Chullin 111b

חולין קי״א ע״ב

Learn Chullin 111b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Chullin 111b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Blood and meat flavor absorbed by utensils and food: roasting liver, the שחיטה knife, the salting bowl, the radish, and fish in a meat bowl eaten with כותח

Overview

The amud opens with רב אשי criticizing a sage who roasted liver above meat. The חכמים allowed that only דיעבד, not לכתחילה. If a pan catches the drippings, even meat above liver is forbidden, because liver blood floats in the fat, while meat blood sinks. שמואל then rules that a knife used for שחיטה may not cut hot food, and that hot food may not be eaten from a bowl in which meat was salted, because מליח הרי הוא כרותח. רבין reports that רבי יוחנן disagrees, but אביי proves from רבי אמי's broken bowl that the report is wrong. רב כהנא allows a radish cut with a meat knife to be eaten with כותח, and אביי and רבא debate why it differs from the salting bowl, ending with whether the food can be tasted. Next, רב and שמואל argue about hot fish placed in a meat bowl: is second-hand flavor (נותן טעם בר נותן טעם) enough to forbid it with כותח? Stories about רב, שמואל, and two sages at the סורא ford follow. The final הלכה, from אביי, is that the fish is permitted with כותח but the radish is forbidden, and the גמרא begins to explain why the radish is special.

Opening lines

The steps (28)

1. Statementרב אשי criticizes roasting liver above meat
2. StatementWith a drippings pan, even meat above liver is forbidden
3. ChallengeWhy is meat blood in the pan any different?
4. ResolutionMeat blood sinks, liver blood floats
5. StatementA knife used for slaughter and hot or cold food
6. StatementA bowl used for salting meat may not be used for hot food
7. Statementרבין reports that רבי יוחנן says salting is not like heat
8. Rejectionאביי rejects רבין's report using רבי אמי's broken bowl
9. Statementרב כהנא: salting bowl is forbidden, but a radish cut with a meat knife is allowed with milk
10. QuestionWhat is the reason for the difference?
11. ResponseThe radish absorbed something permitted; the bowl absorbed something forbidden
12. Rejectionרבא rejects אביי's answer about the radish
13. Resolutionרבא's answer: the radish can be tasted, the bowl cannot
14. Challengeרב פפא asks: let a non-Jewish cook taste it
15. Proofרב פפא's support: רבא himself said a cook can taste
16. Resolutionרבא: I meant when no cook is available
17. StatementHot fish in a meat bowl: רב and שמואל disagree
18. StatementThe reasons behind רב and שמואל's dispute
19. Statementרב's view was learned from a story about an eye ointment
20. RejectionThe ointment story does not prove anything
21. Proofשמואל says רב himself ate such fish
22. Questionרבי אלעזר asks רב if he changed his mind
23. Responseרב denies ever eating it
24. StatementTwo sages at the סורא ford: fish with כותח, and fruit without a ברכה
25. ChallengeEach sage challenges the other: would our teacher do this?
26. ResponseEach sage explains which authority he follows
27. ConclusionThe final הלכה: fish in a meat bowl is allowed, a radish cut with a meat knife is not
28. StatementSetting up a limit: this applies only to a radish