Avodah Zarah 76

בת יומא דלאו נותן טעם לפגם הוא

that was used for cooking that same day by a gentile, as in such a case, it does not impart flavor to food cooked in it to the detriment of the mixture.

מכאן ואילך לישתרי גזירה קדירה שאינה בת יומא משום קדירה בת יומא

The Gemara asks: If so, from that point onward the pot should be permitted, as on the following day the taste of the non-kosher food imparted by the pot is already to the detriment of the food. The Gemara answers: There is a rabbinic decree that prohibits use of a pot that was not used by a gentile that same day, due to concern that one will use a pot used by a gentile that same day.

ואידך קדירה בת יומא נמי מפגם פגמה

The Gemara comments: And according to the opinion of the other tanna, who holds that even if the imparted flavor is to the detriment of the permitted food nevertheless it is forbidden, even the flavor imparted by a pot that was used that same day is detrimental to the flavor of the food, and still the Torah deems it forbidden, which proves that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to its detriment, the permitted food is forbidden.

רמי ליה רב עמרם לרב ששת תנן השפודין והאסכלא מלבנן באור והתניא גבי קדשים השפוד והאסכלא מגעילן בחמין

§ Rav Amram raises a contradiction before Rav Sheshet: We learned in the mishna: With regard to the spits and the grill, one must heat them until white-hot in the fire. But it is taught in a mishna (Zevaḥim 97a) with regard to sacrificial meat: The spit and the grill that were used to roast sacrificial meat may not be used again after the time for eating that particular offering has passed, as the leftover taste of the offering in these utensils is forbidden, unless one purges them in hot water. Apparently, heating them until white-hot is unnecessary.

אמר ליה עמרם ברי מה ענין קדשים אצל גיעולי גוים הכא היתירא בלע התם איסורא בלע

Rav Sheshet said to him: Amram, my son, what has the matter of sacrificial meat to do with vessels of gentiles that require purging? Here, in the case of sacrificial meat, the utensils absorbed a permitted food that subsequently became forbidden, and therefore purging in hot water is sufficient. There, in the case of utensils acquired from gentiles, the utensils absorbed a forbidden food, and so they must be heated until white-hot.

אמר רבא סוף סוף כי קא פליט איסורא קא פליט אלא אמר רבא מאי הגעלה נמי שטיפה ומריקה

Rava disagreed, saying: Ultimately, even in the case of sacrificial meat, when it emits flavor, it emits a forbidden flavor, so what difference does it make that it was permitted when it was absorbed? Rather, Rava said: What is meant by the purging stated with regard to sacrificial meat? It means that besides heating it until white-hot, rinsing and scouring it are also required, as is the halakha with regard to any utensil used with sacrificial meat, as the verse states: “It shall be scoured and rinsed in water” (Leviticus 6:21).

אמר ליה אביי מי דמי מריקה ושטיפה בצונן הגעלה בחמין אלא אמר אביי יגיד עליו רעו תנא הכא ליבון והוא הדין להגעלה תנא התם הגעלה והוא הדין לליבון

Abaye said to him: Are rinsing and scouring comparable to purging? Scouring and rinsing are done in cold water, whereas purging is done in hot water. Therefore, this is not a valid interpretation of the term purging. Rather, Abaye said that the Mishna employs the style of: Its counterpart reveals about it (see Job 36:33), as follows: The Mishna taught here that the spit and the grill require heating until white-hot, and the same is true of purging, which is also required. The Mishna taught there that purging the spit and the grill is necessary, and the same is true of heating until white-hot.

אמר ליה רבא אי הכי לתנינהו לכולהו בחדא וליתני חדא באידך אחריתי ולימא יגיד עליו רעו

Rava said to him: If so, let the Mishna teach all of these requirements in one of the places, and let it teach only one of them in the other, and then let us say that the Mishna employs the style of: Its counterpart reveals about it. The principle that one mishna supplements the other can apply when all of the information is stated in one of the two places, but not when each has only part of it.

אלא אמר רבא קדשים היינו טעמייהו כדרב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה דאמר כל יום ויום נעשה גיעול לחבירו

Rather, Rava said that with regard to sacrificial meat, this is the reason that its utensils do not require heating until white-hot: It is in accordance with that which Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says, as he says: Each and every day constitutes purging for the other day, i.e., the previous day. Since the designated time for eating the meat of a peace-offering ends the day after it is sacrificed, using the utensils every day for an offering sacrificed on that day guarantees that the taste of every offering is expelled from the utensils before they becomes forbidden, by using them with fire on the following day. Therefore the utensils do not require special heating until white-hot in fire in order to become permitted for subsequent use.

תינח שלמים דכיון דלשני ימים מיתאכלי מקמי דניהוי נותר קא הוי גיעול אלא חטאת כיון דליום ולילה מיתאכלא כי מבשל בה האידנא חטאת הוי נותר כי הדר מבשל בה למחר או שלמים או חטאת קא פליט נותר דחטאת דהאידנא בחטאת ושלמים דלמחר

The Gemara raises an objection: This works out well with regard to peace-offerings, as, since their meat may be eaten over two days, purging is achieved before they become leftover sacrificial meat, which is forbidden. But with regard to a sin-offering, since its meat may be eaten only over the course of a day and a night, when one cooks the meat of a sin-offering with the utensil now, it becomes leftover the next morning. And when one cooks with it again the next day, whether the meat of a peace-offering or a sin-offering, the utensil expels the leftover taste of the sin-offering sacrificed now into the meat of the sin-offering or peace-offering sacrificed the next day, and it should be forbidden.

אמרי לא צריכא דכי מבשל בה חטאת האידנא הדר מבשל בה האידנא שלמים

The Sages say in response: It is not necessary to purge the utensil by heating it until white-hot even if it was used for the meat of a sin-offering; it is possible to avoid such a requirement, as when one cooks a sin-offering with the utensil now, he can then cook the meat of a peace-offering with the same utensil now, i.e., on the same day, and the taste of the sin-offering is consequently expelled from the utensil on that same day.

דחטאת דלמחר ושלמים דאתמול בהדי הדדי קא שלים זמנייהו והדר מבשל שלמים דלמחר

Then, when the taste of the peace-offering is absorbed, it creates a situation where the designated times for eating the meat of the sin-offering of the next day and the meat of the peace-offering of the previous day are complete simultaneously. It is therefore possible to use the utensil for cooking the meat of a sin-offering the next day without having to purge it from the taste of the previous day’s offerings. And one can then cook the meat of a peace-offering with the utensil the next day, thereby expelling from it the taste of the sin-offering of that day, and repeat this practice day after day.

אי הכי הגעלה נמי לא ליבעי קשיא

The Gemara raises an objection: If so, if each day the utensil expels the taste of the sacrificial meat that has not become leftover, then purging it with boiling water is also unnecessary. Why, then, does the mishna require purging with boiling water? The Gemara comments: This poses a difficulty to Rava’s explanation.

רב פפא אמר האי קריד האי לא קריד

Rav Pappa said that there is another resolution to the contradiction between mishnayot: In this case of a gentile’s spit and grill, because it is a utensil that is not in continual use, it becomes crusty and must be heated until white-hot; but that utensil used for sacrificial meat is in continual use, so it does not become crusty.

רב אשי אמר לעולם כדאמרן מעיקרא הכא התירא בלע הכא איסורא בלע

Rav Ashi said: Actually, the contradiction should be resolved as we said from the outset, as explained by Rav Sheshet: There, in the case of sacrificial meat, the utensils absorbed a permitted food that subsequently became forbidden, and therefore purging is sufficient. Here, in the case of utensils acquired from gentiles, the utensils absorbed a forbidden food, and so they must be heated until white-hot.

ודקא קשיא לך דבעידנא דקא פליט איסורא קא פליט בעידנא דקא פליט לא איתיה לאיסורא בעיניה

And as for that which poses a difficulty for you, that at the time that the utensil expels flavor, it expels the flavor of a forbidden food, the answer is that at the time it expels flavor, the forbidden food is nonexistent in its substantive form. Since the forbidden substance expelled from the utensil is not the forbidden food itself but only its flavor, it is treated leniently, and therefore the fact that it was permitted at the time it was absorbed in the utensil is taken into account.

ועד כמה מלבנן אמר רבי מני עד שתשיר קליפתן וכיצד מגעילן אמר רב הונא יורה קטנה בתוך יורה גדולה

§ Returning to the mishna, the Gemara asks: And how much does one heat utensils to make them white-hot? Rabbi Mani says: Until they shed their outer layer. And how does one purge utensils with boiling water? Rav Huna says: One immerses a small kettle inside a large kettle of boiling water.

יורה גדולה מאי תא שמע דההוא דודא דהואי בי רב עקביה אהדר ליה

The Gemara asks: What does one do with a large kettle? The Gemara suggests: Come and hear an answer from an incident involving a certain cauldron that was in the house of Rav Akavya and required purging. He surrounded it

גדנפא דלישא אפומא ומליוה מיא וארתחה אמר רבא מאן חכים למעבד כי הא מילתא אי לאו רב עקביה דגברא רבא הוא קסבר כבולעו כך פולטו מה בולעו בנצוצות אף פולטו בנצוצות

with a rim [gedanfa] of dough around its rim, and filled it with water and boiled it, so that the water boiled along its rim. Rava said: Who would be clever enough to perform such an action if not Rav Akavya, as he is a great man. He maintains that as it absorbs it so it expels it; just as the rim absorbs the forbidden substance by small drops of it that reach the rim, so too it expels the forbidden substance by small drops of boiling water that reach the rim.

הסכין שפה והיא טהורה אמר רב עוקבא בר חמא ונועצה עשרה פעמים בקרקע אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ובקרקע שאינה עבודה אמר רב כהנא ובסכין יפה שאין בה גומות תניא נמי הכי סכין יפה שאין בה גומות נועצה עשרה פעמים בקרקע אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לאכול בה צונן

§ The mishna teaches: With regard to the knife, one must polish it and it is rendered pure. Rav Ukva bar Ḥama says: And one must thrust it ten times into the ground. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says: And this must be done in untilled earth, i.e., hard earth. Rav Kahana says: And this applies to a good knife that does not have notches, so that the entire surface of the knife is scraped against the ground. This is also taught in a baraita: With regard to a good knife that does not have notches, one can thrust it ten times into the ground. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says: This is sufficient for the purpose of eating cold food with it.

כי הא דמר יהודה ובאטי בר טובי הוו יתבי קמיה דשבור מלכא אייתו לקמייהו אתרוגא פסק אכל פסק והב ליה לבאטי בר טובי הדר דצה עשרה זימני בארעא פסק הב ליה למר יהודה אמר ליה באטי בר טובי וההוא גברא לאו בר ישראל הוא אמר ליה מר קים לי בגויה ומר לא קים לי בגויה

This is like that incident involving Mar Yehuda, an important personage of the house of the Exilarch, and Bati bar Tuvi, a wealthy man, who were sitting before King Shapur, the king of Persia. The king’s servants brought an etrog before them. The king cut a slice and ate it, and then he cut a slice and gave it to Bati bar Tuvi. He then stuck the knife ten times in the ground, cut a slice, and gave it to Mar Yehuda. Bati bar Tuvi said to him: And is that man, referring to himself, not Jewish? King Shapur said to him: I am certain of that master, Mar Yehuda, that he is meticulous about halakha; but I am not certain of that master, referring to Bati bar Tuvi, that he is meticulous in this regard.

איכא דאמרי אמר ליה אידכר מאי עבדת באורתא

There are those who say that King Shapur said to him: Remember what you did last night. The Persian practice was to present a woman to each guest, with whom he would engage in intercourse. Mar Yehuda did not accept the woman who was sent to him, but Bati bar Tuvi did, and therefore he was not assumed to be meticulous with regard to eating kosher food.

הדרן עלך השוכר את הפועל וסליקא לה מסכת עבודה זרה