Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

February 23, 2018 | ื—ืณ ื‘ืื“ืจ ืชืฉืขืดื—

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Avodah Zarah 39

The gemara continues to discuss the items mentioned in the mishna that come from non-Jews that cannot be eaten but it is not forbidden to benefit from them. The gemara explains what the issues surrounding each case are. Within this context, issues of who among Jews can be trusted/not trusted for kashrut and other issues (techelet – and concern over forgeries of techelet) and in what situations (to buy from/eat in their house) are discussed. The next mishna mentions items that Jews are even allowed to eat if they come from non-Jews.

ื”ืชื ื™ื“ื™ืข ืžืžืฉื• ื”ื›ื ืœื ื™ื“ื™ืข ืžืžืฉืŸ

The Gemara explains: There, the substance of the wine is a recognizable component of the fish stew; here, its substance is not a recognizable component of the pickled vegetables.

ื•ื˜ืจื™ืช ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ื•ืฆื™ืจ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ื” ื•ื›ื•ืณ ืžืื™ ื—ื™ืœืง ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื–ื• ืกื•ืœืชื ื™ืช ื•ืžืคื ื™ ืžื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืžืคื ื™ ืฉืขืจื‘ื•ื ื” ืขื•ืœื” ืขืžื”

ยง The mishna teaches: And minced tarit fish, and brine that does not have a kilbit fish floating in it, and แธฅilak are all prohibited. The Gemara asks: What is แธฅilak? Rav Naแธฅman bar Abba says that Rav says: This is sultanit, a type of small fish that is generally caught before its scales have developed. And for what reason is it prohibited? It is because its size causes it to be intermingled with other fish, and as a result sultanit rises out of the water with non-kosher fish when it is caught.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ืœื• ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ื•ืขืชื™ื“ ืœื’ื“ืœ ืœืื—ืจ ื–ืžืŸ ื›ื’ื•ืŸ ื”ืกื•ืœืชื ื™ืช ื•ื”ืขืคื™ืฅ ื”ืจื™ ื–ื” ืžื•ืชืจ ื™ืฉ ืœื• ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ื•ืขืชื™ื“ ืœื”ืฉื™ืจ ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืขื•ืœื” ืžืŸ ื”ื™ื ื›ื’ื•ืŸ ืืงื•ื ืก ื•ืืคื•ื ืก ื›ื˜ืกืคื˜ื™ื™ืก ื•ืื›ืกืคื˜ื™ื™ืก ื•ืื•ื˜ื ืก ืžื•ืชืจ

The Sages taught: If a fish does not currently possess scales but will grow them after a period of time, such as the sultanit and afiyatz fish, it is permitted. Likewise, if it has scales now but will shed them when it is caught and rises from the sea, such as akunas and afuna, ketasfatiyas and akhsaftiyas and otanas fish, it is permitted.

ืื›ืจื™ื– ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื”ื• ื‘ืงื™ืกืจื™ ืงื™ืจื‘ื™ ื“ื’ื™ื ื•ืขื•ื‘ืจืŸ ื ื™ืงื—ื™ืŸ ืžื›ืœ ืื“ื ื—ื–ืงืชืŸ ืื™ื ืŸ ื‘ืื™ื ืืœื ืžืคืœื•ืกื ื•ืืกืคืžื™ื ื›ื™ ื”ื ื“ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ืื™ ืฆื—ื ืชื ื“ื‘ื‘ ื ื”ืจื ืฉืจื™ื

Rabbi Abbahu announced in Caesarea: Fish entrails and their eggs may be purchased from any person, as the presumption with regard to them is that they come only from Pelusium [Pilusa] and Spain [Aspamya], and non-kosher fish are not found in those areas. This is similar to that which Abaye says: These small fish [tzaแธฅanta] of the Bav River are permitted, as non-kosher fish are not found in that river.

ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืื™ืœื™ืžื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืจื“ื™ืคื™ ืžื™ื ื•ื”ืื™ ื“ื’ ื˜ืžื ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ืœื™ืช ืœื™ื” ื—ื•ื˜ ื”ืฉื“ืจื” ื‘ื“ื•ื›ืชื ื“ืจื“ื™ืคื™ ืžื™ื ืœื ืžืฆื™ ืงืื™ ื•ื”ื ืงื ื—ื–ื™ื ืŸ ื“ืงืื™

The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Abaye unequivocally permitted eating these fish and was not concerned about the potential presence of non-kosher fish among them? If we say that it is due to the fact that the water flows rapidly, and these non-kosher fish, since they do not have a spinal cord, are not able to exist in a place where the water flows rapidly, as the current carries the non-kosher fish out of the Bav River, and consequently all the remaining fish are kosher, that is not the case, since we see that non-kosher fish exist in rivers with strong currents.

ืืœื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืžืœื™ื—ื™ ืžื™ื ื•ื”ืื™ ื“ื’ ื˜ืžื ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ืœื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืงืœืคื™ ื‘ื“ื•ื›ืชื ื“ืžืœื™ื—ื™ ืžื™ื ืœื ืžืฆื™ ืงืื™ ื•ื”ื ืงื—ื–ื™ื ืŸ ื“ืงืื™ ืืœื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืœื ืžืจื‘ื” ื˜ื™ื ื ื“ื’ ื˜ืžื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ื”ืื™ื“ื ื ื“ืงื ืฉืคื›ื™ ื‘ื™ื” ื ื”ืจ ื’ื•ื–ื ื•ื ื”ืจ ื’ืžื“ื ืืกื™ืจื™

Rather, perhaps Abaye permitted the fish because the water is salty, and these non-kosher fish are not able to exist in a place of salty water since they do not have scales. This, too, is not the case, since we see that non-kosher fish exist in salty water. Rather, Abaye permitted the small fish in the Bav River because the mud in that river is not suitable for non-kosher fish to reproduce. The conditions in the river render it an unproductive habitat for non-kosher fish. Ravina says: Nowadays, as the government built canals between the rivers, and the Goza River and the Gamda River spill into the Bav and carry non-kosher fish there, it is prohibited to eat the small fish without thorough inspection.

ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ืื™ ื—ืžืจื ื“ื™ืžื ืฉืจื™ ืชื•ืจื ื“ื™ืžื ืืกื™ืจ ื•ืกื™ืžื ื™ืš ื˜ืžื ื˜ื”ื•ืจ ื˜ื”ื•ืจ ื˜ืžื

The Gemara cites several other statements of amoraโ€™im that concern the halakhic status of fish. Abaye says: This creature known as the sea donkey [แธฅamara deyamma] is permitted; the creature known as the sea ox [tora deyamma] is prohibited, and your mnemonic to remember this halakha is: Impure is pure, and pure is impure, i.e., the name of an animal which is non-kosher on land is kosher in the sea, and that which is kosher on land is non-kosher in the sea.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ืฉืคืจ ื ื•ื ื ืฉืจื™ ืงื“ืฉ ื ื•ื ื ืืกื™ืจ ื•ืกื™ืžื ื™ืš ืงื“ืฉ ืœื”ืณ ืื™ื›ื ื“ืืžืจื™ ืงื‘ืจ ื ื•ื ื ืืกื•ืจ ื•ืกื™ืžื ื™ืš ืงื‘ืจื™ ื’ื•ื™ื

Rav Ashi said: The type of fish known as shefar nuna is permitted, and the type of fish known as kadesh nuna is prohibited, and your mnemonic to remember this halakha is: That which is holy [kodesh] is to the Lord, and not for humans. And some say that Rav Ashi said: The type of fish known as kevar nuna is prohibited, and your mnemonic is: The grave [kever] is impure like the graves of gentiles.

ืจื‘ื™ ืขืงื™ื‘ื ืื™ืงืœืข ืœื’ื™ื ื–ืง ืื™ื™ืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื”ื”ื•ื ื ื•ื ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื“ืžื™ ืœื—ื™ืคื•ืฉื ื—ืคื™ื™ื” ื‘ื“ื™ืงื•ืœื ื—ื–ื ื‘ื™ื” ืงืœืคื™ ื•ืฉืจื™ื™ื” ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ืื™ืงืœืข ืœื˜ืžื“ื•ืจื™ื ืื™ื™ืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื”ื”ื•ื ื ื•ื ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื“ืžื™ ืœืฆืœื•ืคื—ื ื ืงื˜ื™ื” ืœื”ื“ื™ ื™ื•ืžื ื—ื–ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื‘ื™ื” ืฆื™ืžื—ื™ ื•ืฉืจื™ื™ื”

The Gemara relates several incidents involving Sages and their rulings with regard to fish. Rabbi Akiva happened to come to Ginzak and they brought before him a certain fish that was similar to a แธฅippusha, a non-kosher aquatic creature. When he enclosed it in a basket he saw that it had scales which it shed as it struggled to escape from the basket, and he permitted it on that basis. Rav Ashi happened to come to Tamduria where they brought before him a certain fish that was similar to an eel [tzelofแธฅa]. He took it out and held it against the light of day and saw that there were thin scales on it, and he permitted it.

ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ืื™ืงืœืข ืœื”ื”ื•ื ืืชืจื ืื™ื™ืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื ื•ื ื ื“ื”ื•ื™ ื“ืžื™ ืœืฉืคืจื ื•ื ื ื—ืคื™ื™ื” ื‘ืžืฉื™ื›ืœื™ ื—ื™ื•ืจื™ ื—ื–ื ื‘ื™ื” ืงืœืคื™ ื•ืฉืจื™ื™ื” ืจื‘ื” ื‘ืจ ื‘ืจ ื—ื ื” ืื™ืงืœืข ืœืืงืจื ื“ืื’ืžื ืงืจื™ื‘ื• ืœื™ื” ืฆื—ื ืชื ืฉืžืขื™ื” ืœื”ื”ื•ื ื’ื‘ืจื ื“ื”ื•ื” ืงืจื™ ืœื™ื” ื‘ืื˜ื™

Rav Ashi also happened to come to a certain land where they brought before him a fish that was similar to a shefarnuna. He enclosed it in a white vessel and saw that it shed dark scales, which he could see against the white background of the container, and he permitted it. Rabba bar bar แธคana happened to come to Akra DeAgma and they brought him some tzaแธฅanta, a dish prepared from small fish. He heard a certain man calling it batei, the name of a non-kosher sea creature.

ืืžืจ ืžื“ืงื ืงืจื™ ืœื™ื” ื‘ืื˜ื™ ืฉืžืข ืžื™ื ื” ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ืื™ืช ื‘ื™ื” ืœื ืื›ืœ ืžื™ื ื™ื” ืœืฆืคืจื ืขื™ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืืฉื›ื— ื‘ื™ื” ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ืงืจื™ ืื ืคืฉื™ื” ืœื ื™ืื ื” ืœืฆื“ื™ืง ื›ืœ ืื•ืŸ

Rabba bar bar แธคana said to himself: From the fact that he called it batei, I can conclude from here that there is a non-kosher substance in the tzaแธฅanta. And he did not eat from it that night. In the morning, he examined the dish and in fact found a non-kosher substance in it. He read the following verse about himself: โ€œNo sin shall befall the righteousโ€ (Proverbs 12:21).

ื•ื”ืงื•ืจื˜ ืฉืœ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืžืคืกืงื™ ืœื™ื” ื‘ืกื›ื™ื ื ืืฃ ืขืœ ื’ื‘ ื“ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ืœืคื’ื ืžื•ืชืจ ืื’ื‘ ื—ื•ืจืคื™ื” ื“ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืชื ืžื—ืœื™ื ืœื™ื” ืฉืžื ื•ื ื™ืชื ื•ื”ื•ื” ืœื™ื” ื›ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ืœืฉื‘ื— ื•ืืกื•ืจ

ยง The mishna teaches: And a sliver of แธฅiltit may not be consumed, although one may derive benefit from it. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that it is prohibited? It is because they slice it with a knife on which there is presumably non-kosher residue. And even though the Master said that a prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the detriment of the mixture is permitted, that principle does not apply in this case because as a result of the sharpness of the แธฅiltit, the act of slicing it with a knife sweetens, i.e., enhances, the taste of the non-kosher residue. And there-fore it is like a prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the enhancement of the mixture, and it is prohibited.

ืขื‘ื“ื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ืœื•ื™ ื”ื•ื” ืงื ืžื–ื‘ื™ืŸ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืชื ื›ื™ ื ื— ื ืคืฉื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ืœื•ื™ ืืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืืžืจื• ืœื™ื” ืžื”ื• ืœืžื™ื–ื‘ืŸ ืžื™ื ื™ื” ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ

The Gemara relates that the gentile slave of Rabbi Levi would sell แธฅiltit, and it was permitted to purchase it from him as he was the slave of a Sage. When Rabbi Levi passed away, they came before Rabbi Yoแธฅanan and said to him: Now that Rabbi Levi has passed, what is the halakha with regard to whether or not it is permitted to purchase แธฅiltit from his gentile slave? Rabbi Yoแธฅanan said to them: The slave of a แธฅaver, one devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, especially halakhot of ritual purity, teruma, and tithes, is as a แธฅaver himself, and therefore it is permitted to buy แธฅiltit from him.

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื‘ืจ ืžื ื™ื•ืžื™ ื–ื‘ืŸ ืชื›ื™ืœืชื ืžืื ืฉื™ ื“ื‘ื™ืชื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ืขืžืจื ื—ืกื™ื“ื ืืชื ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืœื ื”ื•ื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ื”

The Gemara relates another incident that involves the status of a แธฅaver and his household. Rav Huna bar Minyumi purchased sky-blue dye [tekhelta] from the people of the household, i.e., the wife, of Rav Amram the pious. One may purchase sky-blue dye for ritual fringes only from a reliable individual, as it is easy to counterfeit it. Rav Huna then came before Rav Yosef to ask if he could rely on her assurance that it was usable for the mitzva. The answer was not available to Rav Yosef.

ืคื’ืข ื‘ื™ื” ื—ื ืŸ ื—ื™ื™ื˜ื ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืขื ื™ื ืžื ื ืœื™ื” ื‘ื“ื™ื“ื™ ื”ื•ื” ืขื•ื‘ื“ื ื“ื–ื‘ื™ื ื™ ืชื›ื™ืœืชื ืžืื ืฉื™ ื“ื‘ื™ืชื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื ืื” ืื—ื•ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ื•ืืชืื™ ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ืœื ื”ื•ื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ื” ืืชืื™ ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืžื”ื’ืจื•ื ื™ื ืืžืจ ืœื™ ื ืคืœืช ืœื™ื“ ื”ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืืฉืช ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ

Later, แธคanan the tailor happened to meet Rav Huna, and he said to him: From where could poor Rav Yosef have known the answer to this question? แธคanan continued: There was an incident in which I was involved, as I purchased sky-blue dye from the people of the household, i.e., the wife, of Rabenaโ€™a, brother of Rabbi แธคiyya bar Abba, and I came before Rav Mattana to ask him the same question, and the answer was not available to him either. I then came before Rav Yehuda of Hagronya, who said to me: You have fallen into my hand, i.e., I am the only one who can answer your question. This is what Shmuel says: The wife of a แธฅaver is herself considered like a แธฅaver, and you may therefore rely on her statement.

ืชื ื™ื ื ืœื”ื ื“ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืืฉืช ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉืžืช ืืฉืชื• ื•ื‘ื ื™ื• ื•ื‘ื ื™ ื‘ื™ืชื• ื”ืจื™ ื”ืŸ ื‘ื—ื–ืงืชืŸ ืขื“ ืฉื™ื—ืฉื“ื• ื•ื›ืŸ ื—ืฆืจ ืฉืžื•ื›ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืชื›ืœืช ื”ืจื™ ื”ืŸ ื‘ื—ื–ืงืชืŸ ืขื“ ืฉืชื™ืคืกืœ

The Gemara comments: We learn here that which the Sages taught explicitly in a baraita: The wife of a แธฅaver is like a แธฅaver; the slave of a แธฅaver is like a แธฅaver. Furthermore, with regard to a แธฅaver that died, his wife and children and members of his household remain in their presumptive status until they are suspected of engaging in inappropriate deeds. And similarly, with regard to a courtyard in which they sell sky-blue dye, it remains in its presumptive status as a place in which kosher sky-blue dye is sold until it is disqualified due to unscrupulous behavior.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืืฉืช ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื•ื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื• ืฉืœ ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื•ื›ืŸ ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉื ืžื›ืจ ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื›ื•ืœืŸ ืฆืจื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื‘ืจื•ืช ืื‘ืœ ืืฉืช ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ื•ื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ื•ื›ืŸ ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉื ืžื›ืจ ืœืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืื™ื ืŸ ืฆืจื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื‘ืจื•ืช ืœื›ืชื—ืœื” ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ

The Sages taught: The wife of one who is not careful to keep the particulars of certain halakhot [am haโ€™aretz], who later marries a แธฅaver, and likewise the daughter of an am haโ€™aretz who marries a แธฅaver, and likewise the slave of an am haโ€™aretz who is sold to a แธฅaver, must all accept upon themselves the commitment to observe the matters associated with แธฅaver status. But the wife of a แธฅaver who later marries an am haโ€™aretz, and likewise the daughter of a แธฅaver who marries an am haโ€™aretz, and likewise the slave of a แธฅaver who was sold to an am haโ€™aretz, these people need not accept upon themselves the commitment to observe the matters associated with แธฅaver status ab initio. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืืฃ ื”ืŸ ืฆืจื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื‘ืจื•ืช ืœื›ืชื—ืœื” ื•ื›ืŸ ื”ื™ื” ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืืœืขื–ืจ ืื•ืžืจ ืžืขืฉื” ื‘ืืฉื” ืื—ืช ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื•ื”ื™ืชื” ืงื•ืฉืจืช ืœื• ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื• ื ืฉืืช ืœืžื•ื›ืก ื•ื”ื™ืชื” ืงื•ืฉืจืช ืœื• ืงืฉืจื™ ืžื•ื›ืก ืขืœ ื™ื“ื•

Rabbi Yehuda says: They too must accept upon themselves the commitment to observe the matters associated with แธฅaver status ab initio. And similarly, Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would illustrate this point and say: There was an incident involving a certain woman who married a แธฅaver and would tie for him phylacteries on his hand, and she later married a tax collector and would tie for him tax-seals on his hand, which shows that her new husband had a great influence on her level of piety.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื—ื‘ื™ืช ืืกื•ืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื—ืžืคื’ ืžื•ืชืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื—ืœื‘ ื‘ืฉืจ ื™ื™ืŸ ืชื›ืœืช

ยง Rav says: The substances represented by the acronym แธฅet, beit, yod, tav are prohibited if they were deposited with a gentile while they were sealed with only one seal. Those represented by the acronym แธฅet, beit, peh, gimmel are permitted if they were deposited with a gentile while they were sealed with one seal. The Gemara elaborates: Milk [แธฅalav], meat [basar], wine [yayin], and sky-blue dye [tekhelet]

ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ืคืช ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“

are all prohibited when they are found with only one seal; แธฅiltit, fish stew [morayes], bread [pat], and cheese [gevina] are all permitted when they are found with one seal.

ืคืช ืœืžืื™ ื ื™ื—ื•ืฉ ืœื” ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ืื™ื—ืœื•ืคื™ ืงืจื™ืจื ื‘ื—ืžื™ืžื ืžื™ื“ืข ื™ื“ื™ืข ื“ื—ื™ื˜ื™ ื‘ื“ืฉืขืจื™ ื ืžื™ ืžื™ื“ืข ื™ื“ื™ืข ืื™ ื›ื™ ื”ื“ื“ื™ ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ืื™ื›ื ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืœื ื˜ืจื— ื•ืžื–ื™ื™ืฃ

The Gemara explains why only one seal is necessary for bread. With regard to what need we be concerned in the case of bread, that one might have thought it requires two seals? If it is due to the concern for the gentile exchanging the fresh bread of the Jew with his own bread that is less fresh, the difference between cold bread and warm bread is known, and the Jew will realize that there has been an exchange. Likewise, if there is a concern that a gentile might exchange the more valuable wheat bread of the Jew with his own less valuable barley bread, the Jew will also know about it in this case. And if it is due to the concern that a gentile might exchange similar kinds of bread with each other, it can be assumed that since there is one seal the gentile will not trouble himself and forge another seal just to exchange bread of equal value.

ื•ืจื‘ ืžืื™ ืฉื ื ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ื“ืœื ื˜ืจื— ื•ืžื–ื™ื™ืฃ ื—ืœื‘ ื ืžื™ ืœื ื˜ืจื— ื•ืžื–ื™ื™ืฃ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื›ื”ื ื ืืคื™ืง ื—ืœื‘ ื•ืขื™ื™ืœ ื—ืชื™ื›ืช ื“ื’ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืกื™ืžืŸ

The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Rav, what is different about cheese that it requires only one seal whereas milk requires two? If the reason is that a gentile will not trouble himself and forge a different seal, as cheese is generally inexpensive and the small profit he might make is not worth such an effort, this reasoning should apply to milk also, as he will not trouble himself and forge a new seal in this case either. Rav Kahana said: Remove the term: Milk, from Ravโ€™s statement, and enter instead: A piece of fish that has no sign of kashrut.

ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื‘ืฉืจ ืชืจื™ ื’ื•ื•ื ื™ ื‘ืฉืจ

The Gemara raises an objection: Rav could not have been teaching that a piece of fish with no signs of kashrut requires two seals, as fish is the same as meat, which is already included in the list of items that require two seals. The Gemara explains that there are two categories of meat: Animal meat and fish meat. Since one might have thought that they are subject to different halakhot, Rav therefore teaches that both require two seals.

ื•ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืื•ืžืจ ื‘ื™ืช ืืกื•ืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืžื—ื’ ืžื•ืชืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื‘ืฉืจ ื™ื™ืŸ ืชื›ืœืช ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืœืฉืžื•ืืœ ื—ืชื™ื›ืช ื“ื’ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืกื™ืžืŸ ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื‘ืฉืจ ืชืจื™ ื’ื•ื•ื ื™ ื‘ืฉืจ ืœื ืืžืจื™ื ืŸ

The Gemara cites a different set of lists than that presented by Rav. And Shmuel says: The substances represented by the acronym beit, yod, tav are prohibited when sealed with one seal; those represented by the acronym mem, แธฅet, gimmel, are permitted when sealed with one seal. The Gemara explains: Meat [basar], wine [yayin], and sky-blue dye [tekhelet] are prohibited when sealed with a single seal; fish stew [morayes], แธฅiltit, and cheese [gevina], are permitted when sealed with a single seal. The Gemara comments: According to Shmuel, a piece of fish that has no sign of kashrut is the same as meat, and we do not say that there is a difference between two categories of meat. Consequently, he does not include in his list a piece of fish that has no sign of kashrut.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ืœื•ืงื—ื™ืŸ ื™ืžื— ืžื—ื’ ื‘ืกื•ืจื™ื ืœื ื™ื™ืŸ ื•ืœื ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ื•ืœื ื—ืœื‘ ื•ืœื ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ื•ืœื ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ื•ืœื ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ืืœื ืžืŸ ื”ืžื•ืžื—ื” ื•ื›ื•ืœืŸ ืื ื ืชืืจื— ืืฆืœ ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ืžื•ืชืจ

The Sages taught: One may not purchase foods represented by the acronym yod, mem, แธฅet; mem, แธฅet, gimmel in Syria, not even from Jews. The Gemara elaborates: One may not purchase wine [yayin], nor fish stew [morayes], nor milk [แธฅalav], nor salkondarit salt [melaแธฅ salkondarit], nor แธฅiltit, nor cheese [gevina], except when purchased from an expert with a reputation for knowing and upholding the halakhot of kashrut. And with regard to all of them, if one is a guest in the home of his host, they are permitted, as a Jew is assumed to keep the halakhot of kashrut in his own home.

ืžืกื™ื™ืข ืœื™ื” ืœืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ืฉืข ื‘ืŸ ืœื•ื™ ื“ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ืฉืข ื‘ืŸ ืœื•ื™ ืฉื’ืจ ืœื• ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ืœื‘ื™ืชื• ืžื•ืชืจ ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ืœื ืฉื‘ื™ืง ื”ื™ืชื™ืจื ื•ืื›ืœ ืื™ืกื•ืจื ื•ื›ื™ ืžืฉื’ืจ ืœื™ื” ืžืžืื™ ื“ืื›ื™ืœ ืžืฉื“ืจ ืœื™ื”

The Gemara adds: This supports the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: If a homeowner sent someone a package of food to his house, the food is permitted. What is the reason? It is because a homeowner does not leave aside permitted foods and eat prohibited foods, and when he sends food to another, he sends it from that which he eats himself, even though one may not be allowed to purchase food from that individual.

ื•ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ืžืื™ ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืืžืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืžืœื— ืฉื›ืœ ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ ืจื•ืžื™ ืื•ื›ืœื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื” ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ืฉื—ื•ืจื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืœื‘ื ื” ืžื•ืชืจืช ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืœื‘ื ื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืฉื—ื•ืจื” ืžื•ืชืจืช ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ืื•ืžืจ ื–ื• ื•ื–ื• ืืกื•ืจื”

ยง The mishna teaches that salkondarit salt is prohibited. The Gemara asks: What is salkondarit salt? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: It is the salt that all Roman bakers [salkondarei] eat. The Sages taught: With regard to salkondarit salt, black salt is prohibited, whereas white salt is permitted; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: White salt is prohibited; black salt is permitted. The Gemara cites a third opinion: Rabbi Yehuda ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi แธคanina ben Gamliel: This and that, i.e., both white and black salkondarit salt, are prohibited.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื” ื‘ืจ ื‘ืจ ื—ื ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ืœื‘ื ื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืงื™ืจื‘ื™ ื“ื’ื™ื ืœื‘ื ื™ื ื˜ืžืื™ื ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ืฉื—ื•ืจื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืงื™ืจื‘ื™ ื“ื’ื™ื ืฉื—ื•ืจื™ื ื˜ืžืื™ื ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื”

The Gemara cites an explanation of this dispute. Rabba bar bar แธคana says that Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: According to the statement of the one who says that white salkondarit salt is prohibited, it is suspected that the intestines of white non-kosher fish are mixed in it, and this is the reason for the prohibition. According to the statement of the one who says that black salt is prohibited, it is suspected that the intestines of black non-kosher fish are mixed in it.

ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ื–ื• ื•ื–ื• ืืกื•ืจื” ื–ื” ื•ื–ื” ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื”ื• ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ื–ืงืŸ ืื—ื“ ื”ื™ื” ื‘ืฉื›ื•ื ืชื ื• ืฉื”ื™ื” ืžื—ืœื™ืง ืคื ื™ื” ื‘ืฉื•ืžืŸ ื—ื–ื™ืจ

According to the statement of the one who said this and that are prohibited, he is concerned that this and that, i.e., the intestines of both white and black fish, are mixed in white and black salt, respectively. The Gemara mentions an additional problem with salkondarit salt: Rabbi Abbahu says in the name of Rabbi แธคanina ben Gamliel: There was a certain elder in our neighborhood who would smooth its surface with pig fat.

ื”ืจื™ ืืœื• ืืกื•ืจื™ื ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืžืื™ ืœื—ื–ืงื™ื” ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ื‘ื™ื“ื•ืข ืœืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ื•ื’ื‘ื™ื ืช ื‘ื™ืช ืื•ื ื™ื™ืงื™ ื•ืกืชืžื ื›ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ

ยง The mishna further teaches that the list of items it mentioned are all prohibited. The Gemara asks: Since the mishna began by stating that the items it lists are prohibited for consumption, what does this apparently redundant conclusion serve to exclude? The Gemara answers: According to the opinion of แธคizkiyya cited on 38b, it serves to exclude cases where it is known that wine of gentilesโ€™ was added to the foods, as one may not even derive benefit from such foods. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yoแธฅanan, it serves to exclude fish stew and cheese of Beit Unyaki, as it is prohibited to derive benefit from these, and accordingly, the unattributed statement in this mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, cited in the previous mishna (29b).

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื•ืืœื• ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื‘ืื›ื™ืœื” ื—ืœื‘ ืฉื—ืœื‘ื• ื’ื•ื™ ื•ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืจื•ืื”ื• ื•ื”ื“ื‘ืฉ ื•ื”ื“ื‘ื“ื‘ื ื™ื•ืช ืืฃ ืขืœ ืคื™ ืฉืžื ื˜ืคื™ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื”ื›ืฉืจ ืžืฉืงื” ื•ื›ื‘ืฉื™ืŸ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื“ืจื›ืŸ ืœืชืช ืœืชื•ื›ืŸ ื™ื™ืŸ ื•ื—ื•ืžืฅ ื•ื˜ืจื™ืช ืฉืื™ื ื” ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ื•ืฆื™ืจ ืฉื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ื” ื•ืขืœื” ืฉืœ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ื•ื–ื™ืชื™ ื’ืœื•ืกืงืื•ืช ื”ืžื’ื•ืœื’ืœื™ืŸ

MISHNA: And these are permitted for consumption: Milk that was milked by a gentile and a Jew watched him doing so; and honey; and grape clusters [davdevaniyyot] which, despite the fact that they are dripping juice, are not subject to the halakhot of susceptibility to ritual impurity caused by contact with that liquid; and pickled vegetables whose usual manner of preparation does not involve adding wine and vinegar to them; and tarit fish that is not minced; and brine that has fish in it; and the leaf of a แธฅiltit plant; and rolled olive cakes [geluskaot].

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ืื•ืžืจ ื”ืฉืœื—ื™ืŸ ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ื”ื—ื’ื‘ื™ื ื”ื‘ืื™ื ืžืŸ ื”ืกืœื•ืœื” ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ืžืŸ ื”ื”ืคืชืง ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื•ื›ืŸ ืœืชืจื•ืžื”

Rabbi Yosei says: Overripe olives are prohibited. Locusts that come from a salesmanโ€™s basket are prohibited, whereas those that come from the storeroom [heftek] are permitted; and likewise with regard to the portion of the produce designated for the priest [teruma], as will be explained in the Gemara.

ื’ืžืณ ืชื ื™ื ื ืœื”ื ื“ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื™ื•ืฉื‘ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื‘ืฆื“ ืขื“ืจื• ืฉืœ ื’ื•ื™ ื•ื’ื•ื™ ื—ื•ืœื‘ ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ืœื• ื•ืื™ื ื• ื—ื•ืฉืฉ ื”ื™ื›ื™ ื“ืžื™ ืื™ ื“ืœื™ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ื‘ืขื“ืจื• ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื•ืื™ ื“ืื™ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ื‘ืขื“ืจื• ืืžืื™

GEMARA: We learn from the mishna that which the Sages taught explicitly in a baraita: A Jew may sit beside a gentileโ€™s flock and wait while the gentile milks his animals and brings the milk to the Jew, and he not need be concerned, even if he cannot see the milking process from his seated position. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If it is known that there is no non-kosher animal in the gentileโ€™s flock, isnโ€™t it obvious that the milk is permitted? Why would the baraita teach an obvious halakha? And if there is a non-kosher animal in his flock, then why is the milk permitted, considering the fact that the Jew could not see the gentile from where he sat?

ืœืขื•ืœื ื“ืื™ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ื•ื›ื™ ืงืื™ ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ื•ื›ื™ ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืœื ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ืžื”ื• ื“ืชื™ืžื ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืœื ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ื ื™ื—ื•ืฉ ื“ืœืžื ืžื™ื™ืชื™ ื•ืžืขืจื‘ ื‘ื™ื” ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ื›ื™ ืงืื™ ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ืื™ืจืชื•ืชื™ ืžื™ืจืชืช ื•ืœื ืžื™ืขืจื‘ ื‘ื™ื”

The Gemara explains: Actually, this is referring to a case where there is a non-kosher animal in the flock, and when the Jew is standing he can see the gentile, but when he is sitting he cannot see the gentile. Lest you say: Since when the Jew is sitting, he cannot see the gentile, we should be concerned that perhaps the gentile will bring non-kosher milk and mix it with the kosher milk, the baraita therefore teaches us that since when the Jew is standing, he can see him, the gentile is fearful of being caught and does not mix anything into the milk.

ื•ื”ื“ื‘ืฉ ื“ื‘ืฉ ืœืžืื™ ื ื™ื—ื•ืฉ ืœื” ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ืื™ืขืจื•ื‘ื™ ืžื™ืกืจื ืกืจื™ ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ื‘ื™ืฉื•ืœื™ ื’ื•ื™ื ื ืื›ืœ ื›ืžื• ืฉื”ื•ื ื—ื™ ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ื’ื™ืขื•ืœื™ ื’ื•ื™ื ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ืœืคื’ื ื”ื•ื ื•ืžื•ืชืจ

ยง The mishna teaches: And the honey of gentiles is permitted. The Gemara explains: For what need we be concerned with regard to honey? If it is due to the concern that a gentile might mix wine with it, honey spoils when it is mixed with wine, and therefore a gentile would not do so. If it is due to the cooking of gentiles, this too does not apply, because it is eaten as it is, i.e., raw. If it is due to the concern that the honey might have absorbed prohibited taste from vessels of gentiles that require purging, this does not apply either, as it is a prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the detriment of the mixture, and such a case is permitted. Since none of these concerns are relevant, the honey is permitted.

ื•ื”ื“ื‘ื“ื‘ื ื™ื•ืช ืืฃ ืขืœ ืคื™ ืฉืžื ื˜ืคื•ืช ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื”ื›ืฉืจ ืžืฉืงื” ื•ืจืžื™ื ื”ื™ ื”ื‘ื•ืฆืจ ืœื’ืช ืฉืžืื™ ืื•ืžืจ ื”ื•ื›ืฉืจ ื”ืœืœ ืื•ืžืจ ืœื ื”ื•ื›ืฉืจ ื•ืื•ื“ื™ ืœื™ื” ื”ืœืœ ืœืฉืžืื™

ยง The mishna further teaches: And grape clusters which, despite the fact that they are dripping juice, are not subject to the halakhot of susceptibility to ritual impurity caused by contact with that liquid. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following baraita: With regard to one who harvests grapes in order to take them to the press and crush them, there is a dispute as to whether or not the liquid that seeps from the grapes renders them susceptible to ritual impurity. Shammai says: It has become susceptible to ritual impurity, and Hillel says: It has not become susceptible. And eventually Hillel conceded to the opinion of Shammai. This shows that the juice that seeps out of grapes does render them susceptible to ritual impurity, which apparently contradicts the ruling of the mishna.

ื”ืชื ืงื ื‘ืขื™ ืœื™ื” ืœืžืฉืงื” ื”ื›ื ืœื ืงื ื‘ืขื™ ืœื™ื” ืœืžืฉืงื”

The Gemara explains: There, in the case of the baraita, he wants the juice as a beverage, and oneโ€™s intention influences the capability of certain liquids to render substances susceptible to ritual impurity. Therefore, the liquid that seeps from the grapes renders them susceptible to ritual impurity. Here, in the case of the mishna, he does not want the juice as a beverage, and therefore the grapes are not rendered susceptible to impurity.

ื•ื˜ืจื™ืช ืฉืื™ื ื” ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื™ื–ื• ื”ื™ื ื˜ืจื™ืช ืฉืื™ื ื” ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ื›ืœ ืฉืจืืฉ ื•ืฉื“ืจื” ื ื™ื›ืจ ื•ืื™ื–ื• ืฆื™ืจ ืฉื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ื” ื›ืœ ืฉื›ื™ืœื‘ื™ืช ืื—ืช ืื• ืฉืชื™ ื›ื™ืœื‘ื™ื•ืช

ยง The mishna further teaches: And tarit fish that is not minced and brine that has fish in it are permitted. The Sages taught: What is considered tarit that has not been minced? Any fish whose head and spine are recognizable. And what is considered brine that has fish in it? Any brine that has one kilbit or two kilbiyot

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Avodah Zarah 39

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Avodah Zarah 39

ื”ืชื ื™ื“ื™ืข ืžืžืฉื• ื”ื›ื ืœื ื™ื“ื™ืข ืžืžืฉืŸ

The Gemara explains: There, the substance of the wine is a recognizable component of the fish stew; here, its substance is not a recognizable component of the pickled vegetables.

ื•ื˜ืจื™ืช ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ื•ืฆื™ืจ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ื” ื•ื›ื•ืณ ืžืื™ ื—ื™ืœืง ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื–ื• ืกื•ืœืชื ื™ืช ื•ืžืคื ื™ ืžื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืžืคื ื™ ืฉืขืจื‘ื•ื ื” ืขื•ืœื” ืขืžื”

ยง The mishna teaches: And minced tarit fish, and brine that does not have a kilbit fish floating in it, and แธฅilak are all prohibited. The Gemara asks: What is แธฅilak? Rav Naแธฅman bar Abba says that Rav says: This is sultanit, a type of small fish that is generally caught before its scales have developed. And for what reason is it prohibited? It is because its size causes it to be intermingled with other fish, and as a result sultanit rises out of the water with non-kosher fish when it is caught.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ืœื• ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ื•ืขืชื™ื“ ืœื’ื“ืœ ืœืื—ืจ ื–ืžืŸ ื›ื’ื•ืŸ ื”ืกื•ืœืชื ื™ืช ื•ื”ืขืคื™ืฅ ื”ืจื™ ื–ื” ืžื•ืชืจ ื™ืฉ ืœื• ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ื•ืขืชื™ื“ ืœื”ืฉื™ืจ ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืขื•ืœื” ืžืŸ ื”ื™ื ื›ื’ื•ืŸ ืืงื•ื ืก ื•ืืคื•ื ืก ื›ื˜ืกืคื˜ื™ื™ืก ื•ืื›ืกืคื˜ื™ื™ืก ื•ืื•ื˜ื ืก ืžื•ืชืจ

The Sages taught: If a fish does not currently possess scales but will grow them after a period of time, such as the sultanit and afiyatz fish, it is permitted. Likewise, if it has scales now but will shed them when it is caught and rises from the sea, such as akunas and afuna, ketasfatiyas and akhsaftiyas and otanas fish, it is permitted.

ืื›ืจื™ื– ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื”ื• ื‘ืงื™ืกืจื™ ืงื™ืจื‘ื™ ื“ื’ื™ื ื•ืขื•ื‘ืจืŸ ื ื™ืงื—ื™ืŸ ืžื›ืœ ืื“ื ื—ื–ืงืชืŸ ืื™ื ืŸ ื‘ืื™ื ืืœื ืžืคืœื•ืกื ื•ืืกืคืžื™ื ื›ื™ ื”ื ื“ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ืื™ ืฆื—ื ืชื ื“ื‘ื‘ ื ื”ืจื ืฉืจื™ื

Rabbi Abbahu announced in Caesarea: Fish entrails and their eggs may be purchased from any person, as the presumption with regard to them is that they come only from Pelusium [Pilusa] and Spain [Aspamya], and non-kosher fish are not found in those areas. This is similar to that which Abaye says: These small fish [tzaแธฅanta] of the Bav River are permitted, as non-kosher fish are not found in that river.

ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืื™ืœื™ืžื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืจื“ื™ืคื™ ืžื™ื ื•ื”ืื™ ื“ื’ ื˜ืžื ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ืœื™ืช ืœื™ื” ื—ื•ื˜ ื”ืฉื“ืจื” ื‘ื“ื•ื›ืชื ื“ืจื“ื™ืคื™ ืžื™ื ืœื ืžืฆื™ ืงืื™ ื•ื”ื ืงื ื—ื–ื™ื ืŸ ื“ืงืื™

The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Abaye unequivocally permitted eating these fish and was not concerned about the potential presence of non-kosher fish among them? If we say that it is due to the fact that the water flows rapidly, and these non-kosher fish, since they do not have a spinal cord, are not able to exist in a place where the water flows rapidly, as the current carries the non-kosher fish out of the Bav River, and consequently all the remaining fish are kosher, that is not the case, since we see that non-kosher fish exist in rivers with strong currents.

ืืœื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืžืœื™ื—ื™ ืžื™ื ื•ื”ืื™ ื“ื’ ื˜ืžื ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ืœื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืงืœืคื™ ื‘ื“ื•ื›ืชื ื“ืžืœื™ื—ื™ ืžื™ื ืœื ืžืฆื™ ืงืื™ ื•ื”ื ืงื—ื–ื™ื ืŸ ื“ืงืื™ ืืœื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืœื ืžืจื‘ื” ื˜ื™ื ื ื“ื’ ื˜ืžื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ื”ืื™ื“ื ื ื“ืงื ืฉืคื›ื™ ื‘ื™ื” ื ื”ืจ ื’ื•ื–ื ื•ื ื”ืจ ื’ืžื“ื ืืกื™ืจื™

Rather, perhaps Abaye permitted the fish because the water is salty, and these non-kosher fish are not able to exist in a place of salty water since they do not have scales. This, too, is not the case, since we see that non-kosher fish exist in salty water. Rather, Abaye permitted the small fish in the Bav River because the mud in that river is not suitable for non-kosher fish to reproduce. The conditions in the river render it an unproductive habitat for non-kosher fish. Ravina says: Nowadays, as the government built canals between the rivers, and the Goza River and the Gamda River spill into the Bav and carry non-kosher fish there, it is prohibited to eat the small fish without thorough inspection.

ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ืื™ ื—ืžืจื ื“ื™ืžื ืฉืจื™ ืชื•ืจื ื“ื™ืžื ืืกื™ืจ ื•ืกื™ืžื ื™ืš ื˜ืžื ื˜ื”ื•ืจ ื˜ื”ื•ืจ ื˜ืžื

The Gemara cites several other statements of amoraโ€™im that concern the halakhic status of fish. Abaye says: This creature known as the sea donkey [แธฅamara deyamma] is permitted; the creature known as the sea ox [tora deyamma] is prohibited, and your mnemonic to remember this halakha is: Impure is pure, and pure is impure, i.e., the name of an animal which is non-kosher on land is kosher in the sea, and that which is kosher on land is non-kosher in the sea.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ืฉืคืจ ื ื•ื ื ืฉืจื™ ืงื“ืฉ ื ื•ื ื ืืกื™ืจ ื•ืกื™ืžื ื™ืš ืงื“ืฉ ืœื”ืณ ืื™ื›ื ื“ืืžืจื™ ืงื‘ืจ ื ื•ื ื ืืกื•ืจ ื•ืกื™ืžื ื™ืš ืงื‘ืจื™ ื’ื•ื™ื

Rav Ashi said: The type of fish known as shefar nuna is permitted, and the type of fish known as kadesh nuna is prohibited, and your mnemonic to remember this halakha is: That which is holy [kodesh] is to the Lord, and not for humans. And some say that Rav Ashi said: The type of fish known as kevar nuna is prohibited, and your mnemonic is: The grave [kever] is impure like the graves of gentiles.

ืจื‘ื™ ืขืงื™ื‘ื ืื™ืงืœืข ืœื’ื™ื ื–ืง ืื™ื™ืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื”ื”ื•ื ื ื•ื ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื“ืžื™ ืœื—ื™ืคื•ืฉื ื—ืคื™ื™ื” ื‘ื“ื™ืงื•ืœื ื—ื–ื ื‘ื™ื” ืงืœืคื™ ื•ืฉืจื™ื™ื” ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ืื™ืงืœืข ืœื˜ืžื“ื•ืจื™ื ืื™ื™ืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื”ื”ื•ื ื ื•ื ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื“ืžื™ ืœืฆืœื•ืคื—ื ื ืงื˜ื™ื” ืœื”ื“ื™ ื™ื•ืžื ื—ื–ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื‘ื™ื” ืฆื™ืžื—ื™ ื•ืฉืจื™ื™ื”

The Gemara relates several incidents involving Sages and their rulings with regard to fish. Rabbi Akiva happened to come to Ginzak and they brought before him a certain fish that was similar to a แธฅippusha, a non-kosher aquatic creature. When he enclosed it in a basket he saw that it had scales which it shed as it struggled to escape from the basket, and he permitted it on that basis. Rav Ashi happened to come to Tamduria where they brought before him a certain fish that was similar to an eel [tzelofแธฅa]. He took it out and held it against the light of day and saw that there were thin scales on it, and he permitted it.

ืจื‘ ืืฉื™ ืื™ืงืœืข ืœื”ื”ื•ื ืืชืจื ืื™ื™ืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื ื•ื ื ื“ื”ื•ื™ ื“ืžื™ ืœืฉืคืจื ื•ื ื ื—ืคื™ื™ื” ื‘ืžืฉื™ื›ืœื™ ื—ื™ื•ืจื™ ื—ื–ื ื‘ื™ื” ืงืœืคื™ ื•ืฉืจื™ื™ื” ืจื‘ื” ื‘ืจ ื‘ืจ ื—ื ื” ืื™ืงืœืข ืœืืงืจื ื“ืื’ืžื ืงืจื™ื‘ื• ืœื™ื” ืฆื—ื ืชื ืฉืžืขื™ื” ืœื”ื”ื•ื ื’ื‘ืจื ื“ื”ื•ื” ืงืจื™ ืœื™ื” ื‘ืื˜ื™

Rav Ashi also happened to come to a certain land where they brought before him a fish that was similar to a shefarnuna. He enclosed it in a white vessel and saw that it shed dark scales, which he could see against the white background of the container, and he permitted it. Rabba bar bar แธคana happened to come to Akra DeAgma and they brought him some tzaแธฅanta, a dish prepared from small fish. He heard a certain man calling it batei, the name of a non-kosher sea creature.

ืืžืจ ืžื“ืงื ืงืจื™ ืœื™ื” ื‘ืื˜ื™ ืฉืžืข ืžื™ื ื” ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ืื™ืช ื‘ื™ื” ืœื ืื›ืœ ืžื™ื ื™ื” ืœืฆืคืจื ืขื™ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืืฉื›ื— ื‘ื™ื” ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ืงืจื™ ืื ืคืฉื™ื” ืœื ื™ืื ื” ืœืฆื“ื™ืง ื›ืœ ืื•ืŸ

Rabba bar bar แธคana said to himself: From the fact that he called it batei, I can conclude from here that there is a non-kosher substance in the tzaแธฅanta. And he did not eat from it that night. In the morning, he examined the dish and in fact found a non-kosher substance in it. He read the following verse about himself: โ€œNo sin shall befall the righteousโ€ (Proverbs 12:21).

ื•ื”ืงื•ืจื˜ ืฉืœ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ืžืฉื•ื ื“ืžืคืกืงื™ ืœื™ื” ื‘ืกื›ื™ื ื ืืฃ ืขืœ ื’ื‘ ื“ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ืœืคื’ื ืžื•ืชืจ ืื’ื‘ ื—ื•ืจืคื™ื” ื“ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืชื ืžื—ืœื™ื ืœื™ื” ืฉืžื ื•ื ื™ืชื ื•ื”ื•ื” ืœื™ื” ื›ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ืœืฉื‘ื— ื•ืืกื•ืจ

ยง The mishna teaches: And a sliver of แธฅiltit may not be consumed, although one may derive benefit from it. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that it is prohibited? It is because they slice it with a knife on which there is presumably non-kosher residue. And even though the Master said that a prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the detriment of the mixture is permitted, that principle does not apply in this case because as a result of the sharpness of the แธฅiltit, the act of slicing it with a knife sweetens, i.e., enhances, the taste of the non-kosher residue. And there-fore it is like a prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the enhancement of the mixture, and it is prohibited.

ืขื‘ื“ื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ืœื•ื™ ื”ื•ื” ืงื ืžื–ื‘ื™ืŸ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืชื ื›ื™ ื ื— ื ืคืฉื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ืœื•ื™ ืืชื• ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืืžืจื• ืœื™ื” ืžื”ื• ืœืžื™ื–ื‘ืŸ ืžื™ื ื™ื” ืืžืจ ืœื”ื• ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ

The Gemara relates that the gentile slave of Rabbi Levi would sell แธฅiltit, and it was permitted to purchase it from him as he was the slave of a Sage. When Rabbi Levi passed away, they came before Rabbi Yoแธฅanan and said to him: Now that Rabbi Levi has passed, what is the halakha with regard to whether or not it is permitted to purchase แธฅiltit from his gentile slave? Rabbi Yoแธฅanan said to them: The slave of a แธฅaver, one devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, especially halakhot of ritual purity, teruma, and tithes, is as a แธฅaver himself, and therefore it is permitted to buy แธฅiltit from him.

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื‘ืจ ืžื ื™ื•ืžื™ ื–ื‘ืŸ ืชื›ื™ืœืชื ืžืื ืฉื™ ื“ื‘ื™ืชื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ืขืžืจื ื—ืกื™ื“ื ืืชื ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืœื ื”ื•ื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ื”

The Gemara relates another incident that involves the status of a แธฅaver and his household. Rav Huna bar Minyumi purchased sky-blue dye [tekhelta] from the people of the household, i.e., the wife, of Rav Amram the pious. One may purchase sky-blue dye for ritual fringes only from a reliable individual, as it is easy to counterfeit it. Rav Huna then came before Rav Yosef to ask if he could rely on her assurance that it was usable for the mitzva. The answer was not available to Rav Yosef.

ืคื’ืข ื‘ื™ื” ื—ื ืŸ ื—ื™ื™ื˜ื ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืขื ื™ื ืžื ื ืœื™ื” ื‘ื“ื™ื“ื™ ื”ื•ื” ืขื•ื‘ื“ื ื“ื–ื‘ื™ื ื™ ืชื›ื™ืœืชื ืžืื ืฉื™ ื“ื‘ื™ืชื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื ืื” ืื—ื•ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ื•ืืชืื™ ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ืžืชื ื ืœื ื”ื•ื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ื” ืืชืื™ ืœืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืžื”ื’ืจื•ื ื™ื ืืžืจ ืœื™ ื ืคืœืช ืœื™ื“ ื”ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืืฉืช ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ

Later, แธคanan the tailor happened to meet Rav Huna, and he said to him: From where could poor Rav Yosef have known the answer to this question? แธคanan continued: There was an incident in which I was involved, as I purchased sky-blue dye from the people of the household, i.e., the wife, of Rabenaโ€™a, brother of Rabbi แธคiyya bar Abba, and I came before Rav Mattana to ask him the same question, and the answer was not available to him either. I then came before Rav Yehuda of Hagronya, who said to me: You have fallen into my hand, i.e., I am the only one who can answer your question. This is what Shmuel says: The wife of a แธฅaver is herself considered like a แธฅaver, and you may therefore rely on her statement.

ืชื ื™ื ื ืœื”ื ื“ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืืฉืช ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื—ื‘ืจ ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉืžืช ืืฉืชื• ื•ื‘ื ื™ื• ื•ื‘ื ื™ ื‘ื™ืชื• ื”ืจื™ ื”ืŸ ื‘ื—ื–ืงืชืŸ ืขื“ ืฉื™ื—ืฉื“ื• ื•ื›ืŸ ื—ืฆืจ ืฉืžื•ื›ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืชื›ืœืช ื”ืจื™ ื”ืŸ ื‘ื—ื–ืงืชืŸ ืขื“ ืฉืชื™ืคืกืœ

The Gemara comments: We learn here that which the Sages taught explicitly in a baraita: The wife of a แธฅaver is like a แธฅaver; the slave of a แธฅaver is like a แธฅaver. Furthermore, with regard to a แธฅaver that died, his wife and children and members of his household remain in their presumptive status until they are suspected of engaging in inappropriate deeds. And similarly, with regard to a courtyard in which they sell sky-blue dye, it remains in its presumptive status as a place in which kosher sky-blue dye is sold until it is disqualified due to unscrupulous behavior.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืืฉืช ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื•ื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื• ืฉืœ ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื•ื›ืŸ ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืฉื ืžื›ืจ ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื›ื•ืœืŸ ืฆืจื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื‘ืจื•ืช ืื‘ืœ ืืฉืช ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ื•ื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ื•ื›ืŸ ืขื‘ื“ื• ืฉืœ ื—ื‘ืจ ืฉื ืžื›ืจ ืœืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืื™ื ืŸ ืฆืจื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื‘ืจื•ืช ืœื›ืชื—ืœื” ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ

The Sages taught: The wife of one who is not careful to keep the particulars of certain halakhot [am haโ€™aretz], who later marries a แธฅaver, and likewise the daughter of an am haโ€™aretz who marries a แธฅaver, and likewise the slave of an am haโ€™aretz who is sold to a แธฅaver, must all accept upon themselves the commitment to observe the matters associated with แธฅaver status. But the wife of a แธฅaver who later marries an am haโ€™aretz, and likewise the daughter of a แธฅaver who marries an am haโ€™aretz, and likewise the slave of a แธฅaver who was sold to an am haโ€™aretz, these people need not accept upon themselves the commitment to observe the matters associated with แธฅaver status ab initio. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืืฃ ื”ืŸ ืฆืจื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื‘ืจื•ืช ืœื›ืชื—ืœื” ื•ื›ืŸ ื”ื™ื” ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืืœืขื–ืจ ืื•ืžืจ ืžืขืฉื” ื‘ืืฉื” ืื—ืช ืฉื ืฉืืช ืœื—ื‘ืจ ื•ื”ื™ืชื” ืงื•ืฉืจืช ืœื• ืชืคื™ืœื™ืŸ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื• ื ืฉืืช ืœืžื•ื›ืก ื•ื”ื™ืชื” ืงื•ืฉืจืช ืœื• ืงืฉืจื™ ืžื•ื›ืก ืขืœ ื™ื“ื•

Rabbi Yehuda says: They too must accept upon themselves the commitment to observe the matters associated with แธฅaver status ab initio. And similarly, Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would illustrate this point and say: There was an incident involving a certain woman who married a แธฅaver and would tie for him phylacteries on his hand, and she later married a tax collector and would tie for him tax-seals on his hand, which shows that her new husband had a great influence on her level of piety.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื—ื‘ื™ืช ืืกื•ืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื—ืžืคื’ ืžื•ืชืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื—ืœื‘ ื‘ืฉืจ ื™ื™ืŸ ืชื›ืœืช

ยง Rav says: The substances represented by the acronym แธฅet, beit, yod, tav are prohibited if they were deposited with a gentile while they were sealed with only one seal. Those represented by the acronym แธฅet, beit, peh, gimmel are permitted if they were deposited with a gentile while they were sealed with one seal. The Gemara elaborates: Milk [แธฅalav], meat [basar], wine [yayin], and sky-blue dye [tekhelet]

ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ืคืช ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“

are all prohibited when they are found with only one seal; แธฅiltit, fish stew [morayes], bread [pat], and cheese [gevina] are all permitted when they are found with one seal.

ืคืช ืœืžืื™ ื ื™ื—ื•ืฉ ืœื” ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ืื™ื—ืœื•ืคื™ ืงืจื™ืจื ื‘ื—ืžื™ืžื ืžื™ื“ืข ื™ื“ื™ืข ื“ื—ื™ื˜ื™ ื‘ื“ืฉืขืจื™ ื ืžื™ ืžื™ื“ืข ื™ื“ื™ืข ืื™ ื›ื™ ื”ื“ื“ื™ ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ืื™ื›ื ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืœื ื˜ืจื— ื•ืžื–ื™ื™ืฃ

The Gemara explains why only one seal is necessary for bread. With regard to what need we be concerned in the case of bread, that one might have thought it requires two seals? If it is due to the concern for the gentile exchanging the fresh bread of the Jew with his own bread that is less fresh, the difference between cold bread and warm bread is known, and the Jew will realize that there has been an exchange. Likewise, if there is a concern that a gentile might exchange the more valuable wheat bread of the Jew with his own less valuable barley bread, the Jew will also know about it in this case. And if it is due to the concern that a gentile might exchange similar kinds of bread with each other, it can be assumed that since there is one seal the gentile will not trouble himself and forge another seal just to exchange bread of equal value.

ื•ืจื‘ ืžืื™ ืฉื ื ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ื“ืœื ื˜ืจื— ื•ืžื–ื™ื™ืฃ ื—ืœื‘ ื ืžื™ ืœื ื˜ืจื— ื•ืžื–ื™ื™ืฃ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื›ื”ื ื ืืคื™ืง ื—ืœื‘ ื•ืขื™ื™ืœ ื—ืชื™ื›ืช ื“ื’ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืกื™ืžืŸ

The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Rav, what is different about cheese that it requires only one seal whereas milk requires two? If the reason is that a gentile will not trouble himself and forge a different seal, as cheese is generally inexpensive and the small profit he might make is not worth such an effort, this reasoning should apply to milk also, as he will not trouble himself and forge a new seal in this case either. Rav Kahana said: Remove the term: Milk, from Ravโ€™s statement, and enter instead: A piece of fish that has no sign of kashrut.

ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื‘ืฉืจ ืชืจื™ ื’ื•ื•ื ื™ ื‘ืฉืจ

The Gemara raises an objection: Rav could not have been teaching that a piece of fish with no signs of kashrut requires two seals, as fish is the same as meat, which is already included in the list of items that require two seals. The Gemara explains that there are two categories of meat: Animal meat and fish meat. Since one might have thought that they are subject to different halakhot, Rav therefore teaches that both require two seals.

ื•ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืื•ืžืจ ื‘ื™ืช ืืกื•ืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืžื—ื’ ืžื•ืชืจ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ื‘ืฉืจ ื™ื™ืŸ ืชื›ืœืช ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื—ื•ืชื ืื—ื“ ืœืฉืžื•ืืœ ื—ืชื™ื›ืช ื“ื’ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืกื™ืžืŸ ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื‘ืฉืจ ืชืจื™ ื’ื•ื•ื ื™ ื‘ืฉืจ ืœื ืืžืจื™ื ืŸ

The Gemara cites a different set of lists than that presented by Rav. And Shmuel says: The substances represented by the acronym beit, yod, tav are prohibited when sealed with one seal; those represented by the acronym mem, แธฅet, gimmel, are permitted when sealed with one seal. The Gemara explains: Meat [basar], wine [yayin], and sky-blue dye [tekhelet] are prohibited when sealed with a single seal; fish stew [morayes], แธฅiltit, and cheese [gevina], are permitted when sealed with a single seal. The Gemara comments: According to Shmuel, a piece of fish that has no sign of kashrut is the same as meat, and we do not say that there is a difference between two categories of meat. Consequently, he does not include in his list a piece of fish that has no sign of kashrut.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ืœื•ืงื—ื™ืŸ ื™ืžื— ืžื—ื’ ื‘ืกื•ืจื™ื ืœื ื™ื™ืŸ ื•ืœื ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ื•ืœื ื—ืœื‘ ื•ืœื ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ื•ืœื ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ื•ืœื ื’ื‘ื™ื ื” ืืœื ืžืŸ ื”ืžื•ืžื—ื” ื•ื›ื•ืœืŸ ืื ื ืชืืจื— ืืฆืœ ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ืžื•ืชืจ

The Sages taught: One may not purchase foods represented by the acronym yod, mem, แธฅet; mem, แธฅet, gimmel in Syria, not even from Jews. The Gemara elaborates: One may not purchase wine [yayin], nor fish stew [morayes], nor milk [แธฅalav], nor salkondarit salt [melaแธฅ salkondarit], nor แธฅiltit, nor cheese [gevina], except when purchased from an expert with a reputation for knowing and upholding the halakhot of kashrut. And with regard to all of them, if one is a guest in the home of his host, they are permitted, as a Jew is assumed to keep the halakhot of kashrut in his own home.

ืžืกื™ื™ืข ืœื™ื” ืœืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ืฉืข ื‘ืŸ ืœื•ื™ ื“ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ืฉืข ื‘ืŸ ืœื•ื™ ืฉื’ืจ ืœื• ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ืœื‘ื™ืชื• ืžื•ืชืจ ืžืื™ ื˜ืขืžื ื‘ืขืœ ื”ื‘ื™ืช ืœื ืฉื‘ื™ืง ื”ื™ืชื™ืจื ื•ืื›ืœ ืื™ืกื•ืจื ื•ื›ื™ ืžืฉื’ืจ ืœื™ื” ืžืžืื™ ื“ืื›ื™ืœ ืžืฉื“ืจ ืœื™ื”

The Gemara adds: This supports the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: If a homeowner sent someone a package of food to his house, the food is permitted. What is the reason? It is because a homeowner does not leave aside permitted foods and eat prohibited foods, and when he sends food to another, he sends it from that which he eats himself, even though one may not be allowed to purchase food from that individual.

ื•ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ืžืื™ ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืืžืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืžืœื— ืฉื›ืœ ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ ืจื•ืžื™ ืื•ื›ืœื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื” ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืžืœื— ืกืœืงื•ื ื“ืจื™ืช ืฉื—ื•ืจื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืœื‘ื ื” ืžื•ืชืจืช ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืœื‘ื ื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืฉื—ื•ืจื” ืžื•ืชืจืช ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ืื•ืžืจ ื–ื• ื•ื–ื• ืืกื•ืจื”

ยง The mishna teaches that salkondarit salt is prohibited. The Gemara asks: What is salkondarit salt? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: It is the salt that all Roman bakers [salkondarei] eat. The Sages taught: With regard to salkondarit salt, black salt is prohibited, whereas white salt is permitted; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: White salt is prohibited; black salt is permitted. The Gemara cites a third opinion: Rabbi Yehuda ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi แธคanina ben Gamliel: This and that, i.e., both white and black salkondarit salt, are prohibited.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื” ื‘ืจ ื‘ืจ ื—ื ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ืœื‘ื ื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืงื™ืจื‘ื™ ื“ื’ื™ื ืœื‘ื ื™ื ื˜ืžืื™ื ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ืฉื—ื•ืจื” ืืกื•ืจื” ืงื™ืจื‘ื™ ื“ื’ื™ื ืฉื—ื•ืจื™ื ื˜ืžืื™ื ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื”

The Gemara cites an explanation of this dispute. Rabba bar bar แธคana says that Rabbi Yoแธฅanan says: According to the statement of the one who says that white salkondarit salt is prohibited, it is suspected that the intestines of white non-kosher fish are mixed in it, and this is the reason for the prohibition. According to the statement of the one who says that black salt is prohibited, it is suspected that the intestines of black non-kosher fish are mixed in it.

ืœื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ื–ื• ื•ื–ื• ืืกื•ืจื” ื–ื” ื•ื–ื” ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ื”ื• ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืŸ ื’ืžืœื™ืืœ ื–ืงืŸ ืื—ื“ ื”ื™ื” ื‘ืฉื›ื•ื ืชื ื• ืฉื”ื™ื” ืžื—ืœื™ืง ืคื ื™ื” ื‘ืฉื•ืžืŸ ื—ื–ื™ืจ

According to the statement of the one who said this and that are prohibited, he is concerned that this and that, i.e., the intestines of both white and black fish, are mixed in white and black salt, respectively. The Gemara mentions an additional problem with salkondarit salt: Rabbi Abbahu says in the name of Rabbi แธคanina ben Gamliel: There was a certain elder in our neighborhood who would smooth its surface with pig fat.

ื”ืจื™ ืืœื• ืืกื•ืจื™ื ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืžืื™ ืœื—ื–ืงื™ื” ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ื‘ื™ื“ื•ืข ืœืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืžื•ืจื™ื™ืก ื•ื’ื‘ื™ื ืช ื‘ื™ืช ืื•ื ื™ื™ืงื™ ื•ืกืชืžื ื›ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ

ยง The mishna further teaches that the list of items it mentioned are all prohibited. The Gemara asks: Since the mishna began by stating that the items it lists are prohibited for consumption, what does this apparently redundant conclusion serve to exclude? The Gemara answers: According to the opinion of แธคizkiyya cited on 38b, it serves to exclude cases where it is known that wine of gentilesโ€™ was added to the foods, as one may not even derive benefit from such foods. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yoแธฅanan, it serves to exclude fish stew and cheese of Beit Unyaki, as it is prohibited to derive benefit from these, and accordingly, the unattributed statement in this mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, cited in the previous mishna (29b).

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื•ืืœื• ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื‘ืื›ื™ืœื” ื—ืœื‘ ืฉื—ืœื‘ื• ื’ื•ื™ ื•ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืจื•ืื”ื• ื•ื”ื“ื‘ืฉ ื•ื”ื“ื‘ื“ื‘ื ื™ื•ืช ืืฃ ืขืœ ืคื™ ืฉืžื ื˜ืคื™ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื”ื›ืฉืจ ืžืฉืงื” ื•ื›ื‘ืฉื™ืŸ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื“ืจื›ืŸ ืœืชืช ืœืชื•ื›ืŸ ื™ื™ืŸ ื•ื—ื•ืžืฅ ื•ื˜ืจื™ืช ืฉืื™ื ื” ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ื•ืฆื™ืจ ืฉื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ื” ื•ืขืœื” ืฉืœ ื—ื™ืœืชื™ืช ื•ื–ื™ืชื™ ื’ืœื•ืกืงืื•ืช ื”ืžื’ื•ืœื’ืœื™ืŸ

MISHNA: And these are permitted for consumption: Milk that was milked by a gentile and a Jew watched him doing so; and honey; and grape clusters [davdevaniyyot] which, despite the fact that they are dripping juice, are not subject to the halakhot of susceptibility to ritual impurity caused by contact with that liquid; and pickled vegetables whose usual manner of preparation does not involve adding wine and vinegar to them; and tarit fish that is not minced; and brine that has fish in it; and the leaf of a แธฅiltit plant; and rolled olive cakes [geluskaot].

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ืกื™ ืื•ืžืจ ื”ืฉืœื—ื™ืŸ ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ื”ื—ื’ื‘ื™ื ื”ื‘ืื™ื ืžืŸ ื”ืกืœื•ืœื” ืืกื•ืจื™ืŸ ืžืŸ ื”ื”ืคืชืง ืžื•ืชืจื™ืŸ ื•ื›ืŸ ืœืชืจื•ืžื”

Rabbi Yosei says: Overripe olives are prohibited. Locusts that come from a salesmanโ€™s basket are prohibited, whereas those that come from the storeroom [heftek] are permitted; and likewise with regard to the portion of the produce designated for the priest [teruma], as will be explained in the Gemara.

ื’ืžืณ ืชื ื™ื ื ืœื”ื ื“ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื™ื•ืฉื‘ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื‘ืฆื“ ืขื“ืจื• ืฉืœ ื’ื•ื™ ื•ื’ื•ื™ ื—ื•ืœื‘ ื•ืžื‘ื™ื ืœื• ื•ืื™ื ื• ื—ื•ืฉืฉ ื”ื™ื›ื™ ื“ืžื™ ืื™ ื“ืœื™ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ื‘ืขื“ืจื• ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื•ืื™ ื“ืื™ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ื‘ืขื“ืจื• ืืžืื™

GEMARA: We learn from the mishna that which the Sages taught explicitly in a baraita: A Jew may sit beside a gentileโ€™s flock and wait while the gentile milks his animals and brings the milk to the Jew, and he not need be concerned, even if he cannot see the milking process from his seated position. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If it is known that there is no non-kosher animal in the gentileโ€™s flock, isnโ€™t it obvious that the milk is permitted? Why would the baraita teach an obvious halakha? And if there is a non-kosher animal in his flock, then why is the milk permitted, considering the fact that the Jew could not see the gentile from where he sat?

ืœืขื•ืœื ื“ืื™ื›ื ื“ื‘ืจ ื˜ืžื ื•ื›ื™ ืงืื™ ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ื•ื›ื™ ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืœื ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ืžื”ื• ื“ืชื™ืžื ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืœื ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ื ื™ื—ื•ืฉ ื“ืœืžื ืžื™ื™ืชื™ ื•ืžืขืจื‘ ื‘ื™ื” ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ื›ื™ ืงืื™ ื—ื–ื™ ืœื™ื” ืื™ืจืชื•ืชื™ ืžื™ืจืชืช ื•ืœื ืžื™ืขืจื‘ ื‘ื™ื”

The Gemara explains: Actually, this is referring to a case where there is a non-kosher animal in the flock, and when the Jew is standing he can see the gentile, but when he is sitting he cannot see the gentile. Lest you say: Since when the Jew is sitting, he cannot see the gentile, we should be concerned that perhaps the gentile will bring non-kosher milk and mix it with the kosher milk, the baraita therefore teaches us that since when the Jew is standing, he can see him, the gentile is fearful of being caught and does not mix anything into the milk.

ื•ื”ื“ื‘ืฉ ื“ื‘ืฉ ืœืžืื™ ื ื™ื—ื•ืฉ ืœื” ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ืื™ืขืจื•ื‘ื™ ืžื™ืกืจื ืกืจื™ ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ื‘ื™ืฉื•ืœื™ ื’ื•ื™ื ื ืื›ืœ ื›ืžื• ืฉื”ื•ื ื—ื™ ืื™ ืžืฉื•ื ื’ื™ืขื•ืœื™ ื’ื•ื™ื ื ื•ืชืŸ ื˜ืขื ืœืคื’ื ื”ื•ื ื•ืžื•ืชืจ

ยง The mishna teaches: And the honey of gentiles is permitted. The Gemara explains: For what need we be concerned with regard to honey? If it is due to the concern that a gentile might mix wine with it, honey spoils when it is mixed with wine, and therefore a gentile would not do so. If it is due to the cooking of gentiles, this too does not apply, because it is eaten as it is, i.e., raw. If it is due to the concern that the honey might have absorbed prohibited taste from vessels of gentiles that require purging, this does not apply either, as it is a prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the detriment of the mixture, and such a case is permitted. Since none of these concerns are relevant, the honey is permitted.

ื•ื”ื“ื‘ื“ื‘ื ื™ื•ืช ืืฃ ืขืœ ืคื™ ืฉืžื ื˜ืคื•ืช ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื”ื›ืฉืจ ืžืฉืงื” ื•ืจืžื™ื ื”ื™ ื”ื‘ื•ืฆืจ ืœื’ืช ืฉืžืื™ ืื•ืžืจ ื”ื•ื›ืฉืจ ื”ืœืœ ืื•ืžืจ ืœื ื”ื•ื›ืฉืจ ื•ืื•ื“ื™ ืœื™ื” ื”ืœืœ ืœืฉืžืื™

ยง The mishna further teaches: And grape clusters which, despite the fact that they are dripping juice, are not subject to the halakhot of susceptibility to ritual impurity caused by contact with that liquid. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following baraita: With regard to one who harvests grapes in order to take them to the press and crush them, there is a dispute as to whether or not the liquid that seeps from the grapes renders them susceptible to ritual impurity. Shammai says: It has become susceptible to ritual impurity, and Hillel says: It has not become susceptible. And eventually Hillel conceded to the opinion of Shammai. This shows that the juice that seeps out of grapes does render them susceptible to ritual impurity, which apparently contradicts the ruling of the mishna.

ื”ืชื ืงื ื‘ืขื™ ืœื™ื” ืœืžืฉืงื” ื”ื›ื ืœื ืงื ื‘ืขื™ ืœื™ื” ืœืžืฉืงื”

The Gemara explains: There, in the case of the baraita, he wants the juice as a beverage, and oneโ€™s intention influences the capability of certain liquids to render substances susceptible to ritual impurity. Therefore, the liquid that seeps from the grapes renders them susceptible to ritual impurity. Here, in the case of the mishna, he does not want the juice as a beverage, and therefore the grapes are not rendered susceptible to impurity.

ื•ื˜ืจื™ืช ืฉืื™ื ื” ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื™ื–ื• ื”ื™ื ื˜ืจื™ืช ืฉืื™ื ื” ื˜ืจื•ืคื” ื›ืœ ืฉืจืืฉ ื•ืฉื“ืจื” ื ื™ื›ืจ ื•ืื™ื–ื• ืฆื™ืจ ืฉื™ืฉ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ื” ื›ืœ ืฉื›ื™ืœื‘ื™ืช ืื—ืช ืื• ืฉืชื™ ื›ื™ืœื‘ื™ื•ืช

ยง The mishna further teaches: And tarit fish that is not minced and brine that has fish in it are permitted. The Sages taught: What is considered tarit that has not been minced? Any fish whose head and spine are recognizable. And what is considered brine that has fish in it? Any brine that has one kilbit or two kilbiyot

Scroll To Top