Explanation: Rashi explains that the cut a Nochri makes in a thigh of meat is not the same as the cut made by a Jew, as the Nochri cuts it opposite the Gid (as he does not intend to cut it out).

Explanation (cont.): This is why Rebbi was lenient regarding someone who sent a thigh of meat via a Nochri messenger to his friend without making a seal. He said that it was permitted if it is cut in a way that a Jew would cut it after he had already dug out the Gid.

Question: This is difficult. If so, let us say that this is even in a place where they do not announce a Treifah, and he should not send a cut thigh as perhaps he will sell it to a Jew. As it is clear that it is the cut of a Jew, the person who wants to buy it will not realize it is a Treifah. If it was a Treifah (he will reason), why would the meat have been cut in a way that indicates the Gid was going to be taken out?

Answer: You might say that the Jew will suspect that he may find out later that it was a Treifah.

Question (cont.): If so, for this reason we should forbid sending a thigh via a Nochri messenger, lest the Nochri messenger obtain a different thigh that the Jew does not know about that was discovered to be a Treifah after its Gid was taken out, and he will switch it for this thigh!

Answer: We do not suspect that such an uncommon case, where the Nochri finds a similar Treifah thigh, will occur. However, where the Jew sent the Nochri the thigh, a Jew (who wants to buy it from the Nochri) must suspect that it is unkosher (without a seal) in a place where they do not announce Treifos. This is because it is possible that the Jew sent it to the Nochri because he found out after he already dug out the Gid ha'Nasheh that the animal was a Treifah.

Question: It is possible I will tell you that it is permitted to do Geneivas Da'as to a Nochri. The only reason he was upset was because his helper told the Nochri that it was a slaughtered chicken. Saying this should be forbidden lest the Nochri accept it in front of a Jew who will proceed to buy it from him (thinking it is kosher).

Answer: Even so, it is still possible to deduce from here that it is forbidden to do Geneivas Da'as to a Nochri. If it would be permitted, there is no suspicion that the Jew will buy the chicken from the Nochri, as he will suspect that the Jew was doing Geneivas Da'as when he said it was slaughtered.

Question: There is a difficulty according to Abaye, Rava, and Rav Ashi. In the first case of the Beraisa, how is he allowed to send a cut piece? We said earlier that this is forbidden, lest he send this to a Nochri in front of a Jew or because he is doing Geneivas Da'as to the Nochri!

Answer: According to the answers of these Amoraim the only answer earlier that applies is the first answer that it is in a place where they announce Treifos and the cut of a Nochri will be recognizable.

Answer (cont.): Rashi had no reason to explain regarding Rav Ashi's answer that the Tana of our Mishnah argues on the Tana of the Beraisa. He could have explained that Rav Ashi is using the first answer stated earlier, as we have explained.

Explanation: The middle case that says one cannot sell Neveilos and Treifos to Nochrim due to Geneivas Da'as is only regarding selling, as the Nochri pays as if the meat was slaughtered. However, he is allowed to send the Nochri a present.

Explanation (cont.): The last case, where there is a suspicion they will sell him Neveilos and Treifos, is not where we suspect they sell it as slaughtered. Rather, perhaps they will sell it to him and tell him it is a Treifah, and the Nochri will not tell this to the Jew. This is what these Amoraim suspect.

Explanation (cont.): When the Beraisa says that we suspect that he will resell it to a Jew, according to Abaye and Rava the case is where they announce when an animal is found to be a Treifah, and they did not announce. However, in a place where they do not announce Treifos, we do not suspect that a Jew will buy it from the Nochri, even from his butcher shop, as there are many Jews to buy from.

Explanation (cont.): Rav Ashi suspects that as there are many Jews there, perhaps one of them will end up buying from the Nochri, as Rashi explains. However, according to the answer that was given earlier, that this is a decree lest he give it to the Nochri in front of a Jew, the first case proves difficult. It is also difficult to say the cases argue.

Opinion: Rabeinu Tam explains that the Mishnah earlier is referring to when the Jew says to the Nochri the thigh has had the Gid taken out of it. This is forbidden due to Geneivas Da'as. However, if it is whole, the Nochri sees that the Gid was not taken out. Even if the Jew will tell him it was, the Nochri knows he is lying.

Opinion (cont.): Therefore we suspect regarding a cut piece that he will give it to a Nochri in front of a Jew, and the Jew will subsequently buy it from that Nochri even in a place where they do not announce Treifos. The Jew will eat it with the Gid ha'Nasheh, and he will not suspect it is a Treifah as the first Jew said when he gave it to the Nochri that he fixed it and bothered to take out the Gid to the point where it is fit. Even if the Jew knows that it is permitted to do Geneivas Da'as to a Nochri, he will not think that the Jew intended to trick the Nochri with this statement.

Implied Question: The Gemara deduced from the fact that Shmuel was upset that it is forbidden to do Geneivas Da'as to a Nochri. (In the previous Tosfos (see at length), we explained that if Geneivas Da'as of a Nochri was permitted, the Jew would never buy the chicken. However, we just said that the Jew will not think the first Jew was doing Genevas Da'as. What, then, is the proof from Shmuel that Geneivas Da'as of a Nochri is forbidden?)

Answer: Shmuel knew that his helper gave this chicken to the Nochri privately when there was no reason to think that any other Jews were present. Therefore, it must be that the reason he was upset was due to Geneivas Da'as.

Explanation: The Beraisa states that regarding a Nochri, whether it is cut or whole one does not have to dig out the Gid ha'Nasheh.

Explanation (cont.): The case there is when he gave it to the Nochri without saying that the Gid was taken out. The Nochri mistakenly thought on his own that the Gid was taken out. (When a person makes up on his own that someone did him a favor without any indication to make him think this is so, it is not Geneivas Da'as. See the following Tosfos for more on this case.)

Explanation (cont.): There is also no reason to suspect that another Jew saw the Nochri receive this meat (from the Jew) and will therefore purchase it from him, as the case is in a place where they do not announce Treifos.

Explanation (cont.): The Jew will suspect that after the Gid was taken out it was realized that the animal was a Treifah. This is why it was given to the Nochri. However, where he said to the Nochri that he took the Gid out, the Jew does not suspect that it is a Treifah. If it would be a Treifah, why would the Jew mention that he took the Gid out? The digging out of the Gid does not make it more fit!

Explanation (cont.): The middle case that one does not sell Neveilos and Treifos to Nochrim is when he says to the Nochri that the meat is kosher. This is forbidden due to Geneivas Da'as, and because perhaps a Jew will buy from him in a place where they usually announce Treifos but this time forgot to do so.

Explanation (cont.): However, in a place where they do not announce Treifos we do not suspect this. Even if a Jew saw a different Jew giving this meat to the Nochri, the Jew seeing this thinks that the first Jew is merely making his sale better, as a kosher piece of meat is more expensive as it can be sold to a Jew. However, when he says that the Gid was taken out, this reason is inapplicable (as a Jew can buy it either way).

Explanation (cont.): Rav Ashi understands that even in a place where they do not announce Treifos we suspect that the Jew that hears this will not think that the first Jew is saying this in order to make his sale better.

Question: Why doesn't the Beraisa state that this law only applies regarding the Gid ha'Nasheh and in a place where they do not announce Treifos? According to Abaye, the first case of the Beraisa is that he should not send the meat to the Nochri until the Gid is taken out due to two reasons: It is Geneivas Da'as, and the Nochri might sell it to a Jew.

Answer: The Beraisa stated Neveilah and Treifah in order to include (that it is even forbidden to sell Neveilos and Treifos to Nochrim). One might have thought that Geneivas Da'as is not a reason that it should be prohibited when he sells it as if it is slaughtered, as the Nochri knows the Jew is saying this merely to make what he sells better.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that when the Gemara earlier said that the Jew is doing Geneivas Da'as to the Nochri, this is when he sells him a chicken and tells him it was slaughtered. Similarly, when someone opens barrels he is going to sell to a storekeeper as if he is opening them for his guest, this is when he says, "I am opening them in your honor." This is certainly Geneivas Da'as.

Question #1: This does not seem correct, as "unless he informs him" implies that even if he does these things without explaining his actions it is forbidden, and it is only permitted if he informs him (that it is not slaughtered or it is not for his honor)!

Question #2: Additionally, what is the question from Rav Yehudah who opened these barrels for Ula? Rav Yehudah certainly would not have explicitly told Ula that he is opening them in his honor (when this was patently false)!

Explanation #2: It therefore appears that the cases in the Gemara earlier are when nothing was explained. It is forbidden because the guest has no reason to assume that these barrels are going to be sold to a storekeeper. However, here he should have realized that this is a Treifah. Mar Zutra also should have realized that they were very possibly not coming to meet him, but rather were there due to their own needs to be there.

Question: This was not a mistake, as they indeed would have went to honor him, as he told him, "We would have troubled ourselves even more (if we know your were coming)." We similarly say earlier that Ula is different, as he was very dear to Rav Yehudah.

Answer: The cases are incomparable. While Rav Yehudah did not lose by opening the barrels as he was going to sell them to a storekeeper, he indeed opened them in honor of Ula. Since he would have opened them even if he was not going to sell them to a storekeeper, he did not have to tell him anything. However, here they did not come to greet him at all.