Radishes and Horseradish, Not in Summer, Not in Winter The Gemara in Eruvin 56a says seeing radishes is like seeing a life-saving remedy. But another Baraita calls them the "poison of death"! This is resolved by noting that in summer they're healthy, but in winter, harmful. [So why praise Rebbi and Antoninus for always having them?] Perhaps the Gemara refers to when they're beneficial. Some texts say the leaves are harmful but the roots always healthy, and our Gemara refers to the roots. [But Rebbi didn't benefit from this world!] True, but he had many guests at his table.

Radishes Never Left Their Table This isn't remarkable in itself, but rather indicates lavish meals requiring much cutting and turning of food to make room in their stomachs.

If It's a Chukah, How Can We Burn? Why is this a question? Perhaps it is a Chukah (ritual), and since it's in the Torah, we're not bound by the prohibition against following their rituals. Sanhedrin 52b discusses execution. The Rabbis say to use a sword as the kings do. Rebbi Yehudah prefers an axe, citing the prohibition against following their rituals. The Rabbis counter that since "killing" is in the Torah, we're not emulating them. [If so, why question burning for kings?] Perhaps our Mishnah's Rabbis follow Rebbi Yehudah, who does consider it following their rituals. [But we conclude burning isn't a Chukah!] Rabbeinu Yitzhak explains there are two types: those for idolatry, and those out of silly custom. Our Gemara refers to idolatry. Rebbi Meir holds burning for kings isn't idolatrous, hence the question. If it were idolatrous, it'd be forbidden, even if mentioned in the Torah, like the matzeivah (stone altar), loved when the Patriarchs used it, but hated when the Amorites made it idolatrous. The Gemara concludes it's not idolatrous, just silly custom. Sanhedrin 52b understands "Chukah" as something important, based on this conclusion. Thus, even Rebbi Yehudah agrees it's permitted if in the Torah and not idolatrous. If not in the Torah, we wouldn't follow it, even if just silly. "Killing" doesn't specify "sword," so an axe is fine. Even for a condemned city, "by the sword" might include an axe. The Rabbis there prefer a sword to avoid a gruesome death.

Severing for Kings Why doesn't the Gemara ask about causing pain to animals, as it does later regarding marketplaces of idolaters? There, it's not bal tashchit (wastefulness), as it's for the king's honour, like expensive shrouds. But animal suffering remains! Perhaps a king's honour is different, representing all of Israel, thus overriding animal suffering.

Severing That Causes Treifah Rashi explains it's forbidden to make an animal unfit for consumption by severing the sciatic nerve. [But are they sacred animals? And what about bal tashchit for non-kosher animals?] The Tosefta (Tosefta Shabbat 8:10) implies "forbidden/permitted" refers to eating. It states, "Severing the sciatic nerve for kings is permitted, and not like Amorite ways. Severing that causes treifah is forbidden for eating but permitted for benefit. Severing without treifah is permitted for eating." [Why state the obvious about treifah?] It clarifies that benefit is permitted, despite the king's honour. It also clarifies that eating is permitted in the other case, again despite the king's honour.