Study Chullin folio 42B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Granted, with regard to the tanna of our Mishnah, one can say that the cases of tereifot that he taught explicitly in the Mishnah, he taught, and that any case that he omitted comes under the general statement beginning: This is the principle. But with regard to the tanna of the school of R' Yishmae
The Talmud objects: But even if one holds that the severed leg can be cauterized and the animal will live, this does not mean that the animal is not a tereifa. According to whom is the question: But aren’t there the cases of beit, samekh, gimmel, reish, stated? It is stated according to the tanna
The Talmud objects: But isn’t there the case of a deficiency in the spine? As we learned in a Mishnah (Oholot 2:3): How much is considered a deficiency in the spine of a corpse so that it will not be considered a full corpse to impart impurity in a tent? Beit Shammai say: Two missing vertebrae, and
The Talmud responds: The omasum or the reticulum that were perforated on their outer walls, which you count as two separate cases, should be counted as one case. Accordingly, one case has been removed from the count of 18 tereifot and one case has been inserted, i.e., the case of a deficiency in th
The Talmud asks: But isn’t there the case of the tereifa mentioned in the Mishnah on 54a of an animal whose hide was removed? The Talmud responds: The tanna of the school of R' Yishmael holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, who deems such an animal kosher.