Today we’re discussing treifot, otherwise kosher animals that are prohibited from consumption because of disease or injury. After enumerating many specific cases — including animals with serious injuries to the gullet, spine, lungs, trachea and brain, as well as an animal that has fallen from a roof or been mauled by a wolf or lion (or, in the case of a small bird, a hawk) — the mishnah at the top of the page ends with a general principle:
Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live is a treifa.
In other words, mortal injuries render the animal unkosher.
The source for the prohibition on consuming a treifa is Exodus 22:30, which states simply that meat from an animal torn by beasts of the field is prohibited. How do the rabbis infer that this ban applies to animals that have suffered a mortal injury? After all, that characterization seems both broader (including, for example, animals that fell from a roof) and more narrow (excluding animals with superficial injuries). The Gemara explains:
It is derived from a verse, as it is written: “These are the living things which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth” (Leviticus 11:2). The verse indicates that you may eat a living animal (i.e., one that can survive) but you may not eat an animal that is not living (i.e., one that cannot survive). One learns by inference that a treifa is an animal that cannot live.
There’s a bit of wordplay going on here: The Hebrew chaya means both “living thing” and “animal.” Read literally, the verse says: “these are the animals you may eat…” Read midrashically, the biblical verse specifies: “these are the living things you may eat…” The midrashic reading implies that only things that are alive (and then, of course, subsequently slaughtered) are permitted for consumption. To the rabbinic mind, a mortally injured animal does not qualify as a “living thing” since it is marked for death.
But there’s a contrary, second opinion:
And according to the one who says that a treifa can live, from where does he derive this?
He derives it from the same verse: “These are the living things which you may eat among all the animals.” “These” indicates that you may eat only these living things, but you may not eat other living things. One learns by inference that a treifa can live.
This is also a midrashic reading of the verse. In this case, the rabbis note that the Torah specifies “these” living things you may eat, implying there are other living things one may not eat. If we take the verse to be referring only to treifot (which is not how it functions in Leviticus, but how it is functioning in this debate), that means there are some treifot that are alive — that is, not mortally injured. This allows us to assume a broader definition of treifot, one that includes animals that will live, not just those doomed to die in the near future.
To counter this second reading, according to talmudic logic, the rabbis must find an alternate meaning of “these” in the verse from Leviticus. And that is exactly what happens. Returning the volley:
As the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught that the verse: “These are the living things which you may eat,” teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, seized one of each and every species of animal and showed it to Moses, and said to him: “These you may eat, and these you may not eat.”
“These,” according to Rabbi Yishmael, distinguishes between permitted and prohibited species of animals: These species are permitted; those species aren’t. This is a fair reading. After all, if you continue in Leviticus 11, that’s exactly what you find.
Does this defeat the view that a treifa is not always an animal marked for death? No. The Gemara acknowledges that we can’t derive two meanings from the same word (in this case “these”), but then pivots to state that there has to be another source for the argument that a treifa can be an animal capable of surviving its injuries or defects. What might that be? Turns out, Rabbi Yishmael can supply the answer:
He derives it from the other beraita that the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught. As the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: The verse states: “To make a difference … between the living thing that may be eaten and the living thing that may not be eaten” (Leviticus 11:47).
Further down in the same chapter from Leviticus, we find a verse that explicitly states that there are living things that are permitted and living things that are forbidden. How can there be living things that are forbidden? Answer: If there are animals that are living (i.e., not near death) that are considered treifot.
This chunk of the discussion demonstrates that the definition of treifa is far from settled. Stay tuned, there is more debate coming.
Read all of Chullin 42 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on June 11, 2026. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
Help us keep Jewish knowledge accessible to millions of people around the world. With your help, My Jewish Learning can provide endless opportunities for learning, connection and discovery.
