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


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Chulin, 64

CHULIN 64 - sponsored by Dr. and Mrs. Shalom Kelman of Baltimore, Maryland, USA. May Hashem bless them with long years filled with Torah, Chidushei Torah, and Nachas!


OPINIONS: The Beraisa states that a sign that an egg comes from a Kosher bird is that one end is round and the other end is pointed. If both ends are round or both are pointed, then that is a sign that the egg comes from a non-Kosher bird and is prohibited. The Beraisa earlier (63b) teaches that the same way in which we verify whether or not eggs are Kosher, we also verify whether or not fish eggs are Kosher.

The Halachah regarding fish eggs is recorded in the SHULCHAN ARUCH (YD 83:8) who writes that if both ends are the same, the egg is certainly not Kosher. If one end is pointy and one is round, then the buyer must ask the Jewish seller about the origin of the eggs. If he says that he personally took them from a Kosher fish, then he is believed. If he simply says that they are Kosher, then he is not believed unless he is known to be very trustworthy in areas of Kashrus.

The Shulchan Aruch adds that the common practice, though, is different. In practice, a person is allowed to buy *red* fish eggs, even from Nochrim, in any form, while *black* fish eggs are not eaten at all.

What is the basis for this practice? Do we follow this practice as the Halachah?

(a) The source for the custom is the words of the BEIS YOSEF himself. The Beis Yosef explains that it appears that the earlier generations must have held that the only reason why we require the seller to attest that he took the fish eggs out of the fish himself is to permit even certain black fish eggs. In the earlier generations, they must have known that there simply are no types of non-Kosher, *red* fish eggs. In order to determine that one did not make a mistake among the variations of black eggs, they prohibited consumption of all black fish eggs. The Beis Yosef comments that even though he heard that there indeed is a non-Kosher fish that lays red fish eggs, upon being salted they turn black. Therefore, the rule is that no red fish egg in the world can be non-Kosher if it remains red after being salted. The SHULCHAN GAVO'AH (YD 83:23) upholds the ruling of the Beis Yosef.

(b) The SHACH (YD 83:27) quotes the ISUR V'HETER who says that "we can no longer rely on the signs for fish eggs, as we are no longer experts." The Shach explains that it is clear that the Isur v'Heter is ruling not to rely on the Shulchan Aruch's practice regarding external signs. While the Shulchan Aruch writes that everything depends on color, the Isur v'Heter is saying that we follow the original Halachah, which depends on the believability of the seller. The PRI MEGADIM in SIFSEI DA'AS concurs with the Shach's understanding of the Isur v'Heter, but he says that it is possible that we remain with the Shulchan Aruch's practice never to eat black fish eggs.

The DARCHEI TESHUVAH (83:80) quotes many Acharonim, including the PRI CHADASH, YA'AVETZ, and the CHOCHMAS ADAM who rule that one should not rely on the custom of the Shulchan Aruch, but one should buy fish eggs based only on the believability of the Jewish seller. The ARUCH HA'SHULCHAN (YD 83:50) notes that many Acharonim objected strongly to the lenient practice of the Shulchan Aruch, and he agrees that this is a strange leniency. He explains that had his custom been clearly transmitted to us from the Ge'onim, then we could have relied on such a leniency. However, it is impossible to rely on a lenient custom that developed with no clear Halachic source, especially a custom that involves a Torah prohibition. He concludes that, therefore, no one eats fish eggs that have come from afar, whether they are red or black. (Y. Montrose)


QUESTION: Chizkiyah teaches that the source that eggs of a non-Kosher bird are prohibited is the verse, "v'Es Bas ha'Ya'anah" (Vayikra 11:16). By referring to the bird as the "*Bas* ha'Ya'anah," the Torah is alluding to its egg and teaching that its egg is also prohibited.

Why, though, do we need a special source to teach that the egg of a non-Kosher bird is prohibited? There is a general principle that "Kol ha'Yotzei Min ha'Tamei Tamei" -- anything that comes from a non-Kosher animal is also not Kosher, such as milk that comes from a non-Kosher animal (Bechoros 7b). This principle should prohibit eating an egg of a non-Kosher animal!


(a) TOSFOS (64a, DH she'Im Rikmah v'Achlah) suggests the following answer. Even though eggs that come from a Kosher bird should be prohibited as Ever Min ha'Chai since they emerged from a living animal, the Torah nevertheless permits them. When the Torah teaches the Mitzvah of Shilu'ach ha'Ken, it shows that eggs are not prohibited as Ever Min ha'Chai. We might have thought that just as the Torah excludes eggs from the prohibition of Ever Min ha'Chai, it also excludes them from all other prohibitions, such as "Kol ha'Yotzei Min ha'Tamei Tamei," and thus even the eggs of non-Kosher birds should be permissible. For this reason we need a new source to teach that the eggs of non-Kosher birds are prohibited.

(b) The RAMBAN and RE'AH answer that even though the eggs of a non-Kosher bird indeed would be prohibited because of the general principle of "Kol ha'Yotzei Min ha'Tamei Tamei," a new source is necessary to teach that one who eats such an egg is punished with Malkus. (Z. Wainstein)

Next daf


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