(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Chulin 56

CHULIN 56 - The material produced for this Daf has been dedicated in loving memory of Moshe Simcha ben David Z"L Rubner (Yahrzeit: 23 Adar II) by his parents, David and Zahava Rubner of Petach Tikva, Israel.


(a) Our Mishnah now discusses the Tereifos of a bird. How do they compare with those of an animal?

(b) Then why does the Tana find it necessary to list them?

(c) The Tana mentions Nekuvas ha'Veshet on account of Pesukas ha'Gargeres. Why does he need to mention ...

  1. ... 'Pesukas ha'Gargeres'?
  2. ... 'Hiksah Chuldah al Roshah'? What would we otherwise have thought?
(d) In the latter case, why must the Tana be speaking in a case where the weasel bit the bird and not where it clawed it?
(a) The Tana includes 'Nikav ha'Kurkevan' and 'Nikvu ha'Dakin'.
What are the 'Kurkevan' and the 'Dakin'?

(b) The Tana needs to include 'Nikvu ha'Dakin' because of the Seifa 'Yatz'u B'nei Me'ehah ... '. What does the Tana say there? Why is it necessary to mention it?

(c) The Tana discusses a bird that fell into the fire (and did not die). What happened to its innards?

(d) What does the Tana say in a case where the stomach was found to be ...

  1. ... yellow?
  2. ... red?
(a) The Tana declares a bird which someone trampled on, which he banged against a wall or which an animal trampled on, and which is still convulsing, Safek Tereifah.
Under which category of Tereifus does this fall?

(b) In which case will the bird be Kasher?

(c) What do Rav, Shmuel and Levi say about a bird that has been bitten by a weasel on its head? How does one examine it for Tereifus?

(d) How will we reconcile this with the opinion that declares an animal whose brain has been punctured Tereifah, even if only the upper membrane has been pierced?

(a) Initially, Ze'iri maintained that a weasel's bite cannot be examined.
Why not?

(b) How did Rav Oshaya explain that, in answer to the Kashya that the thinness of the holes does not justify Ze'iri's statement?

(c) What did Ze'iri say after arriving in Neherda'a?

(d) He cited the opinion of Resh Lakish who forbade examining the bird using a nail.
How does one do this? Why did Resh Lakish forbid it?

(a) What does Rebbi Yochanan say about examining the bird with a nail?

(b) This is in fact, a Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Nechemyah (see Tosfos DH 've'Rebbi Yochanan').
What did the one who searched ...

  1. ... with his hand (from the inside) say to the one who searched using a needle (from the outside)?
  2. ... using a needle say to the one who searched with his hand?
(c) How do we ascertain that Rebbi Yehudah is the one who used to examine with his hand (and Rebbi Nechemyah, using his nail)?

(d) To reconcile Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar's ruling with the continuation of the Beraisa, which renders a bird Tereifah if the skull is punctured, even if the membrane is not (which means that it cannot be examined), how do we establish this latter ruling?

(a) What is the one distinction that a Beraisa cited by Levi, draws between the Tereifos of animals and the Tereifos of birds?

(b) Why did he not include a hole in the Meses and the Beis ha'Kosos, which renders an animal Tereifah, but not a bird?

(c) What did Rav Anan reply, when Rav Nachman asked him how to reconcile Rav and Shmuel, both of whom are quoted as permitting examining a bird with the hand, with Levi's Beraisa?

(a) What did Rav Masna rule when Rav Chana sent him a chicken with a hole in the skull, but with the membrane intact?

(b) How did he reconcile his ruling with Levi's Beraisa, which declares such a bird Tereifah?

(c) Rav Shizbi would examine a a bird (that was bitten in the head by a weasel) by holding the brain up to the sun. What do we mean when we say that ...

  1. ... Rav Yeimar would examine it with water?
  2. ... Rav Acha bar Ya'akov would examine it with a straw?
(d) Rav Shizbi compares our geese to water fowl.
Why is that?
Answers to questions



(a) What does Rebbi Yochanan citing Rebbi Yossi ben Yehoshua say about the Shi'ur of yellowness of the innards that renders a bird that fell into the fire, Tereifah?

(b) What objection did Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi initially raise to his son's She'eilah as to what the Din will be if the lower end of the liver (that adjoins the intestines) has turned yellow)?

(c) How did Rava uphold the She'eilah, and issue a ruling in the same statement?

(a) What did Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapar b'Rivi rule when Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi sent him a chicken whose intestines were yellow?

(b) How do we reconcile this with our Mishnah, which declares a bird with yellow innards (that fell into the fire) Tereifah?

(c) And what did Rebbi Avahu rule when Rebbi Yitzchak bar Yosef sent him a chicken whose intestines were red?

(d) How do we reconcile this with our Mishnah, which declares a chicken with red innards, Kasher?

(a) What does Rav Shmuel bar Chiya Amar Rebbi Mani say about the gizzard, the heart or the liver of a bird that fell into a fire and turned yellow?

How is it possible for the bird to be declared Kasher after that?
(b) The what caused it to turn yellow in the first place?

(c) What does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak extrapolate from Rebbi Mani's ruling regarding the same three limbs, that did not immediately turn yellow, but did, after they were cooked?

(d) On what grounds do we repudiate Rav Ashi who (based on Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak), forbids eating a bird that fell into the fire, and whose three limbs did not turn yellow, before cooking them, to see whether or not, they will turn yellow?

11) We learned in our Mishnah, that a bird that was trampled on or that was banged against the wall, is Kasher, provided it survives twenty-four hours.
What further condition is required, according to Rebbi Elazar ben Antignos in the name of Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yanai?


(a) Our Mishnah, listing the cases that are Kasher by a bird begins 'Nikvah ha'Gargeres O she'Nisdekah'.
In which case will the bird be Kasher ...
  1. ... if it is struck by a weasel on its head?
  2. ... if its intestines spilled out (and were returned)?
(b) The Tana Kama declares the bird Kasher if its Zefek is punctured.
What is 'Zefek'?

(c) Rebbi is even more lenient.
What does he say?

(d) What does the Tana say about a bird with broken wing-bones, broken legs or with its plumage removed?

(e) What does Rebbi Yehudah say about one minus the fluff next to its skin?

(a) The Beraisa describes how Rebbi Sima'i and Rebbi Tzadok, on their way to Lud, spent Shabbos in Ono. What were they going to do in Lud?

(b) The Tana records 'Horu be'Tarpachas ke'Rebbi be'Zefek'.
What is 'Tarpachas'?

(c) This might mean that they forbade an animal with its womb removed, but permitted a bird minus its crop, like Rebbi.
What else might it mean?

(d) What is the outcome of the She'eilah?

(a) What did Rabah (or Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi) say about the roof of the crop?

(b) How does Rav Bibi bar Abaye define 'the roof of the crop'?

(a) Our Mishnah permits a bird whose intestines have come out (and been returned) as long as they are not punctured.
How does Rebbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak qualify this? In which case will the bird be Tereifah?

(b) How do we learn this from the Pasuk in Ha'azinu "Hu Ascha Va'yechonenecha"?

(c) What does Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, learn from this Pasuk?

(a) What did that Nochri do when he saw a man falling off a roof and his intestines spill out?

(b) Why did he do that?

(c) Why did the Nochri not return the intestines himself?

(d) Did he succeed in his mission?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,