Chullin 112a — the Talmud in English

And these words apply to a radish

exact page location")

because, on account of its sharpness, it absorbs.

But a cucumber,

which is sweet, does not absorb the fatty substance; rather, it floats upon the place of the cut, and therefore,

he scrapes

a little with a knife

toward its cut

to the place of the cut and removes the fat adhering there,

and he may eat it.

The stalks of turnip —

permitted.

For the stalks of turnip are sweet, and the taste of the fat is not discernible in them.

As for spinach —

forbidden,

because the fat imparts taste to them.

And if he cuts

if he mixes

among them

at the time of cutting, the stalks

of turnip,

when he cuts together stalks of turnip and spinach—that is, he cuts one turnip and after it spinach—

it is well.

For the stalk of turnip nullifies the taste of the fatty substance upon the knife, and the spinach does not receive taste from it.

Rav Dimi asked Rav Naḥman: What is the law regarding placing

to place

a vessel of salt beside a vessel of kutakh

of kutakh, which contains milk? Must we be concerned lest some of the contents of the vessel of kutakh fall into the vessel of salt, and they come to salt meat with salt mixed with milky kutakh?

He said to him: It is forbidden.

And Rav Dimi further asked Rav Naḥman: What is the law regarding placing a vessel of kutakh beside a vessel

of vinegar,

vinegar,

what is the law?

Are we to be concerned lest some of the kutakh fall into the vinegar, and they come to put some of this vinegar into a meat stew?

He said to him: Permitted.

For we are not concerned lest the kutakh spill into the vinegar and he put it into a meat stew.

And in what way is it different

salt from vinegar?

Rav Naḥman said to Rav Dimi: I will explain to you the reason for distinguishing between salt and vinegar only

when you eat

when you measure for me

a

in return for my explanation,

a kor of salt!

That is, you will pay me a kor of salt as my fee!

What is the reason?

What indeed is the distinction between salt and vinegar?

This one,

the kutakh that became mixed with salt,

has the forbidden substance itself present,

for the kutakh is discernible in the salt, and therefore it is forbidden to salt meat with it, because it is not nullified.

And this one,

when the kutakh falls into the vinegar,

does not have the forbidden substance itself present,

and the kutakh also does not impart taste to the vinegar and is nullified; therefore it is permitted to salt meat with it.

That one fledgling

a small fledgling

that fell into a vessel of kutakh

of kutakh.

Rav Ḥinnana son of Rava of Pashronya permitted it,

even though there was salt in the kutakh, and he did not consider this cooking.

Rava said: Who was wise enough to permit a case such as this, if not Rav Ḥinnana son of Rava of Pashronya?

He held

Rav Ḥinnana:

when Shmuel said, “

Salted —

it is like boiling,”

also with regard to cooking meat with milk,

these words apply where it is not eaten

the salted food

on account of its salt.

That is, its salting was extensive, and it could be eaten only after soaking and rinsing it in water.

But this kutakha is eaten

it

on account of its salt.

That is, its salting is not great.

And these words apply

that it is permitted, when the fledgling fell and its flesh was

raw.

But

if its flesh was

roasted —

it requires peeling,

from above, all around.

And if it has

in its flesh

cracks,

splits —

all of it is forbidden,

because it absorbs through the holes and cracks.

And if he seasons it with spices —

all of it is forbidden,

for the spices soften it, and it absorbs more.

Rav Naḥman said in the name of Shmuel: A loaf upon which one cut meat

roasted

is forbidden to eat,

because the blood issuing from the roasted meat is absorbed in it.

And these words apply when it became red,

when the roasted meat was red.

And these words apply when it penetrated it,

when the blood passed through the loaf from one side to the other.

And these words apply when it was thick,

when the liquid issuing from the meat was thick.

But when it is thin,

clear liquid

we have no concern,

for it is not considered blood.

Shmuel threw it

such a loaf

to his dogs.

Rav Huna gave it to his attendant,

to his servant, and he did not eat it himself.

And we raised a difficulty concerning Rav Huna’s conduct:

What is your view? If it is permitted —

it is permitted for everyone.

If it is forbidden —

it is forbidden for everyone!?

And we answer: It is indeed permitted, but

Rav Huna is different, for his mind was fastidious,

he did not eat it because he was an aesthete, and not because of a prohibition.

Rava ate it and called it “

meat wine,”

that is, “the wine of the meat.”

Rav Naḥman said in the name of Shmuel: One may not place a vessel

["the vessel of the blood," mentioned above]

beneath meat —

until all appearance of redness in it has disappeared.

From where do we know

that from this point onward no red appearance will flow from it, and that it is already permitted to place a vessel beneath it?

Mar Zutra said in the name of Rav Pappa: When its smoke rises.

That smoke-like vapor rises from the meat. [And in another wording Rashi explained: from the time that the coals beneath it raise smoke, for as long as the blood issues, it extinguishes the coals; and only when the blood stops and the fatty substance begins to issue do the coals ignite].

Rav Ashi objected to this: Perhaps the lower part has reached [the proper degree], but the upper part has not reached it!?

Perhaps only the lower side, facing the fire, has been roasted, but the upper side has not yet been roasted.

Rather, Rav Ashi said: It has no remedy except by throwing into it

to throw onto the meat, and likewise to place in the vessel in which one salts

two lumps of salt,

two pieces of salt, and thereby the blood will sink to the bottom of the vessel, and then

and pouring it off,

that is, the fat that floats above the blood may be poured off gently, so that the blood does not mix with it, into another vessel, and it may be eaten.