b:3
[Chullin 37b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:3)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ מָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי: וְדִלְמָא לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ הַיְינוּ טְרֵפָה הַיְינוּ מְסוּכֶּנֶת, וּדְקָאָמְרַתְּ: ״נְבֵלָה״ דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? לְהָךְ נְבֵלָה דְּלָא אָתְיָא מִכֹּחַ מְסוּכֶּנֶת. וְהֵיכִי דָּמֵי? שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ גִּיסְטְרָא. הָתָם נָמֵי, אִי אֶפְשָׁר דְּלָא הֲוַי מְסוּכֶּנֶת פּוּרְתָּא מִקַּמֵּי דְּלִיפְסֹק לְרוּבָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Mar bar Rav Ashi objects to this: And perhaps, actually I will say to you** that the halakhic status of **a *tereifa* is** the same as that of an animal **in danger** of imminent death, **and** with regard to **that which you said: Why do I** need the prohibition with regard to **an unslaughtered carcass that the Merciful One writes,** one can explain that it is necessary **for that unslaughtered carcass that does not come as a result of danger** of imminent death. **And what are the circumstances** of that unslaughtered carcass? It is in a case **where one rendered** the animal like **a shard,** by cutting it into two widthwise. The Gemara rejects that distinction: **There too,** in the case where one rendered the animal like a shard, it is **impossible that** the animal **was not** at least **somewhat in danger** of imminent death **before he cut the majority** of the animal.


###### Chullin 37b:4
[Chullin 37b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:4)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא, אִם כֵּן לֵימָא ״חֵלֶב נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה״, ״חֵלֶב״ ״חֵלֶב״ לְמָה לִי? זוֹ הִיא שֶׁאֵין חֶלְבָּהּ חָלוּק מִבְּשָׂרָהּ, וְיֵשׁ לְךָ אַחֶרֶת שֶׁחֶלְבָּהּ חָלוּק מִבְּשָׂרָהּ, וְאֵיזוֹ זוֹ? מְסוּכֶּנֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead that there is a different source for the fact that the meat of an animal in danger of imminent death is permitted. **If** it is **so** that an animal in danger of imminent death is included in the category of *tereifa*, **let** the verse **say: The fat of an unslaughtered carcass and a *tereifa*. Why do I** need it to be written: **“Fat** of a carcass and the **fat** of a *tereifa*”? The term “fat” is repeated to teach that **it is this** case **where** the status of **its fat is not distinct from** the status of **its meat,** and both are prohibited; **but you have another** case **where** the status of **its fat,** which is forbidden, **is distinct from** the status of **its meat,** which is permitted. **And which** case is that? **That is** the case of an animal **in danger** of imminent death.


###### Chullin 37b:5
[Chullin 37b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:5)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא מֵהָכָא, ״וָאֹמַר אֲהָהּ ה׳ אֱלֹהִים הִנֵּה נַפְשִׁי לֹא מְטֻמָּאָה וּנְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה לֹא אָכַלְתִּי מִנְּעוּרַי וְעַד עַתָּה וְלֹא בָא בְּפִי בְּשַׂר פִּגּוּל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead that it is derived **from here: “Then I said: Ah, Lord God, my soul has not become impure; and from my youth until now I have not eaten an unslaughtered carcass or a *tereifa*, and no *piggul* flesh came into my mouth”** (Ezekiel 4:14).


###### Chullin 37b:6
[Chullin 37b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:6)

״הִנֵּה נַפְשִׁי לֹא מְטֻמָּאָה״ – שֶׁלֹּא הִרְהַרְתִּי בַּיּוֹם לָבֹא לִידֵי טוּמְאָה בַּלַּיְלָה, ״וּנְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה לֹא אָכַלְתִּי מִנְּעוּרַי״ – שֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתִּי בְּשַׂר כּוֹס כּוֹס מֵעוֹלָם, ״וְלֹא בָא בְּפִי בְּשַׂר פִּגּוּל״ – שֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתִּי מִבְּהֵמָה שֶׁהוֹרָה בָּהּ חָכָם. מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי נָתָן אָמְרוּ: שֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתִּי מִבְּהֵמָה שֶׁלֹּא הוּרְמוּ מַתְּנוֹתֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **“My soul has not become impure”** means **that I did not consider** any sinful thoughts **during the day** that would cause me **to come to impurity** due to a seminal emission **at night. “And from my youth until now I have not eaten an unslaughtered carcass or a *tereifa*”** means **that I never ate** the **flesh of** an animal that was in danger of imminent death, leading one to say: **Slaughter** it, **slaughter** it quickly, before it dies. **“And no *piggul* flesh came into my mouth”** means **that I never ate from an animal** with regard to which there was uncertainty whether it is forbidden and **a Sage issued a ruling** to permit it. **They said in the name of Rabbi Natan** that the last portion of the verse means: **That I never ate from an animal whose gifts** to which members of the priesthood are entitled, i.e., the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw, **were not** already **separated.**


###### Chullin 37b:7
[Chullin 37b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:7)

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא שַׁרְיָא – הַיְינוּ רְבוּתֵיהּ דִּיחֶזְקֵאל, אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ אֲסִירָא – מַאי רְבוּתֵיהּ דִּיחֶזְקֵאל?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The proof is: **Granted, if you say** that **it is permitted** to slaughter and eat an animal in imminent danger of death, then **that is the greatness of Ezekiel,** as, although eating it is permitted, he refrained from doing so. **But if you say** that **it is forbidden** to slaughter and eat that animal, **what** in that action attests to **the greatness of Ezekiel?** Apparently, it is permitted to slaughter and eat an animal in danger of imminent death.


###### Chullin 37b:8
[Chullin 37b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:8)

הֵיכִי דָּמֵי מְסוּכֶּנֶת? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כֹּל שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִין אוֹתָהּ וְאֵינָהּ עוֹמֶדֶת. רַב חֲנִינָא בַּר שֶׁלֶמְיָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ אוֹכֶלֶת בְּקָעִיּוֹת. רָמֵי בַּר יְחֶזְקֵאל אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ אוֹכֶלֶת קוֹרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances** of an animal **in danger** of imminent death? **Rav Yehuda said** that **Rav said:** It is **any** animal with regard to **which one stands it** on its feet **but it does not stand** unaided. **Rav Ḥanina bar Shelamya in the name of Rav said:** That indicator is so clear that **even** if that animal maintains sufficient strength in its jaw and **eats pieces of wood,** if it is unable to stand, its status is that of an animal in danger of imminent death. **Rami bar Yeḥezkel said:** That is the case **even** if that animal **eats beams.**


###### Chullin 37b:9
[Chullin 37b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:9)

בְּסוּרָא מַתְנֵי הָכִי. בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא מַתְנֵי הָכִי: הֵיכִי דָּמְיָא מְסוּכֶּנֶת? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִין אוֹתָהּ וְאֵינָהּ עוֹמֶדֶת, וַאֲפִילּוּ אוֹכֶלֶת בְּקָעִיּוֹת. רָמֵי בַּר יְחֶזְקֵאל אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ אוֹכֶלֶת קוֹרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In Sura, they** would **teach** the exchange in **that** manner. **In Pumbedita, they** would **teach** the exchange in **this** manner: **What are the circumstances** of an animal **in danger** of imminent death? **Rav Yehuda said** that **Rav said:** It is **any** animal with regard to **which one stands it** on its feet **but it does not stand** unaided, **even** if that animal maintains sufficient strength in its jaw and **eats pieces of wood. Rami bar Yeḥezkel said:** That indicator is so clear that **even** if that animal maintains sufficient strength in its jaw **and eats beams,** if it is unable to stand its status is that of an animal in danger of imminent death.


###### Chullin 37b:10
[Chullin 37b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/37b:10)

אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ שְׁמוּאֵל לְתַלְמִידִי דְּרַב, אֲמַר לְהוּ: מַאי אָמַר רַב בִּמְסוּכֶּנֶת? אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: הָכִי אָמַר רַב:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Shmuel found students of Rav** after Rav’s death. **He said to them: What did Rav say with regard to** an animal **in danger** of imminent death? **They said to him: This** is what **Rav said:**