Study Kiddushin folio 80B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
נקורים נקורים בעיסה – תולין, לא אוכלין ולא שורפין.
small holes in the dough where the chickens had pecked it, in that case the dough is held in suspension; it is neither eaten nor burned, since the chickens may have drunk from the impure liquids before they pecked at the dough but there is no proof of this. Despite this being a case where they cannot be asked, which generally would result in the dough being deemed pure, here it is deemed impure due to the uncertainty. The fact that in the second case of the baraita it is not deemed to be definitely impure supports the opinion of R' Yoḥanan, who holds that in the case of the child the status of the dough also remains a matter of uncertainty.
אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי: לא שנו אלא במשקים לבנים, אבל במשקים אדומים – אם איתא דנקיר מידע ידיע. ודילמא בלעתינהו עיסה?
R' Yehoshua ben Levi says: They taught this halakha only in a case of white liquid, when the appearance of the peck marks provides no proof of whether the chickens had previously drunk from the liquid, but in a case of red, impure liquid, if it is so that they had pecked, it would be known that they had drunk from the liquid, since the peck marks would be colored red. The Talmud asks: Even if the liquid were red and there were no red marks on the dough, how can one say definitively that they did not peck? Perhaps the dough absorbed the liquid, leaving no identifiable mark?
אמר רבי יוחנן: דבר זה שמע בריבי, ופירושו לא שמע: לא שנו אלא במשקים צלולים, שבבואה של תינוק ניכר בה[ן], אבל משקים עכורים – לא.
R' Yoḥanan says: The Distinguished, i.e., R' Yehoshua ben Levi, heard this matter, but he did not hear its interpretation, and he should have supplied an additional detail: They taught this halakha only in a case of clear liquid, which can be absorbed in the dough without leaving a stain. What is meant by clear? It means that in which the reflection [bavua] of a child is recognizable when he peers into it. But in a case of murky liquid, this halakha was not stated, since the liquid would have left a mark.