Halacha
הלכה א
שְׁנֵּי קְרוּמוֹת יֵשׁ עַל הָרֵאָה. אִם נִקַּב זֶה בְּלֹא זֶה מֻתֶּרֶת. וְאִם נִקְּבוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן טְרֵפָה. אֲפִלּוּ נִגְלַד הַקְּרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן כֻּלּוֹ וְהָלַךְ לוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת. וְהַקָּנֶה שֶׁנִּקַּב מִן הֶחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה בְּמַשֶּׁהוּ טְרֵפָה. וְהוּא הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לִשְׁחִיטָה בַּקָּנֶה לְמַטָּה:
כסף משנה
1.
The lungs have two membranes. If only one of them is perforated, [the animal] is permitted.1For the other will protect the lung (Chullin 46a). If they are both perforated, [the animal] is trefe.2If both membranes are perforated, but the perforations do not correspond, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:1) rules that the animal is kosher, but the Rama considers it trefe. Even if the entire upper membrane3The Radbaz states that if, by contrast, the lower membrane alone is peeled off, the animal is trefe, for certainly, part of the lung will be lacking. is peeled off and dissolves, [the animal] is permitted. If there was even a slight perforation in the portion of windpipe in the chest4I.e., from the beginning of the ribcage. or lower, [the animal] is trefe. For this is a place in the lower portion of the windpipe that is not fit for ritual slaughter.5Chapter 1, Halachah 7 defines the portion of the windpipe acceptable for ritual slaughter. If, however, the windpipe is perforated in a such a place, the animal is kosher.הלכה ב
הִתְחִיל בִּשְׁחִיטָה וְשָׁחַט כָּל הַקָּנֶה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִקְּבָה הָרֵאָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ גָּמַר הַשְּׁחִיטָה הֲרֵי זוֹ טְרֵפָה הוֹאִיל וְנִקְּבָה קֹדֶם גְּמַר שְׁחִיטָה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
כסף משנה
2.
If a person began slaughtering the animal and slit the windpipe entirely, then perforated the lung, and afterwards, completed the slaughter, [the animal] is trefe, for [the lung] was perforated before the completion of the slaughter.6Although the functioning of the lung is dependent on the windpipe, since a perforation in the lung causes an animal to be considered trefe, it is given that status (Chullin 32b). Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.הלכה ג
אֶחָד מִסִּמְפּוֹנֵי רֵאָה שֶׁנִּקַּב אֲפִלּוּ נִקַּב לַחֲבֵרוֹ טְרֵפָה. וְרֵאָה שֶׁנִּקְּבָה וְעָלָה קְרוּם בַּמַּכָּה וְנִסְתַּם הַנֶּקֶב אֵינוֹ כְּלוּם. נִקְבָּה הָאוֹם שֶׁל רֵאָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁדֹּפֶן סוֹתַמְתָּהּ טְרֵפָה. וְאִם נִקְּבָה בִּמְקוֹם חִתּוּךְ הָאֻנּוֹת שֶׁלָּהּ וְהוּא הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁרוֹבֶצֶת עָלָיו כְּשֵׁרָה:
כסף משנה
3.
If one of the bronchioles7The small extensions of the windpipe that convey air within the lungs itself. was perforated, even if the perforation is covered by another bronchiole, [the animal] is trefe.8Because the walls of the bronchioles are firm and not pliant. Hence, they will not serve as effective seals (Rashi, Chullin 48b).In his Kessef Mishneh and his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:6), Rav Yosef Caro rules that if a perforation in a bronchiole is sealed by flesh, the animal is acceptable. See also the comments of Siftei Cohen 36:20. As the Rama states (Yoreh De'ah 39:18), the custom in the Ashkenazic community is to rule that an animal is trefe if its lungs are perforated even if they are sealed closed by other inner organs. If one saw that it was perforated and then it developed a scab, [the scab] is of no consequence.9For ultimately it will open (Rashi, Chullin 47b).
If the mass of the lung is perforated, [the animal] is trefe, even if one of the ribs seals the perforation.10Since this portion of the lung is located below the ribs, the perforation will never be sealed thoroughly. If it was perforated in a place where the lung breaks into lobes and the lobe lies on [a rib, the animal] is kosher.11For the lobes lie on the ribs themselves and the seal will be maintained.
One of the issues related to the question of whether a lung is perforated or not is sirchaot, adhesions, where the lung becomes attached to the ribs and/or other portions of the body. For a discussion of that matter, see the latter half of Chapter 11.
הלכה ד
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁסָּתַם מְקוֹם הַנֶּקֶב שֶׁבָּאֻנּוֹת בָּשָׂר. אֲבָל אִם נִסְמַךְ הַנֶּקֶב לָעֶצֶם אֵינוֹ מֵגֵן. וְאִם הָיָה נֶקֶב הָאֻנּוֹת דָּבוּק בָּעֶצֶם וּבַבָּשָׂר מֻתֶּרֶת:
כסף משנה
4.
When does the above apply? When the perforation in the lobes is sealed by flesh.12It is not necessary to inspect the lung to see if air escapes (Tur, as quoted by Siftei Cohen 39:44). If, however, the perforation is pressed against the bone, it does not protect it.13For the bone is firm and will not move when the lung expands and contracts. Even if one inspects the lung and no air escapes, the animal is still considered trefe (ibid.). If, however, the perforation in the lobes was clinging both to the bone and the flesh, [the animal] is permitted.הלכה ה
הָאוֹם שֶׁל רֵאָה שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת סְמוּכָה לַדֹּפֶן. בֵּין שֶׁהֶעֱלַת צְמָחִים בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא הֶעֱלַת חוֹשְׁשִׁין לָהּ שֶׁמָּא נִקְּבָה. וְכֵיצַד עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ. מְפָרְקִין אוֹתָהּ מִן הַדֹּפֶן וְנִזְהָרִין בָּהּ שֶׁלֹּא תִּנָּקֵב. אִם נִמְצֵאת נְקוּבָה וְנִמְצָא בַּדֹּפֶן מַכָּה בִּמְקוֹם הַנֶּקֶב תּוֹלִין בַּמַּכָּה וְאוֹמְרִים אַחַר שְׁחִיטָה נִקְּבָה כְּשֶׁנִּפְרָק מִן הַמַּכָּה. וְאִם אֵין מַכָּה בַּדֹּפֶן בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁנֶּקֶב זֶה בָּרֵאָה הָיָה קֹדֶם הַשְּׁחִיטָה וּטְרֵפָה:
כסף משנה
5.
When the body of the lung is found adhering to the ribs, we suspect that it was perforated. [This applies] whether or not growths14Boils or carbuncles filled with pus. This heightens the probability that it could have been perforated. appeared on it.What do we do [to check it]? We separate it from the rib while taking care not to perforate it. If it is discovered to be perforated and a bruise is discovered on the rib in the place where it was perforated, we assume that the perforation was caused by the bruise.15And we postulate that the animal was bruised after its slaughter. Hence it is acceptable. The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that we are talking about a situation where the perforation is opposite the bruise. If they do not correspond, the animal is trefe. If there was no bruise on the rib, it is clear that this perforation existed within the lung before the animal was slaughtered and it is trefe.16Here, also, even if one inspects the lung and no air escapes, the animal is still considered trefe [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:22)]. The Ra'avad states there is an apparent contradiction to the Rambam's ruling here and that in Chapter 11, Halachah 6. See the notes to that halachah for a discussion of this issue.
הלכה ו
הָרֵאָה שֶׁנִּמְצָא בָּהּ מָקוֹם אָטוּם כָּל שֶׁהוּא שֶׁאֵין הָרוּחַ נִכְנֶסֶת בּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ נִתְפָּח הֲרֵי זוֹ כִּנְקוּבָה וּטְרֵפָה. וְכֵיצַד בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ. קוֹרְעִין הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁלֹּא נִתְפַּח בִּשְׁעַת נְפִיחָה. אִם נִמְצֵאת בּוֹ לֵחָה מֻתֶּרֶת שֶׁמֵּחֲמַת הַלֵּחָה לֹא נִכְנְסָה שָׁם הָרוּחַ. וְאִם לֹא נִמְצֵאת בּוֹ לֵחָה נוֹתְנִין עָלָיו מְעַט רֹק אוֹ תֶּבֶן אוֹ כָּנָף וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן וְנוֹפְחִין אוֹתָהּ אִם נִתְנַדְנֵד כְּשֵׁרָה וְאִם לָאו טְרֵפָה שֶׁאֵין הָרוּחַ נִכְנֶסֶת לְשָׁם:
כסף משנה
6.
When it is discovered that there is a closed place in the lung which air does not enter and it does not inflate, it is as if it had been perforated and [the animal] is trefe.17I.e., unless it is checked as the Rambam continues to explain.How do we inspect it? We cut off the portion [of the lung]18According to the Rambam, the portion of the lung itself is cut off and we inspect it. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:9) offers a different interpretation. PAGE 239 that would not inflate when [air was] blown [into the lung]. If fluid was discovered within it,19I.e., the feather is placed on the portion of the lung that was cut off. One blows throw the brochia. If the air passes through the bronchioles, the feather should flutter. it is permitted, because it was due to the fluid that the air did not enter. If no fluid is found within, we put some saliva, a straw, a feather or the like over [the separated portion] and blow air into it. If they move, [the animal] is kosher.20The movement indicates that air flows through it. If not, it is trefe, because air does not enter [that portion of the lung].
הלכה ז
רֵאָה שֶׁתִּשָּׁמַע בָּהּ הֲבָרָה כְּשֶׁנּוֹפְחִין אוֹתָהּ אִם נִכָּר הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁמִּמֶּנּוּ תִּשָּׁמַע הַהֲבָרָה מוֹשִׁיבִין עָלָיו רֹק אוֹ תֶּבֶן וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. אִם נִתְנַדְנֵד בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהִיא נְקוּבָה וּטְרֵפָה. וְאִם לֹא נִכַּר הַמָּקוֹם מוֹשִׁיבִין אוֹתָהּ בְּמַיִם פּוֹשְׁרִין וְנוֹפְחִין אוֹתָהּ. אִם בִּקְבֵּק הַמַּיִם טְרֵפָה. וְאִם לָאו בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁקְּרוּם הַתַּחְתּוֹן בִּלְבַד נִקַּב וְהָרוּחַ תְּנַהֵג בֵּין שְׁנֵי הַקְּרוּמוֹת וּמִפְּנֵי זֶה יִשָּׁמַע בָּהּ קוֹל דְּמָמָה בִּשְׁעַת נְפִיחָה:
כסף משנה
7.
[The following rules apply when] a sound is heard when a lung is inflated. If the place from which the sound emanates can be detected, saliva, a straw, or the like should be placed over it. If they flutter, it is apparent that the lung is perforated and [the animal] is trefe.If the place [from which the sound emanates] cannot be detected, the lung should be placed in lukewarm21Chullin 47b states that hot water will cause the lung to contract and cold water will cause it to become firmer. If it was put in either hot or cold water first, it may not be checked in lukewarm water afterwards [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:4)]. water and blown. If the water bubbles, [the animal] is trefe.22For obviously the lung has been perforated and the air is flowing out from it. If not, it is apparent that only the lower membrane has been perforated, the air is moving between the two membranes. For this reason, it will be possible to hear a hushed sound when it is inflated.
הלכה ח
זֶה עִקָּר גָּדוֹל יִהְיֶה בְּיָדְךָ שֶׁכָּל רֵאָה שֶׁנּוֹפְחִין אוֹתָהּ בְּפוֹשְׁרִין וְלֹא יְבַקְבֵּק הַמַּיִם הֲרֵי הִיא שְׁלֵמָה מִכָּל נֶקֶב:
כסף משנה
8.
Keep this encompassing general principle in mind: Whenever air was blown into a lung that was placed in lukewarm water and the water did not bubble, [the lung] is intact, without a perforation.23This principle is significant with regard to the discussion concerning sirchaot, adhesions, in Chapter 11. The Ra'avad (whose interpretation is paralleled by that of Rashi and other Rishonim) maintain that inflating the lung represents a stringency: If air escapes, an animal is considered trefe even though there is reason to permit it. The same principle cannot be applied as a leniency. The Rambam - and his approach is shared by Rabbenu Tam, Rashba, Rabbenu Nissim, and others - maintains that this principle was instituted as a leniency.הלכה ט
רֵאָה שֶׁנִּשְׁפְּכָה כְּקִיתוֹן וּקְרוּם הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁלָּהּ קַיָּם שָׁלֵם בְּלֹא נֶקֶב. אִם הַסִּמְפּוֹנוֹת עוֹמְדִים בִּמְקוֹמָם וְלֹא נִמּוֹחוּ כְּשֵׁרָה. וְאִם נִמּוֹחַ אֲפִלּוּ סִמְפּוֹן אֶחָד טְרֵפָה. כֵּיצַד עוֹשִׂין. נוֹקְבִין אוֹתָהּ וְשׁוֹפְכִין אוֹתָהּ בִּכְלִי שֶׁהוּא שׁוֹעַ בַּאֲבָר וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. אִם נִרְאֶה בָּהּ חוּטִין לְבָנִין בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁנִּמֹּקּוּ הַסִּמְפּוֹנוֹת וּטְרֵפָה. וְאִם לָאו בְּשַׂר הָרֵאָה בִּלְבַד הוּא שֶׁנִּמּוֹק וּכְשֵׁרָה:
כסף משנה
9.
[The following laws apply when the insides of] a lung24The Siftei Cohen 36:21 states that this leniency applies even if the entire lung has degenerated and can be poured out like water. can be poured out like [water from] a pitcher, but the outer membrane is intact, without a perforation. If the bronchioles remain in their place and have not degenerated, it is acceptable. If even one of the bronchioles have degenerated, it is trefe.25As stated in Halachah 3, if one of the bronchioles is perforated, the animal is trefe. Certainly, that ruling applies if it has degenerated.What should be done? We perforate [the membrane of the lung] and pour it out into a container glazed with lead26Because it is glazed, one will be able to see the white strands clearly if they exist [Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 36)]. or the like. If white strands can be seen, it is apparent that the bronchioles have degenerated27And the white strands are the remnants of the bronchioles. and it is trefe. If not, it is only the flesh of the lung that has degenerated and [the animal] is acceptable.28When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:7) adds a concept stated in the following halachah: that the fluid poured out may not be putrid. (The commentaries to the Shulchan Aruch maintain that the Rambam would follow this stringency.) The Rama, however, rules leniently, maintaining that as long as the bronchioles are not visible, the animal is acceptable.
הלכה י
רֵאָה שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בָּהּ אֲבַעְבּוּעוֹת אִם הָיוּ מְלֵאִים רוּחַ אוֹ מַיִם זַכִּים אוֹ לֵחָה הַנִּמְשֶׁכֶת כִּדְבַשׁ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ אוֹ לֵחָה יְבֵשָׁה וְקָשָׁה אֲפִלּוּ כְּאֶבֶן הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת. וְאִם נִמְצֵאת בָּהֶן לֵחָה סְרוּחָה אוֹ מַיִם סְרוּחִין אוֹ עֲכוּרִין הֲרֵי זוֹ טְרֵפָה. וּכְשֶׁמּוֹצִיא הַלֵּחָה וּבוֹדֵק אוֹתָהּ צָרִיךְ לִבְדֹּק הַסִּמְפּוֹן שֶׁתַּחְתֶּיהָ. אִם נִמְצָא נָקוּב טְרֵפָה:
כסף משנה
10.
[The following rules apply when] boils29Based on Chullin 48a, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 37:1) states that even if boils are very large, the animal may still be kosher. are discovered on a lung. If they are filled with air, clear water, fluid that is viscous like honey or the like, dried fluid that is firm like a stone, [the animal] is permitted. If putrid fluid or putrid or murky liquid is found within it, it is trefe.30The Rambam's ruling is cited by the Shulchan Aruch. The Tur and the Rama follow the opinion of many other Rishonim who permit the animal even if the fluid in the boils is putrid. When one removes the fluid and checks it, one should check the bronchiole below it. If it is discovered to be perforated, it is trefe.31The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam's ruling is based on his decision in the previous halachah. The Rambam maintains that the fluid indicates that there is a strong possibilility that a perforation exists. Other opinions maintain that the animal is permitted, for the fluid is not necessarily a sign that a perforation exists. According to those views (and they are accpeted by the Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.), there is no need for the inspection the Rambam requires.הלכה יא
רֵאָה שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי אֲבַעְבּוּעוֹת סְמוּכוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ טְרֵפָה. שֶׁהַדָּבָר קָרוֹב הַרְבֵּה שֶׁיֵּשׁ נֶקֶב בֵּינֵיהֶן וְאֵין לָהֶן דֶּרֶךְ בְּדִיקָה. הָיְתָה אַחַת וְנִרְאֶה כִּשְׁתַּיִם נוֹקְבִין הָאַחַת. אִם שָׁפְכָה לָהּ הָאַחֶרֶת אַחַת הִיא וּמֻתֶּרֶת וְאִם לָאו טְרֵפָה:
כסף משנה
11.
When one discovers two boils on a lung close to each other, [the animal] is trefe,32The Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 37:3) state that even if the boils are filled with clear fluid, the animal is trefe. If, however, they are hard, it is acceptable. for it is very likely that there is a perforation between them33Rashi (Chullin 47a) explains that most likely the membrane was perforated and therefore the boils developed. Rabbenu Nissim explains that since the two boils are next to each other, it is likely that one perforated the other. and there is no way of checking the matter. If there is one which appears like two, one should perforate one, if the other flows into it, it is only one and [the animal] is permitted.34The Maharil requires a further check: to see whether they share the same pocket (Turei Zahav 37:5; Siftei Cohen 37:7). If not, [the animal] is trefe.הלכה יב
הָרֵאָה שֶׁנִּתְמַסְמְסָה טְרֵפָה. כֵּיצַד. כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת שְׁלֵמָה וּכְשֶׁתּוֹלִין אוֹתָהּ תֵּחָתֵךְ וְתִפּל חֲתִיכוֹת חֲתִיכוֹת. רֵאָה שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת נְקוּבָה בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיַּד הַטַּבָּח מְמַשְׁמֵשׁ מֻתֶּרֶת וְתוֹלִין בְּיָדוֹ וְאוֹמְרִין מִיַּד הַטַּבָּח נִקְּבָה אַחַר הַשְּׁחִיטָה. נִמְצָא הַנֶּקֶב בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם קֹדֶם שְׁחִיטָה אוֹ אַחַר שְׁחִיטָה נוֹקְבִין בָּהּ נֶקֶב אַחֵר וּמְדַמִּין כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעוֹשִׂים בִּבְנֵי מֵעַיִם:
כסף משנה
12.
If the lung degenerated, [the animal] is trefe. What is implied? For example, it was discovered intact and when it is hung up, it will break apart and fall into separate pieces.When a lung was discovered to be perforated in the place where it was handled by the butcher's hand, the animal is permitted. We assume that [it was blemished by his] hand and say: "It was perforated by the butcher's hand after slaughter."35The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:5) suggests that the shape of the perforations must indicate that they were made by the butcher.
If the perforation was discovered in another place and it is not known whether it took place before ritual slaughter or afterwards, we make another perforation and compare the two as is done with regard to the digestive organs.36See Chapter 6, Halachah 14.
הלכה יג
וְאֵין מְדַמִּין מֵרֵאָה שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה דַּקָּה לְרֵאָה שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה גַּסָּה אֶלָּא מִדַּקָּה לְדַקָּה וּמִגַּסָּה לְגַסָּה. נִמְצָא הַנֶּקֶב בְּאֶחָד מִן הָאֲבַעְבּוּעוֹת הֲרֵי זוֹ טְרֵפָה וְאֵין אוֹמְרִין נִקּוֹב אֲבַעְבּוּעַ אַחֵר וְנַעֲרֹךְ שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר נִכָּר:
כסף משנה
13.
We do not compare the lung of a small domesticated animal to the lung of a large domesticated animal. Instead, [the lung of] a small animal [must be compared to that] of a small animal and that of a large animal to that of a large animal.37This represents the Rambam's understanding of Chullin 50a. Rashi interprets the passage slightly differently. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 36:5) follows Rashi's understanding and states that we do not compare a lung from one animal to that of another one at all. And even within one animal, we do not compare a perforation in a large lobe to one in a small lobe.If a perforation is found in one of the boils of a lung, [the animal] is trefe. We do not say: "Perforate another boil and compare them,"38With the intent of seeing whether the perforation was made before or after the slaughter. because the matter is not clearly apparent.39I.e., in this instance, it is not easy to differentiate based on the comparison.
הלכה יד
מַחַט שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת בַּרֵאָה נוֹפְחִין אוֹתָהּ. אִם לֹא יָצָא מִמֶּנָּה רוּחַ בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁזֹּאת הַמַּחַט דֶּרֶךְ סִמְפּוֹנוֹת נִכְנְסָה וְלֹא נִקְּבָה. וְאִם נִתְחַתְּכָה הָרֵאָה קֹדֶם נְפִיחָה וְנִמְצֵאת בָּהּ הַמַּחַט הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה שֶׁהַדָּבָר קָרוֹב שֶׁנִּקְּבָה כְּשֶׁנִּכְנְסָה:
כסף משנה
14.
When a needle is found in the lung, we blow up the lung. If no air is released from it, it is apparent that this needle entered via the bronchioles and did not perforate [them].40In contrast to the liver where some authorities make a distinction in the ruling depending on the direction it is facing (see Chapter 6, Halachah 8), no such contrast is made with regard to a needle found in the lung. See also Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 36:16-17) which states that if a drop of blood is found on the exterior of the lung, the animal is considered trefe. the Rama rules that unles a significant loss is involved, whenever a needle is found in the lungs, the animal is considered trefe. If the lung was cut open before it was blown up and a needle was found in it,41And thus it is impossible to check it by blowing air into it, for the air will be released through the portion cut off. [the animal] is forbidden. For there is a high probability that it perforated [the lung] when it entered.הלכה טו
תּוֹלַעַת שֶׁהָיְתָה בָּרֵאָה וְנִקְּבָה וְיָצְאָה וַהֲרֵי הָרֵאָה נְקוּבָה בְּתוֹלַעַת הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת. חֶזְקָתָהּ שֶׁאַחַר שְׁחִיטָה תִּקּוֹב וְתֵצֵא. יֵשׁ שָׁם מַרְאוֹת שֶׁאִם נִשְׁתַּנָּה מַרְאֵה הָאֵיבָר לְאוֹתוֹ הַמַּרְאֶה הָרַע הֲרֵי הוּא כְּנָקוּב שֶׁאוֹתוֹ הַבָּשָׂר שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאָיו לְמַרְאֶה זֶה כְּמֵת הוּא חָשׁוּב וּכְאִלּוּ הוּא הַבָּשָׂר שֶׁנֶּהֱפַךְ עֵינוֹ אֵינוֹ מָצוּי. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר (ויקרא יג י) "וּמִחְיַת בָּשָׂר חַי בַּשְׂאֵת" (ויקרא יג יד) "וּבְיוֹם הֵרָאוֹת בּוֹ בָּשָׂר חַי" מִכְּלָל שֶׁשְּׁאָר הַבָּשָׂר שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנָּה אֵינוֹ חַי:
כסף משנה
15.
When there is a worm in the lung and it perforated the lung and emerged and we see the lung perforated by the worm, [the animal] is permitted. We rely on the prevailing assumption that it perforated [the lung] after ritual slaughter42For while the animal was alive, the lung was continually expanding and contracting and it would be very hard for the worm to perforate it (Turei Zahav 36:8). and emerged [then].There are ways that certain organs appear [that can disqualify the organ].43The remaining halachot in this chapter are expressions of this principle. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 48:5) rules that we are not knowledgeable with regard to the correct appearance of the lung. Hence, if its appearance changes and one might think it became unacceptable, we rule stringently. For if the appearance of the organ is changed to that undesirable appearance, it is considered as if it was perforated.44And as stated above, the perforation of a lung disqualifies it. For since the appearance of this flesh changed to the [undesirable] appearance, it is considered as if it was dead. It is as if the flesh whose appearance changed does not exist. Similarly, [Leviticus 13:10] states: "And there is a spot of living45We have translated the verses literally to convey the meaning mentioned by the Rambam. In its ordinary context, the terms would be translated as "healthy flesh." flesh in the blemish...," and [ibid. 13:10] states: "On the day when he will present living flesh...." Implied is that flesh whose appearance has changed is not "alive."
הלכה טז
רֵאָה שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֶיהָ. בֵּין מַרְאֵה כֻּלָּה בֵּין מַרְאֵה מִקְצָתָהּ. אִם נִשְׁתַּנֵּית לְמַרְאֶה הַמֻּתָּר אֲפִלּוּ נִשְׁתַּנֵּית כֻּלָּהּ מֻתֶּרֶת. וְאִם נִשְׁתַּנָּה לְמַרְאֶה הָאָסוּר אֲפִלּוּ כָּל שֶׁהוּא טְרֵפָה. שֶׁהַמַּרְאֶה הָאָסוּר כְּנֶקֶב הוּא חָשׁוּב כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
כסף משנה
16.
[The following principles apply if] the color46Our translation is dependent on the following halachah. of a lung changes, whether part of its color changes or its entire color changes. If it changes to a permitted color, even if its entire color changes, it is permitted. If, however, even the slightest portion of it changes to a forbidden color, [the animal] is trefe. [The rationale is that] the forbidden color is considered equivalent to a perforation as explained [above].47And even the slightest perforation of the lung disqualifies the animal.הלכה יז
וְחָמֵשׁ מַרְאוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת יֵשׁ בָּרֵאָה וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. שְׁחוֹרָה כִּדְיוֹ. אוֹ יְרֻקָּה כְּעֵין כְּשׁוּת. אוֹ כְּעֵין חֶלְמוֹן בֵּיצָה. אוֹ כְּעֵין חֲרִיעַ. אוֹ כְּמַרְאֵה הַבָּשָׂר. וַחֲרִיעַ הוּא הַצֶּבַע שֶׁצּוֹבְעִים בּוֹ הַבְּגָדִים וְהוּא דּוֹמֶה לִשְׂעָרוֹת אֲדֻמּוֹת מְעַט וְנוֹטוֹת לִירֻקָּה:
כסף משנה
17.
There are five forbidden hues for the lung: black like ink, greenish-yellow48This represents the translation the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 38:1) offers for the Talmudic term yerok quoted by the Rambam. like hops, [yellow] like the yolk of an egg, or like safflower,49Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 3:2). Rashi (Chullin 47b) renders the term as saffron. There is little difference between the two colors. or like the color of meat.50Which is reddish [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.)].Safflower is a color which clothes are dyed. It is comparable to hairs that are slightly red, leaning towards gold.
הלכה יח
נִמְצֵאת כְּעֵין חֲרָיוֹת שֶׁל דֶּקֶל אוֹסְרִין אוֹתָהּ מִסָּפֵק שֶׁזֶּה קָרוֹב לְמַרְאֶה הָאָסוּר. וְכָל הַמַּרְאוֹת הָאֵלּוּ אֵין אוֹסְרִין בָּהֶם עַד שֶׁנּוֹפְחִים אוֹתָהּ וּמְמָרֵס בָּהּ בְּיָדוֹ. אִם נִשְׁתַּנֵּית לַמַּרְאֶה הַמֻּתָּר מֻתֶּרֶת. וְאִם עָמְדָה בְּעֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה:
כסף משנה
18.
If the lung is discovered to be the color of the branches of a date palm, we forbid it because of the doubt involved, because this is very close to a forbidden color. We do not forbid any of these colors until the lung is inflated and massaged by hand. If it changes to a permitted color, [the animal] is permitted.51For during the animal's lifetime, the lung is repeatedly inflated. If it retains the [forbidden] color, it is forbidden.הלכה יט
אַרְבַּע מַרְאוֹת מֻתָּרוֹת יֵשׁ בָּהּ וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. שְׁחוֹרָה כִּכְחוֹל. אוֹ יְרֻקָּה כְּחָצִיר. אוֹ אֲדֻמָּה. אוֹ כְּמַרְאֵה הַכָּבֵד. וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיְתָה הָרֵאָה כֻּלָּהּ טְלָאִים טְלָאִים נְקֻדּוֹת נְקֻדּוֹת מֵאַרְבַּע מַרְאוֹת אֵלּוּ הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת:
כסף משנה
19.
There are four permitted hues [for the lung]. They are: blackish blue, green like a leek, red, or the color of the liver. Even if the lung was entirely colored in these four hues patch by patch, spot by spot, [the animal] is permitted.הלכה כ
עוֹף שֶׁנָּפַל לָאוּר וְהוֹרִיק לִבּוֹ אוֹ כְּבֵדוֹ אוֹ קֻרְקְבָנוֹ אוֹ שֶׁהֶאְדִּימוּ הַמֵּעַיִם שֶׁלּוֹ בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא הֲרֵי זוֹ טְרֵפָה. שֶׁכָּל הַיְרֻקִּים שֶׁהֶאְדִּימוּ אוֹ הָאֲדֻמִּים שֶׁהוֹרִיקוּ מֵחֲמַת הָאוּר בָּעוֹף הֲרֵי הֵן כְּמִי שֶׁנִּטְּלוּ וּטְרֵפָה. וְהוּא שֶׁיַּעַמְדוּ בְּמַרְאֶה זֶה אַחַר שֶׁשָּׁלְקוּ אוֹתָן מְעַט וּמְמָרְסִין בָּהֶן:
כסף משנה
20.
When a fowl52These laws do not apply with regard to an animal because its skin is tough and its ribs protect it [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:7]. The Rama, however, does not accept this leniency. The Ra'avad (Chapter 10, Halachah 11) also accepts the Rama's view. fell into a fire and its heart, its liver,53In his Kessef Mishneh and in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:1), Rav Yosef Caro qualifies the ruling with regard to the liver, stating that to disqualify a fowl, it must change color at its thin end, the portion next to the gall-bladder, or at the place where it derives its nurture. or its craw turned green or its digestive organs turned red, [the fowl] is trefe.54Significantly, if the lungs change color, the fowl is not disqualified, because its ribs protect it [Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)]. [This applies if] even the slightest portion of the organs [changed color]. For whenever a fire causes organs that were green to turn red or those which were red to turn green, it is considered as if the organ was removed and [the animal] is trefe. [This applies] provided they retain this color after they were cooked slightly and massaged.55For it is possible that the cooking and/or the massage will restore the organ's natural color.הלכה כא
כָּל עוֹף שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הַכָּבֵד שֶׁלּוֹ כְּמַרְאֵה בְּנֵי מֵעַיִם. אוֹ שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ שְׁאָר בְּנֵי מֵעַיִם וְעָמְדוּ בְּשִׁנּוּיָן אַחַר שְׁלִיקָה וּמְרִיסָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁנָּפַל לָאוּר וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְּנֵי מֵעָיו וּטְרֵפָה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא בְּנֵי מֵעַיִם שֶׁל עוֹף שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא בָּהֶם שִׁנּוּי וּכְשֶׁנִּשְׁלְקוּ נִשְׁתַּנּוּ וְהֶאְדִּימוּ הַיְרֻקִּים וְהוֹרִיקוּ הָאֲדֻמִּים. בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁנָּפַל לָאוּר וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְּנֵי מֵעָיו וּטְרֵפָה. וְכֵן הַוֵּשֶׁט שֶׁנִּמְצָא הָעוֹר הַחִיצוֹן שֶׁלּוֹ לָבָן וְהַפְּנִימִי אָדֹם בֵּין בָּעוֹף בֵּין בַּבְּהֵמָה הֲרֵי הוּא כְּאִלּוּ אֵינוֹ וּטְרֵפָה:
כסף משנה
21.
Whenever the liver of a fowl appears like the digestive organs or [the appearance of] the other digestive organs change and the change remains after they were cooked slightly and massaged as explained [above], we can assume that the fowl fell into a fire,56I.e., even though we do not know that the fowl fell into a fire, the fact that these organs changed color serves as evidence of such [Kessef Mishneh; the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah 3:3)]. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:6) quotes this ruling, but the Rama rules leniently and states that we must see that the fowl actually fell into a fire. its digestive organs were burnt, and it is trefe.Moreover, when there was no change detected in the digestive organs of a fowl, but when they were cooked slightly they changed color, those that were green turned -red or those that were red turned green, we can assume that the fowl fell into a fire, its digestive organs were burnt, and it is trefe.57The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 52:3) does not accept this stringency, following the opinion of the Rashba who maintains that we do not disqualify an animal unless we definitely know that it fell into a fire.
Similarly, if [the color of] the gullet [has changed] - the outer skin appears white and the inner red - it is considered as if the organ is not present, and it - either an animal or a fowl - is trefe.