ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 112
CHULIN 111-112 - Sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor.
Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and
prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.
(a) Rav Dimi asked Rav Nachman whether it is permitted to place a jar of
salt beside a jar of milk stew - in case some of the milk stew falls into
the salt without the owner's knowledge, and he subsequently uses the salt
with a meat meal.
(b) After the latter replied that it was forbidden, he then asked him - the
same She'eilah regarding placing a jar of salt next to a jar of vinegar.
(c) Rav Nachman's replied ...
1. ... that it is permitted.
(d) He subsequently explained - that in the first case (involving salt,
which is thick) the milk stew remains intact and recognizable, whereas in
the second, a. it disintegrates in the vinegar and becomes Bateil, and b. it
is not Nosen Ta'am either.
2. ... when Rav Dimi asked him why he ruled differently in each the two
cases, he told him initially - that when he measures him a Kur of salt, he
will give him an answer.
(a) When a dove fell into a jar of milk stew (partially comprising salt) Rav
Chin'na b'rei de'Rava mi'Pashrunya ruled - that it was permitted.
(b) When Rava heard that ruling - he exclaimed that only Rav Chin'na b'rei
de'Rava mi'Pashrunya would have issued such a (wise) ruling ...
(c) ... because even though Shmuel declared a principle 'Meli'ach Harei Hu
ke'Rose'ach' (in which case one might have thought that the dove absorbed
some of the taste of the milk stew) - that is only if it is salted to the
point that it is inedible, which is not the case by a milk stew.
(a) We qualify Rav Chin'na's ruling, however, confining to where the bird is
raw. If it was ...
1. ... roasted - it would require peeling.
(b) ... as it would be even if its skin was not cracked - if it had
previously been cooked with spices.
2. ... raw but contained cracks in its skin - it would be forbidden ...
(a) Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel rules - that a loaf of bread on which one cut a
piece of roasted meat is forbidden.
(b) He only forbids it however, under three conditions. The meat must be
red, and the juice, which must have gone right through the bread - must also
be thick (because if it is watery, it is not considered blood).
(c) Shmuel would throw the bread to his dog. Rav Huna - would give it to his
(d) In fact, Rav Huna permitted it - only he was finicky and was disgusted
(e) Rava - used to eat it, referring to the juice as 'the wine of the meat'.
(a) Rav Nachman permits placing a drip-tray underneath a piece of meat -
only after all the blood has drained.
(b) One knows when all the blood has drained, Mar Zutra explains citing Rav
Papa - when smoke begins to rise from the meat (or from the coals, because
until that stage, the blood merely drips on them and extinguishes them).
(c) Rav Ashi refutes this gauge however - by suggesting that perhaps the
smoke only indicates that all the blood has drained from the bottom of the
meat, but the blood from the top has yet to begin draining.
(d) According to Rav Ashi, one can permit the gravy - by placing two grains
of salt in the tray, which will draw the blood, and then pouring the gravy
gently into another receptacle.
(e) Rav Ashi mentions specifically two grains of salt - because a lot of
salt will have the affect of causing the blood to become watery in which
case it will mix with the gravy.
(a) Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Ika queries Rav Ashi from the ruling of Shmuel
that we cited earlier, where he forbade the loaf on which one cut meat.
According to Rav Ashi, he asks, Shmuel ought to have said there too - that
all the blood already drained during the roasting, and what enters the bread
is only juice, and not blood.
(b) Rav Ashi replied - that in fact, some blood always remain in the meat,
only whereas the fire is not able to extract it, the pressure of the knife
(a) Rav Nachman rules - that if birds and fish are salted together in the
same K'li, the fish is forbidden.
(b) If the fish was salted together with Basar Beheimah - the Din would be
exactly the same (since Basar Beheimah takes even longer to exude its
(c) He cannot be speaking about a K'li that has no holes for the blood to
drain - because then even birds that were salted together with birds would
be forbidden too as we will learn on the next Daf).
(d) He must therefore be speaking about one which does, yet the fish is
forbidden - because in spite of that, due to their soft skin, they quickly
finish exuding their blood, and begin to absorb some of the blood of the
birds, which have not yet finished exuding theirs.
(a) When Rav Mari bar Rachel was salting meat, he discovered among the batch
of salted pieces - some that were Tereifah (or Neveilah).
(b) He was salting them in a vessel - with holes for the blood to drain.
(c)The Beraisa learns from the extra 'Hey' in the Pasuk (in connection with
Sheratzim) "Eileh ha'Teme'im" - that the body-juices, the gravy and the
sediment and spices of Sheratzim as well as all non-Kasher species, are
included in the Isur.
(d) Based on this D'rashah, Rav Mari bar Rachel asked Rava - whether,
although, seeing as the vessel contained holes, the Kasher pieces of meat
would not have been affected by the blood (as we already learned), maybe
they would be rendered Tereifah by the body-juices of the Tereifos.
(a) Rava's replied - that this was indeed the case, because body-juice is
absorbed easier than blood.
(b) We cannot learn this from Shmuel's principle 'Meli'ach Harei Hu
ke'Rose'ach ... ' - because if not for Rava, we would have confines Shmuel's
principle to blood (such as in a vessel that does not contain holes).