Bartenura on Mishnah Chullin

Sefaria · Mishnah > Rishonim on Mishnah > Bartenura > Seder Kodashim · 509 sections

6.1.5
ונוהג בכוי – it is a creature of its own and the Sages did not determine if it is [a kind of] wildlife that would require covering [of the blood], [or] if it is cattle and does not require covering [of its blood].
6.1.6
ואין שוחטין אותו ביו"ט – because perhaps it requires covering [of its blood] and out of doubt, we don’t violate [the sanctity] of the Yom Tov–Jewish holy day.
6.1.7
ואם שחטו ביו"ט אין מכסים את דמו – and even if there was dust prepared or ashes, lest the person who sees it will say that it is definitely wildlife and therefore, he covered its blood on the Jewish holy day, and he will come to permit its fat.
6.2.1
רבי מאיר מחייב – for he holds that ritual slaughter that is inappropriate is called ritual slaughter.
6.2.2
וחכמים פוטרים – as they hold that [inappropriate ritual slaughter] is not called ritual slaughter, and the Halakha is according to the Sages.
6.3.1
ואחרים רואין אותם – for in that manner, their ritual slaughter was fit.
6.3.2
חייבים לכסות – those others that see them are liable to cover [the blood] as it is taught further on. If he ritually slaughtered and did not cover [the blood] and another saw him, he is liable to cover [the blood].
6.3.3
פטור מלכסות – Rabbi Meir said regarding it that he holds that the ritual slaughter of a deaf-mute, imbecile and–or a minor, among themselves, is complete carrion–not slaughtered according to the ritual rules, since most of their acts are corrupted. But the Rabbis dispute that of Rabbi Meir whether at the beginning [of the Mishnah] or at the end [of the Mishnah], but rather they observe him until he completes the matter and then return to dispute him, for the Rabbis think that it is doubtful carrion–not slaughtered according to the ritual rules, but not verifiable carrion. Therefore, regarding the matter of covering [the blood], they are obligated to cover [the blood], and they don’t do ritual slaughter after them of the animal and its young (see Leviticus 22:28), lest it is a good–valid ritual slaughtering. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Meir.
6.4.1
שחט חיה יכסנה ואחר כך ישחוט את העוף – as it is written (Leviticus 17:13): “[And if any Israelite or any stranger who resides among them hunts down] an animal or a bird [that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth],” he interrupts from this one to the other one to put on a covering for each and every one. But the Rabbis think this or they require him to divide it, for it not, I would have said that there is no need to cover [the blood] unless he ritually slaughtered both of them. But everyone admits that regarding the blessing, he doesn’t recite other than one blessing, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
6.4.2
וראהו אחר חייב לכסות – as it is written in the portion of the covering of the blood, [and I say] (Leviticus 17:12): “[Therefore I say] to the Israelite people: [No person among you shall partake of blood],” this Mitzvah–commandment applies to all the Israelite people.
6.4.3
כסהו הרוח חייב לכסות – this Mishnah was learned only that he returned and it was revealed–exposed, but if he did not return and it was revealed, he is exempt from covering [the blood].
6.5.1
נתערב ביין – which is red and the appearance of the blood is not recognized in it.
6.5.2
רואין אותו – [we view that] wine as if [it is] water, for if the appearance of blood was recognized in the water according to this measurement, he would be liable to cover [the blood].
6.5.3
נתערב בדם בהמה – which is not something covered, and the majority of it is the blood of a cattle.
6.5.4
או בדם חיה – the blood bled by an animal–beast of chase or deer.
6.5.5
רואין אותו – that it is not required to cover [the blood], as if it were water, but if this blood is from the ritual slaughter of an animal–beast of chase and fowl and it is recognized, one is required to cover it.
6.5.6
אין דם מבטל דם – and even if the appearance of blood is not recognized in the water like the blood of this cattle, the blood of animals–beasts of chase are not nullified, for he holds that a mixture of homogeneous things (of which one is forbidden), the rule of neutralization by quantity takes no effect (see Talmud Hullin 100a). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
6.6.1
דם הניתז – on the back of the wall.
6.6.2
אימתי – it comes to explain but not to dispute.
7.1.1
גיד הנשה. ובמוקדשים – even a burnt offering which is burnt entirely, he removes the nervus ischiadicus (i.e., sinew of the hip, the sciatic nerve) and casts it upon the ashes of the communal altar that is called “pile” (the place on the altar where the ashes are piled up) and it is not offered up with the meat.
7.1.2
שאין לו כף – it does not have a hollow [of the thigh or a spoon-shaped hip] similar to that of man which is round, but the rather, the meat that is upon the thigh-bone of the fowl is in its width. And if fowl is found that has a round sole, its sciatic nerve is prohibited.
7.1.3
ונוהג בשליל – a living [embryo] nine [months old] that is found in the animal.
7.1.4
רבי יהודה אומר יאנו נוהג בשליל – but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
7.1.5
וחלבו – of the embryo is permitted. Another interpretation: and the fat of the sinew, meaning to say, the permitted fat of animals (as opposed to forbidden fat) is permitted according to al, but the Jewish people which is holy practiced a prohibition regarding it.
7.1.6
ואין הטבחים נאמנים – [the butchers are not believed] to state we take it because of the trouble it is for them to hollow it out. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.
7.2.1
שולח אדם ירך לנכרי וכו' – and we don’t take into consideration lest a Jew should see it when he sends it to him and he returns and purchases it from the heathen and eat it with its sinew. For since it is whole, the place of the sciatic nerve is known if it was hollowed out from it and the purchaser understands that it was not removed, and he removes it.
7.2.2
שיטול את כולו – he will hollow it out afterwards.
7.2.3
לקיים בו מצות נטילה – he peels the fat off even (see Talmud Hullin 92b) from the top and that is enough.
7.3.1
אכלו ואין בו כזית חייב – because it is a living creature, he is liable for whatever the amount, like one who eats an ant of whatever the amount is liable.
7.3.2
מזה כזית – from the right thigh an olive’s bulk and similarly from the left thigh.
7.3.3
אינו סופג אלא ארבעים – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that this is not practiced other than with the right [thigh] for he expounds (Genesis 32:33): “[the socket] of the hip,” that means the strongest of the hips (i.e., the right” (see Talmud Hullin 91a). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
7.4.1
כבשר בלפת – we view it as if the thigh is broken and the nerve is meat, and whereas if it provided a flavor in the meat like the size of the nerve–sinew, like turnips, [like the measurement of] the thigh, it is prohibited, for the measurement is a traditional law dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai, and we derive that in this we estimate, even though it if it were a cabbage or a leek with a head–porret, one would need less, or more, and that of our Mishnah would be superseded and is not the Halakha and we hold that there isn’t in the sinews–nerve for imparting a flavor, for whether it is cooked or whether it is salted or whether it is roasted, we cast it aside and it is permitted. But especially it, but its fat, it imparts a flavor and if he didn’t carry off the fat, it prohibits, and the imparting of a flavor that is mentioned with it must be of the same species, for a person cannot distinguish, we estimate it as one-sixtieth.
7.5.1
גיד הנשה שנתבשל עם הגידים – [of those thighs] that are permitted.
7.5.2
בזמן שמכירו – he casts it outside, and there is nothing here other than its remnants.
7.5.3
בנותן טעם – if the prohibited nerve–sinew imparts a taste of flavor in all of these, they are all prohibited.
7.5.4
ואם לאו – that he doesn’t recognize that all of them are forbidden, and in each one, one can say that this is it, but it is not neutralized through a majority for it is considered like a living creature and a living creature cannot be neutralized.
7.5.5
בזמן שמכירין – for the forbidden pieces, we estimate with the imparting of a flavor and if there isn’t enough in order to impart a flavor, it is something permitted, and the rest is permitted.
7.5.6
ואם אין מכירין – all the pieces are forbidden for each one of them, one can suspect and state that perhaps this is it, and it is not nullified in a majority, since it is appropriate to be adorned before the guests.
7.5.7
והרוטב מותר – if there isn’t among the forbidden pieces in order to impart a flavor to the broth–juice and the sediment of boiled meat and the pieces and the Halakha in practice is that something forbidden that was mixed with something permitted, a species that is combined with something that is not its species, that one can establish it by taste, if it is priest’s due–heave offering that we combined with profane–unconsecrated produce, a Kohen should taste it. And if it is a forbidden thing, then a heathen professional baker should taste it. If he states that this mixture does not contain the taste of heave offering or the taste of something prohibited, everything is permitted, and the Rabbis believed the heathen professional baker, because it is his craft, he doesn’t lie so that he doesn’t lose his profession. And if there was a mixture of one species with something from the same species where it is not possible to establish the taste–flavor, or if it was one species with something from another species, and there was no Kohen present, or a heathen upon whom one can rely, if the prohibited [substance] is from fat and blood of animals that died of themselves (i.e., carrion) and torn animals, forbidden animals and reptiles, we estimate it with being [one-part] in sixty. If there are sixty [parts] of permitted [food] corresponding to the prohibited [part], it is all permitted, and if not, everything is prohibited. And similarly, the permitted fat of the sciatic nerve, we estimate it corresponding to the sixty [parts] of permissible [fat] but the udder that was cooked with the meat, we estimate it with sixty parts, and the udder is part of the number, because it’s prohibition is from the words of the Scribes; and an egg which has a chick [within] that was cooked with the rest of the permitted eggs, it requires sixty-one parts corresponding to it, but if the prohibited [part] is priest’s due–heave offering, Hallah and First-Fruits, if it is one species with material from the same species, or one species with material from another species, and there isn’t a Kohen or a heathen who can taste it, we estimate it with one-hundred [parts] of unconsecrated produce. But if it is fruit of trees of the first three years or mixed seats in the vineyard, we estimate it with two-hundred parts and all of these measures, we estimate with what is in the pot with the broth and the pieces and the spices and the sediments of boiled meat, and this is the smallest of the bowels at the rim–bottom of the pot, and what comes before us, we estimate, but we don’t estimate what the pot absorbed from that which is permitted, for even that which is prohibited is absorbed and reduced from the amount that was, for that which was permitted was absorbed, but that which was forbidden was not absorbed.
7.6.1
ואינו נוהג בטמאה – for if he ate the sciatic nerve of prohibited [meat], the one who states that there is the imparting of a flavor by the nerve–sinew is flogged because it is a ritually impure, and not because of the sinew–nerve, and the one who states that the sinew–nerves have no flavor, is exempt from everything, for a pure piece of wood is what the Torah obligates him, but one that is impure, is not practiced.
7.6.2
מבני יעקב נאסר – and yet that which is impure is permitted to them, until the Giving of the Torah.
7.6.3
אמרו לו – this Biblical verse that they warned him at Sinai it was stated at Sinai, but until Sinai, they were not warned about it.
7.6.4
אלא שנכתב במקומו – after it was stated at Sinai, when Moses came to arrange the Torah, he wrote this Biblical passage about the event, therefore, the children of Israel were warned afterwards that they should not eat the sciatic nerve [to known for which reason it was prohibited to them], but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
8.1.1
כל הבשר אסור לבשל בחלב – there are those of them, from the words of the Torah, such as the flesh–meat of cattle. But there are those of them from words of the Scribes, such as the meat–flesh of fowl.
8.1.2
חוץ מבשר דגים וחגבים – which are not either from the words of the Torah nor from the words of the Scribes.
8.1.3
ואסור להעלותן עם הגבינה על השלחן – and even the flesh–meat of fowl whose eating is forbidden [with cheese] from the words of the Sages, it is forbidden to bring them up with the cheese on the table. It is a decree lest one brings cheese with the flesh–meat of cattle in a boiling tightly-covered pot, which is forbidden from the Torah, which is considered cooking.
8.1.4
הנודר מן הבשר – in vows, he went after the language of human beings. And for every type of meat that a person calls “meat”, except for the meat of fish and locusts.
8.2.1
ובלבד שלא יהיו נוגעים זה בזה – for if they (i.e., meat and cheese) touch–come in contact, even though it is something cold with something cold, they require rinsing.
8.2.2
שני אכסנאין אוכלין על שלחן אחד – specifically if they don’t know one another, but if they know each other, it is forbidden, for perhaps one of them will take from that of his colleague and will eat it. But the Halakha is according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel.
8.3.1
טיפת חלב שנפלה – into the pot of one of the pieces for all of it is outside of the sauce, and he did not stir the pot nor did he cover it. The taste of the drop [of milk] was not divided–spread other than upon that piece alone.
8.3.2
אם יש בנותן טעם באותה חתיכה – meaning to say, if there is not in that piece alone sixty [parts] to nullify the drop, the piece [of meat] is immediately forbidden and prohibits [the pieces] next to it, and it requires sixty [parts] corresponding the entire [piece of] meat.
8.3.3
ניער את הקדרה – that he stirred it immediately, before the piece actually absorbed the taste from the drop [of milk], for now, the drop [of milk] has been mixed with everything.
8.3.4
אם יש בנותן אעם באותה קדרה – meaning to say, there isn’t power in the drop [of milk] to prohibit all of it, other than if it has the flavor to give to the entire pot.
8.3.5
הכחל – the nipples [of the breast] of the cow.
8.3.6
קורעו ומוציא את חלבו – tears it by its warp (i.e., longitudinal direction) and woof (i.e., latitudinal direction) and squeeze it–fasten it into the wall and he is permitted afterwards to cook it with the meat in the pot.
8.3.7
לא קרעו אינו עובר עליו – of he cooked it alone in the pot, and it is permissible to do this even ab initio, but since it (i.e., the Mishnah) is required to teach the concluding clause regarding the heart, if he didn’t tear it, he doesn’t violate anything regarding it, but nevertheless, there is a prohibition, it is also taught in the opening clause, that he doesn’t violate anything, but if he cooked it with the meat without tearing it, we estimate it by sixty [parts], and the nipple itself is part of the count, but the nipple remains always forbidden.
8.3.8
הלב קורעו ומוציא את דמו. לא קרעו אינו עובר עליו – to be in extirpation, and in Tractate Keritot [22a], it establishes it with the heart of a fowl that does not have an olive’s bulk of blood, but the heart of cattle, one is liable for extirpation if he did not eat it and did not tear it after cooking it. But the flesh of the heart is not forbidden, for the heart is part but does not absorb.
8.3.9
אינו עובר לבא תעשה – he cannot come to [the violation of] a negative commandment, meaning to say, one should not worry lest he eat it and transgress it; or alternatively he consumes it and does not transgress the negative commandment.
8.4.1
מותר לבשל ומותר בהנאה – there is nothing in it because of meat with milk, for “a kid” (“You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk” is written three times (i.e., Exodus 23:19, Exodus 34:26 and Deuteronomy 14:21) relating to the prohibition of meat in milk. And one of them is to exclude the unclean–levitically impure, for if he cooked the meat of unclean cattle, even in the milk of pure cattle it is permitted, but, however, regarding eating, it is prohibited because of unclean meat. And similarly, also, as the words “in its mother’s milk” is written three times, and one of those is to exclude impure milk, and even if the meat is pure.
8.4.2
פרט לחיה ולעוף ולבהמה טמאה – a “kid,” excluding fowl which is not cattle. A “kid,” excluding a beast of chase, and even though a beast of chase is included within cattle. An additional Biblical verse comes to exclude it. A “kid,” and not unclean cattle, and we derive if from what is written (Genesis 27:16): “with the skins of the kids;” “Judah sent the kid [by his friend the Adullamite]” (Genesis 38:20) – here the Biblical verse explains to you that this “kid” is from the goats. But if he did not explain this, there is by implication, even the rest of the cattle, hence it was necessary for him to explain this.
8.4.3
נאמר לא תאכלו כל נבלה – and it is stated in that same [Biblical] verse: “You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk, which implies that everyone who practices this prohibition of a carrion (i.e., an animal that has died a natural death), it has because of [the prohibition] of meat with milk. And there is a difference between Rabbi Yosi Haglili and Rabbi Akiva, for Rabbi Yosi Haglili holds that a beast of chase is according to Torah, for everything that is forbidden because of being a carrion, it also has the [prohibition of] meat with milk, except for the fowl, which has no mother’s milk. But Rabbi Akiva holds that beasts of chase are not from the Torah; alternatively, there is a difference between them concerning fowl according to the Rabbis. Rabbi Akiva who explained that it is not from the Torah, implying that it is from the Rabbis where regarding it there is a prohibition, but Rabbi Yosi Haglili did not explain this language and permitted it completely. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva.
8.5.1
קיבה – congealed milk that is within the maw.
8.5.2
נכרי ושל נבלה – this is what he said, the maw [of the stomach] slaughtered by a heathen is carrion and this is prohibited.
8.5.3
המעמיד – milk.
8.5.4
בעור של קיבה – which is meat.
8.5.5
אם יש בה – to impart a flavor with milk, it is prohibited, and if not, it is permitted, and even though he curdles [milk] since the flesh itself is of something permitted, and its prohibition is not other than on account of another matter that was combined with it, and we don’t say in this that everything follows after the curdling. But if he curdled the cheese in the flesh of the maw of a carrion, even if it doesn’t have what to impart a flavor in the milk, it is prohibited because the curdling is prohibited, and its prohibition is on account of itself. Therefore, [the Rabbis] prohibited the heathen cheeses because they curdle it in the skin of the maw of a carrion. But the rennet itself which is the congealed milk that is within the maw. We wind up that there isn’t a prohibition at all, that it is a mere secretion (see Tractate Hullin 116b). Maimonides wrote this, but Rashi wrote that the milk that is found congealed in the skin of the maw that we salt it in its hide. I would be wont to permit it until this point, for as long as no other milk is placed in it. But I would err in this for I would think as we state [in Talmud Avodah Zarah 29b -see Mishnah Avodah Zarah, Chapter 2, Mishnah 5) regarding the rennet from a whole [burnt] offering of a Kohen who is not squeamish sucks it out raw, we learn from it that it is a mere secretion and it is not forbidden. But it is not complete milk, as it is taught in our Mishnah that it is fit, when one sucked it from an animal with an organic inflicted disease, it is prohibited, we learn from it that it is milk. And the rennet of a burnt offering which is permitted, because it is not part of its body but rather that which is quaffed from its mother, and it is an entrance into the bowels like it is placed into a dish and it is permitted.
8.6.1
שחחלב מועלין בו – and even offerings of lesser sanctity (I.e., individual peace offerings, the thanks-offering, the Nazirite’s ram, the male firstborn of a kosher animal, animal tithes, and the Paschal lamb) which are the money of their owners, there is no sacrilege during their lifetimes, [but] there is sacrilege with the portions of the offerings consumed on the altar (i.e., portions of sin-offerings, guilt-offerings and peace offerings consumed on the altar such as the fats, the kidneys and the fat-tail, etc.) after their blood has been sprinkled, as it is written regarding offerings of lesser sanctity (Leviticus 3:16): “All fat is the LORD’s,” and thus it is written for them “the LORD’s,” to state that we call them the holy things of God, regarding sacrilege–misappropriation.
8.6.2
וטמא – if he ate it with an impure body, he is liable for two sin-offerings; one because of fat and one because of impurity of an impure body.
8.6.3
משא"כ בדם (see Tractate Meilah, Chapter 3, Mishnah 3) – for relating to blood, it is written (Leviticus 17:11): “[For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have assigned it to you] for making expiation for your lives upon the altar,” for expiation–atonement it was given, but not that it should be called, “mine” to make sacrilege–misappropriation, for it does not endure other than to atone for yourselves, but it does not have [anything] because of a sacrifice that is disqualified by improper intention [of the officiating Kohen] (i.e., “piggul”) for another thing permits it, such as the meat of holy things as the blood permits it to the Kohanim with his sprinkling of it, and like the example of the burnt offering whose blood permits it to the altar, for if its blood was not sprinkled, its limbs are not offered, as it is written (Leviticus 17:6): “That the priest may dash [the] blood against the altar of the LORD [at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting],” and afterwards, “and turn the fat into smoke as a pleasing odor [to the LORD].” These have in them [the possibility of] an offering disqualified by improper intention. But blood which in and of itself permits, they are not liable for regarding an offering disqualified by improper intention. But they don’t have an offering left over [after the time permitted for it to be eaten – punishable by extirpation] and impure also, as it is written, “with blood” twice to exclude. – “him” and “they” – one to exclude from an offering left over, and one to exclude from defilement.
8.6.4
אלא בבהמה טמאה – as it is written (Leviticus 7:25): “[If anyone eats the fat of] animals from which offerings by fie may be made to the LORD [the person who eats it shall be cut of from his kin].”
9.1.1
העור והרוטב (the hide and the juice of meat) – because it is taught in the Mishnah in the chapter [four]: “A beast which was in hard labor” regarding the placenta–after-birth, and that it does not defile the defilement of foods nor the defilement of carrions, it (i.e., the Mishnah) teaches, “The Hide and the Juice of Meat” – chapter 9). But this that separates–divides, because it (i.e., the Mishnah) teaches in the chapter “A beast which was in hard labor” (in Mishnah 5): “[If] he found a live nine-months’ birth, it requires slaughtering and he is liable for to the ruling of ‘it and its young’,” it (i.e., the Mishnah) taught afterwards [the chapter] “It and its young.” But since it (chapter 5) is speaking about ritual slaughtering that is not appropriate, it (i.e., the Mishnah) teaches after it (chapter 6), “the requirement to cover up its blood,” and since it (i.e., the Mishnah) teaches in “the requirement to cover up its blood,” and that it applies to wild beasts and fowl, it (i.e., the Mishnah) teaches “The sinew of the hip–the sciatic nerve” (Chapter 7) which applies to wild animals but not to fowl. But since it teaches in “The sinew of the hip–the sciatic nerve” with the thigh that was cooked with the sinew of the hip [with forbidden swallowing], it teaches “Every [kind of] flesh” (Chapter 8), and after it, it returns to the first matter of the placenta–after-birth, or that doesn’t become defiled with the defilement of foods.
9.1.2
העור והרוטב – the hide of the ritually slaughtered animal, such as, for example, less than an egg’s bulk of flesh and its hide is attached to it, it combines, because it protects the flesh, and the guards combine for a light defilement which is defilement of food, as It is written regarding it (Leviticus 11:37): “[If such a carcass falls upon] seed grain that is to be sown, [it is pure],” in he manner that people find for sowing, wheat in its husk and barley in its husk and lentils in their husks. But even though that in this verse (Leviticus 11:37 referenced above), it is written that “it is pure,” the reason is that it did not become susceptible, but adjacent to it (Leviticus 11:38): “but if water is put on the seed, [and any part of a carcass falls upon it]” that it becomes susceptible, it is impure.(i.e., “it is impure for you”).
9.1.3
והרוטב – that it is congealed–becomes solid in that it is the manner to eat it with the meat–flesh, and combines to complete the measurement, like the bulk of an egg. But it is not able to receive defilement on its own.
9.1.4
והקיפה – spices. But they are not considered to be food on their own, but rather, to be combined with foods.
9.1.5
האלל (fatty substance of meat) – sinews of the spine and of the neck, and it is wide, white and hard, and we call it KAPILO in the foreign tongue. And its example is in Job [13:4]: “[If you invent lies,] All of you are quacks.” For once it is split–broken in two, it has no remedy to be attached once again, so you [as well], a thing that has no remedy, you say to provide a remedy. Alternatively, the Tanna–teacher [of the Mishnah] calls it אלל–fatty substance of meat–flesh which the knife has taken off (see Talmud Hullin 121a), when they flay the animal, sometimes when the knife removes from the flesh near the hide, and it is not considered food, but combines with the food.
9.1.6
והקרנים והטלפים (and the horns and the hooves) – all that they sever them and blood comes out from them near their roots from below which are soft. But however, on their own, they are not food.
9.1.7
מצטרפין – because it protects.
9.1.8
לטמא טומאת אוכלין – to complete the measurement like the bulk of an egg, for impure foods do not defile with less than an egg’s bulk.
9.1.9
אבל לא טומאת נבילות – if they are carrion [meat], they do not defile, and they don’t combine to the equivalent of an olive’s bulk to complete the measurement of a carrion to defile a person and he clothing that are upon him, as it is written (Leviticus 11:39): “[If an animal that you may eat has died,] anyone who touches its carcass [shall be impure until evening],” and not on the hide which does not have the equivalent of an olive’s bulk of flesh and the hide completes the equivalent of an olive’s bulk, for the person who comes in contract with it is not ritually impure, because the guarding does not combine to defilement of carrions. And similarly, the spices and the juice of the meat that becomes congealed are not a species of carrion. And the fatty substance of meat and the sinews are not meat–flesh. But we consume them generally with flesh–meat.
9.1.10
כיוצא בו – [there is] that which defiles the defilement of foods, to receive defilement from the unclean reptile and it defiles other foods, but does not defile of its own accord the defilement of carrion to defile others.
9.1.11
השוחט בהמה טמאה לנכרי – a Jew who slaughtered an impure animal for the needs of a heathen, and it is still moves convulsively, even though It is not fit for a heathen, for ritual slaughter is not permitted to the children of Noah until it dies, even so, since an Israelite did a ritual slaughter, it is as good–valid slaughter, for since that slaughter is permitted regarding that an Israelite with a ritually pure animal, his intention–thought is considered as food with a ritual slaughter, even with something ritually impure for a heathen. But a heathen, regarding ritual slaughter does not consider it in his thought as food, and we do not find it as slaughter concerning him. But something ritually impure for a Jew is not considered as food for him., for his intention is void.
9.1.12
אבל לא טומאת נבילות עד שתמות – for this [verse] (Leviticus 11:39): “If an animal that you may eat has die.”
9.1.13
או עד שיתיז את ראשה – which would be an animal body maimed to disfigurement and a carrion while alive, and it is considered as dead, and even if it is maimed to disfigurement.
9.1.14
ריבה הכתוב לטמא טומאת אוכלים = for all of these has regarding food, tat they are food but it is not called carrion even though that it is belonging to it.
9.1.15
האלל המכונס (flayed off meat that is collected) – this fatty substance of the concluding segment [of the Mishnah], for everyone, it is flesh that the knife has taken off in flaying near the hide.
9.1.16
המכונס – that is gathered in one place. For its intention is not abolished, and the flesh is considered carrion, and he is liable for it if he came in contact or entered in the Temple or ate Holy food. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
9.2.1
אלו שעורותיהן (their hide is deemed equivalent to their meat) – they defile like their meat–flesh.
9.2.2
ועוד חזיר של ישוב – because it is soft and they eat it.
9.2.3
אף עור חזיר הבר – for he holds that this also is soft–tender. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda (actually, it should read, Rabbi Yosi, here, as Rabbi Yehuda’s comment in the Mishnah does not come until much later in the text).
9.2.4
חטוטרת של גמל הרכה (hump of a young camel) – all the while that it didn’t carry a burden.
9.2.5
עגל הרך – all the while that it nurses.
9.2.6
ועור הפרסות (skin of the hooves) – when they sever–cut off the legs, and it is soft.
9.2.7
בית הבושת (pudenda) – the sides of the womb of the female.
9.2.8
ועור שתחת האליה – the hide of the tail from under the place where there is no hair, because it is soft.
9.2.9
האנקה (hedgehog) – RITZU
9.2.10
והלטאה (a species of lizard) – LEVIYARDA.
9.2.11
חומט (snail) – LUGMA.
9.2.12
הלטאה כחולדה (the lizard is equivalent to the weasel) – its hide is smoother than its skin, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
9.2.13
וכולן שעיבדן (and all of them which one tanned) – all of these which they stated that defile like he meat, if he tanned them, they became hide and were abolished from the law of flesh and are pure.
9.2.14
או שהלך בהן – that he stretched them in order to trample them, which is a bit like tanning them (and do not impart food uncleanness).

Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020. Via Sefaria (sefaria.org), Sefaria-Export. Version source: http://sefaria.org/ Licence: CC-BY. Source.