There are various opinions among the Rishonim regarding the sugya of nat bar nat. What are the halachic ramifications? More cases regarding salting of meat are brought.
Masechet Chullin is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the Hadran Community. “During my first cycle of Daf Yomi, just as we began Masechet Chullin, my son was injured while serving in the IDF. Throughout those two and a half months of difficulty and uncertainty, my fellow learners never left my side. With profound gratitude to the community that held me, encouraged me, and ensured I could keep up with the Daf during those trying times.”
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
English
עברית
0:00
0:00
0:00
0:00
Today’s daily daf tools:
Masechet Chullin is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the Hadran Community. “During my first cycle of Daf Yomi, just as we began Masechet Chullin, my son was injured while serving in the IDF. Throughout those two and a half months of difficulty and uncertainty, my fellow learners never left my side. With profound gratitude to the community that held me, encouraged me, and ensured I could keep up with the Daf during those trying times.”
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Chullin 112
דְּאַגַּב חוּרְפֵּיהּ בָּלַע, אֲבָל קִישּׁוּת – גָּרֵיר לְבֵי פְסָקֵיהּ וְאָכֵיל.
as due to its sharpness it absorbs the fat on the knife. But if one cut a cucumber with the same knife, it does not absorb the fat to the same extent. One may therefore simply scrape the place of the cut to remove any fat residue, and then one may eat the cucumber with kutaḥ.
קִילְחֵי דְּלִיפְתָּא – שְׁרֵי, דְּסִילְקָא – אֲסִירי, וְאִי פְּתַךְ בְּהוּ דְּלִיפְתָּא – שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי.
Likewise, turnip stalks cut with such a knife are permitted for consumption with kutaḥ. But chard cut with such a knife is prohibited for consumption with kutaḥ, as it absorbs flavor from the knife. And if one alternated between cutting chard and turnip stalks it is permitted, as the turnip stalks nullify the taste of the meat in the knife.
בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב דִּימִי מֵרַב נַחְמָן: מַהוּ לְאַנּוֹחֵי כַּדָּא דְמִלְחָא גַּבֵּי כַּדָּא דְכַמְכָּא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָסוּר. דְּחַלָּא מַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שְׁרֵי.
§ Rav Dimi inquired of Rav Naḥman: What is the halakha with regard to placing a jug of salt, used to salt meat, alongside a jug of kamka, i.e., kutaḥ, a milk dish? Need one be concerned lest some of the kutaḥ fall on the salt without his knowledge and ultimately contaminate his meat? Rav Naḥman said to him: It is prohibited to place the two jugs next to each other. Rav Dimi further inquired: What is the halakha with regard to a similar case involving a jug of vinegar used to season meat? Need one be concerned lest the kutaḥ fall into the vinegar? Rav Naḥman said to him: It is permitted to place these two jugs next to each other.
וּמַאי שְׁנָא לְכִי תֵּיכוּל עֲלַהּ כּוֹרָא דְמִלְחָא? מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי – אִיתֵיהּ (איסורא) [לְאִיסּוּרָא] בְּעֵינֵיהּ, וְהַאי – לֵיתֵיהּ (איסורא) [לְאִיסּוּרָא] בְּעֵינֵיהּ.
Rav Dimi asked: And what is different about the vinegar? Rav Naḥman responded: When you have thought about it long enough to eat a kor of salt, you will know the reason. The Gemara clarifies: What is the reason then? In this case of the salt, the prohibited substance is substantive, as the traces of kutaḥ are discernible and not nullified by the salt. But in that case of the vinegar, the prohibited substance is not substantive, since the kutaḥ melts away in the vinegar and will no longer impart flavor.
הָהוּא בַּר גּוֹזָלָא דִּנְפַל לְכַדָּא דְּכַמְכָּא, שַׁרְיֵיהּ רַב חִינָּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא מִפַּשְׁרוּנְיָא. אָמַר רָבָא: מַאן חַכִּים לְמִישְׁרֵי כִּי הַאי גַוְונָא, אִי לָאו רַב חִינָּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא מִפַּשְׁרוּנְיָא? קָסָבַר: כִּי אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל ״מָלִיחַ הֲרֵי הוּא כְּרוֹתֵחַ״, הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל מֵחֲמַת מִלְחוֹ, אֲבָל הַאי כּוּתָּחָא הֲרֵי נֶאֱכָל מֵחֲמַת מִלְחוֹ.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain young bird that fell into a jug of kamka, i.e., kutaḥ. Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rava of the city of Pashronya, permitted the bird. Rava said about this: Who is wise enough to discern reasons to permit the food in difficult cases like this, if not Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rava of Pashronya? He maintains that when Shmuel said that a salted food imparts flavor like a boiling food, that statement applies only to a food so salty that it is not eaten due to its salt, but this kutaḥ can still be eaten due to, i.e., despite, its salt. Therefore, it is as if both foods are cold and unsalted, and they do not impart flavor to one another, provided one rinses the area of contact.
וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי חַי, אֲבָל צָלִי – בָּעֵי קְלִיפָה, וְאִי אִית בֵּיהּ פִּילֵי – כּוּלֵּיהּ אָסוּר, וְאִי מְתַבַּל בְּתַבְלִין – כּוּלֵּיהּ אָסוּר.
The Gemara adds: And this statement applies only if the bird is raw, but if it is roasted, it requires peeling to remove the outer layer, since roasting softens the meat and causes it to absorb more flavor. And if it has cracks [pilei], it is entirely forbidden, because the milk is absorbed into the cracks. And if it has been flavored with spices it is likewise entirely forbidden, because the spices soften the meat and render it absorbent.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כִּכָּר שֶׁחָתַךְ עָלֶיהָ בָּשָׂר – אָסוּר לְאׇכְלָהּ, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַסְמֵיק, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַבְרְיֵהּ, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַסְמְכֵיהּ, אֲבָל קְלִישְׁתָּא – לֵית לַן בַּהּ.
Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel says: It is prohibited to eat a loaf of bread upon which one cut unsalted roasted meat, since the blood expelled from the roasted meat is absorbed in the loaf. The Gemara adds: And this statement applies only if the meat is ruddy from the blood it contains. And furthermore, this statement applies only if so much blood was absorbed in the loaf that it passed through from one side of the loaf to the other and was visible from both sides. And furthermore, this statement applies only if the liquid emitted by the roasted meat is viscous. But if it is runny, we have no problem with it, i.e., the loaf is permitted.
שְׁמוּאֵל שָׁדֵי לֵיהּ לְכַלְבֵּיהּ, רַב הוּנָא יָהֵיב לֵיהּ לְשַׁמָּעֵיהּ. מָה נַפְשָׁךְ? אִי שְׁרֵי – לְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא שְׁרֵי, אִי אֲסִיר – לְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אֲסִיר! שָׁאנֵי רַב הוּנָא דַּאֲנִינָא דַּעְתֵּיהּ. רָבָא אָכֵיל לֵיהּ, וְקָרֵי לֵיהּ ״חֲמַר בָּשָׂר״.
The Gemara relates: Shmuel would throw to his dog such a loaf of bread that he held was prohibited. Rav Huna would not eat the loaf himself but would rather give it to his attendant. The Gemara objects: Whichever way you look at it, Rav Huna’s behavior is problematic: If the loaf is permitted, it is permitted for everyone, including Rav Huna himself. And if it is prohibited, then it is prohibited for everyone, and he should not give it to his attendant. The Gemara explains: In fact, the loaf is permitted for consumption, and Rav Huna is different, as he is of delicate constitution and did not want to eat the loaf himself. The Gemara further relates: Rava would eat a loaf of this type, and he would call the red liquid meat wine.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אֵין מַנִּיחִין כְּלִי תַּחַת בָּשָׂר עַד שֶׁיִּכְלֶה כׇּל מַרְאֵה אַדְמוּמִית שֶׁבּוֹ. מְנָא יָדְעִינַן? מָר זוּטְרָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: מִשֶּׁתַּעֲלֶה תִּימְרָתוֹ.
Rav Naḥman says that Shmuel says: One may not place a vessel under roasting meat to catch the drippings of fat until all the ruddiness of the meat’s appearance has dissipated. Beforehand, though, one must be concerned that blood will fall with the drippings into the vessel, rendering the mixture and the vessel prohibited. The Gemara asks: How do we know when all the meat’s redness has disappeared? Mar Zutra said in the name of Rav Pappa: As soon as its smoke rises, one can be sure that all the blood has been expelled from the meat.
מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אָשֵׁי: וְדִלְמָא תַּתָּאָה מְטָא, עִילָּאָה לָא מְטָא? אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: לֵית לֵיהּ תַּקַּנְתָּא, אֶלָּא מִשְׁדֵּא בֵּיהּ תַּרְתֵּי גַּלְלֵי מִלְחָא,
Rav Ashi objects to this: But perhaps the underside of the meat, which is closest to the coals, has been fully roasted, but its upper part is still not roasted and still expels blood at this stage. Rather, Rav Ashi said: One who wishes to collect the drippings has no remedy except to place two lumps of salt in it, i.e., one in the receptacle under the meat and one on top, in the meat itself.
וּמִשְׁפְּיֵיהּ.
Doing this will allow the blood dripping from the meat to stick to the salt on the sides of the vessel, while the fat will float to the top. And when emptying the receptacle, he should tilt it gently to pour the fat into another vessel without it mixing with the blood.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִיקָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: וּמִי אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל הָכִי? וְהָאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כִּכָּר שֶׁחָתַךְ עָלֶיהָ בָּשָׂר אָסוּר לְאׇכְלָהּ! שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאַגַּב דּוּחְקָא דְסַכִּינָא פָּלֵיט.
Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika, said to Rav Ashi: And did Shmuel really say this, that once the meat’s ruddiness has dissipated it is permitted to place a receptacle underneath it? But didn’t Shmuel say: It is prohibited to eat a loaf of bread upon which one cut roasted meat? Apparently he holds that meat contains blood even after it has finished roasting. Rav Ashi replied: Shmuel holds that the meat no longer emits blood after its ruddiness has dissipated. And as for his ruling with regard to a loaf of bread, it is different there, as due to the pressure of the knife the meat expels more blood.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: דָּגִים וְעוֹפוֹת שֶׁמְּלָחָן זֶה עִם זֶה – אֲסוּרִין. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי בִּכְלִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְנוּקָּב – אֲפִילּוּ עוֹפוֹת וְעוֹפוֹת נָמֵי אֲסִירִי, אִי בִּכְלִי מְנוּקָּב – אֲפִילּוּ דָּגִים וְעוֹפוֹת נָמֵי שְׁרֵי.
§ Rav Naḥman says: If one salted fish and birds together, the fish are prohibited for consumption due to the blood they absorb from the birds. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this ruling? If they were placed in an unperforated vessel, in which the blood emitted by the birds will pool, then even if one salted a bird and another bird together they should be prohibited, as the blood expelled from one bird will be absorbed by the other. And if the case involves a perforated vessel, out of which the blood can flow, then even if fish are salted with birds the fish should be permitted.
לְעוֹלָם בִּכְלִי מְנוּקָּב, וְדָגִים מִשּׁוּם דִּרְפוּ קְרָמַיְיהוּ קָדְמִי וּפָלְטִי, וְעוֹפוֹת קְמִיטִי, בָּתַר דְּנָיְחִי דָּגִים פָּלְיטִי עוֹפוֹת, וַהֲדַר בָּלְעִי מִינֵּיהּ.
The Gemara answers: Actually, the ruling is referring to a perforated vessel. And the fish are prohibited because their skin is soft, and therefore when they are salted they expel their blood first, whereas the skin of birds is hard. After the fish finish expelling their blood, the birds continue to expel their blood, and then the fish absorb blood from them. If one salts two birds together, they expel their blood simultaneously, and neither will absorb blood from outside while expelling its own.
רַב מָרִי בַּר רָחֵל אִימְּלַח לֵיהּ בְּשַׂר שְׁחוּטָה בַּהֲדֵי בְּשַׂר טְרֵפָה, אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבָא.
The Gemara relates: Meat of a slaughtered animal was salted for Rav Mari bar Raḥel together with prohibited meat of an animal that had a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa], in a perforated vessel, as meat is generally salted. He came before Rava to ask whether the kosher meat was prohibited, as perhaps it would not have absorbed flavor from the non-kosher meat while itself expelling blood.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״הַטְּמֵאִים״ – לֶאֱסוֹר צִירָן, וְרוֹטְבָן, וְקֵיפֶה שֶׁלָּהֶן.
Rava said to him: When the verse states, with regard to forbidden foods: “These are the unclean to you” (Leviticus 11:31), the added definite article serves to prohibit not only their flesh but also their juice emitted by salting, and their gravy, and their spices with which they are cooked. Even while the kosher meat is emitting its blood, it still absorbs the juices of the non-kosher meat, which are absorbed more easily than blood.
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.
Hullin 82: Who’s Tracking the Animals and Their Offspring?
July 22, 2026 | ח׳ באב תשפ״ו
Hullin 76: Doh! Even the Sages Realize What They Could Have Said Better
July 16, 2026 | ב׳ באב תשפ״ו
Hullin 73: Impurity without Shechitah – Hypothetically Hypothetical Cases
July 12, 2026 | כ״ז בתמוז תשפ״ו
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 had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Terri Krivosha
Minneapolis, 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
I began my journey with Rabbanit Michelle more than five years ago. My friend came up with a great idea for about 15 of us to learn the daf and one of us would summarize weekly what we learned.
It was fun but after 2-3 months people began to leave. I have continued. Since the cycle began Again I have joined the Teaneck women.. I find it most rewarding in so many ways. Thank you
Dena Heller
New Jersey, United States
I decided to give daf yomi a try when I heard about the siyum hashas in 2020. Once the pandemic hit, the daily commitment gave my days some much-needed structure. There have been times when I’ve felt like quitting- especially when encountering very technical details in the text. But then I tell myself, “Look how much you’ve done. You can’t stop now!” So I keep going & my Koren bookshelf grows…
Miriam Eckstein-Koas
Huntington, United States
I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.
Jenifer Nech
Houston, United States
In my Shana bet at Migdal Oz I attended the Hadran siyum hash”as. Witnessing so many women so passionate about their Torah learning and connection to God, I knew I had to begin with the coming cycle. My wedding (June 24) was two weeks before the siyum of mesechet yoma so I went a little ahead and was able to make a speech and siyum at my kiseh kallah on my wedding day!
Sharona Guggenheim Plumb
Givat Shmuel, Israel
In January 2020, my teaching partner at IDC suggested we do daf yomi. Thanks to her challenge, I started learning daily from Rabbanit Michelle. It’s a joy to be part of the Hadran community. (It’s also a tikkun: in 7th grade, my best friend and I tied for first place in a citywide gemara exam, but we weren’t invited to the celebration because girls weren’t supposed to be learning gemara).
Sara Averick
Jerusalem, Israel
Hadran entered my life after the last Siyum Hashaas, January 2020. I was inspired and challenged simultaneously, having never thought of learning Gemara. With my family’s encouragement, I googled “daf yomi for women”. A perfecr fit!
I especially enjoy when Rabbanit Michelle connects the daf to contemporary issues to share at the shabbat table e.g: looking at the Kohen during duchaning. Toda rabba
Marsha Wasserman
Jerusalem, 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
A friend mentioned that she was starting Daf Yomi in January 2020. I had heard of it and thought, why not? I decided to try it – go day by day and not think about the seven plus year commitment. Fast forward today, over two years in and I can’t imagine my life without Daf Yomi. It’s part of my morning ritual. If I have a busy day ahead of me I set my alarm to get up early to finish the day’s daf
Debbie Fitzerman
Ontario, Canada
I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Sarene Shanus
Mamaroneck, NY, United States
When we heard that R. Michelle was starting daf yomi, my 11-year-old suggested that I go. Little did she know that she would lose me every morning from then on. I remember standing at the Farbers’ door, almost too shy to enter. After that first class, I said that I would come the next day but couldn’t commit to more. A decade later, I still look forward to learning from R. Michelle every morning.
Ruth Leah Kahan
Ra’anana, Israel
I heard the new Daf Yomi cycle was starting and I was curious, so I searched online for a women’s class and was pleasently surprised to find Rabanit Michelle’s great class reviews in many online articles. It has been a splendid journey. It is a way to fill my days with Torah, learning so many amazing things I have never heard before during my Tanach learning at High School. Thanks so much .
Martha Tarazi
Panama, Panama
I started to listen to Michelle’s podcasts four years ago. The minute I started I was hooked. I’m so excited to learn the entire Talmud, and think I will continue always. I chose the quote “while a woman is engaged in conversation she also holds the spindle”. (Megillah 14b). It reminds me of all of the amazing women I learn with every day who multi-task, think ahead and accomplish so much.
Julie Mendelsohn
Zichron Yakov, Israel
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
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Phyllis Hecht
Hashmonaim, Israel
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 heard about the syium in January 2020 & I was excited to start learning then the pandemic started. Learning Daf became something to focus on but also something stressful. As the world changed around me & my family I had to adjust my expectations for myself & the world. Daf Yomi & the Hadran podcast has been something I look forward to every day. It gives me a moment of centering & Judaism daily.
Talia Haykin
Denver, United States
In January 2020 on a Shabbaton to Baltimore I heard about the new cycle of Daf Yomi after the siyum celebration in NYC stadium. I started to read “ a daily dose of Talmud “ and really enjoyed it . It led me to google “ do Orthodox women study Talmud? “ and found HADRAN! Since then I listen to the podcast every morning, participate in classes and siyum. I love to learn, this is amazing! Thank you
Sandrine Simons
Atlanta, United States
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Beth Kissileff
Pittsburgh, United States
Chullin 112
דְּאַגַּב חוּרְפֵּיהּ בָּלַע, אֲבָל קִישּׁוּת – גָּרֵיר לְבֵי פְסָקֵיהּ וְאָכֵיל.
as due to its sharpness it absorbs the fat on the knife. But if one cut a cucumber with the same knife, it does not absorb the fat to the same extent. One may therefore simply scrape the place of the cut to remove any fat residue, and then one may eat the cucumber with kutaḥ.
קִילְחֵי דְּלִיפְתָּא – שְׁרֵי, דְּסִילְקָא – אֲסִירי, וְאִי פְּתַךְ בְּהוּ דְּלִיפְתָּא – שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי.
Likewise, turnip stalks cut with such a knife are permitted for consumption with kutaḥ. But chard cut with such a knife is prohibited for consumption with kutaḥ, as it absorbs flavor from the knife. And if one alternated between cutting chard and turnip stalks it is permitted, as the turnip stalks nullify the taste of the meat in the knife.
בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב דִּימִי מֵרַב נַחְמָן: מַהוּ לְאַנּוֹחֵי כַּדָּא דְמִלְחָא גַּבֵּי כַּדָּא דְכַמְכָּא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָסוּר. דְּחַלָּא מַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שְׁרֵי.
§ Rav Dimi inquired of Rav Naḥman: What is the halakha with regard to placing a jug of salt, used to salt meat, alongside a jug of kamka, i.e., kutaḥ, a milk dish? Need one be concerned lest some of the kutaḥ fall on the salt without his knowledge and ultimately contaminate his meat? Rav Naḥman said to him: It is prohibited to place the two jugs next to each other. Rav Dimi further inquired: What is the halakha with regard to a similar case involving a jug of vinegar used to season meat? Need one be concerned lest the kutaḥ fall into the vinegar? Rav Naḥman said to him: It is permitted to place these two jugs next to each other.
וּמַאי שְׁנָא לְכִי תֵּיכוּל עֲלַהּ כּוֹרָא דְמִלְחָא? מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי – אִיתֵיהּ (איסורא) [לְאִיסּוּרָא] בְּעֵינֵיהּ, וְהַאי – לֵיתֵיהּ (איסורא) [לְאִיסּוּרָא] בְּעֵינֵיהּ.
Rav Dimi asked: And what is different about the vinegar? Rav Naḥman responded: When you have thought about it long enough to eat a kor of salt, you will know the reason. The Gemara clarifies: What is the reason then? In this case of the salt, the prohibited substance is substantive, as the traces of kutaḥ are discernible and not nullified by the salt. But in that case of the vinegar, the prohibited substance is not substantive, since the kutaḥ melts away in the vinegar and will no longer impart flavor.
הָהוּא בַּר גּוֹזָלָא דִּנְפַל לְכַדָּא דְּכַמְכָּא, שַׁרְיֵיהּ רַב חִינָּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא מִפַּשְׁרוּנְיָא. אָמַר רָבָא: מַאן חַכִּים לְמִישְׁרֵי כִּי הַאי גַוְונָא, אִי לָאו רַב חִינָּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא מִפַּשְׁרוּנְיָא? קָסָבַר: כִּי אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל ״מָלִיחַ הֲרֵי הוּא כְּרוֹתֵחַ״, הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל מֵחֲמַת מִלְחוֹ, אֲבָל הַאי כּוּתָּחָא הֲרֵי נֶאֱכָל מֵחֲמַת מִלְחוֹ.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain young bird that fell into a jug of kamka, i.e., kutaḥ. Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rava of the city of Pashronya, permitted the bird. Rava said about this: Who is wise enough to discern reasons to permit the food in difficult cases like this, if not Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rava of Pashronya? He maintains that when Shmuel said that a salted food imparts flavor like a boiling food, that statement applies only to a food so salty that it is not eaten due to its salt, but this kutaḥ can still be eaten due to, i.e., despite, its salt. Therefore, it is as if both foods are cold and unsalted, and they do not impart flavor to one another, provided one rinses the area of contact.
וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי חַי, אֲבָל צָלִי – בָּעֵי קְלִיפָה, וְאִי אִית בֵּיהּ פִּילֵי – כּוּלֵּיהּ אָסוּר, וְאִי מְתַבַּל בְּתַבְלִין – כּוּלֵּיהּ אָסוּר.
The Gemara adds: And this statement applies only if the bird is raw, but if it is roasted, it requires peeling to remove the outer layer, since roasting softens the meat and causes it to absorb more flavor. And if it has cracks [pilei], it is entirely forbidden, because the milk is absorbed into the cracks. And if it has been flavored with spices it is likewise entirely forbidden, because the spices soften the meat and render it absorbent.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כִּכָּר שֶׁחָתַךְ עָלֶיהָ בָּשָׂר – אָסוּר לְאׇכְלָהּ, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַסְמֵיק, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַבְרְיֵהּ, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאַסְמְכֵיהּ, אֲבָל קְלִישְׁתָּא – לֵית לַן בַּהּ.
Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel says: It is prohibited to eat a loaf of bread upon which one cut unsalted roasted meat, since the blood expelled from the roasted meat is absorbed in the loaf. The Gemara adds: And this statement applies only if the meat is ruddy from the blood it contains. And furthermore, this statement applies only if so much blood was absorbed in the loaf that it passed through from one side of the loaf to the other and was visible from both sides. And furthermore, this statement applies only if the liquid emitted by the roasted meat is viscous. But if it is runny, we have no problem with it, i.e., the loaf is permitted.
שְׁמוּאֵל שָׁדֵי לֵיהּ לְכַלְבֵּיהּ, רַב הוּנָא יָהֵיב לֵיהּ לְשַׁמָּעֵיהּ. מָה נַפְשָׁךְ? אִי שְׁרֵי – לְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא שְׁרֵי, אִי אֲסִיר – לְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אֲסִיר! שָׁאנֵי רַב הוּנָא דַּאֲנִינָא דַּעְתֵּיהּ. רָבָא אָכֵיל לֵיהּ, וְקָרֵי לֵיהּ ״חֲמַר בָּשָׂר״.
The Gemara relates: Shmuel would throw to his dog such a loaf of bread that he held was prohibited. Rav Huna would not eat the loaf himself but would rather give it to his attendant. The Gemara objects: Whichever way you look at it, Rav Huna’s behavior is problematic: If the loaf is permitted, it is permitted for everyone, including Rav Huna himself. And if it is prohibited, then it is prohibited for everyone, and he should not give it to his attendant. The Gemara explains: In fact, the loaf is permitted for consumption, and Rav Huna is different, as he is of delicate constitution and did not want to eat the loaf himself. The Gemara further relates: Rava would eat a loaf of this type, and he would call the red liquid meat wine.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אֵין מַנִּיחִין כְּלִי תַּחַת בָּשָׂר עַד שֶׁיִּכְלֶה כׇּל מַרְאֵה אַדְמוּמִית שֶׁבּוֹ. מְנָא יָדְעִינַן? מָר זוּטְרָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: מִשֶּׁתַּעֲלֶה תִּימְרָתוֹ.
Rav Naḥman says that Shmuel says: One may not place a vessel under roasting meat to catch the drippings of fat until all the ruddiness of the meat’s appearance has dissipated. Beforehand, though, one must be concerned that blood will fall with the drippings into the vessel, rendering the mixture and the vessel prohibited. The Gemara asks: How do we know when all the meat’s redness has disappeared? Mar Zutra said in the name of Rav Pappa: As soon as its smoke rises, one can be sure that all the blood has been expelled from the meat.
מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אָשֵׁי: וְדִלְמָא תַּתָּאָה מְטָא, עִילָּאָה לָא מְטָא? אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: לֵית לֵיהּ תַּקַּנְתָּא, אֶלָּא מִשְׁדֵּא בֵּיהּ תַּרְתֵּי גַּלְלֵי מִלְחָא,
Rav Ashi objects to this: But perhaps the underside of the meat, which is closest to the coals, has been fully roasted, but its upper part is still not roasted and still expels blood at this stage. Rather, Rav Ashi said: One who wishes to collect the drippings has no remedy except to place two lumps of salt in it, i.e., one in the receptacle under the meat and one on top, in the meat itself.
וּמִשְׁפְּיֵיהּ.
Doing this will allow the blood dripping from the meat to stick to the salt on the sides of the vessel, while the fat will float to the top. And when emptying the receptacle, he should tilt it gently to pour the fat into another vessel without it mixing with the blood.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִיקָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: וּמִי אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל הָכִי? וְהָאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כִּכָּר שֶׁחָתַךְ עָלֶיהָ בָּשָׂר אָסוּר לְאׇכְלָהּ! שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאַגַּב דּוּחְקָא דְסַכִּינָא פָּלֵיט.
Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika, said to Rav Ashi: And did Shmuel really say this, that once the meat’s ruddiness has dissipated it is permitted to place a receptacle underneath it? But didn’t Shmuel say: It is prohibited to eat a loaf of bread upon which one cut roasted meat? Apparently he holds that meat contains blood even after it has finished roasting. Rav Ashi replied: Shmuel holds that the meat no longer emits blood after its ruddiness has dissipated. And as for his ruling with regard to a loaf of bread, it is different there, as due to the pressure of the knife the meat expels more blood.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: דָּגִים וְעוֹפוֹת שֶׁמְּלָחָן זֶה עִם זֶה – אֲסוּרִין. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי בִּכְלִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְנוּקָּב – אֲפִילּוּ עוֹפוֹת וְעוֹפוֹת נָמֵי אֲסִירִי, אִי בִּכְלִי מְנוּקָּב – אֲפִילּוּ דָּגִים וְעוֹפוֹת נָמֵי שְׁרֵי.
§ Rav Naḥman says: If one salted fish and birds together, the fish are prohibited for consumption due to the blood they absorb from the birds. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this ruling? If they were placed in an unperforated vessel, in which the blood emitted by the birds will pool, then even if one salted a bird and another bird together they should be prohibited, as the blood expelled from one bird will be absorbed by the other. And if the case involves a perforated vessel, out of which the blood can flow, then even if fish are salted with birds the fish should be permitted.
לְעוֹלָם בִּכְלִי מְנוּקָּב, וְדָגִים מִשּׁוּם דִּרְפוּ קְרָמַיְיהוּ קָדְמִי וּפָלְטִי, וְעוֹפוֹת קְמִיטִי, בָּתַר דְּנָיְחִי דָּגִים פָּלְיטִי עוֹפוֹת, וַהֲדַר בָּלְעִי מִינֵּיהּ.
The Gemara answers: Actually, the ruling is referring to a perforated vessel. And the fish are prohibited because their skin is soft, and therefore when they are salted they expel their blood first, whereas the skin of birds is hard. After the fish finish expelling their blood, the birds continue to expel their blood, and then the fish absorb blood from them. If one salts two birds together, they expel their blood simultaneously, and neither will absorb blood from outside while expelling its own.
רַב מָרִי בַּר רָחֵל אִימְּלַח לֵיהּ בְּשַׂר שְׁחוּטָה בַּהֲדֵי בְּשַׂר טְרֵפָה, אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבָא.
The Gemara relates: Meat of a slaughtered animal was salted for Rav Mari bar Raḥel together with prohibited meat of an animal that had a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa], in a perforated vessel, as meat is generally salted. He came before Rava to ask whether the kosher meat was prohibited, as perhaps it would not have absorbed flavor from the non-kosher meat while itself expelling blood.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״הַטְּמֵאִים״ – לֶאֱסוֹר צִירָן, וְרוֹטְבָן, וְקֵיפֶה שֶׁלָּהֶן.
Rava said to him: When the verse states, with regard to forbidden foods: “These are the unclean to you” (Leviticus 11:31), the added definite article serves to prohibit not only their flesh but also their juice emitted by salting, and their gravy, and their spices with which they are cooked. Even while the kosher meat is emitting its blood, it still absorbs the juices of the non-kosher meat, which are absorbed more easily than blood.
Follow
