August 7 · 14 min
TT
Religion & SpiritualityJudaism
Talking Talmud
Yardaena Osband & Anne Gordon
Learning the daf? We have something for you to think about. Not learning the daf? We have something for you to think about! (Along with a taste of the daf...)
Join the conversation with us!
- 63 episodes
- daily
- Avg 17 min
- English
Counted on this page — what you have heard stays on this device, so it is not something the list can be paged by.
- TTS31 · E98August 6 · 19 min
Hullin 98: Counting Eggs
The question of 1 in 60 vs. 1 in 61, and the conundrum of eggs -- where they are all counted, and including in the same food -- depending on the ratio of non-kosher to kosher. The kosher food essentially dwarfs the non-kosher food to nullify it. Also, the source texts from the rulings regarding the nazir. With a question of whether the ration is 1/60 or 1/100.
- TTS31 · E97August 5 · 17 min
Hullin 97: A Non-Jewish Chef, a Cow's Udder, and 1/60th of Food
When foods get mingled, and you need to determine whether you can eat the kosher food, or whether the contamination of the non-kosher with the kosher. Plus, how to pull away the non-kosher/forbidden fat, and leave the kosher meat behind, with no flavor of the forbidden fat added to the taste of the otherwise kosher food. Determining whether the non-kosher food imparts flavor -- one needs a non-Jewish "taster," a gourmand or a chef, who knows the taste of the non-kosher food and has the ability to determine whether that non-kosher taste is present in the kosher food (and therefore rendering it non-kosher). Also, determining how much non-kosher food can be present in a mixture with kosher food, primarily via whether it imparts flavor. Which leads to the discussion of 1/60th of the sum total. And the classic example of a cow's udder, that is meat and has milk in it.
- TTS31 · E96August 4 · 14 min
Hullin 96: The Flavor of the Sciatic Nerve
2 mishnayot! 1 - Which part of the sciatic nerve incurs a violation of the prohibition? And how much would one need to eat to be liable? Including a dispute and the distinction between what was prohibited at the biblical level of prohibition and what was prohibited at the rabbinic level. With an acceptance of diversity in the practice of kashrut that seems radical for many in this day and age. 2 - What happens when the gid ha-nasheh is imparting flavor to your meat? If it were not imparting flavor, you might well be able to eat that meat. But if it does, then you have to treat it as prohibiting the meat as well. But how do you know whether the sciatic nerve is providing flavor?
- TTS31 · E95August 3 · 19 min
Hullin 95: Keeping Kosher
The case of meat that is held by a non-Jew: what if it wasn't supervised continually? According to Rav - that's prohibited as a caution against the possibility that the kosher meat was swapped out for non-kosher meat. Which leads to a discussion of that likelihood, as the Gemara argues against Rav. Also, if the meat were unsupervised at any time, was it a stringency to not eat it, or was that required? With a story about a ferry and a festival. Which leads into discussion of how the sages used portents -- not quite divination, but some inference from "signs" that are established three times.
- TTAugust 2 · 23 min
Hullin 94: False Pretenses and a Town of Kosher Meat
A new mishnah! When a Jew makes a gift or sale of meat to a non-Jew that includes the gid ha-nasheh, because the process of "nikor" hadn't happened. Specifically, in the case of the whole thigh. Note that in some communities, all of the slaughterers were Jewish, and all meat was then presumed to be kosher (if sold by a non-Jew, presumably already purchased from the Jewish slaughterer). And announcements were made when non-kosher meat was on the market on a given day. But in a place without that kind of announcement, then purchasing from a non-Jew would not be permitted. Also, if the non-Jew cut the thigh that had gid ha-nasheh in it, then it might deceive Jewish buyers, which would obviously be problematic. Which leads to a discussion of false pretenses, even when nothing. Plus, other actions a person should not do because they are misleading, even if no other wrong-doing is taking place. Except possibly if it's to demonstrate that one's guest is worthy of honor, as per the cases of wine and oil on this daf. Plus, the horrible outcome of violating a policy of not giving food received from one's host to the host's children, in this case, the matter of 3 eggs. Also, in a town of all kosher slaughterers, how would the Jews make the announcement that there was non-kosher food on the given day, without it being obnoxious in the faces of the non-Jews? They made the genteel effort to refer to soldiers, for example. Note that self-deception isn't the same problem as false pretenses.
- TTS31 · E93August 2 · 17 min
Hullin 93: Trustworthy Butchers
If the head of an offering is buried in hot ash to singe off the hair, and if that was in the place of the slaughtering in an upright position, the blood flows out (yes, very gory) and after it is removed, the meat can be eaten. Plus, attention to the inner and outer sinews of the animal's thigh, and the difference between a rabbinic vs. a Torah-level prohibition (the inner one being the gid ha-nasheh). But can the butchers be trusted in what they have to say about the kashrut of the meat, about the removal of the sciatic nerve? In the end, the conclusion is that they are trustworthy. But it's a complicated process and with more and less taxing elements, which might influence their credibility.
- TTJuly 31 · 13 min
Hullin 92: The Righteous Who Uphold the World
First, housekeeping note... Also, 7 interpretations of Yosef and the gifts God gave to the Jewish people. Plus, the 15 pieces of silver that God acquired for the people, i an allusion to the 15th day of Nisan and the exodus from Egypt and another allusion to 45 (or 30...) righteous people, without whom the world would not exist. Or understand the 30 as the commandments that the Noachides apparently took upon themselves - that many more than the 7. But they keep only 3, including not writing a marriage contract for males -- a difficult passage for modern ears. Plus, more on the gid ha-nasheh, and the surprising notion that one shouldn't be culpable for eating it to begin with.
- TTS31 · E91July 30 · 16 min
Hullin 91: Wrestling with the Angel
The discussion of the gid ha-nasheh leads into some lovely aggadic passages. First of all, did the sciatic nerve have to be in the right thigh to be prohibited at the Torah level or not? (Hint: It's a machloket). The Gemara breaks down the wrestling between Jacob and the angel from Genesis, to ensure that the injury would be in the right leg. But, again, not everyone thought that was necessary, and for that view, the sciatic nerve in each leg is equally prohibited. With further details about keeping a non-Jew, with whom one might be expected to spar, on the right side, and conversely, one must stay clear of the right side of the Torah scholar. Also, other midrashim/aggadot about Jacob -- how the stones became one larger stone to be his pillow, as it were (solving for a contradiction in the text). Plus, going back to that fight with the angel, and the ambiguities in that text. And the hint to exile and the leadership in both exile and the land of Israel.
- TTS31 · E90July 29 · 18 min
Hullin 90: The Very Large Pile of 300 Kor of Ash on the Altar
More on the sciatic nerve -- the prohibition against the "gid ha-nasheh" applies only to the sacrificial animals that are consumed (not a burnt-offering, but a peace-offering, for example). Though there are those who note that if you eat from a sacrificial animal that shouldn't be eaten from - that will still be lashes, as compared to a fully-burnt offering, which would not levy a penalty for not removing the gid ha-nasheh. And note that a removed gid ha-nasheh would not be brought on the altar. Also, the gid ha-nasheh from the peace-offering -- it should be swept to the drain, while the burnt-offering would entail putting it on the pile of ash in the middle of the altar. Which leads into a discussion of exaggeration in the Torah, by the prophets, and by the sages. But this was not the norm, and the Gemara provides the specific list of the exaggerations from these three sources.
- TTS31 · E89July 28 · 12 min
Hullin 89: The Beautiful Blue of the Heavens and the Sea
Beginning with some aggadic material - with Abraham claiming about himself that he is nothing but dust and ashes, and that he and his descendants have 2 mitzvot. Which 2 mitzvot is a matter of discussion. The discussion leads to the color of "tekhelet" -- the blue thread in tzitzit, the ritual fringes, and what makes them distinctive. Plus, an encounter with Nimrod. Also, chapter 7! With a new mishnah, and the wrestling between Jacob and the angel, which leads to the prohibition of the sciatic nerve, the "gid ha-nasheh," and the many details pertaining to it.
- TTS31 · E88July 27 · 14 min
Hullin 88: Ecological Benefits of Covering the Blood
Blood that splatters and blood that's left on the knife also need to be covered, with a verse to make that point. As long as there's no other blood there at the same time. But if the life-blood was covered, then these other extra locations of blood do not to be covered. Also, a new mishnah - with a long list of substances that can be used for covering the blood, including that which can make plants grow. Plus, defining "fine sand," as a possible blood-coverer. Also, what do you use if you're in a situation where there's no material that will support the sprouting of seeds after covering the blood?
- TTS31 · E87July 26 · 19 min
Hullin 87: A Family of Heretics
2 mishnayot! 1 - What if one is obligated to cover the blood after the slaughter of a non-domesticated animal or a bird and does not do it? A passerby who sees it should then cover the blood, but if the blood had been covered and it became uncovered, then there's no longer an obligation to cover. If the wind covered it, the obligation remains. But in a story of someone who covered the blood before the slaughterer had a chance to do so, the person who covered the blood had to pay (in gold) the slaughterer -- with a question as to why exactly he's penalized. Plus, another story of Sadducees and the dynamic in Rome between Jewish sects and the drama of Birkat HaMazon. 2 - If the blood that is supposed to be covered is mixed with water or wine or the blood of an animal that doesn't need to be covered -- if the mixture has the appearance of blood, it still needs to be covered, for example. And the solution itself, including the proportion of blood therein matters less than the appearance.
- TTS31 · E86July 25 · 22 min
Hullin 86: Taking Responsibility for Shechitah
A new mishnah! If a deaf-mute, someone with cognitive impairment, or a minor slaughtered an animal with supervision, then the slaughtering is kosher shechitah - and there's an obligation to cover the blood, if the animal were a non-domesticated animal or a bird. But not if there was no supervisor there. Likewise, when it comes to slaughtering an animal and its offspring on the same day. Also, Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi on covering the blood, and how far the requirement for taking care of this goes -- how did they figure out the halakhah? And another new mishnah! Slaughtering 100 animals in 1 place requires only 1 act of covering the blood.
- TTS31 · E85July 24 · 20 min
Hullin 85: Mitigating Factors to Covering the Blood
A new mishnah! Does the mitzvah of covering the blood apply to an animal that is discovered to be unfit for consumption? Whether because the animal is a treyfa or because the slaughtering was done in the name of idolatry, for example. With sources, and machloket (of course) in the Gemara on the mishnah, with a focus on the rabbis and Rabbi Shimon, and then, eventually, the view of Rabbi Meir as well. Plus, Rabbi Meir's opinion and Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi's opinion line up for some of the cases, in any case.
- TTS31 · E84July 23 · 15 min
Hullin 84: Don't Eat Too Much Meat
More on covering the blood of non-domesticated animals and birds, and how it applies to those animals that are prepared for it -- which itself requires some measure of investigation. Bottom line, only trap an animal when you truly need it for meat. Better to eat vegetables or grain, with specific advice per the money one might have to spend on food. Also, Rabbi Eina was teaching at the entrance to the house of the exilarch. Which leads into the timing of covering the blood of the non-domesticated animal. Apparently, Rabbi Eina's brother jumps in, and the parallel to brit milah (circumcision) is introduced, though the holiday may actually "win" depending on the parameters of when it would be done. Likewise, Rosh Hashanah --
- TTJuly 22 · 16 min
Hullin 83: Covering the Blood
4 events of proclaiming the slaughtering of an animal that was sold as well as the offspring, to help the buyers keep the dates straight. All the dates are connected to holidays, when festive meals would be prepared. Note that the calendar follows the Jewish day. Also, the mitzvah of covering the blood of a non-domestic sacrificial animal.
- TTS31 · E82July 21 · 26 min
Hullin 82: Who's Tracking the Animals and Their Offspring?
3 mishnayot on the daf! But first, on Rabbi Yochanan's position, in contrast to that of Resh Lakish, on the "eglah arufah," as listed in the mishnah -- where the position is that this case is not in the mishnah at all -- a bold statement, if nothing else. The first new mishnah! When 2 people purchase the animal and its offspring respectively, they need to be apprised of when the other animal is being slaughtered. Also, one who slaughters an animal and its offspring on the same day would be punished with 40 lashes -- depending on the time period of that slaughtering. And all the more so if the offspring and the offspring's offspring -- that might well entail two sets of lashes (namely, 80). Which raises the question of how many punishments can be visited upon the person who violates multiple prohibitions, and the Gemara introduces all kinds of other, potentially parallel cases, including that of the nazir. Also, the specificity of the Mishnah in general, and the fact that once it teaches a point in one place, it would not need to teach it elsewhere, as the first place is sufficient. Which means the other place must be teaching something else.
- TTS31 · E81July 20 · 17 min
Hullin 81: Shechitah That Isn't Shechitah
More on the prohibition against slaughtering an animal and its offspring on the same day -- in an effort to determine Rav Hamnuna's take on Rabbi Shimon's approach. Note that the slaughtering of the parent animal makes the slaughtering of the offspring a prohibition, but if the offspring weren't slaughtered, then there's no prohibition in slaughtering the parent animal either. Also, slaughter of an animal that is not fit for consumption independent of the kosher shechitah - such that the kosher slaughtering fundamentally doesn't work - isn't considered "shechitah." And that which is not suitable for kosher shechitah is not eligible for the category of prohibition of "the animal and its offspring," as that depends on the shechitah being shechitah.
- TTS31 · E79July 19 · 19 min
Hullin 80: When Lashes Are Applied
More on the koy -- whether a male goat and a female deer or a male deer and a female goat. With all the concomitant ramifications. Also, the biblical passage that prohibits slaughtering an animal and its offspring on the same day, and the practical implications for the one who violates the prohibition.