Parallel
חולין 45
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
‘They are honoured by [inviting] me’. Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: If the windpipe was perforated [with many holes] like a sieve, they are reckoned together in order to make up the greater part. R. Jeremiah raised an objection It was taught: If there was one long hole in the skull, or even if there were many small holes in it, in either case the hole or holes are computed to make up the measure of a hole the size of a [surgeon's] drill. We therefore see that if the measure is that of a hole the size of a drill, several small holes are reckoned together so as to make up this measure; similarly we ought to say here, inasmuch as the measure is that of a hole the size of an issar, that several small holes shall be reckoned together to make up a hole the size of an issar? — He [R. Jeremiah] obviously overlooked the dictum of R. Helbo which he reported in the name of R. Hama b. Guria on the authority of Rab: Holes with loss of substance are reckoned together to make up the measure of a hole the size of an issar, but holes without any loss of substance are reckoned together to make up the greater part [of the circumference]. Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi: If a strip [of the windpipe] was removed its space is computed to make up a hole the size of an issar. R. Isaac b. Nahmani enquired of R. Joshua b. Levi: What is the law if the windpipe was perforated like a sieve? — He replied: They have said: Holes with loss of substance are reckoned together to make up the measure of a hole the size of an issar, but holes without any loss of substance are reckoned together to make up the greater part [of the circumference]. What is the test in the case of a bird? — R. Isaac b. Nahmani said: It was explained to me by R. Eleazar thus: It must be cut out and placed over the opening of the windpipe; if it covers the greater part of the windpipe, the bird is trefah, but if not, it is permitted. R. Papa said: And in order to remember this [test] think of a sieve. R. Nahman said, if the windpipe was lacerated in the shape of a door, it is trefah if an issar can pass through it horizontally. Rab said, if the windpipe was slit lengthwise it is permitted, provided there remained intact at least one ring at the top and one ring at the lower end. When this was reported to R. Johanan he exclaimed: Why a ring? Why does Rab insist upon a ring? I would rather say: It is permitted — provided there remained a portions no matter how little, intact at the top and at the lower end. When this same ruling was reported to R. Johanan in the name of [the Babylonian] R. Jonathan he exclaimed: Our Babylonian friends know full well how to interpret the law! R. Hiyya b. Joseph recited in the presence of R. Johanan: The whole of the neck is the appropriate place for slaughtering — that is, from the large ring to the nethermost lobe of the lung. Raba said: ‘The nethermost lobe’ really means the uppermost lobe, for I hold [that the appropriate place for slaughtering is] the entire extent of the neck observed at the time when the animal is grazing. But on no account may the organs [of the throat] be stretched [by force]. R. Hanina (others say: R. Hanania) enquired: What is the law if the animal of its own accord stretched its neck? It is undecided. R. Johanan and R. Simeon b. Lakish were once sitting together and the following was established: If one stretched the organs of the throat of an animal by force and slaughtered in the extended part, the slaughtering is invalid. If the windpipe was pierced below the breast it is considered as if the lungs [were pierced]. Our Rabbis taught: What counts as the breast? It is that portion which looks down upon the ground; on top it extends as far as the neck, and below as far as the rumen. Two ribs from the two sides, on this side and on that, are cut away with it. This is the breast which is to be given to the priests. IF THE MEMBRANE OF THE BRAIN WAS PIERCED. Rab and Samuel both said: If the outer membrane only was pierced, even though the inner was not, [it is trefah]. Others say [that Rab and Samuel both said: It is not trefah] unless the inner membrane was [also] pierced. R. Samuel b. Nahmani said: And in order to remember this think of the bag in which the brain lies. Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi: The same is to be observed with the stones. R. Simeon b. Pazzi said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi on the authority of Bar Kappara: All the marrow that is within the cranium is regarded as the brain; from the point at which it begins to elongate it is counted as the spinal cord. At what point does it begin to elongate? — Said R. Isaac b. Nahmani: It was explained to me by R. Joshua b. Levi: there are two
—
bean shaped protuberances that lie at the entrance of the cranium; whatsoever lies on the inside of these protuberances is regarded as within [the cranium] and whatsoever lies on the outside of these protuberances is regarded as outside [the cranium]. As to that which lies directly opposite these protuberances, I know not how to regard it. It is the more reasonable view, however, to regard it as within [the cranium]. R. Jeremiah once examined the skull of a bird and found these two bean shaped protuberances at the entrance of the cranium. IF THE HEART WAS PIERCED AS FAR AS THE CAVITY THEREOF. R. Zera raised the question: Does it mean as far as the small cavity or as far as the large cavity? Thereupon Abaye said to him: Why are you in doubt? Have we not learnt: R. SIMEON SAYS, PROVIDED IT WAS PIERCED AS FAR AS THE MAIN BRONCHI? And this was explained by Rabbah b. Tahlifa in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba on the authority of Rab to mean that it [the lung] must be pierced as far as the large bronchus! — He replied: There is no comparison at all! There it says: AS FAR AS THE MAIN BRONCHI, that is the center into which the bronchial tubes converge, but here it says: AS FAR AS THE CAVITY THEREOF; what does it matter whether it is the large or small cavity? As to the aorta, Rab says: The slightest perforation therein [will render the animal trefah]; Samuel says, [It is trefah only if] the greater portion [of its circumference was severed]. What is the aorta? Said Rabbah b. Isaac in the name of Rab: It is the artery which runs along the [chest] walls. The walls? But that is absurd! Rather it is the artery which runs in the groove between the lungs. Amemar said in the name of R. Nahman: There are three main vessels, one leads to the heart, the other to the lungs and the third to the liver; the one that leads to the lungs is counted as the lungs, the one that leads to the liver is counted as the liver, but with regard to the one that leads to the heart there is the abovementioned dispute [between Rab and Samuel]. Mar b. Hiyya reports a different version: The one that leads to the lungs is counted as the liver, the one that leads to the liver is counted as the lungs, but with regard to the one that leads to the heart there is the above-mentioned dispute [between Rab and Samuel]. R. Hiyya b. Joseph went and reported Rab's view to Samuel. Said Samuel: If this is what Abba said, then he knows nothing about defects in animals. IF THE SPINE WAS BROKEN. Our Rabbis taught: Rabbi says: The greater part of the circumference of the spinal cord must be severed. R. Jacob says: Even if it was only pierced [the animal is trefah]. Rabbi, however, decided cases according to the view of R. Jacob. R. Huna said: The halachah is not in accordance with R. Jacob's view. What is meant by ‘the greater part’? — Rab said: It means the greater part of the circumference of the membrane [which envelops the cord]. Others say [in the name of Rab]: It means the greater part of the circumference of the medulla. Now those who say: ‘the greater part of the circumference of the medulla’, will certainly hold [that the severance of] the greater part of the circumference of the membrane [renders the animal trefah]; but as for those who say: ‘the greater part of the circumference of the membrane’, what would be their view if the greater part of the circumference of the medulla [was severed]? — Come and hear: Niwli said in the name of R. Huna, ‘The greater part’ of which the Rabbis spoke means the greater part of the circumference of the membrane, for the actual medulla is of no consequence. R. Nathan b. Abin was once sitting before Rab and was examining the spinal cord for any severance of the greater part of the circumference of the membrane and also for any severance of the greater part of the circumference of the medulla; whereupon [Rab] said to him: If the greater part of the circumference of the membrane is intact [no further examination is necessary, for] the actual medulla is of no consequence. Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi: If [the medulla] liquified, [the animal] is unfit; [likewise] if softened, it is unfit. What is meant by ‘liquified’ and by ‘softened’? ‘Liquified’ means that it flows out as from a jug; ‘softened’ means that it cannot stand upright. R. Jeremiah asked: What is the law if it cannot stand upright because of its [abnormal] heaviness? It is Undecided. In the school of Rab it was taught: If it softened, the animal is unfit, but if part wasted away the animal is still fit. The following objection was raised: R. Simeon b. Eleazar said: If part of the spinal substance of an animal wasted away it is trefah. — That was a case where the substance had softened. But surely this is not right, for Levi was once sitting in the public baths when he saw a man shaking his head incessantly and exclaimed: ‘Ah, this man's brain has wasted away’. Now he meant to imply, did he not, that he could not continue to live? — No, said Abaye; he meant to imply that he could not procreate. How far does the spinal cord extend? — Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: Up to the interval between the branch nerves. As R. Dimi b. Isaac was intending to go to Be Huzai he came to Rab Judah and said: ‘Would the Master indicate to me the position of these intervals?’ ‘Go’, he replied: ‘fetch me a kid and I will show them to you’. He brought them a fat kid so Rab Judah said to him, ‘In this they are too deeply sunken in and are not distinguishable’. He then brought him a lean kid and Rab Judah said to him, ‘In this they protrude too much and are not distinguishable. But come’, said he, ‘and I will teach you the traditional law. Thus said Samuel, [The severance of the cord in any part] up to the first interval is trefah, in the third interval it is permitted, as to the second interval I do not know’. R. Huna son of R. Joshua raised the point:
—