Is it permitted to give a thigh to a non Jew without removing the sciatic nerve? Does one need to be concerned he will sell it to a Jew and the Jew will not know it wasn’t removed? It is forbidden to deceive others, even non Jews. This is discussed through various examples and stories.
This week’s learning is sponsored by Robert and Paula Cohen in loving memory of Joseph Cohen, Yosef ben Moshe HaCohen, z”l. “He was hard working, loved to sing, esp. as a chazan, and was very dedicated to his family and community.”
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 sponsored by Robert and Paula Cohen in loving memory of Joseph Cohen, Yosef ben Moshe HaCohen, z”l. “He was hard working, loved to sing, esp. as a chazan, and was very dedicated to his family and community.”
Chullin 94
חתוכה נמי לישדר ליה דהא לא אתו למזבן מיניה אלא במקום שמכריזין שלימה נמי לא לישדר ליה דחתיך ליה ומזבין ליה
Consequently, it should also be permitted to send to a gentile a thigh that has been cut, because Jews will not come to purchase it from him. Rather, if the mishna is referring to a place where all the butchers are Jewish, and they announce every time they sell a tereifa to a gentile, in which case Jews may purchase meat from the local gentiles when such an announcement is not made, one should not be permitted to send even a whole thigh to a gentile, due to the concern that he might cut it up and sell it to Jews who would not realize that it still contains the sciatic nerve.
אי בעית אימא במקום שמכריזין ואי בעית אימא במקום שאין מכריזין
The Gemara offers two answers: If you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they announce every time they sell a tereifa; and if you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell a tereifa.
איבעית אימא במקום שמכריזין חיתוכא דעובד כוכבים מידע ידיע
The Gemara explains: If you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they announce every time they sell a tereifa, and nevertheless it is permitted to send a whole thigh of meat to a gentile. There is no concern that the gentile will sell the thigh to a Jew, because the Jew would know that it is non-kosher by the manner of cutting of the gentile. Jewish butchers would cut the meat in a distinctive manner that would not be replicated by a gentile who cut the meat.
ואיבעית אימא במקום שאין מכריזין גזירה שמא יתננה לו בפני ישראל אחר
And if you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell a tereifa, and nevertheless it is prohibited to give the gentile a thigh that has been cut up. The Sages issued a decree against doing so, lest he give it to the gentile in the presence of another Jew, who will think that it is kosher and purchase it from the gentile.
ואי בעית אימא משום דקא גניב ליה לדעתיה דאמר שמואל אסור לגנוב דעת הבריות ואפילו דעתו של עובד כוכבים
And if you wish, say that there is an entirely different reason why one may not send a gentile a cut-up thigh without removing the sciatic nerve: Because he thereby deceives the gentile. The gentile will think that the Jew has exerted himself to cut up the leg and remove the sciatic nerve and that although the Jew could have eaten the meat himself he decided to send it to the gentile. The gentile will therefore be more appreciative of the gift than he would be if he realized that the sciatic nerve had not been removed. This is as Shmuel said: It is prohibited to deceive people, and even to deceive a gentile.
והא דשמואל לאו בפירוש איתמר אלא מכללא איתמר דשמואל הוה קא עבר במברא א”ל לשמעיה פייסיה למבוריה פייסיה ואיקפד
And the Gemara points out that this ruling of Shmuel was not stated explicitly; rather, it was stated by inference, i.e., it was inferred based upon the following incident: Shmuel was once crossing a river in a ferry [mavra]. He said to his attendant: Compensate the ferryman with an appropriate gift. The attendant compensated him, but Shmuel became angry with his attendant.
מ”ט איקפד אמר אביי תרנגולת טרפה הואי ויהבה ניהליה במר דשחוטה רבא אמר אנפקא אמר ליה לאשקויי ואשקייה חמרא מזיגא
The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Shmuel became angry? Abaye said: The compensation that the attendant gave the ferryman was a chicken that was a tereifa, and he gave it to him as though it were a slaughtered, kosher chicken. Rava said: Shmuel told him to give the ferryman wine for drinking in an anpaka, i.e., a utensil that holds a quarter-log and which was generally used for undiluted wine, but he gave him diluted wine for drinking. According to both Abaye and Rava, Shmuel was upset that his attendant deceived the gentile ferryman.
וכי מכללא מאי למ”ד טרפה הואי א”ל אמאי תשהא איסורא
The Gemara asks: And if Shmuel’s opinion was derived by inference, what of it? The story clearly demonstrates that according to Shmuel it is prohibited to deceive a gentile. The Gemara answers that it cannot be ascertained with certainty that this is the reason Shmuel became angry. According to the one who said it was a chicken that was a tereifa that was given as compensation, perhaps Shmuel became angry and said to his attendant: Why did you retain in your possession an animal that is forbidden for consumption? This could have led to a Jew accidentally eating it.
למ”ד אנפקא א”ל לאשקויי אנפקא חייא משמע
Similarly, according to the one who said that Shmuel told him to give the ferryman wine to drink in an anpaka, since anpaka indicates undiluted wine and the attendant gave the ferryman diluted wine, perhaps Shmuel became angry simply because his attendant disobeyed his instruction.
תניא היה ר’ מאיר אומר אל יסרהב אדם לחבירו לסעוד אצלו ויודע בו שאינו סועד ולא ירבה לו בתקרובת ויודע בו שאינו מקבל
§ Apropos the prohibition against acting deceitfully, the Gemara cites other statements on this topic. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: A person may not importune [yesarhev] another to eat with him, making it seem as though he genuinely wants his company, but in reality he entreats him only because he knows that the other will not eat with him, i.e., will not accept the invitation. And similarly, one may not send another person many gifts merely because he knows that the other will not accept them.
ולא יפתח לו חביות המכורות לחנוני אא”כ הודיעו ולא יאמר לו סוך שמן מפך ריקן ואם בשביל כבודו מותר
And one may not open barrels of wine for a guest if they have already been sold to a storekeeper, unless he notifies the guest beforehand that the barrel had been sold. And he may not say to another: Anoint yourself with oil, and place an empty jug before him with the knowledge that he will not attempt to anoint himself. But if he does so for the guest’s honor, to show that he holds his guest in high esteem, rather than to deceive the guest so that he will feel indebted to him, it is permitted.
איני והא עולא איקלע לבי רב יהודה פתח לו חביות המכורות לחנוני אודועי אודעיה ואיבעית אימא שאני עולא דחביב ליה לרב יהודה דבלאו הכי נמי פתוחי מפתח ליה
The Gemara asks: Is that so? But didn’t Ulla happen to come to the house of Rav Yehuda, and Rav Yehuda opened barrels of wine for Ulla that had already been sold to a storekeeper? The Gemara answers: Rav Yehuda notified Ulla that he was not opening the barrels especially for him. And if you wish, say that Ulla is different from an ordinary guest because he was very dear to Rav Yehuda, so that even without this, i.e., even if he had not already sold the barrels to a storekeeper, Rav Yehuda would have opened the barrels for him.
ת”ר לא ילך אדם לבית האבל ובידו לגין המתקשקש ולא ימלאנו מים מפני שמתעהו ואם יש שם חבר עיר מותר
The Sages taught in a baraita: A person may not go to a house of mourning with a wine jug [lagin] in his hand that is mostly empty and where the small amount of wine rattles about, because the mourner will think that his visitor is bringing him a full jug of wine. And he may not fill up that jug of wine with water, because he thereby misleads the mourner into thinking he has brought him a full jug of undiluted wine. But if there is a crowd of people [ḥever ir] and the guest wants to honor the mourner in their presence, it is permitted.
ת”ר לא ימכור אדם לחבירו סנדל של מתה בכלל של חיה שחוטה מפני ב’ דברים א’ מפני שמתעהו וא’ מפני הסכנה
The Sages taught in a baraita: A person may not sell to another a sandal made from the hide of an animal that died of natural causes as though it were a sandal made from the hide of a healthy animal that was slaughtered. This is prohibited due to two factors: One, because he misleads the customer into thinking that the leather is of higher quality than it really is; and another, because of the danger involved, as it is possible that the animal died from a snakebite and the poison seeped into the part of the animal’s hide from which the sandal is made.
ולא ישגר אדם לחבירו חבית של יין ושמן צף על פיה ומעשה באחד ששיגר לחבירו חבית של יין ושמן צף על פיה והלך וזימן עליה אורחין ונכנסו מצאה שהיא של יין וחנק את עצמו
And furthermore a person may not send a barrel of wine to another with oil floating at its mouth, such that the recipient thinks that it is a barrel of oil. There was an incident involving a certain individual who sent a barrel of wine to another with oil floating at its mouth, and that recipient, thinking it was a barrel of oil, went and invited guests to share it with him, and the guests arrived. When the host went to bring them oil, he found that it was a barrel of wine rather than oil, and in his shame at not having oil for them, he hanged himself and died.
ואין האורחין רשאין ליתן ממה שלפניהם לבנו ולבתו של בעה”ב אא”כ נטלו רשות מבעה”ב
The baraita continues: And guests are not permitted to give some of the food that is placed before them to the son or to the daughter of the host unless they first receive permission from the host.
ומעשה באחד שזמן ג’ אורחין בשני בצורת ולא היה לו להניח לפניהם אלא כשלש ביצים בא בנו של בעה”ב נטל אחד מהן חלקו ונתנו לו וכן שני וכן שלישי בא אביו של תינוק מצאו שעוזק א’ בפיו ושתים בידו חבטו בקרקע ומת כיון שראתה אמו עלתה לגג ונפלה ומתה אף הוא עלה לגג ונפל ומת
And there was an incident involving a certain individual who invited three guests during years of famine, and he had enough to place only three eggs before them. The son of the host came, and one of the guests took his portion and gave it to the son. And similarly the second guest gave his portion to the son, and similarly the third guest. The father of the child came and found that his son was holding one egg in his mouth and two in his hand. The father became so angry with his son for taking all the food that he hit the son to the ground, and the son died. When his mother saw what had happened, she ascended to the roof and fell down to the ground and died. And when the father saw that both his son and his wife were dead he also ascended to the roof and fell down to the ground and died.
א”ר אליעזר בן יעקב על דבר זה נהרגו ג’ נפשות מישראל מאי קמ”ל דכולה ר”א בן יעקב היא
Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: For this matter of giving food to the child of the host, three Jewish souls were killed. The Gemara asks: What does this statement teach us? It is obvious from the incident that three people were killed. The Gemara answers: It teaches that the entire baraita is taught by Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.
ת”ר השולח ירך לחבירו שלימה אינו צריך שיטול הימנה גיד הנשה חתוכה צריך ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה ובעובד כוכבים בין חתוכה ובין שלימה א”צ ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: In the case of one who sends a whole thigh of an animal to another, he is not required to first remove the sciatic nerve from it. This is because the recipient can see that it has not yet been removed and will not eat it until he removes the sciatic nerve himself. But if one sends a thigh that has been cut up, he is required to first remove the sciatic nerve from it so that the recipient does not eat it unwittingly. And in the case of one who sends a thigh to a gentile, regardless of whether it is cut or whole he is not required to remove the sciatic nerve from it.
ומפני ב’ דברים אמרו אין מוכרין נבילות וטרפות לעובד כוכבים אחד מפני שמתעהו ואחד שמא יחזור וימכרנה לישראל אחר
And it was due to two factors that the Sages said that one may not sell meat from unslaughtered animal carcasses or tereifot to a gentile: One, because it misleads him, as he thinks that it is kosher meat, which is more desirable; and another factor is the concern lest the gentile then sell the meat to another Jew, who will think it is kosher since it originally was sold by a Jew.
ולא יאמר אדם לעובד כוכבים קח לי בדינר זה בשר מפני ב’ דברים
And similarly, a person may not say to a gentile: Purchase meat for me from a Jewish butcher with this dinar, due to two factors:
אחד מפני האנסין ואחד שמא מוכרין לו נבלות וטרפות
One factor is because of the oppressors, i.e., the concern that perhaps the gentile will keep the money for himself and force the merchant to give him the meat without payment. And another factor is lest the merchant sell him meat from unslaughtered carcasses or tereifot without realizing that the gentile is purchasing the meat on behalf of a Jew.
אמר מר ובעובד כוכבים בין שלימה בין חתוכה אינו צריך ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה במאי עסקינן אילימא במקום שמכריזין חתוכה אמאי אינו צריך ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה כיון דלא אכרוז אתי למיזבן מיניה
The Master said in the baraita: And in the case of one who sends a thigh to a gentile, regardless of whether it is cut or whole he is not required to remove the sciatic nerve from it. The Gemara asks: What are we dealing with? If we say that it is referring to a place where all the butchers are Jewish and they announce every time they sell non-kosher meat to a gentile, then in the case of a thigh that has been cut, why is one not required to remove the sciatic nerve? Since it was not announced that they sold non-kosher meat, a Jew might come to purchase it from a gentile without realizing that it still contains the sciatic nerve.
אלא פשיטא במקום שאין מכריזין אימא מציעתא מפני שני דברים אמרו אין מוכרין נבלות וטרפות לעובד כוכבים אחד מפני שמטעהו ואחד שמא יחזור וימכרנה לישראל אחר
Rather, it is obvious that it is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell non-kosher meat, and in such a place a Jew would not purchase meat from a gentile. But say the middle clause of the baraita: And it was due to two factors that the Sages said that one may not sell meat from unslaughtered animal carcasses or tereifot to a gentile: One is because it misleads him; and another is the concern lest the gentile then sell the meat to another Jew, who will think it is kosher since it originally was sold by a Jew.
ואי במקום שאין מכריזין הא לא אתי למיזבן מיניה אלא פשיטא במקום שמכריזין
But if the baraita is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell non-kosher meat to a gentile, a Jew will not come to purchase the meat from the gentile. Rather, it is obvious that the baraita is referring to a place where they announce every time they sell non-kosher meat.
אימא סיפא לא יאמר אדם לעובד כוכבים קח לי בדינר זה בשר מפני שני דברים אחד מפני האנסין ואחד שמא מוכרין לו נבילות וטרפות ואי במקום שמכריזין אי איתא דהוה טרפה אכרוזי הוו מכרזי
But say the latter clause: And similarly, a person may not say to a gentile: Purchase meat for me with this dinar, due to two factors. One factor is because of the oppressors, and another factor is lest the merchant sell him meat from unslaughtered carcasses or tereifot without realizing that the gentile is purchasing the meat on behalf of a Jew. But if it is referring to a place where they announce every time non-kosher meat is sold, if it would happen that it was a tereifa the butchers would have announced the fact, and the Jew would know not to eat that meat.
אלא פשיטא במקום שאין מכריזין רישא וסיפא במקום שאין מכריזין מציעתא במקום שמכריזין
Rather, it is obvious that the baraita is referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold. But is it possible that the first clause and the latter clause of the baraita are referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold but the middle clause is referring to a place where they do announce every time non-kosher meat is sold?
אמר אביי אין רישא וסיפא במקום שאין מכריזין מציעתא במקום שמכריזין
Abaye said: Yes, the first clause and the latter clause of the baraita are referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold, and the middle clause is referring to a place where they do announce every time non-kosher meat is sold.
רבא אמר כולה במקום שמכריזין רישא וסיפא שהכריזו מציעתא שלא הכריזו
Rava said: The entire baraita is referring to a place where they announce every time non-kosher meat is sold. The first clause and the latter clause are referring to days when they announced that non-kosher meat had been sold, and the middle clause is referring to a day when they did not announce that non-kosher meat had been sold.
רב אשי אמר כולה במקום שאין מכריזין ומציעתא גזירה שמא ימכרנה בפני ישראל
Rav Ashi said: The entire baraita is referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold. And the reason that the middle clause teaches that it is prohibited to sell meat from unslaughtered carcasses or tereifot to a gentile is due to a rabbinic decree lest the Jew sell it to the gentile in the presence of another Jew, who will think that this particular piece of meat is kosher.
היכי מכרזינן אמר רב יצחק בר יוסף נפל בישרא לבני חילא
§ The Gemara noted that there were places where they would announce whenever non-kosher meat was sold to a gentile. The Gemara asks: How do we announce that non-kosher meat has been sold? The Gemara answers that Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef said: Meat has fallen into our possession for the soldiers, i.e., the gentiles.
ולימא נפל טריפתא לבני חילא לא זבני
The Gemara objects: But let them say: A tereifa has fallen into our possession for the soldiers. The Gemara answers that if a butcher would publicize the fact that it is a tereifa, the gentiles would not purchase it from him because they would not want an animal rejected by the Jews.
והא קמטעי להו אינהו הוא דקמטעו נפשייהו
The Gemara asks: But if the announcement is made in a way that obscures from the gentiles the fact that the animal is a tereifa, doesn’t this deceive them? The Gemara answers: It is they who deceive themselves, because the seller does not specify which kind of meat he is selling.
כי הא דמר זוטרא בריה דרב נחמן הוה קאזיל מסיכרא לבי מחוזא ורבא ורב ספרא הוו קא אתו לסיכרא פגעו אהדדי הוא סבר לאפיה הוא דקאתו אמר להו למה להו לרבנן דטרוח ואתו כולי האי א”ל רב ספרא אנן לא הוה ידעינן דקאתי מר אי הוה ידעינן טפי הוה טרחינן
The Gemara cites proof that it is permitted to allow others to mislead themselves. It is like this incident when Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, was going from the city of Sikhra to the city of Bei Meḥoza, and at the same time Rava and Rav Safra were going to Sikhra. They met each other, and Mar Zutra thought they were coming out to greet him. He said to them: Why did the Rabbis exert themselves and come all this way to greet me? Rav Safra said to him: We did not know that the Master was coming; if we would have known we would have exerted ourselves more.
א”ל רבא מ”ט אמרת ליה הכי דאחלישתיה לדעתיה א”ל והא קא מטעינן ליה איהו הוא דקא מטעי נפשיה
Rava said to Rav Safra: What is the reason that you said this to Mar Zutra? By telling him that we were not coming to greet him you upset him. Rav Safra said to Rava: But if I would not have said so we would have misled him. Rava responded: Mar Zutra misled himself, since we never said we were coming to greet him.
ההוא טבחא דא”ל לחבריה
§ The Gemara returns to the topic of selling non-kosher meat to a gentile. There was a certain Jewish butcher who said to another individual:
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 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
I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!
Rochel Cheifetz
Riverdale, NY, United States
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
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 read Ilana Kurshan’s “If All the Seas Were Ink” which inspired me. Then the Women’s Siyum in Jerusalem in 2020 convinced me, I knew I had to join! I have loved it- it’s been a constant in my life daily, many of the sugiyot connect to our lives. My family and friends all are so supportive. It’s incredible being part of this community and love how diverse it is! I am so excited to learn more!
Shira Jacobowitz
Jerusalem, Israel
After all the hype on the 2020 siyum I became inspired by a friend to begin learning as the new cycle began.with no background in studying Talmud it was a bit daunting in the beginning. my husband began at the same time so we decided to study on shabbat together. The reaction from my 3 daughters has been fantastic. They are very proud. It’s been a great challenge for my brain which is so healthy!
Stacey Goodstein Ashtamker
Modi’in, Israel
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Sharon Mink
Haifa, Israel
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
After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.
Madeline Cohen
London, United Kingdom
Jill Shames
Jerusalem, Israel
Shortly after the death of my father, David Malik z”l, I made the commitment to Daf Yomi. While riding to Ben Gurion airport in January, Siyum HaShas was playing on the radio; that was the nudge I needed to get started. The “everyday-ness” of the Daf has been a meaningful spiritual practice, especial after COVID began & I was temporarily unable to say Kaddish at daily in-person minyanim.
Lisa S. Malik
Wynnewood, United States
I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!
Rochel Cheifetz
Riverdale, NY, United States
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Sharon Mink
Haifa, Israel
Having never learned Talmud before, I started Daf Yomi in hopes of connecting to the Rabbinic tradition, sharing a daily idea on Instagram (@dafyomiadventures). With Hadran and Sefaria, I slowly gained confidence in my skills and understanding. Now, part of the Pardes Jewish Educators Program, I can’t wait to bring this love of learning with me as I continue to pass it on to my future students.
Hannah Greenberg
Pennsylvania, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi because my sister, Ruth Leah Kahan, attended Michelle’s class in person and suggested I listen remotely. She always sat near Michelle and spoke up during class so that I could hear her voice. Our mom had just died unexpectedly and it made me feel connected to hear Ruth Leah’s voice, and now to know we are both listening to the same thing daily, continents apart.
Jessica Shklar
Philadelphia, 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
Ive been learning Gmara since 5th grade and always loved it. Have always wanted to do Daf Yomi and now with Michelle Farber’s online classes it made it much easier to do! Really enjoying the experience thank you!!
Lisa Lawrence
Neve Daniel, Israel
Since I started in January of 2020, Daf Yomi has changed my life. It connects me to Jews all over the world, especially learned women. It makes cooking, gardening, and folding laundry into acts of Torah study. Daf Yomi enables me to participate in a conversation with and about our heritage that has been going on for more than 2000 years.
Shira Eliaser
Skokie, IL, United States
I started learning on January 5, 2020. When I complete the 7+ year cycle I will be 70 years old. I had been intimidated by those who said that I needed to study Talmud in a traditional way with a chevruta, but I decided the learning was more important to me than the method. Thankful for Daf Yomi for Women helping me catch up when I fall behind, and also being able to celebrate with each Siyum!
Pamela Elisheva
Bakersfield, United States
Inspired by Hadran’s first Siyum ha Shas L’Nashim two years ago, I began daf yomi right after for the next cycle. As to this extraordinary journey together with Hadran..as TS Eliot wrote “We must not cease from exploration and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we began and to know the place for the first time.
Susan Handelman
Jerusalem, Israel
Chullin 94
חתוכה נמי לישדר ליה דהא לא אתו למזבן מיניה אלא במקום שמכריזין שלימה נמי לא לישדר ליה דחתיך ליה ומזבין ליה
Consequently, it should also be permitted to send to a gentile a thigh that has been cut, because Jews will not come to purchase it from him. Rather, if the mishna is referring to a place where all the butchers are Jewish, and they announce every time they sell a tereifa to a gentile, in which case Jews may purchase meat from the local gentiles when such an announcement is not made, one should not be permitted to send even a whole thigh to a gentile, due to the concern that he might cut it up and sell it to Jews who would not realize that it still contains the sciatic nerve.
אי בעית אימא במקום שמכריזין ואי בעית אימא במקום שאין מכריזין
The Gemara offers two answers: If you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they announce every time they sell a tereifa; and if you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell a tereifa.
איבעית אימא במקום שמכריזין חיתוכא דעובד כוכבים מידע ידיע
The Gemara explains: If you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they announce every time they sell a tereifa, and nevertheless it is permitted to send a whole thigh of meat to a gentile. There is no concern that the gentile will sell the thigh to a Jew, because the Jew would know that it is non-kosher by the manner of cutting of the gentile. Jewish butchers would cut the meat in a distinctive manner that would not be replicated by a gentile who cut the meat.
ואיבעית אימא במקום שאין מכריזין גזירה שמא יתננה לו בפני ישראל אחר
And if you wish, say that the mishna is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell a tereifa, and nevertheless it is prohibited to give the gentile a thigh that has been cut up. The Sages issued a decree against doing so, lest he give it to the gentile in the presence of another Jew, who will think that it is kosher and purchase it from the gentile.
ואי בעית אימא משום דקא גניב ליה לדעתיה דאמר שמואל אסור לגנוב דעת הבריות ואפילו דעתו של עובד כוכבים
And if you wish, say that there is an entirely different reason why one may not send a gentile a cut-up thigh without removing the sciatic nerve: Because he thereby deceives the gentile. The gentile will think that the Jew has exerted himself to cut up the leg and remove the sciatic nerve and that although the Jew could have eaten the meat himself he decided to send it to the gentile. The gentile will therefore be more appreciative of the gift than he would be if he realized that the sciatic nerve had not been removed. This is as Shmuel said: It is prohibited to deceive people, and even to deceive a gentile.
והא דשמואל לאו בפירוש איתמר אלא מכללא איתמר דשמואל הוה קא עבר במברא א”ל לשמעיה פייסיה למבוריה פייסיה ואיקפד
And the Gemara points out that this ruling of Shmuel was not stated explicitly; rather, it was stated by inference, i.e., it was inferred based upon the following incident: Shmuel was once crossing a river in a ferry [mavra]. He said to his attendant: Compensate the ferryman with an appropriate gift. The attendant compensated him, but Shmuel became angry with his attendant.
מ”ט איקפד אמר אביי תרנגולת טרפה הואי ויהבה ניהליה במר דשחוטה רבא אמר אנפקא אמר ליה לאשקויי ואשקייה חמרא מזיגא
The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Shmuel became angry? Abaye said: The compensation that the attendant gave the ferryman was a chicken that was a tereifa, and he gave it to him as though it were a slaughtered, kosher chicken. Rava said: Shmuel told him to give the ferryman wine for drinking in an anpaka, i.e., a utensil that holds a quarter-log and which was generally used for undiluted wine, but he gave him diluted wine for drinking. According to both Abaye and Rava, Shmuel was upset that his attendant deceived the gentile ferryman.
וכי מכללא מאי למ”ד טרפה הואי א”ל אמאי תשהא איסורא
The Gemara asks: And if Shmuel’s opinion was derived by inference, what of it? The story clearly demonstrates that according to Shmuel it is prohibited to deceive a gentile. The Gemara answers that it cannot be ascertained with certainty that this is the reason Shmuel became angry. According to the one who said it was a chicken that was a tereifa that was given as compensation, perhaps Shmuel became angry and said to his attendant: Why did you retain in your possession an animal that is forbidden for consumption? This could have led to a Jew accidentally eating it.
למ”ד אנפקא א”ל לאשקויי אנפקא חייא משמע
Similarly, according to the one who said that Shmuel told him to give the ferryman wine to drink in an anpaka, since anpaka indicates undiluted wine and the attendant gave the ferryman diluted wine, perhaps Shmuel became angry simply because his attendant disobeyed his instruction.
תניא היה ר’ מאיר אומר אל יסרהב אדם לחבירו לסעוד אצלו ויודע בו שאינו סועד ולא ירבה לו בתקרובת ויודע בו שאינו מקבל
§ Apropos the prohibition against acting deceitfully, the Gemara cites other statements on this topic. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: A person may not importune [yesarhev] another to eat with him, making it seem as though he genuinely wants his company, but in reality he entreats him only because he knows that the other will not eat with him, i.e., will not accept the invitation. And similarly, one may not send another person many gifts merely because he knows that the other will not accept them.
ולא יפתח לו חביות המכורות לחנוני אא”כ הודיעו ולא יאמר לו סוך שמן מפך ריקן ואם בשביל כבודו מותר
And one may not open barrels of wine for a guest if they have already been sold to a storekeeper, unless he notifies the guest beforehand that the barrel had been sold. And he may not say to another: Anoint yourself with oil, and place an empty jug before him with the knowledge that he will not attempt to anoint himself. But if he does so for the guest’s honor, to show that he holds his guest in high esteem, rather than to deceive the guest so that he will feel indebted to him, it is permitted.
איני והא עולא איקלע לבי רב יהודה פתח לו חביות המכורות לחנוני אודועי אודעיה ואיבעית אימא שאני עולא דחביב ליה לרב יהודה דבלאו הכי נמי פתוחי מפתח ליה
The Gemara asks: Is that so? But didn’t Ulla happen to come to the house of Rav Yehuda, and Rav Yehuda opened barrels of wine for Ulla that had already been sold to a storekeeper? The Gemara answers: Rav Yehuda notified Ulla that he was not opening the barrels especially for him. And if you wish, say that Ulla is different from an ordinary guest because he was very dear to Rav Yehuda, so that even without this, i.e., even if he had not already sold the barrels to a storekeeper, Rav Yehuda would have opened the barrels for him.
ת”ר לא ילך אדם לבית האבל ובידו לגין המתקשקש ולא ימלאנו מים מפני שמתעהו ואם יש שם חבר עיר מותר
The Sages taught in a baraita: A person may not go to a house of mourning with a wine jug [lagin] in his hand that is mostly empty and where the small amount of wine rattles about, because the mourner will think that his visitor is bringing him a full jug of wine. And he may not fill up that jug of wine with water, because he thereby misleads the mourner into thinking he has brought him a full jug of undiluted wine. But if there is a crowd of people [ḥever ir] and the guest wants to honor the mourner in their presence, it is permitted.
ת”ר לא ימכור אדם לחבירו סנדל של מתה בכלל של חיה שחוטה מפני ב’ דברים א’ מפני שמתעהו וא’ מפני הסכנה
The Sages taught in a baraita: A person may not sell to another a sandal made from the hide of an animal that died of natural causes as though it were a sandal made from the hide of a healthy animal that was slaughtered. This is prohibited due to two factors: One, because he misleads the customer into thinking that the leather is of higher quality than it really is; and another, because of the danger involved, as it is possible that the animal died from a snakebite and the poison seeped into the part of the animal’s hide from which the sandal is made.
ולא ישגר אדם לחבירו חבית של יין ושמן צף על פיה ומעשה באחד ששיגר לחבירו חבית של יין ושמן צף על פיה והלך וזימן עליה אורחין ונכנסו מצאה שהיא של יין וחנק את עצמו
And furthermore a person may not send a barrel of wine to another with oil floating at its mouth, such that the recipient thinks that it is a barrel of oil. There was an incident involving a certain individual who sent a barrel of wine to another with oil floating at its mouth, and that recipient, thinking it was a barrel of oil, went and invited guests to share it with him, and the guests arrived. When the host went to bring them oil, he found that it was a barrel of wine rather than oil, and in his shame at not having oil for them, he hanged himself and died.
ואין האורחין רשאין ליתן ממה שלפניהם לבנו ולבתו של בעה”ב אא”כ נטלו רשות מבעה”ב
The baraita continues: And guests are not permitted to give some of the food that is placed before them to the son or to the daughter of the host unless they first receive permission from the host.
ומעשה באחד שזמן ג’ אורחין בשני בצורת ולא היה לו להניח לפניהם אלא כשלש ביצים בא בנו של בעה”ב נטל אחד מהן חלקו ונתנו לו וכן שני וכן שלישי בא אביו של תינוק מצאו שעוזק א’ בפיו ושתים בידו חבטו בקרקע ומת כיון שראתה אמו עלתה לגג ונפלה ומתה אף הוא עלה לגג ונפל ומת
And there was an incident involving a certain individual who invited three guests during years of famine, and he had enough to place only three eggs before them. The son of the host came, and one of the guests took his portion and gave it to the son. And similarly the second guest gave his portion to the son, and similarly the third guest. The father of the child came and found that his son was holding one egg in his mouth and two in his hand. The father became so angry with his son for taking all the food that he hit the son to the ground, and the son died. When his mother saw what had happened, she ascended to the roof and fell down to the ground and died. And when the father saw that both his son and his wife were dead he also ascended to the roof and fell down to the ground and died.
א”ר אליעזר בן יעקב על דבר זה נהרגו ג’ נפשות מישראל מאי קמ”ל דכולה ר”א בן יעקב היא
Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: For this matter of giving food to the child of the host, three Jewish souls were killed. The Gemara asks: What does this statement teach us? It is obvious from the incident that three people were killed. The Gemara answers: It teaches that the entire baraita is taught by Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.
ת”ר השולח ירך לחבירו שלימה אינו צריך שיטול הימנה גיד הנשה חתוכה צריך ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה ובעובד כוכבים בין חתוכה ובין שלימה א”צ ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: In the case of one who sends a whole thigh of an animal to another, he is not required to first remove the sciatic nerve from it. This is because the recipient can see that it has not yet been removed and will not eat it until he removes the sciatic nerve himself. But if one sends a thigh that has been cut up, he is required to first remove the sciatic nerve from it so that the recipient does not eat it unwittingly. And in the case of one who sends a thigh to a gentile, regardless of whether it is cut or whole he is not required to remove the sciatic nerve from it.
ומפני ב’ דברים אמרו אין מוכרין נבילות וטרפות לעובד כוכבים אחד מפני שמתעהו ואחד שמא יחזור וימכרנה לישראל אחר
And it was due to two factors that the Sages said that one may not sell meat from unslaughtered animal carcasses or tereifot to a gentile: One, because it misleads him, as he thinks that it is kosher meat, which is more desirable; and another factor is the concern lest the gentile then sell the meat to another Jew, who will think it is kosher since it originally was sold by a Jew.
ולא יאמר אדם לעובד כוכבים קח לי בדינר זה בשר מפני ב’ דברים
And similarly, a person may not say to a gentile: Purchase meat for me from a Jewish butcher with this dinar, due to two factors:
אחד מפני האנסין ואחד שמא מוכרין לו נבלות וטרפות
One factor is because of the oppressors, i.e., the concern that perhaps the gentile will keep the money for himself and force the merchant to give him the meat without payment. And another factor is lest the merchant sell him meat from unslaughtered carcasses or tereifot without realizing that the gentile is purchasing the meat on behalf of a Jew.
אמר מר ובעובד כוכבים בין שלימה בין חתוכה אינו צריך ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה במאי עסקינן אילימא במקום שמכריזין חתוכה אמאי אינו צריך ליטול הימנה גיד הנשה כיון דלא אכרוז אתי למיזבן מיניה
The Master said in the baraita: And in the case of one who sends a thigh to a gentile, regardless of whether it is cut or whole he is not required to remove the sciatic nerve from it. The Gemara asks: What are we dealing with? If we say that it is referring to a place where all the butchers are Jewish and they announce every time they sell non-kosher meat to a gentile, then in the case of a thigh that has been cut, why is one not required to remove the sciatic nerve? Since it was not announced that they sold non-kosher meat, a Jew might come to purchase it from a gentile without realizing that it still contains the sciatic nerve.
אלא פשיטא במקום שאין מכריזין אימא מציעתא מפני שני דברים אמרו אין מוכרין נבלות וטרפות לעובד כוכבים אחד מפני שמטעהו ואחד שמא יחזור וימכרנה לישראל אחר
Rather, it is obvious that it is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell non-kosher meat, and in such a place a Jew would not purchase meat from a gentile. But say the middle clause of the baraita: And it was due to two factors that the Sages said that one may not sell meat from unslaughtered animal carcasses or tereifot to a gentile: One is because it misleads him; and another is the concern lest the gentile then sell the meat to another Jew, who will think it is kosher since it originally was sold by a Jew.
ואי במקום שאין מכריזין הא לא אתי למיזבן מיניה אלא פשיטא במקום שמכריזין
But if the baraita is referring to a place where they do not announce every time they sell non-kosher meat to a gentile, a Jew will not come to purchase the meat from the gentile. Rather, it is obvious that the baraita is referring to a place where they announce every time they sell non-kosher meat.
אימא סיפא לא יאמר אדם לעובד כוכבים קח לי בדינר זה בשר מפני שני דברים אחד מפני האנסין ואחד שמא מוכרין לו נבילות וטרפות ואי במקום שמכריזין אי איתא דהוה טרפה אכרוזי הוו מכרזי
But say the latter clause: And similarly, a person may not say to a gentile: Purchase meat for me with this dinar, due to two factors. One factor is because of the oppressors, and another factor is lest the merchant sell him meat from unslaughtered carcasses or tereifot without realizing that the gentile is purchasing the meat on behalf of a Jew. But if it is referring to a place where they announce every time non-kosher meat is sold, if it would happen that it was a tereifa the butchers would have announced the fact, and the Jew would know not to eat that meat.
אלא פשיטא במקום שאין מכריזין רישא וסיפא במקום שאין מכריזין מציעתא במקום שמכריזין
Rather, it is obvious that the baraita is referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold. But is it possible that the first clause and the latter clause of the baraita are referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold but the middle clause is referring to a place where they do announce every time non-kosher meat is sold?
אמר אביי אין רישא וסיפא במקום שאין מכריזין מציעתא במקום שמכריזין
Abaye said: Yes, the first clause and the latter clause of the baraita are referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold, and the middle clause is referring to a place where they do announce every time non-kosher meat is sold.
רבא אמר כולה במקום שמכריזין רישא וסיפא שהכריזו מציעתא שלא הכריזו
Rava said: The entire baraita is referring to a place where they announce every time non-kosher meat is sold. The first clause and the latter clause are referring to days when they announced that non-kosher meat had been sold, and the middle clause is referring to a day when they did not announce that non-kosher meat had been sold.
רב אשי אמר כולה במקום שאין מכריזין ומציעתא גזירה שמא ימכרנה בפני ישראל
Rav Ashi said: The entire baraita is referring to a place where they do not announce every time non-kosher meat is sold. And the reason that the middle clause teaches that it is prohibited to sell meat from unslaughtered carcasses or tereifot to a gentile is due to a rabbinic decree lest the Jew sell it to the gentile in the presence of another Jew, who will think that this particular piece of meat is kosher.
היכי מכרזינן אמר רב יצחק בר יוסף נפל בישרא לבני חילא
§ The Gemara noted that there were places where they would announce whenever non-kosher meat was sold to a gentile. The Gemara asks: How do we announce that non-kosher meat has been sold? The Gemara answers that Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef said: Meat has fallen into our possession for the soldiers, i.e., the gentiles.
ולימא נפל טריפתא לבני חילא לא זבני
The Gemara objects: But let them say: A tereifa has fallen into our possession for the soldiers. The Gemara answers that if a butcher would publicize the fact that it is a tereifa, the gentiles would not purchase it from him because they would not want an animal rejected by the Jews.
והא קמטעי להו אינהו הוא דקמטעו נפשייהו
The Gemara asks: But if the announcement is made in a way that obscures from the gentiles the fact that the animal is a tereifa, doesn’t this deceive them? The Gemara answers: It is they who deceive themselves, because the seller does not specify which kind of meat he is selling.
כי הא דמר זוטרא בריה דרב נחמן הוה קאזיל מסיכרא לבי מחוזא ורבא ורב ספרא הוו קא אתו לסיכרא פגעו אהדדי הוא סבר לאפיה הוא דקאתו אמר להו למה להו לרבנן דטרוח ואתו כולי האי א”ל רב ספרא אנן לא הוה ידעינן דקאתי מר אי הוה ידעינן טפי הוה טרחינן
The Gemara cites proof that it is permitted to allow others to mislead themselves. It is like this incident when Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, was going from the city of Sikhra to the city of Bei Meḥoza, and at the same time Rava and Rav Safra were going to Sikhra. They met each other, and Mar Zutra thought they were coming out to greet him. He said to them: Why did the Rabbis exert themselves and come all this way to greet me? Rav Safra said to him: We did not know that the Master was coming; if we would have known we would have exerted ourselves more.
א”ל רבא מ”ט אמרת ליה הכי דאחלישתיה לדעתיה א”ל והא קא מטעינן ליה איהו הוא דקא מטעי נפשיה
Rava said to Rav Safra: What is the reason that you said this to Mar Zutra? By telling him that we were not coming to greet him you upset him. Rav Safra said to Rava: But if I would not have said so we would have misled him. Rava responded: Mar Zutra misled himself, since we never said we were coming to greet him.
ההוא טבחא דא”ל לחבריה
§ The Gemara returns to the topic of selling non-kosher meat to a gentile. There was a certain Jewish butcher who said to another individual:
Follow
