Commentary page
Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 17
This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.
Read the full text in the readerYoreh De'ah Siman 17
Yoreh De'ah Siman 17 is a source-text unit from the Shulchan Arukh with 3 seifim. Its reading map separates the practical rule, its conditions and the points that need comparison with the surrounding text.
What to track
Read each seif as a separate step. Identify the action, the condition that limits it and any distinction between cases before moving to the next seif.
Study lens
Look for a turn toward a more precise resolution. The source text remains the primary evidence; this note offers a structured way to enter it rather than replacing close reading.
- a turn toward a more precise resolution
Continue the sequence
Parallel sources
Lessons and study tools
A unit-by-unit map of all 3 seifim on this page: opening words, the moves the text actually makes and a link back to that exact seif.
Sages named on this page
- Rashi · Others · First generation of Rishonim
Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, known as Rashi, was a preeminent medieval French rabbi and author of a comprehensive commentary on the Talmud and…
Source: Yoreh De'ah Siman 17 · Seif 1 — “<b>דין השוחט בהמה המסוכנת למות.”
Original text
<b>דין השוחט בהמה המסוכנת למות. ובו ג' סעיפים:</b><br> השוחט את הבריאה ולא פרכסה (פי' שלא נתנענעה) הרי זו מותרת אבל המסוכנת והוא כל שמעמידים אותה (בגערה או במקל) (כל בו בשם הראב"ד) ואינה עומדת אעפ"י שהיא אוכלת מאכל בריאות שחטה ולא פרכסה כלל הרי זו נבלה ולוקין עליה. ואם פרכסה הרי זו מותרת. וצריך שיהיה הפרכוס בסוף השחיטה (ולמשוך עד אחר השחיטה) (תא"ו נט"ו ח"ג לדעת רש"י) אבל בתחלתה אינו מועיל. כיצד הוא הפרכוס בבהמה דקה ובחיה גסה ודקה בין שפשטה ידה והחזירה או שפשטה רגלה אע"פ שלא החזירה או שכפפה רגלה בלבד הרי זה פרכוס ומותר אבל אם פשטה ידה ולא החזירתה הרי זו אסורה שאין זו אלא הוצאת נפש בלבד ובבהמה גסה אחד היד ואחד הרגל בין שפשטה ולא כפפה בין כפפה ולא פשטה הרי זה פירכוס ומותרת ואם לא פשטה לא יד ולא רגל ולא כפפה כלל הרי זו נבלה ובעוף אפילו לא רפרף (פי' מענין כהרף עין) אלא בעינו ולא כשכש (פירוש נענע) אלא בזנבו הרי זה פירכוס :
Seif 1 When one slaughters a healthy animal and after slaughtering it does not make convulsive movements, it is permitted. However regarding an animal that is dangerously ill, i.e., one which cannot maintain itself when others cause it to stand it up, even if it eats the food of healthy animals. If such an animal is slaughtered and does not make any convulsive movements at all, it is a nevelah and one is liable for lashes [for partaking] of it. If it makes convulsive movements, it is permitted. The convulsive movements must be made at the end of the slaughter. If they are made at the beginning, they are of no consequence. What is meant by convulsive movements? For a small domesticated animal and for both a small and a large wild beast, the intent is that it extended its foreleg and returned it, extended its hind leg even though it did not return it, or merely bent its hind leg. This is considered a convulsive movement and [the animal] is permitted. If, however, it merely extended its foreleg and did not return it, it is forbidden. This movement is merely a result of the expiration of the soul. With regard to a large domesticated beast, if it either extended its foreleg or its hind leg without bending it or bent its foreleg or hind leg without extending it, it is considered as a convulsive movement and it is permitted. If, however, it neither extended or bent its foreleg or its hind leg at all, it is considered as a nevelah. With regard to a fowl, even if it only blinked its eyelid or swatted its tail, it is considered a convulsive movement.
השוחט את המסוכנת בלילה ולא ידע אם פרכסה הרי זו ספק נבלה ואסורה:
Seif 2 When one slaughters an animal that is dangerously ill at night and does not know whether or not it made convulsive movements, it is forbidden, because of the possibility that it is forbidden as nevelah.
גדולי החכמים לא היו אוכלים מבהמה שממהרים ושוחטים אותה כדי שלא תמות ואע"פ שפרכסה בסוף השחיטה. ודבר זה אין בו איסור אלא כל הרוצה להחמיר על עצמו בדבר זה הרי זה משובח:
Seif 3 Our great sages would not partake would not eat of an animal which people were hurrying to slaughter before it died, even if it made convulsive movements after being slaughtered. This is an issue that does not involve a prohibited act. Nevertheless, if one desires to accept this stringency upon himself it is considered praiseworthy.
English translation: Asher Meza (without commentary) · unknown