Chullin 92b (צב:) — the Talmud in English

One -

that they do not write a marriage contract for a male:

even though they designate a male for intercourse, nevertheless they do not treat the matter casually until they write a marriage contract for them.

And one -

that they do not weigh the flesh of a dead person in a butcher shop:

even though they eat human flesh, they do not sell it in a butcher shop publicly [another interpretation: they do not sell the flesh of an animal that died on its own in a butcher shop].

And one -

that they honor the Torah.

We learned in the Mishna:

and it does not apply to a bird

because it does not have a kaf.

And we challenge this:

But we see that it does have one

a kaf, as there is flesh surrounding the bone of its thigh?

And we answer:

It does have one,

but

it is not rounded!

For the surrounding flesh is not round but flat across, and it does not resemble a kaf; and with regard to the sciatic nerve it is stated: “that is upon the kaf of the thigh.” Therefore, it does not apply to a bird.

Rabbi Yirmeya raised a dilemma: If a bird has one and it is rounded,

if a bird happened to have a round kaf, or

if an animal has one but it is not rounded,

if an animal happened to have a kaf that was not round in its case—

what is the halakha?

Is

our determination based on that particular creature,

so that each bird and each animal is judged according to its own characteristics, and the sciatic nerve of that bird whose kaf is round is forbidden, whereas the sciatic nerve of the animal whose foot-kaf is not round is not forbidden;

or

perhaps

our determination is based on its species.

Since, ordinarily, a bird does not have a round kaf, whereas an animal does have a round kaf, is the entire species of bird permitted and the entire species of animal forbidden?

And we conclude:

Teyku!

We learned in the Mishna:

and it applies to a fetus.

Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus, and its forbidden fat is permitted.

Shmuel said:

“And its forbidden fat is permitted,”

which is taught at the end of our Mishna, is not the conclusion of Rabbi Yehuda’s statement; rather,

it is according to everyone

.

We inquire concerning this:

“Its forbidden fat”—of what?

What forbidden fat is being discussed concerning which everyone agrees?

If you say

it is

the forbidden fat of the fetus, but they disagree explicitly concerning it,

the first tanna and Rabbi Yehuda?

As it was taught:

The sciatic nerve

applies to a fetus, and its forbidden fat

of the fetus

is forbidden! These are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus, and its forbidden fat

of the fetus

is permitted! And Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Oshaya said: The dispute

between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda

concerns

a fetus

of nine

months that was found

alive

in the womb of the animal after it was slaughtered.

And Rabbi Meir followed his own reasoning!

For he maintains that a viable nine-month fetus is not permitted through the slaughter of its mother, like any fetus found in its mother’s womb after she has been slaughtered; rather, it is considered an animal in its own right and requires slaughter. Therefore, its sciatic nerve and its forbidden fat are also forbidden.

And Rabbi Yehuda followed his own reasoning!

For Rabbi Yehuda maintains that even a viable nine-month fetus is permitted through the slaughter of its mother; it is not considered an animal in its own right, but rather like one of its mother’s limbs. Consequently, it is not subject to the prohibition of the sciatic nerve, and its forbidden fat is not prohibited.

But rather,

perhaps you will say that our Mishna is speaking about

the forbidden fat of the sciatic nerve,

the fat of the sciatic nerve [in every animal, not in a fetus]; and concerning this Shmuel said that it is permitted according to everyone. This is difficult, for

do they not explicitly disagree concerning it?

As it was taught: One searches for the sciatic nerve wherever it is,

when removing it from the thigh,

and cuts away its fat

of the nerve

from its root,

even where it is embedded and rooted in the flesh,

the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yehuda says: He severs it

cuts it

flush with the smooth surface,

in a straight line with the kaf of the thigh. Only the fat protruding on the kaf must be cut away because of appearances, but the roots of the fat [and also of the nerve] within the flesh are permitted to be eaten.

It follows that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda disagree, and according to Rabbi Meir the fat of the sciatic nerve is forbidden!

And we answer:

Actually,

it is speaking about

the forbidden fat of the sciatic nerve,

and what Shmuel said—that it is permitted according to everyone—means that by Torah law even Rabbi Meir agrees that it is permitted; he prohibits it only by rabbinic decree.

And Shmuel agrees that according to Rabbi Meir it is forbidden by rabbinic decree.

As it was taught,

as we learned in a beraita, that according to Rabbi Meir it is forbidden only by rabbinic decree. As it was taught:

And its fat

of the sciatic nerve

is permitted. But the Jewish people, being holy, adopted the practice of prohibiting it!

And we infer:

Is it not that

this beraita

is Rabbi Meir’s?

For Rabbi Yehuda permits the fat entirely, even with regard to the practice. If so, it is demonstrated that this is Rabbi Meir’s beraita,

who says

that the fat is

permitted by Torah law and forbidden

only

by rabbinic decree!

And we challenge this:

From where

is it established that it is Rabbi Meir’s?

Perhaps it is Rabbi Yehuda’s [

and what Rabbi Yehuda permits is permitted as a matter of basic law, but forbidden as a matter of practice].

But according to Rabbi Meir, it is also forbidden by Torah law,

the fat of the nerve?

And we answer:

It cannot enter your mind

that Rabbi Meir prohibits it by Torah law.

As it was taught: One searches for the sciatic nerve wherever it is, and its fat is permitted! Who is it that you heard maintains

that the sciatic nerve requires

searching? Rabbi Meir!

For he said this earlier in the beraita.

And he says, “Its fat is permitted”!

It follows that Rabbi Meir permits the fat of the nerve, and necessarily, what he prohibits elsewhere is prohibited only by rabbinic decree.

Rav Yitzhak bar Shmuel bar Marta said that Rav said: The Torah prohibited

with regard to the sciatic nerve

only its slender branches!

These are the thin sinews that branch off from the sciatic nerve; they are soft and have flavor. But the nerve itself, which is upon the kaf of the thigh, is not forbidden, since it is hard and has no flavor, but is merely like wood.

Ulla said:

Although the nerve

is wood,

nevertheless

the Torah made one liable for it! [

whereas the slender branches are permitted, as will be stated below].

Abaye said: It is reasonable in accordance with Ulla! For Rav Sheshet said that Rav Asi said: The strands

the thin ones

in forbidden fat are forbidden

by rabbinic decree

but one is not liable for them

to receive karet on account of forbidden fat.

Apparently,

we say:

“Fat,” the Merciful One said, and not strands; here too, “nerve,” the Merciful One said, and not slender branches!

The essential matter: Rav Sheshet said that Rav Asi said: The strands in forbidden fat are forbidden, but one is not liable for them.

The strands

in the kidney are forbidden, but one is not liable for them.

The white fat of the kidney,

which is found in the groove of the kidney and penetrates into the kidney, is subject to a dispute between

Rabbi and Rabbi Hiyya: One prohibits it

on account of forbidden fat,

and one permits it.

Rabba plucked it out

removing it entirely down to the root; and likewise,

Rabbi Yohanan plucked it out. Rav Asi would cut it away

cutting away only the white fat on the kidney, but he would eat what penetrated into the kidney.

Abaye said: It is reasonable in accordance with Rabbi Asi! For Rabbi Abba said that Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: