Commentary for Chullin 136:43

דכתיב

- Whether to render forbidden the lesser portion of the limb that was within or not.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' l.e., the greater portion of a limb emerged but a little of it remained inside. There will in this case be a difference of view as to the opinion expressed by Rab according to the first or second version. According to the second version Rab maintains that the emergence of a limb is regarded as the birth of that limb, similarly be would hold that the emergence of the greater portion of a limb is reckoned as the birth of that entire limb, hence even the lesser portion of the limb which had never emerged would not be rendered permitted by the slaughtering of the dam. According to the first version this lesser portion would be rendered permitted, for it is only the actual part of the limb which had emerged that is forbidden. According to Alfasi, the law as to the lesser portion of the limb that remained within is the issue between Rab and R. Johanan.');">²²</span>

Explore commentary for Chullin 136:43. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.