F. He said to him, “Perhaps there the case refers to a liver that is prohibited [such as a liver from a terefah animal (Rashi)].” [111a] And [it is prohibited] because of the fat [from the animal that is on the liver].
H. When he [Safra] again journeyed [to Israel] he found R. Zeriqa. He said to him, “This [matter of the status of the blood of a liver] also should be no question. For I and Yannai the son of R. Ammi called on the house of Judah the son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi. And they served us the windpipe along with [the organs] appended to it [i.e., the lung, heart and liver, all cooked together]. And we ate it.”
I. By way of contradiction to this R. Ashi raised a question. And some say it was R. Samuel from Zeruqinia: “But perhaps [in the case in H] the opening of the windpipe was outside of the pot [when they cooked the dish, and the blood ran out of the pot through the pipe.]”
J. Another possible explanation is that [the liver before it was cooked with the other organs] was first scalded [in boiling water to seal in the blood]. As was the case of R. Huna who used to scald [liver] in vinegar. And R. Nahman used to scald [liver] in boiling water.
K. R. Pappa reasoned before Raba in accord with the view that the vinegar [itself that was used for this purpose] is prohibited [because it contains some of the blood from the liver]. He said to him, “If the vinegar itself is prohibited, it [the liver] too should be prohibited. For what [blood that] it egests [into the vinegar] it will again absorb.”
A. Rab bar Sheba called upon the house of R. Nahman. They brought before him boiled liver and he did not eat it. They said to him [Nahman], “There is a member of the house of Rab inside who does not eat. And who is he? Rab bar Sheba.” R. Nahman said to them, “Make him eat.”
B. This accords with a Tannaite dispute: R. Eliezer says, “The [blood from a] liver renders [food cooked with it in a pot] prohibited. But it itself does not become prohibited because it egests [blood] but does not absorb it.” R. Ishmael the son of R. Yohanan b. Beroqa says, “[Blood from] a seasoned [liver] renders [food cooked with it] prohibited and it itself becomes prohibited. [The spices soften the liver so that it will reabsorb the blood.] [Blood from] a boiled [liver] renders [food cooked with it] prohibited and it itself becomes prohibited. [The boiling softens the liver so that it will reabsorb the blood.]”
C. Raba bar R. Huna called upon the house of Raba bar R. Nahman. They brought before him three seahs of glazed pastries. He said to them, “How did you know that I was coming?” They said to him, “Are you more important than [the Sabbath? We prepared the pastries for the Sabbath.] For it is written, `[If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day,] and call the Sabbath a delight [and the holy day of the Lord honorable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly]' (Isa. 58:13).”
D. Meanwhile he found there a certain liver that had an artery attached that was saturated with blood. He said to them, “Why did you prepare this [liver for eating? The blood in the artery renders it prohibited.]” They said to him, “How then shall we prepare it?” He said to them, “Cut it across its length and width. [And place it on the fire] with the cut side facing down.”
E. And this concern applies to a liver. But regarding [the fluid in] a spleen [with regard to the law we deem that to have the status of] ordinary fat. [So if cooked in a pot, it does not render prohibited the other foods cooked with it.]
F. This accords with [the practice of] Samuel. They prepared for him a cooked dish with spleen on the day that he would have [bloodletting] done to him.
A. It was stated: [Broiling] liver on top of meat is permitted [because] the blood slides off. [Broiling] spleen on top of meat is prohibited. What is the basis for this? The fat [in the liquid that exudes] adheres and penetrates (Jastrow).
B. R. Dimi from Nehardea taught the reverse. [Broiling] spleen on top of meat is permitted. What is the basis for this? The fat [in the liquid that exudes from meat] of a slaughtered animal is prohibited [only] on the authority of the rabbis. [Broiling] liver on top of meat is prohibited [because] the blood [is prohibited] on the authority of the Torah.
C. Meremar expounded, “[With regard to broiling] the law is in accord with the following: Both for liver and for spleen — if it is [broiled] under a piece of meat, it is permitted. If it is [broiled] on top of a piece of meat — after the fact, yes [you may eat it]. To begin with, no [you may not eat the meat].”
D. R. Ashi called upon the house of Rami bar Abba [111b] his father-in-law. He saw the son of Rami bar Abba was broiling, on a spit, liver on top of meat. He said, “How arrogant is this rabbi. Concerning which case did the rabbis state the matter [that it is permitted to eat liver broiled in this manner]? Only after the fact [if the meat had already been prepared in this fashion]. But to begin with did they state [that it is permitted to do this]?
E. And if there is a pan underneath to catch the drippings, then even where the meat is on top of the liver it is prohibited [to prepare the meat in this manner]. [The blood of the liver will drip into the pan and he will eat it.]
F. And why is this [rule] different from [the rule] for blood from [any] meat? The blood from meat sinks [to the bottom of the pan and he can pour off the fat to eat it and leave behind the blood]. The blood from the liver floats [on top of the pan and he cannot pour off the fat without also taking some blood with it (Cashdan)].
A. Said R. Nahman, said Samuel, “The knife that he used for slaughtering — he is prohibited from using it to cut any scalding hot foods. [What is the rule regarding the use of this knife to cut] cold foods? There are some that say that it must be washed [first before it is used to cut cold foods]. And there are some that say that it does not have to be washed [first].”
B. Said R. Judah, said Samuel, “On the platter on which one salted meat [to remove the blood], it is prohibited to eat scalding hot foods.”
C. And Samuel is consistent with his opinion elsewhere. For said Samuel, “[With regard to the rules of mixtures of foods] salting is equivalent to scalding and pickling is equivalent to boiling.”
D. When Rabin came [from Israel to Babylonia he said]: Said R. Yohanan, “[With regard to the rules of mixtures of foods] salting is not equivalent to scalding and pickling is not equivalent to boiling.”
E. Said Abayye, “This rule of Rabin has no authority. For there was once a dish in the house of R. Ammi that was used for salting meat. And he broke it [so that they would not use it again. This implies that it had absorbed blood as if it was heated in the dish.]”
F. What is the case? R. Ammi was a student of R. Yohanan [and should have followed in accord with his view]. On what basis then did he break the dish? Must it not be that he heard the rule from R. Yohanan himself that he said, “[With regard to the rules of mixtures of foods] salting is equivalent to scalding?”
A. R. Kahana the brother of R. Judah sat in session before R. Huna. And he sat and stated, “On the platter on which one salted meat [to remove the blood], it is prohibited to eat scalding foods [as in B above]. But [with regard to] a radish that one cut with a knife [that was used for cutting meat], it is permitted to eat it in a milk concoction.”
B. What is the basis for this distinction? Said Abayye, “This one [the radish cut with a knife used for meat] absorbed a permitted substance [i.e., the residue of the meat that he cut]. And this one [the platter used for salting] absorbed prohibited substance [i.e., the blood].”
C. Said Raba, “What difference does it make if it absorbed a permitted substance? In the final analysis this permitted substance [of the radish containing the residue of the meat, by combining with milk in the concoction], results in a prohibited mixture [of milk and meat] and he will come to eat a prohibited substance!”
D. Rather said Raba, “[The distinction between the two cases of the radish and the platter is as follows:] This one [the radish] he can taste [to see if it tastes like meat]. And this one [the meat on the platter] he cannot taste [to see if it tastes like blood]. [Tasting blood is prohibited.]”
E. Said R. Pappa to Raba, “One may let a gentile chef taste it. For is it not taught on Tannaite authority: [As regards] a pot in which one cooked meat — he should not [thereafter] cook in it dairy. (Text here omits: [If he cooked in it] dairy, he should not [thereafter] cook in it meat.) [Text here adds:] But if one cooked [food in any of these prohibited ways] — lo, this [i.e., what has been cooked second] is prohibited if [the food that was cooked first] imparted to it flavor. [If he cooked in it] heave-offering, he should not [thereafter] cook in it unconsecrated produce. But if one cooked [food in any of these prohibited ways] — lo, this [i.e., what has been cooked second] is prohibited if [the food that was cooked first] imparted to it flavor [T. Ter. 8:16].
F. “And we say it makes perfect sense that regarding [a mixture of] heave-offering one may give it to a priest to taste it. But who can taste [a mixture of] meat and milk? And we said regarding this that one may give it to a [gentile] chef to taste it. Here too let him give it to a [gentile] chef to taste it.”
G. [Raba answered,] “Here then it must be that we uphold the view [that one cannot eat meat from a platter that might have imparted to it blood] where there is no [gentile] chef [present to taste it].”
A. It was stated: Hot fish served on a platter [used for meat] — Rab said, “It is prohibited to eat them in a milk concoction.” And Samuel said, “It is permitted to eat them in a milk concoction.”
B. Rab said it is prohibited [because he reasons that the platter] imparts flavor [of meat to the fish]. Samuel said it is permitted [because he reasons that the platter] imparts flavor [of the meat to the fish and] that in turn imparts flavor [to the milk concoction].[We are not concerned with a second remove of flavor.]
C. And the view of Rab is not based on an explicitly stated rule. Rather it is derived from a general principle. For Rab called upon the house of R. Shimi bar Hiyya, his grandson. He had pain in his eyes. They prepared for him a salve on a dish. After that they brought him cooked food on it [the dish]. He detected taste of the salve [in the cooked food]. He said, “See how far it [the dish] imparts flavor.”
D. But the cases [of B and C] are not completely analogous. That case [of the salve] is different. For it is very bitter [and goes further to impart flavor].
A. R. Eleazar was attending Mar Samuel. They brought before him fish on a platter [used for meat] and he ate them in a milk concoction. He served some to him [Eleazar] but he did not eat it. He [Samuel] said to him, “They served this to your master [i.e., to Rab] and he ate it. And yet you do not eat it?”
B. He [Eleazar] came before Rab and said to him, “Has the master retracted his opinion [of B above]?” He [Rab] said to him, “May mercy come upon the offspring of Abba bar Abba [i.e., Samuel] if he were to have given me anything [to eat] contrary to my view [of the law].” [Rab did not retract his view and the incident never occurred (Rashi).]
A. R. Huna and R. Hiyya bar Ashi were sitting. One was on one side of the ferry to Sura and the other was on the other side of the ferry. They brought to one master fish on a platter [used for meat] and he ate them in a milk concoction. They brought to the other master figs and grapes in the middle of the dinner and he ate them and did not recite a separate blessing for them. One master said to his companion, “You oaf! Would your master do that?” And the other master said to his companion, “You oaf! Would your master do that?”
B. [Interpret the matter as follows:] One master said to his companion, “I reason in accord with the view of Samuel [above, V.1 B].” And the other master said to his companion, “I reason in accord with the view of R. Hiyya.”
C. For taught R. Hiyya, “[If one recited the blessing over] the bread he exempts thereby every kind of food [from a separate blessing at the dinner]. [If one recited the blessing over] the wine he exempts thereby every kind of drink [from a separate blessing, b. Ber 41b].”
A. Hezekiah [said] in the name of Abayye, “The law accords with the view that hot fish served on a platter [used for meat] — it is permitted to eat them in a milk concoction [V.1 A]. A radish that one cut with a knife [that was used for cutting meat], it is prohibited to eat it in a milk concoction [IV.2 A].”