Skip to content

Parallel Talmud

Chullin — Daf 93b

Babylonian Talmud (Gemara) · Soncino English Talmud

מדלא קא בריין הני אבר מן החי נינהו מאן דשרי מדלא קא מסרחן הני חיותא אית בהו

ואידך האי דלא קא מסרחן דלא קא שליט בהו אוירא ואידך האי דלא בריין כחישותא הוא דנקט להו

א"ל רבי יוחנן לרב שמן בר אבא הני ביעי חשילתא שריין ואת לא תיכול משום (משלי א, ח) ואל תטוש תורת אמך

אמר מר בר רב אשי הני ביעי דגדיא עד תלתין יומין שריין בלא קליפה מכאן ואילך אי אזרען אסורין ואי לא אזרען שריין מנא ידעינן אי אית בהו שורייקי סומקי אסירן לית בהו שורייקי סומקי שריין

אומצי ביעי ומזרקי פליגי בה רב אחא ורבינא בכל התורה כולה רבינא לקולא ורב אחא לחומרא והלכתא כרבינא לקולא לבר מהני תלת דרב אחא לקולא ורבינא לחומרא והלכתא כרב אחא לקולא

אומצא דאסמיק חתכה ומלחה אפילו לקדרה נמי שפיר דמי תלייה נמי בשפודא דאיב דמא אגומרי פליגי בה רב אחא ורבינא חד אמר משאב שאיבי ליה וחד אמר מצמת צמתי ליה וכן ביעי וכן מזרקי

רישא בכיבשא אותביה אבית השחיטה דייב דמא ושרי אצדדין מיקפא קפי ואסור אותביה אנחיריה דץ ביה מידי שרי ואי לא אסיר

איכא דאמרי אנחיריה ואבית השחיטה דאיב אצדדין אי דץ ביה מידי שרי ואי לא אסיר

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שני גידין הן הפנימי סמוך לעצם אסור וחייבין עליו חיצון סמוך לבשר אסור ואין חייבין עליו

והתניא פנימי סמוך לבשר אמר רב אחא אמר רב כהנא איקלודי מיקליד

והא תניא חיצון הסמוך לעצם אמר רב יהודה היכא דפרעי טבחי

איתמר טבח שנמצא חלב אחריו רב יהודה אמר בכשעורה רבי יוחנן אמר בכזית

אמר רב פפא ולא פליגי כאן להלקותו כאן לעברו

אמר מר זוטרא כשעורה במקום אחד כזית אפילו בב' ובג' מקומות והלכתא להלקותו בכזית לעברו בכשעורה:

אין הטבחין נאמנין [וכו']: א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן חזרו לומר נאמנין

אמר רב נחמן אכשור דרי מעיקרא דהוו סברי לה כרבי מאיר לא הוו מהימני ולבסוף סברי כרבי יהודה

איכא דמתני לה אסיפא וחכמים אומרים נאמנין עליו ועל החלב אמר ר' חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן חזרו לומר אין נאמנין אמר רב נחמן בזמן הזה נאמנין

אכשור דרי מעיקרא סברוה כרבי יהודה הדר סברוה כרבי מאיר

כמה דהוו דכירי לה לדרבי יהודה לא מהימני והשתא דאנשיוה לדרבי יהודה מהימני:

ועל החלב: חלב מאן דכר שמיה הכי קאמר אין נאמנין עליו ועל החלב וחכמים אומרים נאמנין עליו ועל החלב:

מתני' שולח אדם ירך לעובד כוכבים שגיד הנשה בתוכה מפני שמקומו ניכר:

גמ׳ שלמה אין חתוכה לא במאי עסקינן אילימא במקום שאין מכריזין

since they will never recover, they are to be considered as a limb torn loose from the living animal. And he who permits them [argues thus]: since they do not rot there is obviously vitality in them. And the former? — He maintains that they do not rot only because the outside air does not penetrate into them. And the latter? — He maintains that they do not recover only because emaciation has set in. R. Johanan said to R. Shaman b. Abba: Crushed testicles are permitted, but you must not eat them for it is written: Forsake not the teaching of thy mother.1 Mar son of R. Ashi said: The testicles of a kid2 that is not yet thirty days old, are permitted without having to peel off the membrane; thereafter, if they contain semen they are forbidden,3 if they do not contain semen they are permitted. How does one know this? — If there are red streaks [in the membrane], they are forbidden;4 I if there are no red streaks, they are permitted. As to [dark red] meat, testicles, and the arteries [of the neck], there is a dispute between R. Aha and Rabina. (In any law of the Torah [whenever there is a dispute between them], Rabina always adopts the lenient view and R. Aha the strict view, and the law is always in accordance with Rabina's view thus tending towards leniency; excepting in these three cases, where R. Aha adopts the lenient view and Rabina the strict view, and, the law is in accordance with R. Aha's view and thus tending towards leniency.) As to dark red meat5 if it was cut up and salted, it is even permitted [to be cooked] in a pot; if it was thrust on a spit [and held over the fire], the blood would easily flow out; if it was placed on the coals, in this there is a dispute between R. Aha and Rabina: one says that they [the coals] would draw out the blood, and the other says that they would cause [the meat] to contract.6 The same rules apply to the testicles, and also to the arteries [of the neck]. If a head was put on hot ashes7 and it was made to stand up upon the open cut of the neck, the blood would then flow out and it is permitted; if it was placed upon its side, the blood would become clotted and it is forbidden; if it was made to stand up upon its nostrils and something was thrust into them,8 it is permitted; otherwise it is forbidden. Some there are who say, [If it was made to stand up] upon its nostrils or upon the cut of the neck, the blood would flow out; if it was placed upon its side and it was pierced with something it is permitted, otherwise it is forbidden. [To revert to] the above text:9 Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel, ‘It10 consists of two nerves, the inner,11 next to the bone, is forbidden, and one is liable on account of it, the outer,11 next to the flesh, is forbidden, but one is not liable on account of it’. But it was taught that the inner is nearer the flesh! — R. Aha explained in the name of R. Kahana, [That is so further on] where it is embedded in the flesh. But it was taught that the outer is nearer the bone! — Rab Judah answered: That is so only [at the part] where the butchers cut it open.12 It was stated: If a butcher was found to have overlooked forbidden fat, even only as much as a barley grain, says Rab Judah, [he is punishable]. R. Johanan says, [Only if he overlooked] as much as an olive's bulk. R. Papa said: They do not disagree, for here it is a question of punishing him with stripes,13 and there of removing him.14 Mar Zutra said, [If there was found] as much as a barley grain in one place or as much as an olive's bulk scattered in two or three places [he is punishable].15 The law is: in order to punish him with stripes [he must have overlooked] as much as an olive's bulk, and in order to remove him even if [he overlooked] only as much as a barley grain.16 BUTCHERS ARE NOT TRUSTWORTHY etc. R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan. Later they held that they were to be trusted.17 R. Nahman exclaimed: Have the generations become more virtuous? — At first they [the Sages] held the view of R. Meir18 and so they were not to be trusted, but later they held the view of R. Judah.19 Others report this with reference to the last clause, THE SAGES SAY, THEY ARE TRUSTWORTHY WITH REGARD TO IT AS WELL AS WITH REGARD TO THE [FORBIDDEN] FAT. R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan: Later they held that they were not to be trusted. R. Nahman said: Today they are to be trusted. Have the generations then become more virtuous? — At first they [the Sages] held the view of R. Judah, and later they held the view of R. Meir; and as long as people still remembered the view of R. Judah, they were not to be trusted, but now that R. Judah's view has been forgotten they are to be trusted. AS WELL AS WITH REGARD TO THE [FORBIDDEN] FAT. But who has mentioned the forbidden fat at all? — This is what he [R. Meir] said: They are not trustworthy with regard to it nor with regard to the forbidden fat. But the Sages say: They are trustworthy with regard to it as well as with regard to the forbidden fat.20 MISHNAH. ONE MAY SEND TO A GENTILE A THIGH IN WHICH THERE IS YET THE SCIATIC NERVE, BECAUSE ITS PLACE IS KNOWN.21 GEMARA. Only a whole thigh one may [send] but not if it was cut up.22 But what are the circumstances? If we are speaking of a place where they do not proclaim it, 23 between R. Ammi and R. Assi. [Aliter: meat pickled in vinegar.] behind the hip joint and then behind the femur in the thigh. It gives off branches to the muscles behind the femur, but its longest branch is the common peroneal. The ‘inner’ is probably the great sciatic nerve, and the ‘outer’ the common peroneal. a butcher (R. Nissim). ‘Stripes’ here is not that ordained by the Torah but corporal punishment inflicted for disobeying a Rabbinic law, i.e., Makkath Marduth, stripes for rebellion. (cf. Yoreh Deah, LXIV, 21). trusted for it. nerve had been removed and will buy it from the gentile, because it can easily be seen whether the nerve has been removed or not. announcing it is not in vogue, there Jews are not allowed to buy meat from gentiles under any circumstances, for the Jewish butchers may have disposed of the trefah animal to a gentile and did not trouble to make this fact known.