## Chullin Daf 43a

###### Chullin 43a:1
[Chullin 43a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:1)

אֶלָּא הָנָךְ תַּרְתֵּי דְּאַפֵּקְתְּ, לָא תַּפֵּיק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Rather,** if one counts this way, one must say that **these two** cases that **you removed,** i.e., an animal whose hind legs were severed and one whose hide was removed, **do not remove.** The count will then remain eighteen.


###### Chullin 43a:2
[Chullin 43a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:2)

אָמַר עוּלָּא: שְׁמֹנָה מִינֵי טְרֵפוֹת נֶאֶמְרוּ לוֹ לְמֹשֶׁה בְּסִינַי – נְקוּבָה, וּפְסוּקָה, נְטוּלָה, וַחֲסוּרָה, קְרוּעָה, וּדְרוּסָה, נְפוּלָה, וּשְׁבוּרָה. לְאַפּוֹקֵי לָקוּתָא דְּרָכִישׁ בַּר פָּפָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Ulla says: Eight types of *tereifot* were stated to Moses at Sinai,** and all the cases mentioned in the Mishna and elsewhere fall into these categories: An animal whose organ was **perforated or severed, removed or missing** a piece, one that was **torn or clawed** by wild animals, or that **fell or** was **broken.** The Gemara notes: This list is compiled **to the exclusion of a diseased** organ, **which Rakhish bar Pappa** mentioned with regard to a kidney. Ulla does not deem this a *tereifa*.


###### Chullin 43a:3
[Chullin 43a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:3)

אָמַר חִיָּיא בַּר רָבָא: שְׁמֹנָה טְרֵפוֹת יֵשׁ בִּנְקוּבָה, אִם תֹּאמַר תֵּשַׁע – מָרָה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה קָתָנֵי לַהּ, דְּתַנְיָא: נִיקְּבָה הַקֵּיבָה, נִיקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּים – טְרֵפָה, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף נִיקְּבָה הַמָּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ḥiyya bar Rava says: There are eight *tereifot* in** the category of **a perforated** organ: A perforated gullet, brain membrane, heart, lung, abomasum, intestine, inner rumen, and reticulum or omasum that was perforated to the outside. **If you say** that there are **nine,** because a perforated gallbladder is also mentioned in the mishna, one can say that with regard to the **gallbladder,** only **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, teaches it,** and it is the opinion of an individual. **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: If **the abomasum was perforated,** or **the intestines were perforated,** it is **a *tereifa*. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Even** if **the gallbladder was perforated** it is a *tereifa*.


###### Chullin 43a:4
[Chullin 43a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:4)

(הִלְכוֹת חָבֵר כְּזַיִת מָרָה וְקוּרְקְבָן – סִימָן).

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara provides **a mnemonic** for the following statements of Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Yosef: ***Halakhot*, friend, olive-bulk, gallbladder, and gizzard.**


###### Chullin 43a:5
[Chullin 43a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:5)

אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Yosef, says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan** disagrees with the statement of Ḥiyya bar Rava and **says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda,** that a perforated gallbladder renders the animal a *tereifa*.


###### Chullin 43a:6
[Chullin 43a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:6)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי אַהְדַּרוּ לֵיהּ חַבְרֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה? ״יִשְׁפּוֹךְ לָאָרֶץ מֵרָרָתִי״, וַעֲדַיִין אִיּוֹב קַיָּים. אָמַר לָהֶם: אֵין מַזְכִּירִין מַעֲשֵׂה נִסִּים, דְּאִי לָא תֵּימָא הָכִי ״יְפַלַּח כִּלְיוֹתַי וְלֹא יַחְמוֹל״ – מִי קָא חָיֵי? אֶלָּא נִיסָּא שָׁאנֵי, דִּכְתִיב: ״רַק אֶת נַפְשׁוֹ שְׁמֹר״. הָכָא נָמֵי נִיסָּא שָׁאנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Yosef, says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: What did the friends of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, respond to him?** They responded that Job said: **“He pours out my gall upon the ground”** (Job 16:13), **and** yet **Job** was **still alive.** Evidently, one with a perforated gallbladder can live. Rabbi Yosei **said to them:** Job was kept alive by a miracle, and **one does not mention miraculous acts** as proof for a general ruling. **As, if you do not say so,** then the other phrase in the verse: **“He cleaves my kidneys asunder, and does not spare,”** is problematic. **Does** one with cleaved kidneys **live? Rather, a miracle is different, as it is written** that God said to Satan with regard to Job: **“Only spare his life”** (Job 2:6). Under natural circumstances, Job should have died from his injuries, but in this case he was kept alive by a miracle. **Here too,** with regard to the gallbladder, one must say that **a miracle is different,** and one cannot bring proof from it.


###### Chullin 43a:7
[Chullin 43a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:7)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כְּדִבְרֵי הָאוֹמֵר כְּזַיִת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Yosef, says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with the statement of the one who says** that if the liver of an animal was removed but one **olive-bulk** of it remains, it is kosher.


###### Chullin 43a:8
[Chullin 43a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:8)

וּמִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הָכִי? וְהָאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כִּסְתַם מִשְׁנָה, וּתְנַן: נִיטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְלֹא נִשְׁתַּיֵּיר הֵימֶנָּה כְּלוּם – הָא נִשְׁתַּיֵּיר כְּשֵׁרָה, אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא הָוֵי כְּזַיִת! אָמוֹרָאֵי נִינְהוּ וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does Rabbi Yoḥanan** really **say this? But doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The ***halakha*** is always **in accordance with an unattributed mishna; and we learned** in the mishna: If **the liver was removed and nothing remained of it,** the animal is a *tereifa*? One can infer that if any of it **remained,** the animal is **kosher even if** what remains **does not** constitute **an olive-bulk.** The Gemara responds: **They are *amora’im*, and** they disagree **with regard to** the opinion **of Rabbi Yoḥanan** as to whether he holds that the *halakha* is always in accordance with an unattributed mishna.


###### Chullin 43a:9
[Chullin 43a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:9)

דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מָרָה שֶׁנִּיקְּבָה, וְכָבֵד סוֹתַמְתָּהּ – כְּשֵׁרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara brings another statement **that Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Yosef, says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** If the **gallbladder was perforated** in a place where it was adjacent to the liver, **and the liver seals** the hole, the animal is **kosher,** even though a perforated gallbladder normally renders the animal a *tereifa* according to Rabbi Yoḥanan.


###### Chullin 43a:10
[Chullin 43a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:10)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: נִיקַּב הַקּוּרְקְבָן וְכִיס שֶׁלּוֹ קַיָּים – כָּשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Yosef, says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** Even though the mishna on 56a teaches that if a bird’s gizzard was perforated it is a *tereifa*, if **the gizzard was perforated but its** inner **lining is intact,** the bird is **kosher.**


###### Chullin 43a:11
[Chullin 43a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:11)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: נִיקַּב הַכִּיס וְקוּרְקְבָן קַיָּים, מַאי? תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: נִיקַּב זֶה בְּלֹא זֶה – כָּשֵׁר. אָמַר רָבָא: שְׁנֵי עוֹרוֹת יֵשׁ לוֹ לַוֶּושֶׁט, חִיצוֹן אָדוֹם וּפְנִימִי לָבָן, נִיקַּב זֶה בְּלֹא זֶה – כָּשֵׁר. לְמָה לִי לְמֵימַר חִיצוֹן אָדוֹם וּפְנִימִי לָבָן? דְּאִי חַלֵּיף – טְרֵפָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: If **the** inner **lining** of the gizzard **was perforated, but** the flesh of **the gizzard is intact, what** is the *halakha*? The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from that **which Rav Naḥman said** with regard to a perforated gullet: If both its outer and inner lining were perforated, the animal is a *tereifa*, but if **this** lining **was perforated without that** lining being perforated, it is **kosher.** Similarly, **Rava says: The gullet has two linings,** the **outer red, and** the **inner white.** If **this** lining **was perforated without that** lining being perforated, the animal is **kosher.** The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need for Rava **to state** that the **outer** one is **red and** the **inner** one is **white?** Isn’t this self-evident? The Gemara responds: This teaches **that if** the two were **switched,** i.e., the outer lining turned white and the inner red, the animal is **a *tereifa*.**


###### Chullin 43a:12
[Chullin 43a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:12)

אִבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: נִיקְּבוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם זֶה שֶׁלֹּא כְּנֶגֶד זֶה, מַהוּ? אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא: בַּוֶּושֶׁט – כָּשֵׁר, בַּקּוּרְקְבָן – פָּסוּל. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אָשֵׁי: אַדְּרַבָּה, וֶושֶׁט דְּאָכְלָה בֵּיהּ וּפָעְיָא בֵּיהּ רָוַוח, גָּמְדָא לֵיהּ וּפָשְׁטָה לֵיהּ, זִמְנִין דְּמִיהַנְדְּזִין בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי; קוּרְקְבָן דְּמֵינָח נָיַיח, כִּדְקָאֵי קָאֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף לְרַב אָשֵׁי: הָכִי אָמְרִינַן מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּמָר זוּטְרָא, דְּאָמַר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא כְּוָותָיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: If **both** linings **were perforated,** but **not adjacent to one another, what is** the *halakha*? **Mar Zutra says in the name of Rav Pappa:** If this occurred **in the gullet,** the animal is **kosher;** but if it occurred **in the gizzard,** it is **unfit** for consumption. **Rav Ashi objects to this: On the contrary, the gullet, with which** the animal **eats and calls, is spacious** and flexible, and the animal **constricts it and stretches it.** Since the two linings are not connected to each other, **there are times** in the course of their movement **that** the two holes **align [*demihandezin*] with one another,** creating a fully aligned perforation. But the **gizzard, which is** always **at rest** in place, **stands as it** always **stands.** Accordingly, two such perforations will never align. **Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Yosef, said to Rav Ashi: So we say in the name of Mar Zutra, that** he in fact **said in the name of Rav Pappa in accordance with your** objection.


###### Chullin 43a:13
[Chullin 43a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/43a:13)

וְאָמַר רַבָּה: קְרוּם שֶׁעָלָה מֵחֲמַת מַכָּה בַּוֶּושֶׁט, אֵינוֹ קְרוּם. וְאָמַר רַבָּה: וֶושֶׁט אֵין לוֹ בְּדִיקָה מִבַּחוּץ, אֶלָּא בִּפְנִים. לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **And Rabba says: A membrane that appeared due to a wound in the gullet,** i.e., a scab that covered a perforation, **is not** considered **a membrane** that prevents the animal from being rendered a *tereifa*. **And Rabba says:** The **gullet cannot be inspected from outside** to determine whether the animal is a *tereifa*, since the outer lining itself is red, and therefore reddening due to injury cannot be discerned in it. **Rather,** it must be inspected **from inside,** where the lining is white. The Gemara asks: **What difference is** there as a result of this statement, i.e., in what case must the gullet be checked from the inside?