Enter your email address to get our weekly email with fresh, exciting and thoughtful content that will enrich your inbox and your life.

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Shechitah - Chapter 6, Shechitah - Chapter 7, Shechitah - Chapter 8

Video & Audio Classes
Show content in:

Shechitah - Chapter 6

1

What is meant by nekuvah?1 There are eleven organs that if there is a perforation of the slightest size that reaches their inner cavity, [the animal] is trefe. They are:2 the entrance to the gullet,3 the membrane of the brain in the skull, the heart and its large arteries, the gall-bladder, the arteries leading to the liver, the maw,4 the stomach, the abdomen, the gut, the intestines, and the lung and the bronchia.

א

נקובה כיצד, אחד עשר איברים הן שאם ניקב אחד מהן לחללו במשהו טרפה ואלו הן: תרבץ הושט, וקרום של מוח הראש, והלב עם הקנה שלו, והמרה, וקנה הכבד, והקיבה, והכרס, והמסס, ובית הכוסות, והדקין, והריאה עם הקנה שלה.

2

We have already mentioned the definition of the entrance to the gullet.5 It refers to a portion of the esophagus above the gullet which is not fit for ritual slaughter. If there is a perforation of the slightest size that reaches its inner cavity, [the animal] is trefe.

ב

תרבץ הושט כבר ביארנו שיעורו ושהוא המקום מן הושט שאינו ראוי לשחיטה למעלה מן הושט אם ניקב לחללו במה שהוא טריפה.

3

The brain in the skull has two membranes. If the outer one near the skull bone alone is perforated, [the animal] is permitted.6 If the lower one near the brain is perforated, it is trefe.7 With regard to the portion where the brain extends to the spinal cord, i.e., the portion below the glands where the neck begins, the laws governing [the perforation of] its membranes change.8 If they are perforated beyond the glands, [the animal] is permitted.

ג

שני קרומות יש למוח שבראש, אם ניקב העליון הסמוך לעצם בלבד הרי זו מותרת, ואם ניקב התחתון הסמוך למוח טרפה, ומשיתחיל המוח להמשך לשדרה והוא מחוץ לפולין שהן תחלת העורף יהיה לקרומו דין אחר, ואם ניקב חוץ לפולין מותר.

4

When the brain itself is perforated9 or crushed, [the animal] is acceptable if its membrane is intact.10 If, however, [it has degenerated to the extent that] it can be poured like water or melts like wax, [the animal] is trefe.11

ד

המוח עצמו שניקב או נתמעך והקרום קיים כשרה, ואם נשפך כמים או נמס כדונג טריפה.

5

When there is a perforation of the heart to its inner cavity - whether to the larger cavity on the left or the smaller cavity to the right - [the animal] is trefe. If, however, the flesh of the heart is perforated, but the perforation does not reach the inner cavity, [the animal] is permitted.12 The arteries leading from the heart to the lung is considered as the heart itself. If there is a perforation of the slightest size that reaches its inner cavity, [the animal] is trefe.

ה

הלב שניקב לבית חללו, בין לחלל גדול שבשמאל בין לחלל קטן שבימין טרפה, אבל אם ניקב בשר הלב ולא הגיע לחללו מותר, וקנה הלב והוא המזרק הגדול שיוצא ממנו לריאה הרי הוא כלב ואם ניקב לחללו במשהו טריפה.

6

When the gall-bladder is perforated and the liver seals it, [the animal] is permitted.13 If, however, the perforation is not sealed, it is trefe even if the perforation is located close to the liver.

ו

מרה שניקבה וכבד סותמה מותרת, ואם לא נסתם הנקב אע"פ שהוא סמוך לכבד טרפה.

7

[The following rules apply when] a kernel14 is found in the gall-bladder. If it was shaped like a date seed, i.e., its head is not pointed, [the animal] is permitted.15If, however, its head is pointed like an olive seed, it is forbidden, for we can assume that it perforated [the gall bladder] when it entered. [The reason that] the perforation cannot be seen is that a scab developed over the opening of the wound.16

ז

נזייה שנמצאת במרה אם היתה כמו גרעינה של תמרה שאין ראשה חד מותרת, ואם ראש חד כגרעינת הזית אסורה, שהרי ניקבה אותה כשנכנסה, וזה שלא יראה הנקב מפני שהוגלד פי המכה.

8

When there is a perforation of the slightest size in one of the arteries of the liver where the blood develops, [the animal] is trefe.17 Accordingly, [the following rules apply] if a needle is found in the lobes of the liver. If it was a large needle and its pointed edge was facing inward, it can be assumed that it perforated [the liver] when it entered. If its rounded edge was facing inward, we say that it entered through the blood vessels and [the animal] is permitted.18

ח

קני הכבד והן המזרקין שבו שבהן הדם מתבשל, אם ניקב אחד מהן במשהו טרפה, לפיכך מחט שנמצאת בחיתוך הכבד אם היתה מחט גדולה והיה הקצה החד שלה לפנים בידוע שניקבה כשנכנסה ואם היה הראש העגול לפנים אומרין דרך סימפונות הלכה ומותרת. 62

9

If it was a small needle, [the animal] is trefe, because both of its heads are sharp and it certainly perforated [the liver].19 If it is found in the large blood vessel, the wide artery through which food enters the liver,20 it is permitted.21 If the flesh of the liver became wormridden, [the animal] is permitted.22

ט

היתה מחט קטנה הרי זה טרפה מפני ששני ראשיה חדין ודאי ניקבה, ואם נמצאת בסימפון הגדול שבכבד והוא הקנה הרחב שבאמצע שבו נכנס המאכל לכבד הרי זה מותרת, ובשר כבד שהתליע מותרת.

10

When the maw is perforated and kosher fat23 seals [the perforation], [the animal] is permitted. Similarly, whenever a perforation is sealed by flesh or fat that is permitted to be eaten, [the animal] is permitted. The [only] exceptions are the fat of the heart,24 the membrane that is above the entire heart, the diaphragm in the midst of the belly that separates between the digestive organs and the respiratory organs, i.e., the one that when it is cut open, the lungs could be seen and which is called the membrane [above] the liver, the white place in the center [of the liver], and the fat of the colon. In these organs, we do not say that they shield [the perforation] because they are firm.25 A perforation that is sealed with one of these is not considered as sealed.

A portion of fat from a beast that corresponds to a portion of forbidden fat in a domesticated animal does not seal [a perforation] even though it is permitted to be eaten.26

י

קיבה שניקבה וחלב טהור סותם את הנקב מותרת, וכן כל נקב שהבשר או החלב המותר באכילה סותם אותו הרי זה מותר, חוץ מחלב הלב והקרום שעל הלב כולו, והמחיצה שבאמצע הבטן המבדלת בין איברי המאכל ואיברי הנשימה, והיא שקורעין אותה ואחר כך תראה הריאה, והיא הנקראת טרפש הכבד, והמקום הלבן שבאמצעה, וחלב המעי האחרון שבאיברים אלו, אין מגינין לפי שהן קשין, ונקב שנסתם באחד מהן אינו כסתום, וחלב חיה שכנגדו בבהמה אסור אינו סותם אע"פ שהוא מותר באכילה.

11

When the stomach is perforated, [the animal] is trefe. There is nothing that can seal it for the fat upon it is forbidden.27 Similarly, when there is a perforation of the abdomen or gut that extends to its outer periphery, [the animal] is trefe. If one of them was perforated and the perforation leads to the cavity of the other,28 [the animal] is permitted.29

יא

כרס שניקב טריפה, ואין לו דבר שיסתום אותו, שהרי החלב שעליו אסור, וכן המסס ובית הכוסות שניקב אחד מהן לחוץ טרפה, ואם נקב אחד מהן לתוך חלל חבירו מותרת.

12

[The following rules apply when] a needle is found in the folds of the gut: If it was from one side,30 [the animal] is permitted.31 If it caused a complete perforation extending [from the outer side] to the cavity of the gut and a drop of blood was found at the place of the perforation, [the animal] is trefe. For we are certain that the perforation occurred before the slaughter. If there is no blood at the place of the perforation,32 [the animal] is permitted. For we are certain that after the slaughter, under pressure the needle caused the perforation.33

יב

מחט שנמצאת בעובי בית הכוסות מצד אחד כשירה, ואם נקבה נקב מפולש לתוך חלל בית הכוסות, ונמצאת טיפת דם במקום הנקב טרפה שודאי קודם שחיטה ניקב, אבל אם אין דם במקום הנקב הרי זה מותר שודאי אחר שחיטה דחקה המחט ונקבה. 63

13

When an animal swallowed a substance that will perforate the intestines, e.g., the root of the asafetida34 plant or the like, it is trefe, for we can be certain that it perforated them. If there is a question whether or not a perforation was made,35 [the animal] must be inspected.36

When one of the organs of the digestive system through which the food waste passes, i.e., the intestines, are perforated, [the animal] is trefe. Among them are those which are curved and surrounded by each other like a snake that is coiled, they are referred to as the small intestines. If one of them was perforated [on the side where] another [is located], the animal is permitted, for the other [intestine] will shield [the perforation].

יג

בהמה שהלעיטה דבר שנוקב בני מעיה כגון קורט של חלתית וכיוצא בו טרפה שודאי נוקב, ואם היה ספק נוקב ספק אינו נוקב תבדק, כל אחד מן בני המעים שפסולת המאכל סובבת בהן והן הנקראים דקין שניקב טרפה, ויש מהן מלופפין ומוקפין זו לפנים מזו בעיגול כמו נחש שנכרך ואלו הן הנקראים הדרא דכנתה אם ניקב אחד מהן לחבירו כשירה, שהרי חבירו מגין עליו. 64

14

When the digestive organs were perforated and viscous body fluids seal them, [the animal] is trefe for this seal will not endure.37

When a wolf, a dog, or the like, snatched [an animal's] intestines38 and they were perforated after they were abandoned, we surmise that [the predator caused the perforation and the slaughtered animal] is permitted. We do not say that perhaps [the predator] made a perforation in a place where one already existed.39

If [an intestine] was discovered to be perforated40 and it was not known whether it was perforated before [the animal's] slaughter41 or afterwards, we perforate it again and compare the two. If the first perforation resembles this one, [the animal] is kosher.42 If there was a difference between them, [we presume that the first] occurred before the slaughter and [the animal] is trefe. If the perforation in doubt was handled, the perforation to which it is being compared must also be handled before the comparison is made.

יד

ומעים שניקבו וליחה סותמתן טריפה שאין זו סתימה עומדת, בני מעים שבא זאב או כלב וכיוצא בהן ונטלן והרי הן נקובין אחר שהניחן תולין בו ומותרת ואין אומרין שמא במקום נקב ניקב, נמצאו נקובין ולא נודע אם קודם שחיטה ניקבו אם אחר שחיטה נוקבין בהן נקב אחר ומדמין לו, אם היה הנקב הראשון כמותו כשרה, ואם היה ביניהן שינוי קודם שחיטה ניקב וטרפה, ואם משמשו הידים בנקב הספק כך צריך למשמש בנקב שמדמין לו ואחר כך עורכין זה לזה.

15

When [an animal's] digestive organs protrude outside [its body] without having been perforated,43 [the animal] is permitted. If they were turned upside down,44 [the animal] is trefe even if they were not perforated. [The rationale is that] once [the digestive organs] have been turned upside down,45they will never return to their ordinary functioning and [the animal] will not live.

טו

בני מעיים שיצאו לחוץ ולא ניקבו מותרת ואם נתהפכו אף על פי שלא ניקבו טרפה, שאי אפשר שיחזרו כמות שהיו אחר שנהפכו ואינה חיה.

16

The final digestive organ that is straight and not curved from which feces are excreted in the genital area and is joined [to the body] between the thighs is called the colon. If it is perforated even slightly, [the animal] is trefe,46 as applies with regard to the other digestive organs.

When does the above apply? When the perforation faced the cavity of the belly. When, however, it was perforated at the point where it is joined between the thighs, [the animal] is permitted.47 [Indeed,] even if the entire place where it is joined between the thighs is removed, [the animal] is permitted, provided a length of at least four fingerbreadths48 remains in an ox.49

טז

המעי האחרון שהוא שוה ואין בו עיקום והוא שהרעי יוצא בו מן הערוה והוא דבוק בין עיקרי היריכים הוא הנקרא חלחולת אם ניקב במשהו טרפה כשאר המעים, במה דברים אמורים שניקב לחלל הבטן אבל אם נקב במקום הדבוק ביריכים מותרת ואפילו נטל ממנו מקום הדבק כולו מותרת והוא שישתייר מארכו בשור כמו ארבע אצבעות.

17

A fowl does not have a stomach, an abdomen, or a gut. Instead of them, it has a crop and a craw.50

All the factors that render an animal trefe apply equally to a domesticated animal, a wild beast, and a fowl.51

When the roof of the crop receives even the slightest perforation, [the animal] is trefe. What is meant by the roof of the crop? That which becomes extended with the gullet when the fowl extends its neck.52 If, however, the remainder of the crop becomes perforated, [the fowl] is permitted.

יז

העוף אין לו כרס ולא המסס ולא בית הכוסות, אבל יש לו כנגדן זפק וקרקבן, וכל הטרפות שוות הן בבהמה חיה ועוף, וזפק שניקב גגו במשהו טרפה ואי זהו גגו של זפק זה שימתח עם הושט כשיאריך העוף צוארו אבל שאר הזפק שניקב מותר.

18

The craw has two [membranes] covering it. The outer one is red like meat; the inner one is white like skin. If one was perforated and not the other, [the fowl] is permitted unless they are both perforated, even slightly. If they are both perforated, but in places that do not correspond, [the fowl] is permitted.53

יח

שני כיסין יש בקרקבן, החיצון אדום כמו בשר, והפנימי לבן כמו עור, ניקב זה בלא זה מותרת עד שינקבו שניהן במשהו, ואם ניקבו שניהן זה שלא כנגד זה מותר.

19

The spleen is not one of the limbs which is disqualified because of a perforation of even the slightest size. Therefore our Sages did not include it in that category. Instead, a perforation that disqualifies it has a measure which is not uniform throughout it.

What is implied? One of the ends of the spleen is thick and the other thin, like the shape of the tongue. If the thick end was perforated by a hole that extends from side to side, [the animal] is trefe. If the hole does not extend from side to side, [more lenient rules apply]: If a portion the thickness of a golden dinar remains,54 [the animal] is permitted. If less than that remains, [the perforation] is considered as if it extends from side to side and [the animal] is trefe. If the thin side is perforated, [the animal] is acceptable.55

יט

הטחול אינו מן האיברין שנקיבתן במשהו ולפיכך לא מנו אותו חכמים בכללן אלא יש לנקב שלו שיעור שאינו שוה בכולו, כיצד הטחול ראשו האחד עבה והשני דק כבריית הלשון, אם ניקב בראש העבה נקב מפולש טרפה, ואם ניקב נקב שאינו מפולש אם נשאר תחתיו כעובי דינר של זהב מותר פחות מכאן הרי הוא כמפולש וטרפה, אבל אם ניקב הדק כשרה.

20

[The following principle applies with regard to] all of the organs concerning which our Sages said that even the slightest perforation [causes the animal to be considered] trefe. If [that organ] was removed entirely, [the animal] is trefe.56 This applies whether it was eliminated through sickness, removed by hand, or [the animal] was created lacking the organ.

The same laws also apply if it was created with two of that organ, for any extra limb or organ is considered as if it was lacking.57

What is implied? If one of an animal's or fowl's digestive organs, its gall-bladder,58 or the like was removed, it is trefe. Similarly if it was discovered to have two gall-bladders or two of a [particular digestive] organ, it is trefe. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. If, however, the spleen was removed or two spleens were found, [the animal] is permitted, for [that organ] is not among those listed [by our Sages in this category].

כ

כל אבר שאמרו חכמים בו שאם ניקב במשהו טרפה כך אם ניטל כולו טרפה, בין שניטל בחולי או ביד בין שנברא חסר, וכן אם נברא בשני איברים מאותו אבר טרפה שכל היתר כנטול הוא חשוב, כיצד ניטל אחד מן המעים או המרה וכיוצא בהן בין בעוף בין בבהמה טרפה, וכן אם נמצא בהן שתי מררות או שני מעים טרפה וכן כל כיוצא בהן, אבל אם ניטל הטחול או שנמצאו שנים מותרת שאינו בכלל המנויין.

21

[The statement that] an extra digestive organ causes an animal to be considered trefe applies only when there is an entire extra organ from its beginning to its end and thus two digestive organs are found next to each other as is [sometimes found in] the digestive organs of a fowl59 or the extra organ projects outward like a branch from a bough and it is a separate entity.60 [The latter applies] whether in a fowl or in an animal. If, however, the extra organ returns and becomes combined with the main organ and they are fused at the two ends61 even though they are separate in the middle, [the animal] is permitted and the organ is not considered as extra.

כא

המעי היתר שתטרף בו הבהמה הוא היתר מתחלתו ועד סופו עד שנמצאו שני מעים זה בצד זה מתחלה ועד סוף כמעי העוף או שהיה המעי יוצא כענף מן הבד והרי הוא מובדל בין בעוף בין בבהמה, אבל אם חזר ונתערב עם המעי ונעשה אחד משני ראשיו והרי שניהם מובדלין באמצע הרי זו מותרת ואין כאן יתר..

Footnotes
1.

The term literally means "perforated."

2.

The Rambam explains the particular laws regarding the perforation of these organs in this chapter with the exception of those concerning the lung. The latter, because they are many and are of more common application, are given greater focus and an entire chapter, Chapter 7, is devoted to them.

3.

If the gullet itself is perforated, the animal is considered a nevelah as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 13.

4.

A kosher domesticated animal has four stomachs. If any one of them is perforated, the animal is trefe. This and the following three terms refer to those stomachs.

5.

See Chapter 1, Halachah 6.

6.

The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 31:1) quotes authorities who maintain that even if the upper membrane alone is perforated, the animal is trefe. He states that unless a significant loss is involved, this perspective should be followed. The Turei Zahav 31:1 and the Siftei Cohen 31:1 quote views that advocate stringency even if a significant loss is involved.

7.

There is a question among the commentaries with regard to the law if only the bottom membrane is perforated. Many Rishonim - and this is the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 31:10) - rule that the animal is considered trefe in such a situation, for that membrane is the primary protection for the brain.

There are those who maintain that this is alluded to in the Rambam's wording: "If the lower one near the brain is perforated, it is trefe," i.e., its perforation alone causes the animal to be considered trefe. Others maintain that this is not the Rambam's intent and some even maintain that the proper version of the text is "If also the lower one...," which would imply that both membranes must be perforated.

[The more stringent ruling is also stated in the popular translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 3:1). However, Rav Kappach - while not disputing the ruling - maintains that the translation there is in error.]

8.

Instead, it is governed by the laws pertaining to the breach of the spinal cord, as described in Chapter 9, Law 1.

9.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro quotes a different version substituting nirkav ("decayed") for nikeiv ("perforated"). He also quotes this version in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 31:2).

10.

For the animal will still be able to function.

11.

In Chapter 10, the Kessef Mishneh includes this - as the implication from the Rambam's order here - in the category of nekuvah. For in such a situation, ultimately, the brain's membrane will become perforated.

12.

The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 40:2) follows the opinion of the Tur who accepts the Rambam's ruling with regard to a perforation stemming from sickness, but rules more stringently with regard to a perforation caused by a thorn or a needle. In such an instance, even if the perforation does not extend to the cavity of the heart, the animal is trefe.

13.

For flesh will cling to flesh .

14.

Needless to say, these laws apply when a needle or a thorn is found in the gall-bladder [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 42:9)].

15.

We assume that instead of perforating the gall bladder from the outside, it entered through the blood vessels and became lodged there.

16.

And as indicated by Chapter 3, Halachah 21, the sealing of a perforation by a scab is not significant in these contexts.

17.

The Ra'avad and other Rishonim take issue with the Rambam, maintaining that this ruling applies only with regard to the arteries leading to the liver, but not with regard to those within the liver itself. The Rivosh (Responsum 189) supports the challenge to the Rambam by citing the ruling (Chapter 8, Halachah 21) that if the liver is removed entirely except for a small portion, the animal is not trefe.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro explains the Rambam's position as follows: Even when the liver is removed, its blood vessels must remain intact. A parallel to that concept exists with regard to the lungs (see Chapter 7, Halachah 9). Nevertheless, in his Shulchan Aruch, he follows the position of the other Rishonim and does not mention a perforation in the liver as a factor that disqualifies an animal.

18.

Here also the Ra'avad and other Rishonim take issue with the Rambam, maintaining that his understanding of Chullin 45b, the source for this halachah, is in error. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 41:6) follow their understanding.

19.

I.e., regardless of the direction it entered.

20.

I.e., blood from the stomach; for food does not enter the liver.

21.

Since this blood vessel is large, it cannot be taken for granted that the needle perforated the blood vessel.

22.

We do not suspect that the blood vessels of the liver were perforated.

23.

See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, ch. 7, for an explanation which fat is kosher and which is forbidden. Halachah 6, of that chapter speaks explicitly of the fat on the maw.

24.

Concerning this point, there is a difference of opinion among the Rishonim. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 40:1) follows the lenient view and permits the animal in such a situation, while the Rama follows the more stringent perspective.

25.

And thus they will not bend in a manner that will seal the perforation. Kosher fat and flesh, by contrast, are pliable and will seal any perforation over which they are located.

26.

All fat in a wild beast is permitted to be eaten. Hence, in this instance, the general principle stated above is not followed and we determine which fat can seal a perforation by comparing it to the corresponding situation in a domesticated animal.

With regard to a fowl, all its kosher fat will seal a perforation beneath it [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 46:1)].

27.

The Turei Zahav 48:2 questions: Seemingly, the spleen should be able to seal it, for the spleen may be eaten and lies on the stomach. He explains that since the membrane covering the spleen is forbidden, it is not an effective seal.

28.

This is possible for some of these stomachs are located within each other.

29.

For the perforation will not reach beyond the digestive system.

30.

From the following clause, it appears that according to the Rambam, this refers to a needle lodged in the outer side of the gut. See the following note.

31.

There are other authorities (their perspective is reflected in the objections of the Ra'avad) who maintain that even in this instance, an examination is required. Moreover, they explain that we are speaking about a needle lodged in the inner side of the gut. If a needle is lodged in the outer side of the gut, according to this view, the animal is trefe.

According to the Rambam, as mentioned above, we are speaking about a needle that comes from the outside. As the Rambam states in Chapter 11, Halachah 4, in such an instance, all of the inner organs of the body must be checked (Kessef Mishneh). Thus this halachah is speaking only with regard to the gut. Since the perforation does not breach the digestive system, the animal is not considered trefe.

Both perspectives are based on a comparison of two Talmudic passages (Chullin 50b and 51a) that are difficult to reconcile. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 48:8,10) follows the perspective of the other authorities. The Rama cites the Rambam's perspective with regard to a hole made on the inside that does not pass from one side to the other and states we may rely on it in a situation where a severe financial loss is involved.

32.

The Ra'avad and the other authorities state that the drop of blood must be found on the outer side of the gut.

33.

Since the animal was slaughtered, it blood was not flowing and it is unlikely that there will be sufficient pressure to force it outside the gut.

34.

A yellow-brown, bitter, offensive-smelling resinous material used for medicinal purposes in the ancient Middle East.

35.

The Maggid Mishneh, the Tur (Yoreh De'ah 51), and others quote a different version of the Mishneh Torah concerning which questions are raised. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the version translated here and the Frankel edition of the Mishneh Torah states that it is followed by most of the authoritative manuscripts.

36.

The Ra'avad states that the inspection of the intestines is difficult. That position is reflected in the ruling of the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 51:4) who rules that in such a situation, because of its questionable status, the animal is considered as trefe.

37.

When the digestive system is under pressure, the vicious fluids will not seal effectively. The Siftei Cohen 46:1 states that the same ruling applies even if a scab has developed over the wound.

38.

I.e., after the animal was slaughtered.

39.

Chullin 9a explains that, unless there is a known factor that certainly indicates otherwise, we assume that an animal that has been slaughtered is acceptable. In this instance, the perforation would lead us to rule stringently. Nevertheless, since the fact that it was snatched by a predator can serve as an explanation, we rely on the original assumption. Accordingly, for this ruling to apply, we must know that the animal was slaughtered properly [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 25:3)].

40.

As indicated by the Rambam's explanation, in this instance, we do not know how it was perforated.

41.

In which instance, the animal would be considered as trefe.

42.

The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 50:1) rules that in the present generation, we are not knowledgeable regarding the making of such a comparison and hence, forbid the animal because of the doubt.

43.

I.e., the animal's belly was cut open while it was alive. It could no longer support the digestive organs and they protruded beyond the skin. Nevertheless, the digestive organs themselves were not blemished.

44.

As might happen if a person was trying to reinsert them into the animal's belly.

45.

The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 46:2) rules that if an animal's digestive organs are discovered to have turned upside down, the animal is trefe, even if the organs did not fall out of its belly.

46.

Even though the fat upon it is kosher, it does not seal it [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 46:1); see also Halachah 10].

47.

For the thighs will support it (Chullin 50a).

48.

The Rambam (based on Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi) considers this the meaning of the term "in order to grasp it" used by Chullin, loc. cit. Although there are more lenient views, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 46:5) follows the Rambam's ruling.

According to Shiurei Torah , a fingerbreadth is 2 cm, according to Chazon Ish 2.48 cm.

49.

For other animals, the minimum measure is calculated proportionately (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.).

50.

Unlike a domesticated animal that has four stomachs, a kosher fowl has two.

51.

I.e., though the laws above were stated with regard to a domesticated animal, they apply equally to a beast and to a fowl if they possess the same organs.

52.

Hence just as the perforation of the gullet disqualifies a fowl; so, too, the perforation of this portion of the crop (see Chullin 58b).

53.

Compare this entire halachah to Chapter 3, Halachah 20, concerning the gullet, noting the similarities and differences.

54.

This is less than half the thickness of the spleen (Rashba as quoted by the Kessef Mishneh).

55.

This applies with regard to an animal and a beast. More lenient rules apply with regard to a fowl and the perforation of its spleen never causes it to be considered as trefe, as stated in Chapter 10, Halachah 10.

56.

Since the perforation of an organ impairs its functioning to the point that the animal is trefe, the implication is that the organ must function excellently for the body to be maintained. Hence, we can certainly assume that an animal will be considered trefe when the organ does not exist at all.

57.

The commentaries explain that since the organ is duplicated, neither one of the two organs will be able to function satisfactorily. Thus it is as the animal is lacking that organ entirely.

58.

The Radbaz states that if we do not see a gall-bladder, we have the liver tasted. If its taste is bitter, we assume that the gall-bladder was absorbed by the liver. See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:3).

59.

Thus this phenomenon does not render a fowl trefe, only an animal (Chullin 58b).

60.

The Siftei Cohen 47:1 rules that this applies only when the extra organ branches off from the stomach. If it branches off from the intestines, it is acceptable.

61.

If, however, each of the organs branches of from a different place in the animal's digestive system, the animal is trefe even if the organs merge at their end (Maggid Mishneh).

62.

קני הכבד והן המזרקין שבו שבהן הדם. א"א כמדומה לי שהוא סובר על הנקבים [ס"א הקנים] דכבדא כריאה שאפילו על מה שיש מהם בתוך הכבד נאמר שאם ניקב במשהו טריפה ואינו כן ואין חכם שיסבור כן אלא מה שנתפשט ממנו לריאה והוא חוץ לכבד ועל כן אינו חשש נקב בכבד בשביל נקב עצמו אלא שמא דרך הושט בא לו לכבד. /השגת הראב"ד/ והיה הקצה החד שלה בפנים בידוע שניקבה. א"א אין בכאן תבלין ולא מלח והמבין יבין ואין כאן ודאי נקובה.

63.

מחט שנמצאת בעובי בית הכוסות כשרה ואם ניקבה נקב מפולש. א"א אין זה מיושר. /השגת הראב"ד/ ונמצאת טיפת דם במקום הנקב. א"א הטיפה צריכה שתמצא מבחוץ.

64.

ואם היה ספק נוקב ספק לא נוקב. א"א קשה בדיקת הדקין.

Shechitah - Chapter 7

1

The lungs have two membranes. If only one of them is perforated, [the animal] is permitted.1 If they are both perforated, [the animal] is trefe.2 Even if the entire upper membrane3 is peeled off and dissolves, [the animal] is permitted. If there was even a slight perforation in the portion of windpipe in the chest4 or lower, [the animal] is trefe. For this is a place in the lower portion of the windpipe that is not fit for ritual slaughter.5

א

שני קרומות יש על הריאה אם ניקב זה בלא זה מותרת, ואם ניקבו שניהן טרפה אפילו נגלד הקרום העליון כולו והלך לו מותרת, והקנה שניקב מן החזה ולמטה במשהו טרפה, והוא המקום שאינו ראוי לשחיטה בקנה למטה.

2

If a person began slaughtering the animal and slit the windpipe entirely, then perforated the lung, and afterwards, completed the slaughter, [the animal] is trefe, for [the lung] was perforated before the completion of the slaughter.6 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

ב

התחיל בשחיטה ושחט כל הקנה ואחר כך ניקבה הריאה ואחר כך גמר השחיטה הרי זו טרפה, הואיל וניקבה קודם גמר שחיטה וכן כל כיוצא בזה.

3

If one of the bronchioles7 was perforated, even if the perforation is covered by another bronchiole, [the animal] is trefe.8 If one saw that it was perforated and then it developed a scab, [the scab] is of no consequence.9

If the mass of the lung is perforated, [the animal] is trefe, even if one of the ribs seals the perforation.10 If it was perforated in a place where the lung breaks into lobes and the lobe lies on [a rib, the animal] is kosher.11

ג

אחד מסמפוני ריאה שניקב אפילו ניקב לחבירו טרפה, וריאה שניקבה ועלה קרום במכה ונסתם הנקב אינו כלום, ניקבה האום של ריאה אע"פ שדופן סותמתה טרפה, ואם ניקבה במקום חתוך האונות שלה והוא המקום שרובצת עליו כשרה.

4

When does the above apply? When the perforation in the lobes is sealed by flesh.12 If, however, the perforation is pressed against the bone, it does not protect it.13 If, however, the perforation in the lobes was clinging both to the bone and the flesh, [the animal] is permitted.

ד

במה דברים אמורים כשסתם מקום הנקב שבאונות בשר, אבל אם נסמך הנקב לעצם אינו מגין, ואם היה נקב האונות דבוק בעצם ובבשר מותרת. 58

5

When the body of the lung is found adhering to the ribs, we suspect that it was perforated. [This applies] whether or not growths14 appeared on it.

What do we [to check it]? We separate it from the rib while taking care not to perforate it. If it is discovered to be perforated and a bruise is discovered on the rib in the place where it was perforated, we assume that the perforation was caused by the bruise.15 If there was no bruise on the rib, it is clear that this perforation existed within the lung before the animal was slaughtered and it is trefe.16

ה

האום של ריאה שנמצאת סמוכה לדופן, בין שהעלת צמחים בין שלא העלת חוששין לה שמא ניקבה, וכיצד עושין בה מפרקין אותה מן הדופן ונזהרין בה שלא תנקב, אם נמצאת נקובה ונמצא בדופן מכה במקום הנקב תולין במכה ואומרים אחר שחיטה ניקבה כשנפרק מן המכה, ואם אין מכה בדופן בידוע שנקב זה בריאה היה קודם השחיטה וטרפה. 59

6

When it is discovered that there is a closed place in the lung which air does not enter and it does not inflate, it is as if it had been perforated and [the animal] is trefe.17

How do we inspect it? We cut off the portion [of the lung]18 that would not inflate when [air was] blown [into the lung]. If fluid was discovered within it,19 it is permitted, because it was due to the fluid that the air did not enter. If no fluid is found within, we put some saliva, a straw, a feather or the like over [the separated portion] and blow air into it. If they move, [the animal] is kosher.20If not, it is trefe, because air does not enter [that portion of the lung].

ו

הריאה שנמצא בה מקום אטום כל שהוא שאין הרוח נכנסת בו ואינו נתפח הרי זו כנקובה וטרפה, וכיצד בודקין אותו, קורעין המקום שלא נתפח בשעת נפיחה אם נמצאת בו לחה מותרת שמחמת הלחה לא נכנסה שם הרוח, ואם לא נמצאת בו לחה נותנין עליו מעט רוק או תבן או כנף וכיוצא בהן ונופחין אותה אם נתנדנד כשרה ואם לאו טרפה שאין הרוח נכנסת לשם.

7

[The following rules apply when] a sound is heard when a lung is inflated. If the place from which the sound emanates can be detected, saliva, a straw, or the like should be placed over it. If they flutter, it is apparent that the lung is perforated and [the animal] is trefe.

If the place [from which the sound emanates] cannot be detected, the lung should be placed in lukewarm21 water and blown. If the water bubbles, [the animal] is trefe.22 If not, it is apparent that only the lower membrane has been perforated, the air is moving between the two membranes. For this reason, it will be possible to hear a hushed sound when it is inflated.

ז

ריאה שתשמע בה הברה כשנופחין אותה אם ניכר המקום שממנו תשמע ההברה מושיבין עליו רוק או תבן וכיוצא בו, אם נתנדנד בידוע שהיא נקובה וטרפה, ואם לא ניכר המקום מושיבין אותה במים פושרין ונופחין אותה, אם בקבק המים טרפה, ואם לאו בידוע שקרום התחתון בלבד ניקב והרוח תנהג בין שני הקרומות ומפני זה ישמע בה קול דממה בשעת נפיחה.

8

Keep this encompassing general principle in mind: Whenever air was blown into a lung that was placed in lukewarm water and the water did not bubble, [the lung] is intact, without a perforation.23

ח

זה עיקר גדול יהיה בידך שכל ריאה שנופחין אותה בפושרין ולא יבקבק המים הרי היא שלימה מכל נקב. 60

9

[The following laws apply when the insides of] a lung24 can be poured out like [water from] a pitcher, but the outer membrane is intact, without a perforation. If the bronchioles remain in their place and have not degenerated, it is acceptable. If even one of the bronchioles have degenerated, it is trefe.25

What should be done? We perforate [the membrane of the lung] and pour it out into a container glazed with lead26 or the like. If white strands can be seen, it is apparent that the bronchioles have degenerated27 and it is trefe. If not, it is only the flesh of the lung that has degenerated and [the animal] is acceptable.28

ט

ריאה שנשפכה כקיתון וקרום העליון שלה קיים שלם בלא נקב, אם הסמפונות עומדים במקומם ולא נמוחו כשרה, ואם נמוח אפילו סמפון אחד טרפה, כיצד עושין נוקבין אותה ושופכין אותה בכלי שהוא שוע באבר וכיוצא בו, אם נראה בה חוטין לבנין בידוע שנימוקו הסמפונות וטרפה, ואם לאו בשר הריאה בלבד הוא שנמוק וכשרה.

10

[The following rules apply when] boils29 are discovered on a lung. If they are filled with air, clear water, fluid that is viscous like honey or the like, dried fluid that is firm like a stone, [the animal] is permitted. If putrid fluid or putrid or murky liquid is found within it, it is trefe.30 When one removes the fluid and checks it, one should check the bronchiole below it. If it is discovered to be perforated, it is trefe.31

י

ריאה שנמצאו בה אבעבועות אם היו מלאים רוח או מים זכים או לחה הנמשכת כדבש וכיוצא בו או לחה יבשה וקשה אפילו כאבן הרי זו מותרת, ואם נמצאת בהן לחה סרוחה או מים סרוחין או עכורין הרי זו טרפה, וכשמוציא הלחה ובודק אותה צריך לבדוק הסמפון שתחתיה אם נמצא נקוב טרפה.

11

When one discovers two boils on a lung close to each other, [the animal] is trefe,32 for it is very likely that there is a perforation between them33 and there is no way of checking the matter. If there is one which appears like two, one should perforate one, if the other flows into it, it is only one and [the animal] is permitted.34 If not, [the animal] is trefe.

יא

ריאה שנמצאו בה שתי אבעבועות סמוכות זו לזו טרפה, שהדבר קרוב הרבה שיש נקב ביניהן ואין להן דרך בדיקה, היתה אחת ונראה כשתים נוקבין האחת אם שפכה לה האחרת אחת היא ומותרת ואם לאו טרפה.

12

If the lung degenerated, [the animal] is trefe. What is implied? For example, it was discovered intact and when it is hung up, it will break apart and fall into separate pieces.

When a lung was discovered to be perforated in the place where it was handled by the butcher's hand, the animal is permitted. We assume that [it was blemished by his] hand and say: "It was perforated by the butcher's hand after slaughter."35

If the perforation was discovered in another place and it is not known whether it took place before ritual slaughter or afterwards, we make another perforation and compare the two as is done with regard to the digestive organs.36

יב

הריאה שנתמסמסה טרפה, כיצד כגון שנמצאת שלימה וכשתולין אותה תחתך ותפול חתיכות חתיכות, ריאה שנמצאת נקובה במקום שיד הטבח ממשמש מותרת ותולין בידו ואומרין מיד הטבח ניקבה אחר השחיטה, נמצא הנקב במקום אחר ואין ידוע אם קודם שחיטה או אחר שחיטה נוקבין בה נקב אחר ומדמין כשם שעושים בבני מעיים.

13

We do not compare the lung of a small domesticated animal to the lung of a large domesticated animal. Instead, [the lung of] a small animal [must be compared to that] of a small animal and that of a large animal to that of a large animal.37

If a perforation is found in one of the boils of a lung, [the animal] is trefe. We do not say: "Perforate another boil and compare them,"38 because the matter is not clearly apparent.39

יג

ואין מדמין מריאה של בהמה דקה לריאה של בהמה גסה אלא מדקה לדקה ומגסה לגסה, נמצא הנקב באחד מן האבעבועות הרי זו טרפה ואין אומרין ניקוב אבעבוע אחר ונערוך שאין הדבר ניכר.

14

When a needle is found in the lung, we blow up the lung. If no air is released from it, it is apparent that this needle entered via the bronchioles and did not perforate [them].40 If the lung was cut open before it was blown up and a needle was found in it,41 [the animal] is forbidden. For there is a high probability that it perforated [the lung] when it entered.

יד

מחט שנמצאת בריאה נופחין אותה אם לא יצא ממנה רוח בידוע שזאת המחט דרך סמפונות נכנסה ולא ניקבה, ואם נתחתכה הריאה קודם נפיחה ונמצאת בה המחט הרי זו אסורה שהדבר קרוב שניקבה כשנכנסה. 61

15

When there is a worm in the lung and it perforated the lung and emerged and we see the lung perforated by the worm, [the animal] is permitted. We rely on the prevailing assumption that it perforated [the lung] after ritual slaughter42 and emerged [then].

There are ways that certain organs appear [that can disqualify the organ].43For if the appearance of the organ is changed to that undesirable appearance, it is considered as if it was perforated.44 For since the appearance of this flesh changed to the [undesirable] appearance, it is considered as if it was dead. It is as if the flesh whose appearance changed does not exist. Similarly, [Leviticus 13:10] states: "And there is a spot of living45 flesh in the blemish...," and [ibid. 13:10] states: "On the day when he will present living flesh...." Implied is that flesh whose appearance has changed is not "alive."

טו

תולעת שהיתה בריאה וניקבה ויצאה והרי הריאה נקובה בתולעת הרי זו מותרת, חזקתה שאחר שחיטה תיקוב ותצא, יש שם מראות שאם נשתנה מראה האבר לאותו המראה הרע הרי הוא כנקוב שאותו הבשר שנשתנו מראיו למראה זה כמת הוא חשוב וכאילו הוא הבשר שנהפך עינו אינו מצוי, וכן הוא אומר ומחית בשר חי בשאת וביום הראות בו בשר חי מכלל ששאר הבשר שנשתנה אינו חי.

16

[The following principles apply if] the color46 of a lung changes, whether part of its color changes or its entire color changes. If it changes to a permitted color, even if its entire color changes, it is permitted. If, however, even the slightest portion of it changes to a forbidden color, [the animal] is trefe. [The rationale is that] the forbidden color is considered equivalent to a perforation as explained [above].47

טז

ריאה שנשתנו מראיה, בין מראה כולה בין מראה מקצתה אם נשתנית למראה המותר אפילו נשתנית כולה מותרת, ואם נשתנה למראה האסור אפילו כל שהוא טרפה, שהמראה האסור כנקב הוא חשוב כמו שביארנו. 62

17

There are five forbidden hues for the lung: black like ink, greenish-yellow48like hops, [yellow] like the yolk of an egg, or like safflower,49 or like the color of meat.50

Safflower is a color which clothes are dyed. It is comparable to hairs that are slightly red, leaning towards gold.

יז

וחמש מראות אסורות יש בריאה ואלו הן: שחורה כדיו, או ירוקה כעין כשות, או כעין חלמון ביצה, או כעין חריע, או כמראה הבשר, וחריע הוא הצבע שצובעים בו הבגדים והוא דומה לשערות אדומות מעט ונוטות לירוקה.

18

If the lung is discovered to be the color of the branches of a date palm, we forbid it because of the doubt involved, because this is very close to a forbidden color. We do not forbid any of these colors until the lung is inflated and massaged by hand. If it changes to a permitted color, [the animal] is permitted.51 If it retains the [forbidden] color, it is forbidden.

יח

נמצאת כעין חריות של דקל אוסרין אותה מספק שזה קרוב למראה האסור, וכל המראות האלו אין אוסרין בהם עד שנופחים אותה וממרס בה בידו אם נשתנית למראה המותר מותרת, ואם עמדה בעינה אסורה.

19

There are four permitted hues [for the lung]. They are: blackish blue, green like a leek, red, or the color of the liver. Even if the lung was entirely colored in these four hues patch by patch, spot by spot, [the animal] is permitted.

יט

ארבע מראות מותרת /מותרות/ יש בה ואלו הן: שחורה ככחול, או ירוקה כחציר, או אדומה, או כמראה הכבד, ואפילו היתה הריאה כולה טלאים טלאים נקודות נקודות מארבע מראות אלו הרי זו מותרת.

20

When a fowl52 fell into a fire and its heart, its liver,53 or its craw turned green or its digestive organs turned red, [the fowl] is trefe.54 [This applies if] even the slightest portion of the organs [changed color]. For whenever a fire causes organs that were green to turn red or those which were red to turn green, it is considered as if the organ was removed and [the animal] is trefe. [This applies] provided they retain this color after they were cooked slightly and massaged.55

כ

עוף שנפל לאור והוריק לבו או כבדו או קרקבנו או שהאדימו המעיים שלו בכל שהוא הרי זו טרפה, שכל הירוקים שהאדימו או האדומים שהוריקו מחמת האור בעוף הרי הן כמי שניטלו וטרפה, והוא שיעמדו במראה זה אחר ששלקו אותן מעט וממרסין בהן.

21

Whenever the liver of a fowl appears like the digestive organs or [the appearance of] the other digestive organs change and the change remains after they were cooked slightly and massaged as explained [above], we can assume that the fowl fell into a fire,56 its digestive organs were burnt, and it is trefe.

Moreover, when there was no change detected in the digestive organs of a fowl, but when they were cooked slightly they changed color, those that were green turned -red or those that were red turned green, we can assume that the fowl fell into a fire, its digestive organs were burnt, and it is trefe.57

Similarly, if [the color of] the gullet [has changed] - the outer skin appears white and the inner red - it is considered as if the organ is not present, and it - either an animal or a fowl - is trefe.

כא

כל עוף שנמצאת הכבד שלו כמראה בני מעים, או שנשתנו שאר בני מעים ועמדו בשינויין אחר שליקה ומריסה כמו שביארנו בידוע שנפל לאור ונחמרו בני מעיו וטרפה, ולא עוד אלא בני מעים של עוף שלא נמצא בהם שינוי וכשנשלקו נשתנו והאדימו הירוקים והוריקו האדומים, בידוע שנפל לאור ונחמרו בני מעיו וטרפה, וכן הושט שנמצא העור החיצון שלו לבן והפנימי אדום בין בעוף בין בבהמה הרי הוא כאילו אינו וטרפה. 63.

Footnotes
1.

For the other will protect the lung (Chullin 46a).

2.

If both membranes are perforated, but the perforations do not correspond, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:1) rules that the animal is kosher, but the Rama considers it trefe.

3.

The Radbaz states that if, by contrast, the lower membrane alone is peeled off, the animal is trefe, for certainly, part of the lung will be lacking.

4.

I.e., from the beginning of the ribcage.

5.

Chapter 1, Halachah 7 defines the portion of the windpipe acceptable for ritual slaughter. If, however, the windpipe is perforated in a such a place, the animal is kosher.

6.

Although the functioning of the lung is dependent on the windpipe, since a perforation in the lung causes an animal to be considered trefe, it is given that status (Chullin 32b).

7.

The small extensions of the windpipe that convey air within the lungs itself.

8.

Because the walls of the bronchioles are firm and not pliant. Hence, they will not serve as effective seals (Rashi, Chullin 48b).

In his Kessef Mishneh and his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:6), Rav Yosef Caro rules that if a perforation in a bronchiole is sealed by flesh, the animal is acceptable. See also the comments of Siftei Cohen 36:20. As the Rama states (Yoreh De'ah 39:18), the custom in the Ashkenazic community is to rule that an animal is trefe if its lungs are perforated even if they are sealed closed by other inner organs.

9.

For ultimately it will open (Rashi, Chullin 47b).

10.

Since this portion of the lung is located below the ribs, the perforation will never be sealed thoroughly.

11.

For the lobes lie on the ribs themselves and the seal will be maintained.

One of the issues related to the question of whether a lung is perforated or not is sirchaot, adhesions, where the lung becomes attached to the ribs and/or other portions of the body. For a discussion of that matter, see the latter half of Chapter 11.

12.

It is not necessary to inspect the lung to see if air escapes (Tur, as quoted by Siftei Cohen 39:44).

13.

For the bone is firm and will not move when the lung expands and contracts. Even if one inspects the lung and no air escapes, the animal is still considered trefe (ibid.).

14.

Boils or carbuncles filled with pus. This heightens the probability that it could have been perforated.

15.

And we postulate that the animal was bruised after its slaughter. Hence it is acceptable. The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that we are talking about a situation where the perforation is opposite the bruise. If they do not correspond, the animal is trefe.

16.

Here, also, even if one inspects the lung and no air escapes, the animal is still considered trefe [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:22)]. The Ra'avad states there is an apparent contradiction to the Rambam's ruling here and that in Chapter 11, Halachah 6. See the notes to that halachah for a discussion of this issue.

17.

I.e., unless it is checked as the Rambam continues to explain.

18.

According to the Rambam, the portion of the lung itself is cut off and we inspect it. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:9) offers a different interpretation. PAGE 239

19.

I.e., the feather is placed on the portion of the lung that was cut off. One blows throw the brochia. If the air passes through the bronchioles, the feather should flutter.

20.

The movement indicates that air flows through it.

21.

Chullin 47b states that hot water will cause the lung to contract and cold water will cause it to become firmer. If it was put in either hot or cold water first, it may not be checked in lukewarm water afterwards [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:4)].

22.

For obviously the lung has been perforated and the air is flowing out from it.

23.

This principle is significant with regard to the discussion concerning sirchaot, adhesions, in Chapter 11. The Ra'avad (whose interpretation is paralleled by that of Rashi and other Rishonim) maintain that blowing the lung represents a stringency: If air escapes, an animal is considered trefe even though there is reason to permit it. The same principle cannot be applied as a leniency. The Rambam - and his approach is shared by Rabbenu Tam, Rashba, Rabbenu Nissim, and others - maintains that this principle was instituted as a leniency.

24.

The Siftei Cohen 36:21 states that this leniency applies even if the entire lung has degenerated and can be poured out like water.

25.

As stated in Halachah 3, if one of the bronchioles is perforated, the animal is trefe. Certainly, that ruling applies if it has degenerated.

26.

Because it is glazed, one will be able to see the white strands clearly if they exist [Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 36)].

27.

And the white strands are the remnants of the bronchioles.

28.

When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:7) adds a concept stated in the following halachah: that the fluid poured out may not be putrid. (The commentaries to the Shulchan Aruch maintain that the Rambam would follow this stringency.) The Rama, however, rules leniently, maintaining that as long as the bronchioles are not visible, the animal is acceptable.

29.

Based on Chullin 48a, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 37:1) states that even if boils are very large, the animal may still be kosher.

30.

The Rambam's ruling is cited by the Shulchan Aruch. The Tur and the Rama follow the opinion of many other Rishonim who permit the animal even if the fluid in the boils is putrid.

31.

The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam's ruling is based on his decision in the previous halachah. The Rambam maintains that the fluid indicates that there is a strong possibilility that a perforation exists. Other opinions maintain that the animal is permitted, for the fluid is not necessarily a sign that a perforation exists. According to those views (and they are accpeted by the Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.), there is no need for the inspection the Rambam requires.

32.

The Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 37:3) state that even if the boils are filled with clear fluid, the animal is trefe. If, however, they are hard, it is acceptable.

33.

Rashi (Chullin 47a) explains that most likely the membrane was perforated and therefore the boils developed. Rabbenu Nissim explains that since the two boils are next to each other, it is likely that one perforated the other.

34.

The Maharil requires a further check: to see whether they share the same pocket (Turei Zahav 37:5; Siftei Cohen 37:7).

35.

The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:5) suggests that the shape of the perforations must indicate that they were made by the butcher.

36.

See Chapter 6, Halachah 14.

37.

This represents the Rambam's understanding of Chullin 50a. Rashi interprets the passage slightly differently. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:5) follows Rashi's understanding and states that we do not compare a lung from one animal to that of another one at all. And even within one animal, we do not compare a perforation in a large lobe to one in a small lobe.

38.

With the intent of seeing whether the perforation was made before or after the slaughter.

39.

I.e., in this instance, it is not easy to differentiate based on the comparison.

40.

In contrast to the liver where some authorities make a distinction in the ruling depending on the direction it is facing (see Chapter 6, Halachah 8), no such contrast is made with regard to a needle found in the lung. See also Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:16-17) which states that if a drop of blood is found on the exterior of the lung, the animal is considered trefe. the Rama rules that unles a significant los is involved, whenever a needle is found in the lungs, the animal is considered trefe.

41.

And thus it is impossible to check it by blowing air into it, for the air will be released through the portion cut off.

42.

For while the animal was alive, the lung was continually expanding and contracting and it would be very hard for the worm to perforate it (Turei Zahav 36:8).

43.

The remaining halachot in this chapter are expressions of this principle. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 48:5) rules that we are not knowledgeable with regard to the correct appearance of the lung. Hence, if its appearance changes and one might think it became unacceptable, we rule stringently.

44.

And as stated above, the perforation of a lung disqualifies it.

45.

We have translated the verses literally to convey the meaning mentioned by the Rambam. In its ordinary context, the terms would be translated as "healthy flesh."

46.

Our translation is dependent on the following halachah.

47.

And even the slightest perforation of the lung disqualifies the animal.

48.

This represents the translation the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 38:1) offers for the Talmudic term yerok quoted by the Rambam.

49.

Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 3:2). Rashi (Chullin 47b) renders the term as saffron. There is little difference between the two colors.

50.

Which is reddish [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.)].

51.

For during the animal's lifetime, the lung is repeatedly inflated.

52.

These laws do not apply with regard to an animal because its skin is tough and its ribs protect it [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:7]. The Rama, however, does not accept this leniency. The Ra'avad (Chapter 10, Halachah 11) also accepts the Rama's view.

53.

In his Kessef Mishneh and in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:1), Rav Yosef Caro qualifies the ruling with regard to the liver, stating that to disqualify a fowl, it must change color at its thin end, the portion next to the gall-bladder, or at the place where it derives its nurture.

54.

Significantly, if the lungs change color, the fowl is not disqualified, because its ribs protect it [Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)].

55.

For it is possible that the cooking and/or the massage will restore the organ's natural color.

56.

I.e., even though we do not know that the fowl fell into a fire, the fact that these organs changed color serves as evidence of such [Kessef Mishneh; the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah 3:3)]. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:6) quotes this ruling, but the Rama rules leniently and states that we must see that the fowl actually fell into a fire.

57.

The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:3) does not accept this stringency, following the opinion of the Rashba who maintains that we do not disqualify an animal unless we definitely know that it fell into a fire.

58.

במה דברים אמורים כשסתם מקום הנקב שבאונות בשר. א"א הנה הוא סובר דוקא סריך אבל לא סריך לאו ודוקא בבשרא אבל בגרמא לחודיה לא ויש מן הגאונים שאמרו בין סריך בין לא סריך בין בבשרא בין בגרמא ואני אומר בשניקבה ודאי בעינן סריך דוקא ובבשרא דוקא שאין סירכא סותמת ואין עצם סותם ועל שמעתיה דרב נחמן הוא דאתמר דקאמר ניקבה אבל כל סירכא מאונא לדופן כשרה מפני דוחק רביצתה עליו נעשו הסרכות ולא משום נקב וכן עיקר, עכ"ל.

59.

אם נמצאת נקובה ונמצאת בדופן מכה במקום הנקב תולין. א"א זה העיקר טעות גדולה שאם נמצאת נקובה אין להכשיר במכת הדופן באומד אלא כך אמרו שאם יש מכה בדופן ונפחו את הריאה ועלתה בנפיחה תולין את הדיבוק במכת הדופן ואם אין שם מכה אע"פ שעלתה בנפיחה לא כלום הוא שאני אומר שהדבוק מחמת נקב היה וקרום עלה עליו.

60.

זה עיקר גדול יהיה בידך וכו'. א"א זה המחבר שונה רב נחמיה דבדיק לה בפושרין לקולא ורוב המפרשים אומרים לחומרא דאע"ג דאיכא מכה בדופן בדיק לה, עכ"ל.

61.

מחט שנמצאת בריאה נופחין אותה. א"א וכיון שנמצא המח הרי נחתכה הריאה ואין נופחין אותה עוד אלא שאם נפחו אותה קודם שנחתכה הריאה ועלתה בנפיחה כשרה.

62.

נשתנה למראה האסור אפילו כל שהוא טרפה. א"א אומר אני כל מקום שהזכירו פסול בריאה ולא הזכירו בה מקצתה עד דהויא בכולה שכיון שהזכירו במקצת דוקא הוא והרי האדימה שהיו מחולקין בה בפירוש ולבסוף הכשירוהו כולה הילכך חזותא שהכשירו אפילו היו בה מראות הרעות כשרה, עכ"ל.

63.

כל עוף שנמצאת הכבד שלו כמראה בני מעים. א"א זה כתב במקום הוריקה כנגד בני מעים וטעה בפירושו אלא כך שאל הוריקו סמוך לבני מעים מהו תלינן ליה דבצד בני מעים אתיא לה ירקות או לא ופשט לה דאפילו לבני מעיים גופייהו איכא למיחש אלא שאינו ניכר בהם, עכ"ל.

Shechitah - Chapter 8

1

What is meant by the term chasairah?1 There are two organs that render [an animal] trefe if it is lacking the proper number. They are the lungs and the feet.2

The lungs have five lobes. When a person will drape them over his hand with the inner portion of the lung facing his face,3 there will be three [lobes] on the right and two on the left. In addition, at the right of [the lung], there is a small ear-like attachment. It is not in the row of the lobes. It has a pocket of its own and it is located in the pocket. This [attachment] is called a rose, because that is what it looks like.4 It is not counted as one of the number of lobes.

Accordingly, if [an animal] does not possess this "rose," it is permitted.5 For this is the pattern with regard to [this organ], there are some animals in which it is found and some in which it is not found. If it is perforated, [the animal] is trefe even though its pocket seals it.6

א

חסירה כיצד, שני איברים הן שאם חסר ממניינם טרפה, ואלו הן: הריאה והרגלים, וחמש אונות יש לריאה כשיתלה אותה אדם בידו ופני ריאה כנגד פניו, שלש מן הימין, ושתים מן השמאל, ובצד ימין ממנה כמו אזן קטנה ואינה בצד האונות ויש לה כמו כיס בפני עצמה והיא בתוך הכיס, ואוזן זו קטנה היא הנקרא ורדא מפני שהיא דומה לורד ואינה מן המנין, לפיכך אם לא נמצאת הורדא מותרת, שכך היא דרכה יש בהמות תמצא בהם ויש בהמות לא תמצא בהם, ואם נמצאת נקובה אע"פ שהכיס שלה סותם את הנקב הרי זו טרפה.

2

If the number of lobes was lacking and one was discovered on the left side or two on the right side, [the animal] is trefe. If, however, there were two on the right side and this "rose," [the animal] is permitted.7

ב

חסר מנין האונות ונמצאת אחת מן השמאל או שתים מן הימין טרפה, ואם נמצאו שתים בימין וזאת הורדא הרי זו מותרת.

3

If the position of the lobes was switched and three were found on the left and two on the right without a "rose" or the "rose" was found together with three on the left side, it is trefe, for it is lacking on the right side.8

ג

נתחלפו האונות ונמצאו שלש מן שמאל ושתים מן הימין בלא ורד, או שהיה הורד עם השלש בצד שמאל הרי זו טריפה שהיא חסרה מצד הימין.

4

[The following rules apply if] the number of lobes was increased. If the extra lobe was on the side of the [other] lobes9 or in front of the lungs10on the side of the heart, [the animal] is permitted. If [the extra lobe] is on its back, near the ribs, [the animal] is trefe for an extra [organ] is considered equivalent to one that is lacking. [This applies] provided it is [at least] the size of a myrtle leaf.11 If it is smaller than this, it is not considered as a lobe and [the animal] is permitted.

ד

נתוספו האונות במניינם אם היתה האוזן היתירה בצד האונות או מלפני הריאה שהוא עומת /לעומת/ הלב מותרת, ואם היתה על גבה שהוא לעומת הצלעות הרי זו טרפה שהיתר כחסר, והוא שתהיה כמו עלה של הדס, אבל פחות מזה אינה אוזן ומותרת.

5

When one lobe is found clinging to the one next to it, [the animal] is permitted. If, however, [the lobes] became attached out of the ordinary order, e.g., the first lobe became attached to the third, [the animal] is trefe.12

ה

אוזן שנמצאת דבוקה בחברתה הסמוכה לה מותרת, ואם נסמכו שלא על הסדר כגון שנסמכה ראשונה לשלישית טריפה.

6

[The following laws apply if] there are two lobes [that appear] as one lobe and do not appear as two lobes joined together.13 If there was a space about the size of a myrtle leaf14 between them - whether at their root, in their center, or at their end - so that it is clear that they are two which are attached, [the animal] is permitted. If not, it is lacking [one of the lobes] and is trefe.

ו

נמצאו שתי האונות כאונה אחת ואינן נראות כשתים דבוקות אם היה ביניהן כמו עלה ההדס בין בעיקרן בין באמצען בין בסופן כדי שיוכר שהן שתים דבוקות מותרת ואם לאו הרי זו חסירה וטריפה.

7

If the entire lung appears like two rows and it is not divided into lobes, it is trefe. Similarly, if the body of the lung itself15 was lacking, even if it was not perforated, it is considered as if the required number of lobes were missing and [the animal] is trefe.16 Therefore if a dried portion that could be chipped away with one's nail of even the slightest size was discovered within it, it is considered as lacking17 and [the animal] is trefe.

ז

נמצאת כולה שתי ערוגות ואין לה חתוך אזנים טריפה, וכן אם חסר גוף הריאה אע"פ שלא נקבה הרי זו כמי שחסר מנין האונות וטריפה, לפיכך אם נמצא ממנה מקום יבש עד שיפרך בצפורן הרי זו כחסר וטריפה ואפילו היה כל שהוא.

8

When a lung was discovered to be inflated like the leaves of a palm tree, we rule that it is forbidden because of the doubt involved. For this is an abnormal addition to its body and perhaps an addition to its body is considered as equivalent to a lack in its body, as stated with regard to the number of lobes.18

ח

ריאה שנמצאת נפוחה כמו עיקר חריות של דקל אוסרין אותה מספק, שזו תוספת משונה בגופה ושמא התוספת בגוף כחסרון כמו שאמר במנין.

9

[The following rules apply when] an animal became frightened and was terrified to the extent that her lung19 shriveled and came closer to becoming dried out: If it became frightened through the hand of heaven, e.g., it heard a thunderclap, saw lightening, or the like, it is permitted.20 If it became frightened through human activity, e.g., another animal was slaughtered in its presence or the like, it is considered as if it were lacking and it is trefe.

ט

הבהמה שפחדה ויראה עד שצמקה הריאה שלה וקרבה להיות יבשה, אם פחדה בידי שמים כגון ששמעה קול רעם או ראתה זיקים וכיוצא בזה מותרת, ואם פחדה בידי אדם כגון ששחטו לפניה בהמה אחרת וכיוצא בזה הרי זו כחסרה וטרפה.

10

How do we inspect it? We place the lung in water for an entire day. In the winter, we place it in lukewarm water, in a container which will not cause the water to condense on its back21 and flow so that they will not become cold rapidly. If the season was hot, we place it in cold water in a container on which the water will condense on its back so that the water will remain cold. If [the lung] returns to its natural state, [we assume that the animal was frightened] by the hand of heaven and it is permitted.22 If it does not return, we [we assume that] it happened due to mortal causes and [the animal] is trefe.

י

כיצד בודקין אותה, מושיבין את הריאה במים מעת לעת, ואם היה זמן הקור מושיבין אותה במים פושרין ובכלי שאין המים מתמצין מגבו ונוזלים כדי שלא יצונו במהרה, ואם היה זמן החום מושיבין אותה במים צונן בכלי שהמים מתמצין מגבו כדי שישארו קרים, אם חזרה לברייתה הרי זו בידי שמים ומותרת ואם לא חזרה בידי אדם היא וטרפה.

11

An animal that was lacking a foot23 from the time it came into being is trefe. The same ruling applies if it possesses an extra foot, for an extra limb or organ is considered as if it was lacking. If, however, it has three forefeet or only one forefoot, [the animal] is permitted. Accordingly, if [an animal's] forefoot is cut off, [the animal] is permitted.24

If its leg is cut off from the joint and above,25 [the animal] is trefe. From the joint and below, it is permitted.26 Which joint are we speaking about? The joint that is at the end of the hip close to the body.

יא

בהמה שהיתה חסרה רגל בתחלת ברייתה טרפה, וכן אם היתה יתירה רגל שכל היתר כחסר הוא, אבל אם היו לה שלש ידים או יד אחת מותרת, לפיכך אם נחתך היד שלה מותרת, נחתך הרגל מן הארכובה ולמעלה טרפה, מן הארכובה ולמטה מותרת, באי זו ארכובה אמרו בארכובה שהוא סוף הירך הסמוך לגוף.

12

When the bone27 is broken above the joint, if it emerges outward entirely or in its majority, it is considered as if it were cut and fell off,28 and [the animal] is trefe. If the flesh or the skin29 was covering both the majority of the thickness and the majority of the circumference of the broken bone, [the animal] is permitted.30 This applies even if part of the broken bone fell off and no longer is present. Soft sinews are not considered as flesh.

יב

נשבר העצם למעלה מן הארכובה אם יצא כולו או רובו לחוץ הרי זה כמה שנחתך ונפל וטריפה, ואם היה הבשר או העור חופה רוב עביו ורוב היקפו של עצם שנשבר הרי זו מותרת ואפילו נפל מקצת העצם שנשבר והלך לו, וגידים הרכים אינן חשובין כבשר.

13

The juncture of the sinews is a place in an animal and in a beast which is above the heel, at the place where the butchers hang the animal.31 There are three white sinews there, one thick and two thin. From the place where they begin and are firm and white until [the place] where the whiteness is removed from them and they begin to become red and soften is considered the juncture of the sinews. It is approximately sixteen fingerbreadths32 [long] in an ox.

יג

צומת הגידין הן בבהמה ובחיה למעלה מן העקב במקום שתולין בו הטבחים הבהמה והן שלשה גידין לבנים, אחד עבה ושנים דקים, וממקום שיתחיל והן קשים ולבנים עד שיסור הלובן מהן ויתחילו להתאדם ולהתרכך הוא צומת הגידים והוא כאורך שש עשרה אצבעות בשור.

14

In a fowl, there are sixteen such sinews. They begin on the lowest bone, from the extra talon and [continue] until the conclusion of the foot which is [covered by a series of] crusted scales.33

יד

ומנין גידים אלו בעוף ששה עשר גידין, תחלתן מן העצם של מטה מאצבע יתירה עד סוף הרגל שהוא עשוי קשקשים קשקשים. 64

15

When an animal's feet are cut off at the juncture of the sinews, it is trefe. Do not be amazed and say: "How is it possible that [an animal] will be permitted if its [legs] are cut off above the juncture of the sinews - indeed, it is permitted unless its [legs] are cut off above the highest joint as we explained34- but forbidden if they are cut off at a lower point, at the juncture of the sinews?

[The resolution is as follows: With regard to the designation of an animal] as trefe, [there are times when] one will cut from this point and it will live, but if [one would cut] from this point, it would die. We have not forbidden this animal, because its feet were cut off at a particular point,35 but rather because its sinews were severed36 and this renders it trefe, as will be explained.37

טו

בהמה שנחתכו רגליה במקום צומת הגידין טריפה, ואל תתמה ותאמר כיצד תחתך למעלה מצומת הגידים והיא מותרת עד שתחתך למעלה מן האכובה העליונה כמו שביארנו ואם נחתך למטה מצומת הגידים אסורה, שבטריפות תחתך מכאן ותחיה ומיכן ותמות, ולא נאסרה בהמה זו מפני שהיא חתוכת רגל ממקום זה אלא מפני שנחתכו הגידין שחתיכתן מכלל הטרפות כמו שיתבאר.

16

What is meant by the term Netulah?38 There are three limbs and organs which even though they do not [cause an animal to be deemed trefe] when they are perforated or if they are lacking [when the animal is born],39 cause the animal to be deemed trefe. They are: the juncture of the sinews,40 the liver, and the upper jaw-bone.

טז

נטולה כיצד, שלשה איברים הן שאם ניטלו טריפה ואע"פ שאין בהן דין נקב ולא דין חסרון, ואלו הן: צומת הגידים, והכבד, ולחי העליון.

17

We already explained41 that when an animal or a fowl has had its legs cut off at the place of the juncture of the sinews, it is deemed trefe only because the sinews were cut.42 Therefore if the sinews alone were severed even though the foot remains intact, the animal is trefe, because the juncture of the sinews has been removed.

יז

וכבר ביארנו שהבהמה שנחתך רגלה וכן העוף במקום צומת הגידים לא נעשו טרפה אלא מפני שנחתכו הגידין, לפיכך אם נחתכו הגידים לבדם והרגל קיימת טריפה שהרי ניטלה צומת הגידים. 65

18

In an animal, if the thick sinew alone was severed, [the animal] is permitted, for the two [thin] ones remained. If both thin ones were severed, [the animal] is permitted, for the one thick one is larger than both of them. [In both cases,] the entire juncture was not removed, only its smaller portion.43 If the majority of each of them was severed, [the animal] is trefe. Needless to say, this applies if they were all severed or removed.

יח

נחתך בבהמה האחד העבה לבדו מותרת, שהרי נשארו שנים, נחתכו השנים הדקין מותרת שהרי האחד העבה גדול שניהן והרי לא ניטל כל הצומת אלא מיעוטה, נחתך רובו של כל אחד מהן טרפה ואין צריך לומר שנחתכו כולן או ניטלו כולן.

19

With regard to a fowl, even if the majority of one of the sixteen were severed, [the animal] is trefe.44

יט

ובעוף אפילו נחתך רובו של (כל) אחד מן הששה עשר טרפה.

20

When a fowl's wings are broken, it is permitted like an animal whose forelegs have been cut off.45

כ

ועוף שנשתברו אגפיו מותר, כבהמה שנחתכו ידיה.

21

When the entire liver has been removed, [the animal] is trefe. If an olive-sized portion remains at the place from which it is suspended46 and there is an olive-sized portion at the place of the gall-bladder, it is permitted.47

If the liver slipped from its place and it is [in disarray,] connected with the diaphragm, [the animal] is permitted.48 If the place from which it is suspended and the portion at the place of the gall-bladder were removed, it is trefe49 even if the remainder is intact as it was previously.

כא

כבד שניטלה כולה טרפה, ואם נשתייר ממנה כזית במקום שהיא תלויה בו וכזית במקום מרה הרי זו מותרת, נידלדלה הכבד והרי היא מעורה בטרפש שלה מותרת, ניטל ממנה מקום שהיא תלויה בו ומקום המרה ואע"פ שהשאר קיים כמו שהוא טרפה.

22

If there remained an olive-sized portion at the place of the gall-bladder and an olive-sized portion at the place from which it was suspended, [the animal] is kosher. If, however, the portions of the liver which remain intact were scattered, some here and some there, flattened, or elongated like a strap, there is a doubt concerning its status. It appears to me that it is forbidden.50

כב

נשאר בה כזית במקום מרה וכזית במקום שהיא תלויה בו כשרה, אבל היה מפוזר מעט בכאן ומעט בכאן או שהיה מרודד או שהיה ארוך כרצועה הרי זו ספק ויראה לי שהיא אסורה.

23

When the upper jaw-bone is removed, [the animal] is trefe.51 If, however, the lower jaw-bone is removed,52 i.e., it was cut away until the place of the gullet and the windpipe, but they were not uprooted [from their connection to the throat, the animal] is permitted.

כג

לחי העליון שניטל טרפה, אבל אם ניטל התחתון כגון שנגמם עד מקום הסימנין ולא נעקרו הרי זו מותרת.

24

Whenever it is said that an animal is trefe if a limb or organ is lacking,53 so, too, it is trefe if that organ is removed.54 If, however, it is said that an animal is trefe if an organ is removed, [the animal] is not forbidden unless that organ was cut off. If, however, the animal was created lacking that organ, it is permitted. For if not, the categories of chasairah and netulah would be identical.55 Whenever it is said that [an animal] is permitted if a limb is removed, it is certainly permitted56 if this organ was lacking from the beginning of the animal's existence and was never created.

כד

כל אבר שנאמר בו שאם היה חסר טרפה כך אם ניטל טריפה, אבל אבר שנאמר בו אם ניטל טרפה אינה נאסרת אלא אם נחתך אותו אבר, אבל אם נבראת חסירה אותו אבר הרי זו מותרת, שאם לא תאמר כן נמצאת החסירה והנטולה אחת, וכל אבר שנאמר בו שאם ניטל מותרת קל וחומר אם חסר מתחלת ברייתה ולא נברא שהיא מותרת.

25

When the uterus of an animal, i.e., its womb, was removed or its kidneys were removed,57 it is permitted. Therefore if it was created with only one kidney or with three kidneys58 it is permitted.59 Similarly, it is permitted if a kidney was perforated.

כה

בהמה שניטלה האם שלה והוא בית הרחם, או שניטלו הכליות הרי זו מותרת, לפיכך אם נבראת בכוליא אחת או בשלש כליות מותרת, וכן אם ניקבה הכוליא מותרת.

26

Although [an animal] is permitted despite the fact that a kidney was removed or it was created without it, if its kidney is extremely undersized, it is trefe.60 For a small animal, this means the size of a bean, for a large one, the size of a grape.61 Similarly, if a kidney became afflicted, i.e., its flesh became like the flesh of a dead [animal] that decayed after several days. Thus if one would take hold of a portion of it, it will decompose and fall apart. If this condition reached the white portion62 in the kidney, the animal is trefe. Similarly, if moisture - even if it is not putrid - is found in the kidney or murky or putrid fluid is found there, it is trefe. If, however, clear water is found there,63 [the animal] is permitted.

כו

אע"פ שהכוליא שניטלה או חסרה מותרת אם נמצאת קטנה ביותר, והקטנה בדקה עד כפול ובגסה עד כעינב, טרפה, וכן אם לקתה הכוליא והוא שיעשה בשרה כבשר המת שהבאיש אחר ימים שאם תאחוז במקצתו יתמסמס ויפול והגיע חלי זה עד הלבן שבתוך הכוליא הרי זו טרפה, וכן אם נמצאת בכוליא ליחה אע"פ שאינה סרוחה או שנמצא בה מים עכורין או סרוחים הרי זו טרפה אבל אם נמצאו בה מים זכים הרי זו מותרת..

Footnotes
1.

Chasairah means "lacking." This category disqualifies an animal if it lacks one of its fundamental organs.

2.

It is true that there are more organs that render an animal trefe if they are lacking. Nevertheless, the lack of these organs is not placed in this category. Instead, the organ is considered as nekuvah, "perforated." As stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 20, if the perforation of these organs will disqualify an animal, surely, it will be disqualified when the organs are lacking entirely.

3.

I.e., he will be holding the animal from behind. See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 35:2).

4.

I.e., it is small and red.

5.

The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 35:2 states that it is customary within the Ashkenazic community to declare an animal trefe, if it lacks this "rose" or if there is an extra "rose."

6.

For it does not seal it thoroughly.

7.

For the "rose" functions in place of the missing lobe. If, however, the "rose" is found on the left and there is only one lobe, the animal is not acceptable. Since it is not in its proper place, it cannot replace a lobe (Kessef Mishneh). The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 35:7) quotes the Rambam's ruling, but the Rama differs.

8.

In this instance, the "rose" does not compensate for the lack of the lobe, because it is not on the right side.

9.

"In the row of the lungs" to borrow the expression used by Chullin 47b. Generally, we follow the principle that every addition is considered as if it was lacking. In this instance, however, since the extra lobe is found in the row of the lobes, it will not disturb the lungs' ordinary functioning.

10.

In this instance as well, the Rambam maintains that the position of the extra lobe prevents it from disturbing the lungs' ordinary functioning. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 35:3) accepts the Rambam's ruling.The Rama quotes more stringent views that state that any extra lobe that is not found in the row of the lungs is trefe. Nevertheless, the custom is to rule leniently.

11.

I.e., even when inflated.

12.

If the portions of the lungs that follow their natural pattern become attached to each other, all authorities agree that the animal is acceptable, for this attachment will not create any difficulties. And if the third lobe becomes attached to the first, all agree that it is unacceptable, because as the lungs inflate, the attached portions will separate, cause the attachment to tear, and in doing so, perforate the lobe.

The commentaries question - and the Maggid Mishneh actually maintains that the text of the Mishneh Torah reads in this manner - whether if the back of one lobe is attached to the back of the lobe next to it, the animal is also trefe. For in this instance as well, since the lobes are attached in an unnatural order, the attachment will tear and perforate the lungs. In his Kessef Mishneh maintains that the Rambam's wording implies that as long as the attached lobes are next to each other, the lung is acceptable, even if they are attached back to back. He does note, however, that there are authorities who rule stringently. He concludes in his Kessef Mishneh and also rules accordingly in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:4), that the attachments do not disqualify an animal only when the lobes are attached side to side - and not back to back - in the natural order. If they are attached in such an order, however, the lungs need not be checked. The Rama differs, requiring an examination. He also states that there are authorities who maintain that we are not knowledgable regarding how to make such an examination and therefore such an animal should be considered as trefe. Nevertheless, his ruling also leaves room for leniency if less than half of the body of the lobes are attached. See Siftei Cohen 39:11.

13.

I.e., they appear as one flush mass, without differentiation. If they are distinct, but attached, they are governed by the laws stated in the previous halachah.

14.

From Halachah 4, it appears that this is the size of a lobe that is significant. Hence, just as it is significant in disqualifying an animal, it is significant in causing it to be deemed kosher (Maggid Mishneh).

The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 35:8). The Rama cites authorities that maintain that even if a smaller portion is distinct, the lobes are considered as separate and the animal, kosher. The Rama states that we may rely on these opinions if there is a significant loss involved.

15.

I.e., it is lacking part of its ordinary mass.

16.

The Kessef Mishneh notes that in Chapter 7, Halachah 9, the Rambam rules that if a lung has decayed, it is kosher as long as its bronchioles and outer membrane are intact despite the fact that it has lost a large amount of its substance. He explains that this is not necessarily a contradiction to the ruling here. In that instance, since the lung has decayed significantly and yet, the brochioles have not been perforated, we assume that they will not be perforated. In this instance, by contrast, we suspect that the lack within the lung will cause it to become perforated.

Many other Rishonim, however, do not make such a distinction and maintain that a lung is acceptable if it is lacking some of its inner substance. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:8) quotes both views. The Rama states that certain circumstances call for leniency and others, for stringency.

17.

The Kessef Mishneh explains that others explain that it is considered as if the dried portion is perforated and therefore the animal is trefe.

18.

As stated in law 4, an extra lobe is considered as a missing lobe and disqualifies a lung. Similarly, there is reason to think that an increase in the size of a lung is equivalent to a decrease in its size and disqualifies it in a similar fashion.

19.

When quoting this law, Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:14) speaks of an "entire lung" shriveling.

20.

For in the near future, it will regain its natural size, as indicated by the following halachah.

21.

Chullin 55b states that earthern-ware utensils made of white clay will have water condense upon them easily.

22.

Chullin, loc. cit., also debates what the ruling would be if one animal is frightened by another animal. The Rambam does not discuss the issue for seemingly, it would be able to be resolved by the same test mentioned here. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:14 considers being frightened by other animals as equivalent to being frightened by the hand of heaven.

The Radbaz also states that if the lung returns to normal, it is acceptable even if the animal was frightened by human activity. Other authorities differ and maintain that if we know that the animal was frightened by human activity, this examination is not acceptable (Siftei Cohen 36:30).

See also Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:15) who rules that in the present era, we are not knowledgeable with regard to the various inspections that our Sages spoke about and hence, should not employ them. If, however, it appears that an animal's lung shrunk due to the hand of heaven, it should not be permitted without undergoing this examination.

23.

The category of chasairah involves two organs: the lungs and the feet. Having discussed the lungs, the Rambam proceeds to discuss the feet. As the Rambam continues to explain, here the intent is the hindlegs.

24.

The severed foot itself, however, is forbidden.

25.

There are three segments of an animal's leg between its trunk and its hoofs. We are speaking about the joint between the highest and middle portions of the leg.

26.

Note, however, Halachah 15.

27.

I.e., the highest of the three bones of the animal's legs.

28.

For it will never heal.

29.

Even the covering of the skin alone is sufficient. This represents a revision of the Rambam's thinking. The initial text of his Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 8:13) stated "there was flesh and skin covering it" and he altered it to read "flesh or skin covering it."

30.

For the leg will heal. Not only is the animal permitted, the leg itself is permitted. We do not consider it as if it had been severed and removed during the animal's lifetime.

31.

I.e., it is customary for the butchers to make a hole in the lowest bone of the leg and hang the animal head downwards so that they can skin it and cut off its meat. The definition of "the juncture of the sinews" is important, as reflected in Halachot 15-18.

32.

A fingerbreadth is approximately 2 cm according to Shiurei Torah and 2.4 cm according to Chazon Ish.

Together with the Rambam's view, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 56:5) also quotes Rashi's view that the juncture of the sinews is four fingerbreadths long.

33.

The Ra'avad takes issue with the Rambam's statements, admitting that the sinews of a fowl - as do those of an animal - begin in its actual feet. Nevertheless, he states, it is only from the joint between the second and third bone of the leg that they are considered halachically significant. For the laws of trefot that govern a fowl parallel those which govern an animal.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro cites authorities that maintain that the text of the Mishneh Torah is in error and it should be amended to parallel the Ra'avad's comments. He cites a responsum attributed to the Rambam sent to the Sages of Provence which also follows this understanding. And in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 56:8), he rules in this manner.

34.

Halachah 11.

35.

Thus according to the Rambam - and his position is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 55:1) - if an animal's leg is severed in the top bone, it is trefe. If it is severed in the bottom bone, it is kosher, and if it is severed in the middle bone, the ruling depends on whether it was severed above the juncture of the sinews or not.

The Shulchan Aruch also cites a more stringent view - and the Rama states that it should be followed - that if the middle bone was severed, even above the juncture of the sinews, the animal is trefe. Moreover, even if it is severed at the lower joint, above the cartiledge called the irkum, the animal is trefe.

36.

The Kessef Mishneh states that the Rambam is explaining that a severed leg causes an animal to be considered trefe, because it is in the category of chasairah. When the juncture of its sinews is lacking, it is considered trefe, because it is in the category of netulah, as the Rambam proceeds to explain.

37.

See Halachot 16-17.

38.

Netulah is one of the eight types of trefot mentioned in Chapter 5, Halachah 2. The term literally means "removed."

39.

I.e., there are many organs besides these three that cause an animal to be deemed lacking if they are removed. The disqualification of these other organs, however, is not included in the category of netulah, rather that of nekuvah, perforated, or chasairah, lacking, i.e., the organ's removal is the greatest perforation or lack that could be. See Chapter 6, Halachah 20.

40.

The Ra'avad notes that seemingly, the disqualification of an animal because the junction of its sinews was severed would cause it to be placed in the following category, pesukah (Chapter 9, Halachah 1). He and the Kessef Mishneh explan that since our Sages (Chullin 57a, 76a) uses the expression: "If the juncture of the sinews was removed," it should be placed in this category and not in the other. Note the Siftei Cohen 56:1 who interprets the Ra'avad slightly differently.

41.

Halachah 15.

42.

I.e., the fact that this portion of the leg is missing is not significant.

43.

As long as a majority - either a majority in number or the larger portion - remains intact, the animal is permitted (Chullin 76b).

44.

The Kessef Mishneh explains this ruling as follows. Since we are stringent with regard to a fowl and require that all sixteen be intact, we extend that stringency and disqualify it if the majority of one is impaired. For when the majority of a sinew is impaired, it is as if the entire sinew is impaired.

45.

As stated in Halachah 11. See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 53:2-3) which explains details about this situation.

46.

I.e., near the kidneys. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin3:1) refers to it as the place attached to the blood vessels from which blood from the liver is dispersed throughout the body. Chullin 46a refers to this as "the place from which it derives its nurture." See the Siftei Cohen 41:1 and the Turei Zahav 41:1 which quote authorities that interpret this as meaning the place to which it is attached on the diaphragm.

47.

For these are fundamentally necessary for its functioning.

48.

Because it - and its two fundamentally necessary portions - are still intact.

49.

For these two portions are of primary necessity.

50.

Chullin 46a raises questions regarding these situations and does not resolve them. The commentaries question why the Rambam rules definitively that the animal is unacceptable. The Kessef Mishneh explains that this applies even if there is one olive-sized portion that is entirely intact.

51.

The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 33) objects to the Rambam's ruling, stating: "I am amazed at his prohibition [of the animal] when the upper jaw is removed since this is not explicitly stated. Are we to add to the trefot?"

To explain: Chullin 54a states that if the lower jaw is removed, the animal is permitted. The Rambam deduces that the implication is that if the upper jaw is removed, the animal is trefe. The Tur claims that this deduction is not explicitly stated and hence, we have no right to make this deduction on our own. The sages of Provence wrote to the Rambam, voicing similar objections and he replied to them, explaining that the upper jaw is necessary for an animal's breathing. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 33:2) states that it is proper to show respect for the Rambam's ruling.

Based on the gloss of the Rogatchover Gaon, it is possible to explain why this defect is not mentioned by the Sages of the Talmud. This defect is not in and of itself a direct cause for an animal's death, it is only a side factor that will lead to its death. Hence our Sages did not mention it, for they mentioned only those factors whice are direct causes (Yayin Malchut).

52.

When quoting this ruling, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 33:1) adds that the animal must be able to continue to survive by being force-fed.

53.

I.e., the lungs and the hindlegs as stated in Halachah 1.

54.

As mentioned above (Chapter 6, Halachah 20), all the organs which render an animal trefe if they are perforated, also render it trefe when they are lacking or removed. Nevertheless, the Rambam places them in the category of nekuvah for that is the most inclusive classification.

55.

And our Sages listed them as separate categories, as stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 2.

The Rashba (as quoted by the Kessef Mishneh, Chapter 6, Halachah 20) differs and maintains that an animal is also trefe if it is lacking a liver from the beginning of its existence. Why then did our Sages mention chasairah and netulah as two separate categories? Because if they were not listed so, one might argue that an animal is trefe only when an organ is removed and not when it was lacking from the beginning of the animal's existence or vice versa. The Tur follows the Rashba's view. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 50:72 quotes both opinions, but appears to favor the Rashba's view. The Rama states that we may rely on the Rambam when a significant loss is involved.

56.

For the ruling is more lenient if at the outset, it was not created with this organ, as above.

57.

I.e., even if both kidneys were removed. Even though according to medical knowledge, there is no way such an animal can live, our Sages did not deem this condition trefe. See Chapter 10, Halachah 12.

58.

For we follow the principle that any extra organ is considered as if it was removed.

59.

It is, however, considered a blemish and the animal may not be offered as a sacrifice (Hilchot Issurei HaMizbe'ach 2:11).

60.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro states that many Rishonim disqualify an animal only when its kidneys shrank because of illness. If, however, it was born with an undersized kidney, it is acceptable. And in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 44:5), he accepts this ruling as law.

61.

The Turei Zahav 44:12 and the Siftei Cohen 44:13 quote authorities who explain that the grapes of Eretz Yisrael were very large during the Talmudic period. At that time, a grape was significantly larger than a bean.

62.

The white fat from the loins enters the kidneys, because the different sinews are all interwoven there, causing a split to appear within the kidney. This is located in the midst of the kidney (Rashi, Rabenu Nissim, Chullin 55b).

63.

Even if it reached the white portion [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 44:2)].

64.

ומנין גידים אלו בעוף ששה עשר גידין תחלתן מן העצם של מטה. א"א זה חדוש גדול שלא שמעתי כמותו ומעולם לא בדקתי צומת הגידים אלא מן הארכובה ולמעלה כנגד צומות הגידין של בהמה ואמת הוא שהם יורדים עד למטה עד שהם מתקשרים ומתחזקים בארכובה משם הם חיים ומפרנסים את הגוף.

65.

וכבר ביארנו שהבהמה וכו'. א"א זאת האומנות לא עלתה לו כהוגן בכאן שיחשב חתוכת הגידים כנטולה ומה בין חתוכה לפסוקה והוא סבור שניטל צומת הגידין הוא שנחתכו ולפיכך מנה אותן בנטולה ולא דקדק יפה אלא אם רצה למנותה בנטולין יאמר שאם לא נחתכו אלא שנעקרו מן הארכובה ונקפלו מעל העצם עד למעלה טריפה ולפיכך אמר וכן שניטל צומת הגידין ולא אמר שנחתך, שמעה עמי בינה זאת, עכ"ל.

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here. The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in the one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah