בוקי סריקי הכי אמר רב נחמן מקום הדבק אפילו ניטל כולו כשר והוא שנשתייר בו כדי תפיסה וכמה אמר אביי כמלא בטדא בתורא

empty bottles, i. e., not to falsely attribute statements to him? So said Rav Naḥman: With regard to the place that the rectum is attached to the hips, even if all of it was removed, the animal is kosher. And this is the halakha only where sufficient space remains of it for a hand to grip. The Gemara asks: And how much is considered sufficient to grip? Abaye said: The width of a finger. This measure is sufficient even in the case of a large bull.

הכרס הפנימי אמר רב יהודה אמר רב העיד נתן בר שילא ריש טבחיא דצפורי לפני רבי משום רבי נתן אי זו היא כרס הפנימי סניא דיבי וכן אמר רבי יהושע בן קרחה סניא דיבי רבי ישמעאל אמר איסתומכא דכרסא

§ The mishna states that if the internal rumen was perforated or most of the external rumen was torn, the animal is a tereifa. With regard to this, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Natan bar Sheila, chief butcher of Tzippori, testified before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi in the name of Rabbi Natan: Which is the internal rumen? It is the cecum. And so said Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa: It is the cecum. Rabbi Yishmael said: It is the opening [istumka] of the rumen.

רב אסי אמר רבי יוחנן מקום צר יש בכרס ואיני יודע איזהו אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק נפל כרסא בבירא אמר רב אחא בר רב עוא אמר רב אסי מן המיצר ולמטה

Rav Asi says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: There is a narrow place in the rumen, and this is the internal rumen; all the rest is the external rumen. But I do not know which area is this narrow place. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The rumen has fallen in a pit, i. e., since it is unknown which area is considered the narrow place, a perforation in any part of the rumen renders the animal a tereifa. Rav Aḥa bar Rav Ava says that Rav Asi says: The inner rumen extends from the narrow place, where the rumen begins to narrow as it approaches the gullet, and downward toward the gullet when the animal is suspended by its legs.

רבי יעקב בר נחמני אמר שמואל מקום שאין בו מילת רבי אבינא אמר גניבא משמיה דרב טפח בוושט סמוך לכרס זו היא כרס הפנימית

Rabbi Ya’akov bar Naḥmani says in the name of Shmuel: The internal rumen is the place in the rumen that has no wool, i. e., downy projections on the inside of the rumen. Rabbi Avina says in the name of Geneiva, who said in the name of Rav: The handbreadth in the gullet adjacent to the rumen, this is the internal rumen.

אמרי במערבא משמיה דרבי יוסי בר חנינא כל הכרס כולו זו היא כרס הפנימית ואיזהו כרס החיצון בשר החופה את רוב הכרס רבה בר רב הונא אמר מפרעתה מאי מפרעתה אמר רב אויא היכא דפרעי טבחי

In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they said in the name of Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina: The entire rumen is the internal rumen. And if so, which is the external rumen? It is the flesh that envelops the majority of the rumen on the underside of the animal. Rabba bar Rav Huna says: The internal rumen is the mafrata. The Gemara asks: What is the mafrata? Rav Avya said: It is the place that the butcher exposes when he opens up the animal, i. e., the underside of the stomach.

בנהרדעא עבדי כרבה בר רב הונא אמר ליה רב אשי לאמימר כל הני שמעתתא מאי אמר ליה כולהו שייכן בדרבה בר רב הונא

The Gemara recounts: In Neharde’a, they practiced in accordance with the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna. Rav Ashi said to Ameimar, one of the Sages of Neharde’a: What about all these other statements, that the internal rumen is another part of the rumen? Ameimar said to him: They are all included in the definition of the rumen according to Rabba bar Rav Huna. The cecum, the opening of the stomach, and the place with no wool all face the underside of the stomach, i. e., the mafrata.

ודרב אסי אמר רבי יוחנן מאי אמר ליה כבר פירשה רב אחא בר עוא ודרבי אבינא ודבני מערבא מאי אמר ליה הני ודאי פליגי

Rav Ashi replied: And what about the opinion that Rav Asi says in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, that the internal rumen is an unknown narrow area? Shouldn’t the entire rumen be treated as the internal rumen? Ameimar said to him: Rav Aḥa bar Ava already explained that it is the area extending from the narrow place until the gullet. This area is also included in the mafrata. Rav Ashi asked further: And what of the opinion of Rabbi Avina, that the internal rumen is the handbreadth near the gullet, and of the residents of the West, Eretz Yisrael, that it is the entire rumen? Ameimar said to him: These opinions certainly disagree with that of Rabba bar Rav Huna, but we do not follow them.

רבי יהודה אומר בגדולה כו׳ אמר רבי בנימין בר יפת אמר רבי אלעזר לא גדולה גדולה ממש ולא קטנה קטנה ממש אלא כל שנקרע בה טפח ולא הוי רובא זו היא ששנינו בגדולה טפח רובא ולא הוי טפח זו היא ששנינו בקטנה ברובא

§ The mishna states: Rabbi Yehuda says: With regard to a tear in the external rumen, for a large animal, a tear of one handbreadth renders it a tereifa, while for a small animal, it is a tereifa only if most of it was torn. Rabbi Binyamin bar Yefet says that Rabbi Elazar says: The word: Large, is not referring literally to a large animal, and the word: Small, is not referring literally to a small animal. Rather, concerning any animal large enough that its external rumen can be torn one handbreadth and this does not constitute most of it, this is what we learned: For a large animal, a tear of one handbreadth renders it a tereifa. And concerning any animal small enough that most of its external rumen can be torn and this does not constitute one handbreadth, this is what we learned: For a small animal, it is a tereifa only if most of it was torn. In other words, any external rumen torn either one handbreadth or in its majority renders the animal a tereifa.

רובא ולא הוי טפח פשיטא לא צריכא דהויא טפח במשהו מהו דתימא עד דמיקרע בה טפח לא הוי טרפה קא משמע לן

The Gemara asks: If most of the external rumen is torn but it does not constitute a handbreadth, isn’t it obvious that the animal is rendered a tereifa? There is a principle that the majority of an entity is considered like all of it. The Gemara responds: No, it is necessary to teach this for a case where the tear would constitute a handbreadth with any amount more than a majority, i. e., the external rumen is slightly smaller than two handbreadths. Lest you say that in such a case, the animal is not a tereifa until a handbreadth of it is torn, this halakha teaches us that this is not so. Rather, if the majority of the rumen is torn, the animal is a tereifa, even if this constitutes less than a handbreadth.

אמר גניבא אמר רבי אסי נקדרה כסלע טרפה שאם תמתח תעמוד על הטפח אמר רבי חייא בר אבא לדידי מפרשא לי מיניה דגניבא אמברא דנהרדעא כסלע כשרה יתר מכסלע טרפה וכמה יתר מכסלע אמר רב יוסף כגון דעיילן תלת קשייתא בציפא בדוחקא בלא ציפא ברווחא

Geneiva says that Rabbi Asi says: If a round hole was bored through the external rumen as large as a sela coin, the animal is a tereifa, since if a hole of such size will be stretched, it will reach the length of a handbreadth. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: This matter was explained to me personally by Geneiva himself, when we were on the ferry of Neharde’a: If the hole is exactly as large as a sela, the animal is kosher. If the size of the hole is greater than a sela, it is a tereifa. The Gemara asks: And how much is considered greater than a sela? Rav Yosef said: For example, if three date pits covered in remains of the date can fit through the hole with difficulty, or if, without being covered in any remains, they can fit comfortably, this is considered a hole larger than a sela.

המסס ובית הכוסות תנו רבנן מחט שנמצאת בעובי בית הכוסות מצד אחד כשרה משני צדדים טרפה נמצא עליה קורט דם

§ The mishna states: An animal is a tereifa if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated to the outside, i. e., to the abdominal cavity. With regard to this, the Sages taught: In the case of a needle that is found in the thickness of the reticulum, if it pierced the wall from only one side, the animal is kosher. If it pierced the wall from both sides, i. e., the needle completely pierced the wall of the stomach, it is a tereifa. But even if it protrudes from both sides, it is not always a tereifa, and it may be inspected further: If a drop of congealed blood is found on top of the needle,