The gemara deals with exceptions to the rule of nullifications in order to explain the cases in the mishna. Is the sciatic nerve forbidden in non kosher animals?
This week’s learning is dedicated by Robert and Paula Cohen in loving memory of Robert’s brother (my uncle), Richard Cohen on his first yahrzeit. “A true baal chesed, who helped anyone in need without seeking recognition. He was a friend to everyone, young or old, and always put others’ needs before his own. He is truly missed by so many.”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
English
עברית
0:00
0:00
0:00
0:00
Today’s daily daf tools:
This week’s learning is dedicated by Robert and Paula Cohen in loving memory of Robert’s brother (my uncle), Richard Cohen on his first yahrzeit. “A true baal chesed, who helped anyone in need without seeking recognition. He was a friend to everyone, young or old, and always put others’ needs before his own. He is truly missed by so many.”
Chullin 100
בְּרִיָּה שָׁאנֵי.
The Gemara answers that the sciatic nerve is a distinct entity, and therefore it is different in that it is not subject to nullification.
וְכֵן חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה [וְכוּ׳]. וְתִבְטֵיל בְּרוּבָּא!
§ The mishna states: And similarly, in the case of a piece of an animal carcass or a piece of non-kosher fish that was cooked with similar pieces of kosher meat or fish, when one identifies the forbidden piece and removes it, the rest of the meat or fish is forbidden only if the forbidden piece was large enough to impart flavor to the entire mixture. And if he does not identify and remove the forbidden piece, all the pieces are forbidden, due to the possibility that each piece one selects might be the forbidden piece. The Gemara challenges: Even if the piece of an animal carcass was not removed, let it be nullified by a simple majority, as the majority of the pieces are kosher.
הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר, כֹּל שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִימָּנוֹת שָׁנִינוּ, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִימָּנוֹת שָׁנִינוּ, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר? שָׁאנֵי חֲתִיכָה, הוֹאִיל וּרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד בָּהּ לִפְנֵי הָאוֹרְחִים.
The Gemara clarifies its challenge. This ruling works out well according to the one who said that we learned: Any item whose manner is to be counted, i.e., that is sometimes sold by unit rather than by weight or volume, is considered significant and therefore is not subject to nullification. But according to the one who said that we learned: It is only an item whose manner is exclusively to be counted, i.e., that is always sold by unit, that is considered significant, and is therefore not subject to nullification, what can be said? Since pieces of meat or fish are not always sold by unit, they should be subject to nullification. The Gemara answers: A piece of meat or fish is different, since it is suitable to give honor with it by placing it before guests. Therefore, due to its significance it is not subject to nullification.
וּצְרִיכָא, דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן גִּיד – מִשּׁוּם דִּבְרִיָּה הִיא, אֲבָל חֲתִיכָה – אֵימָא לָא.
The Gemara adds: And it was necessary for the mishna to teach both the halakha that the sciatic nerve is not nullified and the halakha that a piece of non-kosher meat or fish is not nullified, as if the mishna had taught us only the case of a sciatic nerve, one might think that it is not nullified because it is a distinct entity, but in the case of a piece of non-kosher meat, say it is not significant, and it is subject to nullification.
וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן חֲתִיכָה, הוֹאִיל וּרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד בָּהּ לִפְנֵי הָאוֹרְחִים, אֲבָל גִּיד – אֵימָא לָא. צְרִיכָא.
And if the mishna had taught us the halakha only in the case of a piece of non-kosher meat or fish, one might think that it is not nullified since it is suitable to give honor with it by placing it before the guests. But in the case of a sciatic nerve, say it is not significant, and it is subject to nullification. Therefore it was necessary for the mishna to teach both cases.
דָּרֵשׁ רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה וְשֶׁל דָּג טָמֵא אֵינָהּ אוֹסֶרֶת, עַד שֶׁתִּתֵּן טַעַם בָּרוֹטֶב וּבַקֵּיפֶה וּבַחֲתִיכוֹת.
§ Rabba bar bar Ḥana taught: A piece of meat of an unslaughtered carcass or of a non-kosher species of fish that fell into a pot of kosher food does not render the contents of the pot forbidden unless it imparts flavor to the broth and to the deposits of food remaining in the pot and to the other pieces of food in the pot.
אוֹקֵי רַב אָמוֹרָא עֲלֵיהּ, וּדְרַשׁ: כֵּיוָן שֶׁנָּתַן טַעַם בַּחֲתִיכָה – חֲתִיכָה עַצְמָהּ נַעֲשֵׂת נְבֵלָה, וְאוֹסֶרֶת כׇּל הַחֲתִיכוֹת כּוּלָּן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מִינָהּ.
Rav disagreed with Rabba bar bar Ḥana and appointed a disseminator to stand before him and teach his statement to a wider audience, and he taught: Once the non-kosher meat or fish has imparted flavor to another piece in the pot, that second piece itself becomes non-kosher. And this second piece renders all the pieces of meat or fish in the pot forbidden, because they are of the same type; therefore, nullification does not apply.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא לְאַבָּיֵי: מִכְּדֵי רַב כְּמַאן אַמְרַהּ לִשְׁמַעְתֵּיהּ? כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר מִין בְּמִינוֹ לֹא בָּטֵיל. מַאי אִירְיָא כִּי נָתַן טַעַם? אֲפִילּוּ כִּי לֹא נָתַן טַעַם נָמֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – בְּשֶׁקָּדַם וְסִלְּקוֹ.
Rav Safra said to Abaye: Now, in accordance with whose opinion did Rav say his statement? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who says that a type of food mixed with food of its own type is not nullified. But if so, why does Rav state specifically that the non-kosher meat renders all the pieces forbidden only when it has imparted flavor to another piece? Even if it did not impart flavor to another piece it should render all the contents of the pot forbidden. Abaye said to him: Here we are dealing with a case where he cooked the non-kosher piece with one kosher piece and first removed the non-kosher piece before adding the other pieces. Consequently, the remaining pieces are forbidden only if the non-kosher piece imparted flavor to the piece it was cooked with.
רָבָא אָמַר:
Rava said an alternate answer to Rav Safra’s challenge of Rav’s statement:
אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא לֹא קָדַם וְסִלְּקוֹ, הָוֵי מִין וּמִינוֹ וְדָבָר אַחֵר.
You may even say that it is referring to a case where he did not first remove the piece of non-kosher meat or fish. Nevertheless, this is a case of a mixture of one type of food with its own type of food and with something else, i.e., the spices and broth in the pot.
וְכׇל מִין וּמִינוֹ וְדָבָר אַחֵר – סַלֵּק אֶת מִינוֹ כְּמִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ, וְשֶׁאֵין מִינוֹ רָבֶה עָלָיו וּמְבַטְּלוֹ.
And in any case of a type of forbidden food mixed with its own type of food and with something else, disregard the food that is its own type, as though it is not present in the mixture, and if the amount of permitted food that is not its own type is sixty times greater than the forbidden food, the permitted food nullifies it. Rav’s ruling applies to a case where the forbidden piece of meat or fish imparts flavor to another piece before the spices and broth are added, and there is a total volume sixty times greater than the original non-kosher piece. Consequently, even if the amount of spices and broth is eventually sixty times greater than the original non-kosher piece of meat or fish, the entire mixture is forbidden, as the spices and broth are not sixty times greater than the two pieces of meat or fish which are now non-kosher.
מַתְנִי׳ נוֹהֵג בִּטְהוֹרָה, וְאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בִּטְמֵאָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף בִּטְמֵאָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא מִבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נֶאֱסַר גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, וַעֲדַיִין בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מוּתֶּרֶת לָהֶן? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: בְּסִינַי נֶאֱמַר, אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּכְתַּב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ.
MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then.
גְּמָ׳ וְסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אִיסּוּר חָל עַל אִיסּוּר? וְהָתַנְיָא: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל תְּהֵא נִבְלַת עוֹף טָמֵא מְטַמְּאָה בְּגָדִים בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה?
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Yehuda hold that a prohibition takes effect where another prohibition already exists? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: One might have thought that the carcass of a non-kosher bird renders the garments of one who swallows it ritually impure when it is in the throat, similar to the carcass of a kosher bird.
תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה לֹא יֹאכַל לְטׇמְאָה בָהּ״ – מִי שֶׁאִיסּוּרוֹ מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תֹּאכַל נְבֵלָה״, יָצָא זֶה שֶׁאֵין אִיסּוּרוֹ מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תֹּאכַל נְבֵלָה״ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תֹּאכַל טְמֵאָה״.
Therefore the verse states concerning the impurity of carcasses of birds: “A carcass, or that which is torn of animals, he shall not eat to defile himself with it” (Leviticus 22:8). The verse indicates that only those birds that are forbidden specifically due to the prohibition: You shall not eat of a carcass, i.e., kosher birds that died without ritual slaughter, cause impurity in this manner. This serves to exclude any bird that is not forbidden due to the prohibition: You shall not eat of a carcass, but rather due to the prohibition: You shall not eat a non-kosher bird. This indicates that according to Rabbi Yehuda, the prohibition of eating a carcass does not take effect with regard to a non-kosher bird, because it is already subject to a different prohibition.
וְכִי תֵּימָא, קָסָבַר אֵין בְּגִידִין בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, וּבִטְמֵאָה נָמֵי אִיסּוּר גִּיד אִיכָּא, אִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה לֵיכָּא.
The Gemara continues with its question: And if you would say that Rabbi Yehuda holds that sciatic nerves do not impart flavor, i.e., they do not have flavor and therefore are not classified as food, and even with regard to a non-kosher animal it is prohibited to eat the sciatic nerve because the general prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve applies, whereas the prohibition of eating non-kosher animals does not apply because the sciatic nerve is not considered food, this is untenable.
וְסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אֵין בְּגִידִין בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם? וְהָתַנְיָא: הָאוֹכֵל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה – רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּיב שְׁתַּיִם, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר!
The Gemara explains: And does Rabbi Yehuda hold that sciatic nerves do not impart flavor? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to one who eats the sciatic nerve of a non-kosher animal, Rabbi Yehuda deems him liable to receive two sets of lashes, one for eating the sciatic nerve and one for eating the meat of a non-kosher animal, and Rabbi Shimon exempts him entirely from lashes. This indicates that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the sciatic nerve does have flavor.
לְעוֹלָם, קָסָבַר יֵשׁ בְּגִידִין בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, וְקָסָבַר נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל, דְּאִיסּוּר גִּיד וְאִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי קָאָתֵי.
The Gemara answers: Actually Rabbi Yehuda holds that sciatic nerves do impart flavor, and he also holds that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to the sciatic nerve of an animal fetus. Consequently, although Rabbi Yehuda holds that a prohibition does not take effect where another already exists, one who eats the sciatic nerve of a non-kosher animal is flogged twice, because the prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve and the prohibition of eating meat from a non-kosher animal come into effect at the same time.
וּמִי מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל? וְהָתְנַן: נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל, וְחֶלְבּוֹ מוּתָּר!
The Gemara challenges this answer: And can you say that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve applies to the sciatic nerve of a fetus? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (89b): The prohibition applies to a late-term fetus in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus, and similarly the fat of a fetus is permitted?
הָנֵי מִילֵּי גַּבֵּי טְהוֹרָה, דְּרַחֲמָנָא אָמַר: ״כֹּל בַּבְּהֵמָה תֹּאכֵלוּ״, אֲבָל בִּטְמֵאָה נוֹהֵג.
The Gemara answers: This statement, that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve does not apply to a fetus, is with regard to a kosher species of animal, because the Merciful One stated in the Torah: “And every animal that divides the hoof, and has the hoof wholly cloven in two, and chews the cud, among the animals [babehema], that you may eat” (Deuteronomy 14:6). The term babehema may also be translated as: Inside the animals, indicating that anything inside a kosher animal when it is slaughtered is permitted for consumption, including all parts of a fetus. But with regard to a non-kosher species of animal the prohibition applies.
וּמִי מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ דְּתַרְוַיְיהוּ בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי קָאָתוּ? וְהָתְנַן: עַל אֵלּוּ טוּמְאוֹת הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ, עַל הַמֵּת וְעַל כְּזַיִת מִן הַמֵּת.
The Gemara challenges the assertion that the prohibitions of eating the sciatic nerve and of eating non-kosher meat take effect at the same time. And can you say that they both come into effect at the same time? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Nazir 49b): A nazirite shaves for having become impure from these following sources of ritual impurity: For having become impure with impurity imparted by a corpse; and for impurity imparted by an olive-bulk of a corpse.
וְקַשְׁיָא לַן: עַל כְּזַיִת מִן הַמֵּת מְגַלֵּחַ, עַל הַמֵּת כּוּלּוֹ לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן? וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא נִצְרְכָא אֶלָּא לְנֵפֶל שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַשְּׁרוּ אֵבָרָיו בְּגִידִין. אַלְמָא אִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה קָדֵים!
And this poses a difficulty for us: If a nazirite shaves for becoming impure from an olive-bulk of a corpse, is it not obvious that all the more so he must shave for becoming impure from an entire corpse? And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is necessary only with regard to a miscarried fetus whose limbs have not yet become joined to its sinews. Although the fetus does not yet contain an olive-bulk of flesh, since it is a complete entity, it transmits impurity to anything under the same roof. Evidently, the limbs of the body are formed before the nerves and sinews, and therefore the prohibition of eating non-kosher meat takes effect prior to the prohibition of the sciatic nerve.
אַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה קָדֵים, אָתֵי אִיסּוּר גִּיד חָיֵיל עֲלֵיהּ, שֶׁכֵּן אִיסּוּרוֹ נוֹהֵג בִּבְנֵי נֹחַ.
The Gemara answers: Even though the prohibition of eating non-kosher meat takes effect prior to the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve, the prohibition of the sciatic nerve also comes and takes effect upon a non-kosher animal because this prohibition applies to descendants of Noah, i.e., to gentiles. Since the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve adds an additional stringency that did not exist with regard to non-kosher meat, it takes effect even though there was an already existing prohibition.
דַּיְקָא נָמֵי, דְּקָתָנֵי: אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא מִבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נֶאֱסַר גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, וַעֲדַיִין בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מוּתֶּרֶת לָהֶם.
According to this answer, the language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: Rabbi Yehuda said: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? This indicates that the basis of Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is the fact that the sciatic nerve was forbidden to the children of Jacob, who had the status of descendants of Noah.
גּוּפָא: הָאוֹכֵל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה – רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּיב שְׁתַּיִם,
§ The Gemara returns to the matter itself cited above. With regard to one who eats the sciatic nerve of a non-kosher animal, Rabbi Yehuda deems him liable to receive two sets of lashes: One for eating the sciatic nerve and one for eating the meat of a non-kosher animal;
Follow 
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I began daf yomi in January 2020 with Brachot. I had made aliya 6 months before, and one of my post-aliya goals was to complete a full cycle. As a life-long Tanach teacher, I wanted to swim from one side of the Yam shel Torah to the other. Daf yomi was also my sanity through COVID. It was the way to marking the progression of time, and feel that I could grow and accomplish while time stopped.
Leah Herzog
Givat Zev, Israel
I attended the Siyum so that I could tell my granddaughter that I had been there. Then I decided to listen on Spotify and after the siyum of Brachot, Covid and zoom began. It gave structure to my day. I learn with people from all over the world who are now my friends – yet most of us have never met. I can’t imagine life without it. Thank you Rabbanit Michelle.
Emma Rinberg
Raanana, Israel
3 years ago, I joined Rabbanit Michelle to organize the unprecedented Siyum HaShas event in Jerusalem for thousands of women. The whole experience was so inspiring that I decided then to start learning the daf and see how I would go…. and I’m still at it. I often listen to the Daf on my bike in mornings, surrounded by both the external & the internal beauty of Eretz Yisrael & Am Yisrael!
Lisa Kolodny
Raanana, Israel
As Jewish educator and as a woman, I’m mindful that Talmud has been kept from women for many centuries. Now that we are privileged to learn, and learning is so accessible, it’s my intent to complete Daf Yomi. I am so excited to keep learning with my Hadran community.
Sue Parker Gerson
Denver, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi to fill what I saw as a large gap in my Jewish education. I also hope to inspire my three daughters to ensure that they do not allow the same Talmud-sized gap to form in their own educations. I am so proud to be a part of the Hadran community, and I have loved learning so many of the stories and halachot that we have seen so far. I look forward to continuing!
Dora Chana Haar
Oceanside NY, United States
I learned Mishnayot more than twenty years ago and started with Gemara much later in life. Although I never managed to learn Daf Yomi consistently, I am learning since some years Gemara in depth and with much joy. Since last year I am studying at the International Halakha Scholars Program at the WIHL. I often listen to Rabbanit Farbers Gemara shiurim to understand better a specific sugyiah. I am grateful for the help and inspiration!
Shoshana Ruerup
Berlin, Germany
I start learning Daf Yomi in January 2020. The daily learning with Rabbanit Michelle has kept me grounded in this very uncertain time. Despite everything going on – the Pandemic, my personal life, climate change, war, etc… I know I can count on Hadran’s podcast to bring a smile to my face.
Deb Engel
Los Angeles, United States
Attending the Siyyum in Jerusalem 26 months ago inspired me to become part of this community of learners. So many aspects of Jewish life have been illuminated by what we have learned in Seder Moed. My day is not complete without daf Yomi. I am so grateful to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Community.
Nancy Kolodny
Newton, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Patti Evans
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi inspired by תָּפַסְתָּ מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַסְתָּ, תָּפַסְתָּ מוּעָט תָּפַסְתָּ. I thought I’d start the first page, and then see. I was swept up into the enthusiasm of the Hadran Siyum, and from there the momentum kept building. Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur gives me an anchor, a connection to an incredible virtual community, and an energy to face whatever the day brings.
Medinah Korn
בית שמש, Israel
I was moved to tears by the Hadran Siyyum HaShas. I have learned Torah all my life, but never connected to learning Gemara on a regular basis until then. Seeing the sheer joy Talmud Torah at the siyyum, I felt compelled to be part of it, and I haven’t missed a day!
It’s not always easy, but it is so worthwhile, and it has strengthened my love of learning. It is part of my life now.
Michelle Lewis
Beit Shemesh, Israel
Michelle has been an inspiration for years, but I only really started this cycle after the moving and uplifting siyum in Jerusalem. It’s been an wonderful to learn and relearn the tenets of our religion and to understand how the extraordinary efforts of a band of people to preserve Judaism after the fall of the beit hamikdash is still bearing fruits today. I’m proud to be part of the chain!
Judith Weil
Raanana, Israel
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
Meira Shapiro
NJ, United States
Years ago, I attended the local Siyum HaShas with my high school class. It was inspiring! Through that cycle and the next one, I studied masekhtot on my own and then did “daf yomi practice.” The amazing Hadran Siyum HaShas event firmed my resolve to “really do” Daf Yomi this time. It has become a family goal. We’ve supported each other through challenges, and now we’re at the Siyum of Seder Moed!
Elisheva Brauner
Jerusalem, Israel
My family recently made Aliyah, because we believe the next chapter in the story of the Jewish people is being written here, and we want to be a part of it. Daf Yomi, on the other hand, connects me BACK, to those who wrote earlier chapters thousands of years ago. So, I feel like I’m living in the middle of this epic story. I’m learning how it all began, and looking ahead to see where it goes!
Tina Lamm
Jerusalem, Israel
I was inspired to start learning after attending the 2020 siyum in Binyanei Hauma. It has been a great experience for me. It’s amazing to see the origins of stories I’ve heard and rituals I’ve participated in my whole life. Even when I don’t understand the daf itself, I believe that the commitment to learning every day is valuable and has multiple benefits. And there will be another daf tomorrow!
Khaya Eisenberg
Jerusalem, Israel
See video
Susan Fisher
Raanana, Israel
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Rebecca Stulberg
Ottawa, Canada
I have joined the community of daf yomi learners at the start of this cycle. I have studied in different ways – by reading the page, translating the page, attending a local shiur and listening to Rabbanit Farber’s podcasts, depending on circumstances and where I was at the time. The reactions have been positive throughout – with no exception!
Silke Goldberg
Guildford, United Kingdom
I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.
Deborah Dickson
Ra’anana, Israel
Chullin 100
בְּרִיָּה שָׁאנֵי.
The Gemara answers that the sciatic nerve is a distinct entity, and therefore it is different in that it is not subject to nullification.
וְכֵן חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה [וְכוּ׳]. וְתִבְטֵיל בְּרוּבָּא!
§ The mishna states: And similarly, in the case of a piece of an animal carcass or a piece of non-kosher fish that was cooked with similar pieces of kosher meat or fish, when one identifies the forbidden piece and removes it, the rest of the meat or fish is forbidden only if the forbidden piece was large enough to impart flavor to the entire mixture. And if he does not identify and remove the forbidden piece, all the pieces are forbidden, due to the possibility that each piece one selects might be the forbidden piece. The Gemara challenges: Even if the piece of an animal carcass was not removed, let it be nullified by a simple majority, as the majority of the pieces are kosher.
הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר, כֹּל שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִימָּנוֹת שָׁנִינוּ, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִימָּנוֹת שָׁנִינוּ, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר? שָׁאנֵי חֲתִיכָה, הוֹאִיל וּרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד בָּהּ לִפְנֵי הָאוֹרְחִים.
The Gemara clarifies its challenge. This ruling works out well according to the one who said that we learned: Any item whose manner is to be counted, i.e., that is sometimes sold by unit rather than by weight or volume, is considered significant and therefore is not subject to nullification. But according to the one who said that we learned: It is only an item whose manner is exclusively to be counted, i.e., that is always sold by unit, that is considered significant, and is therefore not subject to nullification, what can be said? Since pieces of meat or fish are not always sold by unit, they should be subject to nullification. The Gemara answers: A piece of meat or fish is different, since it is suitable to give honor with it by placing it before guests. Therefore, due to its significance it is not subject to nullification.
וּצְרִיכָא, דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן גִּיד – מִשּׁוּם דִּבְרִיָּה הִיא, אֲבָל חֲתִיכָה – אֵימָא לָא.
The Gemara adds: And it was necessary for the mishna to teach both the halakha that the sciatic nerve is not nullified and the halakha that a piece of non-kosher meat or fish is not nullified, as if the mishna had taught us only the case of a sciatic nerve, one might think that it is not nullified because it is a distinct entity, but in the case of a piece of non-kosher meat, say it is not significant, and it is subject to nullification.
וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן חֲתִיכָה, הוֹאִיל וּרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד בָּהּ לִפְנֵי הָאוֹרְחִים, אֲבָל גִּיד – אֵימָא לָא. צְרִיכָא.
And if the mishna had taught us the halakha only in the case of a piece of non-kosher meat or fish, one might think that it is not nullified since it is suitable to give honor with it by placing it before the guests. But in the case of a sciatic nerve, say it is not significant, and it is subject to nullification. Therefore it was necessary for the mishna to teach both cases.
דָּרֵשׁ רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה וְשֶׁל דָּג טָמֵא אֵינָהּ אוֹסֶרֶת, עַד שֶׁתִּתֵּן טַעַם בָּרוֹטֶב וּבַקֵּיפֶה וּבַחֲתִיכוֹת.
§ Rabba bar bar Ḥana taught: A piece of meat of an unslaughtered carcass or of a non-kosher species of fish that fell into a pot of kosher food does not render the contents of the pot forbidden unless it imparts flavor to the broth and to the deposits of food remaining in the pot and to the other pieces of food in the pot.
אוֹקֵי רַב אָמוֹרָא עֲלֵיהּ, וּדְרַשׁ: כֵּיוָן שֶׁנָּתַן טַעַם בַּחֲתִיכָה – חֲתִיכָה עַצְמָהּ נַעֲשֵׂת נְבֵלָה, וְאוֹסֶרֶת כׇּל הַחֲתִיכוֹת כּוּלָּן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מִינָהּ.
Rav disagreed with Rabba bar bar Ḥana and appointed a disseminator to stand before him and teach his statement to a wider audience, and he taught: Once the non-kosher meat or fish has imparted flavor to another piece in the pot, that second piece itself becomes non-kosher. And this second piece renders all the pieces of meat or fish in the pot forbidden, because they are of the same type; therefore, nullification does not apply.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא לְאַבָּיֵי: מִכְּדֵי רַב כְּמַאן אַמְרַהּ לִשְׁמַעְתֵּיהּ? כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר מִין בְּמִינוֹ לֹא בָּטֵיל. מַאי אִירְיָא כִּי נָתַן טַעַם? אֲפִילּוּ כִּי לֹא נָתַן טַעַם נָמֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – בְּשֶׁקָּדַם וְסִלְּקוֹ.
Rav Safra said to Abaye: Now, in accordance with whose opinion did Rav say his statement? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who says that a type of food mixed with food of its own type is not nullified. But if so, why does Rav state specifically that the non-kosher meat renders all the pieces forbidden only when it has imparted flavor to another piece? Even if it did not impart flavor to another piece it should render all the contents of the pot forbidden. Abaye said to him: Here we are dealing with a case where he cooked the non-kosher piece with one kosher piece and first removed the non-kosher piece before adding the other pieces. Consequently, the remaining pieces are forbidden only if the non-kosher piece imparted flavor to the piece it was cooked with.
רָבָא אָמַר:
Rava said an alternate answer to Rav Safra’s challenge of Rav’s statement:
אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא לֹא קָדַם וְסִלְּקוֹ, הָוֵי מִין וּמִינוֹ וְדָבָר אַחֵר.
You may even say that it is referring to a case where he did not first remove the piece of non-kosher meat or fish. Nevertheless, this is a case of a mixture of one type of food with its own type of food and with something else, i.e., the spices and broth in the pot.
וְכׇל מִין וּמִינוֹ וְדָבָר אַחֵר – סַלֵּק אֶת מִינוֹ כְּמִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ, וְשֶׁאֵין מִינוֹ רָבֶה עָלָיו וּמְבַטְּלוֹ.
And in any case of a type of forbidden food mixed with its own type of food and with something else, disregard the food that is its own type, as though it is not present in the mixture, and if the amount of permitted food that is not its own type is sixty times greater than the forbidden food, the permitted food nullifies it. Rav’s ruling applies to a case where the forbidden piece of meat or fish imparts flavor to another piece before the spices and broth are added, and there is a total volume sixty times greater than the original non-kosher piece. Consequently, even if the amount of spices and broth is eventually sixty times greater than the original non-kosher piece of meat or fish, the entire mixture is forbidden, as the spices and broth are not sixty times greater than the two pieces of meat or fish which are now non-kosher.
מַתְנִי׳ נוֹהֵג בִּטְהוֹרָה, וְאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בִּטְמֵאָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף בִּטְמֵאָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא מִבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נֶאֱסַר גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, וַעֲדַיִין בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מוּתֶּרֶת לָהֶן? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: בְּסִינַי נֶאֱמַר, אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּכְתַּב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ.
MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then.
גְּמָ׳ וְסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אִיסּוּר חָל עַל אִיסּוּר? וְהָתַנְיָא: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל תְּהֵא נִבְלַת עוֹף טָמֵא מְטַמְּאָה בְּגָדִים בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה?
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Yehuda hold that a prohibition takes effect where another prohibition already exists? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: One might have thought that the carcass of a non-kosher bird renders the garments of one who swallows it ritually impure when it is in the throat, similar to the carcass of a kosher bird.
תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה לֹא יֹאכַל לְטׇמְאָה בָהּ״ – מִי שֶׁאִיסּוּרוֹ מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תֹּאכַל נְבֵלָה״, יָצָא זֶה שֶׁאֵין אִיסּוּרוֹ מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תֹּאכַל נְבֵלָה״ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תֹּאכַל טְמֵאָה״.
Therefore the verse states concerning the impurity of carcasses of birds: “A carcass, or that which is torn of animals, he shall not eat to defile himself with it” (Leviticus 22:8). The verse indicates that only those birds that are forbidden specifically due to the prohibition: You shall not eat of a carcass, i.e., kosher birds that died without ritual slaughter, cause impurity in this manner. This serves to exclude any bird that is not forbidden due to the prohibition: You shall not eat of a carcass, but rather due to the prohibition: You shall not eat a non-kosher bird. This indicates that according to Rabbi Yehuda, the prohibition of eating a carcass does not take effect with regard to a non-kosher bird, because it is already subject to a different prohibition.
וְכִי תֵּימָא, קָסָבַר אֵין בְּגִידִין בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, וּבִטְמֵאָה נָמֵי אִיסּוּר גִּיד אִיכָּא, אִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה לֵיכָּא.
The Gemara continues with its question: And if you would say that Rabbi Yehuda holds that sciatic nerves do not impart flavor, i.e., they do not have flavor and therefore are not classified as food, and even with regard to a non-kosher animal it is prohibited to eat the sciatic nerve because the general prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve applies, whereas the prohibition of eating non-kosher animals does not apply because the sciatic nerve is not considered food, this is untenable.
וְסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אֵין בְּגִידִין בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם? וְהָתַנְיָא: הָאוֹכֵל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה – רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּיב שְׁתַּיִם, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר!
The Gemara explains: And does Rabbi Yehuda hold that sciatic nerves do not impart flavor? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to one who eats the sciatic nerve of a non-kosher animal, Rabbi Yehuda deems him liable to receive two sets of lashes, one for eating the sciatic nerve and one for eating the meat of a non-kosher animal, and Rabbi Shimon exempts him entirely from lashes. This indicates that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the sciatic nerve does have flavor.
לְעוֹלָם, קָסָבַר יֵשׁ בְּגִידִין בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, וְקָסָבַר נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל, דְּאִיסּוּר גִּיד וְאִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי קָאָתֵי.
The Gemara answers: Actually Rabbi Yehuda holds that sciatic nerves do impart flavor, and he also holds that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to the sciatic nerve of an animal fetus. Consequently, although Rabbi Yehuda holds that a prohibition does not take effect where another already exists, one who eats the sciatic nerve of a non-kosher animal is flogged twice, because the prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve and the prohibition of eating meat from a non-kosher animal come into effect at the same time.
וּמִי מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל? וְהָתְנַן: נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל, וְחֶלְבּוֹ מוּתָּר!
The Gemara challenges this answer: And can you say that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve applies to the sciatic nerve of a fetus? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (89b): The prohibition applies to a late-term fetus in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus, and similarly the fat of a fetus is permitted?
הָנֵי מִילֵּי גַּבֵּי טְהוֹרָה, דְּרַחֲמָנָא אָמַר: ״כֹּל בַּבְּהֵמָה תֹּאכֵלוּ״, אֲבָל בִּטְמֵאָה נוֹהֵג.
The Gemara answers: This statement, that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve does not apply to a fetus, is with regard to a kosher species of animal, because the Merciful One stated in the Torah: “And every animal that divides the hoof, and has the hoof wholly cloven in two, and chews the cud, among the animals [babehema], that you may eat” (Deuteronomy 14:6). The term babehema may also be translated as: Inside the animals, indicating that anything inside a kosher animal when it is slaughtered is permitted for consumption, including all parts of a fetus. But with regard to a non-kosher species of animal the prohibition applies.
וּמִי מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ דְּתַרְוַיְיהוּ בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי קָאָתוּ? וְהָתְנַן: עַל אֵלּוּ טוּמְאוֹת הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ, עַל הַמֵּת וְעַל כְּזַיִת מִן הַמֵּת.
The Gemara challenges the assertion that the prohibitions of eating the sciatic nerve and of eating non-kosher meat take effect at the same time. And can you say that they both come into effect at the same time? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Nazir 49b): A nazirite shaves for having become impure from these following sources of ritual impurity: For having become impure with impurity imparted by a corpse; and for impurity imparted by an olive-bulk of a corpse.
וְקַשְׁיָא לַן: עַל כְּזַיִת מִן הַמֵּת מְגַלֵּחַ, עַל הַמֵּת כּוּלּוֹ לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן? וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא נִצְרְכָא אֶלָּא לְנֵפֶל שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַשְּׁרוּ אֵבָרָיו בְּגִידִין. אַלְמָא אִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה קָדֵים!
And this poses a difficulty for us: If a nazirite shaves for becoming impure from an olive-bulk of a corpse, is it not obvious that all the more so he must shave for becoming impure from an entire corpse? And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is necessary only with regard to a miscarried fetus whose limbs have not yet become joined to its sinews. Although the fetus does not yet contain an olive-bulk of flesh, since it is a complete entity, it transmits impurity to anything under the same roof. Evidently, the limbs of the body are formed before the nerves and sinews, and therefore the prohibition of eating non-kosher meat takes effect prior to the prohibition of the sciatic nerve.
אַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיסּוּר טוּמְאָה קָדֵים, אָתֵי אִיסּוּר גִּיד חָיֵיל עֲלֵיהּ, שֶׁכֵּן אִיסּוּרוֹ נוֹהֵג בִּבְנֵי נֹחַ.
The Gemara answers: Even though the prohibition of eating non-kosher meat takes effect prior to the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve, the prohibition of the sciatic nerve also comes and takes effect upon a non-kosher animal because this prohibition applies to descendants of Noah, i.e., to gentiles. Since the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve adds an additional stringency that did not exist with regard to non-kosher meat, it takes effect even though there was an already existing prohibition.
דַּיְקָא נָמֵי, דְּקָתָנֵי: אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא מִבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נֶאֱסַר גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, וַעֲדַיִין בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מוּתֶּרֶת לָהֶם.
According to this answer, the language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: Rabbi Yehuda said: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? This indicates that the basis of Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is the fact that the sciatic nerve was forbidden to the children of Jacob, who had the status of descendants of Noah.
גּוּפָא: הָאוֹכֵל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה – רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּיב שְׁתַּיִם,
§ The Gemara returns to the matter itself cited above. With regard to one who eats the sciatic nerve of a non-kosher animal, Rabbi Yehuda deems him liable to receive two sets of lashes: One for eating the sciatic nerve and one for eating the meat of a non-kosher animal;
Follow
