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.
Chullin 112
March 19, 2019 | י״ב באדר ב׳ תשע״ט
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
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 
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.
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Shira Krebs
Minnesota, United States
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 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
I began my Daf Yomi journey on January 5, 2020. I had never learned Talmud before. Initially it struck me as a bunch of inane and arcane details with mind bending logic. I am now smitten. Rabbanit Farber brings the page to life and I am eager to learn with her every day!
Lori Stark
Highland Park, United States
I started learning Jan 2020 when I heard the new cycle was starting. I had tried during the last cycle and didn’t make it past a few weeks. Learning online from old men didn’t speak to my soul and I knew Talmud had to be a soul journey for me. Enter Hadran! Talmud from Rabbanit Michelle Farber from a woman’s perspective, a mother’s perspective and a modern perspective. Motivated to continue!
Keren Carter
Brentwood, California, United States
I learned Talmud as a student in Yeshivat Ramaz and felt at the time that Talmud wasn’t for me. After reading Ilana Kurshan’s book I was intrigued and after watching the great siyum in Yerushalayim it ignited the spark to begin this journey. It has been a transformative life experience for me as a wife, mother, Savta and member of Klal Yisrael.
Elana Storch
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Jill Shames
Jerusalem, Israel
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Gitta Jaroslawicz-Neufeld
Far Rockaway, United States
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
Last cycle, I listened to parts of various מסכתות. When the הדרן סיום was advertised, I listened to Michelle on נידה. I knew that בע”ה with the next cycle I was in (ב”נ). As I entered the סיום (early), I saw the signs and was overcome with emotion. I was randomly seated in the front row, and I cried many times that night. My choice to learn דף יומי was affirmed. It is one of the best I have made!
Miriam Tannenbaum
אפרת, Israel
What a great experience to learn with Rabbanit Michelle Farber. I began with this cycle in January 2020 and have been comforted by the consistency and energy of this process throughout the isolation period of Covid. Week by week, I feel like I am exploring a treasure chest with sparkling gems and puzzling antiquities. The hunt is exhilarating.
Marian Frankston
Pennsylvania, United States
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Debbie Engelen-Eigles
Minnesota, United States
I started the daf at the beginning of this cycle in January 2020. My husband, my children, grandchildren and siblings have been very supportive. As someone who learned and taught Tanach and mefarshim for many years, it has been an amazing adventure to complete the six sedarim of Mishnah, and now to study Talmud on a daily basis along with Rabbanit Michelle and the wonderful women of Hadran.
Rookie Billet
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
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
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.
Wendy Rozov
Phoenix, AZ, United States
I’ve been wanting to do Daf Yomi for years, but always wanted to start at the beginning and not in the middle of things. When the opportunity came in 2020, I decided: “this is now the time!” I’ve been posting my journey daily on social media, tracking my progress (#DafYomi); now it’s fully integrated into my daily routines. I’ve also inspired my partner to join, too!
Joséphine Altzman
Teaneck, United States
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
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
I began to learn this cycle of Daf Yomi after my husband passed away 2 1/2 years ago. It seemed a good way to connect to him. Even though I don’t know whether he would have encouraged women learning Gemara, it would have opened wonderful conversations. It also gives me more depth for understanding my frum children and grandchildren. Thank you Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle Farber!!
Harriet Hartman
Tzur Hadassah, Israel
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
