The mishnah on 54a stated that an animal whose “lung was haruta by the hand of Heaven” is nonetheless kosher. The Gemara begins by clarifying the term:
The sages taught in a beraita: Which is a haruta? It is any animal whose lung shriveled (tzamka).
The word for shriveled used in the beraita, tzamka, is the basis of the modern word for raisins: tzimukim. The comparison may help clarify what “shriveled” means. Since we saw earlier that a dried lung renders an animal a treifa, and therefore unkosher, we can’t be referring to a lung that’s completely dried up; rather, it’s perhaps shriveled but still retaining some basic moisture, like a raisin.
The beraita continues:
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.
If this occurred by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. But if it happened by the hands of a person, it is a treifa. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even if the lung shriveled by the hands of any creature.
The rabbis assume that a creature’s lungs shrivel in response to fear. Rashi explains that this “occurring by the hands of Heaven” means the animal was startled by something like thunder, whereas “by the hands of a person” is when a person frightened the animal, by shouting or kicking at it. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar adds that we should factor in the case of a lung shriveling in response to, say, an animal’s roar. But factor it in how?
A dilemma was raised before the sages: Is the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar referring to the first clause, in which case the statement is a leniency? Or perhaps it is referring to the latter clause, and the statement is a stringency?
Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar simply added “even by the hands of any creature,” but he didn’t tell us which clause of the beraita that “even” was referring to. If it’s amending the first clause, this is a leniency: Animals frightened by other animals, as well as by the natural world, are kosher. If it’s amending the latter clause, it’s a stringency: Animals frightened by other animals and those frightened by humans are treifot.
The Gemara suggests an answer:
Come and hear a proof, as it is taught: A lung that was shriveled by the hands of a person renders the animal a treifa. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even by the hands of any creature.
Given that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar’s statement immediately follows the case in which an animal becomes a treifa, we can assume that’s the clause he’s referring to, and he’s adding a stringency. From the fact that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar is presented as dissenting from the main opinion of the beraita, it’s inferred that the other rabbis think even an animal frightened by other animals is kosher.
The Gemara goes on to relay a story of Rabba bar bar Hana, who finds rams with their lungs shriveled and inquires of the sages how he might determine the cause. They advise him to place the lungs in water: If they expand and return to a healthy appearance, we assume the shriveling was at the hands of Heaven, and the animal is kosher; if they don’t return to a healthy appearance, we assume it was by means of a person, and the meat is treyf.
You might be wondering why the cause of an animal’s lung shriveling determines whether that’s a fatal defect. But they never tell us! Even the commentators don’t postulate why a lung shriveled “by the hands of Heaven” might function differently from another shriveled lung. The Rashba, a 13th-century Spanish commentator, also points out that once we prescribe a method for checking these lungs, it’s not clear why the moniker “by the hands of Heaven” is even relevant. Why not just say that a shriveled lung that returns to health in water is kosher, and one that doesn’t proves the animal was a treifa? The test becomes somewhat tautological, for we have to define a lung shriveled by the hands of heaven as one that returns to health in water, and one that returns to health in water is considered kosher because that proves it’s by the hands of Heaven.
He suggests this “by the hands of Heaven” distinction is relevant in a case of uncertainty, but when it’s a plausible explanation: Perhaps if we observed an animal frightened by thunder or a nearby threatening predator, and when slaughtered in the near future, we found its lung shriveled, we could default to assuming the animal is kosher without any testing. Only if we slaughter an animal, find shriveled lungs and are unable to point to plausible recent causes must we perform the test mentioned above.
Read all of Chullin 55 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on June 24, 2026. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
