Chullin 216

חלב אמאי מותר

why is the milk permitted?

חלב נבלה הוא

Is not the milk<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. that milk which was first absorbed by the flesh and later discharged in the rest of the milk in the pot.');">¹</span>

לעולם קסבר רב אפשר לסוחטו אסור ושאני התם דאמר קרא

as nebelah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that when it mixes with the rest of the milk we have here a mixture of homogeneous liquids which, according to Rab can never neutralize each other.');">²</span>

(שמות כג, יט) לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו גדי אסרה תורה ולא חלב

- I still maintain, that Rab holds that even when it can be considered extracted it is still forbidden, but there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In connection with the prohibition of flesh in milk.');">³</span>

וסבר רב גדי אסרה תורה ולא חלב

it is exceptional, for the verse states: Thou shal not seethe a kid in its mother's milk,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXIII, 19.');">⁴</span>

והא איתמר חצי זית בשר וחצי זית חלב שבשלן זה עם זה אמר רב

whence it is clear that the Torah forbade the kid only and not the milk.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rab contends that whenever flesh and milk are cooked together in any proportion whatsoever, it is only the flesh that is forbidden and not the milk.');">⁵</span>

לוקה על אכילתו ואינו לוקה על בשולו

But does Rab hold that the Torah forbade the kid only and not the milk?

ואי ס"ד גדי אסרה תורה ולא חלב אאכילה אמאי לוקה

But it has been reported: If a person cooked half an olive's bulk of flesh with half an olive's bulk of milk,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An olive's bulk of liquid is that amount of liquid displaced from a brimming bowl by an olive.');">⁶</span>

חצי שיעור הוא

he suffers stripes, says Rab, if he eats it, but does not suffer stripes for cooking it.

אלא לעולם קסבר רב

Now if you maintain that [Rab contends that] the Torah forbade the kid only and not the milk, why should he suffer stripes for eating it?

חלב נמי אסור והכא במאי עסקינן כגון שנפל לתוך יורה רותחת דמבלע בלע מפלט לא פלט

There was only half the [minimum] quantity!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The minimum quantity of a forbidden substance to render one liable to stripes is an olive's bulk. Here the only forbidden substance is the meat and there is only half an olive's bulk of it.');">⁷</span>

סוף סוף כי נייח הדר פליט

Rather we must say that Rab holds the view that the milk is also forbidden, but in this case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Namely, where an olive's bulk of flesh fell into a pot of milk.');">⁸</span>

כשקדם וסילקו

we must suppose that [the olive's bulk of flesh] fell into a boiling pot, in which case it will absorb al the time and not discharge at all.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The milk absorbed by the flesh will not be given out so long as the pot is boiling, consequently it will not affect the rest of the milk in the Pot.');">⁹</span>

גופא חצי זית בשר וחצי זית חלב שבשלן זה עם זה אמר רב

But eventually when [the boiling] subsides it will discharge [the milk which it had absorbed]! - By then he had already removed it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The olive's bulk of flesh.');">¹⁰</span>

לוקה על אכילתו ואינו לוקה על בשולו

The text [stated above]: 'If a person cooked half an olive's bulk of flesh with half an olive's bulk of milk suffers stripes, says Rab, if he eats it, but does not suffer stripes for cooking it'.

מה נפשך אי מצטרפין אבשול נמי לילקי

But say what you will.

אי לא מצטרפין אאכילה נמי לא לילקי

If two<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the flesh and the milk.');">¹¹</span>

לעולם לא מצטרפי ובבא מיורה גדולה

combine [to make the prohibition], then he should also suffer stripes for cooking it; and if they do not combine, then he should not suffer stripes even if he ate it! - Really they do not combine, but this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of Rab that he suffers stripes for eating it.');">¹²</span>

ולוי אמר

is a case where each [half an olive's bulk] came from a large pot.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wherein large quantities of flesh and milk were cooked together. To take out of this Pot half an olive's bulk of flesh and half an olive's bulk of milk and eat them certainly renders one liable to stripes. But to cook half an olive's bulk of meat with half an olive's bulk of milk does not, according to Rab, render one liable to stripes. So that the two rulings given by Rab refer to different cases.');">¹³</span>

אף לוקה על בשולו

Levi, however, said: He also suffers stripes for cooking it.

וכן תני לוי במתניתין

Moreover, Levi taught so in a Baraitha: Just as he suffers stripes for eating it he suffers stri for cooking it.

כשם שלוקה על אכילתו כך לוקה על בשולו

And of what kind of cooking did they speak?

ובאי זה בשול אמרו בבשול שאחרים אוכלין אותו מחמת בשולו

Of such cooking as others<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Non-Jews. I.e., sufficiently cooked.');">¹⁴</span>

ואפשר לסוחטו עצמו תנאי היא דתניא

would eat thereof.

טפת חלב שנפלה על החתיכה כיון שנתנה טעם בחתיכה החתיכה עצמה נעשת נבלה ואוסרת כל החתיכות כולן מפני שהן מינה דברי ר' יהודה

With regard to the law where the forbidden essence is considered extracted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether the original piece which contained the forbidden essence becomes now permitted or not.');">¹⁵</span>

וחכ"א

there is a dispute between Tannaim.

עד שתתן טעם ברוטב ובקיפה ובחתיכות אמר רבי

For it was taught: If a drop of milk fell on a piece of flesh, as soon as it imparted a flavour to the piece, the piece itself is forbidden as nebelah, and it will in turn render all the pieces [in the pot] forbidde for they are of like kind: so R'Judah.

נראין דברי ר' יהודה בשלא ניער ושלא כסה ודברי חכמים בשניער וכסה

But the Sages say.

מאי לא ניער ולא כסה

[It is not forbidden at all] until it imparts a flavo the broth, the sediments and the pieces.

אילימא לא ניער כלל ולא כסה כלל מבלע בלע מפלט לא פלט

Said Rabbi: The words of R'Judah are acceptable in the case where he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc., the person who was looking after the pot. By stirring or covering the pot the forbidden substance is distributed equally among the entire contents of the pot.');">¹⁶</span>

ואלא לא ניער בתחלה אלא בסוף ולא כסה בתחלה אלא בסוף אמאי הא בלע והא פלט

neither stirred nor covered [the pot], and the words of the Sages in the case where he either stirred it o covered it.

קסבר

Now what is meant by 'neither stirred nor covered'?

אפשר לסוחטו אסור

Should you say it means that he did not stir it at all, or that he did not cover it at all, then this piece will indeed have absorbed [the drop of milk] but will not at any time have given it out; [wherefore then are the other pieces forbidden? ] And if it means that he did not stir it straightway but only later on, or that he did not cover it straightway but only later on, wherefore [are any of the pieces forbidden]? True, this piece had absorbed [the drop of milk] but it has also given it out! - He is of the opinion that even when the forbidden substance can be considered extracted it is still forbidden.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Once a piece of flesh has absorbed a forbidden substance it becomes absolutely forbidden as nebelah and will at once render all the pieces in the pot forbidden, no matter how much there is in the Pot besides this; for it can never be neutralized since this is a case of a forbidden piece among permitted pieces, or a mixture of homogeneous substances.');">¹⁷</span>