Avodah Zarah, Daf Mem, Part 2

 

Introduction

In yesterday s sugya we learned that for the tarit fish to be edible when bought from a non-Jew, its head and backbone must be recognizable. Today s sugya continues discussing this subject.

 

אמר רב יהודה משמיה דעולא מחלוקת לטבל בצירן אבל בגופן דברי הכל אסור עד שיהא ראש ושדרה ניכר

 

Rav Judah said in the name of Ulla: There is a dispute [between R. Huna and R. Nahman over the permissibility] to dip [bread] in the brine, but as regards eating the fish itself, all agree that it is prohibited unless both the head and backbone are recognizable.

 

The rules regarding the brine are more lenient than the rules regarding eating the fish itself. To eat the fish itself, one needs to be able to see the head and backbone.

 

אמר ר’ זירא מריש הוה מטבילנא בצירן כיון דשמענא להא דאמר רב יהודה משמיה דעולא מחלוקת לטבל בצירן אבל בגופן דברי הכל אסור עד שיהא ראש ושדרה ניכר בצירן נמי לא מטבילנא

 

R. Zera said: At first I used to dip [bread] in the brine; but when I heard the statement of Rav Judah in the name of Ulla, the dispute is over the permissibility to dip [bread] in the brine but as regards eating the fish itself all agree that it is prohibited unless both the head and backbone are recognizable, I would not also dip in it.

 

R. Zera seems to hold like R. Huna, according to whom the head and backbone must be recognizable. But he used to think that the disagreement was over eating the fish itself. R. Huna would have agreed that when it comes to dipping in the brine, only one sign of its kashrut is needed. But then when he heard that they disagree over dipping in the brine, and that R. Huna said that even then both signs are needed, he stopped dipping in the brine.

 

אמר רב פפא הלכתא עד שיהא ראש ושדרה ניכר של כל אחת ואחת

 

R. Papa said: The halakhah is that both the head and backbone of each fish must be recognizable.

 

מיתיבי חתיכות שיש בהן סימן בין בכולן בין במקצתן ואפילו באחד ממאה שבהן כולן מותרות ומעשה בעובד כוכבים אחד שהביא גרב של חתיכות ונמצא סימן באחת מהן והתיר רשב"ג את הגרב כולו

 

They objected: Pieces of fish which have a sign [that the fish was of a clean species] whether in all of them, some of them or even in one in one hundred, they are all permitted. And it once happened that a non-Jew brought a barrel containing pieces of fish and a mark [of it being clean] was found in one of them and Rabban Shimon b. Gamaliel declared the whole barrel to be permitted!

 

R. Papa had said that the head and spine of each and every fish must be recognizable. But the baraita seems to imply that even if only one in an entire barrel is recognizable, they are all kosher.

 

תרגמה רב פפא כשחתיכות שוות

א"ה מאי למימרא מהו דתימא ניחוש דלמא אתרמי קמ"ל

 

R. Papa interpreted this to be a case where the pieces fit together.

If so, what does this teach us! What might you have said? We are concerned lest [that fish which had the mark of cleanness] happened [to fit in] by chance; so he informs us [that we need have no such fear].

 

R. Papa said that the case of the barrel of fish which Rabban Shimon b. Gamaliel permitted was only when the pieces fit together such that we could see that they all came from one fish. But this is a bit too obvious to even need to be stated. The Talmud solves this minor problem by suggesting that we might have been concerned that this was just happenstance, that there was some unclean fish together with the clean fish. Therefore, according to R. Papa, we learn that we are not concerned about such a possibility. But if all of the pieces do not fit together, then we need to recognize the head and backbone of each and every fish.