The Talmudist Cookbook

Ben Zoma would say: A good guest, what does he say? How much effort did the host expend on my behalf, how much meat did the host bring before me. How much wine did he bring before me. How many loaves [geluskaot] did he bring before me. All the effort that he expended, he expended only for me. However, a bad guest, what does he say? What effort did the host expend? I ate only one piece of bread, I ate only one piece of meat and I drank only one cup of wine. All the effort that the home owner expended he only expended on behalf of his wife and children.

Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rav said: One may establish an eiruv with lentil bread. The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so? Is such bread edible? But there was that lentil bread in the days of Mar Shmuel, which he threw to his dog, and even it would not eat it. Clearly, lentil bread is not fit for human consumption. The Gemara answers: That bread which the dog refused to eat was a mixture of various types of grain. It was baked in order to discover the taste of a bread of mixed ingredients and was similar to that which the prophet Ezekiel was commanded to eat, as it is written: “Take you for yourself wheat, and barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet, and spelt, and put them in one vessel, and make them for yourself into bread” (Ezekiel 4:9). This bread is unfit for human consumption, as even a dog at times will not eat it. However, bread prepared from lentils alone is edible. Rav Pappa said: That bread of Ezekiel’s was roasted in human excrement, as it is written: “And you shall eat it as barley cakes, and you shall bake it with human excrement, in their sight” (Ezekiel 4:12).

Rav was wont to say:The World-to-Come is not like this world.In the World-to-Come there is no eating, no drinking,no procreation, no business negotiations,no jealousy, no hatred, and no competition.Rather, the righteous sit with their crowns upon their heads, enjoying the splendor of the Divine Presence, as it is stated:“And they beheld God, and they ate and drank” (Exodus 24:11), meaning that beholding God’s countenance is tantamount to eating and drinking.

The Gemara cites additional instructions issued by Shmuel: Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda, his beloved student: Keen scholar, grab and eat, grab and drink, as the world from which we are departing is like a wedding feast, whose joy is only temporary, and one who does not take pleasure in it now will not be able to do so in the future.

The mishna mentions: And gifts distributed to the poor. Rav Yosef taught a baraita that the verse states: “And of sending portions one to another” (Esther 9:22), indicating two portions to one person. The verse continues: “And gifts to the poor” (Esther 9:22), indicating two gifts to two people. The Gemara relates that, on Purim, Rabbi Yehuda Nesia sent to Rabbi Oshaya the leg of a third-born calf and a jug of wine. Rabbi Oshaya sent him a message of gratitude: You have fulfilled two mitzvot through us, our teacher: The mitzva of: “And sending portions one to another,” and the mitzva of: “And gifts to the poor,” as Rabbi Oshaya was poor and this was a substantial gift. The Gemara relates that Rabba sent Purim portions from the house of the Exilarch to Marei bar Mar in the hands of Abaye, who was his nephew and student. The Purim portions consisted of a sack [taska] full of dates [kashva] and a cupful of roasted flour [kimḥa de’avshuna]. Abaye said to him: Now, Mari will say the popular expression: Even if a farmer becomes the king, the basket does not descend from his neck. Rabba was named the head of the yeshiva in Pumbedita, and nevertheless, he continued to send very plain gifts, because he was impoverished. Marei bar Mar sent back to him a sack full of ginger and a cupful of long peppers [pilpalta arikha], a much more expensive gift. Abaye said to him: The master, Rabba, will now say: I sent him sweet items and he sent me pungent ones. In describing that same incident, Abaye said: When I left the house of the master, Rabba, to go to Marei bar Mar, I was already satiated. However, when I arrived there at Marei bar Mar’s house, they served me sixty plates of sixty kinds of cooked dishes, and I ate sixty portions from each of them. The last dish was called pot roast, and I was still so hungry that I wanted to chew the plate afterward. And in continuation Abaye said: This explains the folk saying that people say: The poor man is hungry and does not know it, as Abaye was unaware how hungry he had been in his master’s house. Alternatively, there is another appropriate, popular expression: Room in the stomach for sweets can always be found. The Gemara relates that Abaye bar Avin and Rabbi Ḥanina bar Avin would exchange their meals with each other to fulfill their obligation of sending portions on Purim.

The Sages taught: Sponge-like cakes, honey cakes, spiced cakes [eskeritin], pan-fried bread [ḥallat hamasret], and bread prepared from a mixture of permitted grain and teruma, their owners are all exempt from ḥalla. The Gemara clarifies these obscure terms. What is pan-fried bread? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: This is boiled bread baked by ordinary homeowners in a deep frying pan. Reish Lakish said: These dishes are pot-boiled stew [ilpas], not bread. Since this food is prepared in a pot and not in an oven, it has been boiled rather than baked, and its owner is therefore exempt from ḥalla. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Even the owner of bread prepared like a pot-boiled stew is obligated in ḥalla, but the owners of these pan-fried breads and the other baked goods listed are exempt, as these breads were baked in the sun. Since they were not baked over a fire, they are not classified as bread with regard to the mitzva of ḥalla.

The Gemara asks: Didn’t Rava happen to come to the house of the Exilarch, and they breaded a young goose for him, and he said: If I had not seen that the breading is as clear as a white, i.e., new, coin, I would not eat from it out of concern that it absorbed some of the blood? And if it should enter your mind to accept the principle that as it absorbs it so it emits it, why note that he ate it particularly because it was clear? Even if it was not clear, it should also be permitted. The Gemara responds: There, it was talking about white flour, which is firm and does not allow the blood to pass through; Rava ate it only because its color indicated that no blood remained in the breading.

GEMARA:A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If there is among the members of a group one of them who has fine hands, a euphemism for one who always hastens to take a large quantity of food, what is the halakha concerning whether they can say to him: Take your allotted portion to eat and leave; and don’t take any more from the other’s members portions? Do we say that he can say to them: You accepted me in the group without preconditions, and you therefore have no right to limit how much I can take now? Or perhaps they can say to him: When we accepted you, it was only for the preparation of the offering, to ensure that enough people would be registered to guarantee that the entire offering would be eaten with none left over. However, we did not accept you with the understanding that you would eat considerably more than us.

The Gemara relates another incident with regard to this matter: Ameimar and Mar Zutra and Rav Ashi were sitting at the entrance to the house of King Izgur. The king’s chief butler was passing by with various foods. Rav Ashi saw Mar Zutra’sface blanch because he craved the food, so he took some of the food with his finger and put it in Mar Zutra’s mouth. The chief butler said to him: You have spoiled the king’s meal, as now he will not eat from it. The king’s soldiers who were there said to him: Why did you do this? He said to them: The one who makes such awful dishes is the one who actually spoiled the king’s food. They said to him: Why do you say this? He said to them: I saw something else, i.e., a leprous infection, in this meat. They checked and didn’t find anything. He took his finger and placed it on the food and said to them: Did you check here? They then checked that spot and found the infection. The Sages said to Rav Ashi: What is the reason that you relied on a miracle and assumed that leprosy would in fact be found there? He said to them: I saw a leprous spirit hovering over the food and realized that it had this defect.

The verse states: “Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the women, in the royal house, which belonged to King Ahasuerus” (Esther 1:9). The Gemara questions why she held the feast in the royal house, a place of men, rather than in the women’s house, where it should have been. Rava said in response: The two of them had sinful intentions. Ahasuerus wished to fornicate with the women, and Vashti wished to fornicate with the men. This explains the folk saying that people say: He with pumpkins and his wifewith zucchinis, indicating that often a man and his wife engage in similar actions.

MISHNA:Beit Shammai say: Spices may be pounded on a Festival in a slightly unusual manner, with a wooden pestle, and salt may be pounded only with an earthenware flask or with a wooden pot ladle, in a manner very different from that of a weekday. And Beit Hillel say: Spices may be pounded in their usual manner, even with a stone pestle, and as for salt, although it must be pounded in an irregular manner, a slight modification such as pounding it with a wooden pestle is enough to render the act permitted. GEMARA:In any event, everyone, both Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, agrees that the pounding of salt requires a change; it may not be performed in the regular weekday manner. What is the reason for this? Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda disputed this issue. One of them said: Everyone knows that all dishes require salt, and therefore one should prepare salt the day before the Festival. Since he failed to do so, this task may be performed on the Festival only in an unusual manner. But not all dishes require spices, and therefore it is possible that on the day prior to the Festival, one was not aware that he would require spices on the Festival. And the other one said a different reason: All spices lose their flavor and cannot be prepared ahead of time, and salt does not lose its flavor, which means one could have prepared it the day before. Since he neglected to do so, he may prepare salt on the Festival only in an unusual manner. The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between these two reasons? The Gemara answers: The practical difference between them is in a case where one knew beforehand which type of dish he wants to cook on the Festival. Since he knew which spices he would require, he could have prepared them the day before, in which case spices are no different from salt, and one should be required to prepare them in an unusual manner. However, if the reason is that spices lose their flavor, the fact that he knew which dishes he planned to prepare is of no relevance. Alternatively, there is a practical difference in the case of saffron, whose flavor does not dissipate over the course of a single day. Consequently, one who knows what dish he will prepare on the Festival could have prepared the saffron the day before. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: All foods that must be pounded before being eaten may be pounded in their usual manner, and this applies even to salt. The Gemara challenges this: But didn’t you say that everyone agrees that salt requires a change in its manner of preparation? The Gemara answers: He said this halakhain accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree in the case of foods that are regularly pounded. They both maintain that they may be pounded in their usual manner, and salt can be pounded together with them.They disagreed only about whether it is permitted to pound salt by itself, as Beit Shammai say: Salt may be pounded with a flask and with a wooden pot ladle for roasting, i.e., in small quantities, as one does not require much salt for roasting meat, but it may not be pounded in the large quantities required to salt meat for a cooked pot. And Beit Hillel say: It may be pounded by anything. The Gemara expresses surprise at this last statement: By anything? Can this enter your mind? How can Beit Hillel say that one may pound salt in any manner, when it has been established that everyone agrees that this may be performed only in an unusual manner? Rather, say: Salt may be pounded for anything, whether it is a small quantity for roasting or a large quantity for salting meat. Rav Aḥa Bardela said to his son: When you pound salt, tilt it a little to the side and then pound, so that it will at least be performed in a slightly different manner on a Festival. The Gemara similarly relates: Rav Sheshet heard the sound of a pestle pounding salt on a Festival. He said to himself: This sound is not coming from inside my house, as I have instructed the members of my household not to do so. The Gemara asks: But perhaps they tilted it and pounded in a permitted manner? The Gemara answers: This could not have been the case, as Rav Sheshet heard that it was a clear sound, unlike the one produced when a pestle is tilted. The Gemara asks: But perhaps they were pounding spices, which may be pounded in the regular fashion on a Festival? The Gemara answers: The sound produced by pounding spices is distinctive, like a bark, which he would have recognized.

HALAKHAH: A woman asked Rebbi Mana: Since I want to make iṭry in my kneading-trough, may I take from it so that it should be free from ḥallah? He said to her, why not? He went to ask his father. He said to him, it is forbidden; maybe she would change her mind to use it as bread dough. “Similarly, qenubqa’ot are obligated”. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Zwieback. Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Agul in the name of Ḥizqiah said boqrlṭa. That you should not say that because in the end it will be turned into a kind of farina it should be free from ḥallah. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda said, dough for the sick is obligated for ḥallah, that you should not say that because in the end it will be turned into a kind of farina it should be free from ḥallah. Rav said, dough for kutaḥ is subject to ḥallah. Rebbi Abun said, perhaps she will change her mind to make it white Zwieback. Rebbi Mana said, we have to announce publicly that those who make ‘abiṣin should make less than the measure since they think it is exempt but it is obligated. It was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose said in his father’s name: What is parboiled? If one adds hot water to flour. Dumpling, flour into hot water.”

§ It is stated in the mishna that one who vowed that loose cooked food is forbidden to him is permitted to taste a thick cooked food. The Gemara comments: The mishna is not in accordance with the custom of the Babylonians, as Rabbi Zeira said: Babylonians are foolish, as they eat bread with bread. They eat thick porridge with their bread, which is essentially eating one kind of bread with another. According to their custom, one who vows that cooked foods are forbidden to him is prohibited from eating even a thick cooked food.

In that context, Rav Ḥisda said that those fastidious resi-dents of Huzal, Babylonia were asked: How is it best to eat this porridge? Should wheat porridge be eaten with wheat bread and barley porridge with barley bread, or perhaps wheat porridge should be eaten with barley bread and barley porridge with wheat bread?

Rav said to his son Ḥiyya, and Rav Huna similarly said to his son Rabba: If you are invited to eat porridge, for such a meal you should travel up to the distance of a parasang [parsa]. If you are invited to eat ox meat, you should travel up to three parasangs. Rav said to his son Ḥiyya, and Rav Huna similarly said to his son Rabba: You should not spit out anything before your teacher, as this is disrespectful, apart from gourd and porridge, as they are like a burning lead wick in the intestines when they cannot be digested, and therefore spit them out even before King Shapur, due to the danger involved.

Alexander did this and went on his campaign. He came to a certain town whose entire population was women, and he wanted to wage battle against them. The women said to him: It is not in your interest to fight us. If you kill us, people will say: Alexander kills women; and if we kill you, people will say: Alexander is the king whom women killed in battle. Instead of fighting them, Alexander said to them: Bring me bread. They brought him bread of gold, upon a table of gold. Alexander said to the women: Do people eat bread of gold? They said to him: But if all you wanted was actual bread, didn’t you have bread to eat in your own place? It was not for bread that you took up a campaign and toiled and came here. You must have come to increase your wealth. When Alexander left and came back to his land, he wrote upon the gate of the town: I, Alexander of Macedon, was a fool until I came to the country of Africa of women, and I learned sense from women. § With regard to Alexander, the Gemara relates: When he took himself and went on his way, he sat at a certain spring and was eating bread. He had salted fish [guldenei] in his hands, and while he cleansed them of their excessive salt, a particularly pleasant fragrance fell upon them. Alexander said to himself: I may conclude from this event that this spring comes from the Garden of Eden.

And any living creature eaten whole restores the soul. Rav Pappa said: This includes even small fish that grow among the reeds, as even a small creature is beneficial if it reached its full size. Anything close to the soul restores the soul. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: This refers to the neck, which is close to the animal’s vital organs. The Gemara relates that Rava said to his servant: When you bring me a piece of meat, make an effort to bring me a piece from the place of the blessing, the neck, where the animal was slaughtered and the slaughterer recited a blessing over the ritual slaughter.

§ We learned in the mishna: Throughout all the seven days that the High Priest was in the Parhedrin chamber, they would not withhold from him any food or drink that he desired. It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Nekosa says: On Yom Kippur eve they feed him fine flour and eggs in order to loosen his bowels, so that he will not need to relieve himself on Yom Kippur. They said to Rabbi Yehuda ben Nekosa: In feeding him those foods, all the more so that you bring him to a state of arousal. Feeding him those foods is antithetical to the efforts to prevent the High Priest from becoming impure, as they are liable to cause him to experience a seminal emission. It was taught in a baraita that Sumakhos said in the name of Rabbi Meir: One does not feed him foods represented by the acrostic: Alef, beit, yod; and some say that one does not feed him foods represented by the acrostic: Alef, beit, beit, yod; and some say neither does one feed him white wine. The Gemara elaborates: Not alef, beit, yod means neither etrog, nor eggs [beitzim], nor old wine [yayin]. And some say: Not alef, beit, beit, yod means neither etrog, nor eggs [beitzim], nor fatty meat [basar], nor old wine [yayin]. And some say neither does one feed him white wine because white wine brings a man to the impurity of a seminal emission. Similarly, the Sages taught: If a man experienced an emission that could render him a zav, one attributes the emission not to his being a zav but perhaps to a different cause, e.g., to food, or to all kinds of food, i.e., he may have eaten too much food, which could have caused the emission. Elazar ben Pineḥas says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira: During the days that a zav is examining himself to determine whether or not he is impure, one feeds him neither foods represented by the acrostic: Ḥet, gimmel, beit, yod, nor foods represented by the acrostic: Gimmel, beit, mem, nor any food items that might bring him to impurity caused by an emission. The Gemara explains: Not ḥet, gimmel, beit, yod means neither milk [ḥalav], nor cheese [gevina], nor egg [beitza], nor wine [yayin]. And not gimmel, beit, mem means neither soup of pounded beans [mei gerisin], nor fatty meat [basar], nor small fish pickled in brine [muryas]. The Gemara asks about the phrase: Nor any food items that might bring him to impurity; what does it come to include? It comes to include that which the Sages taught: Five food items bring a man to a state of impurity due to emission. And these are: Garlic,cress, purslane, eggs, and arugula. Apropos the arugula plant, the Gemara cites a verse: “And one of them went out into the fields to collect orot” (II Kings 4:39). It was taught in the name of Rabbi Meir with regard to orot in this verse: This is the plant called arugula. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Why are these arugula plants called orot? It is because they enlighten [me’irot] the eyes. Rav Huna said: With regard to one who finds arugula, if he can eat it, he eats it, and if not, he passes it over his eyes, as that too is beneficial. Rav Pappa said: Arugula is most effective when it grows on the border of the field, where it is unadulterated by other plants. Rav Giddel said that Rav said: A guest should neither eat eggs, because they lead to a seminal emission, nor sleep in a garment belonging to the homeowner, his host, because if he experiences a seminal emission and it gets on the garment, he will be diminished in the estimation of his host. Apropos conduct of a guest, the Gemara relates: When Rav would happen to come to Darshish he would declare: Who will be married to me for the day that I am here so that I will not be unwed in this place, after which I will divorce her? Similarly, when Rav Naḥman would come to Shekhantziv he would declare: Who will be married to me for the day that I am here? But wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A man should not marry a woman in one state and go and marry another woman in a different state, lest a match be arranged between the child of this wife with the child of that wife who are unaware of their relationship. This would lead to a brother marrying his sister or a father marrying his daughter, filling the whole world in its entirety with mamzerim. And concerning this it is stated: “And the land became filled with lewdness” (Leviticus 19:29). The Sages say in response: The Sages generate publicity. Since they were well-known, the identity of their children was also undoubtedly known. Therefore, there was no concern that errors of this kind would befall their children. The Gemara raises a different problem with the practice of Rav and Rav Naḥman. But didn’t Rava say: With regard to one who proposed marriage to a woman and she agreed, she is required to sit seven clean days, as perhaps due to the anticipatory desire she might not notice that she experienced menstrual bleeding and she is therefore impure. How, then, could these amora’im marry a woman on the day that they proposed? The Gemara answers: The Sages would inform them by sending messengers before their arrival. The messenger would announce that the amora sought to marry a local woman. The woman who agreed would in fact wait seven clean days before marrying him. And if you wish, say instead that these Sages were not actually proposing marriage; rather, they proposed so that they could be in seclusion with the women, without consummating the relationship. Since the women knew that the marriage would not be consummated, they did not experience anticipatory desire. There is no similarity between one who has bread in his basket and one who does not have bread in his basket. One who does not have access to bread experiences hunger more acutely than one for whom bread is available and can eat whenever he chooses. Similarly, an unmarried man experiences a more acute desire. In order to mitigate that desire, these Sages made certain that women would be designated for them.

Rabbi Ḥaggai said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: The former Sages, i.e., the scholars of earlier generations, metaphorically plowed and planted, weeded, cleared thorns, hoed, harvested, gathered sheaves into a pile, threshed the sheaves, winnowed the threshed grain, separated the bad grain form the good, ground the remainder into flour, sifted the flour in a sieve, kneaded the dough, smoothed the surface of the unbaked loaves with liquid, and baked the bread. They prepared everything so that we should be able to grasp Torah concepts; and yet, after all that, we have nothing to eat, as we are still unable to understand the Torah properly. The Gemara cites another metaphor with regard to the relationship between the earlier and later generations. Rabbi Abba bar Zemina said in the name of Rabbi Ze’eira: If the former generations were akin to angels, we are akin to humans; and if they were akin to humans, we are akin to donkeys. Rabbi Mana said: At that hour, when the previous statement was issued, they also said: We are not even comparable to the female donkey of Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair. § The Gemara explains the reference to this particular donkey. The donkey of Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair was stolen by robbers one night. It was kept hidden by them for three days, and yet it did not eat anything. After three days, they reconsidered and decided to return it. They said: Let’s get it out of here, so that it shouldn’t die in our possession and leave a stench in our cave. When they set it free it went and stood by its master’s gate and began braying. Rabbi Pineḥas said to the members of his household: Open up for that poor creature, which has gone three days without eating anything. They opened the gate for it, and it entered Rabbi Pineḥas’ courtyard. He told them: Give it something to eat. They placed barley before it, but it would not eat. They said to him: Rabbi, it will not eat. He said to them: Has the barley been tithed so that it is fit to eat? They replied: Yes. He then asked them: And have you separated their doubtfully tithed produce? Did you tithe the grain about which there is doubt as to whether it has been tithed properly? They replied: Didn’t you teach us the following, Rabbi: One who purchases grain for feeding an animal, or flour for processing animal hides, or oil for lighting a lamp, is exempt from separating doubtfully tithed produce? There is no need to separate tithes from doubtfully tithed produce to feed a donkey. He said to them: What can we do for that poor creature, which is very strict with itself and will not eat even from doubtfully tithed produce, despite this exemption? And they therefore separated tithes from the doubtfully tithed produce, and the donkey finally ate the barley grains.

Rava said: Who is this that does not care about his flour, i.e., he does not truly care about what he says and speaks imprecisely? Did we not learn in the mishna: On every other day. This clearly implies that Rabbi Meir’s ruling applies equally to all days of the week. As such, Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov’s justification for bar Kappara’s teaching is already implied in Rabbi Meir’s words in the mishna. The Gemara comments: Indeed, it is difficult.

§ It is stated in the mishna that one who vowed that loose cooked food is forbidden to him is permitted to taste a thick cooked food. The Gemara comments: The mishna is not in accordance with the custom of the Babylonians, as Rabbi Zeira said: Babylonians are foolish, as they eat bread with bread. They eat thick porridge with their bread, which is essentially eating one kind of bread with another. According to their custom, one who vows that cooked foods are forbidden to him is prohibited from eating even a thick cooked food. In that context, Rav Ḥisda said that those fastidious residents of Huzal, Babylonia were asked: How is it best to eat this porridge? Should wheat porridge be eaten with wheat bread and barley porridge with barley bread, or perhaps wheat porridge should be eaten with barley bread and barley porridge with wheat bread? The Gemara relates: Rava would eat his bread with ḥasisei, a porridge made of toasted barley grains. Rabba, son of Rav Huna, found Rav Huna eating porridge with his fingers. He said to him: Why is the Master eating with his hands? Rav Huna said to him: This is what Rav said: Porridge eaten with a finger is tasty, and all the more so if it is eaten with two fingers, and all the more so with three. It is more enjoyable to eat porridge with your hands. Rav said to his son Ḥiyya, and Rav Huna similarly said to his son Rabba: If you are invited to eat porridge, for such a meal you should travel up to the distance of a parasang [parsa]. If you are invited to eat ox meat, you should travel up to three parasangs. Rav said to his son Ḥiyya, and Rav Huna similarly said to his son Rabba: You should not spit out anything before your teacher, as this is disrespectful, apart from gourd and porridge, as they are like a burning lead wick in the intestines when they cannot be digested, and therefore spit them out even before King Shapur, due to the danger involved. The Gemara relates more incidents: Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda dined together. One of them ate porridge with his fingers, and the other one ate with a fork [hutza]. The one who was eating with a fork said to the one who was eating with his fingers: For how long will you keep feeding me your filth? Must I keep eating off of your dirty fingernails? The one who was eating with his fingers said to the one who was eating with a fork: For how long will you keep feeding me your spittle, as you eat with a fork which you then put back in the common bowl. Belospayin, a type of figs, were brought before Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Yehuda ate them, but Rabbi Shimon did not eat them. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: What is the reason that the Master is not eating? Rabbi Shimon said to him: These do not leave the intestines at all. They remain undigested. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: If so, all the more that one can rely on them to feel full tomorrow.Rabbi Yehuda was sitting before Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Tarfon said to him: Your face today is ruddy, i.e., a rosy, healthy color. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: Last night your servants, i.e., we students, went out to the field, and beets were brought to us, and we ate them without salt. This is the reason for our healthy complexion. And had we eaten them with salt, all the more so would our faces have been ruddy. The Gemara cites related incidents: A certain gentile lady [matronita] said to Rabbi Yehuda, whose face was ruddy: How can one teach the Jews and be a drunk at the same time? He said to her: I place my integrity in the hands of this woman and should no longer be deemed credible if I ever taste any wine except for that of kiddush, havdala, and the four cups of Passover. And after I drink those four cups I tie my temples from Passover to Shavuot, as wine gives me a headache. Rather, my complexion is explained by the verse “A man’s wisdom makes his face to shine” (Ecclesiastes 8:1). A certain heretic said to Rabbi Yehuda: Your face is similar either to usurers or to pig breeders. These people would earn a good living without expending much energy, which gave them plump, healthy complexions. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: Both of these occupations are prohibited to Jews. Rather, my face is ruddy because I have twenty-four bathrooms on the way from my home to the study hall, and all the time I enter each and every one of them. He did not suffer from constipation, which had a beneficial effect on his complexion.