חולין 97 — Soncino English Talmud

¹It is different with fat for it spreads [throughout the flesh]. Is it then forbidden in the case of fat? But Surely Rabbah b. Bar Hana has related a case which came before R. Johanan at the synagogue of Ma'on of a kid that was roasted with its fat, and on enquiring of R. Johanan he ruled that one may cut away [the meat] and eat it until one reaches the fat! — That was a lean kid. R. Huna b. Judah suggested that it was the case of a kidney roasted with its fat, and he [R. Johanan] declared it to be permitted. Rabin son of R. Ada said: It was the case of a kilkith that was found in a pot of stew, and on enquiring of R. Johanan he ruled that a gentile cook should taste it. Raba said: In the past the following was always a difficulty to me. It was taught: In a pot wherein meat had been cooked a person may not boil milk, and if he did boil [milk] therein, it depends whether the pot imparted a flavour [to the milk] or not. [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 depends whether the pot imparted a flavour [to the common food] or not. Now in the case of terumah it is clear, for a priest could taste the food; but in the case of meat and milk who may taste it? But now that R. Johanan ruled that we can rely upon a gentile cook, in this case too we could rely upon a gentile cook. Raba also said, [In certain cases] the Rabbis ruled that the test whether or not it imparts a flavour applies, and [in other cases] the Rabbis ruled that one may rely upon a [gentile] cook,^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ

^ᵃnote:And it had little fat; or the fat of a lean animal would not spread (Tosaf.).
^ᵇnote:For the forbidden fat of the kidney could not penetrate the kidney by reason of the strong membrane which separates them.
^ᶜnote:A small fish that may not be eaten; probably the stickleback.
^ᵈnote:To ascertain whether the flavour of the fish is discernible in the stew. The cook's opinion, even though he is a gentile, would be relied upon only so long as he is ignorant of the issue that is involved.
^ᵉnote:V. supra p. 540, n. 4.
^ᶠnote:V. Glos.
^ᵍnote:For to a priest both terumah and common food are permitted. He therefore could taste the common food to ascertain whether it contains any flavour of the terumah food which had previously been cooked in this pot.
^ʰnote:For if one actually imparts a flavour into the other then it is forbidden to everyone, even only to taste thereof.

²and yet [in other cases] the Rabbis ruled that the test is sixty [to one]. Therefore we say, where substances of different kinds, each kind being permitted by itself, were mixed together, the test is whether or not one imparts a flavour to the other; and if one of the substances was forbidden then we rely upon the opinion of a gentile cook. Where substances of like kind were mixed together, in which case it is impossible to discern whether one imparts a flavour to the other; or where substances of different kinds, one of which was forbidden, were mixed together, and no [gentile] cook is available, then the test is sixty [to one]. In the house of the Exilarch, sides of meat were once salted with the sciatic nerve in them. Rabina declared them to be forbidden, whilst R. Aha son of R. Ashi declared them to be permitted. When this case was put to Mar son of R. Ashi he said: My father declared them to be permitted. Then said R. Aha son of R. [Ashi] to Rabina: What is the reason for your view? Is it not Samuel's dictum that whatsoever is salted is counted as hot and whatsoever is preserved is counted as cooked? But [remember,] did not Samuel say. 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? And should you say that the term counted as hot’ means hot as when cooked, surely [this cannot be, for] since he said: ‘whatsoever is preserved is counted as cooked’, it follows that [in the first clause ‘counted as hot’ means] hot as when roasted! This is indeed a difficulty. R. Hanina said: When measuring one should measure the broth, the sediments, the pieces, and the pot. Some say: The actual thickness of the] pot must be taken into account; but others say: Only that which is absorbed in the pot is to be taken into account. R. Abbahu said in the name of R. Johanan. As regards all things prohibited by the Torah one should measure them as though they were onions or leeks. R. Abba said to Abaye: Why not measure as though they were pepper or spices, in which case the flavour would not become neutralized even in a thousand-fold? — He replied: The Rabbis have estimated that among forbidden substances there is none that can impart a stronger flavour than onions or leeks. R. Nahman said: The [sciatic] nerve [is neutralized] in sixty-fold, but the nerve itself is not to be included to make up this number. The udder is neutralized in sixty-fold, but the udder itself is to be included. An egg is neutralized in sixty-fold, but the egg itself is not to be included. R. Isaac the son of R. Mesharsheya said: But the udder itself is forbidden, and if it fell into another pot it renders [the contents] forbidden. R. Ashi said: When we were at R. Kahana's the question was put before us: When measuring, should one measure [the prohibited substance] itself or only the essence which exuded from it? — It is obvious, surely, that one should measure the substance itself, for if only the essence which exuded from it, [the question arises,] How do we know [how much it is]? — But if so, if it subsequently fell into another, pot it should not render [the contents] forbidden? — Since R. Isaac the son of R. Mesharsheya had said that the udder itself was forbidden, the Rabbis declared it to be as a piece of nebelah. ‘An egg is neutralized in sixty-fold, but the egg itself is not to be included [to make up this number’]. R. Idi b. Abin said to Abaye. Can it be said that it imparts a flavour? but people usually say: ‘As the mere water of eggs’! — He replied: We are dealing here^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ

^ⁱnote:E.g., where terumah was mixed with common food the mixture is permitted to a priest, and he could taste it and give his opinion as to whether the terumah does impart a flavour in the common food, in which case the mixture is forbidden to all save priests, or does not, in which case the mixture is permitted to all.
^ʲnote:E.g., where one of the substances was flesh of an unclean animal, or where both substances separately are permitted but when mixed are forbidden to all, e.g., milk food mixed with meat.
^ᵏnote:I.e., the flavour of the forbidden substance is neutralized and lost if the bulk of the permitted substance is sixty times as large as the bulk of the forbidden substance.
^ˡnote:So in cur. edd. In MS.M.: R. Aha b. Rab. Most probably it should be: R. Aha b. Raba, who was a contemporary of Rabina and R. Ashi.
^ᵐnote:If two substances, one permitted and the other forbidden, were salted together they are regarded as having been roasted (or cooked? v. infra) together.
^ⁿnote:If substances were preserved in vinegar and in spices for at least twenty-four hours they are regarded as having been cooked together.
^ᵒnote:And therefore meat salted together with the sciatic nerve is permitted just as if it was roasted with it; so that Rabina's view cannot be upheld.
^ᵖnote:To ascertain whether the permitted substance is sixty times as much as the forbidden substance or not.
^ᵠnote:All these should be included to make up the sixty-fold as against the forbidden substance.
^ʳnote:One should reckon the volume of the thickness of the pot as well as the quantity of meat and broth etc. in order to make up the required sixty-fold.
^ˢnote:The absorption of the pot is considered to be the difference in the weight between the raw flesh and the flesh when cooked.
^ᵗnote:Except the sciatic nerve, for which the standard is ‘meat and turnips’, v. our Mishnah.
^ᵘnote:If by substituting onions or leeks for the amount of the forbidden substance the taste of the onions or leeks could be felt in the rest of the stew of the pot, the contents of the pot would be prohibited on account of the forbidden substance, which evidently imparts its flavour so that it can be felt. This method was resorted to before the standard of sixty-fold was fixed.
^ᵛnote:I.e., there must be sixty times the volume of the forbidden nerve.
^ʷnote:If an udder which was not emptied of its milk was cooked together with meat, the entire contents of the pot would be forbidden unless there was in the pot sixty times as much as the milk of the udder. (The quantity of milk in the udder is regarded as equal to the volume of the udder). Now the udder can also be included to make up this sixty-fold since it is not the udder that is forbidden but only the milk contained in it. In other words, there must be in the pot fifty-nine times the quantity of the udder; v. infra 109a.
^ˣnote:Of an unclean bird which was boiled with eggs of clean birds. V. infra.
^ʸnote:Even though the pot contained sixty times the quantity of the udder, in which case everything else in the pot is permitted, the udder itself is forbidden, for the meat in the pot imparted its flavour into it.
^ᶻnote:For the actual forbidden substance has now been removed from the pot, and the question is only with regard to the essence that exuded from it.
^ᵃᵃnote:Sc. any forbidden substance which was cooked with sixty times as much permitted food and which when taken out subsequently fell into another pot of meat which did not contain the sixty-fold. According to Tosaf. this question deals specifically with the case of the udder mentioned above.
^ᵃᵇnote:For the essence and flavour of the forbidden substance has entirely exuded and has become neutralized and nullified in the first pot, consequently it cannot render forbidden any other foodstuff.
^ᵃᶜnote:The neutralization in the first pot only came about gradually, so that before there was the necessary sixty-fold it was forbidden; accordingly the forbidden substance is always regarded as a piece of nebelah which renders forbidden the contents of any and every pot into which it fell.
^ᵃᵈnote:I.e., an egg when cooked with others imparts a flavour in them.