POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Chulin 113
1) WHAT IS ABSORBED DURING SALTING?
(a) Question (Rav Mari bar Rachel): If Kosher and Tereifah
meat were salted together, what is the law?
2) PRECAUTIONS AGAINST BLOOD
(b) Answer (Rava - Beraisa): "*Ha*'Teme'im" - this forbids
the brine (of Sheratzim), their soup (the water in which
they were cooked), and their Kipah (spices and shredded
meat that accumulate at the bottom of the pot; the Kosher
meat absorbed forbidden brine and soup).
(c) Question: Why didn't Rava cite Shmuel's law to show that
they are forbidden?
1. (Shmuel): Salting is like roasting (regarding
absorptions and emissions); pickling is like
(d) Answer: One might have thought that Shmuel's law applies
only to blood - the Beraisa teaches that it applies to
even to brine and soup.
(e) Question #1 (Beraisa): If a Tahor fish was salted with a
Tamei fish, it (the Tahor fish) is permitted.
1. Suggestion: Both were salted (and the Tahor fish
does not absorb brine of the Tamei fish)!
(f) Answer: No, only the Tahor fish was salted.
1. Question: But the Seifa says, if the Tahor fish was
salted and the Tamei fish was unsalted, it is
permitted - this implies that the Reisha is when
both were salted!
(g) Question #2 (Seifa): If the Tamei fish was salted and the
Tahor fish was unsalted, it is forbidden.
2. Answer: No, the Seifa explains the Reisha:
i. If a Tahor fish was salted with a Tamei fish,
it is permitted;
3. Support: We must explain this way - if the Reisha
permits when both are salted, we already know to
permit when only the Tahor fish is salted (the Seifa
would be superfluous)!
ii. The case is, the Tahor fish was salted and the
Tamei fish was unsalted.
4. Rejection: No - [we could say that] the Seifa must
teach when only the Tahor fish is salted, so we will
know that the Reisha is not this case;
i. Rather, the Reisha is when both are salted, and
it is permitted.
1. Inference: If both were salted, it is permitted!
(h) Answer: No, even if both were salted, it is forbidden;
1. Since the previous case is when the Tahor fish was
salted and the Tamei fish was unsalted, the Tana
taught the next case when the Tamei fish was salted
and the Tahor fish was unsalted.
(a) (Shmuel): Blood leaves the meat only if it is salted very
well and rinsed very well.
3) WHICH MEAT IS FORBIDDEN WITH MILK
(b) (Rav Huna): One must salt it, then rinse it.
(c) (Beraisa): One must rinse it, salt it, and rinse it
1. They do not argue - Rav Huna discusses when the
butcher rinsed the meat (before the buyer took it
home), the Beraisa is when he did not.
(d) Rav Dimi of Neharda'a salted with coarse salt; he would
shake it off afterwards.
(e) (Rav Mesharshiya): We do not presume that there is blood
in the Benei Me'ayim (innards).
1. This refers to the entrails, stomachs, small
intestines, and end of the large intestine.
(f) (Shmuel): We salt meat only in a porous vessel.
(g) Rav Sheshes would salt each piece individually.
(h) Question: Why wouldn't he salt two at a time?
(i) Answer: The blood would separate from one and enter the
(j) Objection: Also in one piece, the blood separates from
one end and goes to the other end!
1. Rather, it is permitted even to salt pieces together
(Rashi - they all emit blood at the same time, and
do not absorb then; Tosfos - because blood is
smooth, they do not absorb it; alternatively, as
long as any piece emits blood, all the pieces emit
brine, and do not absorb then).
(k) (Shmuel): If a butcher breaks the neckbone (after
slaughtering) before the animal dies, he makes the flesh
heavy, steals from the buyer, and causes blood to be
absorbed in the limbs.
(l) Question: What does this mean?
1. Does it mean, he makes the flesh heavy and steals
from the buyer because he makes blood be absorbed in
(m) This question is unresolved.
i. His only transgression is theft (he causes
people to pay for blood), but he does not cause
people to eat blood (salting will remove the
2. Or, does it mean, he makes the flesh heavy and
steals from the buyer, *and* he causes blood be
absorbed in the limbs?
ii. If so, a butcher may do this if he will not
sell the meat, rather eat it himself.
i. Not only does he steal, he also causes people
to eat blood (salting will not remove the
ii. If so, he may not do this even to eat it
(a) (Mishnah): One who brings fowl on the same table with
cheese does not transgress a Lav.
(b) (Gemara) Inference: If he would eat them together, he
transgresses a Lav - this shows that the Torah forbids
fowl and milk!
(c) Rejection: No - it means, one who brings fowl on the same
table with cheese will not come to transgress a Lav
(since the Torah does not forbid them).
(d) (Mishnah): Basar v'Chalav of Tahor Behemos may not be
cooked together; if they were cooked, one may not benefit
(e) If the meat or milk is from a Tamei Behemah, they may be
cooked together, one may benefit from it;
(f) R. Akiva says, the Torah does not forbid meat of a Chayah
or bird (with milk);
1. It says three times "Do not cook a kid in its
mother's milk," to exclude Chayos, birds and Tamei
(g) R. Yosi ha'Galili says, it says "Do not eat any
Neveilah," and "Do not cook a kid in its mother's milk" -
the Isur of Basar v'Chalav applies to species to which
(h) Suggestion: Since Neveilah applies to birds, Basar
v'Chalav should apply to birds!
(i) Rejection: "In its mother's milk" excludes birds, which
do not have milk.
(j) (Gemara) Question: What is the source of this (that all
Behemos are forbidden, the Torah only said "Gedi" (kid))?
(k) Answer (R. Elazar): "Yehudah sent Gedi ha'Izim (a kid of
goats)" - this implies that when it says only 'Gedi', it
may even be a cow or sheep.
(l) Question: We should learn (Rashi - from a Gezerah Shavah)
from here that 'Gedi' always refers to a goat!
4) WHICH "BASAR V'CHALAV" ARE INCLUDED IN THE "ISUR"?
(m) Answer: It also says "The skins of Gediyei *ha'Izim*" -
this implies that (unspecified) 'Gedi' may be a cow or
(n) Question: We should learn that 'Gedi' always refers to a
(o) Answer: These are Shnei Kesuvim (two verses that teach
the same thing, we do not learn from them to other
(p) Question: According to the opinion that we can learn from
Shnei Kesuvim to other places, how can we answer?
(q) Answer: There are two exclusions - the above verses said
"*ha*'Izim', they could have said 'Izim'.
(a) (Shmuel): From [the repetitions of] "Gedi" we include
Chelev, meat of a Neveilah, and a fetus; from "Gedi" we
exclude blood, a fetal sac, and meat of a Tamei animal;
1. "In the milk of its mother" - this excludes the milk
of a male (if such an abberation should arise), of a
slaughtered animal, and of a Tamei animal.
(b) Question: "Gedi" is written only three times (regarding
Basar v'Chalav) - how does Shmuel learn six laws from it?
(c) Version #1 - Answer: Shmuel holds that Isur Chal Al Isur
(an Isur takes effect even on something that is already
forbidden); we derive Chelev and meat of a Neveilah from
1. We do not need a verse to exclude blood or a fetal
sac, for these are not included in "Gedi."
(d) Question: Shmuel holds Ein Isur Chal Al Isur!
2. One "Gedi" includes a fetus, the last "Gedi"
excludes meat of a Tamei animal.
1. (Shmuel citing R. Eliezer): If a Tamei Kohen ate
Tamei Terumah, he is not liable to death (at the
hands of Heaven);
(e) Answer #1: In general, Shmuel holds that Isur Chal Al
Isur; Tamei Terumah is an exception, because it says "In
i. "They will die for it, when they profane it
(Terumah)" - this excludes Tamei Terumah, which
is already profaned.
(f) Answer #2: In general, Shmuel holds Ein Isur Chal Al
Isur; Basar v'Chalav is an exception, we learn this from
(g) Answer #3: Shmuel himself holds that Isur Chal Al Isur;
he cited R. Eliezer's opinion, but argues with it.
(h) Question (Rav Achdevoy bar Ami): If one cooked [meat] in
milk of an animal that never nursed yet, what is the law?
(i) Answer (Rava): Shmuel excluded milk of a male - this is
because a male will never be a mother;
1. Inference: A female will [probably] become a mother,
her milk is forbidden [with meat] even though she
has not nursed yet.