THE 18 TEREIFOS (cont.)
(Ula): Eight kinds of Tereifos were taught to Moshe on Sinai: punctures, cuts, missing organs, deficient organs, tears, Drisah, animals that fell, and broken organs.
Ula excludes afflicted organs, i.e. Rachish bar Papa's teaching about an afflicted kidney.
(Chiya bar Rav): Any of eight punctures makes an animal Tereifah.
Question: There is a ninth, i.e. a punctured gall bladder!
Answer: That is according to R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah. The Halachah is not like him.
(Beraisa): If the Kevah or small intestines were punctured, it is Tereifah;
R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah says, even if the gall bladder was punctured it is Tereifah.
(R. Yitzchak b'Rebbi Yosef, citing R. Yochanan): The Halachah follows R. Yosi;
Chachamim (to R. Yosi): Iyov said "My gall bladder spills to the ground", yet he lived!
R. Yosi: We cannot learn from miraculous cases.
Iyov's kidneys were stricken. He could not survive naturally (Tosfos - without a cure)!
We must say that he was kept alive miraculously. (Hash-m told the Satan) "just guard his soul (keep him alive)."
(R. Yitzchak b'Rebbi Yosef, citing R. Yochanan): The Halachah is like the opinion that if less than k'Zayis (the volume of an olive) of the liver remains, it is Tereifah.
Contradiction (Rabah bar bar Chanah, citing R. Yochanan): The Halachah follows a Stam Mishnah.
(Our Mishnah): If the liver was removed and nothing remains (it is Tereifah).
Inference: If anything remains, it is Kosher.
(Summation of contradiction): R. Yochanan should rule like our Stam Mishnah!
Answer: Amora'im argue about R. Yochanan's opinion. (If he really said (h), he did not say (i).)
(R. Yitzchak b'Rebbi Yosef, citing R. Yochanan): If the gall bladder was punctured, but the liver seals (covers) the hole, it is Kosher.
(R. Yitzchak b'Rebbi Yosef, citing R. Yochanan): If the Kurkevan (gizzard, the second stomach of a bird) was punctured, but the inner membrane is intact, it is Kosher.
Question: If the inner membrane was punctured, but the stomach is intact, what is the law?
Answer (Rav Nachman): If either one (but not both) is punctured, it is Kosher.
TEREIFOS OF THE VESHET
(Rava): The Veshet has two membranes. The outer is red, and the inner is white. If either one (but not both) is punctured, it is Kosher.
Question: Why must Rava specify which is red and which white?
Answer: If the colors are reversed, it is Tereifah.
Question: If both membranes are punctured, but in different places, what is the law?
Answer #1 (Mar Zutra): Regarding the Veshet this is Kosher. Regarding the gizzard it is Tereifah. (Food will go between the membranes and seep to the other hole, and leave.)
Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Just the opposite! The Veshet contracts and expands during digestion and breathing. The holes will line up, and there will be a puncture going all the way through. The gizzard is stationary, so the holes will not line up.
(Rav Acha brei d'Rav Yosef): I heard that also Mar Zutra said like Rav Ashi.
(Rava): If a scab formed on a wound in the Veshet, this is not considered a seal to be Machshir the animal).
(Rava): The Veshet cannot be checked from the outside (for it is red. One would not notice a drop of blood due to a puncture.) It is checked only from the inside. (One turns it inside out.)
Question: To what does Rava's teaching apply?
Answer: It applies to a Safek whether (Rashi - the Veshet was punctured, or) it became Tereifah due to Drisah. (If the venom made the Veshet red, it is Tereifah.)
A doubtfully Nidras bird was brought in front of Rabah. He was checking the Veshet from the outside.
Abaye: You taught that the Veshet can be checked only from the inside!
Rabah checked it from the inside and found blood, which showed that the venom had penetrated. He ruled that it is Tereifah.
Initially, he checked from the outside to see if Abaye would catch the mistake.
(Ula): If a thorn became stuck in the Veshet, we are not concerned lest it punctured the Veshet and the wound healed. (This would be Tereifah, since the scab is not considered a proper seal.)
Question: According to Ula, why is this different than a Safek Nidras?
Answer: Also there, Ula is not concerned.
Question: Why is this different than two pieces of meat, one of which is Chelev (and we do not know which? There, due to the doubt we may not eat either one!)
Answer: There, we know that a forbidden piece is there.
Question: Why is this different than one who slaughters with a checked knife, and finds (after slaughtering) that the knife is blemished? (The animal is forbidden.)
Answer: There, a problem (definitely) arose in the knife.
Question: Why is this different than Safek Tum'ah in Reshus ha'Yachid (about which we are stringent)?
Counter-question: Perhaps we should compare it to Safek Tum'ah in Reshus ha'Rabim (about which we are lenient)!
Answer: Safek Tum'ah in Reshus ha'Rabim is a special law learned from Sotah. (We do not learn Isurim from it.)
(Answer: Also Safek Tum'ah in a Reshus ha'Yachid is a special law learned from Sotah, and we do not learn Isurim from it!)
(A Chacham): Ula said only that we are not concerned for a thorn found in the Veshet. We would be concerned for one lodged in the Veshet.
Objection (Rav Kahana): Ula would not need to permit a thorn found in the Veshet. Animals that graze freely eat thorns all the time!
(Rav): A puncture in Turbatz Veshet (the place where the Veshet is attached to the jaw) of any size makes the animal Tereifah;
He holds that this is a valid place for Shechitah (like the rest of the Veshet).
(Shmuel): It is Tereifah only if the majority is cut.
He holds that this is an invalid place for Shechitah.
Question: Which part of the Veshet is considered Turbatz Veshet?
Answer #1 (Mari bar Mar Ukva): If one slices it (widthwise) and the cut area expands, this is Turbatz Veshet. If the cut area does not expand, it is the Veshet proper;
Answer #2 (Rav Papi): If the cut area stays the same size, this is Turbatz Veshet. If the cut area constricts, it is the Veshet proper.
Version #1 - Answer #3 (Yonah (a Chacham)): Turbatz Veshet is the place where it swallows.
Version #2 (Zira): In a Yonah (dove), Turbatz Veshet is the place where it swallows. (end of Version #2)
Question: How far does it extend?
Answer (Rav Avya): It extends less than the length of a barley seed, but more than a wheat kernel.
Rav Ukva's children had an ox. The Shechitah started in the Turbatz Veshet, and finished in the Veshet proper.
Rava: I will apply the stringencies of Rav and Shmuel to rule that it is Tereifah.
The stringency of Rav is that a cut of any size in the Turbatz Veshet makes it a Tereifah.
Question: Rav holds that also Turbatz Veshet is a valid place for Shechitah!
Answer: Regarding this, Rava rules like Shmuel, that it is not.
Question: Shmuel holds that only cutting the majority of Turbatz Veshet makes it a Tereifah!
Answer: Regarding this, Rava rules like Rav.
R. Aba: Both Rav and Shmuel agree that the Shechitah was valid. Rava ruled incorrectly. He must pay the owners for the loss that he caused them.
Mar brei d'Ravina: A Beraisa refutes Rava!