Tosefta for Chullin 110:10
מתקיף לה ר' תנחומא
And indeed, take the case of clear water which [if found] in either organ is not a defect.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This question is unintelligible, and Rashi is at a loss to explain it. The fact that this is clearly implied in the second ruling which followed as a matter of course makes this statement meaningless; but v. Tosaf a.I. It seems that the entire passage is corrupt. R. Gershom comments upon this line, but on the other hand does not seem to have had the second ruling in his text. A very likely original text is to be found in the Alfasi on this passage, q.v.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
Tosefta Chullin
A charuta by the hand of Heaven (i.e., without human agency) is valid. What does "charuta" mean? Any [animal whose] lung is shriveled. There are among the [potentially disqualifying defects in] limbs those that are valid: An animal with a dangling limb where there remains a sufficient quantity of [attached matter] to permit healing; an animal with dangling flesh where there remains a sufficient quantity of [attached matter] to permit healing; a broken bone that juts out and the hide and flesh [around it] are sufficient to encircle it is valid. There are among the fetuses that are valid, a five-month fetus in small animals, and a nine-month fetus in large animals. [If a fetus] had five eyes or three legs, since it is [nonetheless] similar to one that is qualified [for slaughter], it remains valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy