Podcast
Talking Talmud
Hosted by Yardaena Osband & Anne Gordon · EN
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!
60episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
Hullin 53: Clawed and Kosher - Maybe
4d ago00:18:16Tap to summarizeWhen a kosher animal is clawed by a non-kosher animal - when do we take it as a given that it will be considered a treyfa -- or really to the contrary? What if the animal is a cat? Or a fox? Or a hawk? Why is the question what animal did the clawing, as compared to asking what damage has been caused? Plus, determining what happened to the clawed animal, when nothing was really seen. Where the clawing animal's claws poisonous? If so, doesn't that harm lead to the animal becoming a treyfa? The sages are establishing rules of thumb so that they can make assumptions about the clawed animal, rather then investigating every case.
Transcribe →Hullin 52: Dislocations
5d ago00:14:59Tap to summarizeA majority of broken ribs -- seems to be a treyfa. But what is the way in which they were broken? Does having been attached to the vertabrae make the process that much more challenging? If the ribs are dislocated and the spine is not damaged. Also, an animal that is clawed by a wolf (or a predator of that size or larger) will render the victim animal a treyfa (and predator birds from a "netz." But what about a small animal, like a cat?
Transcribe →Hullin 51: Falling from a Roof, Falling from the Air
5d ago00:15:05Tap to summarizeIf/when an animal falls from a roof -- if it breaks its limbs, the question shifts to focus on whether the injury is common (like rheumatism) or unusual, like a broken spine. And the concern here is only for the common case. Also, a bird that fundamentally crashes on water is considered fine if it can swim the length of its body -- upstream. Plus, what if a bird falls into all kinds of other substances?
Transcribe →Hullin 50: Confusing Intestines
6d ago00:17:06Tap to summarizePerforated intestines are likely to be sealed by internal mucous, which would leave the animal kosher. The Gemara then traces Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's statement on this point - namely, that it would be kosher. And Rabbi Shimon's view on mourning -- that a mourner who first hears about the death late will join the count with the family that is sitting shiva if he is close enough to join them (and then continue his own count afterwards). Until the end of the discussion, when Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's approach is rejected, and Rabbi Shimon's is upheld. Also, the inner and outer paunch - with a lot of detail regarding what needs to be intact to be able to call the animal kosher. But the sages themselves have a lot of questions here.
Transcribe →Hullin 49: Brine and Honey as Neutralizing Venom
1w ago00:18:51Tap to summarizeIf there's a perforation in the 4th stomach of a cow, the kohanim were accustomed to treat it as permitted. Which leads to lots of discussion and tracing back. With a mnemonic about the blessing of the kohanim. And that blessing pertaining specifically to the meat. Also, the implications of the forbidden fat -- in contrast to the permitted fat. Plus, what if the impetus to be lenient puts others at risk, for example? Also, unguarded honey, and the possible kashrut issues, as compared to a risk in ancient honey..
Transcribe →Hullin 48: The Local Rabbi Is Far Away
1w ago00:14:58Tap to summarizeThe unusual kashrut halakhic question that was brought from Asia Minor to the land of Israel for an answer. And they repeated the question: whether an animal that had worms in its liver would be kosher or not. Finally, they were told that it was kosher. What about if a needle was found in a lung? Doesn't that render the animal not-kosher/a treyfa? A case of this is brought to explain why it's not a simple answer.
Transcribe →Hullin 47: The Telling Colors of Blood
1w ago00:15:40Tap to summarizeRulings by Rava: Issues of the lungs, specifically with regard to the lobes. Plus, Meimar, who answers the halakhic questions differently from Rava. Until the Gemara establishes that their answers pertain to different cases -- regarding the lobes. The sages are very precise here in their examination of the different concerns. Also, the implications of various colors -- dark grey (kosher) vs. black (not kosher) vs. green (kosher) vs. red (kosher) vs. Black being the shift from the red of blood, as it deteriorates, which means there's a problem in the lung that would lead to the color black. Plus, the stories of Rabbi Natan, who saves a couple of babies by advising their mothers to let the children's blood to be reabsorbed before brit milah (circumcision).
Transcribe →Hullin 46: Frictionless Kashrut
2w ago00:13:43Tap to summarizeThe Gemara moves on to the mishnah''s case of an animal that was missing a liver -- which is surely a treyfa -- but what if an olive's worth remained? That seems to define the animal as a kosher animal. But less than a "kezayit" amount of the liver seems that it would get that treyfa distinction. Also, 4 rulings - listed with a mnemonic. Including the case of creepy crawlies - and the question of them not bleeding, with implications for Shabbat -- all as a parallel to a punctured (or not!) lung. But note throughout here the lack of attack among the sages, despite all the differences of opinion, and with practical implications.
Transcribe →Hullin 45: Talmudic Anatomy - Animals Edition
2w ago00:15:28Tap to summarizeA review of injuries to various body parts and the implications for a kosher shechitah. Note the sages' awareness of the animals' anatomy. After all, they did open these animals up and were able to discern their inner workings. Note also the sages' verbal descriptions of the visual/physical. Also, a deeper dive into the potential perforation of the heart -- and which chamber of the heart was (presumably necessarily) perforated? And, of course, note the big loss that a treyfa discovery would mean. It wasn't a simple thing to render the meat before the shochet into non-kosher food.
Transcribe →Hullin 44: Resolved by a Bat Kol/Heavenly Voice (Or Not)
2w ago00:22:02Tap to summarizeAn investigation into an acceptance of the stringencies of Rav and the stringencies of Shmuel when it comes to the details of shechitah, including the location of where one begins the process of slaughtering. But taking the stringencies of both sages, instead of following either of them for the full gamut of their respective views, seems incongruous in its inconsistency. Plus, the bat kol (heavenly voice) that establishes halakhah as per Beit Hillel, though it seems a contradiction here -- and also as against the statement that we do not determine practice from a bat kol! Also, what is the "majority" of the trachea? Is it the thickness of the trachea wall or is it the majority of the hollowness of the tube itself? Plus, the case of Yehezkel (Ezekiel), who never personally ate from the meat of an animal that had been called into question, even though it was subsequently declared fine. Also, the decision to offer the prime cut.
Transcribe →