SECTION 31 The Laws Governing the Perforation of the Brain and Its [Surrounding] Membranes (1-4)

סימן לא דִּין נְקִיבַת הַמּוֹחַ וּקְרוּמָיו וּבוֹ ד' סְעִיפִים

1

The brain has two membranes, one above the other. (1) If the lower [membrane] was perforated from side to side, [the animal] is tereifah. However, if only the upper [membrane] was perforated, it is kosher. (2) Note: There are [authorities] who rule that [the animal] is tereifah even if only the upper [membrane] was perforated (Halachos Gedolos, as quoted by Hagahos Asheri; Terumas HaDeshen, sec. 166; Hagahos Shaarei Dura, sec. 87). This is the accepted custom unless a severe [financial] loss is involved (3) ([this is Rama’s] own understanding).

א

הַמּוֹחַ יֵשׁ לוֹ ב' קְרוּמִים זֶה עַל זֶה, (א) נִקַּב הַתַּחְתּוֹן נֶקֶב מְפֻלָּשׁ, טְרֵפָה; אֲבָל אִם נִקַּב הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבַדּוֹ, כְּשֵׁרָה. (ב) הַגָּה: וְיֵשׁ מַטְרִיפִין גַּם כֵּן בְּנִקַּב הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבָד, (בַּהַ''ג הֱבִיאוֹ הַגָּהוֹת אֲשֵׁרִי וּתְרוּמַת הַדֶּשֶׁן סִימָן קס''ו וְהַגָּהוֹת שַׁעֲרֵי דוּרָא סִימָן פ''[ז]); וְהָכִי נָהוּג אִם לֹא בִּמְקוֹם הֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה (ג) (דַּעַת עַצְמוֹ).

(1) One above the other – The upper [membrane] is attached to the inner part of the skull and is tough. The brain is contained within the lower [membrane, which] is soft and very thin, and appears to be [part of] the brain itself (Rashi,1 Rabbeinu Nissim2).
(2) It is kosher [Our Sages3 taught that it is] a halachah transmitted to Moshe at Sinai that [an animal] is tereifah when the membrane of the brain is perforated. It is only the lower membrane which contains the brain that is called “the brain’s membrane”, but not the upper [membrane] that is connected to the skull.
There is another authority in the Talmud4 who maintains that [an animal] is tereifah if the upper [membrane] alone is perforated, for the lower [membrane] is soft and does not protect [the brain]. However, if only the lower [membrane] is perforated, [the animal] is kosher, because the upper [membrane] is strong and protects [the brain].
Since the Gemara does not make a definitive ruling [regarding the halachah], the author of Halachos Gedolos [rules that] when either of [the membranes was perforated, the animal] is tereifah. This is the opinion of the authorities cited by Rama in his note. [True,] above, in sec. 30[:2], regarding a fowl bitten by a weasel, [Rav Yosef Caro rules in his Shulchan Aruch that one should] insert his finger in [the fowl’s] mouth and press down. If the brain matter does not emerge, it is evident that the membrane of the brain was not perforated; there is no concern that perhaps only the upper [membrane] was perforated. [However, the rationale in that instance is different:] If the upper [membrane] – which is strong – was perforated, then the lower [membrane] would [also surely] be torn5 [because, when] the finger is pressed down, it would push the brain upward and it would bubble up and emerge through the perforation in the upper membrane (Gemara).6
The reason we do not suspect that only the lower [membrane] was perforated is that a weasel bites from above. The same [logic] applies when [a fowl] was struck by [a piece of] wood or a stone ‒ [it was struck] from above (Rabbeinu Asher, [Chulin 3:11]).
(3) Unless a severe [financial] loss is involved – Maharshal7 and Bayis Chadash8 forbid [the animal’s meat] even when a severe [financial] loss is involved since [the matter concerns] doubt involving a Scriptural prohibition. [Their views are cited by] Turei Zahav9 and Sifsei Kohen.10 However, Pri Chadash and Tevuos Shor11 agree with Rama and rule leniently when a severe [financial] loss is involved.
(א) זֶה עַל זֶה. הָעֶלְיוֹן מְחֻבָּר לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת מִבִּפְנִים וְהוּא חָזָק וְהַתַּחְתּוֹן הוּא שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ מֻנָּח בְּתוֹכוֹ וְהוּא רַך וְדַק מְאֹד וְנִרְאֶה כַּמּוֹחַ עַצְמוֹ (רַשִׁ"יא וְרַ"ןב):
(ב) כְּשֵׁרָה. דַּהֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַיג נִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ טְרֵפָה. וְאֵין נִקְרָא קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ אֶלָּא הַתַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ מֻנָּח בְּתוֹכוֹד וְלֹא הָעֶלְיוֹן הַמְחֻבָּר לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת. וְאִיכָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בִּגְמָרָאה שֶׁנִּקַּב הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבַדּוֹ טְרֵפָה שֶׁהַתַּחְתּוֹן רַךְ וְאֵינוֹ מֵגִיןו אֲבָל נִקַּב הַתַּחְתּוֹן לְבַדּוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁהָעֶלְיוֹן חָזָק וּמֵגִין.ז וּמֵאַחַר דְּלָא אִפְסְקָא הִלְכְתָא בִּגְמָרָא כָּתַב בְּבַהַ"גח לְהַטְרִיף בִּשְׁנֵיהֶם וְזֶהוּ דַּעַת הַיֵּשׁ מַטְרִיפִים שֶׁבְּהַגָּ"ה. וְהָא דִלְעֵיל סִימָן ל'ט בְּעוֹף שֶׁנְּשָׁכוֹ חֻלְדָּה שֶׁמַּכְנִיס אֶצְבָּעוֹ לְתוֹךְ פִּיו וְדוֹחֵק שָׁם וְאִם לֹא יָצָא הַמּוֹחַ בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁלֹּא נִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ וְלֹא חַיְשִׁינָן שֶׁמָּא הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבַדּוֹ נִקַּבי הַיְנוּ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁאִם הָיָה נִקָּב הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁהוּא חָזָק אָז הַתַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁהוּא רַךְ מְאֹד הָיָה נִשְׁקָעיא בִּדְחִיקַת הָאֶצְבַּע שֶׁדּוֹחֵק אֶת הַמּוֹחַ לְמַעְלָהיב וְהָיָה הַמּוֹחַ מְבַצְבֵּץ וְיוֹצֵא דֶּרֶךְ הַנֶּקֶב שֶׁבָּעֶלְיוֹן (גְּמָרָאיג). וְהָא דְּלֹא חַיְשִׁינָן שֶׁמָּא נִקַּב הַתַּחְתּוֹן לְבַדּוֹיד הַיְנוּ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהַחֻלְדָּה נְשִׁיכָתָהּ מִלְמַעְלָה וְכֵן אִם נִגְּפָה בְּעֵץ אוֹ בְּאֶבֶןטו מִלְמַעְלָה (רֹא"שׁטז):
(ג) בְּהֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה. רְשַׁ"ליז וּבַ"חיח אוֹסְרִים אַף בְּהֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה מֵאַחַר דִּסְפֵיקָא דְאוֹרַיְתָא הִיא וְהוּבָא בְּטַ"ז וּבְשַׁ"ךְיט אֲבָל הַפְּרִי חָדָשׁ וּתְבוּאוֹת שׁוֹרכ הִסְכִּימוּ לִרְמָ"א לְהָקֵל בְּהֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה:

Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch (Kehot Publication Society)

The new layout – with the original text and the facing translation – provides a unique user-friendly approach to studying the Alter Rebbe’s work. An inclusive commentary provides insightful explanations and guidelines for actual practice.

2

When the brain itself decomposes slightly (4) or is crushed, but its [surrounding] membrane is intact, [the animal] is kosher. If [the brain] pours like liquid or wax, [the animal] is tereifah.

[The following laws apply] when fluid is found in the membrane and [the size of] the brain has been reduced commensurate with the amount of the fluid. (5) If the brain encompassesthe fluid so that it is not revealed at all, even to the membrane, [the animal] is kosher; (6) if not, it is tereifah. The same law applies when the fluid was found in a small cyst [within the brain]. If the brain [totally] encompasses [the cyst] so that it is not revealed [at all], (7) even to the membrane, [the animal] is kosher; if not, it is tereifah. Note: Similarly, if the cyst is located between the membrane and the skull, (8) [the animal] is tereifah (9) (Hagahos Asheri, ch. Eilu Tereifos). If there is a doubt as to whether or not the brain covers it, [the animal] is tereifah.

For this reason, when one opens the head [of an animal], he should be careful to open it in a manner that enables him to see, in the event that fluid will be found [there], whether the brain surrounds [the fluid]. Nevertheless, it is not obligatory to make such an examination, for one may rely on the [situation] that applies in most cases: [that most animals do not have fluid in their brain and are kosher]. Therefore, one may cast away the head or sell it to a non-Jew without opening it (10) (this is Rama’s own conclusion).

ב

הַמּוֹחַ עַצְמוֹ שֶׁנִּרְקַב מְעַט (ד) מִמֶּנּוּ, אוֹ נִתְמַעֵךְ וְהַקְּרוּם קַיָּם, כְּשֵׁרָה; וְאִם נִשְׁפַּךְ כַּמַּיִם אוֹ כַּדּוֹנַג, טְרֵפָה. וְאִם נִמְצְאוּ מַיִם בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּרוּם וְנֶחְסַר מֵהַמּוֹחַ כְּשִׁעוּר הַמַּיִם, (ה) אִם הַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף הַמַּיִם סָבִיב, שֶׁלֹּא הָיוּ מְגֻלִּים כְּלָל אֲפִלּוּ לַקְּרוּם, כְּשֵׁרָה; (ו) וְאִם לָאו, טְרֵפָה. וְהוּא הַדִּין אִם הָיוּ הַמַּיִם מֻנָּחִים בְּתוֹךְ שַׁלְחוּפִית (פֵּרוּשׁ כְּעֵין כִּיס) קְטַנָּה, שֶׁאִם הָיָה הַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיפָהּ שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה מְגֻלָּה (ז) אֲפִלּוּ לַקְּרוּם, כְּשֵׁרָה; וְאִם לָאו, טְרֵפָה. הַגָּה: וְכֵן אִם הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית מֻנַּחַת בֵּין הַקְּרוּם וְהַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת, (ח) טְרֵפָה (ט) (הַגָּהוֹת אֲשֵׁרִי פֶּרֶק אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת). הָיָה סָפֵק אִם הָיָה מְכֻסֶּה בַּמּוֹחַ אוֹ לֹא, טְרֵפָה. עַל כֵּן יֵשׁ לִזָּהֵר כְּשֶׁפּוֹתְחִין אֶת הָרֹאשׁ, שֶׁיִּפְתָּחוֹ בְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁיּוּכַל לִרְאוֹת אִם הַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף אִם יִמָּצְאוּ שָׁם מַיִם אוֹ לֹא. וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין צָרִיךְ לִבְדּוֹק אַחַר זֶה, דְּסָמְכִינָן אַרוּבָּא, וְיָכוֹל לְהַשְׁלִיךְ הָרֹאשׁ אוֹ לְמָכְרוֹ לְנָכְרִי בְּלֹא פְּתִיחָה (י) (דַּעַת עַצְמוֹ).

(4) Decomposes slightly – The wording of the Tur12 is, “If [a bit of] the brain’s [substance] was missing, for example, it decomposed….”
[The source for this ruling is] the Gemara,13 which states:
[If] the greater portion of the spine was severed, [the animal] is tereifah…. Rav Huna says, “When [the Sages] spoke of the greater portion of [the spine, their intent] was the greater portion of its membrane.”14 (If the greater portion of the circumference of its encompassing membrane was severed, even if none of the nerve matter was separated, it is tereifah.)15 [The state of] the nerve tissue is absolutely irrelevant.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says, “If [the spine decomposed to the extent that] it was nismarach, [i.e., it became liquefied, the animal] is unfit [for slaughter. Even] if it was [merely] nismasmeis [i.e., softened like wax, the animal] is unfit.”
What is [meant by] liquefaction, and what is [meant by] softening? [The word nismarach,] “liquefied” [refers to] any [instance] where (the nerve tissue becomes fluid like water within the membrane [to the extent that, were the membrane] to be punctured, [the decomposed tissue] would [pour] out through the hole)15 like [liquid from] a jug. [The word nismasmeis,] “softened” [refers to] any [instance] where [the nerve tissue] cannot stand [on its own] (because it became [soft and] jelly-like. However, [in the above instance, the spine did not become so soft] that were [the surrounding membrane] to be punctured it would pour like [liquid from] a jug. Nevertheless, [the spine softened to the extent that] if one was to hold it with a portion positioned above his hand, [that protruding portion] would bend over and fall [downward].15 All these [instances where the nerve tissue] became liquefied or softened are included [in the category of] the spinal cord being severed, because our Sages maintained that because of this defect, ultimately, the spinal cord would be perforated and severed. Alternatively, [it could be said that] there is no greater [instance of the spine] being severed than this. Even though [it was said that the state of] the nerve tissue is of absolutely no consequence, that refers to an instance where it was separated.16 However, [in an instance] where [a portion of the spine] liquefied or softened, that [indicates that the condition of the spine is comparable to one that] has been [irreparably] severed (Rabbeinu Nissim17). Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi18 defines nismasmeis, [translated above as “softened,”] as meaning that [the spine actually] melted, like wax [melts when] subjected to fire.)
Rabbi Yirmeya raised a question, “[In a case where the spinal cord] cannot stand upright due to its weight, (i.e., it became thick and heavy, but its inner [nerve tissue] did not become liquefied,)15 what is [the law?” ([The Gemara is asking,] “Did it become heavy due to a [terminal] illness or not?”)15 [The Gemara answers, “The matter] remains unresolved.”
In the study hall, they said, “[If the spine] softened, [the animal] is unfit [for slaughter,] (as stated). [If its nerve tissue] was nismazmeiz [i.e., emptied, the animal] is kosher.” Rashi15 interprets [the word] nismazmeiz [as meaning that] a portion of the nerve tissue emptied [out] from the spinal cord as the result of a natural condition. Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi6 defines nismazmeiz [as meaning that the nerve tissue] shifted from its place.19
An objection [was raised based on a beraisa, which states,] “Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says, ‘An animal whose brain was emptied is tereifah.’”20 [The Gemara responds, “That is incorrect. In fact, an animal whose brain] was nismasmeis [i.e., softened] was stated [there, not an animal whose brain was emptied.]”
This concludes the wording of the Gemara, as interpreted by Rashi [with additions from Rabbeinu Nissim and Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi].
Rabbeinu Asher21 writes that since [the Talmud rules that both nismasmeis, i.e. softening of the spine, and humrach, that the brain tissue was liquified, disqualify an animal, and then] asks a question [regarding a teaching concerning] the spine [based on a teaching concerning] the brain [i.e., equating the spine and the brain], it can be concluded that [both the] liquefaction and softening of the brain disqualify [an animal], (i.e., the implication is that the halachah follows the ruling of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, [because in either of these instances, it is easier for the membrane to be punctured]). In his Toras HaBayis HaAruch,22 Rashba writes that the rationale is that whenever the brain has reached this state of decomposition, the membrane will ultimately become perforated. (According to the opinion23 that maintains that it is only the perforation of the upper [i.e., outer] membrane [which lines the skull] that [renders an animal] tereifah, it must be said that this [condition] will also ultimately cause the outer membrane to be perforated.)
In his Toras HaBayis HaKatzar,24 Rashba – and [this opinion is also accepted by] the Tur25 – defines the extent to which the brain [of an animal] must soften [for the animal] to be deemed tereifah as being that, “it softened to the degree that were the spinal cord [to soften to the same degree], it would not stand erect were one to raise it upright. However, if [the brain] did not become that soft, even though it shifts position, [the animal remains] kosher.” The intent is that the shift of position results from [the brain’s] softening and being compressed slightly. Rambam26 also rules in this manner.
[Rav Yosef Caro in his] Shulchan Aruch, [Yoreh Deah] 32:2, states that the nerve tissue shifts position because it was compressed. The same law applies if [the brain] shifts position because [the animal] fell from a high place (Rashba, Toras HaBayis HaAruch;27 the Gemara13). [This ruling applies] regarding both the spine and the brain, [and] follows Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi’s interpretation of [the term] nismazmeiz.28 [Rav Yosef Caro, in his] Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:4, also rules according to Rashi’s interpretation of [the term] nismazmeiz. Similarly, regarding the brain, [Rav Yosef Caro’s ruling in this section of his] Shulchan Aruch [reflects] these two interpretations. [Thus, he states that the brain] decomposed [slightly], i.e., a small amount of the brain’s [substance] was lacking, as stated above in the name of the Tur – [which follows] Rashi’s understanding. [And Rav Yosef Caro also mentions the animal’s brain being] crushed, which reflects the understanding of Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi and Rashba.29
Sifsei Kohen30 rules that [the animal is kosher] specifically when only a small amount [of the brain’s substance] is lacking. [The intent is that the animal] is kosher [only] [when it is lacking such a small amount of the brain’s substance that] were a similar situation to occur regarding the spinal cord, if one would [hold the spine in an upright position and] hold the portion where it was lacking [substance] above one’s hand, [the spine] would remain upright and would not bend. However, if [the brain] is lacking [so] much of its substance to the extent that, were a similar situation to occur regarding the spinal cord and [a person would hold the spine in an upright position and] the large portion of it extending above his hand would bend over, [the animal] is tereifah. The same law applies regarding the spinal cord.
[Sifsei Kohen continues:]
For this reason, in sec. 32:4, [Rav Yosef Caro] writes [in his] Shulchan Aruch [that the animal is] kosher [if] a small amount [of the substance] from [the nerve tissue in the spine] is lacking, and [the nerve tissue in the spine] became empty, thus, excluding [an instance where] much [of its substance] was lacking, in which instance, [the animal] is tereifah. [The rationale is that] if [a person] would hold [the spine] upright in his hand, the portion above his hand where the substance was lacking would bend. However, if [the brain or the spine’s nerve tissue] merely softened, neither here [regarding the brain] nor in sec. 32 [regarding the spine’s nerve tissue], does [Rav Yosef Caro] make a distinction [in his Shulchan Aruch] between a large [portion becoming soft] or a small [portion], for it is common that a large [portion] becomes soft.
According to this [understanding], even if a small amount [of the brain or the spine] becomes soft, [the animal is] kosher, as the law would be if its substance was reduced slightly, i.e., if [a person] would hold [a spine with the same amount of substance missing upright in his hand with] the portion that softened above his hand, that portion would stand upright and not bend because [the amount of soft substance] is very small. [It can be concluded that] Sifsei Kohen maintains that we measure the place that became soft or where the substance was lacking alone; only [that portion is held] above one’s hand. The remainder should not protrude beyond his hand above the portion that softened or whose substance was reduced.
Tevuos Shor31 however, disputes this [ruling], stating that even if the smallest amount [of the substance of] the brain matter near the membrane softened, [the animal] is tereifah. Similarly, regarding the spine, even if the smallest amount along the length of the spine softened, if it encompasses the greater part of [that portion’s] thickness and circumference, [the animal] is tereifah. [The rationale is that the spine] will bend in the place where it softened and it will not be able to stand upright when one holds it in his hand from below, leaving a very small portion above his hand that – were it not to have softened at all – would stand upright and would not have bent over. However, at this time, because in one place, most of [the spine’s] thickness softened, the small portion above the place where it softened will [become too] heavy [for the spine to support], and [thus, that bit will] bend over.
Accordingly, [an animal] is also [disqualified] if some of the substance [of the spine] was lacking and it was emptied slightly [to the extent that] when one leaves a small portion of the spinal cord that was intact above the empty portion protruding from his hand, that [portion will be too] heavy [for the part of the spine which is lacking substance to support it,] and [therefore, the upper part of the spine will] bend over. The reason [the animal is] kosher [even if] some of [its substance] was lacking is that this measure – [i.e.,] any amount that would [prevent the spine from] standing if held erect – was stated only concerning [a portion of the spine] that softened. [This condition is considered] an infirmity with regard to the nerve matter and, because of this infirmity, eventually its membrane will become perforated and severed. This is not the case when a small portion [of the spine’s substance] is lacking. That is not considered that [severe of] an infirmity. Even though the spine is unable to stand upright [were this amount of substance to be missing], that is not of concern to us, just as it is of no concern to us that [the spine] cannot stand because of its weight if one would say that [the loss of substance] does not reflect illness or infirmity, as [stated] above.32 [Moreover, although] a small amount [of the spine was mentioned, that term should be understood broadly.] The same law applies if a large amount [of the spine] was missing and emptied [of its substance], as long as [the missing portion] constitutes [merely] the lesser portion of the [entire] spinal cord, [as opposed to] its greater portion. (Note [the comments of] Keresi U’Feleisi33).
This same law applies to the brain. Even if a large amount [of matter] is lacking, [the animal] is kosher as long as the greater portion [of the brain’s matter] is not lacking. The statements of Rashba in Toras HaBayis HaKatzar and the Tur regarding the brain, cited above – that, [an animal] is tereifah if “[its brain softened to the degree that were] the spinal cord [to soften to the same degree], it would not stand erect were one to raise it upright” – apply only regarding the degree [to which the brain] must soften and liquefy [to be deemed tereifah]. That measure [is calculated] according to the degree the spinal cord softens and liquefies. However, with regard to the size of the portion that liquefied and softened, no comparison should be made between the brain and the spinal cord. Even if one would say – as Sifsei Kohen30 writes – that the measure of a place where [the spine] has been softened that disqualifies it is any size that prevents it from standing [on its own], and that the same [measure] applies when there is a reduction [in its substance ‒ this rule does not apply] regarding the brain. Since [the brain] can stand – [despite a softening or reduction in its substance because it is [shaped] like a wide pot34 – why should [the animal] be disqualified? We are forced to say that the measure [defined as the amount of substance necessary to prevent the spine] from standing [were a person to] hold it upright in his hand, was stated only concerning [the degree to which the tissue of the brain] softened. However, no measure was stated concerning the size of the portion [of the brain] that softened. Instead, even the slightest measure disqualifies it, because it involves an infirmity of the brain. [This] illness will spread further, and ultimately cause a perforation of the membrane.
This [rule] does not apply regarding a reduction [of its size. Indeed, we rule leniently] even [if the brain] decomposes and is crushed, as long as it does not reach the degree of softening described as mismasmeis. This is [also] the understanding of Tevuos Shor35 and those who follow that approach according to their interpretation of the words of Rabbeinu Asher36 and those who follow his approach, regarding [an instance where] liquid was found in the membrane, as stated below in [this subsection of] the Shulchan Aruch [of Rav Yosef Caro]. ([The ruling of Rav Yosef Caro] is taken from the words of Rabbeinu Asher and those who follow his opinion, and is not found [explicitly] in the Gemara.)
Tevos Shor maintains that, as long as [the infirmity involves] the greater part of the thickness and circumference [of the spinal cord], [even] liquefaction (nismarach) or the softening (nismasmeis) of the slightest length of the spine disqualifies [an animal], just as [the animal would be disqualified if] the spine would be severed. [The rationale is that] it is a sickness and infirmity and, ultimately, it will cause the greater portion of the [spinal] membrane to be severed.37 (By contrast, when [the spinal cord merely] became emptied (nismazmeiz), i.e., [less than a majority of its substance] was lacking, it is not [considered] that great [a sign of] sickness and infirmity, [and the animal is therefore not disqualified]. For this reason, Rabbeinu Asher and those who follow his approach rule that [an animal is] tereifah if even the slightest portion of the brain close to the membrane softens, as stated below by [Rav Yosef Caro in his] Shulchan Aruch.) [The rationale for this stringent ruling is that the softening of the brain] is an infirmity and ultimately, the membrane will become perforated, and even the slightest perforation of [the membrane causes the animal to be deemed tereifah].
However, Rambam’s38 approach, based on that of his master, Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi,18 is that nismazmeiz [means that the nerve tissue] shifted from its place [either] because it was crushed slightly (or because of a fall). However, [according to these authorities,] if [the spinal cord] was slightly emptied, actually losing [some of its nerve tissue, its halachic status] is more severe than when it softens. [The rationale for this ruling is that these authorities] maintain that the reason [the spinal cord] is disqualified when it softens is not because the membrane will ultimately be severed. [Support for that position can be drawn from the law that] a lung whose [inner] substance can be poured out like [liquid from] a jug is kosher.39 We do not say [concerning the lung] that ultimately the membrane will be perforated. Instead, [their] rationale is that whenever [the tissue of the nerve matter] softens, we consider it as if it is [lacking], as stated in the Gemara40 and below [in the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro] 50[:3]. It is thus considered as if the spinal cord were severed, as stated above in the name of Rabbeinu Nissim. Although [the state of the nerve tissue in the spine] is absolutely irrelevant, [that statement applies] only [when the nerve tissue] is separated. However, when it becomes liquefied or softens, it is considered as if the spinal cord were severed, for there is no severance greater than that since it is considered as if [the spinal cord] was lacking [substance]. How much more so does this apply when41 [the spinal cord] actually lost a little of its substance, and the greater portion of thickness and circumference emptied [in one place]. (See Bayis Chadash,42 and K’nesses HaGedolah.)
The softening of the brain disqualifies it for the same reason, i.e., because it is considered as if [the brain] is not [present] and [the law is that an animal] is disqualified if its brain is lacking [any of its substance. Indeed, the reason that] a perforation of the membrane [surrounding] the brain disqualifies [an animal] is only because the membrane protects the brain from any loss [of substance] and deterioration. This is the point of contention behind the difference of opinion in the Talmud43 [regarding] which membrane’s perforation disqualifies [an animal]. The authority who says that [it is] the upper, [outer] membrane [whose perforation disqualifies the animal] maintains that [that is the membrane which] provides the protection [to the brain] (see Rabbeinu Asher44), because it is strong and lasting. The authority who argues that [the determining factor is] the lower, [inner] membrane maintains that it [is the membrane that] provides the protection because it actually adheres to the brain.
If so, [just as] it is totally unnecessary to say that [an animal] is tereifah if its brain is removed, the same [law would apply] if it degenerated and deteriorated entirely to the extent that it can be poured like liquid or melts like wax, for whenever [the brain] softens it is considered as if it is no longer present.
(This [ruling] does not apply regarding the lungs for, [in that instance,] both the upper and lower membranes [offer] protection to the air contained within the lung. [Their purpose is not to] protect the tissue of the lungs itself, for [the body’s] vitality is not dependent on [the lung’s tissue] at all, in contrast to the brain.)
According to the above, the law applying to the liquefaction or softening of the brain is the same as that which applies if [the brain] is lacking [matter] or is emptied. In both [instances, the animal is] disqualified only if [the disqualifying factor affects] the entire [brain, and] not merely a portion of it. [The rationale is that the animal] is not disqualified because ultimately the membrane will become perforated, but rather its disqualification is of a [more] intrinsic nature ‒ because [the animal will not live if the brain is entirely] removed or lacking. This [reflects] a general principle: Whenever the perforation of an organ disqualifies [an animal, the animal] is also disqualified if [such an organ] is lacking. as will be mentioned in sec. 50:2 [of Rav Yosef Caro’s Shulchan Aruch]. This [principle] applies specifically when the entire organ is lacking. Consult that source.
For this reason, Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar13 spoke of an animal whose brain softened without being specific, implying that [this condition must affect] the entire brain. [This parallels the disqualification of other organs that] the Sages stated could render [an animal as] tereifah. [In those instances, when the Sages mentioned an organ] without specifying [the extent to which the organ must be affected, the animal] is not tereifah unless the entire [organ is affected], not [only] a portion [of it], as stated below in sec. 36:14 [of Rav Yosef Caro’s Shulchan Aruch], regarding a lung that shriveled.45 [The only exceptions to this general rule are instances where] the Sages explicitly [stated otherwise,] or [where] there is a clearly apparent reason that need not be explained why [it is sufficient for only a portion of the organ to be affected by the disqualifying factor,] for example, a dried-out lung,46 as stated in [the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro, Yoreh Deah 36:]13.
The statement of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi13 that a spinal cord that became liquefied or softened is disqualified, without specifying that [this ruling] applies to even the slightest length provided [the disqualifying factor affects] the greater portion of [the spinal cord’s] thickness and circumference [does not represent a contradiction to the concept stated immediately beforehand. The rationale is that] Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is referring to [statements of] the Mishnah47 and a beraisa13 [stated previously in the relevant Talmudic passage. These sources state] that if the larger portion of the spinal cord was severed, [the animal] is tereifah. Concerning that [statement, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi] states that [even] if the larger portion of the [spinal] membrane was not severed, but its nerve tissue became liquefied or softened, [the animal] is disqualified, [in the same manner as it would be] were the spinal cord to be severed. Consequently, the implication is that the greater portion of its thickness and circumference [was affected].
Know [that this is the correct interpretation, because] Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did not mention the spinal cord [at all] in his words. We are forced to say that he is referring to the spinal cord [mentioned] in the mishnah and the beraisa].
The reason for the distinction between the spinal cord and the brain is straightforward. The spinal cord connects all the vertebrae, which are [the core of] the entire structure of the body, and which draws down vitality to all [the organs and limbs] from the brain. For this reason, if [the spinal cord] is severed [the animal] will not live. Therefore, the entire spinal cord must be connected in a firm and healthy manner from one end to the other. [Thus, after the animal’s slaughter, when one] stands [the spinal cord] erect and holds a portion [of it] above his hand, [were it to be a healthy animal,] it would stand [on its own]. However, if the portion [of the spinal cord] above [the person’s] hand bends over and falls, [the animal is tereifah. The rationale is that, in such a situation,] since [the spinal cord] is not connected in a firm and healthy manner from one end to the other, it does not have the power to connect all the vertebrae in a fitting manner. [All this] does not apply regarding the brain.
For this reason, Rambam48 also ruled that only [an animal whose] brain decomposed is kosher, but did not mention the decomposition of the spine.49 The spinal cord would remain kosher] only if it was crushed, not if it decomposes, as stated in sec. 32[:2] below. [The rationale is that] when [the spinal cord] decomposes, some of its substance is lacking, as stated above in the name of the Tur, and the spine should not be ruled as kosher if it will not stand when held erect. This is Radbaz’s50 understanding regarding the interpretation of [the rulings of] Rambam and Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi, as quoted by Maharikash51 and Pri Chadash.
Nevertheless, [modification of this understanding is necessary] according to what was stated by the later authorities52 regarding [the ruling in] sec. 36:14 below, concerning a lung that shriveled. [They explain that] although all the halachic authorities ruled that [an animal is deemed] tereifah only when its entire [lung has shriveled], nevertheless, throughout the entire Torah, the greater portion of an entity is considered equivalent to the entity in its entirety.53 Thus, it is appropriate to say that according to the approach of Rambam and Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi, the greater portion of the brain is considered the entire [organ], both in instances when its substance is lacking and when it has softened.
[The ruling that the animal] is kosher even when the entire [brain] has decomposed [is based on the fact that] when [the brain] decomposes only a small amount of its substance is lacking, as stated by the Tur.54 (We do not say that because [the brain] has decomposed, it is as if it no longer exists since it is not as soft as wax. [The brain] does not resemble flesh that [has decomposed to the extent that] a veterinarian must scrape it away, as mentioned in sec. 50 below.55 The case [of the brain] is different because its membranes protect it. As long as [the brain] has not reached the stage that it softened, it will [ultimately] return to a healthy state. Even without this [explanation], we are forced to [arrive at the conclusion that a brain that has decomposed has a different status than a brain that is lacking] according to [the opinions of] all authorities, because all authorities agree that if the entire [brain] is lacking, [the animal] is disqualified, as explained above. However, all authorities agree that if the entire [brain] decomposes, [the animal] is kosher.56)
With regard to [the practical application of] the halachah, when ruling for others, one need not rule stringently in contradiction to the ruling [of Rav Yosef Caro] when [only] some of the spinal cord or the brain was emptied or was lacking.57 [Thus, in practice, we rule according to the decision] of the Shulchan Aruch [of Rav Yosef Caro],58 Sifsei Kohen,59 and Turei Zahav,60 [all of] whom accept Rashi’s understanding regarding nismazmeiz – [i.e., that a portion of the nerve tissue became emptied], as is the understanding of Rabbeinu Asher and those who follow his approach (– in contrast to [the understanding of] Bayis Chadash41 and K’nesses HaGedolah [regarding the liquefaction and softening of the brain]). Nevertheless, every meticulous person should be stringent for himself when a portion of the spinal cord was emptied and lacking, in order to give weight to [the rulings of] Rambam and Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi [mentioned above. Similarly,] if even a small portion of the brain near its [surrounding] membrane softened, one should not rule leniently at all, even when a severe [financial] loss is involved, because such a decision would run contrary to the ruling of [Rav Yosef Caro in his] Shulchan Aruch and the later authorities. However, if there are other grounds for leniency, then there are grounds for leniency when a minor portion has softened, because a compounded doubt is involved, as will be explained below.61 Note the comments of Pri Chadash in the name of Radbaz.
(5) The measure of the fluid – However, if [the size of the brain] was not reduced commensurate with the amount of fluid [present], the fact that the brain’s [tissue] surrounds some of the fluid is not sufficient [to justify a lenient ruling. The rationale is that] the extra amount of fluid, [i.e., the fluid whose volume is] beyond the size of the reduced substance of the brain that is visible to the eye certainly accumulated from many places within the brain, [so many] that [the exact] source [of the fluid] is unknown. [It originated in] many thin perforations and [places where the tissue] dissolved and descended to the place where it was found. Who knows if perhaps some of the fluid came from close to the [brain’s] membrane? [Since a question involving Scriptural Law is involved, we follow the principle that62 whenever there is] a question [involving] Scriptural Law, [we rule] stringently.
How much more so [does this ruling apply] when there was no visible lack [of tissue] in the brain and fluid was found between the brain and the lower membrane. [In this instance, the animal] is certainly tereifah. [The rationale is that] it cannot be said that the brain is [entirely] intact, and [the animal] produced [this] fluid because of its overly moist state, and none of [the brain’s] substance dissolved. This is not true, for certainly the brain’s substance cannot be present where the fluid is located, for it is impossible for the two [entities] to coexist in one [place].63 It is natural for the brain to fill the entire space within the membrane, for the lower membrane is actually attached to the brain in all living beings. It is only the upper membrane that is not attached, as stated above.64 If so, we are forced to say that the brain is lacking [some of its tissue] in the place where the fluid is present; it [must have] dissolved and become liquid (Tevuos Shor;65 this is also the understanding of Turei Zahav,66 and contrary to the position of Pri Chadash).
However, there are authorities67 who interpret the statement of [Rav Yosef Caro in his] Shulchan Aruch (which also follows the wording of Rabbeinu Asher68 and the Tur69), “[the size of] the brain has been reduced commensurate with the measure of the fluid,” as intended to [lead to a] lenient ruling, i.e., if [the tissue of] the brain is not lacking [any of its mass], there is no concern at all regarding the fluid that is found in it. [The rationale is that] we see that the brain has not become liquefied, [but] rather it is intact on all sides. The fluid [itself] is not [a sign that theanimal is] tereifah as long as it is not the result of the liquefaction of the brain, but rather [can be assumed] to be a natural condition that was present from the very beginning [of the animal’s life] or was produced by excessive moisture within the brain. [The rationale for not ruling that the animal is tereifah in this situation is that this condition was not mentioned by our Sages and] we do not add to [the conditions determined by] the Sages [to deem an animal] tereifah.70 (Note [the comments of] Keresi U’Feleisi.)
Rama’s ruling [that an animal] is tereifah [if it] has a cyst, [i.e., a pocket of fluid,] located between the membrane and the skull [does not represent a contradiction to the above. The rationale is that] the brain is certainly lacking [substance] in the place [where the] cyst [is positioned] because the brain is located very close to the skull, and the separation between them is very slight. [In a healthy animal,] there is not sufficient empty space for a cyst to be located there (see Maharikash).
Turei Zahav also maintains that [Rav Yosef Caro’s] statement in his Shulchan Aruch regarding the brain lacking substance involves a leniency. However, [Turei Zahav] maintains that [this] statement was made [to preclude a ruling that the animal is tereifah when] fluid was found in the skull after the brain was removed from it [and found to be] totally intact from all sides. [In such an instance,] we assume that the fluid originally surrounded the brain in the minimal space between the membranes, (for the upper membrane is completely attached to the skull and the lower membrane to the brain, as mentioned above [and there is a slight space between them]). After the brain and the lower membrane that is attached to it were removed, the fluid accumulated and pooled in one place [i.e., the place where it was found after the brain was removed]. Accordingly, in this instance, there is no concern that the brain became liquefied, since we see that the brain is intact from all sides and [we assume that] this fluid originated in another place in the skull – between the membranes – and [did] not [result] from the liquefaction of the brain.
However, if [the fluid] was found between the brain and the lower membrane, no leniency should be granted at all according to the understanding of Turei Zahav. [This ruling] even [applies] if the fluid surrounded the brain and the brain appeared entirely intact in its round [shape], without any blemish or [sign of a] lack [of substance] at all. [The rationale is that the fluid] certainly came [about as the result of] the liquefaction of the brain, since the brain must actually be attached to the membrane, filling its cavity entirely without any separation at all between them.
Furthermore, according to the understanding of Turei Zahav, even if [fluid is found] between the membranes, leniency is granted only when there is a small amount of fluid. However, if there is a [fluid-filled] cyst between the membranes, [the animal] is [deemed] tereifah in all instances, (as stated by Rama). [This ruling applies] even if the brain is entirely intact from all sides, and there is no blemish or lack in [its substance] in the place of the cyst, e.g., [the cyst] is very small. [The rationale for this stringent ruling is that such] a cyst comes into being only as the result of liquefaction of the brain and not [as the result of the presence of] any other fluid.
How much more so does [this ruling apply] if a small cyst is found within the brain near the membrane. [This ruling applies] even if the brain appeared to be entirely intact in its round [shape], even in the place [where] the cyst [was located], i.e., it appears that [the portion of] the brain under the cyst is without any – [i.e., not] even the slightest – blemish or lack [of substance] at all, but is of the same uniform height as the remainder of the brain’s sphere. Even so, [the animal] is tereifah since the cyst certainly came from the liquefaction of the brain, as it is common to find a cyst in the brain. This is the understanding of Turei Zahav.65
Sifsei Kohen71 goes further, ruling stringently even if fluid is found between the membranes, [stating that] it certainly came from the liquefaction of the brain, like the cyst mentioned by Rama. Fundamentally, [this approach should be followed,] ruling stringently [because] a Scriptural [prohibition is involved] (Tevuos Shor).64 Nevertheless, when a severe [financial] loss is involved one may rely on [the opinion of] Radbaz mentioned above,72 and rule leniently, because of the compounded doubt [involved].
However, one should not rely on the authorities66 mentioned above, ruling against Sifsei Kohen and Turei Zahav, unless [the fluid] is found at the bottom of the brain in the cavity filled with white [matter. In such an instance,] even if the fluid is touching the lower membrane that surrounds [the area] below this cavity and the white matter, one may rule leniently and follow the authorities mentioned above, and say that [the fluid] was not [the result of] the liquefaction of the brain since we see that the brain is intact on all its sides. [Thus,] we are forced to say that the brain produced the fluid because it was extremely moist, or that the fluid was there from the very beginning [of the animal’s life].
Furthermore, [even] if the side of the brain that is next to the white matter is not intact, but rather was liquefied – and even if some of the white matter was liquefied – if73 some of the white matter next to the membrane remained, one may rule leniently and say that such a situation is included in the statement of [Rav Yosef Caro in his] Shulchan Aruch, regarding a situation in which the brain encompasses [the fluid], in which case [the brain] will [ultimately] revert to a healthy state. [It is considered analogous to such a situation] since the liquefaction and lack [of substance] is in the middle [of the brain] and not near the membrane. It is only that the fluid descended below to the cavity and was pressed between the white matter and [the other tissue of] the brain that surrounds it until it reached the membrane at the bottom of the white matter.
(6) It is kosher – [The rationale is that] since the brain encompasses the fluid from all sides, [the brain] will [ultimately] revert to a healthy state (Rabbeinu Asher).74
(7) Not revealed at all – [The intent is that] not even a portion of [the cyst is visible] (Hagahos Asheri).75
(8) The skull – The intent is [that the cyst is located] between the lower membrane [that surrounds the brain] and the upper membrane that is attached to the skull, even though the brain is intact (Turei Zahav).76
(9) [The animal] is [The rationale is that] the fluid in the cyst certainly came from the brain,75 i.e., from the liquefaction of many [portions of the brain] and from thin holes (and it is possible that some of [these holes] were close to the membrane, as stated above).77 Because even if the membrane is intact, it is possible for the moisture [from] the fluid in the brain to drip and descend from it like the residual moisture of the brain descends via the membrane to the nose. Therefore, even if the cyst is not joined to and attached to the membrane, [the animal] is tereifah. How much more so [does this ruling apply] if [the cyst] is attached to and joined to [the membrane. In such an instance,] it could be said that the membrane was perforated and the cyst [comes from] the [part of the] membrane that rose upward because of the blow, but is not sealed. (Note [the statements of] Tevuos Shor.)64
(10) Without opening it – [This ruling applies] specifically in an instance where there is no [obviously] visible negative factor. However, if there is a negative factor, for example, the animal would [repeatedly] shake its head [while alive], ([a condition known as dizziness,] shvindle in Yiddish), it is clear that [the animal] should be forbidden until its permissibility is clarified by opening its head (Turei Zahav,78 Bayis Chadash79).
In the month of Tammuz,80 when it is common to find fluid [in the brains of] goats and lambs, as an initial preference, every G‑d-fearing person should act stringently regarding his own conduct and open [the animal’s] head and check that the brain encompasses [the fluid]. However, after the fact, one need not be concerned [about this]. (Note [the statements of] Tevuos Shor.)81
(ד) שֶׁנִּרְקַב מְעַט. לְשׁוֹן הַטּוּר אִם חָסֵר מִן הַמּוֹחַ מְעַט כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּרְקַבכא כוּ'.
וּבִגְמָרָאכב אָמְרִינָן גַּבֵּי חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה שֶׁנִּפְסַק בְּרֻבּוֹ טְרֵפָה אָמַר רַב הוּנָא רֻבּוֹ שֶׁאָמְרוּ רֹב עוֹרוֹ (אִם
נֶחְתַּךְ רֹב הֶקֵּף עוֹרוֹ סָבִיב אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ לֹא נִפְרַד כְּלוּם טְרֵפָהכג) מוֹחַ זֶה לֹא מַעֲלֶה וְלֹא מוֹרִיד. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי נִתְמַרֵךְ פָּסוּל נִתְמַסְמֵס פָּסוּל אֵיזֶהוּ הַמְרָכָה וְאֵיזֶהוּ הֲמַסְמָסָה הַמְרָכָה כֹּל שֶׁנִּשְׁפַּךְ כְּקִיתוֹן (שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה הַמּוֹחַ רַךְ כַּמַּיִם בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּרוּם וְאִם הָיוּ נוֹקְבִים אוֹתוֹ הָיָה יוֹצֵא דֶּרֶךְ הַנֶּקֶבכד) מַסְמָסָה כֹּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה צָלוּל אֲבָל לֹא כָּל כָּךְ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה נִשְׁפָּךְ כְּקִיתוֹן שֶׁל מַיִם אִם הָיוּ נוֹקְבִים אוֹתוֹ אֲבָל כְּשֶׁאוֹחֲזִין אוֹתוֹ וּמַנִּיחַ קְצָתוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִיָּדוֹ הָיָה נִכְפָּף וְנוֹפֵל.כה וְכָל הַנֵּי נִתְמָרֵךְ וְנִתְמַסְמֵס בִּכְלַל נִפְסַק הַחוּט הֵן דְּקִים לְהוּ לְרַבָּנָן שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ לִקּוּי זֶה עָתִיד לִנְקוֹב וְלִפְסוֹק אִי נַמִי אֵין פִּסּוּק גָּדוֹל מִזֶּה וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּמוֹחַ זֶה לֹא מַעֲלֶה וְלֹא מוֹרִיד הַנֵּי מִלֵּי בְּנִפְרָד אֲבָל בְּהַמְרָכָה וַהֲמַסְמָסָה הֶפְסֵק הוּא (רַ"ןכו). וּלְשׁוֹן מַסְמָסָה פֵּרֵשׁ הָרִי"ףכז שֶׁנָּמֵס כַּדּוֹנַג מִפְּנֵי הָאֵשׁ). בָּעֵי רַב יִרְמְיָה אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד מִפְּנֵי כָּבְדּוֹ (שֶׁהוּא עָב וְכָבֵד אֲבָל לֹא נִתְמָרֵךְ מִבִּפְנִיםכח) מַאי (חֹלִי הוּא זֶה שֶׁמַּכְבִּידוֹ אוֹ לֹא) תֵּיקוּ. בֵּי רַב אָמְרִי נִתְמַסְמֵס פָּסוּל (כִּדְקָאָמַרְתְּ) נִתְמַזְמֵז כָּשֵׁר. וּפֵרֵשׁ רַשִׁ"יכט נִתְמַזְמֵז נִתְרוֹקֵן מֵהַמּוֹחַ מִקְצָתוֹ מֵאֵלָיו. וְהָרִי"ף פֵּרֵשׁ נִתְמַזְמֵז נִתְנַדְנֵד מִמְּקוֹמוֹ.ל מֵיתִיבִי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר בְּהֵמָה שֶׁנִּתְמַזְמֵז מוֹחָהּ טְרֵפָה הַהִיא נִתְמַסְמֵס אִתְּמַר עַד כַּאן לְשׁוֹן הַגְּמָרָא וּפֵרוּשׁ רַשִׁ"י.
וְכָתַב הָרֹא"שׁלא מִדְּמַקְשֶׁה מִמּוֹחַ אַחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אַלְמָא דְּהַמְרָכָה וַהֲמַסְמָסָה פּוֹסֶלֶת בַּמּוֹחַ (כְּלוֹמַר דְּקַיְמָא לָן כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר). וְכָתַב הָרַשְׁבָּ"א בְּתוֹרַת הַבַּיִת הָאָרֹךְלב הַטַּעַם דְּכָל שֶׁהִגִּיעַ הַמּוֹחַ לְהֶפְסֵד זֶה עָתִיד הַקְּרוּם לִנָּקֵב (וּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר שֶׁנְּקִיבַת קְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבָד הוּא דְמִטַּרְפָא כוּ' צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר שֶׁגַּם קְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן עָתִיד לִנָּקֵב עַל יְדֵי זֶה). וְשִׁעוּר מַסְמָסָה בַּמּוֹחַ פֵּרֵשׁ הָרַשְׁבָּ"א בְּתוֹרַת הַבַּיִת הַקָּצָרלג וְהַטּוּר דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁנִּתְרַכֵּךְ כָּל כָּךְ שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אִם הָיוּ מַעֲמִידִים אוֹתוֹ לֹא הָיָה עוֹמֵד טְרֵפָה אֲבָל אִם לֹא הִגִּיעַ לְשִׁעוּר רִכּוּךְ זֶה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתְנַדְנֵד כְּשֵׁרָה עַד כַּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ. וְרוֹצֶה לוֹמַר
שֶׁנִּתְנַדְנֵד מֵחֲמַת הָרִכּוּךְ שֶׁנִּתְרַכֵּךְ וְנִתְמַעֵךְ מְעַט. וְכֵן כָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ"םלד וְשֻׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ סִימָן ל"ב סְעִיף [ב'] שֶׁנִּתְנַדְנֵד מֵחֲמַת הַמִּעוּךְ. וְהוּא הַדִּין אִם נִתְנַדְנֵד מֵחֲמַת נְפִילָה שֶׁנָּפְלָה מִמָּקוֹם גָּבוֹהַּ (רַשְׁבָּ"א בְּתוֹרַת הַבַּיִת הָאָרֹךְ.לה גְּמָרָאלו) בֵּין בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה בֵּין בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ. וְזֶהוּ כְּפֵרוּשׁ הָרִי"ף בְּנִתְמַזְמֵז.לז וּבִסְעִיף [ד'] שָׁם פָּסַק הַשֻּׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ גַּם כֵּן כְּפֵרוּשׁ רַשִׁ"י בְּנִתְמַזְמֵז.לח וְהָכִי נַמִי הָכָא גַּבֵּי מוֹחַ נִתְכַּוֵּן הַשֻּׁלְחָן עָרוּךְלט לִשְׁנֵי הַפֵּרוּשִׁים דְּנִרְקַב הַיְנוּ שֶׁחָסֵר מִמֶּנּוּ הַמּוֹחַ מְעַט כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל בְּשֵׁם הַטּוּר וְהַיְנוּ כְּפֵרוּשׁ רַשִׁ"י וְנִתְמַעֵךְ הוּא כְּפֵרוּשׁ הָרִי"ף וְהָרַשְׁבָּ"א.
וְכָתַב הַשַּׁ"ךְמ דְּדַוְקָא כְּשֶׁנֶּחְסַר מְעַט בְּעִנְיָן שֶׁכַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אִם הָיָה מַנִּיחַ הָרֵיקָן לְמַעְלָה מִיָּדוֹ הָיָה עוֹמֵד וְלֹא הָיָה נִכְפָּף כָּשֵׁר אֲבָל אִם נֶחְסַר הַרְבֵּה שֶׁאָז כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אִלּוּ הָיָה יוֹצֵא הַרְבֵּה לְמַעְלָה מִיָּדוֹ הָיָה נִכְפָּף טְרֵפָה. וְכֵן גַּבֵּי חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה נַמִי דִּינָא הָכִי וְלָכֵן כָּתַב הַשֻּׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ סִימָן ל"ב סְעִיף ד' נֶחְסַר קְצָת מֵהַמּוֹחַ וְנִתְרוֹקֵן כָּשֵׁר לְאַפּוּקֵי נֶחְסַר הַרְבֵּה שֶׁאָז טְרֵפָה דְּכֵיוָן שֶׁאִם הָיָה מַעֲמִידוֹ בְּיָדוֹ הָיָה הָרֵיקָן שֶׁחוּץ לְיָדוֹ שׁוֹחֶה. אֲבָל בְּנִתְמַסְמֵס לֹא חִלְּקוּ לֹא כַּאן וְלֹא בְּסִימָן ל"ב בֵּין מְעַט לְהַרְבֵּה לְפִי שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לְהִתְמַסְמֵס הַרְבֵּה עַד כַּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ. וּלְפִי זֶה גַּם בְּנִתְמַסְמֵס מְעַט כָּשֵׁר כְּמוֹ בְּנֶחְסַר מְעַט דְּהַיְנוּ כְּשֶׁמְּקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס שֶׁחוּץ לְיָדוֹ עוֹמֵד וְאֵינוֹ נִכְפָּף מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְעַט מִזְּעֵיר. דִּסְבִירָא לֵיהּ לְהַשַּׁ"ךְ דִּמְשַׁעֲרִינָן בִּמְקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס אוֹ בִּמְקוֹם הָרֵיקָן לְחוֹד שֶׁחוּץ לְיָדוֹ וְיוֹתֵר לֹא יִהְיֶה יוֹצֵא כְּלוּם חוּץ לְיָדוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִמְּקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס אוֹ מִמְּקוֹם הָרֵיקָן.מא
אֲבָל הַתְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹרמב חוֹלֵק עָלָיו וְכָתַב דַּאֲפִלּוּ מַשֶּׁהוּ שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמֵס מֵהַמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ אֵצֶל הַקְּרוּם טְרֵפָה וְכֵן חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אֲפִלּוּ נִתְמַסְמֵס כָּל שֶׁהוּא בְּאֹרֶךְ הַחוּט רַק שֶׁהוּא בְּרֹב עָבְיוֹ וְהֶקֵּפוֹ בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד טְרֵפָה שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא נִכְפָּף בְּאוֹתוֹ מְקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד כְּשֶׁאוֹחֲזוֹ בְּיָדוֹ לְמַטָּה וּמַנִּיחַ יוֹצֵא לְמַעְלָה מִיָּדוֹ מְעַט כָּל כָּךְ בְּעִנְיָן שֶׁאִם לֹא הָיָה נִתְמַסְמֵס כְּלָל הָיָה עוֹמֵד וְלֹא הָיָה נִכְפָּף וְעַכְשָׁו מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמֵס בְּרֹב עָבְיוֹ בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד הֲרֵי הַמְעַט שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מִמְּקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס מַכְבִּיד וְנוֹפֵל. וּלְפִי זֶה גַּם בְּנֶחְסַר וְנִתְרוֹקֵן קְצָת אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד כְּשֶׁמַּנִּיחַ יוֹצֵא לְמַעְלָה מִיָּדוֹ מְעַט מִן הַחוּט הַשָּׁלֵם שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מִמְּקוֹם הָרֵיקָן שֶׁהֲרֵי מְעַט הַחוּט הַשָּׁלֵם הַזֶּה הוּא מַכְבִּיד וְנוֹפֵל. וְהָא דְּמַכְשְׁרִינָן בְּנֶחְסַר קְצָת הַיְנוּ מִשּׁוּם דְּלֹא אִתְּמַר שִׁעוּרָא דְּכֹל שֶׁמַּעֲמִידוֹ וְאֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן מַסְמָסָה וְהוּא לְקוּתָא בַּמּוֹחַ וּמִתּוֹךְ לְקוּתָא זֶה עָתִיד לִנְקוֹב וְלִפְסוֹק אַף עוֹרוֹ מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּנֶחְסַר מְעַט שֶׁאֵינוֹ לְקוּתָא כָּל כָּךְ אַף שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד לֹא אִכְפַּת לָן. כְּמוֹ דְּלֹא אִכְפַּת לָן אִם אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד מִפְּנֵי כָּבְדּוֹ אִם תִּמְצֵי לוֹמַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ חֹלִי וּלְקוּתָא כְּדִלְעֵילמג. וּמְעַט לָאו דַּוְקָא אֶלָּא הוּא הַדִּין נֶחְסַר וְנִתְרוֹקֵן הַרְבֵּה רַק שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מִעוּט הַחוּט לְאַפּוּקֵי נִתְרוֹקֵן רֻבּוֹ (עַיֵּן כְּרֵתִי וּפְלֵתִימד). וְכֵן הַדִּין בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ דַּאֲפִלּוּ נֶחְסַר הַרְבֵּה כְּשֵׁרָה כֹּל שֶׁלֹּא נֶחְסַר רֻבּוֹ. וְלֹא כָתַב הָרַשְׁבָּ"א בְּתוֹרַת הַבַּיִת הַקָּצָר וְהַטּוּר בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ בְּאִם שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אִם הָיוּ מַעֲמִידִים לֹא הָיָה עוֹמֵד טְרֵפָה כְּדִלְעֵיל אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן שִׁעוּר הָרִכּוּךְ אִם נִתְרַכֵּךְ כָּל כָּךְ וְנִתְמַסְמֵס כְּשִׁעוּר רִכּוּךְ וּמִסְמוּס דְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן גֹּדֶל הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמֵס אוֹ שֶׁנִּתְרַכֵּךְ אֵין לְשַׁעֵר כְּלָל בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה. דְּאַף אִם תִּמְצֵי לוֹמַר כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הַשַּׁ"ךְ דְּשִׁעוּר מְקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס הַפּוֹסֵל הוּא כֹּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד וְכֵן בְּחִסָּרוֹן מִכָּל מָקוֹם בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ כֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד לְפִי שֶׁהוּא כִּקְדֵרָהמה רְחָבָה לָמָּה יִפְסוֹל. עַל כָּרְחָךְ לֹא נֶאֱמַר שִׁעוּר דְּכֹל שֶׁמַּעֲמִידוֹ וְאֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן שִׁעוּר הָרִכּוּךְ בִּלְבָד אֲבָל לִמְקוֹם הַמִּסְמוּס לֹא נֶאֱמַר בּוֹ שִׁעוּר כְּלָל אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא פָּסוּל מִשּׁוּם דִּלְקוּתָא הִיא בַּמּוֹחַ וְחֹלִי הַמִּתְפַּשֵּׁט יוֹתֵר וְעָתִיד הַקְּרוּם לִנָּקֵב.מו מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּחִסָּרוֹן אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ בְּנִרְקַב וְנִתְמַעֵךְ כֹּל שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ לְשִׁעוּר רִכּוּךְ דְּנִתְמַסְמֵס. כֵּן דַּעַת הַתְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹר וְסִיעָתוֹ לְפֵרוּשׁ הָרֹא"שׁמז וְסִיעָתוֹ גַּבֵּי נִמְצָא מַיִם בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּרוּם דִּלְקַמָּן בְּשֻׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ (שֶׁדְּבָרָיו שָׁם לְקוּחִים מֵהָרֹא"שׁ וְסִיעָתוֹ וְאֵינוֹ בִּגְמָרָא). דִּסְבִירָא לְהוּ הָא דְנִתְמָרֵךְ וְנִתְמַסְמֵס פָּסוּל בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ בְּאֹרֶךְ רַק שֶׁהוּא בְּרֹב עָבְיוֹ וְהֶקֵּפוֹ דּוּמְיָא דְּנִפְסַק הַחוּט הַיְנוּ טַעְמָא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוּא חֹלִי וּלְקוּתָא וְסוֹפוֹ לִפְסוֹק אַף עוֹרוֹ בְּרֻבּוֹמח (מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּנִתְמַזְמֵז דְּהַיְנוּ חִסָּרוֹן שֶׁאֵינוֹ חֹלִי וּלְקוּתָא כָּל כָּךְ. וּמִשּׁוּם הָכִי סְבִירָא לְהוּ לְהָרֹא"שׁ וְסִיעָתוֹ לְהַטְרִיף גַּם בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ אִם נִתְמַסְמֵס כָּל שֶׁהוּא סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם כְּדִלְקַמָּן בְּשֻׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ) מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוּא לְקוּתָא וְסוֹף הַקְּרוּם לִנָּקֵב שֶׁהֲרֵי נְקִיבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ.מט
אֲבָל שִׁיטַת הָרַמְבַּ"םנ כְּהָרִי"ף רַבּוֹנא דְּנִתְמַזְמֵז הַיְנוּ נִתְנַדְנֵד דַּוְקָא עַל יְדֵי מִעוּךְ קְצָת (אוֹ עַל יְדֵי נְפִילָה) אֲבָל אִם נִתְרוֹקֵן וְנֶחְסַר קְצָת מַמָּשׁ גָּרַענב מִנִּתְמַסְמֵס. מִשּׁוּםנג דִּסְבִירָא לֵיהּ דְּהַיְנוּ טַעְמָא דְּנִתְמַסְמֵס פָּסוּל לָאו מִשּׁוּם שֶׁסּוֹף הָעוֹר לִפְסוֹקנד דְּהָא רֵיאָה שֶׁנִּשְׁפְּכָה כְּקִיתוֹן כְּשֵׁרָהנה וְלֹא אָמְרִינָן שֶׁסּוֹף הַקְּרוּמִים לִנָּקֵב אֶלָּא הַיְנוּ טַעְמָא מִשּׁוּם דְּכֹל שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמֵס רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְּאִלּוּ אֵינוֹ כִּדְאִיתָא בִּגְמָרָאנו וּכְדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן נ'נז וַהֲוָה לֵיהּ הֶפְסֵק בַּחוּט כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל בְּשֵׁם הָרַ"ןנח דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּמוֹחַ זֶה לֹא מַעֲלֶה וְלֹא מוֹרִיד הַנֵּי מִלֵּי בְּנִפְרַד לְחוֹד אֲבָל בְּהַמְרָכָה וּמַסְמָסָה הֲוָה לֵיהּ נִפְסַק הַחוּט דְּאֵין פִּסּוּק גָּדוֹל מִזֶּה מֵאַחַר שֶׁרוֹאִין כְּאִלּוּ אֵינוֹ. וְכָל זֶהנט בְּנֶחְסַר קְצָת מַמָּשׁ וְנִתְרוֹקֵן בְּרֹבס עָבְיוֹ וְהֶקֵּפוֹ (עַיֵּן בַּ"חסא וּכְנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָהסב). וְהָא דְּנִתְמַסְמֵס פָּסוּל בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ הַיְנוּ נַמִי מֵהַאי טַעְמָא מִשּׁוּם דְּרוֹאִין כְּאִלּוּ אֵינוֹ וְנִטַּל הַמּוֹחַ פָּסוּל דִּטְרֵפוּת נִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהַקְּרוּם מֵגִין עַל הַמּוֹחַ מִכָּל הֶפְסֵד וְקִלְקוּל. וּמִשּׁוּם הָכֵי פְּלִיגִי בִּגְמָרָאסג אֵיזוֹ קְרוּם פּוֹסֵל בִּנְקִיבָתוֹ דִּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר קְרָמָא עִלָּאָה סְבִירָא לֵיהּ שֶׁזֶּהוּ הַמֵּגִין (עַיֵּן רֹא"שׁסד) מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא חָזָק וּמִתְקַיֵּם וּמַאן דְּאָמַר קְרָמָא תַּתָּאָה סְבִירָא לֵיהּ שֶׁזֶּהוּ הַמֵּגִין מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא דָּבוּק לַמּוֹחַ מַמָּשׁ. וְאִם כֵּן אִם נִטַּל הַמּוֹחַ אֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר כְּלָל דִּטְרֵפָה וְכֵן אִם נִפְסַד וְנִתְקַלְקֵל לְגַמְרֵי עַד שֶׁנִּשְׁפַּךְ כַּמַּיִם אוֹ נָמֵס כַּדּוֹנַג שֶׁכֹּל שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמֵס רוֹאִין כְּאִלּוּ אֵינוֹ (מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בָּרֵיאָה דְּהָא דִּקְרוּמָא עִלָּאָה גַּם תַּתָּאָה מֵגִין הַיְנוּ עַל רוּחַ מְרַחֶפֶת שֶׁבָּרֵיאָה וְלֹא עַל בְּשַׂר הָרֵיאָה עַצְמוֹ שֶׁאֵין הַחַיּוּת תָּלוּי בּוֹ כְּלָל כְּבַמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ). וּלְפִי זֶה דִּין הַמְרָכָה וּמַסְמָסָה בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ כְּדִין נֶחְסַר וְנִתְרוֹקֵן וּבִשְׁנֵיהֶם אֵין פִּסּוּלָם אֶלָּא בְּכֻלּוֹ וְלֹא בְּמִקְצָתוֹ מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין פְּסוּל מִשּׁוּם דְּסוֹף הַקְּרוּם לִנָּקֵב אֶלָּא מִצַּד עַצְמוֹ מִשּׁוּם נְטִילָתוֹ וְחֶסְרוֹנוֹ. וַהֲרֵי זֶה בִּכְלַל כָּל הָאֵבָרִים שֶׁנְּקִיבָתָם פּוֹסֶלֶת כָּךְ נְטִילָתָם פּוֹסֶלֶת כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן נ' סְעִיף [ב'] דְּהַיְנוּ דַוְקָא בְּנִטַּל כֻּלּוֹ עַיֵּן שָׁם. וּמִשּׁוּם הָכִי נַמִי תָּנָא רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בְּהֵמָה שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמֵס מוֹחָהּ סְתָמָא דְּמַשְׁמַע כָּל מוֹחָהּ כְּמוֹ בִּשְׁאָר אֵבָרִים שֶׁשָּׁנוּ בָּהֶם חֲכָמִים טְרֵפוּת בִּסְתָם שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְרֵפָה אֶלָּא בְּכֻלּוֹ וְלֹא מִקְצָתוֹ כְּגוֹן צָמְקָה הָרֵיאָה כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן ל"ו סְעִיף י"דסה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן פָּרְשִׁי רַבָּנָן בְּפֵרוּשׁ אוֹ דְּמוּכָח מִלְּתָא בְּטַעְמָא דְּאֵין צָרִיךְ לְפָרֵשׁ כְּגוֹן גַּבֵּי רֵיאָה שֶׁיָּבְשָׁה דִּלְקַמָּן שָׁם סְעִיף י"ג.סו וְהָא דְאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִיסז נִתְמָרֵךְ וְנִתְמַסְמֵס פָּסוּל בִּסְתָם גַּבֵּי חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה וְלֹא פֵרֵשׁ דַּאֲפִלּוּ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ בָּאֹרֶךְ רַק שֶׁהוּא בְּרֹב עָבְיוֹ וְהֶקֵּפוֹ פָּסוּל הַיְנוּ מִשּׁוּם דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי קָאֵי עַל מַתְנִיתִיןסח וּבָרַיְתָאסט דְּנִפְסַק חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה בְּרֻבּוֹ טְרֵפָה וַעֲלָהּ קָאָמַר דְּאִם לֹא נִפְסַק רֹב עוֹרוֹ אֶלָּא נִתְמָרֵךְ וְנִתְמַסְמֵס מוֹחוֹ פָּסוּל כְּאִלּוּ נִפְסַק הַחוּט וּמִמֵּילָא מַשְׁמַע דְּהַיְנוּ בְּרֹב עָבְיוֹ וְהֶקֵּפוֹ. וְתֵדַע שֶׁהֲרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי לֹא הִזְכִּיר חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה כְּלָל בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ וְעַל כָּרְחָךְ קָאֵי אַחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה דְּמַתְנִיתִין וּבָרַיְתָא. וְטַעַם הַהֶפְרֵשׁ וְהַחִלּוּק שֶׁבֵּין חוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה לַמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ פָּשׁוּט הוּא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה מְחַבֵּר כָּל הַחֻלְיוֹת שֶׁהֵן בִּנְיַן כָּל הַגּוּף מִזֶּה לְזֶה וּמַמְשִׁיךְ לָהֶם כֹּחַ וְחַיּוּת מִן הַמּוֹחַ וּמִשּׁוּם הָכִי אִם נִפְסַק אֵינָהּ חַיָּה וּלְכָךְ צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת כָּל הַחוּט מְחֻבָּר חִבּוּר חָזָק וּבָרִיא קְצָתוֹ אֶל קְצָתוֹ עַד שֶׁמַּעֲמִידוֹ וּמוֹצִיאוֹ קְצָתוֹ חוּץ לְיָדוֹ הוּא עוֹמֵד אֲבָל אִם הַמִּקְצָת שֶׁחוּץ לְיָדוֹ נִכְפָּף וְנוֹפֵל מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְחֻבָּר קְצָתוֹ אֶל קְצָתוֹ בְּחִבּוּר חָזָק וּבָרִיא אֵין בּוֹ כֹּחַ לְחַבֵּר כָּל הַחֻלְיוֹת חִבּוּר הָרָאוּי מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בַּמּוֹחַ. וּמִשּׁוּם הָכִי נַמִי לֹא כָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ"םע לְהַכְשִׁיר בְּנִרְקַב אֶלָּא בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ וְלֹא בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָהעא אֶלָּא בְּנִתְמַעֵךְ לְבָד וְלֹא בְּנִרְקַב כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן ל"בעב מִשּׁוּם דְּעַל יְדֵי הָרִקָּבוֹן נֶחְסַר מְעַט כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי לְעֵיל בְּשֵׁם הַטּוּר וּבְחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה אֵין לְהַכְשִׁיר כֹּל שֶׁמַּעֲמִידוֹ וְאֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד. זֶהוּ דַּעַת הָרַדְבַּ"זעג בְּפֵרוּשׁ הָרַמְבַּ"ם וְהָרִי"ף הוּבָא בריק"שׁעד וּפְרִי חָדָשׁ.עה
וּמִיהוּ לְפִי מַה שֶּׁכָּתְבוּ הָאַחֲרוֹנִיםעו לְקַמָּן סִימָן ל"ו סְעִיף י"ד גַּבֵּי צָמְקָה הָרֵיאָה דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּכָתְבוּ כָּל הַפּוֹסְקִים דְּלָא מִטַּרְפָא אֶלָּא בְּכֻלּוֹ מִכָּל מָקוֹם רֻבּוֹ כְּכֻלּוֹ בְּכָל הַתּוֹרָה,עז אִם כֵּן הָכִי נַמִי גַּם בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ לְשִׁיטַת הָרַמְבַּ"ם וְהָרִי"ף יֵשׁ לוֹמַר דְּרֻבּוֹ כְּכֻלּוֹ בֵּין בְּחִסָּרוֹן בֵּין בְּנִתְמַסְמֵס. וְהָא דְּנִרְקַב אֲפִלּוּ כֻּלּוֹ כָּשֵׁר מִשּׁוּם דְּעַל יְדֵי הָרִקָּבוֹן אֵינוֹ חָסֵר אֶלָּא מְעַט כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הַטּוּרעח (וְלֹא אָמְרִינָן דְּהַנִּרְקָב כְּאִלּוּ אֵינוֹ הוֹאִיל וְלֹא נָמֵס כַּדּוֹנַג. וְלֹא דָמֵי לְבָשָׂר שֶׁהָרוֹפֵא גוֹרְרוֹ דִּלְקַמָּן סִימָן נ'עט דְּשַׁאֲנִי הָכָא דְּהַקְּרוּמִים מְגִנִּים שֶׁכֹּל שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ לְשִׁעוּר מַסְמָסָה הַדְרָא בָּרְיָא. וּבְלָאו הָכִי נַמִי עַל כָּרְחָךְ צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר כֵּן לְכוּלָא עָלְמָא דְּהָא בְּנֶחְסַר כֻּלּוֹ פָּסוּל לְכוּלָא עָלְמָא כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל וּבְנִרְקַב כֻּלּוֹ כָּשֵׁר לְכוּלָא עָלְמָאפ).
וּלְעִנְיַן הֲלָכָה אֵין לְהַחֲמִיר לַאֲחֵרִים בְּנִתְרוֹקֵן וְנֶחְסַר מִקְצָתוֹ בֵּין בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה בֵּין בַּמּוֹחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ נֶגֶד פְּסַק הַשֻּׁלְחָן עָרוּךְפא וְהַשַּׁ"ךְפב וְטַ"זפג דִּסְבִירָא לְהוּ כְּפֵרוּשׁ רַשִׁ"י בְּנִתְמַזְמֵזפד וּכְשִׁיטַת הָרֹא"שׁפה וְסִיעָתוֹ (דְּלֹא כְּבַ"חפו וּכְנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָהפז). אֶלָּא כָּל בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ יַחְמִיר לְעַצְמוֹ בְּנִתְרוֹקֵן וְחָסֵר מִקְצָתוֹ בְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה לָחוּשׁ לְהָרַמְבַּ"ם וְהָרִי"ף.פח וְכֵן בְּנִתְמַסְמְסָה אֲפִלּוּ מַשֶּׁהוּ סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם שֶׁל מוֹחַ אֵין לְהָקֵל כְּלָל אֲפִלּוּ בְּהֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה נֶגֶד הַשֻּׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִים. אֶלָּא אִם יֵשׁ עוֹד צְדָדִים לְהָקֵל יֵשׁ לְהָקֵל בְּנִתְמַסְמֵס בְּמִקְצָתוֹ מִשּׁוּם סְפֵק סְפֵיקָאפט כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר לְקַמָּן.צ עַיֵּן פְּרִי חָדָשׁצא בְּשֵׁם רַדְבַּ"ז:צב
(ה) כְּשִׁעוּר הַמַּיִם. אֲבָל אִם לֹא נֶחְסַר כְּשִׁעוּר הַמַּיִם לֹא מְהַנֵּי מַה שֶּׁהַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף סְבִיב מִקְצָת הַמַּיִם. כִּי מוֹתַר הַמַּיִם הָעוֹדְפִים עַל שִׁעוּר הַחִסָּרוֹן שֶׁנֶּחְסַר הַמּוֹחַ לְמַרְאִית הָעַיִן בְּוַדַּאי נִתְקַבְּצוּ מִמְּקוֹמוֹת הַרְבֵּה בַּמּוֹחַ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נוֹדַע מְקוֹמָן מִנְּקָבִים דַּקִּים וּמִסְמוּסִים הַרְבֵּה בָּאוּ וְיָרְדוּ לְמָקוֹם הַזֶּה שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בּוֹ וּמִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם מִקְצָתָם בָּאוּ מִסָּמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם וּסְפֵיקָא דְאוֹרַיְתָא לְחוּמְרָא.צג וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם אֵין נִרְאֶה חִסָּרוֹן כְּלָל בַּמּוֹחַ וְנִמְצְאוּ הַמַּיִם בֵּין מוֹחַ לַקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּוַדַּאי טְרֵפָה. שֶׁאֵין לוֹמַר שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ שָׁלֵם וּמֵרֹב לַחוּתוֹ הוֹלִיד מַיִם וְלֹא נָמֵס מִמֶּנּוּ כְּלוּם דְּזֶה אֵינוֹ דְּוַדַּאי בִּמְקוֹם הַמַּיִם לֵיכָּא מוֹחַ דְּאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִשְׁנַיִם בְּנוֹשֵׂא אֶחָד וְרָאוּי הוּא שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ יְמַלֵּא כָּל הֶחָלָל תּוֹךְ הַקְּרוּם דִּקְרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן הוּא דָבוּק לַמּוֹחַ מַמָּשׁ בְּכָל בַּעַל חַי רַק קְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבַדּוֹ אֵינוֹ דָבוּק כְּדִלְעֵילצד וְאִם כֵּן בִּמְקוֹם הַמַּיִם עַל כָּרְחָךְ נֶחְסַר הַמּוֹחַ וְנָמֵס וְהָיָה לְמַיִם (תְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹר.צה וְכֵן דַּעַת הַטַּ"ז.צו דְּלֹא כִּפְרִי חָדָשׁצז).
אֲבָל יֵשׁ מְפָרְשִׁיםצח מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הַשֻּׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ (וְכֵן הוּא לְשׁוֹן הָרֹא"שׁצט וְטוּר) וְנֶחְסַר מֵהַמּוֹחַ כְּשִׁעוּר הַמַּיִם הוּא לְקוּלָא דְּאִם לֹא נֶחְסַר הַמּוֹחַ אֵין לָחוּשׁ כְּלָל לְמַיִם שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בּוֹ מֵאַחַר שֶׁרוֹאִין שֶׁלֹּא נִתְמַסְמֵס הַמּוֹחַ וְהוּא שָׁלֵם בְּכָל צְדָדָיו וְהַמַּיִם מִצַּד עַצְמָן אִם אֵינָן מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ אֶלָּא בְּתוֹלָדָה אוֹ שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ מֵרוֹב לַחוּת הוֹלִיד מַיִם אֵין בָּהֶם שׁוּם טְרֵפוּת שֶׁאֵין מוֹסִיפִים עַל הַטְּרֵפוֹת שֶׁמָּנוּ חֲכָמִיםק (עַיֵּן כְּרֵתִי וּפְלֵתִיקא). וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב רְמָ"א לְהַטְרִיף בְּשַׁלְחוּפִית הַמֻּנַּחַת בֵּין קְרוּם לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת הַיְנוּ נַמִי מִשּׁוּם שֶׁוַּדַּאי נֶחְסַר הַמּוֹחַ בִּמְקוֹם הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית כִּי הַמּוֹחַ הוּא סָמוּךְ מְאֹד לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת וְאֵין בֵּינֵיהֶם כִּי אִם הֶבְדֵּל מְעַט מִזְּעֵיר בִּמְאֹד וְלֹא רֶוַח וְחָלָל כְּלָל כְּדֵי שֶׁיּוּכַל לִהְיוֹת שַׁלְחוּפִית מֻנַּחַת שָׁם (עַיֵּן ריק"שׁקב).
וְהַטַּ"ז סְבִירָא לֵיהּ גַּם כֵּן דְּהַאי וְנֶחְסַר הַמּוֹחַ שֶׁבְּשֻׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ הוּא לְקוּלָא אֶלָּא דִּסְבִירָא לֵיהּ דְּאָתֵי דַּוְקָא לְאַפּוּקֵי מַיִם שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בַּגֻּלְגֹּלֶת אַחַר שֶׁהוֹצִיאוּ מִתּוֹכָהּ אֶת הַמּוֹחַ שָׁלֵם מִכָּל צְדָדָיו דִּתְלִינָן דְּמִתְּחִלָּה הָיוּ הַמַּיִם מַקִּיפִים הַמּוֹחַ בְּהֶבְדֵּל מְעַט מִזְּעֵיר שֶׁבֵּין הַקְּרוּמִים (כִּי קְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן דָּבוּק מַמָּשׁ בַּגֻּלְגֹּלֶת וְהַתַּחְתּוֹן בַּמּוֹחַ כְּדִלְעֵיל) וְאַחַר שֶׁהוֹצִיא הַמּוֹחַ עִם קְרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן הַדָּבוּק בּוֹ נִתְקַבְּצוּ הַמַּיִם וּבָאוּ לְמָקוֹם אֶחָד וּלְכָךְ אֵין לָחוּשׁ לְמִסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ בְּזֶה מֵאַחַר שֶׁרוֹאִין שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ שָׁלֵם מִכָּל צְדָדָיו וּמַיִם אֵלּוּ בָּאוּ מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר בַּגֻּלְגֹּלֶת לְבֵין הַקְּרוּמִים וְלֹא מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ. אֲבָל אִם נִמְצְאוּ בֵּין מוֹחַ לַקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן אַף אִם הַמַּיִם מַקִּיפִים הַמּוֹחַ וְנִרְאֶה הַמּוֹחַ שָׁלֵם בְּעִגּוּלוֹ סָבִיב וְאֵין בּוֹ פְּגַם וְחִסָּרוֹן כְּלָל אֵין לְהָקֵל לְפִי דַּעַת הַטַּ"ז מִשּׁוּם שֶׁבְּוַדַּאי מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ בָּאוּ שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת דָּבוּק בַּקְּרוּם מַמָּשׁ וּמְמַלֵּא כָּל חֲלָלוֹ בְּלִי שׁוּם הֶבְדֵּל כְּלָל בֵּינֵיהֶם. וְגַם בֵּין הַקְּרוּמִים אֵין לְהָקֵּל לְפִי דַּעַת הַטַּ"ז אֶלָּא בִּמְעַט מַיִם אֲבָל בְּשַׁלְחוּפִית שֶׁבֵּין הַקְּרוּמִים טְרֵפָה בְּכָל עִנְיָן (כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב רְמָ"א) אַף אִם הַמּוֹחַ שָׁלֵם לְגַמְרֵי מִכָּל צְדָדָיו וְאֵין שׁוּם פְּגַם וְחִסָּרוֹן כְּלָל בַּמּוֹחַ בִּמְקוֹם הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית כְּגוֹן שֶׁהִיא קְטַנָּה בִּמְאֹד לְפִי שֶׁאֵין דֶּרֶךְ שַׁלְחוּפִית לְהִתְהַוּוֹת אֶלָּא מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ וְלֹא מִמַּיִם אֲחֵרִים. וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם נִמְצֵאת שַׁלְחוּפִית קְטַנָּה בְּתוֹךְ הַמּוֹחַ סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם דְּאַף אִם הַמּוֹחַ נִרְאֶה שָׁלֵם בְּעִגּוּלוֹ סָבִיב גַּם בִּמְקוֹם הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית שֶׁנִּרְאֶה לָעַיִן שֶׁתַּחַת הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית אֵין בַּמּוֹחַ פְּגַם וְחִסָּרוֹן כְּלָל אֲפִלּוּ מַשֶּׁהוּ רַק שָׁוֶה בְּגָבְהוֹ לִשְׁאָר עִגּוּל הַמּוֹחַ אֲפִלּוּ הָכִי טְרֵפָה דְּוַדַּאי מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ נַעֲשָׂה הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית כְּמוֹ שֶׁרְגִילוּת הוּא לְהִמָּצֵא שַׁלְחוּפִית בְּתוֹךְ הַמּוֹחַ כֵּן דַּעַת הַטַּ"ז.קג
וְהַשַּׁ"ךְקד הוֹסִיף לְהַחֲמִיר גַּם בְּנִמְצְאוּ מַיִם בֵּין הַקְּרוּמִים לוֹמַר דְּוַדַּאי מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ בָּאוּ כְּמוֹ בְּשַׁלְחוּפִית שֶׁבִּרְמָ"א. וְכֵן עִקָּר לְהַחֲמִיר בְּשֶׁל תּוֹרָה (תְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹר). וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם בְּהֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה יֵשׁ לִסְמוֹךְ בְּזֶה עַל רַדְבַּ"זקה דִּלְעֵילקו וּלְהָקֵל בְּזֶה מִשּׁוּם סְפֵק סְפֵיקָא.קז
אֲבָל אֵין לִסְמוֹךְ עַל יֵשׁ מְפָרְשִׁים דִּלְעֵיל נֶגֶד הַשַּׁ"ךְ וְטַ"ז אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן נִמְצְאוּ בְּתַחְתִּית הַמּוֹחַ בְּחָלָל הַמָּלֵא לֹבֶן. שֶׁאַף אִם הַמַּיִם נוֹגְעִים בַּקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן הַסּוֹבֵב מִתַּחַת לְחָלָל וְלֹבֶן שֶׁבּוֹ אֶפְשָׁר לְהָקֵל וְלִסְמוֹךְ עַל יֵשׁ מְפָרְשִׁים דִּלְעֵיל וְלוֹמַר דְּלָאו מִמִּסְמוּס הַמּוֹחַ בָּאוּ מֵאַחַר שֶׁרוֹאִין שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ שָׁלִֵם מִכָּל צְדָדָיו עַל כָּרְחָךְ הַמּוֹחַ מֵרֹב לַחוּתוֹ הוֹלִיד מַיִם אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ הַמַּיִם אֵלּוּ בְּתוֹלָדָה. וְגַם אִם הַצַּד הַסָּמוּךְ לְלֹבֶן אֵינוֹ שָׁלֵם אֶלָּא נִתְמַסְמֵס וְגַם אִם אֲפִלּוּ הַלֹּבֶן נִתְמַסְמֵס מִקְצָתוֹ אוֹקח נִשְׁאַר מְעַט לֹבֶן סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם אֶפְשָׁר לְהָקֵל וְלוֹמַר דְּהָוֵי בִּכְלַל הַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף שֶׁבְּשֻׁלְחָן עָרוּךְ דְּהָדָר בָּרְיָא מֵאַחַר שֶׁהַמִּסְמוּס וְהַחִסָּרוֹן הוּא בָּאֶמְצַע וְלֹא סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם רַק שֶׁהַמַּיִם יָרְדוּ לְמַטָּה בְּחָלָל וְנִדְחֲקוּ בֵּין הַלֹּבֶן וּבֵין מוֹחַ הַמַּקִּיפוֹ וּבָאוּ עַד הַקְּרוּם בְּתַחְתִּית הַלֹּבֶן:
(ו) כְּשֵׁרָה. דְּכֵיוָן שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף הַמַּיִם מִכָּל צַד הָדָר בָּרְיָא (רֹא"שׁקט):
(ז) מְגֻלָּה. אֲפִלּוּ מִקְצָתָהּ (הַגָּהוֹת אֲשֵׁרִ"יקי):
(ח) וְהַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת. דְּהַיְנוּ בֵּין קְרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן לַקְּרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן הַדָּבוּק לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ שָׁלֵם (טַ"זקיא):
(ט) טְרֵפָה. מִשּׁוּם דְּוַדַּאי בָּאוּ הַמַּיִם שֶׁבַּשַּׁלְחוּפִית מִן הַמּוֹחַקיב מִמִּסְמוּסִים הַרְבֵּה וּמִנְּקָבִים דַּקִּים (וְשֶׁמָּא מִקְצָתָם סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם כְּדִלְעֵילקיג). כִּי אַף שֶׁהַקְּרוּם שָׁלֵם אֶפְשָׁר לְלַחְלוּחִית הַמַּיִם שֶׁבַּמּוֹחַ לְהִתְלַחְלֵחַ וְלֵירֵד מִתּוֹכוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁיּוֹרְדִים מוֹתְרוֹת לַחְלוּחִית הַמּוֹחַ דֶּרֶךְ הַקְּרוּם אֶל הַחֹטֶם. וּמִשּׁוּם הָכִי אֲפִלּוּ אֵין הַשַּׁלְחוּפִית מְחֻבֶּרֶת וּדְבוּקָה בַּקְּרוּם טְרֵפָה. וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם הִיא דְּבוּקָה וּמְחֻבֶּרֶת בּוֹ דְּאִיכָּא לְמֵימַר שֶׁנִּקַּב הַקְּרוּם וְהַשַּׁלְחוּפִית הִיא קְרוּם שֶׁעָלָה מֵחֲמַת מַכָּה וְאֵינָהּ סְתִימָה (עַיֵּן תְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹרקיד):
(י) בְּלֹא פְּתִיחָה. וְדַוְקָא בְּמָקוֹם דְּאֵין רֵעוּתָא לְפָנֵינוּ אֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ רֵעוּתָא כְּגוֹן שֶׁהַבְּהֵמָה בְּחַיֶּיהָ הָיְתָה מְנַעְנַעַת בְּרֹאשָׁהּ (שֶׁקְּרוּיִן שְׁווִינְדְ"ל בִּלְשׁוֹן אַשְׁכְּנַז) פְּשִׁיטָא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לֶאֱסוֹר עַד שֶׁיִּתְבָּרֵר הַהֶתֵּר בִּפְתִיחַת רֹאשָׁהּ (טַ"זקטו בַּ"חקטז).
וּבְחֹדֶשׁ תַּמּוּז דִּשְׁכִיחִי מַיִם בִּגְדָיִים וּטְלָאִים כָּל יְרֵא שָׁמַיִם יַחְמִיר לְעַצְמוֹ לְכַתְּחִלָּה לִפְתּוֹחַ הָרֹאשׁ וְלִבְדּוֹק אִם הַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף אֲבָל בְּדִיעֲבַד אֵין לָחוּשׁ (עַיֵּן תְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹרקיז):
3

If a worm is found in [the meninges, i.e.,] the membrane of the brain, (11) but the brain is intact and there is no mark on the lower membrane (12) and no trace of blood, [the animal] is kosher. There is an authority who says that we are not knowledgeable regarding the [necessary] examination and [therefore, the animal] is tereifah. [Note:] This is the common practice. (13) However, if [the worm] is found outside [the cavity in the skull that contains the brain], e.g., in the nose, (14) [the animal] is kosher, because we assume that [the worm] never reached the brain. (15)

ג

אִם נִמְצָא תּוֹלַעַת בִּקְרוּם הַמּוֹחַ, (יא) וְהַמּוֹחַ קַיָּם, וְאֵין בַּקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן (יב) רֹשֶׁם וְלֹא קֹרֶט דָּם, כְּשֵׁרָה. וְיֵשׁ מִי שֶׁאוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ בְּקִיאִין בַּבְּדִיקָה, וּטְרֵפָה [הַגָּה] וְהָכֵי נָהוּג. (יג) אֲבָל אִם נִמְצָא חוּץ לַקְּדֵרָה כְּגוֹן בַּחֹטֶם, (יד) כְּשֵׁרָה, דִּתְלִינָן שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ לַמּוֹחַ מֵעוֹלָם. (טו)

(11) The membrane of the brain – [The intent is that the worm was found] in the upper membrane (Sifsei Kohen [31:]8). [This is speaking about examining the membrane] after one removed the brain from it. The same law would apply if [the brain] was [still embedded] in [the membranes] and [a worm] was found positioned on the lower membrane,82 since there is no mark or trace of blood. We do not say that it is impossible that the worm did not perforate the membrane with its mouth, for we find that a gnat entered the nose of Titus the wicked one, and lived [in his skull] for seven years83 (Mordechai;84 Hagahos Asheri,85 according to the understanding of Terumas HaDeshen86 and all the later authorities, in contrast to [the opinion of] Tevuos Shor87).
(12) The lower membrane – By contrast, according to the opinion of Beis Yosef88 [mentioned in] subsection 1, there is no concern regarding the upper membrane [of the animal or fowl’s brain], even if it was perforated. According to the opinion of the authorities who differ [with this ruling, as mentioned] there, [for an animal to be kosher,] it is necessary that there be no mark or trace of blood in the upper membrane as well (Maharshal;89 Sifsei Kohen90).
We do not assume that [the worm originated in the brain and] after [the animal was] slaughtered it [came out] to seek warmth because the natural warmth of the animal’s brain ceased when the animal died and, [while departing, the worm] perforated the lower or upper membrane. An assumption based on this reasoning is made regarding a lung that was perforated by worms, in sec. 36,91 below, and also, regarding a korkevan [i.e., a “thick stomach”92] in sec. 49,93 below. [Nevertheless,] there is a difference [between those instances and the instance of the brain. Regarding the lung or the korkevan] it can be assumed that the worms emerged from inside outwards, for it is very common for the lung to have worms grow inside of it. This also applies to the muscular stomach and the other organs of the digestive system, [because] it is common to find [inside these organs] worms that grow in the waste that the fowl or the animals swallow with their food. [By contrast,] it is very uncommon for worms from the outside to enter these inner [organs, if they are not swallowed together with the food]. Accordingly, we assume that [the worms] emerged from inside [these inner organs] to the outside and perforated [them when doing so], and we assume that they emerged after the slaughter [of the animal or fowl] in search of warmth. However, [with regard to the brain,] it should be assumed that [the worms] did not emerge from within [the brain and proceed] outward, because it is very uncommon for worms to grow in the brain itself or in the head above the upper membrane (note Shaarei Dura, sec. 47). It is more common for [worms] to come from the outside, entering the head through the nose. For this reason, [the worm] was found between the two membranes [of the brain].
Therefore, if there is no mark on the membrane, we see that it was not yet perforated. However, if [the membrane] was already perforated, we do not know when it was perforated.94 [Generally,] there is no [greater] reason to assumethat this occurred after [the animal’s] slaughter than [there is to assume that this occurred] during its lifetime unless the perforation was made when the worm emerged from inside [an organ] outward. [In such an instance,] we assume that it emerged [after the animal’s slaughter] to seek warmth. However, when that reason does not apply, the question is evenly balanced, [and we rule] stringently. Note Tevuos Shor.95 [Also] note sec. 25[:3,96 above,] and sec. 50,97 [below].
(13) This is the common practice – [I.e., it is common practice] not to rely on our examination [of the membranes]. However, were we to rely on our examination [of the membrane, and seek to permit the meat from the animal on that basis], even Rama, who – as stated in subsection 1, above98 – gives weight to the understanding of those who forbid [an animal] even when only the upper [membrane] was perforated, would permit [partaking of the animal’s meat. Despite that stringent view,] were one to also examine the upper [membrane, and find that it has no perforations, Rama] would permit [such an animal]. For we would say that the worm entered via the nose and did not perforate either of the membranes, as was the case regarding Titus, as mentioned above.99 (Note [the comments of] Sifsei Kohen.)100
(14) The nose – [This ruling applies] even [if the worm reached] very close to the brain (Maharai, in his Hagahos to Shaarei Dura101).
(15) Never reached the brain – [This ruling applies] even if the mouth of the worm is pointed outward, and thus it appears that [the worm] had already been on the brain and was seeking to emerge. This is still not definite proof because it is possible that the worm flipped over as living creatures do. We do not assume that a forbidden substance moved from place to place,102 just as we do not assume that an impure substance moved from place to place.103 [This principle is followed] even though it appears that stringency is more appropriate in the situation [at hand] than leniency. Even so, we assume a lenient stance. This same principle applies regarding a prohibition. Maharai writes in this manner in his Hagahos to Shaarei Dura.104 In his Terumas HaDeshen,105 Maharai states that even if one would say [that the discovery of the worm] serves as somewhat of a proof that it was on the brain, nevertheless, [the animal] may be permitted on the basis of [the following] sefek sefeika, [i.e., compounded doubt: Even if the worm is facing the outside, perhaps this is because it] turned over, and [thus] never reached the brain. And even if one would say that [the worm] reached the brain, perhaps it did not perforate the membrane.
A compounded doubt is effective in situations of this nature even though one of the doubtful factors is not evenly balanced, as will be stated below in sec. 110,106 [when outlining] the general principles regarding compounded doubts.
Turei Zahav107 writes that it is nevertheless proper to inspect the membrane[s. The rationale is that] since it is possible to clarify the situation by evidence, [a ruling] should not be established by relying on a [compounded] doubt.
From all of the above, it is evident that the lower membrane surrounds the brain even in the place of the nostrils, and only the upper membrane is open in that place. This can be actually seen, and Sh’vilei Emunah [also] states as such. Therefore, if a worm is found in the brain itself, even though the brain surrounds the worm on all sides and it is not at all close to the [brain’s inner] membrane, there are no grounds for leniency, even in the instance of a severe [financial] loss. [The rationale is that] it can be assumed that the worm came from outside via the nose, as explained above.108 If so, [the worm must have] perforated the lower membrane when it entered. Although [the membrane now] appears intact, [that is because the surface] healed, covering the wound. This is explicitly stated in the Hagahos to Shaarei Dura, sec. 47. (This is also the understanding of Terumas HaDeshen,104 Beis Yosef,109 and all the later authorities,110 in contrast to [the opinion of] Tevuos Shor.111)
(יא) בִּקְרוּם הַמּוֹחַ. פֵּרוּשׁ בְּתוֹךְ קְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן (שַׁ"ךְ סְעִיף קָטָן ח'). וְהַיְנוּ אַחַר שֶׁהוֹצִיאוּ הַמּוֹחַ מִתּוֹכוֹ. וְהוּא הַדִּין בְּעוֹדוֹ בְּתוֹכוֹ וְנִמְצָא מֻנָּח בּוֹ עַל קְרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹןקיח מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ רֹשֶׁם וְלֹא קֹרֶט דָּם. וְלֹא אָמְרִינָן דְּאִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁלֹּא יִנְקוֹב הַתּוֹלַעַת אֶת הַקְּרוּם בְּפִיו דְּהָא אַשְׁכְּחָןקיט גַּבֵּי טִיטוּס הָרָשָׁע שֶׁנִּכְנַס יַתּוּשׁ בְּחָטְמוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן חַי ז' שָׁנִים (מָרְדְּכַיקכ וְהַגָּהוֹת אֲשֵׁרִ"יקכא לְפִי דַּעַת תְּרוּמַת הַדֶּשֶׁןקכב וְכָל הָאַחֲרוֹנִים. דְּלֹא כִּתְבוּאוֹת שׁוֹרקכג):
(יב) הַתַּחְתּוֹן. אֲבָל בַּקְּרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן אֵין לָחוּשׁ אֲפִלּוּ נִקַּב לְפִי דַּעַת הַבֵּית יוֹסֵף כְּדִלְעֵיל סְעִיף א'. וּלְפִי דַּעַת הַחוֹלְקִים שָׁם צָרִיךְ שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה רֹשֶׁם וְלֹא קֹרֶט דָּם גַּם בָּעֶלְיוֹן (רְשַׁ"לקכד שַׁ"ךְקכה).
וְהָא דְּלָא תְּלִינָן דִּלְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה פָּרִישׁ וְנִקַּב הַקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן אוֹ הָעֶלְיוֹן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיָּצָא לְבַקֵּשׁ חֲמִימוּת כַּאֲשֶׁר אָפֵס חֹם הַטִּבְעִי בְּמוֹת הַבְּהֵמָה כִּי הֵיכָא דִּתְלִינָן מֵהַאי טַעְמָא בָּרֵיאָה שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת נְקוּבָה בְּתוֹלָעִים כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן ל"וקכו וְכֵן בְּקֻרְקְבָן כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן מ"ט.קכז דְּשַׁאֲנִי הָתָם דִּסְתָמָא דְמִלְּתָא שֶׁהַתּוֹלָעִים יָצְאוּ מִבִּפְנִים לַחוּץ שֶׁדַּרְכָּהּ שֶׁל רֵיאָה לְגַדֵּל תּוֹלָעִים בְּתוֹכָהּ וְכֵן בְּקֻרְקְבָן וּשְׁאָר בְּנֵי מֵעַיִם מְצוּיִים בְּתוֹכָם תּוֹלָעִים הַגְּדֵלִים בַּפֶּרֶשׁ שֶׁבּוֹלְעָם הָעוֹף אוֹ הַבְּהֵמָה עִם הַמַּאֲכָל וּמִלְּתָא דְּלֹא שְׁכִיחָא כְּלָל שֶׁיִּכָּנְסוּ לְתוֹכָם תּוֹלָעִים מֵעָלְמָא מִחוּץ לִפְנִים וְכֵיוָן דְּאָמְרִינָן שֶׁיָּצְאוּ מִפְּנִים לַחוּץ וְנִקְּבוּ מִשּׁוּם הָכִי תְּלִינָן בִּלְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁיָּצְאוּ לְבַקֵּשׁ חֲמִימוּת. אֲבָל הָכָא מִסְתָּמָא לֹא יָצָא מִפְּנִים לַחוּץ כִּי הִיא מִלְּתָא דְּלֹא שְׁכִיחָא לְגַדֵּל הַתּוֹלָעִים בְּתוֹךְ הַמּוֹחַ עַצְמוֹ אוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הָרֹאשׁ (עַיֵּן שַׁעֲרֵי דוּרָא סִימָן מ"זקכח) לְמַעְלָה מִקְּרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן וּשְׁכִיחַ טְפֵי דְּאָתָא מֵעָלְמָא מִחוּץ לִפְנִים דֶּרֶךְ הַחֹטֶם וּמִשּׁוּם הָכִי נִמְצָא בֵּין ב' הַקְּרוּמִים. וְהִלְכָּךְ בִּדְלֵיכָּא רֹשֶׁם בַּקְּרוּם הָא חֲזִינָן שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא נִקַּב
אֲבָל אִם כְּבָר נִקַּב לֹא יָדְעִינָן אֵימָתַי נִקַּב דְּאֵין לִתְלוֹת בִּלְאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה טְפֵי מִבַּחַיִּים אֶלָּא בְּנֶקֶב הַנַּעֲשָׂה בִּיצִיאַת הַתּוֹלָע מִבִּפְנִים לַחוּץ דִּתְלִינָן שֶׁיָּצָא לְבַקֵּשׁ חֲמִימוּת אֲבָל בְּלָאו הָכִי הָוֵי סָפֵק שָׁקּוּל וּלְחוּמְרָא. עַיֵּן תְּבוּאוֹת שׁוֹר.קכט עַיֵּן סִימָן כ"הקל וְסִימָן נ':קלא
(יג) נָהוּג. שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ עַל בְּדִיקָתֵנוּ אֲבָל אִי הֲוָה סָמְכִינָן אַבְּדִיקָתֵנוּ הָוֵי שָׁרֵי אַף לִרְמָ"א שֶׁחָשַׁשׁ לִסְבָרַת הָאוֹסְרִים אַף בְּנִקַּב הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבַדּוֹ כְּדִלְעֵיל סְעִיף א'קלב דְּמִכָּל מָקוֹם הָוֵי שָׁרֵי כְּשֶׁבָּדַק גַּם הָעֶלְיוֹן דְּאָמְרִינָן שֶׁנִּכְנַס הַתּוֹלָע דֶּרֶךְ הַחֹטֶם וְלֹא נִקַּב אֶחָד מֵהַקְּרוּמִים כִּדְאַשְׁכְּחָן גַּבֵּי טִיטוּס כְּדִלְעֵיל (עַיֵּן שַׁ"ךְקלג):
(יד) בַּחֹטֶם. אֲפִלּוּ סָמוּךְ לַמּוֹחַ מַמָּשׁ (מהרי"א בְּהַגָּהוֹת שַׁעֲרֵי דוּרָאקלד):
(טו) מֵעוֹלָם. וַאֲפִלּוּ פִּי הַתּוֹלָע כְּלַפֵּי חוּץ דְּנִרְאִין הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁהָיָה כְּבָר עַל הַמּוֹחַ וּבִקֵּשׁ לָצֵאת לֹא מוּכְחָא מִלְּתָא דְּאֵימַר נִתְהַפֵּךְ הַתּוֹלָע כְּדֶרֶךְ בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים וְאֵין מַחֲזִיקִין אִסּוּר מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹםקלה כְּמוֹ שֶׁאֵין מַחֲזִיקִין טֻמְאָה מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹםקלו וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּרְאִין הַדְּבָרִים לְהַחֲמִיר יוֹתֵר מִלְּהָקֵל אֲפִלּוּ הָכֵי תְּלִינָן לְקוּלָא וְהוּא הַדִּין לְאִסּוּר כֵּן כָּתַב מהרי"א בְּהַגָּהוֹת שַׁעֲרֵי דוּרָא.קלז וּבִתְרוּמַת הַדֶּשֶׁןקלח כָּתַב דַּאֲפִלּוּ אִם תִּמְצֵי לוֹמַר דְּהָוֵי קְצָת הוֹכָחָה שֶׁהָיָה עַל הַמּוֹחַ מִכָּל מָקוֹם יֵשׁ לְהַתִּיר מִטַּעַם סְפֵק סְפֵיקָא שֶׁמָּא נִתְהַפֵּךְ וְלֹא הִגִּיעַ לְעוֹלָם עַל הַמּוֹחַ וְאִם תִּמְצֵי לוֹמַר הִגִּיעַ עַל הַמּוֹחַ שֶׁמָּא לֹא נִקַּב הַקְּרוּם. וּסְפֵק סְפֵיקָא מְהַנֵּי בִּכְהַאי גַּוְנָא אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁסָּפֵק אֶחָד אֵינוֹ סָפֵק שָׁקוּל מַמָּשׁקלט כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן ק"יקמ בִּכְלָלֵי סְפֵק סְפֵיקָא. וְכָתַב הַטַּ"זקמא דְּמִכָּל מָקוֹם נָכוֹן לִבְדּוֹק בַּקְּרוּם דְּמֵאַחַר שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לַעֲמוֹד עַל הַבֵּרוּר לֹא נַעֲמִיד עַל הַסָּפֵק עַד כַּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ.
וְהִנֵּה מִכָּל זֶה מִתְבָּאֵר שֶׁקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן מַקִּיף הַמּוֹחַ גַּם בִּמְקוֹם נִקְבֵי הַחֹטֶם וּקְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן לְבַדּוֹ פָּתוּחַ שָׁם. וְכֵן נִרְאֶה בְּחוּשׁ. וְכֵן הוּא בִּשְׁבִילֵי אֱמוּנָה.קמב וְהִלְכָּךְ אִם נִמְצָא תּוֹלָע בְּתוֹךְ הַמּוֹחַ עַצְמוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ מַקִּיף הַתּוֹלָע מִכָּל צַד וְאֵינוֹ סָמוּךְ לַקְּרוּם כְּלָל אֵין לְהָקֵל כְּלָל אֲפִלּוּ בְּהֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה מִשּׁוּם דְּמִסְתָּמָא אָתָא מֵעָלְמָא דֶּרֶךְ הַחֹטֶם כְּדִלְעֵילקמג וְאִם כֵּן נִקַּב קְרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן בִּכְנִיסָתוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה שָׁלֵם קְרוּם הוּא שֶׁעָלָה מֵחֲמַת מַכָּה. וְכֵן הוּא בְּהֶדְיָא בְּהַגָּהוֹת שַׁעֲרֵי דוּרָא סִימָן מ"זקמד (וְכֵן דַּעַת תְּרוּמַת הַדֶּשֶׁןקמה וּבֵית יוֹסֵףקמו וְכָל הָאַחֲרוֹנִיםקמז דְּלֹא כִּתְבוּאוֹת שׁוֹרקמח):
4

The bone in which the brain is located, [i.e., the skull,] has a cavity as large as a cauldron. At its opening, towards the neck, there are [two glands], like two beans. (16) All of the brain matter which is contained in the cavity –that extends to [the glands], including [the glands] (17) – is considered [part of] the brain, and even the slightest perforation [disqualifies it]. (18) From that point and [lower, the substance no longer has the designation of brain matter, rather it] is [considered part of] the spinal cord, and [is] judged [according to the rules governing it]. (19)

ד

עֶצֶם שֶׁהַמּוֹחַ מֻנָּח בְּתוֹכוֹ יֵשׁ בּוֹ חָלָל גָּדוֹל כְּמוֹ קְדֵרָה, וְיֵשׁ עַל פִּיהָ כְּלַפֵּי הַצַּוָּאר כְּמוֹ ב' פּוֹלִין, (טז) וְכָל מַה שֶּׁיֵּשׁ מֵהַמּוֹחַ בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּדֵרָה עַד הַפּוֹלִין, וְהַפּוֹלִין בִּכְלָל, (יז) נִדּוֹן כְּמוֹחַ וּנְקִיבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ, (יח) וּמִשָּׁם וְאֵילָךְ נִדּוֹן כְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה. (יט)

(16) Like two beans – This applies regarding [both] an animal and a fowl (Gemara).112
(17) Including [the glands] – This refers to [the portion of] the brain which is parallel to [the glands] (Rashi).113
(18) Even the slightest perforation [disqualifies it] – The intent is that even the slightest perforation of the brain’s membrane [disqualifies the animal] (Rashi).114
(19) As the spinal cord and [is] judged [according to the rules governing it] – [The laws pertaining to the spinal cord are more lenient than those pertaining to the brain. An animal or fowl is disqualified only if] the greater portion of [the spinal cord’s] membrane is perforated, as stated in sec. 32[:1], below.
(טז) ב' פּוֹלִין. בֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה בֵּין בְּעוֹף (גְּמָרָאקמט):
(יז) וְהַפּוֹלִין בַּכְּלָל. פֵּרוּשׁ מוֹחַ שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַפּוֹלִין (רַשִׁ"יקנ):
(יח) וּנְקִיבָתוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ. פֵּרוּשׁ נְקִיבַת קְרוּמוֹ בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ (רַשִׁ"יקנא):
(יט) כְּחוּט הַשִּׁדְרָה. וּנְקִיבַת קְרוּמוֹ בְּרֻבּוֹ כְּדִלְקַמָּן סִימָן ל"ב:קנב