Chullin Daf 102 צולין דַף 102

In a Baraisa, Rebbe Yehudah and Rebbe Elazar say that the prohibition of אבר מן החי – eating a limb taken from a living animal applies to בהמות, חיות, and birds, whether they are from kosher or non-kosher animals. The Chochomim say it only applies to kosher animals. Both opinions are derived from the same passuk: רק חזק לבלתי אכול הדם כי הדם הוא הנפש – only be strong not to eat the blood, for the blood is the life, לא תאכל הנפש עם הבשר – you shall not eat the life with the meat. Rebbe Yehudah and Rebbe Elazar darshen that any animal whose blood is forbidden (which includes nonkosher animals), its אבר מן החי is likewise forbidden. The Chochomim hold that that phrase "הנפש עם הבשר" – the life with the meat implies that that only כל שבשרו מותר אתה מצווה על אבריו – any [animal] whose meat is permitted, you are commanded not to eat its detached limbs, but not those of a non-kosher animal. Rebbe Meir limits the prohibition of אבר מן החי further, applying it only to a בהמה. Rav says that regarding a בן נח, everyone agrees that אבר מן החי applies even to non-kosher animals.

Rav says that the liability for אבר מן החי requires eating a כזית, because the Torah uses the word "אכילה" – eating. Rav Nachman said that one would still be liable במשהו בשר גידין ועצמות – with a limb containing a minimal amount of meat, with enough sinews and bones to combine to a כזית (although they are not food, and do not combine for a כזית to transgress נבילה, etc.). The Gemara asks that Rav contradicts his own ruling that one who eats an entire live kosher bird is liable (for אבר מן החי) even בכל שהוא – for a minimal amount, because its limbs are complete entities!? [If he ate it after it died, he is only liable (for eating נבילה) if it was a כזית.] The Gemara answers that this statement also means that he is liable for eating a minimal amount of meat, along with enough גידין and עצמות to total a כזית. But after it dies, liability for נבילה would require a full כזית of edible meat.

A Baraisa discusses one who eats an entire live bird smaller than a כזית whole. Rebbe exempts him (from malkus), but Rebbe Elazar bar Rebbe Shimon says he is liable, because he holds בחייה לאברים עומדת – while [an animal] is alive, it stands to be cut into limbs, so each limb is already prohibited as anאבר מן החי, which he transgresses by eating the bird alive. Rebbe holds בחייה לאו לאברים עומדת, and it only stands to be cut into limbs when it is shechted. Rava adds that if Rebbe would hold מחשבת אוכלין שמה מחשבה – that one’s thought regarding food is considered effective thought, then one who decided to eat a small living bird one limb at a time (and instead ate it alive) would be liable for אבר מן החי, because his intent renders the limbs independent entities. Although Abaye objects that there cannot be different laws for different people, Rava replies: זה לפי מחשבתו וזה לפי מחשבתו – this one is judged according to his thought, and that one is judged according to his thought. Similarly, Rava says that Rebbe Elazar bar Rebbe Shimon would agree that one who decides to eat this bird dead but instead eats it alive would not be liable.