Question: Is Chibas ha'Kodesh Machshir only to become Pasul, or even to become Tamei? (This was Reish Lakish's question above.)

This question is unresolved.

(Mishnah - R. Shimon ben Gamliel): If one slaughters a dangerously sick animal, it is permitted only if it quivers its foreleg or hind leg. (If it does not, it surely died before the Shechitah finished);

R. Eliezer says, it suffices if it coughs blood;

R. Shimon says, if one slaughters a dangerously sick animal at night, and finds the area of Shechitah covered with blood the next morning, it is permitted;

This is like R. Eliezer.

Chachamim say, it must quiver a leg or wag its tail.

This shows that it is Kosher, for a large or small animal.

If a small animal stuck out a foreleg at the time of Shechitah and did not return it, this does not show that it is Kosher. It normally does so at the time of death.

All this applies to a sick animal, but a healthy animal is permitted even if it did none of these.

(Gemara) Question: What is the source that a dangerously sick animal is permitted?

Question: Why should we think that it is not?

Answer: "This is the Chayah that you may eat" - Chayah (living) you may eat, but not what is not living;

A dangerously sick animal is not considered living.

Answer #1: "Do not eat a Neveilah" (an animal that died without Shechitah) implies that a dangerously sick animal is permitted.

If a dangerously sick animal were forbidden, there would be no need to forbid it after it died!

Suggestion: Perhaps also a dangerously sick animal is called a Neveilah!

Rejection: "When an animal will die... its Neveilah (carcass)..." - it is a Neveilah only when it is dead.

Rejection: Perhaps "this is the Chayah" forbids even a dangerously sick animal. When it is alive, an Aseh forbids it. After death, also a Lav forbids it.

Answer #2: "Do not eat a Treifah" (an animal with a mortal injury or deficiency) implies that a dangerously sick animal is permitted.

If a dangerously sick animal were forbidden, even though nothing is missing, there would be no need to forbid a Treifah!

Suggestion: Perhaps also a dangerously sick animal is called a Treifah. An Aseh and a Lav forbid it!

Rejection: If so, the Torah would not need to forbid a Neveilah!

When it is alive, an Aseh and a Lav forbid it, so all the more so, after death!

Rejection: Perhaps a dangerously sick animal is called Treifah and also Neveilah. An Aseh and two Lavim forbid it.

Answer #3: We learned that "Chelev of a Treifah and Chelev of a Neveilah may be used for any use, but you may not eat it" teaches that the Lavim of Neveilah and Treifah take effect in addition to the Lav of Chelev.

If also a dangerously sick animal were called a Treifah, the Torah should have said 'Chelev of a Neveilah may be used for any use. You may not eat Chelev of a Treifah'.

We would deduce that since the Lav of Treifah takes effect in addition to the Lav of Chelev while the animal is alive, all the more so, the Lav of Neveilah takes effect in addition to the Lav of Chelev after it is dead!

Inference: Rather, the verse forbids also Chelev of a Neveilah, because a dangerously sick animal is not called a Treifah.

Question (Mar bar Rav Ashi): Perhaps a dangerously sick animal really is called Treifah. "Chelev of a Neveilah" is needed for a Neveilah that was never dangerously sick!

Question: How can that be?

Answer: The animal was cut into two pieces.

Rejection: Even in that case, it became dangerously sick a moment before the majority was cut. (This shows that Question (3) was unfounded.)

Answer #4: If a dangerously sick animal were forbidden, the Torah should have said 'Chelev of a Neveilah or Treifah';

Rather, it said "Chelev of a Treifah and Chelev of a Neveilah", to teach that in Neveilah and Treifah, the meat and the Chelev have the same law (both are forbidden), but in another case, i.e. a dangerously sick animal, their laws are different (the meat is permitted, but the Chelev is forbidden).

Answer #5: Yechezkel said about himself "I did not make my soul Tamei. From my youth until now, I did not eat Neveilah or Treifah. Pigul (despised) meat did not enter my mouth."

"I did not make my soul Tamei" - I did not emit semen at night due to thoughts about women during the day;

"I never ate Neveilah or Treifah" - I did not eat from an animal that was hurriedly slaughtered before it died;

"Pigul meat did not enter my mouth" - I did not eat from an animal that a Chacham needed to rule about (that it is indeed Kosher);

R. Noson says, I did not eat from an animal before the gifts to the Kohen (the foreleg, jaws and stomach) were separated.

(Summation of answer): Granted, if a dangerously sick animal is permitted, Yechezkel said that he was more stringent than the law requires;

If it were forbidden, what is the Chidush that he never transgressed?!

Question: What is considered a dangerously sick animal?

Version #1 - Chachamim of Sura - (Rav Yehudah citing Rav): This is an animal that cannot stand up, even when one helps it.

(R. Chinena bar Shalmiya citing Rav): This is even if it can eat pieces of wood;

(Rami bar Yechezkel): This is even if it can eat beams.

Version #2 - Chachamim of Pumbadisa - (Rav Yehudah citing Rav): This is an animal that cannot stand up, even when one helps it, even if it can eat logs;

(Rami bar Yechezkel): This is even if it can eat beams.

Question (Shmuel): What did Rav teach about a dangerously sick animal?