1)

(a)The Mishnah lists the eighteen T'reifos. An animal becomes T'reifah - if it has a hole in the Veshet or if the majority of the Gargeres is broken (width-wise).

(b)It lists a hole in the membrane that covers the brain and a hole in the heart. The latter - must penetrate the entire wall through to the cavity.

(c)When the Tana writes 'Nifsekah ha'Shedrah, ve'Nifsak ha'Chut she'lah' - he really means just that the spinal cord has snapped, adding that the backbone is broken only - because it is unusual for the cord to snap without the backbone breaking.

(d)An animal with a missing liver is considered a T'reifah - provided none of it remains.

2)

(a)An animal with - a hole in the lung or with part of the lung missing is T'reifah.

(b)Rebbi Shimon requires the hole to penetrate the Beis-ha'Simponos - the bronchi (the air-tubes that are surrounded by capillaries, tiny blood vessels, which explains why blood flows from the Simponos, when they are cut).

(c)The Tana then lists a group of three internal organs that are punctured, the Keivah (the maw [the first stomach of an ox), the Marah (the gall-bladder) - and the Dakin (the intestines).

3)

(a)The inner Keres (the rumen [the second of an ox's four stomachs]) renders the animal a T'reifah via the smallest hole, the outer Keres (the abdomen) - if most of it becomes torn.

(b)Rebbi Yehudah agrees with this latter Shi'ur, only with regard to a small ox, whereas a large one renders the animal a T'reifah - with a tear the size of a Tefach (even though it is less than the majority).

(c)A hole in the Messes (the third stomach of ruminants) or in the Beis ha'Kosos (the paunch [the fourth stomach]) is considered a T'reifah - provided it appears in an independent section of the lining, not where the two stomachs are joined.

(d)In the ruminants, the food goes from the Beis ha'Kosos to the Messes, from ...

1. ... the Messes to the Keivah, and from ...

2. ... the Keivah to the Dakin.

4)

(a)The Tana includes in the list an animal that falls off the roof and one the majority of whose ribs are broken - two distinct T'reifos. The first refers even there where no limbs appear to be broken, and the second, even to one that did not fall off the roof.

(b)The former is a Safek T'reifah - and must be considered a T'reifah if one Shechted it immediately (and if it did not stand up after falling).

(c)We consider it T'reifah, even though it does not have any apparent defect - because we suspect that its limbs became shattered or dislocated.

(d)The source of all the T'reifos is - Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai.

5)

(a)D'rusas ha'Ze'ev is - where a wolf clawed the animal, rendering it a T'reifah via the poison that it injects into it.

(b)The Tana Kama does not differentiate between a small animal and a large one with regard to D'rusas ha'Ze'ev. Rebbi Yehudah however, maintains that - a large animal only becomes a T'reifah if it is clawed by a lion, but not by a wolf (whose poison is too weak to affect a large animal).

(c)A large bird (a chicken or a goose) requires the claws of a large bird of prey (such as a sparrow hawk [or a falcon- Aruch]) to render it a T'reifah; a small bird (a dove or a pigeon) - even through the claws of a small one (such as an astor)

(d)The principle the Tana presents to ascertain that the animal is a T'reifah is - any defect that an animal cannot survive (beyond twelve months).

6)

(a)We refute Resh Lakish's question where a T'reifah is hinted in the Torah - by citing the obvious source (the Pasuk in Mishpatim "u'Basar ba'Sadeh T'reifah Lo Socheilu".

(b)Nor can we reject the refutation by referring to other things that we learn from this Pasuk (in Maseches Makos) - due to the principle Ein Mikra Yotzei mi'Yedei Peshuto (A Pasuk does not leave its simple meaning).

(c)We therefore amend Resh Lakish's question to read - where is it hinted that a T'reifah cannot survive (as we just learned in Zeh ha'Kelal in our Mishnah)?

(d)He learns it from the Pasuk in Shemini "Zos ha'Chayah asher Tocheilu" - which implies that one may only eat an animal that can live, but not a T'reifah (which cannot, as we just explained. It is as if the Torah wrote "Zos Chayah").

(e)Those who hold that a T'reifah can live (as will be explained later), prove it from the same Pasuk - from "Zos", which is otherwise superfluous, and from which we can therefore extrapolate 'This live animal you may eat', implying that there is another live animal (a T'reifah) which you may not'.

7)

(a)Those who hold that a T'reifah cannot live interpret "Zos" like Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael, who learns from there that - Hash-m took hold of each species mentioned in the Torah and to tell Moshe 'This you can eat, and this you can't!'

(b)In fact, we conclude, everybody Darshens "Zos" like Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael. And those who hold that a T'reifah can live derive their opinion from the same source as Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael elsewhere - who learns it from "Bein ha'Chayah ha'Ne'echeles, u'Vein ha'Chayah asher Lo Se'acheil" (a reference to T'reifos), which implies that T'reifah animals can live.

8)

(a)We query our Mishnah, which lists only eighteen T'reifos, omitting Basgar and Shev Sh'maitsa, but conclude that the Kashya pertains, not to our Mishnah, but to Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael - inasmuch as he specifically mentions the number eighteen (which our Mishnah does not).

(b)We therefore have no difficulty in reconciling our Mishnah with Basgar and Shev Sh'maitsa - by simply including them in 'Zeh ha'Kelal' in the Seifa.

(c)Basgar is the acronym for the four cases that we are now about to discuss. The 'Beis' represents an animal (*Be*heimah) whose hind legs have been severed above the knee, which the Tana Kama in a Beraisa considers a T'reifah.

(d)Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael maintains that it can survive - by cauterizing the wound.

9)

(a)We nevertheless object to therefore answering the Kashya by establishing Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael like Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar - inasmuch as even if he does, Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael holds that a T'reifah can live, in which case, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar's statement does not prove that the animal is not a T'reifah.

(b)We nevertheless conclude that Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael concurs with Rebbi Shimon ben Elazer, due to the latter's ruling in the same Beraisa - where he specifically states that an animal whose hind leg has been severed above the knee is Kasher - which explains why Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael omitted it from his list of T'reifos.

10)

(a)The 'Samech' in Basgar represents 'Chesaron be'Shedrah'. In the Mishnah in Ohalos, Beis Shamai declares it no longer Metamei be'Ohel, if two vertebrae are missing. According to Beis Hillel - even one will suffice.

(b)Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel are arguing over the Shi'ur of Tum'as Ohel, as we just explained. Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel comments that - they repeat the same Machlokes with regard to T'reifos, posing the Kashya on Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael, why he omits the case from his Beraisa (seeing as he obviously holds like Beis Hillel).

(c)We answer the Kashya - by taking the two T'reifos of the Messes and the Beis ha'Kosos listed in our Mishnah and turning them into one, thereby enabling us to insert 'Chesaron be'Shedrah' instead.

11)

(a)The 'Gimel' in Basgar represents *'G*'ludah' - where the entire skin has been removed.

(b)Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael declines to insert it in his list because he holds like Rebbi Meir, who holds that - G'ludah is Kasher.

(c)The 'Reish' of Basgar is 'Charusa', which means a dried up lung - which is T'reifah only if it dried up due to a noise made by a human being that frightened the animal, but not to one caused by a natural phenomenon (such as thunder), which affects the animal only temporarily, in which case it is not a T'reifah.

(d)The author of the Halachah 'Nikvah ha'Marah, T'reifah' is - Rebbi Meir (a minority opinion)

(e)This helps us to solve the current problem (concerning why Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael omits Charusa) - since Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael will then omit Nikvah Marah and replace it with Charusa.

12)

(a)We ask why Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael omits Shev Sh'maitsa (which we will discuss shortly). They are referred to as 'Sh'maitsa' - because (as opposed to 'Basgar', which all refer to statements of Tana'im), they all refer to statements of Amora'im.

(b)The first of the Shev Sh'maitsa concerns 'Buka de'Atma', the second 'Laksah Kulya' and the third, 'Nikav ha'Techol'. The meaning of ...

1. ... 'Buka de'Atma' Rav Masna explains as - a thigh-bone that became dislocated.

2. ... 'Laksah be'Kulya', as Rachish bar Papa in the name of Rav explains, is - even one kidney that filled up with puss.

(c)The Mishnah later will declare Nital ha'Techol, Kasher, on which Rav Avira Amar Rava comments that - if the T'chol (the spleen) became punctured, it is T'reifah.

(d)Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Shmuel declares T'reifah, Simanim she'Nidald'lu be'Rubah - where the two pipes became disconnected from their source in a number of places, which in total, adds up to a majority.

13)

(a)Rabah bar Rav Shilo ... Amar Shmuel teaches us the last three cases of 'Shev Sh'maitsa'. He declares T'reifah an animal ...

1. ... whose rib - has been torn from its location.

2. ... whose skull - has been badly beaten.

3. ... whose flesh that covers the majority of the Keres (part of the abdominal wall that covers the paunch) - is torn.

(b)He refers to the majority of the Keres - because the minority, which is contained inside the rib-cage, is not covered by a wall of flesh).

(c)Shmuel clearly - disagrees with the Sugya later, which explains our Mishnah 'Rov ha'Chitzonah' to mean Basar ha'Chofeh es Rov ha'Chitzonah. He will explain the Mishnah differently.

14)

(a)We answer the Kashya from the Shev Sh'maitsa on Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael by pointing out that his listincludes eight cases of 'Nekuvi' - which we count as one, replacing the other seven with the Shev Sh'maitsa.

(b)The problem with this is that ...

1. ... by the same token, there are two cases of 'Pesuki', which must then also be counted as one (leaving us with only seventeen T'reifos).

2. ... the case of Rav Avira (Nikav ha'Techol) in the name of Rava (one of the Shev She'ma'tsa) is - that it too, cannot be counted independently, leaving us with only sixteen T'reifos.

(c)We finally resolve the eighteen T'reifos of Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael with 'Basgar' and 'Shev Sh'maitsa' by referring to Beheimah she'Necht'chah Raglehah and G'ludah (both of which we previously precluded from Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael's list and) - which we will now reinstate, leaving us with a total of eighteen T'reifos.

(d)And we reconcile Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael with the many additional T'reifos of the lung which we will discuss later in the Perek - by incorporating them all either in 'Rei'ah she'Nikvah' or 'Rei'ah she'Chasrah'.