Chullin 97a — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

forbidden fat is different from

the sciatic nerve, because

forbidden fat

permeates and

spreads through all the meat even during roasting, whereas the sciatic nerve contracts during roasting and does not release anything into the meat.

and spreads throughout all the meat, even during roasting, whereas the sciatic nerve contracts during roasting, and does not emerge into the meat.

They raise an objection:

But with forbidden fat

that was roasted together with meat, is

the meat forbidden?

?

But didn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say: An incident once occurred before Rabbi Yoḥanan, in the synagogue of Maon, involving a kid that was roasted in its forbidden fat? They came and asked Rabbi Yoḥanan about it, and he said: One peels

the meat of the kid

and eats

it—

until he reaches its forbidden fat!

This proves that even forbidden fat does not permeate during roasting,

doesn’t it? And we answer:

that

kid

was lean!

Rav Huna bar Yehuda said:

That

was a kidney;

he had roasted a kidney

in its forbidden fat, and Rabbi Yoḥanan permitted it, because the membrane between the forbidden fat and the kidney interrupts them, and the forbidden fat cannot bubble through the membrane into the kidney.

because the membrane separates the fat from the kidney, and the fat cannot bubble through the membrane into the kidney.

Ravin bar Rav Adda said:

That

was a fish called kilkit,

a type of small fish that had been fried

in a pan,

together with meat,

and they came and asked Rabbi Yoḥanan about it. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said to them:

Rabbi Yoḥanan

let a non-Jewish baker taste it,

a non-Jewish baker, and let him tell us whether the taste of the forbidden substance can be detected in the meat. We rely on him when he speaks casually, since he does not know that we are asking him about a matter of what is forbidden and what is permitted.

Rava said: At first,

in the beginning,

I found this teaching difficult: If one cooked meat in a pot—

he may not cook forbidden fat in it; but if he did cook it—

we examine it

to determine whether it imparts taste:

if the taste of the meat can be detected in the forbidden fat, the dish is forbidden under the prohibition of meat and milk cooked together.

And likewise, a pot in which one cooked

teruma—

he may not cook ordinary produce in it; but if he did cook it—

we examine it

to determine whether it imparts taste.

And this is what Rava found difficult:

Granted, in the case of teruma,

which was cooked in a pot, after which ordinary produce was cooked in that same pot,

a kohen can taste it,

since he is permitted to eat teruma, and he can tell us whether it imparts taste.

But in the case of meat

that was cooked

with forbidden fat—

who can taste it for us?

After all, everyone is forbidden to eat it!

But now that Rabbi Yoḥanan has said that we rely on a non-Jewish baker,

then

here too,

in the case of meat and milk,

we rely

on the tasting of

a non-Jewish baker!

Rava said: The Sages said

in several places that the measure for nullification is

determined by taste,

for they established the measure for nullification as “imparting taste.”

And the Sages said

in other places, such as here, where Rabbi Yoḥanan said that we examine it

by means of a non-Jewish baker.