Description
As we progress in our study of the sugya of Rabba & Rav in Chulin 100a, we progress towards discovering consistency in the view of Rav. The issue is familiar: on the one hand the 1st piece of meat becomes Issur due to a משהו. Why then does Rav insist that the only way that piece can generate Issur is if it had absorbed Ta'am from the Neveyla. Why shouldn't the pieces in the balance of the pot become אסורות במשהו just as the 1st piece had? Why does Rav refuse to apply the principle of R' Yehuda's משהו consistently? Shall we say that the first piece can absorb a משהו but cannot transmit that משהו? Why should this be so? Furthermore, why does Rav need the principle of חננ to justify the Issur that the 1st piece transmits to the others?
0 comments Leave a Comment