(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Avodah Zarah 67



(a) After ruling like the Seifa of our Mishnah (that 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam is Mutar' [see Tosfos 'Amar Rav Yehudah']), Rav Yehudah Amar Rav qualifies the Mishnah's example 'K'gon Chometz she'Nafal al-Gabei G'risin' to where the vinegar fell on hot G'risin. If it were fall on cold G'risin which was then heated up - the stew would be Asur (because it would be considered 'Hishbi'ach ve'li'be'Sof Pagam' [since until the mixture becomes hot, the taste is pleasant).

(b) Ravin as well as Rav Dimi (when they arrived from Eretz Yisrael), quoted Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan - who corroborated the previous ruling of Rav Yehudah Amar Rav.

(c) According to Rav Dimi's testimony, they actually used to eat cold G'risin with vinegar in Tzipori on Arvei Shabasos, and they called it ...

(d) ... 'Shechalayim'.

(a) Resh Lakish rules that, if for example, the stew is spoiled but would have tasted good had they added salt - 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam' does not apply, and the stew is Asur.

(b) In the second Lashon however, he rules - that as long as the stew is now spoilt, 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam' applies, irrespective, and the stew is permitted.

(a) Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan rules that ...
1. ... 'Kol she'Ta'amo u'Mamasho (where the actual Isur is contained in the mixture [only it is unrecognizable as an Isur]) - Asur ve'Lokin Alav'.
2. ... 'Ta'amo ve'Lo Mamasho (e.g. milk that fell into a meat dish and became absorbed in it, or Cheilev that fell into a cooked dish and melted) - Asur ve'Ein Lokin Alav'.
(b) The Shiur of Isur for Malkos is 'K'dei Achilas P'ras', comprising - four k'Beitzim (the volume of half a loaf of three loaves to a Kav, which in turn is twenty-four k'Beitzim).

(c) The source for the Shiur of 'K'dei Achilas P'ras' is - 'Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai', which is the source of the majority of Shiurim.

(d) Rebbi Yochanan concludes 've'Im Ribah Ta'am li'Fegam, Mutar'. By 'Ribah', he means to include - even where, had they added salt, the food would have tasted good.




(a) We rule - like the second (lenient) Lashon of Resh Lakish (regarding 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam' which could have been rectified by adding salt).

(b) Rav Kahana extrapolates from the statements of Rav Yehudah, Rabah bar Chanah, Rav Dimi, Resh Lakish and Rebbi Avahu - that they all hold 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam Mutar'.

(c) We extrapolate from Resh Lakish's words 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam she'Amru ... ' - that he is only quoting and commenting on those who hold 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam Mutar', but that he himself, holds 'Asur.

(d) The Tana who actually holds 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam Asur' is - Rebbi Meir, and the Tana who argues with him is - Rebbi Shimon.

(a) We cite Rebbi Meir's source as 'Gi'ulei Ovdei-Kochavim'. This refer to - the Parshah of the K'lei Midian (in Matos), which the soldiers brought back with them as booty, and which required Hag'alah (Kashering in hot water).

(b) Rebbi Shimon counters Rebbi Meir's proof from there like Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua, who qualifies the Din of Gi'ulei Nochrim - by confining it to the day that the vessels were used. Once twenty-four hours had passed, the taste exuded from the walls of the vessel were considered 'Nosen Ta'am li'Fegam', and Hag'alah was no longer necessary.

(c) Rebbi Meir refutes this distinction on the grounds - that even on the same day, the taste was bound to have deteriorated to a certain level of Li'fegam, yet the Torah forbade the vessels.

(a) Rebbi Shimon's source is the Pasuk "Lo Sochlu Kol Neveilah, la'Ger Asher bi'She'arecha Titnenu", from which he learns in a Beraisa - that only Neveilah which is fit for a Ger is forbidden, but not that what has been ren dered inedible.

(b) Rebbi Meir uses this Pasuk to preclude 'Seruchah Me'ikara', which means - food that was unfit to eat in the first place (such as an animal that was infested with boils already in its lifetime).

(c) Rebbi Shimon disagrees with Rebbi Meir in this point - because such an animal is considered dust and does not require a Pasuk to permit it.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,