Chapter 87-The forms of forbidden mixtures

The forms of forbidden mixtures

What meats, and which forms of cooking contain a Basar Bechalav prohibition

  

The reasons for the prohibition of eating milk and meat:

  • Some[1] explain that eating milk and meat together is forbidden being that it is an extremely cruel insensitive act to cook the meat of the child within its mother’s milk.
  • Others[2] explain that eating milk with meat numbs the heart, just as the eating of blood. The reason for this is because milk itself is blood which has gone through transfusion and become milk, and when one cooks the milk with meat it returns to it its damaging blood tendencies.
  • Others[3] explain that the true reason behind the prohibition is beyond the understanding of a human, and it is hence deemed as a “Chok”[4] by the Torah.
  • In Kabala[5] it is explained that both meat and milk have two distinct spiritual roots, and these roots although both individually holy, may not be mixed. Mixing the two together is similar to acts of sorcery.[6] The exact understanding of this cannot yet be revealed, and it will only be revealed after the coming of Moshiach.
  • Others[7] explain that eating meat with milk was the practice of idol worshipers, and thus in order to distance the Jewish people from these practices the above mixture of foods were forbidden.

 

Will Basar Bechalav become permitted when Moshiach comes?

Rabbeinu Bechayeh notes[8] that the prohibition of eating meat and milk will be nullified after the resurrection, when the evil inclination will cease to exist.

 

Introduction:

The prohibition against meat and milk is unique in that it carries a three part prohibition. It is forbidden to be cooked together, eaten together, or benefited from once cooked together. Although the above three prohibitions apply by all mixtures of meat and milk which are Biblically forbidden to be eaten, they may not apply when the mixture is only Rabbinically forbidden to be eaten. It is thus necessary to know which mixtures are only Rabbinically forbidden and which contain a Biblical prohibition. At first the difference in laws between the Biblical and Rabbinical prohibitions will be discussed, and following this will proceed which mixtures are defined as being Biblically forbidden and which as Rabbinical.

       

1. The prohibitions applicable to Biblically forbidden mixtures of meat and milk:[9]

The Torah states three times that it is forbidden to cook meat with milk.[10] There are three Biblical prohibitions derived from each one of these commands:[11]

  1. Cooking them together in the usual manner is Biblically forbidden.[12]
  2. Eating them after they have been cooked together in such a way is Biblically forbidden.
  3. Benefiting from them after they have been cooked in such a way is Biblically forbidden.[13]

 

For what reason does the Torah teach us the prohibition against eating meat and milk together from a repetitive command of “Do not cook them together” rather than simply saying that one may not eat them together?[14]

The Torah repeats and says not to cook milk and meat together rather than simply state not to eat them together, in order to teach us that Biblically it is only prohibited to eat meat and milk together if they were previously cooked together in the usual manner of cooking i.e. Derech Bishul. If however they were not cooked together in their usual method, then there is no Biblical prohibition against eating the mixture. However Rabinically any mixture of milk and meat is forbidden to eat even if they were not previously cooked together in any way.

 

Eating:

It is Biblically forbidden to eat meat and milk that have been cooked together in their normal way. One is liable for eating meat and milk even if he eats them in an irregular manner [not Derech Achila]. Thus if the Basar Bechalav has spoiled to the point it is no longer edible, one who eats it is nevertheless liable.[15]

 

Cooking:

It is Biblically forbidden to cook meat with milk. It is forbidden to cook them together even for the sake of a gentile or animal.

Raising the fire under a gentile’s pot:[16] Some opinions rule it is forbidden for a Jew to raise the flame under the pot of a gentile because they cook milk and meat in the same pots[17] and thus one who raises the flame ends up cooking Basar Bechalav. Nevertheless this is a mere stringency and one who is lenient has not lost out.[18]

Having a gentile cook meat with milk in her pots in one’s home:[19] Some[20] write it is forbidden for a Jew to allow a gentile to cook food[21] in his [the gentile’s] pot, in the Jew’s house, due to suspicion that the Jew may come to raise the flame and transgress Basar Bechalav. [It thus goes without saying that it would be forbidden to allow a maid to cook meat with milk in one’s home, even if she uses her own pots, due to suspicion that one may come to raise the flame and transgress the Biblical prohibition of cooking Basar Bechalav.] Accordingly a maid must have separate pots for meat and milk even if she will be cooking non-Kosher food in them. Nevertheless this is a mere stringency and the world is not careful to do so.[22]

 

Q&A on the prohibition of cooking meat with milk

May one work as a cook in a meaty non-kosher restaurant?[23]

Whether a person who is pressed for a job is allowed to work in a non-Kosher restaurant is dependent on the type of meat served at the restaurant. If meat of kosher animal species is served in the restaurant then one may not cook it with milk products, or in a vessel which had milk cooked in it within the past 24 hours. If the vessel is not Ben Yomo, one may cook meat in it. [Vetzaruch Iyun if it is forbidden in such a case to cook a Davar Charif together with meat in the non-Ben Yomo dairy pot.[24]] If one is unsure of the status of the vessel, one may cook in it.[25] In all cases one must verify that the restaurant does not have a non-observent Jewish clientle in order not to stumble them in eating non-Kosher food. 

 

May one burn garbage which may contain meat and milk products inside?

Yes.[26] This is allowed even if one is certain the garbage contains both meat and milk.

 

May one ask a gentile to cook meat and milk for oneself?

No.[27] This applies even if the Jew does not plan to benefit from the mixture.

 

May one give a gentile meat and milk and tell him to cook it for himself?[28]

No. This is forbidden due to Amira Lenachri. It is likewise therefore forbidden to give him meat to cook in a dairy Ben Yomo pot.

 

May one cook dairy products in a meat pot for a gentile, or vice versa?

If the pot is Ben Yomo it is forbidden to cook milk products in it even for the sake of a gentile, even if one is using the gentile’s pot and ingredients.[29] If the pot is not Ben Yomo then it is permitted to do so.[30] Nevertheless it is proper to be stringent even in such a case.[31] Vetzaruch Iyun if it is forbidden even in such a case to cook a Davar Charif together with meat in the non-Ben Yomo dairy pot.[32]

 

May one cook food for a gentile in a non-Kosher pot?[33]

One may cook Pareve food in the pot.[34] However one should not cook meat or dairy in the pot due to fear it was used for meat/milk within the past 24 hours.


Benefiting:

It is forbidden to benefit from Biblical mixtures of meat and milk [even if they were cooked by a gentile and even if they became cooked on their own[35]].

Giving animals dish washing water to drink:[36] There are those that write one is not to mix the [hot[37]] water used to wash the meat vessels with the [hot] water used to wash the dairy vessels, and then give the mixture to ones animal, being that the mixture is forbidden in benefit. Nevertheless this is a mere stringency and the world is not careful to do so.

Using the pots of the Beis Hachoref:[38]

If one transgressed and sold Basar Bechalav may the money that he received for the Basar Bechalav be used?[39] If one received the money only after giving the Basar Bechalav product to the buyer, then he may benefit from the money. If however the money was given first and only after was the food given to the buyer, then one may not benefit from the money. However in a case of great loss one may be lenient.

 

Q&A

May one feed Basar Bechalav to an animal?[40]

It is forbidden to feed Basar Bechalav to even a wild, disowned, animal [as one receives benefit by fulfilling his desire to satiate the animals hunger.[41]]

 

What is one to do with a Biblically forbidden mixture of Basar Bechalav?

Being that the mixture is forbidden in benefit and is thus forbidden to be given to a gentile or animal, as explained above, therefore the mixture must be buried[42] or flushed down the toilet.[43] One is not to burn it being that its ash still remains forbidden.[44]

 

How was Avraham Avinu allowed to serve meat and milk to the travelers?

Some opinions[45] explain that Avraham had created the cow using Sefer Yetzirah[46], and it was hence the laws of Basar Bechalav did not apply to it. Others[47] explain that angels do not have an evil inclination and are hence not commanded against eating meat and milk together. Others[48] explain Avraham did not feed the guests the meat and butter at the same time, rather he first fed them one food and then the other. The Rebbe[49] however explains that Avraham offered each guest an alternative; either meat or dairy, however not both.

 

2. The prohibitions applicable to Rabinically forbidden mixtures of meat and milk:

All Rabinically forbidden mixtures are forbidden to be eaten.

Cooking them: Certain Rabbinically forbidden mixtures are nevertheless Rabbinically permitted to be cooked together from the letter of the law.[50] Others are Rabbinically forbidden to cook.[51] Practically it is forbidden to cook any all Rabbinical mixtures due to Maaras Ayin.[52]

Benefiting from Rabbinical mixtures:

  • Rama:[53]It is permitted to get benefit from all mixtures that are only Rabbinically forbidden. 
  • Rashal[54]/Bach[55]: It is Rabbinically forbidden to benefit even from mixtures which are only Rabbinically forbidden. 
  • Shach[56]/Taz[57]:

The ruling of the Rama stands firm that receiving benefit from Rabbinical mixtures is permitted, as so rules the Rambam, Chinuch, Mordechai, Tur; Issur Viheter 30; and the Michaber (later on in chapter 91).[58]

 

The definition of mixtures which are Biblically and Rabbinically forbidden

Introduction:

It is necessary to determine which mixtures are only Rabbinically forbidden and which contain a Biblical prohibition in order to know which mixtures are forbidden in benefit and which are permitted. In order for a mixture to be Biblically forbidden it must contain ingredients of meat and milk which are deemed as the Biblical ingredients to which the prohibition applies. Additionally these ingredients must be cooked together in a way that is Biblically defined as cooking. 

3. The forms of mixtures of meat and milk which contain a prohibition [i.e. cooked versus not cooked]

A. The Biblical prohibition:

Eating meat and milk together is only Biblically forbidden if the mixture was previously cooked in a Biblically defined form of cooking, which is the common way of cooking.[59]

The Biblical forms of cooking: Cooking, and placing meat and milk together in a Keli Rishon[60], are all Biblical forms of cooking. Pouring milk from a Keli Rishon onto meat cooks the external layer of the food.[61] 

Disputed: The following forms of cooking are disputed whether they are defined as a Biblical or Rabbinical  form of cooking: Roasting meat and milk together[62]; Smoking meat and milk together[63]; Frying meat and milk together[64]; Cooking meat and milk in the Tiberius hot springs.[65]

 

B. The Rabbinical prohibition:[66]

If the mixture was not previously cooked in a common form of cooking it is only Rabbinically forbidden to be eaten.

The Rabbinically forbidden forms of cooking:[67] Pickling, and salting milk and meat together, are not the common ways of cooking and are thus merely a Rabbinical form of cooking.  Such mixtures are thus only Rabbinically forbidden to be eaten.

If the mixture was not cooked at all in any way: Even if the mixture of meat and milk was not cooked at all in any way, it remains Rabbinically forbidden to eat together. Thus it is forbidden to eat cold meat with cold cheese.

Summary:

Eating meat with milk is forbidden even if both foods are cold and have not been cooked or heated together in any which way.[68]

Biblical-Derech Bishul according to all: Cooking; Keli Rishon.

Rabbinical- Not Derech Bishul according to all: Pickling; Salting.

Dispute: Roasting; Smoking; Frying; Tiberius hot springs.

 

Q&A

Is it permitted to “cook” meat and milk in a Rabbinical form of cooking, such as to sell to a gentile?

It is implied from Rav Akiva Eiger[69] that it is permitted to do so.

4. The types of milk and meat which contain a Basar Bechalav prohibition:

A. General rules:

  1. Whenever a mixture is forbidden to eat because of Maaras Ayin and not because of a Rabbinical prohibition, if it falls into meat it does not require 60x against it.[70]
  2. Whenever a mixture is forbidden to cook because of Maaras Ayin it is permitted to be cooked for the sake of using it as medicine for an ill person. It may likewise be eaten by an ill person [even if he is not in danger[71]] if its eating prohibition is merely due to Maras Ayin.[72]
  3. Whenever a mixture is only Rabinically forbidden to eat it may be sold and benefited from.

 

*Important Note:

In all cases the mixture is only Biblically forbidden if both ingredients of meat and milk are Biblical! In all cases the mixture is only Rabbinically forbidden if both mixtures are Rabbinical or one is Rabbinical and one is Biblical.

 

B. Forms of Meat:

Kosher domestic animals:[73] Contain a Biblical Basar Bechalav prohibition and is thus forbidden in eating, cooking and benefit.[74]

Non-Kosher species of animals: Do not have a Basar Bechalav prohibition and thus from the letter of the law may be cooked with milk and benefited from.[75] However it is forbidden to cook them with milk due to Maras Ayin.[76]

Kosher domestic animal which is a Treifa or Neveila:[77] Contain a Biblical Basar Bechalav prohibition and is thus Biblically forbidden in eating, cooking and benefit.

Kosher wild animals [Chayah]:[78] The meat of a Kosher species wild animal [Chayah] contains a Rabbinical Basar Bechalav prohibition to be eaten with milk, although from the letter of the law it may be cooked with milk and benefited from.[79] However practically it is forbidden to cook it with milk due to Maras Ayin.[80] The following is a list of Kosher Chayos:[81] Gazelle [Ayal]; deer [Tzvi]; Yachmor; ibex [Ako]; antelope [Dishon]; giraffe [Zamer].[82]

Fetus:[83] Is Biblically considered meat and thus is Biblically forbidden to be cooked, or eaten with milk, or receive benefit from their mixture.

Bones/horns/hooves/skin/placenta[84]:[85] Are exempt from Biblical liability in cooking them or eating them with milk[86], however they are [Rabbinically] forbidden[87] to eat or cook[88] with milk.

Blood:[89] Is exempt from Biblical liability in cooking with milk [although is Rabbinically forbidden to cook with milk.[90]

Poultry: [91] Contains a Rabbinical[92] Basar Bechalav prohibition to be eaten together with milk. From the letter of the law it may be cooked with milk and benefited from.[93] However practically it is forbidden to cook it with milk due to Maras Ayin.[94] [See footnote for opinion of Rama[95]]

Fish: Fish may be eaten with milk products.[96] However some have the custom to refrain from doing so due to danger.[97] However it may be eaten with butter.[98] Some learn that if butter is added it may be eaten even with milk or cheese.[99] Practically many in Chabad are accustomed to refrain from eating fish with milk products unless butter is added[100], although some are lenient.[101]

Locusts: [102] May be eaten with milk.

Eggs found in a chicken after slaughtering:[103] An egg which was found in a chicken after being slaughtered is permitted to be eaten together with milk if it is fully developed with both a white and yolk. This applies even if the egg is still attached to the sinews. [See footnote for other opinion and scenarios[104]] However if it only has a yolk without a white, it is forbidden to cook or eat[105] it with milk [even if it is not attached to the sinews[106], and certainly if it is still attached]. However even in such a case it is permitted to eat milk products after eating the egg. [Furthermore, in a case of great loss one may be lenient if the eggs were cooked with milk, even if it was still attached to its sinews and has only a yolk.[107]] If an egg was knocked out of a chicken while it was still alive, it is forbidden to eat the egg due to Eiver Min Hachaiy.[108]

 

Q&A

Is there an Issur of Baser Bechalav when the milk or meat is from a non-kosher animal?[109]

Some Poskim[110] learn that the Sages applied a Rabbinical decree of Basar Bechalav against eating meat and milk of a non-Kosher animal, in addition to their innate Biblical prohibition. The practical ramification of this decree is that it gives the mixture a status of Chanan[111] and Charal[112]. Others[113] learn the Sages never made such a decree, and their mixture is only forbidden due to them being Biblically non-Kosher.

 

Summary of Opinions

Is there an Issur of Maaras Ayin by Rabbinical prohibitions?

  • Rama:[114] There is no Maaras Ayin by Rabbinical ingredients, such as chicken. 
  • Shach:[115]There is Maaras Ayin by Rabbinical prohibitions, and so is evident from other places in Halacha that the Rama himself rules likewise.[116] 
  • Taz:[117]Agrees with Shach. 
  • Beir Heiytiv:[118]Everyone agrees there is Maaras Ayin by Rabbinical prohibitions, the Rama however holds that when both ingredients are Rabbinical and one is merely cooking them, there is no Maaras Ayin. Is there an Issur of Maaras Ayin in cooking meats of non-Kosher species with milk?
  • Rama:[119]Yes. 
  • Taz[120]No, although in conclusion he is not lenient against the Rama. 
  • Shach:[121]In conclusion the Shach rules there is Maaras Ayin applicable in such a case.[122]Is there Maaras Ayin by cooking?
  • Rama:[123]Yes 
  • Shach:[124]

The Shach suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when eating the mixture does it apply.[125] Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.

 

C. Forms of milk:

Milk from domestic Kosher animal: The milk from a domestic Kosher animal contains a Biblical Basar Bechalav prohibition.[126]

Milk from a Kosher domestic animal which is a Treifa:[127] Contains a Biblical Basar Bechalav prohibition and is thus Biblically forbidden in eating, cooking and benefiting.

Milk from Kosher wild animals:[128] Contains a Rabbinical Basar Bechalav prohibition to be eaten with milk. From the letter of the law it may be cooked with milk and benefited from.[129] However practically it is forbidden to cook it with milk due to Maaras Ayin.[130]

Milk from non-Kosher species of animals: Does not have a Basar Bechalav prohibition and thus from the letter of the law may be cooked with non-kosher meat and benefited from.[131] However practically it may not be cooked with meat due to Maras Ayin.[132] [See footnote regarding cooking it with non-Kosher meat]

Woman’s milk:[133] Is forbidden to cook [or eat[134]] with meat due to Maras Ayin.[135] If it fell into meat it is nullified and does not require 60x.

  • Cooking women’s milk with chicken: The Rama[136]/Taz[137] rule that it is permitted.[138] The Shach[139] and Rashal rule that it is forbidden.[140] The Beir Heiytiv[141] rules that even according to the Rama it is only permitted to cook chicken with women’s milk[142], although to eat them together is forbidden according to all[143].

Almond Milk: Domestic animal meat may only be cooked[144] with almond milk if one places almonds by the food, however without placing almonds it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin.[145] [However if the meat is not cooked with almond milk then according to some opinions[146] it may be eaten together cold even without having almonds in the mixture. Others[147] however rule that one must place almonds in the mixture even in such a case. Bedieved or in a case that almonds are not available, according to some opinions[148] one may be lenient if the mixture is not cooked together, but rather eaten together cold i.e. not Derech Bishul.]

  • Cooking almond milk with chicken without placing almonds by the food: The Rama[149], Taz[150] and other Poskim[151] rule it is permitted.[152] However the Shach[153], Rashal[154] and other Poskim[155] rules it is forbidden o do so due to Maaras Ayin.[156] The Beir Heiytiv[157] rules that even according to the Rama it is only permitted to cook the poultry in almond milk without almonds, although to eat it without almonds is forbidden.Male animal[158] milk: Is Biblically permitted to cook and eat with meat[159] although it is Rabbinically forbidden to do so, and thus if it fell into meat one requires 60x[160]. Male human milk: It is only forbidden to be eaten with meat because of Maras Ayin and thus if it fell into a mixture, the mixture is permitted in all cases.[161]Chalav Meisa/Milk of a slaughtered cow found in the utter: Is Biblically permitted to eat with meat[162] but is Rabbinically forbidden to cook or eat with meat.[163] Thus if it fell into meat it requires 60x against it.[164]

    Meiy Chalav-Milk whey: Is Biblically permitted to cook and eat with meat[165] although it is Rabbinically forbidden to cook or eat it with meat.[166] Thus if it fell into meat it requires 60x against it.[167]

  • Definition of Meiy Chalav:[168] Some say it is the whey of the cheese[169], others say it is the liquid that remains after cooking the whey of the cheese, while the hard part of the whey is really Biblically forbidden with meat.Chalav Keiva/Stomach milk:[170] Is not considered milk [but rather feces[171]] and is thus permitted to eat with meat. However there is an opinion which forbids eating [liquidly stomach milk[172]] with meat[173] and so is the custom[174] to forbid eating liquidly stomach milk with meat [even after the fact[175]]. However congealed stomach milk is like feces according to all[176], although Lechatchilah one is to be stringent against even cooking it with meat because of Maaras Ayin.[177]
  • Summary of the three opinions regarding stomach milk:
  1. Rif/Rambam/Michaber 1st opinion: Is considered feces even if the milk is liquidly.
  2. Tosafus/Rosh/Rabeinu Tam/Rashba/Ran/Michaber 2nd opinion/Rama: Is considered milk if is still liquidly. Is considered feces if is congealed.
  3. Rashi/Rashal: Is considered milk even if is congealed.

 

General Summary:

1. The Biblical prohibition:

It is Biblically forbidden to either cook, eat, or benefit from meat and milk in the following case: The meat and milk are both from a Kosher[178] domestic[179] animal and have been cooked, roasted, smoked, or placed in a Keli Rishon together with milk from a kosher animal.

Thus one must fulfill the following three conditions for it to be Biblically forbidden:

  1. Kosher animal
  2. Domestic animal
  3. Cooked together

 

The Rabbinical prohibition:

A. General rules of Rabbinical prohibitions:

  • Whenever a mixture is forbidden to eat because of Maaras Ayin and not because of a Rabbinical prohibition, then if it falls into meat it does not require 60x against it.
  • Whenever a mixture is forbidden to cook because of Maaras Ayin it is permitted to cook for the sake of using it as medicine for an ill person. It may likewise be eaten by an ill person if its eating prohibition is merely due to Maras Ayin.[180]
  • Whenever it is only Rabbinically forbidden to eat it may be sold and benefited from.

 

B. Rabinically forbidden to eat and cook:

  1. Bones, horns, skin, placenta, sinews, hooves
  2. Meiy Chalav;
  3. Chalav Meisa;
  4. Male animal milk;
  5. Blood is Biblically forbidden to eat, but only Rabbinically forbidden to cook.

 

  C. Rabinically forbidden to eat and Maaras Ayin to cook:

  1. Poultry[181]
  2. Kosher wild animal meat or milk

 

  D. Maaras Ayin to both cook and eat:

  1. Human milk whether male or female;
  2. Almond milk without almonds;

  E. Biblically forbidden to eat but only Maaras Ayin to cook:

  1. Milk or meat from a non-kosher species;

 

F. Permitted to cook and eat with milk:

  • Fish
  • Locusts
  • Eggs
  • Chalav Keiva according to Michaber.

 

Q&A on Maaras Ayin mixtures

May one eat meat imitated soy produce with milk products or during a milky meal?[182]

Yes[183], although some Poskim advise to leave the wrapper in the vicinity to show that it is vegetarian.

 

May one eat margarine, Pareve ice cream during a meat meal?

Yes[184], however some Poskim advise to leave the wrapper in the vicinity to show that it is not made from real milk products.

 

May one eat Pareve milk with meat?

Seemingly one is to be stringent regarding Pareve milk to leave the container near the meat.[185] Nevertheless seemingly one who is lenient has upon what to rely.

 

5. Using stomach milk as a Maamad/catalyst[186]:[187]

  • Introduction-What is a catalyst?In order to turn milk into cheese an acidic enzyme is needed. This enzyme is called a catalyst. There are various sources of enzymes available [see footnote[188]], although the most efficient is stomach enzymes. The question here is asked whether one may use stomach milk as an enzyme to catalyze milk into cheese.

Lechatchilah:[189] One is to remove the milk before it cools down, [being that the milk is very sharp and can absorb taste of the stomach if it were to remain there for enough time for it to cool down.[190]]

Bedieved if it was removed after it cooled down: If the milk was removed after it had already cooled down, it nevertheless remains Kosher.[191] If however it was only removed after remaining 24 hours in the stomach[192], or less than 24 hours but it had been salted[193] with the stomach then [it is forbidden to be eaten[194] and] it is forbidden to be used as a catalyst for cheese.[195]

Bedieved if one used the forbidden stomach milk as a catalyst:[196] If the stomach milk is liquid then the entire cheese is forbidden unless the cheese has 60x the stomach milk in which case it remains Kosher.[197] If the stomach milk was congealed in the stomach [already by the time of the slaughtering], then the cheese is Kosher[198] without needing nullification.[199] If the milk was at first liquidly in the stomach [after it was slaughtered] and then later congealed, its law is disputed[200] and in a case of [great[201]] loss one may be lenient to consider it congealed.[202]

 

6. Using an animal stomach as a Maamad/Catalyst:

A. Lechatchilah:

It is always forbidden to initially use a piece of the stomach as a catalyst in milk in order to make cheese, [as the stomach is considered actual meat, and it is initially forbidden to nullify an Issur].

B. Bedieved if one used a stomach as a catalyst for cheese:

The ruling for this law is dependent on the following factors:

  1. Is the stomach Kosher?
  2. Is there 60x versus the stomach?
  3. Was another catalyst also used?

Stomach was Kosher to eat:[203] Then if there is 60x[204] in the cheese versus the amount of stomach used then the cheese is Kosher.[205]

Stomach was not kosher to eat, such as the stomach of non-kosher animal, or Niveila or Treifa: Then the entire cheese is forbidden no matter the ratio of it to the stomach[206], as a non-Kosher catalyst is never nullified.[207]

If a kosher and a non-Kosher catalyst were used as catalyst: Then the cheese is kosher if there is 60x against the forbidden catalyst.[208] However this only applies if the non-kosher stomach does not have enough power on its own to do the job to catalyze the milk. However if the non-Kosher catalyst has enough ability to catalyze on its own then the entire mixture is forbidden irrelevant of ratio. This applies whether or not the Kosher catalyst also has enough power to catalyze on its own.[209] Furthermore even if the non-Kosher catalyst was only placed in after the Kosher catalyst had already given enough power to the milk to turn it into cheese, it is nevertheless forbidden in a case that the non-Kosher catalyst has the strength to catalyze on its own.[210]

 

Summary:

If a Kosher stomach was used one requires 60x the stomach. If a non-Kosher stomach was used the cheese is forbidden. If a Kosher and non-kosher catalyst was used, then if one has 60x versus the non-Kosher catalyst and the catalyst does not have ability on its own to catalyze the milk.

 

7. Tanned animal skin or stomach:[211]

If one salted and tanned an animal stomach [or intestines[212]] until it has dried out, and then formed a canteen from the leather and used it to store milk, the milk is permitted.[213] Nevertheless one is initially to avoid using it to store milk.[214] [The above only applies to skin, it is however forbidden to use dried meat to store milk.[215]]

 

Q&A

May one use a dried stomach as a catalyst?

Some Poskim[216] rule doing so is permitted being the stomach is nullified in 60x within the milk.[217] This however only applies if the stomach is Kosher.[218]

 

Is Gelatin Kosher?

See Darkei Halacha p. 171

 


[1] Rashbam Vayikra 11

[2] Bechayeh Mishpatim 19; However see there that he negates this as being the true explanation, and rather gives an explanation in accordance to Kabala, which is explained next.

[3] Bechayeh Mishpatim 19 in his 2nd explanation; Chinuch Mitzvah 92; Keli Yakar

[4] A law which is above logic.

[5] Bechayeh Mishpatim 19; Chinuch Mitzvah 92; Keli Yakar

[6] Chinuch

[7] Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim 3/32; Even Ezra Vayikra

[8] Bechayeh Mishpatim 19

[9] Michaber 87/1

[10] The three versus are found in: Mishpatim 23/19; Ki Sisa 34/26; Reih 14/21. See Lekutei Sichos Mishpatim and Ki Sisa Volume 6 for an analysis on the opinion of Rashi in the three commands that are repeated.

The Torah states “do not cook a goat in its mother’s milk” however the Sages taught through the oral tradition of Torah that it is not exclusive to only such a case [of cooking the child in the mother’s milk], but also includes a prohibition against cooking together any Kosher meat with Kosher  milk.

[11] The source of the discussion is found in Gemara Chulin 115b and Kedushin 57b

[12] Some [Kesef Mishnah Tumas Meis 1/2] explain the prohibition of cooking is a safeguard of the Torah against coming to eat the mixture.

[13] It is only forbidden to benefit from the mixture of milk and meat if they were cooked in the usual manner.

[14] Michaber 87/1

The Rambam: The Rambam explains in Ma’achalos Asuros (9/2) that the reason the Torah does not explicitly state that it is forbidden to eat milk and meat is because it is learned out from a Kal V’chomer of cooking. Just like it is forbidden to merely cook milk and meat without even eating, how much more so to eat it after cooking it is forbidden. See Lechem Mishneh which analyzes this ruling of the Rambam and concludes the Rambam does not negate the teaching brought above, which is sourced in the Gemara, but rather is coming to explain why there is a liability of Malkus for one who eats Basar Bechalav.

[15] Rambam Mamchalos Asuros 14/11 brought in Kaf Hachaim 87/1-2

[16] Rama 87/6

[17] Lit. “at times they cook meat and at times they cook milk”. This means that the walls of the pot have Basar Bechalav absorbed within them, and hence the milk and meat which is absorbed in the walls of the pot comes into the food which is cooking inside it. [See Kaf Hachaim 87/59]

[18] Shach 87/18 and so concludes Rama in this Halacha

There are two possible reasons behind why this is a mere stringency and not a prohibition:

  1. As having the taste of meat and milk enter from the walls of the pot into the food is not Derech Bishul [the usual way of cooking] and is thus not forbidden. [Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18; Chochmas Adam 40/7; Aruch Hashulchan 87/31; Kaf Hachaim 87/59] If however the pot is Ben Yomo of milk or meat and one knows this to be the case, then it is forbidden to raise the flame under such a pot if the opposite food is currently cooking inside. [Peri Megadim ibid and Kaf Hachaim ibid]
  2. As there is no Bishul Achar Bishul [cooking after cooking] by Basar Bechalav. Meaning once meat and milk have been cooked together further cooking is not prohibited. [Aruch Hashulchan 87/31 in his first explanation, although he concludes the Achronim are stringent] Others [Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18; Aruch Hashulchan ibid] however argue that there is Bishul after Bishul by Basar Bechalav and it is hence only permitted due to the first reason mentioned above.

[19] Shach 87/18

[20] Mordechai

[21] Does this include Pareve foods? Mordechai writes it is forbidden for him to cook non-Kosher meat in his pot in the house of a Jew. In truth however it is prohibited to cook all foods in the pot, even Pareve, as the same logic applies by all foods. [Shach 87/18] Meaning to say: Since the pot walls have absorbed meat and milk, when one cooks in the pot, irrelevant of what the food is, one is re-cooking that absorbed meat and milk, and hence once again transgresses the prohibition of cooking Basar Bechalav. Thus the prohibition applies whether the food being cooked is Kosher or Treif, and even to mere water. [See Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18; See Gilyon Maharsha which learns from here that it is forbidden to re-cook a meat and milk mixture that was cooked previously. Hence the prohibition is not because one will come to forbid the food in the pot, as since when is there a prohibition against absorbing Treif into a gentile’s food. The only time there is a prohibition is to cook meat with milk.]

Note of author: Tzaruch Iyun on this ruling of the Shach to include Pareve foods, as certainly there is more of a problem if meat is cooking in the pot versus Pareve cooking in the pot, as explains the Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18 that if the pot is Ben Yomo of milk there is an actual prohibition [and not mere stringency] to forbid cooking meat in it. However when Pareve is cooking in the pot there is no prohibition, as it is not Derech Bishul. Hence perhaps the ruling of the Mordichy is limited to letting the gentile cook meat or milk in his pots in one’s home, and does not apply to other Pareve foods. Vetzaruch Iyun!

[22] There are two possible reasons behind why this is a mere stringency and not a prohibition:

  1. As having the taste of meat and milk enter from the walls of the pot into the food is not Derech Bishul [the usual way of cooking] and is thus not forbidden. [Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18; Chochmas Adam 40/7; Aruch Hashulchan 87/31; Kaf Hachaim 87/59] If however the pot is Ben Yomo of milk or meat and one knows this to be the case, then it is forbidden to raise the flame under such a pot if the opposite food is currently cooking inside. [Peri Megadim ibid and Kaf Hachaim ibid; See Yad Yehuda 30/Ha’aruch 14]
  2. As there is no Bishul Achar Bishul [cooking after cooking] by Basar Bechalav. Meaning once meat and milk have been cooked together further cooking is not prohibited. [Aruch HaShulchan 87/31 in his first explanation, although he concludes the Achronim are stringent] Others [Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18; Aruch Hashulchan ibid] however argue that there is Bishul after Bishul by Basar Bechalav and it is hence only permitted due to the first reason mentioned above.

[23] Hakashrus 10/6; Vetzaruch Iyun on his ruling as cooking even meat of a non-Kosher species with milk should be forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, as rules Rama 87/4; Shach 87/7 in his first and main explanation; Taz 87/5 in his conclusion. Furthermore why is it not forbidden due to the prohibition to do business with non-Kosher foods? Perhaps however it can be permitted despite the Maaris Ayin being that it is a case of need. Likewise it does not contain a prohibition of doing business with non-Kosher foods being that the cook does not own any of the food. See Kaf Hachaim 117/43 and 72 for a list of Poskim regarding working in a non-Kosher restaurant, and his conclusion that it is permitted.

[24] As since a Davar Charif is viewed as “Beiyn” it is like one is actually cooking the milk and meat together. Vetzaruch Iyun why this was omitted by Poskim which mention the allowance.

[25] As the common status of a vessel is not Ben Yomo.

[26] Source for allowance: Practically we have never heard of people being careful in this. This can readily be seen by all when burning chameitz on Erev Pesach that we have never been warned not to throw in milk and meat Chameitz products into the fire due to this suspicion. On such a common matter the fact that all previous Poskim omitted this warning is itself a proof that one need not be careful in this.

Explanation: As an explanation for why it is allowed perhaps this is because it is not certain that there is both meat and milk inside the garbage, as well as even if there is meat and milk inside it is questionable whether they are close enough to each other to be considered cooked together. It is hence not a Pesik Reishei and is therefore allowed being one has no intent to do so, as is the law by all prohibition that if one has no intent and it is not an inevitable occurrence there is no prohibition in doing the action. In truth however one can argue that even if one knows for certain the garbage contains meat and milk which are in contact with each other it is nevertheless permitted, as the Torah did not forbid destroying meat and milk, but rather fixing it and making it into an edible food. A proof for this can be found in the law that Basar Bechalav is to be buried as opposed to burnt, and the reason given is not because of the prohibition of cooking meat with milk but rather because its ash is also forbidden. [Temurah 33b-34a; Rambam Pesulei Mukdashin 19/14] Hence we see there is no prohibition in burning Basar Bechalav when ones intent is to destroy it. [Now although there in Temurah it is referring to a mixture of Basar Bechalav and not to meat and milk which have never been cooked, nevertheless it has the same status, as the Poskim have never used this ruling as a source for saying there is no cooking after cooking by Basar Bechalav, besides for the fact that in truth we rule there is cooking after cooking by Basar Bechalav. Hence it is permitted without doubt to burn it in order to destroy.]

[27] As the prohibition of Amira Lenachri applies by all prohibitions, not just Shabbos. [343/5] Vetzaruch Iyun if it is permitted to hint to the gentile to do so for him, just as is the law on Shabbos.

[28] Peri Megadim brought in 307 Biur Halacha “Heileich”; Admur 307/25

[29] Peri Megadim S.D. 87/18

[30] Kaf Hachaim 87/23

As the Sages did not extend their decree against cooking to a case where the mixture would be only Rabbinically forbidden, and there would be no Maaras Ayin. [As the onlooker does not know whether the pot is dairy or meaty.]

[31] Pischeiy Teshuvah 87/8

[32] As since a Davar Charif is viewed as “Beiyn” it is like one is actually cooking the milk and meat together. Vetzaruch Iyun why this was omitted by the above Poskim which mention the allowance.

[33] The question here is with regards to whether one is allowed to Treif a food due to Basar Bechalav?

[34] P”M S.D. 87/18, As even if the pot contains Ben Yomo Basar Bechalav there is no prohibition of cooking Basar Bechalav involved in causing the Basar Bechalav taste to enter into the food he is now cooking for the gentile.

[35] Chochmas Adam 40/2

[36] Rama 87/6

[37] Shach 87/ ;

May one mix cold dairy water with meaty water and feed it to an animal? Seemingly this is allowed as this mixture is merely Rabbinical [not Derech Bishul] and hence permitted in benefit.

[38] Rama 87/6

[39] Admur Hilchos Pesach 443/9-12

Biblically: Biblically only with regards to idol products do we hold that the money received in exchange for the sale is also forbidden in benefit. This [that by idol worship it is a problem] is learned from the words “Vehayisa Cherem Kamohu“, while from the words “Ki cherem Hu“ we learn to exclude all other prohibitions, like Arlah and Kileiy Hakerem and Chametiz and meat and milk, that by them if they are switched or sold, the item/money received is permitted in benefit.

Rabbinically: Nevertheless Rabinically the money received is forbidden in benefit for the person who sells or switches the prohibited item, [even if the person who is selling it is not the owner of the Chameitz], as if it were to be permitted he is profiting from the prohibition. However for others, [including the owner in a case that someone else sold it], it is permitted, as they are not the ones that profited off the prohibition.

Other Opinions: There are however opinions that hold that there is no such Rabbinical prohibition, and it is thus permitted to be benefited by everyone, even the seller.

The Final Ruling: Practically the seller should only be allowed to rely on this latter opinion in a case of great loss. However in a case that does not involve great loss then even if he sold it after Pesach, when the prohibition on the Chameitz is only Rabbinical, nevertheless one should/must be stringent.

If the Basar Bechalav was taken by the gentile prior to the money being received: According to all if at the sale the Chameitz was first taken by the gentile and only afterwards the money was given, then the money may be used even by the seller, as when the gentile took the chameitz he automatically acquired it [as it is prohibited in benefit, and thus is hefker], and thus the money given is like a present and it’s not considered to be the sales money for the chameitz.

[40] Taz 94/4; Taz 443/2 regarding Chameitz.; Hakdama of Yad Efrayim; Admur 443/3 regarding Chameitz, that it is forbidden to be given to even non-owned animals.

[41] Mishneh Berurah 448/28

[42] Mishneh in end of Temurah 33b

[43] Taz 94/4; Hakashrus 10 footnote 6

[44] Temurah 34a; Rambam Pesulei Hamukdashin 19/14

[45] Cheishek Shlomo 98

[46] As the verse states that Avraham said “and the calf which I have made

[47] Rabbeinu Bechayeh Mishpatim 19

[48] Daas Zekeinim

[49] Likkutei Sichos 6 p. 150

[50] Michaber 87/3 regarding poultry and wild animal meat

[51] Michaber 87/6-7 regarding blood, bones, skin, placenta, Chalav Meisa and Chalav Zachar that he is exempt from lashes if he cooks [ibid] although doing so is Rabbinically forbidden. [Shach 87/22 and Beir Heiytiv 87/19] 

[52] Shach 87/7 in his first explanation, as rules the Michaber 87/4 regarding woman’s milk; and Rama ibid regarding cooking non-kosher meats/milk.

Other Opinions:

  • Taz 87/5 explains that only when both foods are Kosher do we apply the Issur of cooking due to Maaras Ayin. Thus in all cases that one of the foods are forbidden to eat there is no Issur of cooking due to Maaras Ayin. Although this is the opinion of the Taz he does not allow to rule this way and concludes to be stringent like Rama.
  • Shach 87/7 in his 2nd explanation says that the prohibition of Maaras Ayin only applies when eating a mixture and not to cooking the mixture. His reasoning is because the onlooker will think he is cooking for medical purposes or perhaps for another reason, and is not cooking in order to eat the mixture. Hence the onlooker will not deduce from his observation that it is permitted to eat such a mixture. The Shach concludes with his first explanation that nevertheless even to cook is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin. Thus when the Michaber said previously [87/3] “permitted to cook and benefit” he was referring to the letter of the law, but nevertheless holds it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin.
  • The Rama 87/4 rules that chicken may be cooked with milk and there is no concern for Maaras Ayin.

[53] 87/1

[54] 100 in Perek Kol Habasar based on his own logic; Brought in Taz 87/1; Shach 87/2

[55] Brought in Shach 87/2; He holds in the opinion of the Rambam that chicken and milk is Rabbinically forbidden to benefit.

[56] 87/2

[57] 87/1

[58] Shach 87/2

[59] Michaber 87/1

From where is this derived?

The Torah repeats the command not to cook milk and meat together three times from which we also derive the prohibition of eating them together, as otherwise the commands would be superfluous. The reason the Torah did not simply state not to eat them together, despite this being the intent, is to teach us that Biblically it is only prohibited to eat meat and milk together if they were previously cooked together.

[60] Beir Heiytiv 87/1

[61] Peri Chadash, brought in Beir Heiytiv 87/1. Thus one can eat past that layer. However the Minchas Yaakov holds that placing something hot in a cold meat and milk mixture is only a Rabbinical form of cooking, while pouring from a Keli Rishon is a doubt if it is considered Biblically forbidden (Safek D’oraisa).

[62] Beir Heiytiv 87/1 writes it is Biblically forbidden; The Peri Toar [3] and Chovas Daas [87/1] argue and say that roasting is not at all considered to be cooking milk and meat.

[63] The Michaber 87/6 rules that there are no lashes given in eating such a mixture, and lists it with other Rabbinical mixtures. However the Peri Chadash [brought in Beir Heiytiv 87/1] rules that it is a Biblical form of cooking. [See Gra 87/13; Yad Efrayim 87/6]

[64] Yad Avraham 87/6; Peri Chadash [87/2] rule it is a Biblical form of cooking. However the Minchas Yaakov holds that frying is only a Rabbinical form of cooking. The Maharam holds that frying is not at all considered cooking and is not forbidden in benefit.

[65] Michaber 87/6 states that there is no lashes for such cooking. The Shach 87/13 states that it is a Biblical doubt if cooking in such a manner [hot springs] is forbidden, and therefore one does not receive lashes as it is a mere doubt, but it is nevertheless forbidden. Peri Chadash [87/2] holds that it is permitted to benefit from a mixture of meat and milk cooked in the Tiberius hot springs. However the Peri Toar [87/4] disagrees and says that food which was cooked in hot springs is forbidden even in benefit.

[66] Michaber 87/1

[67] Shach 87/1

[68] In such a case it is Rabbinically forbidden. If however the meat and milk were cooked together then eating such a mixture contains a Biblical prohibition.

[69] On Rama 87/1

[70] 87/4

[71] Taz 87/5

[72] Shach 87/7; Taz 87/5 “When the Rama said ‘initially it is forbidden’ this implies that if there is a great need or if it is for medical purposes even if the individual is not in danger it is permitted to cook poultry with milk and even more so regarding non-Kosher milk, since the prohibition against eating it is only Rabbinical.”

[73] Michaber 87/2-3

[74] Although the Torah states the meat of a kid, this is not litteral and it includes also other meats such as from an ox, sheep and goat. [Michaber 87/2]

[75] Michaber 87/3 [See Q&A regarding the Issur Basar Bechalav by non-Kosher animals]

[76] Rama 87/4; Shach 87/7 in his first and main explanation; Taz 87/5 in his conclusion

Other Opinions:

  • The Shach [87/7] suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when cooking in order to eat does it apply. Shach in his third explanation says there is no Maaras Ayin in cooking forbidden meats or milk, as their color is clearly evident to all that they are not Kosher. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.
  • The Taz [87/5] explains there is never a cooking prohibition of Maaras Ayin by foods that are not Kosher. Nevertheless he concludes to be stringent like the Rama.
  • Beir Heitiv [87/7]: According to Rama it is permitted to cook non-Kosher meat with non-Kosher milk since both components are Rabbinical. [However based on Shach 87/6 and Rashal that rule even by chicken and almond milk we suspect for Maaras Ayin, the same would apply here.]

[77] Kaf Hachaim 87/19;

Implied from Michaber 87/3 which states “non-kosher animal” instead of “non-kosher meat”; Rama 87/6 which rules that one may not elevate fire under gentiles pot because perhaps there is milk and meat inside, thus implying that the prohibition applies even if the meat is not-kosher, but from a kosher species. See Matei Yehonasan there. Vetzaruch Iyun.

[78] Michaber 87/3

[79] Michaber 87/3

[80] Shach 87/7 in his first and main explanation; Taz 87/5 in accordance to his rule that Maaras Ayin applies by two Kosher foods; Rama does not mention the law by a Chayah but seemingly since it is Rabbinical there would be no concern for Maaras Ayin [see note below].

Other Opinions:

  • The Rama [87/3 and 4]: According to the Shach’s understanding of the Rama seemingly just like chicken is only Rabbinical and hence does not contain a prohibition of Maaras Ayin, so too Chayah. However according to the understanding of Beir Heiytiv see below.
  • The Shach [87/7] suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when cooking in order to eat does it apply. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.
  • Beir Heitiv 87/7: According to Rama it is permitted to cook Kosher Chayah meat with non-Kosher milk. [However based on Shach 87/5 and Rashal that rule even by chicken and almond milk we suspect for Maaras Ayin, the same applies here.]

[81] Parshas Riei 14/4

[82] A Buffalo: Is questionable whether it is a Chayah or a Biheima. See Rama Yoreh Deah 28/4.

[83] Michaber 87/7 “Shlil”

[84] “Shilya”

[85] Michaber 87/7

[86] Michaber ibid

[87] Shach 87/22

[88] Beir Heiytiv 87/19, as is implied from Michaber that this contains an actual Rabbinical prohibition to be cooked, and not just Maaras Ayin, as does poultry and wild animal meat. Brought also in Chochmas Adam [40/6] and Yad Yehuda [35] that it is Rabbinically forbidden to cook. Seemingly the reason for this is because any product which comes from an animal which its meat has a Biblical prohibition of Basar Bechalav the Sages gave it a Rabbinical prohibition for all matters including cooking.

[89] Michaber 87/6

[90] Shach 87/13 implies that even to cook blood with milk is Rabbinically forbidden. This is understood from the Michaber being that Michaber is dealing with cooking blood with milk, and says “one is exempt” [from the Biblical prohibition] which implies that it is nevertheless forbidden Rabbinically. So rules also Mateh Yehonasan [brought in Otzer Hamefarshim of Shulchan Aruch Habahir]

[91] Michaber 87/3

[92] Michaber 87/3; Shach 87/4

Opinions that hold chicken is Biblical: The Maharshal [Yam Shel Shlomo Perek Kol Habasar 100] and Bach [87] rule based on the Hagahas Sheid [76/4] that chicken is Biblically forbidden with milk. The Hagahos Sheid states that one cannot be lenient against Tosafus Chulin 104b that forbids eating milk after chicken. The Tosafus ibid states that the reason why people are accustomed not to eat milk after chicken is because they hold that chicken with milk is Biblical. Thus the Bach and Rashal deduce from the Hagahos Sheid ibid that he must hold that chicken and milk is Biblical. The Shach ibid however negates these opinions and states that in truth the Hagahos Sheid explicitly states elsewhere that chicken with milk is Rabbinical, and he is only stringent regarding not eating milk after chicken even though it is Rabbinical. Likewise there are alternative ways of explaining why people are stringent to not eat milk after chicken unlike the suggestion of Tosafus. The Shach ibid concludes with a quote from the Rambam [Mamarim 9] who says, “that one who rules that poultry with milk is Biblically forbidden transgresses the prohibition ‘not to add’ rulings onto the Torah. [Shach 87/4]

Does the mixture of meat and milk receive the same status of laws as a Biblical mixture regarding Taaruvos? See Taz 98/5 and Shach 98/7 for a dispute on the severity of this Rabbinical prohibition of chicken, and if it carries Biblical weight.

[93] Michaber ibid as explains Shach 7 in his first explanation

[94] Shach 87/6 and 9; Taz 87/5; as opposed to simple understanding of Rama 87/4

[95] Other Opinions:

  • The Rama 87/4 rules it is permitted to cook chicken in milk as the concept of Maaras Ayin does not apply by a Rabbinical prohibition. However see Beir Heiytiv 87/7 which explains the Rama to be referring to cooking chicken with [almonds or] non-Kosher milk, or with woman’s milk and he is doing it not for the sake of eating. However to cook chicken in real milk even the Rama would agree it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin. [However based on Shach 86/6 and Rashal that rule even by chicken and almond milk we suspect for Maaras Ayin, so too here.]
  • The Shach [87/7] suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when eating the mixture does it apply. His reasoning is because the onlooker will think he is cooking for medical purposes or another reason, and is not cooking in order to eat the mixture. Hence the onlooker will not deduce from his observation that it is permitted to eat such a mixture. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin. The Shach 87/6 likewise explains that Maras Ayin applies also by Derabanun mixtures, and hence it is Maaras Ayin to even cook poultry with milk.
  • Taz [87/5]: We are stringent to apply Maras Ayin by chicken as at times when the chicken is cut it is difficult to tell the difference between poultry and regular meat.

[96] Michaber 87/3; Darkei Moshe 87/4; Perisha 87/8; Magen Avraham 173/1; Shach 87/5; Taz 87/3; Peri Chadash 87/8; Machazik Bracha 87/4; Pischeiy Teshuvah 87/9; Chasam Sofer 101; Yad Yehuda 87/6; Yad Efraim 87; Aruch Hashulchan 87/15 [regarding fish and milk]

Background:

The Darkei Moshe; Shach; Taz; Aruch Hashulchan ibid state that there is a misprint in the Beis Yosef on the Tur and in truth he meant to write fish with meat and not milk. Thus all those that rules based on the Beis Yosef that it is forbidden were based on a misprint. The Chasam Sofer 101 states the Rambam who himself was a doctor can be trusted that it contains no danger. A number of Poskim bring both opinions and conclude that no one is careful in this anymore it is and therefore it is even initially allowed. [So concludes Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid; Yad Yehuda ibid; Aruch Hashulchan ibid]

Other Opinions:

  • The Levush in Ateres Zahav 87/? writes based on the Beis Yosef 87 Ateres Zekainim rule that it is forbidden to eat fish with milk due to Sakana/danger. So rules also Chinuch Beis Yosef 61 and Peri Megadim M”Z 87/3 [brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid].
  • The Peri Megadim brings in the name of the Kenesses Hagdola and Bais Lechem Yehuda, to be careful not to eat them together since a “danger is more stringent than a prohibition.” [This is aside from butter and fat, which are not under the category of a ‘danger’].

[97] Beis Yosef 87 [based on current wording]; Levush in Ateres Zahav 87/7 [Brought in Shach 87/5; Taz 87/3]; Rabbeinu Bechayeh Parshas Mishpatim; Kneses Hagedola 87/19 in name of Sheiris Yehuda; Chinuch Beis Yehuda 61; Peri Megadim M”Z 87/3 in name of Poskim [brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid]; Pachad Yitzchak Mareches Habeis [with actual milk is danger of death]; Mor Uketzia 173; Avnei Paz 42; Oatzar Chaim [brought in Darkei Teshuvah]; Kaf Hachaim 87/25; 173/3; Yechaveh Daas 6/48; Rav Poalim 2/10; Other Poskim that the Darkei Teshuvah ibid refers the reader to: Mateh Yosef 2/7; Besi David  33; Ikaarei Daat Yoreh Deah 14/5; Yad David 87/10.

Background:

The Beis Yosef ibid writes that one may not eat fish with milk due to danger [unlike his ruling in 87/3]. The Levush in Ateres Zahav ibid records the ruling of the Beis Yosef as the final Halacha. This prohibition due to danger is also found in the Rabbeinu Bechayeh which was a Rishon. So rules also Chinuch Beis Yehuda 61 [brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid] and many of the Poskim brought above. The Peri Megadim ibid brings in the name of the Kenesses Hagdola and Beis Lechem Yehuda to be careful not to eat them together since a “danger is more stringent than a prohibition.”The Kaf Hachaim ibid concludes that one is to be stringent unless it has already become a public leniency in one’s area.

The reason it gives danger: The Rabbeinu Bechayeh ibid writes that it can cause leprosy. The Pachad Yitzchak ibid writes that fish with milk can cause instant death. The Oatzar Hachaim ibid, which was an expert doctor, writes that it can bring many illnesses. The Chinuch Beis Yehuda ibid writes that it is dangerous because fish cools the body and causes the milk to be a danger.

The opinion of the doctors: Some Poskim write that they have spoken to many doctors and there is no danger involved. The Oatzar Hachaim ibid, which was a expert doctor, writes that it can bring many illnesses. The Chinuch Beis Yehuda ibid writes that he investigated the matter by doctors and they stated that there is danger involved.

[98] Peri Megadim 173 A”A 1; Y.D. 87 M”Z 3 in name of Kneses Hagedola; Elya Raba 173/16; Beis Lechem Yehuda 87/3; Chinuch Beis Yehuda ibid; Adnei Paz ibid; Beis David 33; Zivcheiy Tzedek 87/18; Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid; Hakashrus p. 427

Other Opinions: Some Poskim are stringent to prohibit eating fish even with butter. [Rav Poalim 2/10]

[99] Shaareiy Yoreh Deah ibid; footnote of editors in Shaareiy Halacha Uminhag ibid based on ruling of Tzemach Tzedek there.

[100] Shaar Halacha Uminhag 5 page 177

[101] Rav Yaakov Landau testified that the Rabbeim were stringent in this, although others have claimed that the Rebbe himself would eat fish and cottage cheese on the same plate. [See Hiskashrus 264]

[102] Michaber 87/3; Shach 87/5 and Taz 87/3.

[103] Michaber 87/5

Why is the egg not considered meaty due to Eiver Min Hachaiy? If an egg was knocked out from a live bird then if it is attached to its sinews it is always forbidden due to Eiver Min Hachay, no matter what its stage of development. [Michaber 86/4; Shach 87/9; Taz 87/6] This does not contradict the ruling here as Eiver Min Hachaiy applies even by non-meaty parts of the animal, as we see from the law of milk, that if not for the Torah’s explicit allowance it too would be forbidden due to Eiver Min Hachaiy. Hence although an egg when attached to its sinews is forbidden due to Eiver Min Hachaiy when it is knocked out while the chicken is alive, nevertheless this does not mean it is considered meat, and in truth the egg is considered Pareve if it was fully developed. [Shach 87/9] Alternatively it can be explained that only regarding Eiver Min Hachaiy which is Biblical do we view the egg as meat, however regarding the prohibition of meat and milk which is only Rabbinical with chicken, we are not stringent regarding a chicken egg to consider it meat. Or perhaps since each is permitted on its own we do not consider their mixture to make a new entity of Issur of Basar Bechalav. Nevertheless the above explanations are unnecessary as in truth the egg is not considered meat at all. [Shach ibid]

[104] Opinion of Rashal: The Rashal [brought in Taz 87/6] however rules that all eggs which are attached to their sinews are considered meat for all matters. His reasoning is because we see from the law of Eiver Min Hachaiy, that when an egg gets pushed out from a chicken when it was still attached to its sinews that it is Treif. One must say, says the Rashal, that the reason for this is because the egg is considered meat so long as it is still attached. Hence so too here the egg is considered meat even when fully developed if it is still attached to the sinews. [See footnote from Shach above in how he answers this proof from the Rashal]

The custom of women to forbid all eggs: The Mahariy [brought in Rashal and Shach 87/10] rules that the women are accustomed to be stringent to avoid eating eggs found in slaughtered chickens even if the shell is hard [and detached from the sinews]. The Rashal concludes that Bedieved one is not to be stringent if the shell has completed, even if it is soft. [Taz 87/6] The Shach [87/10] likewise brings this custom of women and concludes it is a mere stringency and in an area where this custom was not accepted they do not need to follow it [even if the egg is attached to the sinews] as when the outer shell is hard, it is permitted even initially to eat it with milk.

If the shell is soft: The Shach [87/10] rules that even if the egg was fully developed and detached from the sinews if the shell is soft, it is initially forbidden to eat the egg with milk. However Bedieved if it was already cooked with milk it is permitted to eat the mixture. Although if it was attached to its sinews [and has soft shell even if fully developed] then even Bedieved it is forbidden.

Small eggs: Small eggs that only have the yolk developed, even if they are not attached to the sinews are considered like actual meat, although according to the lenient opinion of Rashi, even if only the yolk has developed and the egg is attached one can be lenient Bedieved when they have cooked it and there is a great loss. [??]

[105] Michaber writes cook, Shach [87/11] writes he means “eat” as even chicken itself the Michaber rules may be cooked with milk. [However just as cooking chicken with milk is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, so too the same would apply to this form of egg.]

[106] Shach 87/10

[107] Shach 87/10

[108] Michaber 86/4; Shach 87/9; Taz 87/6; See previous footnotes.

[109] The Tur grouped kosher meat and non-kosher milk in the same sentence with meat of venison and poultry as types of Basar Bechalav that are Rabbinically forbidden. 

The Beis Yosef questions this ruling claiming that non-kosher meat or milk is regardless Biblically forbidden to be eaten, and there would hence be no reason for the Sages to add a decree of Basar Bechalav towards it.  

The Bach argues that there is a reason and practical ramification for a Rabbinical decree of Basar Bechalav to be applied to meat and milk of a non-kosher species, with regards to Chanan and Charal. 

Taz(2) differs with the Bach and says that Chanan and Charal is only relevant when both components of the mixture are permitted to be eaten and in combination become forbidden, as with kosher milk and kosher meat. 

Shach(3) says that Treif meat & kosher milk can be Chanan in theory, but Chazal would have no reason to make such a decree, seeing that  the food is already Treif and it would be far-fetched to say that  one may eat non-kosher meat with milk and go so far as to eat kosher  meat and milk.  The same reason would exclude worrying about Charal.

[110] Tur; Bach on Tur

[111] Chaticha Nasis Niveila. This refers to a piece of Kosher which has now become intrinsically Treif and one now needs 60x versus the entire piece if it were to fall into Heter. Thus if we say Chanan by meat and milk of a non-Kosher species then even if the Kosher ingredient of the mixture were to fall into Heter one would need 60x that entire ingredient, versus merely the Issur.

  • For example: If 10 grams of elephant meat became cooked with 30 grams of kosher milk, and that milk then fell into a mixture of Kosher food, if one holds of Basar Bechalav by non-Kosher species, then one requires 60x all 30 grams of milk. If however one does not hold of Basar Bechalav by non-Kosher meats, then one would only require 60x versus the 10 grams of elephant meat.

To note that practically we follow the Rama which holds of Chanan by other Issurim, and hence in the above case one would require 60x the 30 grams of milk.

[112] Chaticha Hareuya Lehiskabeid. This refers to a piece of Issur which due to its size is never nullified in a mixture. Thus if we were to say Charal by meat and milk of a non-Kosher species then if a nice size piece of Kosher meat were to fall into hot Treif milk the meat would become Charal  and if it became mixed with Heter pieces it would not be nullified even in 1000x.

[113] Beis Yosef 87; Shach 87/3; Taz 87/2

[114] Rama 87/3-4

[115] Shach 87/6

[116] As we see in the ruling that on Shabbos one may not walk out with a bell on an animal due to others thinking one is doing so to sell the animal in the market place. Now, selling itself on Shabbos is only Rabbinical, hence we see the decree of Maras Ayin applies equally to Rabbinical prohibitions. [Shach ibid]

[117] See Taz 87/ 5

[118] 87/7

[119] 87/4

[120] 87/5

[121] 87/7

[122] The Shach [suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when cooking in order to eat does it apply. The Shach in his third explanation says there is no Maaras Ayin in cooking forbidden meats or milk, as their color is clearly evident to all that they are not Kosher. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.

[123] Explicit in Rama 87/4 that one may not cook non-Kosher meat with milk, and there it is not possible the Rama is referring to eating.

[124] 87/7

[125] His reasoning is because the onlooker will think he is cooking for medical purposes or another reason, and is not cooking in order to eat the mixture. Hence the onlooker will not deduce from his observation that it is permitted to eat such a mixture.

[126] Although the Torah states the milk of the mother, this is not litteral and it includes also the milk of any other Kosher animal. [Michaber 87/2]

[127] Kaf Hachaim 87/19;

Implied from Michaber 87/3 which states “non-kosher animal” instead of “non-kosher meat”; Rama 87/6 which rules that one may not elevate fire under gentiles pot because perhaps there is milk and meat inside, thus implying that the prohibition applies even if the meat is not-kosher, but from a kosher species. See Matei Yehonasan there. Vetzaruch Iyun.

[128] Michaber 87/3 Implied from the words “Milk of a Tahor Beheima” that the milk must be from a domestic animal.

[129] Michaber 87/3

[130] Shach 87/7 in his first and main explanation; Taz 5 in accordance to his rule that Maaras Ayin applies by two Kosher foods; Rama does not mention the law by a Chayah but seemingly since it is Rabbinical there would be no concern for Maaras Ayin [see note below].

Other Opinions:

  • The Rama [87/3 and 4]: According to the Shach’s understanding of the Rama seemingly just like chicken is only Rabbinical and hence does not contain a prohibition of Maaras Ayin, so too Chayah. However according to the understanding of Beir Heiytiv see below.
  • The Shach [87/7] suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when cooking in order to eat does it apply. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.
  • Beir Heitiv 87/7: According to Rama it is permitted to cook Chayah meat with non-Kosher milk. [However based on Shach 87/5 and Rashal that rule even by chicken and almond milk we suspect for Maaras Ayin, so too here.]

[131] Michaber 87/3; See above B in Q&A for the dispute in whether there is a Rabbinical prohibition of Basar Bechalav involved.

[132] Rama 87/4; Shach 87/7 in his first and main explanation; Taz 87/5 in his conclusion

Other Opinions:

  • The Shach [87/7] suggests in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when eating the mixture does it apply. His reasoning is because the onlooker will think he is cooking for medical purposes or another reason, and is not cooking in order to eat the mixture. Hence the onlooker will not deduce from his observation that it is permitted to eat such a mixture. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim which wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.
  • The Taz 87/5 explains there is never a cooking prohibition of Maras Ayin by foods that are not Kosher. Nevertheless he concludes to be stringent like the Rama.
  • Beir Heitiv 87/7: According to Rama it is permitted to cook non-Kosher meat with non-Kosher milk since there are two Rabbinical ingredients involved, however if there is only one Rabbinical ingredient involved even the Rama would agree that there is Maaras Ayin. [However based on Shach 5 and Rashal that rule even by chicken and almond milk we suspect for Maaras Ayin, so too here. (Peri Megadim 84/8)]

[133] Michaber 87/4

[134] Shach 87/6 holds that it is forbidden to eat the mixture together even cold due to Maaras Ayin

Other Opinions: According to some opinions [Rama here and in Toras Chatas] one may be lenient to eat the mixture if the mixture is not cooked together, but rather eaten together cold. [Shach 87/6 in his explanation of the Rama; Taz 87/4] However according to this would be forbidden.

[135] This ruling is agreed to by all Poskim as both foods are Kosher and hence able to be eaten [Taz 5] as well as meat is a Biblical food of Basar Bechalav [hence also Rama agrees]. However according to Shach [87/7] in his second explanation that there is never a prohibition of Maaras Ayin by merely cooking and rather only when eating the mixture Maaras Ayin would not apply to merely cooking the meat in woman’s milk. Nevertheless he concludes with his first explanation, that even by cooking it is forbidden due to Maaras Ayin, and that even the Michaber and other Poskim that wrote it is permitted to cook, agree with this ruling as they were referring to the letter of the law and not to Maaras Ayin.

[136] 87/4

[137] Based on Taz 87/4 which rules that if no almonds are available one may cook chicken in almonds milk.

[138] As chicken itself is only Rabbinical, and thus we do not make a decree of Maaras Ayin on it. [Rama as explained by Shach 6; and Taz 4]

[139] 87/8 [and 6]; Shach says that Michaber rules likewise.

[140] As they rule that the Sages forbade due to Maras Ayin also Rabbinical matters, as is evident from many various laws which involve Rabbinical matters [such as the case on Shabbos of the cow with the bell collar {Shach 87/6}] and were nevertheless decreed against due to Maaras Ayin.

[141] 87/7

[142] The reason: As in such a case there is no reason to decree, as even if one were to come to cook chicken in milk due to what he saw, he has not yet transgressed any true prohibition, as cooking chicken even in real milk is only forbidden due to Maaras Ayin and not from the actual decree of the Sages.

[143] As the onlooker may come to eat chicken with milk which is an actual Rabbinical prohibition. [Beir Heiytiv ibid]

[144] Eating with animal milk:

[145] Rama 87/3

[146] Shach 87/6 in his explanation of the opinion of the Rama and that so rules Toras Chatas.

The reason: As the Rama ibid rules that by Rabbinical mixtures we do not apply the prohibition of Maaras Ayin and cold meat with milk is only Rabbinical.

[147] Shach 87/6

[148] Toras Chatas [62/8] brought in Taz 87/4; However seemingly according to Shach 87/6 this would be forbidden.

[149] Rama 87/3: Poultry however is permitted to cook in almond milk even without the almonds being that it itself is only a Rabbinical prohibition

[150] Taz 87/4 rules that the ruling of the Rama is correct and that so is the custom, however if almonds are available the Taz rules that one is to place them near the mixture, as one should try to fix the situation when possible. However when no almonds are available it remains permitted to cook and eat them together.

[151] The Peri Chadash [87/7] and Kraisi v’Plaisi says that the main ruling goes according to the Rama that regarding poultry one does not need to place almonds by the food.

[152] The reason: As chicken itself is only Rabbinical, and thus we do not make a decree of Maaras Ayin on it. Now although we decree by blood of a fish that it may not be eaten unless it has scales due to Maras Ayin this is only because consuming blood of an animal is Biblcial and contains Kareis. [Taz ibid; Shach ibid in his explanation of Rama]

[153] 87/6; He writes that so rule the Achronim and so appears in his opinion and so rules the Beir Sheva.

The reason: As we apply the prohibition of

[154] Perek Kol Habasar 52 brought in Shach ibid; Taz 87/4 and Toras Chatas

[155] However, the Peri Toar disregards the Peri Chadash and says that the ruling goes according to stringent opinion of the Shach.

[156] The reason: As they rule that the Sages forbade due to Maras Ayin also Rabbinical matters, as is evident from many various laws which involve Rabbinical matters and were nevertheless decreed against due to Maaras Ayin. This is evident from the ruling that one may not walk an animal with a bell to the marketplace on Shabbos because it appears like one intends to sell it on Shabbos, which itself is only Rabbinicla forbidden. [Shach ibid]

[157] 87/7 regarding cooking chicken in mother’s milk. To note however that the Taz 87/4 explicitly states by almond milk that the chicken may be eaten.
The reason: This explanation the Beir Heiytiv ibid answers all the questions posed by the Shach against the Rama. He explains that the Rama agrees that we suspect for Maras Ayin even by Rabbinical prohibitions and hence one may not eat chicken with almond milk unless he places almonds in the vicinity even according to the Rama. However the Rama is referring to cooking the mixture together without eating in which case the worst case scenario hell cook chicken with real milk which itself is only prohibited due to Maaras Ayin. [ibid]

[158] The Michaber 87/6 simply states male milk, however the Shach [87/16] explains that the Michaber is referring to male animal milk specifically.

[159] Michaber 87/6

[160] Shach 87/13 and 87/16 states that even though it is a Rabbinical mixture it still requires 60x to be nullified.

[161] Rama 87/6, as explained by Shach 87/16. So agrees also Michaber as stated in Shach there.

[162] Michaber 87/6

[163] Rama 87/6: It is forbidden to cook it Lechatchilah; Likewise Michaber rules “exempt” but Rabbinically forbidden. [Shach 87/13]

[164] Rama bid

[165] Michaber 87/6

[166] Rama 87/6: It is forbidden to cook it Lechatchilah; Likewise Michaber rules “exempt” but Rabbinically forbidden. [Shach 87/13]

[167] Rama ibid

[168] Michaber 87/8. To note from chapter 81 that the whey is called Meiy Chalav while the remaining liquid after the whey is cooked is called Meiymeiy Chalav. Seemingly this follows the first opinion mentioned here.

[169] The whey is the remaining liquid of milk which has curded and become cheese. This is called “Nisyuvei Dechalba”

[170] Michaber 87/9-10

[171] Shach 87/24. This is similar to the ruling in chapter 81 that milk found in the stomach of a non-Kosher animal may be eaten.

[172] Shach 87/25

[173] Michaber 87/9 brings both opinions.

[174] Rama ibid

[175] Shach 87/25 from Toras Chatas

[176] Meaning according to both Michaber and Rama. This follows the ruling of Rabbeinu Tam. However Rashi rules it is forbidden even when it is congealed, as we do not know the exact measurement of congealed milk, and so rules the Rashal. [Taz 87/7]

[177] Shach 87/25

[178] Whether or not the meat itself is kosher or not, meaning came from a Neveila or Treifa.

[179] As opposed to wild

[180] Shach 87/7; Taz 87/5

[181] Rama permits to cook

[182] Based on Cheishev Haeifod 1/20; Mishneh Halachos 5/97

[183] As today all know that such products are available in Pareve.

[184] As today all know that such products are available in Pareve.

[185] Eating Pareve milk with meat is not so common, and is thus judged like almond milk.

[186] The milk of the stomach is very acidic and is thus fitting to use as a catalyst for making cheese. [Shach 87/26; Issur Viheter 18/16; Biur Hagr”a 22; Kaf Hachaim 87/76]

[187] 87/10

[188] The following are the different enzymes used to curd cheese:

Traditional method: Dried and cleaned [189] Rama 87/10

[190] Shach 87/26

[191] Rama ibid; The Peri Megadim S.D. 26 writes one may be lenient if one had already waited until it had cooled down and rely on the opinion that states it is only forbidden if it had been salted while it had been within the stomach or waited a full 24 hours {Kavush Kem’vushal}; Biur Hagra.

[192] In which case we say Kavush Kemevushal [Shach 87/28]

[193] Taz [87/8] adds that the amount for it to be considered salted must be to the point that it is no longer edible.

[194] Shach 87/30

Now although in general regarding Melicha we rule it only forbids a Kelipa worth according to the Michaber, here it would forbid the entire milk as milk is considered a fatty substance, and by a fatty substance we rule Melicha forbids the entire food. [Taz 87/10; The Taz ends off with a Tzarich Iyun Gadol, since in chapter 105/7 it is implied that we don’t hold that milk is considered as a fatty substance].

[195] Michaber 87/10; As it has absorbed the taste of meat. [Shach 87/29]

[196] Rama ibid

[197] Although the general ruling by a catalyst is that it is never nullified even in 1000, nevertheless here if there is 60x it remains Kosher. The reason is because the above rule only applies when the catalyst itself is a forbidden food in it of itself. However if it is Kosher in it of itself and it is only the mixture of the meat with milk that makes it forbidden, as is the case here [that it is the mixture of stomach milk with milk that makes nit forbidden], then it does have the ability to become nullified. The reason for this is because the two ingredients do not join properly when there is 60x nullifying the taste, as the taste became nullified before they had the ability to join in a forbidden manner.

Now although the stomach milk already became intrinsically forbidden due to staying in the animals stomach, and is thus similar to meat and milk that were cooked together and are considered an intrinsic prohibition, nevertheless here it is permitted as it was only salted together which is only a Rabbinical form of cooking, therefore it is not considered as an intrinsic prohibition and it suffices to have 60x to nullify the forbidden milk. [Shach 87/30; See also Shach 87/35]

Other Opinions: The above follows the ruling of the Rama. However according to the Michaber [brought in Beis Yosef] the milk never needs to be nullified. [Shach 87/29]

[198] Even when the milk itself is congealed and is considered like waste, it is only permitted if the stomach milk has not been cooked with other milk, and has not sat in the mixture for 24 hours. However if the congealed [catalyst] milk has been used with hot [regular] milk, or even if it was used with cold milk but had sat in the mixture for a full day, than we are stringent. [??]

[199] Rama ibid

The reason: The reason for this is because the taste of meat which the congealed milk has absorbed from the stomach is weak, being that the congealed milk is like feces. Therefore when this congealed milk is placed as a catalyst into the new milk it is unable to transfer any meat taste into the milk. However the reason for its allowance is not due to Nat Bar Nat [as explains the Levush] as in truth Nat Bar Nat is only permitted when it is Nat Bar Nat Diheteira, and here it is Nat Bar Nat Deisura. [Shach 87/31]

[200] In Rama ibid

[201] Shach 87/32

There he brings the Rama in Toras Chatas that states we can rely on the lenient opinion that holds even without a great loss on can be lenient [and consider it as waste]. However, the Yad Yehuda [47] adds that we are only lenient [regarding congealed milk in a great loss] if it has completely been removed from its edible state, therefore if it is still fit to be eaten by a human than we are not lenient even in a great loss.

[202] Even if it is only congealed a minute amount, and even if it is a doubt whether it was first liquid and then congealed, we rely on the doubt to be lenient.

[203] Michaber 87/11

[204] The Michaber states that there cannot be any taste of meat within the milk. However the Shach concludes that since we do not rely on tasting of a gentile, therefore there would always need to be 60x in the milk versus the meat. [Shach 87/34]

[205] The reason: The reason for why it becomes nullified despite the ruling that a catalyst is never nullified is because the catalyst never began to give off taste due to the nullifying ratio, and thus there was never a creation of a Basar Bechalav prohibition. Thus although the actual catalyst is never nullified, it does not have the ability to create a new prohibition of Basar Bechalav without giving off taste, and it is merely that the meat catalyst is floating on its own in the cheese, and does not join with it at all. [Shach 87/35]

[206] Michaber 87/11

[207] Rama 87/11 The reason for this is because a catalyst is always viewed as if it is in full existence within the catalyzed item, no matter what the ratio, as in the end of the day the item only became catalyzed due to it, and thus the food testifies on the catalyst. [Shach 35]

Other Opinions: Although the Rashal [106] rules that a non-Kosher catalyst could become nullified, we do not hold by this opinion [Shach 87/35].

A case of doubt if a non-Kosher catalyst was used: The Peri Chadash 100/3 and in the Shaalos v’Teshuvos Maharit it states that the ruling that ‘a catalyst is never nullified [even in 1000]’ is only Rabbinical, therefore in a case of doubt one can be lenient and consider it nullified. However, according to the Tur, that holds the ruling of ‘a catalyst never becoming nullified’ is Biblical [than there would be no room to be lenient]. The Peri Megadim [13] also writes very clearly in congruency with the former opinions that the catalyst has a Rabbinical ruling and therefore could still be nullified in a case of doubt [if it actually fell in or not].

[208] Rama 87/11; And in a case that one catalyst was a Kosher stomach while the other a non-kosher stomach then 60x is needed against both stomachs.

[209] Shach 87/36 [but concludes with Tzarich Iyun]; Taz 87/13

[210] Peri Megadim M”Z 87/13 in name of Peri Chadash

However the Bais Lechem Yehuda, rules that even if the non-Kosher catalyst had strength to catalyze on its own, 60x would still help to permit the mixture.

[211] Rama 87/10

[212] Shach 87/33

[213] As the leather is completely dry and is similar to a piece of wood. [ibid]

[214] Shach 87/33; See also Pischeiy Teshuvah 87/21 that one is not allowed to do Kevisha with the skin.

[215] Pischeiy Teshuvah 87/21

[216] Rav Akiva Eiger 207; Chasam Sofer 81; Pischeiy Teshuvah 87/19

[217] See there for why this does not pose a problem of initially nullifying an Issur.

They do not permit doing so on the assumption that there is no more Issur left in the stomach once it is dry, as through becoming wet it once again rejuvenates its moisture and Issur taste.

[218] As otherwise it is never nullified even in 60x.

Was this article helpful?

Related Articles

Leave A Comment?