## Chullin Daf 58a

###### Chullin 58a:1
[Chullin 58a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:1)

שִׁיחְלָא קַמָּא אֲסִירָא, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ – הָוֵה לֵיהּ זֶה וָזֶה גּוֹרֵם, וּמוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**the first clutch [*shiḥala*]** of eggs that were in its body at the time it was rendered a *tereifa* **is prohibited** for consumption, because these eggs are considered part of the bird and were therefore rendered *tereifa* along with it. But as for any egg fertilized **from this** point **forward, it is** a case where both **this and that cause** it, i.e., a *tereifa* female and a kosher male, **and** as a rule, when permitted and prohibited causes operate together, the joint result is **permitted.**


###### Chullin 58a:2
[Chullin 58a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:2)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְאַמֵּימָר: וְשָׁוִין בְּבֵיצַת טְרֵיפָה שֶׁאֲסוּרָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגָּדְלָה בְּאִיסּוּר! הָתָם בִּדְסָפְנָא מֵאַרְעָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi raised an objection to Ameimar** from a mishna (*Eduyyot* 5:1): **And** all **agree with regard to the egg of a *tereifa*** bird **that it is prohibited** for consumption, **because it grew in** a state of **prohibition.** Evidently, even eggs created after the bird was rendered a *tereifa* are prohibited. Ameimar said to him: **There,** the mishna is dealing **with** a bird **that is heated by the earth,** i.e., that was not fertilized by a male, and the female *tereifa* is therefore the sole source of the egg.


###### Chullin 58a:3
[Chullin 58a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:3)

וְלִישַׁנֵּי לֵיהּ בְּשִׁיחְלָא קַמָּא? אִם כֵּן, ״גָּדְלָה״? ״גָּמְרָה״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **And let** Ameimar **answer** differently, that the mishna is dealing **with the first clutch** of eggs, which were part of the mother’s body when it became a *tereifa*. The Gemara responds: **If** this was **so,** why does the mishna state: Because **it grew** in a state of prohibition? The mishna **should have** stated: Because it **was finished** in a state of prohibition.


###### Chullin 58a:4
[Chullin 58a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:4)

אֶלָּא, הָא דִּתְנַן: וְלַד טְרֵפָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: לֹא יִקְרַב לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: יִקְרַב. בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? בְּשֶׁנִּטְרְפָה וּלְבַסּוֹף עִיבְּרָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סָבַר: זֶה וָזֶה גּוֹרֵם אָסוּר, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ סָבַר: זֶה וָזֶה גּוֹרֵם מוּתָּר. אִי הָכִי, אַדְּמִיפַּלְגִי לְגָבוֹהַּ, לִיפַּלְגוּ לְהֶדְיוֹט?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But** if the offspring in the womb of an animal becomes a *tereifa* along with it, then **that which we learned** in a *baraita* is difficult: With regard to the **offspring of a *tereifa*, Rabbi Eliezer says** that **it shall not be sacrificed on the altar, and Rabbi Yehoshua says** that **it may be sacrificed. With regard to what** case do they **disagree?** It must be **with regard to** a case **where** the mother animal **was rendered a *tereifa* and afterward became pregnant** from a kosher male, and **Rabbi Eliezer holds:** In a case where **this and that cause** it, it is **prohibited, and Rabbi Yehoshua holds:** In a case where **this and that cause** it, it is **permitted.** But **if so, rather than disputing** whether it is permitted to sacrifice such offspring **to the Most High, let them disagree** concerning the more basic issue of whether the offspring is permitted **to an ordinary** person for consumption.


###### Chullin 58a:5
[Chullin 58a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:5)

לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, דַּאֲפִילּוּ לְגָבוֹהַּ נָמֵי שָׁרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: The dispute addresses the question of whether it is permitted to sacrifice the animal as an offering in order **to convey to you the far-reaching nature of** the lenient opinion **of Rabbi Yehoshua, that** such an animal is **permitted even** as an offering **to the Most High.**


###### Chullin 58a:6
[Chullin 58a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:6)

וְלִיפַּלְגוּ לְהֶדְיוֹט, לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דַּאֲפִילּוּ לְהֶדְיוֹט נָמֵי אָסַור! כֹּחַ דְּהֶיתֵּרָא עֲדִיף לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **But let them disagree** concerning whether the animal is permitted **to an ordinary** person in order **to convey to you the far-reaching nature** of the stringent opinion **of Rabbi Eliezer, that** such an animal **is prohibited even to an ordinary** person. The Gemara responds: It is **preferable for** the *tanna* to emphasize **the power of leniency.**


###### Chullin 58a:7
[Chullin 58a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:7)

וּמוֹדִים בְּבֵיצַת טְרֵפָה שֶׁאֲסוּרָה, בִּדְסָפְנָא מֵאַרְעָא, דְּחַד גּוֹרֵם הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: Since Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua disagree with regard to an offspring brought about by two causes, it follows that when the mishna states: **And** they **concede with regard to the egg of a *tereifa*** bird **that it is prohibited** for consumption, this is **referring to** a bird **that is heated by the earth** and was not fertilized by a male, so **that there is** only **one cause,** the *tereifa* mother bird.


###### Chullin 58a:8
[Chullin 58a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:8)

רַב אַחָא סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב, וּמַתְנֵי לַהּ לִדְאַמֵּימָר כְּדַאֲמַרַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **Rav Aḥa holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov,** who said at the end of the previous *amud* that a *tereifa* animal can be capable of giving birth, and similarly a *tereifa* bird can be capable of laying eggs as well, **and he** therefore **teaches** the statement **of Ameimar as we have said,** that any egg fertilized after the bird became a *tereifa* is permitted.


###### Chullin 58a:9
[Chullin 58a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:9)

רָבִינָא לָא סָבַר לַהּ כִּדְרַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב, וּמַתְנֵי לַהּ לִדְאַמֵּימָר בְּהַאי לִישָּׁנָא: אָמַר אַמֵּימָר: הָנֵי בֵּיעֵי דִּסְפֵק טְרֵפָה, דְּשִׁיחְלָא קַמָּא מְשַׁהֵינַן לְהוּ, אִי הָדְרָה וְטָעֲנָה – שַׁרְיָין, וְאִי לָא – אֲסִירָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
But **Ravina does not hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov.** Rather, he holds that a *tereifa* cannot produce eggs or give birth. **And he** therefore **teaches** the statement **of Ameimar in this formulation: Ameimar said** that with regard to **these eggs of** a bird concerning which it is **uncertain** whether it is **a *tereifa*,** the *halakha* is as follows: **We leave** aside **the first clutch** of eggs. **If** the bird **produces** eggs **again,** the first eggs **are permitted** for consumption, because the bird is certainly not a *tereifa*. **And if not, they are prohibited,** because they were considered part of the bird when it was rendered a *tereifa*.


###### Chullin 58a:10
[Chullin 58a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:10)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְאַמֵּימָר: וּמוֹדִים בְּבֵיצַת טְרֵפָה שֶׁאֲסוּרָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגָּדְלָה בְּאִיסּוּר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָתָם בִּדְשִׁיחְלָא קַמָּא. אִם כֵּן, ״גָּדְלָה״? ״גָּמְרָה״ מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! תְּנִי: גָּמְרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi raised an objection to Ameimar** from a mishna (*Eduyyot* 5:1): **And they concede with regard to the egg of a *tereifa*** bird **that it is prohibited** for consumption, **because it grew in** a state of **prohibition.** Evidently, a *tereifa* bird can produce eggs. Ameimar **said to him:** The mishna **there** deals **with the first clutch** of eggs, which existed before the bird became a *tereifa*. Rav Ashi asks: **If so,** why does the mishna state: Because **it grew** in a state of prohibition? The mishna **should have** stated: Because it **was finished** in a state of prohibition. Ameimar responded: **Teach** an emended version of the mishna: Because it **was finished** in a state of prohibition.


###### Chullin 58a:11
[Chullin 58a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:11)

אֶלָּא, הָא דִּתְנַן: וְלַד טְרֵפָה, ר׳ אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: לֹא יִקְרַב לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ, ר׳ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: יִקְרַב, בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? כְּשֶׁעִיבְּרָה וּלְבַסּוֹף נִטְרְפָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סָבַר: עוּבָּר יֶרֶךְ אִמּוֹ הוּא, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ סָבַר: עוּבָּר לָאו יֶרֶךְ אִמּוֹ הוּא. אִי הָכִי, אַדְּמִיפַּלְגִי לְגָבוֹהַּ, לִיפַּלְגוּ לְהֶדְיוֹט!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi asks: **But** if a *tereifa* cannot become pregnant, **that which we learned** in a *baraita* is difficult: With regard to **the offspring of a *tereifa*, Rabbi Eliezer says** that **it shall not be sacrificed on the altar,** and **Rabbi Yehoshua says** that **it may be sacrificed. With regard to what** case do they **disagree?** It must be **with regard to** a case **where** the mother animal **became pregnant and** only **afterward was rendered a *tereifa*. Rabbi Eliezer holds** that **a fetus is** considered like **the thigh of its mother** and is rendered a *tereifa* as part of its body, **and Rabbi Yehoshua holds** that **a fetus is not** considered like **the thigh of its mother.** The Gemara objects: But **if so, rather than disputing** whether it is permitted to sacrifice such offspring **to the Most High, let them dispute** the more basic issue of whether the offspring is permitted **to an ordinary** person for consumption.


###### Chullin 58a:12
[Chullin 58a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:12)

לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. וְלִיפַּלְגוּ בְּהֶדְיוֹט לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר? כֹּחַ דְּהֶיתֵּירָא עֲדִיף לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: The mishna discusses the question of whether it is permitted to sacrifice the animal as an offering in order **to convey to you the far-reaching nature** of the lenient opinion **of Rabbi Yehoshua** that such an animal is permitted even as an offering to the Most High. The Gemara suggests: **But let them dispute** whether the animal is permitted **to an ordinary** person, in order **to convey to you the far-reaching nature** of the stringent opinion **of Rabbi Eliezer** that such an animal is prohibited even to an ordinary person. The Gemara responds: It is **preferable for** the *tanna* to emphasize **the power of leniency.**


###### Chullin 58a:13
[Chullin 58a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:13)

וּמוֹדִים וַדַּאי בְּבֵיצַת טְרֵיפָה שֶׁאֲסוּרָה, בִּדְשִׁיחְלָא קַמָּא, מַאי טַעְמָא? גּוּפַהּ הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: According to this explanation, when the mishna states: **And they certainly concede with regard to the egg of a *tereifa*** bird **that it is prohibited** for consumption, it is dealing **with the first clutch** of eggs in the bird’s oviduct at the time it becomes a *tereifa*. Even Rabbi Yehoshua, who holds that the fetus of an animal is not considered like the thigh of its mother, concedes that a bird’s egg is rendered a *tereifa* along with it. **What is the reason** for this? Rabbi Yehoshua holds that an egg **is** a true part of **its body.**


###### Chullin 58a:14
[Chullin 58a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:14)

וְהִלְכְתָא בְּזָכָר – כׇּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, בִּנְקֵבָה – כֹּל שֶׁאֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rules: **And** with regard to an animal concerning which it is uncertain whether it is a *tereifa*, **the *halakha*** is: **In** the case of **a male,** it is prohibited for **an entire twelve-month** period. After that point, the animal is certainly kosher. **In** the case of **a female, any** animal **that does not give birth** is prohibited. Once it has, it is certainly kosher.


###### Chullin 58a:15
[Chullin 58a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/58a:15)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: כֹּל (בְּרִיָּה) שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ עֶצֶם אֵינוֹ מִתְקַיֵּים שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ מִדְּרַב הוּנָא, הָא דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: קִישּׁוּת (שהתליע) [שֶׁהִתְלִיעָה] בְּאִיבֶּיהָ אֲסוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Huna says: Any creature that has no bones cannot last twelve months. Rav Pappa said:** One may **learn from Rav Huna’s** statement about **that which Shmuel says: If a serpent melon became infested by worms while attached to the ground** [***be’ibbeha***], the worm **is prohibited** for consumption, in accordance with the verse: “And every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth is a detestable thing; it shall not be eaten” (Leviticus 11:41).