Chullin 206

מכללו

to its general [restriction],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the whole of the fat of a wild animal is permitted.');">¹</span>

אבל אבר דלא הותר מכללו לא

but it cannot [be superimposed] upon the prohibition of the 'limb' inasmuch as there is no exception to its general [restriction].

כי אתא רב דימי אמר בעא מיניה רבי שמעון בן לקיש מרבי יוחנן

When R'Dimi came [from Palestine] he reported that R'Simeon B'Lakish put the following question to R'Johanan: What is the law if he divided it outside?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A person took an olive's bulk from a limb that had been severed from a living animal, divided it into halves outside, i.e., before putting it into his mouth, and then swallowed each half separately. In connection with other prohibited substances this raises no doubt at all, for so long as he consumed the required quantity, namely an olive's bulk, within the time it takes to eat a half-loaf, he is deemed to have eaten the requisite amount and he is liable; v. Yoma 80b. With regard to the limb severed from the living animal, however, since it is exceptional in that the required quantity may be made up of bones and sinews to which no prohibition applies elsewhere, it might be said that this whole quantity must be eaten at one time.');">²</span>

חלקו מבחוץ מהו

and he replied: He is not liable.

אמר ליה

And what if he divided it inside [his mouth]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And swallowed each half separately.');">³</span>

פטור

and he replied: He is liable.

מבפנים מאי

When Rabin came [from Palestine] he reported as follows: If he divided it outside he is not liable.

אמר ליה

If he divided it inside [his mouth], R'Johanan says, he is liable; R'Simeon B'Lakish says, he is not liable.

חייב

R'Johanan says he is liable', because his gullet has derived enjoyment from an olive's bulk.

כי אתא רבין אמר חלקו מבחוץ פטור

R'Simeon B'Lakish says he is not liable', because there must enter in his stomach [at one time] the full amount that constitutes 'eating', and this is not the case here.

מבפנים רבי יוחנן אמר

⁴ - R'Kahana suggested: In the case [where he ate] a small bone"&gt;.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Rashi, the patella, which has but a moiety of flesh on it, but together with the sinews attached to it is of the size of an olive. This is usually swallowed whole.');">⁵</span>

חייב וריש לקיש אמר

R'Eleazar however said: Even if he divided it outside he is also liable, because the fact that it is not consumed in one whole does not render it an incomplete act.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what is lacking as regards being brought together is not lacking as to the act'. I.e., the fact that the olive's bulk was put into the mouth in parts, one following the other, does not exempt the person from liability, for after all he has eaten a complete olive's bulk.');">⁶</span>

פטור

R'Simeon B'Lakish said: The quantity of an olive's bulk of which they [the Rabbis] have spoken does not include that which is between the teeth.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This and the subsequent cases until the end of the chapter apparently refer to all prohibited substances. According to R. Simeon b. Lakish a person is liable only if he swallowed a whole olive's bulk, i.e., this quantity entered his stomach, but not if he put an exact olive's bulk into his mouth, for in the process of mastication some of the substance would certainly adhere between the teeth and this cannot be reckoned together with the amount swallowed.');">⁷</span>

רבי יוחנן אמר חייב הרי נהנה גרונו בכזית

R'Johanan said: It includes even that which remains between the teeth.

וריש לקיש אמר פטור אכילה במעיו בעינן וליכא

Said R'Papa: As to that which remains between the teeth they certainly do not disagree,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' All hold that it cannot be reckoned together with that which has been swallowed, for neither the gullet nor the stomach has derived any enjoyment therefrom.');">⁸</span>

אלא לרבי שמעון בן לקיש היכי משכחת לה דמחייב

they disagree only as to that which remains in the palate and tongue.

אמר רב כהנא

One [R'Johanan] maintains [that he is liable], since his gullet has derived enjoyment from a whole olive's bulk; the other [R'Simeon B'Lakish] maintains [that he is not liable, because] there must enter his stomach the full amount which constitutes 'eating'.

בגרומיתא זעירתא

R'Assi said in the name of R'Johanan: If a person ate one half-olive's bulk [of a forbidden substance] and vomited it forth, and then<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., within the period of time taken to eat a half-loaf of the size of four (according to Maim. three) ordinary eggs.');">⁹</span>

ורבי אלעזר אמר

ate another half-olive's bulk, he is liable.

אפילו חלקו מבחוץ נמי חייב מחוסר קריבה לאו כמחוסר מעשה דמי

Why?

אמר ר"ש בן לקיש

Because his gullet has derived enjoyment from an olive's bulk.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [R. Assi does not accept the statement reported (supra) by R. Dimi in the name of R. Johanan exempting from liability where the olive's bulk was divided outside (Rashi) .]');">¹⁰</span>

כזית שאמרו חוץ משל בין השינים

R'Eleazar enquired of R'Assi: What is the law if a person ate one half-olive's bulk [of a forbidden substance], vomited it forth and then ate it once again?

ורבי יוחנן אמר

[Let us see], what was his real question?

אף עם בין השינים

If the question was whether it [sc. what has been vomited forth] is considered as digested food or not, then he might have put the question with regard to a complete olive's bulk;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if a person ate an olive's bulk of a forbidden substance, vomited it forth, and swallowed it again, would he be liable twice or once only?');">¹¹</span>

אמר רב פפא

and if the question was whether we regard [eating from the enjoyment of] the gullet or [from the enjoyment of] the stomach, then he might have solved this himself from R'Assi's statement above?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the preceding passage where R. Assi expressly states that the main factor of eating is the enjoyment of the gullet.');">¹²</span>

בשל בין שינים דכולי עלמא לא פליגי כי פליגי בין החניכיים

- R'Assi had forgotten the tradition [he had received from R'Johanan], and R'Eleazar came and reminded him of it in the following manner:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Eleazar himself was not in doubt at all about the law, but he put the case before R. Assi in the form of a question in order to remind him in the most respectful manner of the decision given by R. Johanan.');">¹³</span>

מר סבר הרי נהנה גרונו בכזית ומר סבר אכילה במעיו בעינן

'Why speak of another half-olive's bulk?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which the person swallowed after he had vomited forth a half-olive's bulk.');">¹⁴</span>

אמר רבי אסי אמר רבי יוחנן

The Master could have dealt with the same [half-olive's bulk], by which two results would have been established, viz. , we would have learnt from if that it [sc. what is vomited forth] was not considered as digested food, and we would also have learnt from it that [one is liable if only] the gullet had derived enjoyment from an olive's bulk'.

אכל חצי זית והקיאו וחזר ואכל חצי זית אחר חייב

He remained silent and made no reply at all.

מ"ט

Thereupon he [R'Eleazar] said to him, 'O wonder of the generation! Did you not often say this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he is liable even in the case of the sane half-olive's bulk.');">¹⁵</span>

הרי נהנה גרונו בכזית

before R'Johanan and he agreed with you saying: "His gullet has in fact derived enjoyment from an olive's bulk"'?

בעא רבי אלעזר מר' אסי

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>EVERY KIND OF FLESH IS FORBIDDEN TO BE COOKED IN MILK,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Including even the flesh of fowls and of wild beasts. The prohibition of 'flesh cooked in milk' relating to the cooking, or to the eating, or to the enjoyment of any benefit therefrom, is derived from the thrice-repeated Biblical prohibition: Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk');">¹⁶</span>

אכל חצי זית והקיאו וחזר ואכלו מהו

EXCEPTING THE FLESH OF FISH AND OF LOCUSTS; AND IT IS ALSO FORBIDDEN TO PLACE UPON THE TABLE [FLESH] WITH CHEESE,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a Rabbinic measure as a precaution against eating the two together.');">¹⁷</span>

מאי קא מיבעיא ליה

EXCEPTING THE FLESH OF FISH AND OF LOCUSTS.

אי הוי עיכול אי לא הוי עיכול ותיבעי ליה כזית

אלא אי בתר גרונו אזלינן אי בתר מעיו אזלינן

ותפשוט ליה מדרבי אסי

רבי אסי גמריה איעקר ליה ואתא ר' אלעזר לאדכוריה והכי קאמר ליה

למה לי חצי זית אחר לימא מר בדידיה דאיכא למשמע מינה תרתי שמעינן מינה דלא הוי עיכול ושמעינן מינה דהרי נהנה גרונו בכזית

אישתיק ולא א"ל

ולא מידי א"ל מופת הדור לא זימנין סגיאין אמרת קמיה דרבי יוחנן ואמר לך

הרי נהנה גרונו בכזית:

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך גיד הנשה</strong></big><br><br>

מתני׳ <big><strong>כל</strong></big> הבשר אסור לבשל בחלב חוץ מבשר דגים וחגבים

ואסור להעלות עם הגבינה על השלחן חוץ מבשר דגים וחגבים