This transcript is auto-generated and may contain errors.
0:15 All right. Good morning. Let's begin. Today's daf is first of all today's daff is kuf 100. We are picking up on the last line of sadic with 99b. Our shir this morning is dedicated by make Michael and Rachel Turnanski for the arts to Michael's brother Alan Ternanski Ben Shimakov. We hope that in the merit of our 0:38 family thank you with that let's begin. So the we left off yesterday with literally bottom line is so remember again so the Mishna said that if you cook a gid right with other gidden with other kosher senus so what's the we look again to see if there's does the ganosha infuse taste or not into the 1:02 other gin if it does the mixture is if it does not the mixture is kasha so says the I don't understand why don't we just had to In the rest of in the rest of the mixture we're going to be introduced to a number of incredibly important ideas today through which the Gimar says shiny which introduces us to the concept of barrier. We've actually seen this 1:26 before. We spoke about this a few days ago when we did the Mishna means that even if something is small but it is a fully intact entity then is and if it's not bottle so remember again the parakis that we spoke about before was the ant excellent again so the ant obviously very small but nevertheless 1:51 because it is a burial therefore again it is the suggest that even if GD does not have a kazas if because it is an entity a complete entity unto itself. Therefore, it is not but so we're going to see this theme throughout the daft today about things which although normally again the importance of something in terms of in terms of mixture is in terms of its size we're 2:16 going to see that if something is considered to be a something important for some other reason then again it does not become so says the tap of so to again remember again what was the So the said that if you have a piece of that get mix that gets mixed in with 2:37 other kosher pieces of meat. So what's if you recognize the tra piece pull it out throw it out then say then again we only have an issue of which means you just have to measure the taste infusion. On the other hand, if not then ultimately again everything will be assured let's analyze this. So what I was saying is like this if you don't know if if you recog if you 3:07 recognize so I'm cooking a pot of meat a piece of na falls in. If I recognize the nea piece of meat so then what's the remedy? Step one remove it. Step two measure taste infusion. Right. So step one, remove it. Step two, measure taste infusion. If there's whatever it is, we'll call it 60 times more kosher meat than non- kosher meat, then ultimately 3:30 again we'll be okay. However, what if I don't recognize the piece of I don't recognize it. So said then what's the says everything is asser I don't understand why why why is everything asser clearly dealing with a case where there's an overwhelming majority of kosher meat corresponding to the non-cooser meat if that's the case then ultimately again 3:55 why should the rest of the mixture be beer to which the says here we go so we'll say we're going to see this a couple of times in the next which is o. So we'll say here's what we know. We know that things are often counted or sold in different ways. Some things are 4:20 always sold as groups. Some things are always sold as individual units. Anything that is sold as an individual unit has a kashivos has an importance to it. that kashibos will then prevent it ultimately again from becoming bottle in a mixture. This is the common theme we see. If something is not bottle in a mixture if something is always counted 4:45 as separate units that shows it's therefore it is not butle in a mixture. So some things are always sold in a group some things are always sold or counted individually. Then you have a middle category which is sometimes they're counted or sold individually and sometimes they're not. So I'll say now watch this. So let's just understand what we're trying to do. We have a mishna that tells me that if I have a 5:09 piece of na which gets mixed in with kosher meat and I can't identify which is the which is not what's the entire mixture is asks the but I don't understand why isn't it just right or even say something yet again the mish says the entire mixture is us 5:32 say now watch this says the So we'll say if you hold listen to this means anything that is sometimes counted. Anything that is sometimes counted. Not always counted. Sometimes counted. So I say according to the opinion who says that even something that is only sometimes counted is considered to be a and therefore not I 6:11 understand this case in the Mishna. Therefore again you have a piece of piece of is sometimes counted. It is sometimes counted and therefore what and therefore it will not be bottle in this mixture. If you go according to the opinion of means the say 6:38 means something which is exclusively counted. It is always counted. It is it is always reckoned as a separate individual entity never as part of a group. say therefore how do I understand the why would it be that if the piece of falls into the mixture ultimately again it should be to which the say here we go 7:07 wow we say here we go to which the says this case of the is different this is the case this is what we call means a piece piece of meat that is a significant piece. A significant piece something that is what we call literally means an honorific piece a piece of a piece. So when you have a piece that is 7:35 not bottle literally again it's the type of meat that is so that you would give it to a guest right you give it to a guest such a piece of meat as a and therefore is not say this indeed is actually quite amazing. 8:02 So if you have now what the definition of a piece of meat you know what what defin so again the the idea is this is something this is subjective because obviously it depends on your station I guess your financial status what you normally serve but if you have a piece of meat that is a kashv cut of meat that you would normally give before arim and it's user let's say it's not it's trafe 8:26 and it gets mixed in with other pieces of meatkins that has the of a burial Right? Just like a barrier is not bottled, so to will not be bottled if as well. So say so we begin to see as as our as our list grows of items which have an incredible level of level of importance and as a result therefore are never bottle in a 8:49 mixture. Incredible. We go back to the is both the case of the and the case of the in other words both are teaching me the same concept which is that when something is it is not butle in a mixture so I why do I need both cases here we go if just taught me the case of gid I would have said gid is not why because 9:14 it's a barrier because it's a selfy contained entity kika piece of meat as it might be. Nevertheless, again, it's not a burial and therefore again it should be to which the says therefore again I'm sorry on the other hand I would have said why is not because again it is it is fit to 9:44 be served to guest because of that it has a and that's why it's not however but which again is to be served before remember again how did we end yesterday how do we end right there is no taste in no taste in therefore again I would have said should 10:08 be bottle therefore again therefore say both of these cases both as well as both say now interestingly enough kind of equates the two that both so So will both be treated like a burial and say what's with a burial is not why is it not ultimately again because it is 10:34 considered a self-contained entity. Therefore it is because it is it is not in a mixture. Incredible. So again just you understand the beauty of this is literally again this is after another concept. 11:01 So say here we go. If you have a piece of na or a piece of a non-cooser fish says so ultimately again when do these items asser in a mixture only when there's enough of them to infuse taste into everything we actually saw this in yesterday's daf only when there's enough of a concentration of these items to infuse taste into everything into the gravy the ke say is like the sediment 11:26 the food sediment on the bottom of the pot and the katikos and the other pieces of meat or fish as Well, so fine. So say Rav went ahead and summoned his right. The guy who went ahead and interpreted his rulings and he dashed as follows. 11:54 Wow. Comes along Rav and Ravi introduces to us a bombshell concept. the concept of what we call. So we'll say so this by the way is a dramatic idea which is let me frame this to you in the following situation. Let's say just a simple case. A simple case simple um illustrate but then you'll forget. 12:27 Watch this. A drop of milk falls onto meat. Milk falls on meat. So let's say it's enough milk. That's not the meat. What's the status of the meat? saying now when we say the meat is asser what we have to ask ourselves is a fundamentalist shil which is when that meat is asser 12:54 what's about it is the iser the amount of milk that is absorbed inside of the meat or or is it the piece of meat in totality which becomes asser you hear that you hear that distinction what's asser do we say that you know 73% of this meat is because again that's the amount of milk that was absorbed or no 13:19 the milk absorption transforms the entire piece of meat into a so say so you say to yourself who cares so I'll tell you why it matters let's say that piece of meat falls into another mixture a pot of kosher meat so say obviously what do I need what do I need I need shishim shishim against what do I need 13:42 shishim against the entire entire piece of meat that fell in or just against the absorption of the milk in the first piece of meat. So we'll say so Rav is suggesting over here the concept of when a piece of meat or for that matter a piece of fish it's not unique to meat when a piece when a piece of food right absorbs a prohibited a prohibited absorption 14:08 is that that absorption transforms the entire item the entire piece into a shell is that'san for entire piece of meat becomes prohibited by dent of the absorption. That's what Rav is saying. Incredible. 14:31 Once the prohibited item infused flavor into the piece of kosher food, kosher food. Therefore, the piece of the co the form of kosher piece becomes now like a piece of then in turn goes ahead and answers everything else in the pot. Why? 14:56 Ultimately again because it is a now look at rashi for just a moment. Rashi says now Ravi is also waiting in on a different topic which is the status of a minino mixture. So Rav is really saying two things over here. Number one, right, which we'll say we're going to discuss this in greater depth. 15:24 That's number one. Number two, what he's saying is so if you put this all together then what happens if you have a piece of which falls into a pot of kosher meat then I will say what happens what happens assuming that there's not enough initially to go to and I will say now this case the easiest way to illustrate this case I will say would be what would be you have one piece of kosher meat that is sticking up from the pot you 15:48 have a piece of aa that lands on top of that piece of kosher meat there's not enough in the kosher meat to be mat of the meat So say what happens? Let's go through the mechanics. What happens? Step one. Step one, the piece of meat, right? The kosher piece of meat becomes assurer. Rav says what becomes assurer. 16:05 What becomes asser? The entire piece of meat. So I'll say now what I have is now I have a piece of meat that's sitting in the pot of the rest of the kosher meat. Like mixtures cannot be one another. And therefore what the entire pot becomes. 16:24 So here we go. Who is who is Rav saying his who is Rav who is Raf like so say first of all so I want I want to just divide two things. Say Rav is bringing together two concepts which isan and those two items are not necessarily linked. We're going to see that you could hold of 16:54 and hold the min you can Rav happens to be grouping these two things together. So tell me who is Rav holding like Rav is holding like who holds say like mixtures are not bottle in one another. So if that's the case says I don't understand is not a den in it's a din in what that 17:26 apparently when you have like mixtures they have an inability to be each other. So if that's the case why do you have to get into over here? This is a simple case. Once you have a piece of that falls into a pot of kosher food say what's we're done we're done that's it independent of doesn't make a difference once you hold 17:52 a bottle say once you have any amount of kosh of non kosher food that falls into a kosher food conversation is overlay what's the case No, no, no. Bishel say the case over here is where the kosher piece of meat ultimately the non- kosher piece of meat excuse me fell into the pot but was then immediately 18:15 subsequently removed. Take a look at the listen to this. What's the case here? The case say as I actually framed it for you before in the illustration. You have a pot of meat. One piece of kosher meat extends above the other. The nea piece of meat falls on top of that kosher meat. The never comes in contact with anything other than what other than what that one piece of raised meat. It doesn't come in contact with the gravy, 18:52 with the sediment, with the pot, nothing. Just a piece of raised meat. And say what happens right after contact what occurs? The piece of non-coosher meat is removed. It's removed. So will say what do I have over here? This is only a case of rat only to oh now it begins to come together. So we'll say if it's only a case sorry if it's only a case of 19:16 if it's only a case of then what then now everything begins to come together this is not really initially a case of because at first said this is just a case of infusion so say but now it's a step one so nea falls on top of the piece of kosher meat there's ana infusion therefore what that piece of kosher meat becomes comes non-coosher meat in 19:41 totality. All now that that for that that piece of kosher that piece of meat formerly known as kosher now becomes an entire of now it's mixed in with the rest of the pot and now you have a situation of rav holds like a bottle and therefore the entire pot will be bottled. Incredible 20:03 on the other hand says the truth is even if you did not go ahead and what even if you did not go ahead and remove the neoa immediately the case still works and I'll tell you why so this is actually quite interesting he holds that again they will say this would be an we we've not seen this before and we're going to see it you know the points out this comes on. So 20:33 another week or so say up until now we've always been looking at our mixtures as being one of two ways. Either like items or or dissimilar items. There's a third category of a mixture between two like items and something dissimilar. Now you should understand this is actually the case 20:59 that happens quite often. The easiest example of this could would be what? Would be what? You're making a stew. You're making a stew. The stew has kosher meat. Non- kosher meat falls in. So what's that a case of? On one end, it's minino because I have kosher meat, non-coosher meat. On the other hand, I have potatoes. I have other stuff in there that I have. 21:21 I have like items, but I also have something dissimilar in the mixture. So watch this. So here we go. Say, what? By the way, so what do you do? This is actually quite interesting. and riveting. What do you do in a case of So don't worry, we're going to spend some significant time on this, right? 21:37 We're going to focus on it and try to figure out what to do with it. We have to understand you have two competing you have two competing challenges here. On one hand again you have minino which is what not which is bottle. How much is it? Ro is it is it is it may okay that's subject to my but at least I know it is so so how do I deal with this mixture so I say 22:02 this is wild get ready for this second line and I want to say anytime you have a mixture of similar items and dissimilar items get ready get ready so I'll say so I'll say the allows us to do this incredible thing which is remove the mino and see if the mino can be so we'll 22:32 say well essentially what we allow you to do not not physically but justically is what I remove the similar items and see if the dissimilar items have enough of ratio the so for say for example in the case of the stew so what would I do I would view the kosher meat as if it's not there and what >> there's enough potatoes and carrots and 22:55 onions and everything else to go ahead and be the time ultimately of the non-coosher meat. say so therefore again understand all we're doing over here is just trying to figure out a very very specific case right ultimately again of this so say so again we have Rav telling us that we learned two things over here 23:21 number one number two all the is just giving over here is now alternate versions ultimately of this of this of this case to be able to make it conform even if you don't hold say what comes out from this we we we learn out of just from three very important say number one is that is 23:45 considered to be a barrier and therefore again a burrier is not bottle in a mixture number two if you have a piece of meat or a piece of fish or any item which is enough that you would serve it to company or something very that says has the dinner burial and therefore again not bottle in a mixture. Number three 24:10 say when something permitted absorbs flavor from something prohibited. It's not just that the permitted item is only user in terms of the percentage of the absorption but rather again the entire piece of that which was permitted is fundamentally transformed into aa. Now I I have to give you a very very very strong caveat on that because we're going to see I'm not going to get into 24:33 it now but I just well I'll get into it now for just a second say that the concept of is this is again incredible we're going to We accept this concept ofan but only by milk and meat mixtures only by not by other prohibitions. So both say 25:06 so for example so for example just a very simple illustration we have to go so if you were to have a piece of meat that got mixed kosher meat that got mixed together with na meat and I say let's say again the nea meat was uh we'll call it uh 30% of the size ultimately again of the kosher piece of meat. The kosher piece of meat obviously becomes a user. You can't eat it because it has an available absorption. But if that piece of meat were to fall into 25:30 something else, you would not have to measure against the entire piece of kosher meat. But rather you'd only have to measure against the amount of the absorption. Then say practically how that plays out, we're going to discuss. But again, I'm giving you this only because the brought upan here. I just want to I want to make sure you don't you don't ask in the wrong way when uh if you're faced with any shas today. So we'll say so again 25:54 is only a by but not a by other we're going to spend more time but at least you know in a panoramic view that's how we hold says the back only applies to an animal to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-coosher animal interesting look so therefore again what that means is if 26:19 you were to eat the g say take a look at rashi Rashi says what that means is as follows. So only applies to the g of a kosher animal, not to a g of a non- kosher animal. Well, say practically what that means is what happens if you eat the g of a non-coosher animal. So it depends. So remember again we saw the we had it in yesterday's about right does the g have a flavor does the 26:58 g not have a flavor that the g has a flavor and you eat the gid of a non-coosher animal so are you kive are you kive yes for what for consumption of non-cooser meat right but you're not kive twice you're once for consumption of non-coosher meat you're not for consuming specifically if you the same time and you eat the g of non say what's 27:22 your it's as if you took a bite out of a tree and therefore again there's absolutely no disagrees and he says disagrees and he holds that the prohibition of applies even to a non-coosher animal so say where does get this from so please I'll tell you my proof already again when does become 27:48 becomes after's fight with the mysterious. So already say earlier by the times of Jacob and say we know times of right they didn't have to eat kosher food. The others might have observed whatever they observed but the there was no obligation to go ahead and eat kosher food and yet what do you see the prohibition of gidd was still intact. The prohibition of g 28:15 was there. Therefore, what do you see that the prohibition of g applies even to a non-cooser animal is actually amazing. So the back no the prohibition of gan was actually stated at this is actually quite amazing. So the says no no no the prohibition of was not given until what happens is after gave 28:42 that theor went back and wrote the by the narrative from which it is derived. But in fact again the prohibition of GI did not actually apply until where until this goes with a general concept espoused in the of we cannot learn binding from anything 29:08 which occurred before revelation that's say for example brism which is restated in paras why it says right all the soldiers going to have because again you can't learn binding from anything before Matan Torah. So the Tanakama says despite the fact that is mentioned over here 29:31 in fact it wasn't given until hari and was then just written in the context. Good. So we'll say so again very exciting no say it's like sure >> do I have to like juggle like what is it? What is it? Tell me, tell me what I need to do to to get the excitement level up here. Again, understand like this is incredible. It's new beginning. 29:52 It's there's coffee. There's good people. There's a nice setting. This is say this is this is come on get into it. So say so here we go. Remember again we have a fundamental ultimately again about so does ultimately again apply to a kosher animal non. Say obviously everyone agrees the prohibition of Gdan applies to behem. Obviously it's going to apply 30:16 to a kosher animal. What about Tanakama saying no Rabihuda saying yeshuda seemingly getting his proof ultimately from the fact that it's mentioned by good this say this is I have to tell you something. You see a blood of gimar like this and mamish you feel like you won the spiritual lottery because this is sometimes you go through a piece of gimar and let's be honest you finish the share and you're thinking to yourself 30:40 What just happened here? Right. What what just happened over here? Say so amazing if this is one of these pieces of where it's chock full of incredible. Watch this. So one second. One second. What just happened over here is telling me that the applies to a non-coosher animal say 31:03 that we know what that means. That means we've spoken of this concept many many times. If something is already assur is there the possibility for another layer of isra to devolve upon an already existing is so we'll say what we're assuming is like this is first aha the subsequently devolves upon the animal says for going and eating the of a 31:29 non-coosher animal which must mean that what is that one is could devolve upon another does he really hold that we learned Here we go. We know that the is that if you go ahead and you ingest, you ingest a piece of Na from a kosher animal. So there's an interesting that occurs, which is that when you swallow, 31:53 when that Na is in your throat, it's when the Nava is in your throat, when you're swallowing it, it it conveys tuma to your clothing. I might have thought that this applies to an aa of a non-cooser bird as well. So we'll say as stated in the Torah applies to the of a kosher animal. So kosher animal dies without you go ahead and you eat that animal once that food once that meat is in your throat it conveys to your 32:19 clothing that applies to a to a to a non-coosher bird as well. So the says therefore we'll say the says ultimately again you may not eat an aa or a you may not need it to become watch this we'll say when does an aa convey only when the prohibition is because it's now 32:48 an Ultimately, what does this say? What does this say? Exclude this time comes to exclude ultimately again an animal that what that was already user ta say if the animal was already was already user to me also. So ultimately again it does not get the additional status of Na because it doesn't get the additional status of NVA. Therefore what if I eat it I'll be ultimately for 33:19 consuming non-cooser food but what it is not my clothing. So we'll say what do you see from here apparently you see from here that once something has a prohibited status you can't add on additional layers of prohibition to that item. So we'll say again this is the example once that so if an animal is and it dies without it become it can become 33:41 an it can become an aa therefore when I ingest it makes my clothing tummy on the other hand if the animal was already a it cannot subsequently become an a just basing it on the so say the is taking out from there says no so maybe you'll say that what 34:08 say ultimately means maybe a gid itself maybe holds that the gid doesn't have any kind of flavor and therefore again say what because it has no no therefore again now watch this the prohibition of a non-cooser animal is only when there's a in order to be a d You have to have the buser. If you're 34:36 not considered buser, it's not. So maybe holds that same aid has no flavor. Therefore, if you eat the gid of a non-coosher animal, I not for eating because it's not considered to be like meat. What will I be for? Just the is of gid. Maybe that's that there's not two. We're we're 35:00 assuming that current there's two isim maybe there's not two isim there's just one of we know but is that true that holds that a gid does not have flavor we learned if a person eats the of a bless you of a non-coosher animal we just blew that out of the water right says that if you eat the g of a 35:28 non-coosher animal it's supposed explicit he says says what two sets of malus said presumably why two sets of malcus one for what one for and one for so clearly holds that the g itself must have a flavor because if it didn't you wouldn't be form ultimately says that's your to which the 35:52 say so what does here we go oh here we go Right. You're right. Holds a g has a flavor. When you eat the gay, right? Furthermore, what does he hold? We'll say he also that the prohibition of even applies to the animal in utero. 36:16 Even when the baby is in utero ultimately again there's a prohibition of now watch this. The so we'll say now watch this. When do we say When do we say when? We'll say when one comes first and one comes second. So if one already devolved upon right is a already devolved upon the entity. So that would prevent B from devolving upon 36:42 that same entity. However, when there is simultaneity simultaneity allows for both isim to devolve upon the item at the same time. Therefore again rah who deposits say the is of applies to the baby in utero. He holds that the isra of and the isra of devolve upon the fetus at the same time. 37:07 Therefore both simultaneously devolve upon the fetus and therefore again the will be is that true? Is that true? So we're going to see the seems asking is that true that holds that the prohibition of applies to the fetus we learned right that the applies to 37:34 say quite explicitly that the prohibition of does not apply to the fetus furthermore again and furthermore holds not only is there no prohibition of but there's also no for a fetus to which says no that there's no prohibition of for an animal in that's by a kosher animal we had this the says that while the 38:03 animal is in uro the animal in its entirety is permitted is permitted everything about that animal in euro is permitted even the even ultimately for a non-coosher animal when it's in utero then will agree that will be says is that true that both the and the 38:30 devolve simultaneously upon the animal we're talking about in utero now is that true here we go we learned remember again if a is exposed to tum then say what's is that he has to he has to shave, right? He does the full full haircut, right? And what he has to start all over again. So what are the types of tum for 38:55 which a noir ultimately again will have to go ahead and shave and do the haircut say for a corpse right and for a corpse I don't understand that if you're going to tell me that the nausea has to go ahead and shave if he becomes exposed to then what for a mace in its entirety says no Shalon is 39:28 what are we talking about? We're talking about when the fetus is in utero and the flesh has begun to form but the senus are not there which say tells you what tells you that there is something that exists of the even before the gidden are present. So we'll say what that tells you for our purposes is it has the status now this is obviously talking about by a human 39:50 being right but it's telling us that there is the status of a of an entity a flesh even before the senus are therefore again what do you see from here so we assume that by an animal as well that there's some semblance of some animal of a behemoth before there are senus which tells me that What 40:16 is not simultane the of occurs what before the of so how could say that they simultaneously devolve upon the animal to which the says you're right says the comes first but nevertheless we saw this before say the truth is goes like this 40:41 comes first the comes Second, so how could the animal become if it's already because it's what's called because the the second is that comes of is say what do we call for our purposes like an isra it's more expansive than the first when 41:04 it's a say who is it to who is it to Jews Jews a gentile is permitted to eat a behemoth on the other hand when you have the is more expansive than the why because remember again we've made reference to this before and we're going to see it later on actually in Shabas we'll say 41:30 that what that the there's an opinion that holds the is not just for Jews it applies to Gentiles as well therefore the of is a more expansive than the iso Therefore, even though the isra occurs first, the of will still devolve upon the animal because it is a more expansive. And that is why Rabihuda 41:53 holds that if you eat the g of you get what two sets of malus first set of malus ultimately again for consuming second set of malus ultimately again for consuming ial that's true when there are two of the same caliber but when one is more expansive than the next the second is 42:18 has the ability to devolve upon the first more expansive So we'll stop over here. We'll pick up tomorrow again tomorrow as well.
Expand transcript 5,962 words
