חולין 96 — Soncino English Talmud

¹whereas we do not return it [to anyone who recognizes it] by mere general impressions. But now, having heard the above decisions, I maintain that [identification by] general impression is the more reliable. For should you not say so, how is it that a blind man is permitted [to cohabit] with his wife, or all people with their wives at night? It is only by recognition of the voice; so in all cases general impression [is reliable]. R. Isaac, son of R. Mesharsheya said: You may know it from this too; for if two witnesses were to come and say: ‘So-and-so who has this or that distinguishing mark killed a person’, we should not put him to death, but if they were to say: ‘We recognize him’, we would put him to death. R. Ashi said: You may also know it from this; for if a man were to say to his messenger. ‘Call So-and-so who has this or that distinguishing mark’, there is a doubt whether he would know him or not, but if he [the messenger] is able to recognize him, when he sees him he would certainly know him. MISHNAH. WHEN A PERSON REMOVES THE SCIATIC NERVE HE MUST REMOVE ALL OF IT. R. JUDAH SAYS, ONLY SO MUCH AS IS NECESSARY TO FULFIL THE PRECEPT OF REMOVING IT. IF A PERSON ATE AN OLIVE'S BULK OF THE SCIATIC NERVE, HE HAS INCURRED FORTY STRIPES. IF HE ATE THE WHOLE OF IT AND IT WAS NOT AS MUCH AS AN OLIVE'S BULK, HE IS NEVERTHELESS LIABLE. IF HE ATE AN OLIVE'S BULK OF IT FROM ONE THIGH AND ANOTHER OLIVE'S BULK OF IT FROM THE OTHER THIGH, HE HAS INCURRED EIGHTY STRIPES. R. JUDAH SAYS, HE HAS INCURRED ONLY FORTY STRIPES. GEMARA. Bar Piuli was standing in the presence of Samuel and was porging a side of meat. He was only cutting away the surface [of the nerve], so Samuel said to him, ‘Go down deeper; had I not seen you, you might have given me forbidden meat to eat’. He was alarmed at this, and the knife fell out of his hand. Said Samuel to him, ‘Be not alarmed, for he who taught you this taught you according to the view of R. Judah’. R. Shesheth said: That part which Bar Piuli had removed, is according to R. Judah forbidden by the Torah. Then it follows, does it not, that the part which he [Bar Piuli] did not remove, is according to R. Judah forbidden Rabbinically? If so, according to whose view was he [Bar Piuli] taught this? — R. Shesheth therefore said: That part which Bar Piuli had removed, is [according to R. Meir] forbidden by the Torah, but that part which he did not remove, is forbidden Rabbinically, only according to R. Meir, for according to R. Judah it is permitted even Rabbinically. IF A PERSON ATE AN OLIVE'S BULK OF THE SCIATIC NERVE etc. Samuel said: The Torah forbade only that part [of the nerve] which is on the spoon, for it is written: Which is upon the spoon of the thigh. R. Papa said: This [statement of Samuel] is the subject of dispute between Tannaim; for it was taught: If a person ate [the whole of] it and it was not as much as an olive's bulk, he is nevertheless liable. R. Judah Says, [He is not liable] unless it was as much as an olive's bulk. What is the reason of the Rabbis? — Because it is a complete entity in itself. 13^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ

^ᵃnote:But only to a scholar, cf. B.M. 23b.
^ᵇnote:These witnesses do not claim to know the murderer except that he had certain distinguishing marks.
^ᶜnote:This is the view of R. Meir, supra 92b, that one must follow up the tracks of the nerve in all its ramifications.
^ᵈnote:It is sufficient if one removes the upper part of the nerve, i.e., that part which is visible at the hip-joint.
^ᵉnote:Although the minimum quantity for constituting eating is an olive's bulk, where the thing prohibited by the Torah is in its entirety less than the size of an olive, e.g., an ant, one incurs the penalty for eating the whole of it.
^ᶠnote:Because the Prohibition according to R. Judah applies only to one thigh, the right thigh.
^ᵍnote:I.e., removing the sciatic nerve from the thigh.
^ʰnote:Lit., ‘he who taught him according to whose view did he teach him’? For it is clear that the whole of the nerve must be removed if only by Rabbinic injunction. The question therefore is: Whose view did Bar Piuli adopt by cutting away only the surface?
^ⁱnote:So MS.M., and also according to Bah's gloss. This is also the view of R. Judah.
^ʲnote:So that Bar Piuli acted entirely in accordance with R. Judah's view.
^ᵏnote:The muscles at the proximal end of the thigh are rounded and convex like the back of a spoon. Only that part of the sciatic nerve which runs in these muscles, says Samuel, is prohibited.
^ˡnote:Gen. XXXII, 33. V. supra, p. 500, n. 2.
^ᵐnote:And this was prohibited by the Torah even though the whole of it is not as large as an olive.

²And what does R. Judah [say to this]? — The term ‘eating’ is used in connection therewith. And the Rabbis? — The term ‘eating’ is to teach that if it [the sciatic nerve] consisted of four or five olives’ bulk and he ate thereof the size of one olive, he is liable. And R. Judah? — That is derived from the expression. ‘Which is upon the spoon of the thigh’. And the Rabbis? — This verse is required for Samuel's teaching, for Samuel said: The Torah forbade only that part [of the nerve] which is on the spoon. And R. Judah? — It is written ‘the thigh’, that is, the entire thigh. And the Rabbis? — That is to indicate that the prohibited nerve is the one that is spread over the whole of the thigh, [namely the inner one], and not the outer one; but of course only [so much of it is prohibited as is] upon the spoon. But is not the expression ‘spoon’ required to teach that [the prohibition of the sciatic nerve] does not apply to birds as they have not a spoon-shaped hip? — The word ‘spoon’ is written twice [in the verse]. MISHNAH. IF A THIGH WAS COOKED TOGETHER WITH THE SCIATIC NERVE AND THERE WAS SO MUCH [OF THE NERVE] AS TO IMPART A FLAVOUR [TO THE THIGH], IT IS FORBIDDEN. HOW DOES ONE MEASURE THIS? AS IF IT WERE MEAT [COOKED] WITH TURNIPS. IF THE SCIATIC NERVE WAS COOKED WITH OTHER NERVES [IN A BROTH] AND IT CAN STILL BE RECOGNIZED, THEN IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT; BUT IF IT CAN NO LONGER [BE RECOGNIZED] THEN ALL [THE NERVES] ARE FORBIDDEN; AND AS FOR THE BROTH IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT [THE SCIATIC NERVE] IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT. AND SO IT IS WITH A PIECE OF NEBELAH, OR A PIECE OF AN UNCLEAN FISH. THAT WAS COOKED TOGETHER WITH OTHER PIECES OF FLESH [OR FISH]: IF IT CAN STILL BE RECOGNIZED, THEN IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT; AND IF IT CAN NO LONGER [BE RECOGNIZED]. THEN ALL PIECES ARE FORBIDDEN; AND AS FOR THE BROTH IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT. GEMARA. Samuel said: This [ruling of our Mishnah] applies only to the case where they were cooked together, but if they were roasted together one may then cut away [the meat] and eat it until one reaches the nerve. But Surely this is not so, for did not R. Huna say that if a kid was roasted together with its forbidden fat it is forbidden to eat even of the tip of its ear? —^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ

^ⁿnote:And the minimum quantity for constituting ‘eating’ is an olive's hulk.
^ᵒnote:For it might have been thought that only the eating of the whole of it renders one liable to stripes.
^ᵖnote:I.e., for eating the portion which is upon the spoon of the thigh, even though it is not the whole, one is liable, provided always it consisted of an olive's bulk.
^ᵠnote:And the prohibition applies even to that part which is not upon the spoon, contra Samuel.
^ʳnote:V. supra 93b.
^ˢnote:Ibid., XXXII, 33.
^ᵗnote:If when meat and turnips are cooked together, in the same proportions as here the nerve and the thigh respectively, the meat imparts its flavour to the turnips, then the thigh would be forbidden on account of the taste of the forbidden nerve. It is estimated by the Rabbis that meat cannot impart its taste to any substance that is cooked with it if the latter is sixty times as large in bulk as the meat.
^ᵘnote:Which are not forbidden.
^ᵛnote:It must then be removed, and the only consideration is with regard to the flavour thereof that has remained in the pot.
^ʷnote:Lit., ‘(it is forbidden only) if it imparted a flavour’. I.e., whether the other nerves were sixty times as large in bulk as the forbidden nerve or not. In the former case they would be permitted, in the latter they would not.
^ˣnote:For each nerve might be the forbidden sciatic nerve.
^ʸnote:Sc. the forbidden piece.
^ᶻnote:In cooking the flavour extracted spreads equally in the whole pot.
^ᵃᵃnote:The heat of the fire dries up and constricts the nerves so that no flavour or essence is spread in the meat, and therefore the entire meat is permitted save for the nerve itself.
^ᵃᵇnote:It is here evident that by roasting the essence is carried throughout the whole meat.