Avodah Zarah, Daf Ayin Vav, Part 4

 

Introduction

The Talmud continues to try to resolve why one mishnah requires kashering by making something white hot, while the other mishnah suffices with scalding.

 

רב פפא אמר האי קריד האי לא קריד

 

R. Papa said: [The reason is that] one is encrusted and the other is not.

 

R. Papa resolves that the two sources refer to different situations. If the pot is encrusted, then it must be made white hot. Scalding will not get off the encrusted taste. If the pot is not encrusted, then scalding is sufficient.

 

רב אשי אמר לעולם כדאמרן מעיקרא הכא התירא בלע הכא איסורא בלע ודקא קשיא לך דבעידנא דקא פליט איסורא קא פליט בעידנא דקא פליט לא איתיה לאיסורא בעיניה:

 

R. Ashi said: [The reason is] as was originally explained, in the former [the case of sacrifices] it absorbed what is permitted and in the latter [yayin neseskh] it absorbed what is prohibited, and as for your objection that what it emits is prohibited, at the time it emits [the taste] the prohibition is not visible.

 

R. Ashi offers the final resolution to the problem, which goes back to the first resolution. The pan in which sacrifices was cooked only needs scalding and not being made white hot. Although when it emits taste, that taste is also forbidden, like yayin nesekh, the taste is just taste. It is not visible. Since the taste is not visible, and when it absorbed the taste the taste was permitted, what it emits is less prohibited. Note that it still requires kashering, just a lesser form.