Talking Talmud

Investigating (final?) details about what makes an animal a treyfa - in terms of injuries. Is there a rule of thumb, or is the list of what makes an animal a treyfa complete, in terms of listing all the possibilities? But then the Gemara walks back the question... Also, a new mishnah! On how much damage can be done to the trachea (and other body parts), and the animal remains kosher. Plus, a comparison between two mishnayot that seem to contradict each other in methodology. Also, more on the perforation of a trachea -- and how the measure that keeps the animal kosher is less than an Italian issar - but that wasn't helpful in Babylonia, where they weren't familiar with the coin. Plus, the job of the money-changer who tried to stand up in honor of Rabbi Yochanan, who declined the honor because of the job at hand. Plus, the time the tradesmen stood up to honor those bringing their first fruits (bikkurim) to Jerusalem.

A majority of broken ribs -- seems to be a treyfa. But what is the way in which they were broken? Does having been attached to the vertabrae make the process that much more challenging? If the ribs are dislocated and the spine is not damaged. Also, an animal that is clawed by a wolf (or a predator of that size or larger) will render the victim animal a treyfa (and predator birds from a "netz." But what about a small animal, like a cat?

Perforated intestines are likely to be sealed by internal mucous, which would leave the animal kosher. The Gemara then traces Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's statement on this point - namely, that it would be kosher. And Rabbi Shimon's view on mourning -- that a mourner who first hears about the death late will join the count with the family that is sitting shiva if he is close enough to join them (and then continue his own count afterwards). Until the end of the discussion, when Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's approach is rejected, and Rabbi Shimon's is upheld. Also, the inner and outer paunch - with a lot of detail regarding what needs to be intact to be able to call the animal kosher. But the sages themselves have a lot of questions here.

Rulings by Rava: Issues of the lungs, specifically with regard to the lobes. Plus, Meimar, who answers the halakhic questions differently from Rava. Until the Gemara establishes that their answers pertain to different cases -- regarding the lobes. The sages are very precise here in their examination of the different concerns. Also, the implications of various colors -- dark grey (kosher) vs. black (not kosher) vs. green (kosher) vs. red (kosher) vs. Black being the shift from the red of blood, as it deteriorates, which means there's a problem in the lung that would lead to the color black. Plus, the stories of Rabbi Natan, who saves a couple of babies by advising their mothers to let the children's blood to be reabsorbed before brit milah (circumcision).

A review of injuries to various body parts and the implications for a kosher shechitah. Note the sages' awareness of the animals' anatomy. After all, they did open these animals up and were able to discern their inner workings. Note also the sages' verbal descriptions of the visual/physical. Also, a deeper dive into the potential perforation of the heart -- and which chamber of the heart was (presumably necessarily) perforated? And, of course, note the big loss that a treyfa discovery would mean. It wasn't a simple thing to render the meat before the shochet into non-kosher food.

Chapter 3! A focus on the slaughtering of kosher animals -- and what makes an animal kosher (as compared to a treyfa, which is a kosher kind of animal, but some blemish prevents it from being kosher upon shechitah). Which is to say: a new mishnah -- that lists 18 "defects" that make an animal a treyfa in detail - and then because of the animal's status, the shechitah cannot be kosher. Plus, what is the source in the Torah for this concern about a treyfa? That should be obvious - it's an explicit verse, but what about the position that a treyfa has to be an animal that won't live from the defect? That source is provided - Leviticus 11. Also, the Gemara adds another 7 ways an animal could become a treyfa. With a mnemonic to remember them -- and a strong question why they weren't included in the 18.

A new mishnah! One who slaughters an animal in the name of worship of natural bodies (mountains, rivers, seas, etc.), then the slaughtering is not kosher shechitah. Even if two people are doing the slaughtering together and one of them has correct "kosher" intent, the shechitah is still not valid. But it's also not fully idolatry either - except for a beraita that presents comparable cases as being idolatry (with slight differences that make room to say they are different). Also, if one's animal is lying in front of idolatry, then the moment one cuts that animal, it's prohibited - because it smacks of idolatry, even if it was not intended as such (live, the animal isn't a concern of idolatry, or not until a physical act is done to it). But does that really work? To make another person's animal problematic? The distinction is drawn between a "zevach" (or a shelamim/peace-offering) and a "chatat" - sin-offering.

An animal that is close to death demonstrates its vitality by some form of movement. Of course, the degree and nature of movement is subject to dispute. Also, a new mishnah - if/when one slaughters an animal for a non-Jew, that shechitah should be kosher, depending on the idolatry factor.

Another baraita on the impact of blood on - in this case, a gourd of terumah - in terms of making it susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi and Rabbi Hiyya have a debate about that. Of course, if there is blood and shechitah on the gourd throughout the process, that would render the gourd susceptible to impurity. But perhaps not if the process itself were interrupted. Also, Resh Lakish poses a question regarding a dry portion of a grain-offering - if/when would that become susceptible to impurity? Noting that it still would need to come in contact with water (or the other liquids) to achieve that. Note also the distinction between the impurity that comes from a dead body as compared to that from a creepy-crawly.

More on how to understand the mishnah -- and whether the level of sanctity raised there is potentially really that of terumah, or perhaps that of sacrificial offerings (and how that would be determined). Note that terumah is only ever a gift from one's produce - that which grows from the ground, and it would not be confused with meat (in contrast to the sacrificial meat as compared to regular non-sacred meat, which makes more sense in the context of the mishnah). [Who's Who: Ullah] Also, what happens if a person eats impure food? Well, first, how impure is the food?

2 mishnayot! 1 - A person is slaughtering an animal and the knife falls and he picks it up to complete the slaughtering... as long as the shechitah is completed in the time that it would take to slaughter the animal to begin with, that's kosher. If it takes more time, then it's not a valid shechitah. But different animals - and fowl - take different amounts of time to do the shechitah. Does the statement of "shechting the animal" apply to every animal/bird, or does the time fluctuate depending on the animal/bird at hand? 2 - What if only one of the simanim/pipes were severed correctly, of the esophagus and trachea? If the animal is unfit, it is presented as a treyfa - but then the Gemara addresses such cases as a neveilah.

If there's more than one incision in the pipe, can that be kosher shechitah? It's a machloket. What about 2 people holding the knife for one animal's slaughter? That's one incision, but 2 people with 2 knives, which means 2 incisions, and it has all kinds of insecurities associated with it - and could result in non-kosher shechitah, but we really don't worry about that, and allow it. Note the many cases of shechitah that are left without conclusions. Also, a new mishnah: 1 person who slaughters 2 animals simultaneously; likewise, the 2 people holding one knife (as presented in the Gemara on the daf right before the mishnah), even with 2 cuts -- all of those cases are kosher shechitah. But decapitation in one motion is not considered valid. With the possibility of it being kosher if the length of the knife is the breadth of the animal's neck.

On the bird's "one siman" being severed, does it make a difference which of the esophagus or the trachea is cut? It's a machloket, whether "either one" is enough or one specific one needs to be cut. The Gemara provides a mnemonic to support 5 different arguments, half of which support the one view above and the other half the other view. Plus, the order of when the simanim themselves are examined in the context of shechitah, and then the order of cutting. Also, what if one of the simanim were cut to be 50/50 cut/not cut -- does that count as the majority being cut or not at all cut? But how can anyone be certain, to that degree of precision?