1 and the point is about the fat; [what I wish to know is] the law about the blood’? When he went up [to Palestine] a second time he met R. Zerika who told him [in reply]. ‘This, too, should not cause you any doubt, for I and Jannai the son of R. Ammi once came to the house of Judah the son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi, and we were served with the windpipe and its appendages and we ate them.’ R. Ashi, others say. R. Samuel of Zerukinia, demurred [at any proof from this] saying. Perhaps there the mouth of the windpipe was outside the pot? Or perhaps it [the liver] was first dipped? For R. Huna used to dip it in vinegar, and R. Nahman used to dip it in boiling hot water. R. Papa once suggested to Raba that the vinegar [in which the liver was dipped] should be forbidden, but Raba answered him thus: If the vinegar is forbidden then it [the liver] too should be forbidden, for just as it exudes [its juice into the vinegar] it will later on absorb it. Rab b. Shabba once visited R. Nahman's house and was served with well-cooked liver but he would nor eat it. Thereupon they told him [R. Nahman]. ‘There's a young scholar inside, namely Rab b. Shabba, who will not eat it.’ R. Nahman replied. ‘Force Shabba to eat it.’ This indeed is a matter of dispute between Tannaim: R. Eliezer says. The liver renders [other pieces in the pot] forbidden but is not itself rendered forbidden, because it exudes and does not absorb. R. Ishmael the son of R. Johanan b. Berokah says: If it [the liver] was seasoned with spices it renders others forbidden and is itself also rendered forbidden; [and so too] if it was well-cooked it renders others forbidden and is itself also rendered forbidden. Rabbah son of R. Huna once visited the house of Rabbah son of R. Nahman and was served with three se'ahs of honey-cakes. He said to them, Did you know that I was coming? They replied. You are no more important than it, and it is written. And call the sabbath a delight. In the meantime he noticed a liver and in the artery thereof there was much blood. He said to them: Is it right to do so? They replied. What then should we do? He said. Cut it open lengthwise and breadthwise, and the part cut should be below. This is so only with the liver, but as to the spleen it contains merely a fatty juice. Thus on the day when Samuel was bled they prepared for him spleen broth. It was stated: [To roast] the liver on top of meat, is permitted, for the blood glides off; [to roast] the udder on top of meat is forbidden because the milk clings [to and penetrates into the meat]. R. Dimi of Nehardea reports this just the reverse thus, [To roast] the udder on top of meat, is permitted, because the milk of a slaughtered animal is but a Rabbinic prohibition; liver on top of meat is forbidden because the blood is a Biblical prohibition. Meremar declared in a public exposition: The law is, both with regard to the liver and the udder: under meat, it is permitted; on top of meat, it is permitted only after the act, but one may not do so in the first instance. R. Ashi once visited the house of Rami b. Abba his father-in-law when he saw the son of Rami b. Abbaᵃᵇᶜᵈᵉᶠᵍʰⁱʲᵏˡᵐⁿᵒᵖᵠʳˢ
2 putting liver on the spit on top of meat. ‘How presumptuous this young scholar is!’ he exclaimed. ‘The Rabbis may have permitted it after the act, but did they permit it in the first instance?’ But if a vessel was placed below to collect the drippings, even though the meat was on top of the liver, it is forbidden. But in what way is this different from the blood of flesh? — The blood of flesh settles at the bottom of the vessel, whereas the blood of liver floats at the top. R. Nahman said in the name of Samuel: The knife with which one slaughtered may not be used for cutting hot food; as for cold food, some say it must be washed, whilst others say, it need not be washed. Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The vessel in which one salted meat may not be used for eating therein hot food. This is in accord with Samuel's principle, for Samuel has stated: Whatsoever is salted is counted as hot, and whatsoever is preserved is counted as cooked. When Rabin came [from Palestine] he reported in the name of R. Johanan. Whatsoever is salted is not counted as hot and whatsoever is preserved is not counted as cooked. Said Abaye. This statement of Rabin cannot be upheld, for it once happened in the house of R. Ammi that an earthenware plate had been used for salting meat thereon and he broke It. Now let us see. Was not R. Ammi a disciple of R. Johanan? Why then did he break [the plate]? Surely because he had heard the statement from R. Johanan that whatsoever is salted is counted as hot. R. Kahana, the brother of Rab Judah, was sitting before R. Huna and recited as follows, The vessel in which one salted meat may not be used for eating therein hot food. A radish which was cut with a meat knife may be eaten with a milk sauce. Why the distinction? — Abaye answered: The latter absorbed what is permitted, the former what is forbidden. Said to him Raba. But what difference does it make the fact that it absorbed what is permitted? After all what is permitted now will be forbidden later on, so that he will be eating that which is forbidden! Rather said Raba: [This is the distinction]. The latter can be tasted, the former cannot. R. Papa said to Raba: But could not a gentile cook taste it? Has it not been taught: In a pot wherein meat had been cooked a person may not boil milk, and if he did boil [milk] therein [it is forbidden] if the pot imparts a flavour [to the milk]. In a pot wherein terumah food had been cooked a person may not cook common food, and if he did cook [common food] therein, [it is forbidden] if the pot imparted a flavour [to the common food]. And when we put the question to you. In the case of terumah I grant you that a priest could taste the food; but in the case of meat and milk who may taste it? You replied: A gentile cook could taste it. Now in our case, too, could not a gentile cook taste it? [He replied:] That is so, but I am speaking of a case where there is no gentile cook available. It was stated: If [hot] fish was served on a [meat] plate: Rab says: It is forbidden to eat it with milk sauce; Samuel says: It is permitted to eat it with milk sauce. ‘Rab says: It is forbidden’, because it imparted a flavour to it; ‘Samuel says: It is permitted’, because it imparted a flavour indirectly. This ruling of Rab, however, was not expressly stated by him but was inferred from the following incident. Rab once visited the house of R. Shimi b. Hiyya, his grandson. He felt a pain in his eyes and so they prepared for him an ointment on a dish. Later on he was served with stew in this same dish and he detected the taste of the ointment in it. He remarked: ‘Does it impart such a strong flavour?’ — But this does not prove anything; in that case it is different for the bitterness of the ointment is very pungent. R. Eleazar was once standing before Mar Samuel, who was being served with fish upon a [meat] plate and was eating it with milk sauce. He [Samuel] offered him some but he would not eat it. Samuel said to him, ‘I once offered some to your Master and he ate it, and you won't eat it.’ He [R. Eleazar] then came to Rab and asked him, ‘Has my Master withdrawn his view?’ He replied. Heaven forfend that the son of Abba b. Abba should give me to eat that which I do not hold [to be permitted]! R. Huna and R. Hiyya b. Ashi were once sitting, one on the one side of the ferry of Sura and the other on the other side; one was served with fish on a [meat] plate which he ate with milk sauce; the other was served with figs and grapes in the course of the meal which he ate without reciting a benediction over them. One called out to the other, ‘ignoramus, would your master do so?’ The other called back, ‘Ignoramus, would your master do so?’ The one answered and said: ‘I accept Samuel's view.’ The other answered: ‘I hold the view of R. Hiyya. For R. Hiyya taught: [The benediction over] bread exempts all other kinds of food, and that over wine exempts all other kinds of drink [from the necessity of another benediction].’ Hezekiah said in the name of Abaye: The law is, fish that was served on a [meat] plate may be eaten with milk sauce, and a radish that was cut with a meat knife may not be eaten with milk sauce. This is so only in the case of a radish,ᵗᵘᵛʷˣʸᶻᵃᵃᵃᵇᵃᶜᵃᵈᵃᵉᵃᶠᵃᵍᵃʰᵃⁱᵃʲᵃᵏᵃˡᵃᵐᵃⁿᵃᵒ