Chullin 105
לחתול ולחולדה יש להן דרוסה או אין להן דרוסה
For when he said: 'Even the clawing by a weasel is of consequence', he meant with reference to birds; and when he said: 'Even the clawing by a cat is of no consequence', he meant with reference to large sheep; and when he said: 'The clawing by a cat is of consequence but the clawing by a weasel is not', he meant with reference to kids and lambs.
לחתול יש דרוסה לחולדה אין דרוסה בגדיים וטלאים
For when R'Dimi came [from palestine] he related that there once happened a case where a ewe-lamb was clawed by a fox at the baths of Beth Hini,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' East of Caesarea, v. Horowitz, I.S. Palestine p. 131.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
כי הוינן בי רב כהנא אמר
For when R'Dimi came [from Palestine] he related that there once happened a case where a ewe-lamb was clawed by a fox, and when the case was brought to the Sages they ruled that the clawing was of no consequence! - R'Safra answered: It must have been a dog [and not a fox].
והאנן תנן
Abaye said: We have it on tradition that clawing is only with the fore-leg, thus excluding the hind leg; tha clawing is only with the claws, thus excluding the teeth; that the clawing must be intentional, thus excluding an unintentional act;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., where the animal accidentally fell down upon cattle and its claws entered the body of the victim.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ודרוסת הנץ בעוף הדק
and that the clawing must be by a living animal, thus excluding the clawing by a dead animal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Presumably the dead animal had fallen upon cattle and its claws had struck the victim.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
דרוסת הנץ בדכוותיה ואינך בדזוטרא מינייהו
But since you have already said it must not be unintentional, is it then at all necessary to say that must not be by a dead animal? - It is indeed necessary for the case where the animal struck with its claw and it was immediately amputated.
ואיכא דאמרי
Now you might have thought that it discharges the poison at once when it strikes with the claw, we therefore learn that it discharges the poison only when it withdraws the claw.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that if the claw had been amputated before it had been withdrawn from the victim, the latter is not trefah, for at the time when the poison is discharged the limb was already dead.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
דרוסת הנץ בדרבי מיניה ואינך בדכוותייהו
Rabbah son of R'Huna said in the name of Rab: If a lion had entered amidst oxen and later there was found a nail [from a lion's claw] lodged in the back of one of them, there is no fear that the lion had clawed it.
אין דרוסה לשועל
Because although most lions attack with their claws there are a few that do not; moreover, all that do claw do not usually lose a nail, therefore the fact that this ox has a nail lodged in its back suggests that had rubbed itself against a wall.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is so rare an occurrence for a lion to lose a nail while attacking with its claw, that it is much more probable to suggest that the animal got the nail lodged in its back from having scratched itself against a wall in which this nail protruded.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
איני
On the contrary, we should argue thus: Although most oxen rub themselves against a wall there are a few that do not; moreover, all that do rub themselves against a wall do not usually find a nail lodged in their backs, therefore the fact that this ox has a nail lodged in its back suggests that it was clawed by a lion! - One can argue this way and one can argue that way; therefore as there is a doubt whether [the ox] had been clawed or not<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the current ed. there are added the words: 'We must place it on its former status'. These words are omitted in MS.M., and are evidently redundant. V., however, Glosses of Samuel Strashun.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
מעשה ודרס שועל רחל במרחץ של בית היני ובא מעשה לפני חכמים ואמרו
Abaye said: This is the rule only when the nail was actually there [protruding from the back of the ox], but if there was found the mark of the nail [of a claw upon the back], we are certainly apprehensive about it.
והא כי אתא רב דימי אמר
If there was a doubt whether [an animal had been clawed] by a dog or by a cat, we may assume that it was a dog.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The clawing of a dog being of no consequence (supra) , the animal is permitted.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
אין דרוסה
If it broke the head of one, we may assume that its fury has thereby been assuaged.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And there is no fear for the others. It must be assumed, however, that this was the first victim of the lion.');"><sup>14</sup></span>