Chullin 254
נשחטה הבהמה הוכשרו בדמיה דברי רבי מאיר
IF THE ANIMAL WAS SLAUGHTERED THEY HAVE BY THE BLOOD [OF THE SLAUGHTERING] BECOME SUSCEPTIBLE TO UNCLEANNESS:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For at the slaughtering the limbs and pieces of flesh are not regarded as having fallen off, so that although the slaughtering cannot render the limbs and flesh fit for food it can render them clean that they be not nebelah, and at the same time it renders them susceptible to receive uncleanness by the moistening by the blood. V. supra 33a.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
מתה הבהמה הבשר צריך הכשר
THE FLESH REQUIRES TO BE RENDERED SUSCEPTIBLE TO UNCLEANNESS, AND THE LIMB IS RENDERED UNCLEAN AS A LIMB SEVERED FROM THE LIVING CREATURE, BUT IS NOT RENDERED UNCLEAN AS THE LIMB OF A CARCASS:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For at death the limbs and pieces of flesh are regarded as having fallen off before, i.e., from the living animal, and therefore the flesh is entirely free from uncleanness (v. p. 714, n. 12) whereas the limbs convey uncleanness as limbs severed from a living animal but not as limbs severed from a carcass. For the distinction v. Gemara infra.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ור' שמעון מטהר:
<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>They are rendered unclean in respect of FOOD UNCLEANNESS but not in respect of nebelah uncleanness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the limb does not render men and vessels unclean.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
היכי דמי אי דמעלין ארוכה אפילו טומאת אוכלין נמי לא ליטמו
If they can be restored<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the flesh or the limb hanging from the body could be reset and bound up with the body so as to heal and recover completely.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ואי דאין מעלין ארוכה טומאת נבלה נמי ליטמו
they should not be rendered unclean even In respect of food uncleanness, and if they cannot be restored they should be then rendered unclean also in respect of nebelah uncleanness! - In fact they cannot be restored, but with regard to nebelah Uncleanness it is different, for the Divine Law says.
תניא נמי הכי
There was also taught [a Baraitha] to this effect: 'With regard to the limbs or the pieces of flesh which hang loose from the animal and are attached by a hairbreadth, I might have said that they should convey nebelah uncleanness, the text therefore states. "And if there fall", that is, they must absolutely fall away [from the body]'; nevertheless, they are rendered unclean in respect of food uncleanness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though in respect of nebelah uncleanness they are considered attached to the animal.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
האבר והבשר המדולדלין בבהמה ומעורין בחוט השערה יכול יטמאו טומאת נבלה תלמוד לומר
This supports R'Hiyya B'Ashi, for R'Hiyya B'Ashi said in the name of Samuel: Figs which had shrivelled up on the branch are rendered unclean in respect of food uncleanness, and he who plucks them on the Sabbath is liable to bring a sin-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus although with regard to Sabbath the figs are regarded as still upon the tree, with regard to food uncleanness they are regarded as fallen off.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ירקות שצמקו באיביהן כגון הכרוב והדלעת אין מטמאין טומאת אוכלין
But this is unthinkable, for they are then like wood! R'Isaac, however, explained that it means: If they were cut down in order to be dried.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although they were intended to be dried and used as fuel, nevertheless so long as they are still moist they are rendered unclean in respect of food uncleanness.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
קצצן ויבשן מטמאין טומאת אוכלין
Now this reasoning applies only to cabbages and pumpkins, for these no sooner have they become dry than they are uneatable: but other fruits [even though they shrivelled up on the stem] are rendered unclean [in respect of food uncleanness].
עץ בעלמא הוא
If both they and their stems dried up, it is obvious;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For even with regard to the laws of Sabbath these vegetables would be regarded as plucked, consequently only these do not convey food uncleanness, since they are as wood, but other vegetables do. Hence it was unnecessary for the Baraitha to state these obvious rules.');"><sup>11</sup></span>
וא"ר יצחק
it must be then that only they shrivelled up but not their stems!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case with regard to the laws of Sabbath they would be regarded as unplucked, nevertheless with regard to uncleanness they are considered plucked and convey food uncleanness, thus supporting Samuel's view.');"><sup>12</sup></span>
טעמא דכרוב ודלעת הוא כיון דיבשן לאו בני אכילה נינהו הא שאר פירות מטמאי
In fact both th and their stems had dried up, but it was necessary to teach that if one cut them down in order to dry them [they are still unclean in respect of food uncleanness].
לעולם הן ועוקציהן וקצצן על מנת ליבשן איצטריכא ליה
had dried up they are regarded as attached, presumably as the one is regarded as plucked for all purposes,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., both as regards the laws of Sabbath and uncleanness, thus conflicting with Samuel, who distinguishes between these laws.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ת"ש
so the other is regarded as attached for all purposes!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., both as regards the laws of Sabbath and uncleanness, thus conflicting with Samuel, who distinguishes between these laws.');"><sup>14</sup></span>
מאי לאו מה תלושין לכל דבריהן אף מחוברין לכל דבריהן
One means one thing, and the other another.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In other words, 'regarded as attached' has reference only to the laws of Sabbath but not to uncleanness, thus in agreement with Samuel.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
הא כדאיתא והא כדאיתא:
- Rabbah said: They differ as to whether the animal can be regarded as serving as a handle to a limb;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both agree that moistening the handle of foodstuffs renders the whole foodstuff susceptible to uncleanness, but the question is whether the major portion of a thing can in any way be said to serve as a handle to the lesser portion, so that by moistening the bulk the handle is regarded as made susceptible to uncleanness.');"><sup>17</sup></span>
במאי קא מיפלגי
holds that the animal can be regarded as a handle to a limb,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So when the animal was rendered susceptible to uncleanness the hanging limb was likewise rendered susceptible.');"><sup>19</sup></span>
אין בהמה נעשית יד לאבר
is of the opinion that where by taking hold of the smaller part of a thing the greater part does not come away with it it is regarded like it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the smaller part is still considered as part of the whole. It is agreed to by all that the animal cannot serve as a handle to the limb, but R. Meir and R. Simeon differ in this: R. Meir maintains that whatever still hangs on to the whole is regarded as part of the whole; for, granted that the hanging limb cannot pull with it the rest of the animal, the animal when taken up would certainly take with it this hanging limb. R. Simeon, however, does not accept this argument. hcr');"><sup>21</sup></span>