## Chullin Daf 51a

###### Chullin 51a:1
[Chullin 51a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:1)

בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁלִּפְנֵי שְׁחִיטָה, לֹא נִמְצָא עָלֶיהָ קוֹרֶט דָּם – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁלְּאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**it is certain that** the perforation was created **before** the **slaughter** of the animal, and it is therefore a *tereifa*. If **a drop of blood is not found on it, it is certain that it** occurred **after** the **slaughter,** when the blood of the animal had stopped flowing. The animal is therefore kosher.


###### Chullin 51a:2
[Chullin 51a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:2)

הִגְלִיד פִּי הַמַּכָּה – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁשְּׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים קוֹדֶם שְׁחִיטָה. לֹא הִגְלִיד פִּי הַמַּכָּה – הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵירוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **a scab covered the opening of the wound,** i.e., the perforation, **it is certain that** the perforation occurred **three days before** the **slaughter.** Consequently, if the animal was sold less than three days before the slaughter, the buyer can claim that the transaction was performed in error, as he did not intend to purchase a *tereifa* animal, and the seller must refund the buyer. If **a scab did not cover the opening of the wound,** and it is uncertain whether the perforation occurred before or after the animal was purchased, **the burden of proof rests upon the claimant.** Accordingly, the buyer must furnish proof that the perforation occurred before the purchase in order to demand a refund.


###### Chullin 51a:3
[Chullin 51a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:3)

וּמַאי שְׁנָא מִכֹּל נְקוּבֵי דְּעָלְמָא, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּלֵיכָּא דָּם טָרֵיף מָר? הָתָם לֵיכָּא מִידֵּי לְמִיסְרַךְ, הָכָא כֵּיוָן דְּאִיכָּא מַחַט, אִי אִיתָא דְּקוֹדֶם שְׁחִיטָה הוּא – מִיסְרָךְ הֲוָה סָרֵיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** in **what** way **is** this case **different from all other perforations, where even though there is no blood** on the wound the **Master deems** the animal **a *tereifa*?** The Gemara responds: **There,** in all other cases, **there is nothing to** which the blood can **attach.** Even if the wound had bled, the blood would be reabsorbed into the flesh. **Here, since there is a needle,** it follows that **if it is** the case that the perforation occurred **before slaughter,** blood from the wound **would have attached** to the needle. Accordingly, if there is no blood on the needle, it is certain that the perforation occurred after slaughter.


###### Chullin 51a:4
[Chullin 51a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:4)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא לְאַבָּיֵי: חֲזִי מָר הַאי צוּרְבָּא מֵרַבָּנַן דַּאֲתָא מִמַּעְרְבָא, וְאָמַר: רַב עַוִּירָא שְׁמֵנִי, וְאָמַר: מַעֲשֶׂה וּבָא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי מַחַט שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת בְּעוֹבִי בֵּית הַכּוֹסוֹת מִצַּד אֶחָד, וּטְרָפָהּ. שְׁלַח לֵיהּ לָא אֲתָא לְגַבֵּיהּ, אֲזַל הוּא לְגַבֵּיהּ. הֲוָה קָאֵי אַאִיגָּרָא, אָמַר: נֵיחוֹת מָר וְנֵיתֵי. לָא נָחֵית, סָלֵיק הוּא לְגַבֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֵימָא לִי גּוּפָא דְעוֹבָדָא הֵיכִי הֲוָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rav Safra said to Abaye:** Did **the Master see a Torah scholar who came from the West,** Eretz Yisrael, **and said: My name is Rav Avira? He said** that there was **an incident that came before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi involving **a needle that was found in the thickness of the reticulum** protruding **from** only **one side, and he deemed** the animal **a *tereifa*.** Abaye **sent** a message **to** Rav Avira calling for him to come and explain the matter, since this contradicts the *baraita* that states that the animal is a *tereifa* only if the needle protrudes from both sides. Rav Avira **did not come before him,** so Abaye **went before** Rav Avira. Rav Avira **was standing on the roof.** Abaye **said to him: Let Master descend and come,** but Rav Avira **did not descend.** Abaye **ascended to him** and **said to him: Say to me, what were the circumstances of the incident itself?**


###### Chullin 51a:5
[Chullin 51a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַפְטִיר כְּנֵסִיּוֹת אֲנָא, לְעֵילָּא מֵרַבִּי רַבָּה. וַהֲוָה רַב הוּנָא צִיפּוֹרָאָה וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי מָדָאָה יוֹשְׁבִין לְפָנָיו, וּבָאת לִפְנֵי רַבִּי מַחַט שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת בְּעוֹבִי בֵּית הַכּוֹסוֹת מִצַּד אֶחָד, וַהֲפָכָהּ רַבִּי וּמָצָא עָלֶיהָ קוֹרֶט דָּם וּטְרָפָהּ, וְאָמַר: אִם אֵין שָׁם מַכָּה, קוֹרֶט דָּם מִנַּיִן? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: טְרָא טַרְיֵיהּ לְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא! מַתְנִיתִין הִיא: הֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת שֶׁנִּיקְּבוּ לַחוּץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Avira **said to him: I am a director of assemblies** in the study hall. I was standing **above the Great Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **and Rav Huna of Tzippori and Rabbi Yosei of Media were sitting before him, and a needle came before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **that was found in the thickness of the reticulum** protruding **from one side,** i.e., the inside, **and Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **turned** the reticulum **over and found a drop of blood on** the outside, parallel to the wound on the inside, **and he deemed** the animal **a *tereifa*. And he said: If there is no wound** on the outside **there** as well, **from where** is this **drop of blood?** Abaye **said to** Rav Avira: **He caused that man trouble** needlessly, i.e., you troubled me for no reason. **This is** nothing more than **the mishna,** which states that an animal is a *tereifa* if the **omasum or the reticulum was perforated to the outside.**


###### Chullin 51a:6
[Chullin 51a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:6)

נָפְלָה מִן הַגָּג, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: הִנִּיחַ בְּהֵמָה לְמַעְלָה, וּבָא וּמְצָאָהּ לְמַטָּה – אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם רִיסּוּקֵי אֵבָרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states: An animal that **fell from the roof** is a *tereifa*, since its limbs may have been shattered. **Rav Huna says:** If one **left an animal above,** on the roof, **and he came** back **and found it below,** but did not see it fall, **one** need **not be concerned with regard to the shattering of limbs.** One may presume that it jumped intentionally and was not injured.


###### Chullin 51a:7
[Chullin 51a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:7)

הָהוּא גַּדְיָא דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ לְרָבִינָא, דַּחֲזָא חוּשְׁלָא בְּאִיפּוּמָא דְּגַר, נְפַל מֵאִיגָּרָא לְאַרְעָא, אַתְיוּהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב אָשֵׁי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָא דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא ״הִנִּיחַ בְּהֵמָה לְמַעְלָה וּבָא וּמְצָאָהּ לְמַטָּה אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם רִיסּוּקֵי אֵבָרִים״, מִשּׁוּם דְּאִית לַהּ מִידֵּי לְמִסְרַךְ, וְהַאי לֵית לֵיהּ מִידֵּי לְמִסְרַךְ? אוֹ דִלְמָא מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמְדָה נַפְשָׁהּ, וְהַאי נָמֵי אָמֵדה נַפְשֵׁהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was **a certain kid belonging to Ravina that saw barley groats through** an open **skylight. It jumped** down through the skylight and **fell from the roof to the ground.** The case **came before Rav Ashi,** and Ravina **said to him:** What is the rationale for **this** statement **that Rav Huna says,** that if one **left an animal above and he came** back **and found it below, one** need **not be concerned about the** possible **shattering of limbs?** Is it **because** the animal usually **has something to grab hold of?** If so, since **this** kid jumped through a skylight, it **did not have something to grab hold of,** and one must be concerned. **Or perhaps** it is **because** the animal **evaluates itself** and determines that it can jump without injury. If so, **this** kid **also evaluated itself** before jumping, and one need not be concerned.


###### Chullin 51a:8
[Chullin 51a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:8)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמְדָה נַפְשָׁהּ, וְהַאי נָמֵי אָמֵדה נַפְשֵׁהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi **said to him:** It is **because** the animal **evaluates itself** before jumping, **and this** kid **also evaluated itself** before jumping. Therefore, one need not be concerned about the possible shattering of limbs.


###### Chullin 51a:9
[Chullin 51a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:9)

הָהִיא אִימַּרְתָּא דַּהֲוָה בֵּי רַב חֲבִיבָא, דַּהֲווֹ שָׁדְרָן כַּרְעַיהּ בָּתְרָיָיתָא. אָמַר רַב יֵימַר: הַאי שִׁיגְרוֹנָא נַקְטַיהּ. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רָבִינָא: וְדִלְמָא חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אִיפְּסִיק? בַּדְקוּהָ, אַשְׁכְּחוּהָ כְּרָבִינָא. וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי, הִלְכְתָא כְּרַב יֵימַר, שִׁגְרוֹנָא שְׁכִיחַ, חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה לָא שְׁכִיחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that there was **a certain ewe that was** in **the house of Rav Ḥaviva, whose hind legs would drag. Rav Yeimar said: This** ewe **suffers from rheumatism** [***shigrona***], and this is why she drags her legs. **Ravina objects to this: But perhaps the spinal cord was cut,** and this is why the ewe dragged her legs, and the animal is a *tereifa*. **They inspected her and found** that the spinal cord was cut, **as Ravina** said. The Gemara notes: **And even so, the *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Yeimar,** since **rheumatism is common,** but a cut **spinal cord is not common.** Accordingly, one need not be concerned about the possibility of a cut spinal cord.


###### Chullin 51a:10
[Chullin 51a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:10)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: זְכָרִים הַמְנַגְּחִין זֶה אֶת זֶה – אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם רִיסּוּקֵי אֵבָרִים, אַף עַל גַּב דְּמִידְּווּ וְקָיְימִי – צִימְרָא בְּעָלְמָא הוּא דְּנָקֵט לְהוּ; אִי נְפוּל לְאַרְעָא – וַדַּאי חָיְישִׁינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna** also **says:** With regard to **rams that butt one another, one** need **not be concerned with regard to shattering of limbs. Even though they are in pain and stand** still, it is **only a fever that afflicts them;** one need not be concerned about the possibility of severe injuries. But **if they fall to the ground** due to the impact, **we certainly must be concerned** that their limbs may have been shattered.


###### Chullin 51a:11
[Chullin 51a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:11)

אָמַר רַב מְנַשֵּׁי: הָנֵי דִּכְרֵי דְּגָנְבִי גַּנָּבֵי – אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם רִיסּוּק אֵבָרִים, מַאי טַעְמָא? כִּי שָׁדוּ לְהוּ אַמׇּתְנַיְיהוּ שָׁדוּ לְהוּ, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלִירְהֲטוּ קַמַּיְיהוּ. אַהְדְּרִינְהוּ – וַדַּאי חָיְישִׁינַן; וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַהְדְּרִינְהוּ מֵחֲמַת יִרְאָה, אֲבָל מֵחֲמַת תְּשׁוּבָה – תְּשׁוּבָה מְעַלַּיְיתָא הוּא דְּעָבְדִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Menashei says:** With regard to **these rams that thieves steal** and throw over the fence, **one** need **not be concerned with regard to the shattering of limbs. What is the reason** for this? **When** the thieves **throw them** over the fence, **they throw them** so that they land **on their hips,** where they will not be injured, **so that they will** be able to **run before them.** But if the thieves **returned them** to the owner, **we certainly must be concerned** that their limbs may have been shattered, since thieves do not throw them carefully when returning them. **And this statement** applies only **when they return them due to fear** of being caught, or are otherwise forced to return them. **But** if they return them **due to repentance, they have performed full-fledged repentance** and will take care to return them without injury.


###### Chullin 51a:12
[Chullin 51a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:12)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: הִכָּהּ עַל רֹאשָׁהּ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ כְּלַפֵּי זְנָבָהּ, עַל זְנָבָהּ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ כְּלַפֵּי רֹאשָׁהּ, כְּנֶגֶד כׇּל הַשִּׁדְרָה כּוּלָּהּ – אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם רִיסּוּקֵי אֵבָרִים, וְאִי שְׁלֵים חוּטְרָא אַפַּלְגֵי דְּגַבָּא – חָיְישִׁינַן; וְאִי אִית בַּהּ קִיטְרֵי – חָיְישִׁינַן; וְאִי מַחְיַיהּ אַפַּסְקִית – חָיְישִׁינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says:** If **one hit** an animal **on its head** with a stick, **and** the length of the stick **continued toward its back;** or if one hit the animal **on its tail and** the length of the stick **continued toward its head,** such that in either case the blow extended **along the entire spine, one** need **not be concerned with regard to the shattering of limbs. But if the** length of the **stick concluded at the middle of the back, we** must be **concerned** that the strike caused an injury to the spine. **And if there are knots,** i.e., protrusions, **on** the stick, **we** must be **concerned** that it injured the spine, even if the stick fell across the entire back. **And if he struck it like a slash** across the width of the back, **we** must **be concerned** that it injured the spine.


###### Chullin 51a:13
[Chullin 51a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/51a:13)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: בֵּית הָרֶחֶם אֵין בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם רִיסּוּקֵי אֵבָרִים. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: תַּנְיָא דִּמְסַיַּיע לָךְ, תִּינוֹק בֶּן יוֹם אֶחָד

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Naḥman says: The womb is not subject to** concern about possible **shattered limbs.** In other words, one need not be concerned that the limbs of a newborn calf may have been shattered by the narrow birth canal. **Rava said to Rav Naḥman:** That which **is taught** in a *baraita* **supports your** opinion: **A one-day-old infant**