Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The second mishna on Chullin 32a explains that if an animal is rendered invalid by any death which does not occur through proper ritual slaughter it is nebelah while if it is rendered invalid for some other reason it is terefah. My question is: what are the consequences of an animal having one of these statuses versus the other? You can't eat it either way, obviously; are there differences in what benefit you can derive from it? What are they, and which is the more severe disqualification?

share|improve this question
    
related: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/8513/… –  Menachem Mar 26 '12 at 3:47

4 Answers 4

up vote 12 down vote accepted

As far as I know, the above answer is correct. A neveilah conveys ritual impurity, while a treifa does not; as per the gemura in Niddah on 42b, which makes a drasha from the pasuk in Vayikra 22:8.

Here is a direct link: http://www.hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=37&daf=42b&format=pdf it is about 3/4 of the way down the daf.

share|improve this answer
2  
Adam, Welcome to Judaism.SE, and thanks very much for the clear citation! I look forward to seeing you around. –  Isaac Moses Jul 28 '11 at 13:49

As the other answers stated, the main difference between נבילה וטריפה is the טומאה. However, there are also other differences, such as אותו ואת בנו (see שמלה חדשה טו); in שלחן ערוך פב where ביצת טריפה is אסור but ביצת נבילה is not; and (lamely) someone who makes a vow נדר not to benefit from one but left the other alone. These are found all over שמלה חדשה for a quick summary see there, 20:6.

One that he does not mention there is also found in Baba Kama (7:2, 7:5), where a thief must pay double כפל for טריפה (because it is a שחיטה) but not for נבילה (because it isn't).

share|improve this answer

A neveilah is tamei (ritually impure); a treifa isn't. Benefit is permitted either way.

share|improve this answer
1  
Do you have a source? –  Menachem Jul 28 '11 at 3:49
    
Well the fact that it's tameh isn't a practical difference, rather the fact that it's mitameh. –  Baal Shemot Tovot Mar 25 '12 at 23:24
2  
@BaalShemotTovot I'm trying really hard to think of a nafka mina of its being tamei. –  Double AA Aug 2 '12 at 6:35

Nebelah: An animal that has died a natural death or was killed not in accordance with the jewish ritual lawnatural death is called "nebelah" (carcas). (Bechoros, 3a)

Terefah: An animal afflicted with an organic disease or disability (eg. the removal of a certain portion of the knee) (Chulin, 42a)

A first-born-Nebelah can have kedushat-Bechor and needs to be redeemed from a Kohen. If it is terefah it loses its Bechor-status and doesn't need redeeming.

According to Rav Hisda, if, when it died, a non-Jew owned any of the parts of the Nebelah that would render the animal treif if that part was missing (eg. windpipe), then the animal is unfit to be a Bechor, and doesn't need to be redeemed. (Bechoros, 3a)

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.