Chullin

bean shaped protuberances1 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 cavity2 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!3 — He replied: There is no comparison at all! There it says: AS FAR AS THE MAIN BRONCHI,4 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?5 As to the aorta,6 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 artery7 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. 8 Amemar said in the name of R. Nahman: There are three main vessels, one leads to the heart,9 the other to the lungs10 and the third to the liver;11 the one that leads to the lungs is counted as the lungs,12 the one that leads to the liver is counted as the liver,13 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 Abba14 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 membrane15 [which envelops the cord]. Others say [in the name of Rab]: It means the greater part of the circumference of the medulla.16 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.17 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 away18 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,19 for Levi was once sitting in the public baths when he saw a man shaking his head incessantly20 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?21 — Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: Up to the interval between the branch nerves.22 As R. Dimi b. Isaac was intending to go to Be Huzai23 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 much24 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 interval25 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: cavity, i.e., the ventricle. cit. pp. 132-3. would be of no consequence. from the cord (Rashi, first interpretation). It must be observed that the spinal cord is a long, almost cylindrical rod of nerve tissue accommodated in the vertebral canal, and it extends from the skull to about the middle of the sacrum (the bone at the lower end of the spine and is wedged in between the hip bones). At intervals along the entire length of the cord are given off pairs of spinal nerves (thirty-seven in number, classified as eight cervical, thirteen thoracic, six lumbar, five sacral, and five coccygeal) which break up into branches, and these again into smaller ones until almost every tissue in the body is reached. These spinal nerves (called in the text ‘branch nerves’: Heb. ,uarp) as they emerge from the vertebral canal are at once concealed in muscles and are not visible, with the exception of the first three sacral nerves which are visible and soon unite to form the sacral plexus from which proceeds the sciatic nerve, the largest nerve in the body. Accordingly the intervals between the branch nerves spoken of in the text will refer to the length of spinal cord between the first pair of sacral nerves and the second, and between the second pair and the third. The significance of Samuel's statement is that any severance of the cord below the interval is of no consequence and the animal is valid. the second interval between the second and third sacral nerves, and the third interval after the third sacral nerve.