Chullin 94b (צד:) — the Talmud in English

One, because of the coercive circumstances:

perhaps the gentile will forcibly take meat from the slaughterer and not pay him.

And one, lest they sell him neveilot and tereifot.

The Master said: And with regard to a gentile—

whether it is whole or cut, he need not remove the sciatic nerve from it.

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

What are we dealing with here? If you say it is in a place where they make an announcement—

that today a tereifa was found among one of the animals, and in that place it is permitted to purchase meat from a gentile on that day when no announcement was made about a tereifa—if so,

why, when the thigh is cut, need he not remove the sciatic nerve from it?

But

since they did not announce

today,

a Jew may come to purchase from him,

the gentile; and since the thigh is cut, the Jew will think that the sciatic nerve was removed from it and will consequently stumble by eating the sciatic nerve.

Rather, it is obvious

that it is speaking

of a place where they do not make announcements

about a tereifa if one is found. In that place, it is forbidden to purchase meat from a gentile at any time, lest a tereifa was in fact found that day and the meat in his possession is from that animal. Therefore, it is permitted to send even a cut thigh to a gentile without removing the sciatic nerve from it, since there is no concern that a Jew might purchase the thigh from the gentile.

If so,

say the middle clause

of the beraita, which states:

“For two reasons they said that one may not sell neveilot and tereifot to a gentile: One, because he misleads him, and one, lest he subsequently sell it to another Jew!” And if

it is speaking

of a place where they do not make announcements,

there is no concern that he will sell it to a Jew, since

the Jew will not come

to

purchase from him,

the gentile, out of concern that the meat may be a tereifa.

Rather, it is obvious

that it is speaking

of a place where they make announcements

and today there was in fact a tereifa, but because of coercive circumstances no announcement was made. Therefore, it is forbidden to sell neveilot and tereifot to a gentile on that day, because perhaps a Jew will purchase it from him, since today it is permitted to purchase meat from a gentile, as no announcement was made about a tereifa.

If so,

say the final clause,

which states:

“A person may not say to a gentile: Take this dinar and purchase meat for me, for two reasons: One, because of the coercive circumstances, and one, lest they sell him neveilot and tereifot!” And if

it is speaking

of a place where they make announcements,

there is no concern that they will sell him a tereifa, since

if it were indeed a tereifa

today—

they would have made an announcement!

And since they did not make an announcement, this indicates that there is no tereifa today.

Rather, it is obvious

that it is speaking

of a place where they do not make announcements,

and it is impossible to know whether a tereifa was found among the animals today, so there is concern that meat from it might be sold to a gentile.

Now this is difficult:

The first and final clauses are in a place where they do not make announcements, while the middle clause is in a place where they do make announcements!?

And we answer:

Abaye said: Yes. The first and final clauses are in a place where they do not make announcements,

whereas

the middle clause is in a place where they make announcements!

Rava said: The entire

beraita is

in a place where they make announcements.

The first and final clauses

are speaking

when they made an announcement

that a tereifa was found among the animals today. Therefore, in the first clause it is permitted to send a thigh to a gentile, and there is no concern that a Jew might purchase it from him, since today it is forbidden to purchase meat from a gentile. And in the final clause, it is forbidden for a Jew to give a dinar to a gentile to purchase meat on his behalf, lest they sell him meat from the tereifa.

The middle clause

is speaking of a tereifa that existed today, but

they did not make an announcement

because of coercive circumstances. Therefore, it is forbidden to sell this tereifa to a gentile, because perhaps a Jew will purchase it from him, since today it is permitted to purchase meat from a gentile, as no announcement was made.

Rav Ashi said: The entire matter is in a place where they do not make announcements,

where it is always forbidden to purchase meat from a gentile. Therefore, in the first clause it is permitted to send a thigh to a gentile, while in the final clause it is forbidden to send a gentile to purchase meat, since there is concern that a tereifa may have been found today.

And the middle clause

states that it is forbidden to sell neveilot and tereifot to a gentile. And although in a place where they do not make announcements there is no concern that a Jew will purchase the tereifa from the gentile, nevertheless it must be prohibited because of

a decree lest he sell it

to a gentile

in the presence of a Jew,

and that Jew will hear the Jewish seller tell the gentile that the meat is kosher, think that this is true, and come to purchase the tereifa from the gentile [based on Tosafot, s.v. “Amar.” [See Rashi and Tosafot concerning why, in the first clause, they did not prohibit sending a thigh to a gentile for this reason, as a decree lest he give it to him in the presence of a Jew].

And we raised a difficulty:

How do they make the announcement

when a tereifa is found in the city?

And we answer:

Rav Yitzhak bar Yosef said:

This is the wording of the announcement:

“Meat has fallen to the sons of the army!”

Meat fit for gentiles has come into our possession.

And we challenge this:

Let them say

and announce:

“Tereifa meat has fallen to the sons of the army!”?

And we answer: If so,

they will not buy

the meat, since it is disgraceful for them to eat meat that we do not want to eat.

And we challenge this: If so, if the gentiles do not know that the meat is a tereifa, how is it permitted to sell tereifot to them?

Are they not being misled?

And we answer:

They are the ones who mislead themselves!

They cause themselves to be misled, since they did not ask whether the meat was kosher or a tereifa.

This is like the incident involving Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman: He was traveling from Sikhra to Bei Meḥoza, while Rava and Rav Safra were coming to Sikhra. They encountered one another

and met near Sikhra.

He thought they had come to meet him

Mar Zutra thought that Rava and Rav Safra had come toward him from Bei Meḥoza.

He said to them,

Mar Zutra said:

“Why did the Sages trouble themselves and come all this way?”

You traveled such a great distance to meet me.

Rav Safra said to him,

to Mar Zutra:

“We did not know that the Master was coming”

We had no knowledge at all of your arrival; rather, we were traveling on our way and met by chance. But

if we had known

that you were coming to the city—

we would have troubled ourselves even more!

We would have gone even farther to meet you.

Rava said to him,

to Rav Safra:

“Why did you say that to him?”

Why did you tell him the truth,

thereby weakening his spirits,

since he had thought that we had come in his honor, and now he felt dejected?

He said to him,

Rav Safra said to Rava:

“But we would have misled him!”

Had I remained silent, he would have felt gratitude toward us for this for no reason.

Rava said to him:

“He is the one who misleads himself!”

It would not have been we who misled him had we remained silent; rather, he would have misled himself.

There was a certain slaughterer to whom his fellow said: