Chullin 192:1

ור' יהודה

And what does R'Judah [say to this]? - The term 'eating' is used in connection therewith.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the minimum quantity for constituting 'eating' is an olive's hulk.');">¹</span>

אכילה כתיבה ביה

And the Rabbis? - The term 'eating' is to teach that if it [the sciatic nerve] consisted of four or five olives' bulk and he ate thereof the size of one olive, he is liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it might have been thought that only the eating of the whole of it renders one liable to stripes.');">²</span>

ורבנן

And R'Judah? - That is derived from the expression.'

ההיא אכילה דכי אית ביה ארבעה וחמשה זיתים ואכל חד כזית מיחייב

Which is upon the spoon of the thigh'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., for eating the portion which is upon the spoon of the thigh, even though it is not the whole, one is liable, provided always it consisted of an olive's bulk.');">³</span>

ורבי יהודה

And the Rabbis? - This verse is required for Samuel's teaching, for Samuel said: The Torah forbade only that part [of the nerve] which is on the spoon.

מאשר על כף הירך נפקא

And R'Judah? - It is written 'the thigh', that is, the entire thigh.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the prohibition applies even to that part which is not upon the spoon, contra Samuel.');">⁴</span>

ורבנן

And the Rabbis? - That is to indicate that the prohibited nerve is the one that is spread over the whole of the thigh, [namely the inner one], and not the outer one;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 93b.');">⁵</span>

ההוא מיבעי ליה לכדשמואל דאמר שמואל

but of course only [so much of it is prohibited as is] upon the spoon.

לא אסרה תורה אלא שעל כף הירך

But is not the expression 'spoon' required to teach that [the prohibition of the sciatic nerve] does not apply to birds as they have not a spoon-shaped hip? - The word 'spoon' is written twice [in the verse].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid., XXXII, 33.');">⁶</span>

ור' יהודה

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF A THIGH WAS COOKED TOGETHER WITH THE SCIATIC NERVE AND THERE WAS SO MUCH [OF THE NERVE] AS TO IMPART A FLAVOUR [TO THE THIGH], IT IS FORBIDDEN.

הירך כתיב דכולה ירך

HOW DOES ONE MEASURE THIS?

ורבנן

AS IF IT WERE MEAT [COOKED] WITH TURNIPS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If when meat and turnips are cooked together, in the same proportions as here the nerve and the thigh respectively, the meat imparts its flavour to the turnips, then the thigh would be forbidden on account of the taste of the forbidden nerve. It is estimated by the Rabbis that meat cannot impart its taste to any substance that is cooked with it if the latter is sixty times as large in bulk as the meat.');">⁷</span>

ההוא דפשיט איסוריה בכוליה ירך לאפוקי חיצון דלא ולעולם שעל הכף

IF THE SCIATIC NERVE WAS COOKED WITH OTHER NERVES<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which are not forbidden.');">⁸</span>

והאי כף מיבעי ליה למעוטי עוף דלית ליה כף

[IN A BROTH] AND IT CAN STILL BE RECOGNIZED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It must then be removed, and the only consideration is with regard to the flavour thereof that has remained in the pot.');">⁹</span>

תרי כף כתיבי:

THEN IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., ' (it is forbidden only) if it imparted a flavour'. I.e., whether the other nerves were sixty times as large in bulk as the forbidden nerve or not. In the former case they would be permitted, in the latter they would not.');">¹⁰</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> ירך שנתבשל בה גיד הנשה אם יש בה בנותן טעם הרי זו אסורה

BUT IF IT CAN NO LONGER [BE RECOGNIZED] THEN ALL [THE NERVES] ARE FORBIDDEN;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For each nerve might be the forbidden sciatic nerve.');">¹¹</span>

כיצד משערין אותה כבשר בלפת

AND AS FOR THE BROTH IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT [THE SCIATIC NERVE] IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT.

גיד הנשה שנתבשל עם הגידים בזמן שמכירו בנותן טעם ואם לאו כולן אסורין והרוטב בנותן טעם

AND SO IT IS WITH A PIECE OF NEBELAH, OR A PIECE OF AN UNCLEAN FISH.

וכן חתיכה של נבלה וכן חתיכה של דג טמא שנתבשלה עם החתיכות בזמן שמכירן בנותן טעם ואם לאו כולן אסורות והרוטב בנותן טעם:

THAT WAS COOKED TOGETHER WITH OTHER PIECES OF FLESH [OR FISH]: IF IT CAN STILL BE RECOGNIZED, THEN IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT; AND IF IT CAN NO LONGER [BE RECOGNIZED].

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר שמואל

THEN ALL PIECES ARE FORBIDDEN; AND AS FOR THE BROTH IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the forbidden piece.');">¹²</span>

לא שנו אלא שנתבשל בה אבל נצלה בה קולף ואוכל עד שמגיע לגיד

IMPARTED A FLAVOUR OR NOT.

איני והאמר רב הונא

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Samuel said: This [ruling of our Mishnah] applies only to the case where they were cooked together,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In cooking the flavour extracted spreads equally in the whole pot.');">¹³</span>

גדי שצלאו בחלבו אסור לאכול אפילו מראש אזנו

but if they were roasted together one may then cut away [the meat] and eat it until one reaches the nerve.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The heat of the fire dries up and constricts the nerves so that no flavour or essence is spread in the meat, and therefore the entire meat is permitted save for the nerve itself.');">¹⁴</span> But Surely this is not so, for did not R'Huna say that if a kid was roasted together with its forbidden fat it is forbidden to eat even of the tip of its ear?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is here evident that by roasting the essence is carried throughout the whole meat.');">¹⁵</span> -