![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Masechet Chullin Daf 99/100
Mar. 8th, 2019 07:11 amIn honor of me somehow making it to 100 pages on schedule, let's call this another Open Questions about Talmud Post. Ask anything you want.
Daf 99
People would go to see Rabbi Ami to ask him about thighs that had been accidentally cooked with the gid hanasheh left intact, whether one was permitted to eat the other parts of the thigh. Rabbi Ami personally held that the thigh was rendered nonkosher, but he knew that other Rabbis held differently. So rather than ruling, he would send them to ask the question of Rabbi Yitzhak ben Chalov, who he knew held by the lenient ruling that the thigh was permitted.
It's kind of strange, but you see this a number of times in the Gemara. You'd think that if Rabbi Ami thought he was right, he would just issue his ruling, but apparently he thought that Rabbi Yizhak's position was equally valid even though he didn't personally hold by it, such that he was fine sending other people to get rulings from Rabbi Yitzhak.
One presumes that he wouldn't completely abdicate his job of providing halakhic guidance to his flock. But meat was super expensive, anytime you had to invalidate a big piece of meat as unkosher you were causing significant economic hardship on the owner, so one sees pretty significant value placed by the Talmud on finding ways to minimize that hardship while staying within the ambit of Torah values.
Daf 100
Disagreement in the Mishna between the Tanna Kamma and Rabbi Yehuda about whether you get lashes for eating the gid hanasheh of a nonkosher animal.
On the one hand, eating a non-kosher animal is a lav, so ordinarily you'd get lashes. But eating the nonedible parts of a non-kosher animal is fine, so since the majority opinion on previous pages is that the gid itself has no taste, you wouldn't get lashes. But since the gid is separately forbidden, you would get lashes?
Now, the actual prohibition on gid hanasheh is in Genesis during the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel, as I've said. And the verse goes "Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve”
The Rabbis teach that 'the children of Israel' refers to all of the nation of Israel, that the mitzvah was given at Sinai and was just written down in Genesis to link it to the story and show what the reason for this odd mitzvah is. So therefore they hold that the gid of a nonkosher animal is not prohibited because why would you prohibit the gid of an animal that the children of Israel are not permitted to eat?
Rabbi Yehuda teaches that 'the children of Israel' means the children of Jacob, who was called Israel. Since this is pre-Sinaitic, they were not obligated in the mitzvos of kashrus, so therefore the prohibition of gid includes nonkosher animals, which they were allowed to eat. (Of course, the Rabbis insist a whole bunch of times for Midrashic purposes that the Avot did observe all the mitzvos, but that's a story for another time.)
Daf 99
People would go to see Rabbi Ami to ask him about thighs that had been accidentally cooked with the gid hanasheh left intact, whether one was permitted to eat the other parts of the thigh. Rabbi Ami personally held that the thigh was rendered nonkosher, but he knew that other Rabbis held differently. So rather than ruling, he would send them to ask the question of Rabbi Yitzhak ben Chalov, who he knew held by the lenient ruling that the thigh was permitted.
It's kind of strange, but you see this a number of times in the Gemara. You'd think that if Rabbi Ami thought he was right, he would just issue his ruling, but apparently he thought that Rabbi Yizhak's position was equally valid even though he didn't personally hold by it, such that he was fine sending other people to get rulings from Rabbi Yitzhak.
One presumes that he wouldn't completely abdicate his job of providing halakhic guidance to his flock. But meat was super expensive, anytime you had to invalidate a big piece of meat as unkosher you were causing significant economic hardship on the owner, so one sees pretty significant value placed by the Talmud on finding ways to minimize that hardship while staying within the ambit of Torah values.
Daf 100
Disagreement in the Mishna between the Tanna Kamma and Rabbi Yehuda about whether you get lashes for eating the gid hanasheh of a nonkosher animal.
On the one hand, eating a non-kosher animal is a lav, so ordinarily you'd get lashes. But eating the nonedible parts of a non-kosher animal is fine, so since the majority opinion on previous pages is that the gid itself has no taste, you wouldn't get lashes. But since the gid is separately forbidden, you would get lashes?
Now, the actual prohibition on gid hanasheh is in Genesis during the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel, as I've said. And the verse goes "Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve”
The Rabbis teach that 'the children of Israel' refers to all of the nation of Israel, that the mitzvah was given at Sinai and was just written down in Genesis to link it to the story and show what the reason for this odd mitzvah is. So therefore they hold that the gid of a nonkosher animal is not prohibited because why would you prohibit the gid of an animal that the children of Israel are not permitted to eat?
Rabbi Yehuda teaches that 'the children of Israel' means the children of Jacob, who was called Israel. Since this is pre-Sinaitic, they were not obligated in the mitzvos of kashrus, so therefore the prohibition of gid includes nonkosher animals, which they were allowed to eat. (Of course, the Rabbis insist a whole bunch of times for Midrashic purposes that the Avot did observe all the mitzvos, but that's a story for another time.)