1) TO WHAT WE ATTRIBUTE PUNCTURES

(a) A needle was found in a piece of the liver. Mar brei d’Rav Yosef was about to rule that it is Tereifah.
1. Rav Ashi: Would you say the same if it was found in flesh? (Since a punctured liver is not Tereifah, regarding a needle, it is like flesh!)
(b) (Rav Ashi) Rather, we see which way the needle points. If the needle’s head is inside the liver, it surely came through the Kaneh (and it is Kosher); if the head is outside, it surely came through the Veshet (and it is Tereifah).
1. This distinction only applies to a thick needle; we assume that a thin needle to have came through the Veshet regardless of the direction it faces.
(c) Question: Why is this different than the case of a needle found in the Beis ha’Kosos (a fold after the first stomach)?
1. If a needle is found in the Beis ha’Kosos – if only one wall is punctured, it is Kosher; if both, it is Tereifah.
2. We do not distinguish which way it is pointing!
(d) Answer: Since food and drink pass through the Beis ha’Kosos, they may have pushed (even the head of the needle) through.
(e) A needle was found in the great chamber of the liver. Huna Mar brei d’Rav Idi ruled that it is Tereifah; Rav Ada bar Minyomi was Machshir.
(f) (Ravina): Huna will have to compensate the owner for having fed the animal to the dogs (really, it was Kosher).
(g) (Rav Kahana): If a date pit was found in the gall bladder, it definitely came from the Kaneh (it is Kosher).
1. Even though it is too big to leave the Kaneh by itself, when the animal moves, it becomes wedged in deeper and deeper, until it eventually leaves.
(h) Regarding an olive pit, it is Tereifah, for it tears.
(i) (R. Yochanan): (The lung) is called Rei’ah because it improves Re’iyah (vision).
1. This is only if it is eaten with herbs that improve vision.
(j) Question: If the lungs were punctured where the slaughterer’s hand goes – do we say that the slaughterer caused the hole after slaughter (and it is Kosher), or not?
(k) Answer #1 (Rav Ada bar Noson): We attribute it to the slaughterer.
(l) Answer #2 (Mar Zutra brei d’Rav Mari): We do not.
1. The law is, we attribute it to the slaughterer.
2. (Rav Mesharshiya): This is reasonable, for if a wolf took the intestines and returned them punctured, we attribute the holes to the wolf.
(m) Question: If the lungs were punctured by a worm, do we assume that this happened after slaughter?
(n) Answer: Rav Yosef bar Dosoy and Rabanan argued on this.
1. The Halachah is, we assume that it happened after slaughter.
(o) (Mishnah – R. Shimon): A punctured lung is Tereifah only if the hole goes to the chambers.
(p) (Rabah bar Tachlifa): He refers to the great chamber.
(q) (Rav Acha bar Aba, Rav Bibi): R. Maloch cited R. Yehoshua ben Levi to say that the Halachah follows R. Shimon.
(r) (Rav Huna): No, R. Yehoshua ben Levi says that the Halachah is not like R. Shimon.
1. (R. Zeira): R. Maloch and R. Yitzchak bar Ami said that the Halachah is not lke R. Shimon.
2. The Halachah is not like R. Shimon.
2) A PUNCTURED STOMACH
(a) (Mishnah): If the Kevah was punctured (it is Tereifah).
(b) (Rav Yitzchak bar Nachmani): Kohanim would eat the Chelev on the Kevah, like R. Yishmael who permitted it.
1. (Beraisa – R. Yishmael) Question: “So you will bless Benei Yisrael” – this teaches that the Kohanim bless Yisrael, what is the source that the Kohanim are blessed?
2. Answer (R. Yishmael): “I (Hash-m) will bless them”.
3. Question (R. Akiva) The Torah commands the Kohanim to bless Yisrael – how do we know that Hash-m blesses Yisrael?
4. Answer: “I (Hash-m) will bless them.”
(c) Question: How does R. Akiva learn that the Kohanim are blessed?
(d) Answer (Rav Nachman): “(Hash-m) will bless those that bless (Yisrael)”.
(e) (Beraisa – R. Yishmael): “*And* all the Chelev on the Kerev (innards)” – this comes to include the Chelev on the small intestines;
49b—————————————49b

1. R. Akiva says, it comes to include the Chelev on the Kevah.
(f) Contradiction (Beraisa – R. Yishmael): “And the Chelev on (some texts read – The Chelev that covers) the Kerev” – just like the Chelev covering the Kerev is a membrane that can be peeled off, also all such Chelev (of a Shelamim is offered, and is forbidden to eat even in Chulin Behemos);
1. R. Akiva says, just like the Chelev covering the Kerev is a membrane spread over it that can be peeled off, also all such Chelev (is offered in Kodshim and forbidden in Chulin).
(g) Answer #1 (Ravin): The opinions in the first Beraisa must be switched.
1. Question: Why not switch the opinions in the second Beraisa?
2. Answer: Since the second Beraisa details the opinions so precisely, presumably it is accurate.
(h) Objection: But R. Yitzchak bar Nachmani taught that Kohanim were lenient like R. Yishmael!
(i) Answer #2 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): R. Yishmael said in his father’s name that the Chelev on the Kevah is permitted; he himself holds it is forbidden.
3) WHICH “CHELEV” CAN SEAL A HOLE
(a) (Rav): If Chelev that is permitted (to eat) seals a hole, it is as if there is no hole (regarding Tereifos); forbidden Chelev does not seal a hole.
(b) (Rav Sheshes): Both types of Chelev can seal holes.
(c) Question (R. Zeira): Can Chelev covering the Kerev in a Chayah seal holes (according to Rav)?
1. If we understand Rav very literally, all permitted Chelev seals, all forbidden Chelev does not seal – all Chelev of Chayos seals, for it is permitted;
2. If Rav teaches that permitted Chalavim cling to the punctured organ, forbidden Chalavim do not (presumably, this depends on which organ the Chelev covers, whether in a Behemos or Chayah), this Chelev does not cling to the Kerev.
(d) Answer (Abaye): This is obvious – even though the Chelev is permitted, it does not cling.
(e) An animal was brought before Rava; forbidden Chelev covered a puncture.
1. Rava: The animal is permitted. We rely on Rav Sheshes’ opinion; also, the Torah is concerned for the money of Yisrael.
2. Objection (Rav Papa): We cannot be lenient about a Torah prohibition because the Torah is concerned for the money of Yisrael!
3. A man asked Rava about honey that had been exposed.
4. Rava: The honey is permitted. Firstly, a Mishnah teaches that only wine, water and milk become forbidden if exposed;
i. Secondly, the Torah is concerned for the money of Yisrael!
5. Objection (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): The Torah’s concern for the money of Yisrael does not override mortal danger and R. Shimon’s opinion!
i. (Beraisa): The following liquids are not forbidden through exposure – brine, vinegar, oil, and honey.
ii. R. Shimon: They are forbidden – I saw a snake drinking brine.
iii. Chachamim: That was a deranged snake, normal snakes do not drink these.
6. Rava: At least admit to me that brine does not become forbidden – Rav Papa and other Chachamim would put exposed liquids into brine to permit them!
7. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak: Admit to me that honey becomes forbidden, for (not only R. Shimon, but also) R. Shimon ben Elazar forbids this.
i. (Beraisa – R. Shimon ben Elazar): Exposed honey is forbidden.
(f) (Rav Nachman): Chelev in the shape of a hat does not seal.
1. Question: To which Chelev does he refer?
2. Answer #1: He refers to Chelev at the end of the (large) intestines.
3. Answer #2 He refers to the Chelev over the heart.
(g) (Rava): Rav Nachman taught that either Chimtza or Bar Chimtza (two Chalavim on the Kevah) seals, but not both – I don’t know which seals.
(h) (Rav Chinena): Only Bar Chimtza seals.
(i) Question: Which is Chimtza, which is Bar Chimtza?
(j) Answer: We learn from Rav Nachman.
1. (Rav Nachman): In Eretz Yisrael, they eat (one of these Chalavim) – we (in Bavel) may not rely on it to seal?!
2. Version #1: Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael and Bavel agree that Chelev of the Keshes (bow, i.e. on the outside of the Kevah, which is bow-shaped) is forbidden; they argue about the Chelev of the string (inside of the bow – this is Bar Chimtza, all agree that it seals).
3. Version #2: Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael and Bavel agree that the Chelev of the string is permitted; they argue about the Chelev of the bow. (Rashi – according to this, all Chelev on the Kevah seals – this is unlike Rav Nachman (g); Tosfos – it is like Rav Nachman, but we must say that his teaching (j:1) was not said in wonderment, rather simply – in Eretz Yisrael, they eat (Chelev of the bow, this is Bar Chimtza); we (in Bavel do not eat it, we) cannot even rely on it that it seals!