Reference for Chullin 246:15
ת"ש
- Draw not the inference that in the case of a camel it is not regarded as a connective, but rather that in the case of a camel the skin that is on the neck is not regarde as a connective, and this accords with the opinion of R'Johanan B'Nuri.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This refers to the case where the man who flays the camel requires the hide for a water-skin, or where he flays it from the feet upwards; in either case, according to R. Johanan b. Nuri, once the whole hide, with the exception of that which is on the neck, has been flayed, it can no longer be regarded as a connective (v. our Mishnah supra) , in contradistinction from the case of reptiles, for with reptiles even the skin around the neck is regard ed as a connective. There is indeed here no ground at all to apply a preventive measure in apprehension lest he who flays the camel will not remove all the hide with the exception only of that which remains on the neck, in which case the hide would be a connective, for the standard has been clearly stated, namely, whether or not anything more than the skin of the neck remains, and this standard is a matter which is clearly noticeable and ascertainable. On the other hand, the standard 'as much as can be taken hold of' is not so clearly defined and ascertainable; similarly, the difference between tearing the greater part of a garment and only half of it is also a matter not clearly discernible, accordingly in the latter two cases there is ground for a restrictive measure.');"><sup>10</sup></span>