This Halacha is an excerpt from our Sefer
Buy me here or on Amazon.com
Check out our state of the art Online Melicha course
________________________________________________________
Introduction:
This chapter discusses how to salt the heart and lungs of an animal. The heart contains congealed blood which is unable to be removed through the salting process. This blood is considered blood that contains the life of the animal and hence carries the penalty of Kareis if consumed.[1]
Custom not to eat hearts:[2]
It is customary to beware against eating the hearts of animals or fowl[3] being that eating them leads to forgetfulness.[4] In addition eating a heart attaches ones soul to the animal’s soul and penetrates the person with bad character traits.[5] Torah scholars are to beware very much from eating them.[6] Some Poskim[7] rule that this practice only applies to Torah Scholars and pregnant or nursing women and not to a common layman.
1. Salting the heart:[8]
Removing the inner blood prior to salting: During slaughtering a large amount of blood gathers inside the heart. Therefore prior to salting the heart, one must tear open the heart and remove this congealed blood from within its compartments. After this is done the heart may be salted.
Q&A
Within how much time after the slaughtering is the inner blood to be removed?[9]
The custom is to be lenient to not require the inner blood to be removed within 24 hours from the slaughtering.[10] However there are Poskim[11] that are initially stringent to require the blood to be removed within 24 hours from the slaughtering in order to avoid the issue of Kavush Kemivushal.
2. May one cook the heart after salting it and removing its inner blood:[12]
- Michaber:Once the heart has had its inner blood removed and has been salted for its blood it may be cooked [even together with other meat[13]].
- Rama:First Opinion: Once the heart has had its blood removed and salted it may then even be cooked [with other meats[14]]. Second Opinion: However there are opinions which are stringent to always roast it.[15] [This applies even if one tore and salted the heart beforehand.[16] Nevertheless once the heart has been roasted it may then be cooking.]Final Ruling of Rama: In the Darkei Moshe the Rama writes that many are lenient in this matter and cook the heart after salting it. In the Toras Chatas[17] the Rama writes that in those areas that it is accustomed to follow the stringent opinion they are not allowed to swerve from this custom. However Bedieved if they cooked the heart after tearing and salting it, it remains permitted according to all.
- Shach:[18]The Shach records the words of the Toras Chatas which rules that Lechatchilah those communities which are stringent may not divert from this custom, although Bedieved the heart is permitted if it was cooked.
- Taz:[19] Practically many are lenient to cook the heart after salting it, and so rules the Rashal that one may be lenient in this matter being that this custom is not found in the Talmud or Geonim.
Practical custom:[20]
Practically the custom is to allow cooking the heart after salting it. This applies even by the heart of chickens and certainly to the heart of animals.
Summary:
It is permitted to cook the heart once its inner blood has been removed and it has been salted, and so is the custom. However some communities are stringent not to cook the heart even after it is salted and they rather roast it over an open flame. Once the heart has been roasted it is permitted to cook it according to all.
3. Roasting the heart:[21]
Prior to roasting the heart[22] one is to tear it open, remove its inner blood, and then slightly salt it as is always the custom by roasting.
4. The law if one salted or roasted the heart prior to tearing it and removing its inner blood:[23]
If one salted or roasted the heart without tearing it open and removing its congealed blood then one is to tear the heart and remove the congealed blood after it is salted or roasted and in such a case the heart remains permitted. Now although the heart was salted with its inner blood [and hence absorbed this blood during the salting process] nevertheless it also dissipated this blood through the salting process, following the rule Kebolo Kach Polto.[24]
The law if the heart was completely closed:[25] There is no difference in ruling in whether the heart was opened on its top, or was closed, during the salting [or roasting. Either way one is to tear the heart after the salting or roasting and then remove the blood[26]].
Summary:
If one salted or roasted the heart prior to removing its internal blood then one is to remove the blood prior to cooking it and the heart remains permitted.
5. If one cooked the heart without removing the inner blood:[27]
If one cooked a heart prior to removing its inner blood then one needs 60x in the food versus the [entire] heart being we do not know how much blood has dissipated from it.[28] [This applies even if one roasted or salted the heart prior to the cooking, nevertheless one requires 60x versus the entire heart.[29] However there are opinions[30] which are lenient in such a case to only require 60x versus the blood that is within the compartments of the heart and not versus the entire heart.]
If the pot contains 60x is the heart itself permitted? [31] If the heart was cooked without having its inner blood removed then even if the food in the pot contains 60x the heart, nevertheless the heart itself is forbidden.[32] [This follows the opinion of the Rama. However according to the Michaber when there is 60x the heart then even the heart itself is permitted.[33] Practically Sefaradim may be lenient like the opinion of the Michaber in a case of great loss.[34]]
Removing a peel from the area around the heart:[35] In a case that one cooked a chicken together with an attached heart, without removing the inner blood of the heart, then even if there is 60x in the chicken versus the heart[36] nevertheless one must remove a peel worth of chicken from the area that the heart was attached to.[37] [This however only refers to a case that the chicken was previously salted together with the heart. If however the heart was not salted at all together with the chicken then if there is 60x versus the heart one does not have to remove a Kelipa.[38]]
The law if the heart was cooked after being salted or roasted with an opening in the heart:[39] There is no difference in ruling in whether the heart was opened on its top or was closed during the salting [or roasting process and thus if one did not tear the heart and remove the inner blood prior to cooking 60x is required[40]. If however the heart was positioned, during the roasting or salting process, with its opened area facing down then we assume all of its inner blood has flowed out and the food is permitted if it was cooked without being torn.[41]]
Summary:
If one cooked the heart without removing its inner blood then one requires 60x within the food versus the entire heart. This applies even if the heart was already salted for its blood. Even if there is 60x in the food the heart is forbidden. If the heart was attached to the chicken while cooked, then in addition to requiring 60x within the chicken one must remove a peel worth of chicken from the area that was attached to the heart.
6. Salting the heart with other meat prior to removing its inner blood:[42]
- Rama:Some are stringent to forbid the other meat: If the heart was salted together with other pieces of meat [without removing its inner blood] there are opinions[43] which are stringent to forbid all the other pieces of meat [although the heart itself remains permitted[44]]. The reason for this is because according to this opinion the inner blood of a heart is considered Dam Beiyn and not absorbed blood [Dam Pleita] and by Dam Beiyn the rule of Kebolo Kach Polto does not apply.[45] Final ruling of Rama: Practically the custom is to be lenient, and so is the main opinion [that all the other meats remain Kosher].[46] The reason for this is because we hold that also the inner blood of the heart is considered absorbed blood [Dam Pleita and not actual Dam], and we thus apply the rule of Kebolo Kach Polto, just like we rule regarding the blood of veins.[47] However some are stringent to slightly peel off the area of meat which the heart was attached to [or the area of meat that the heart touched even if was not attached to it[48]] and it is proper to suspect for their opinion and peel some of the area around the heart, and then everything is permitted.[49] Thus in conclusion the heart and other pieces of meat receive the same Halachic ruling [regarding Melicha that just like the heart remains permitted being we consider the blood as Dam Pleita so too the other pieces of meat.[50] Nevertheless as stated above we are stringent to remove a Kelipa from the other meat.]
- Rashal:[51]
The Rashal rules like the Hagahos Sheid that the other meat is completely forbidden.
- Shach:[52]
Lechatchilah it is forbidden to salt meat together with the heart prior to removing its inner blood.[53] However Bedieved we rule like the Rama that the meat remains permitted, [although one is to be stringent to remove a peel worth].
Summary:
One is not to salt the heart together with its inner blood together with other pieces of meat. If one did so he must remove a peel worth of meat from all the pieces that touched the heart.
7. One who salted an entire chicken together with its heart:[54]
If one salted a whole chicken together with the heart, without removing the inner blood of the heart, then one must remove a peel worth of chicken from the area that the heart was in.[55]
8. One who roasted an entire chicken together with its heart:[56]
If one roasted a whole chicken together with the heart, without removing the inner blood of the heart, then one must remove a Netila worth of chicken from the area that the heart was attached to.[57]
9. The law if one cooked a whole chicken together with its heart:[58]
If one cooked a whole chicken together with the heart, without removing the inner blood of the heart, then [if the chicken was salted for its blood prior to cooking], the chicken is Kosher being that all chickens contain 60x versus their heart.[59] This applies even if the heart was still attached to the chicken while it was cooked[60] [and even if the heart was not previously salted.[61]] [Nevertheless according to the Rama the heart itself is always forbidden[62], and if the chicken was salted with its heart attached then one must remove a peel worth of chicken from the area of the heart as explained in Halacha 5]
If the legs, head and other pieces have been cut off:[63] A chicken contains 60x its heart even if the head and legs of the chicken have been cut off.[64] This cutting of the legs refers to up until the lower Arkuva [Autopotium]. Thus if the chicken is whole besides for these areas everything is permitted [with exception to the heart which remains forbidden according to the Rama[65], as explained in Halacha 5]. [Furthermore there are opinions[66] which permit the chicken even if its wings have been cut off.[67] Likewise some[68] rule it is permitted even if its skin has been removed.[69] However others[70] rule a chicken only contains 60x together with its skin. ]
The law if the chicken was stuffed:[71] If one cooked a stuffed chicken together with its heart and the heart contains inner blood, then if the heart was attached to the chicken, the stuffing does not join the chicken for a total of 60x versus the heart and rather the chicken itself must have 60x the heart. If the heart is not attached to the chicken then everything in the pot, including the stuffing joins to nullify the heart in 60x. This applies even if the chicken is stuffed with eggs. [Nevertheless one who desires to be stringent to prohibit the stuffing of eggs may do so, although the chicken itself is certainly permitted if it contains 60x.[72]]
Summary:
A whole chicken contains 60x its heart. This applies even if the chicken does not have a head, legs or skin. Thus if one cooked a whole chicken together with its heart, everything is permitted other than the heart.
Arkuva
10. The law if the heart was attached to a small piece of the chicken:[73]
- Michaber:[74]If the entire chicken was not attached to the heart but rather only a piece of it then everything in the pot joins the attached piece to nullify the heart in 60x.[75]
- Rama:
If the entire chicken was not attached to the heart but rather only part of it then if this attached piece does not have 60x versus the heart, there are opinions[76] which say that the entire piece becomes forbidden[77] [Chanan], and one thus requires 60x in the pot versus the heart and the entire attached piece of chicken. Furthermore even if the pot contains 60x versus the chicken and heart nevertheless the attached piece of chicken remains forbidden being it does not have 60x its heart. Practically the custom is like this opinion. [If however it is uncertain whether the attached piece of chicken has 60x and the main body of the chicken was attached to the heart then one may be lenient to allow the entire pot to join to nullify the heart in 60x.[78]] If the heart was not attached to any part of the chicken then everything in the pot joins to nullify the heart in 60x [although even in such a case the heart itself remains forbidden[79]].
The law if the heart was detached from the meat and through the cooking it attached to one of the pieces:[80] If the heart was detached from the meat and through the cooking it attached to one of the pieces nevertheless everything in the pot joins to nullify the heart in 60x.
Summary:
Ashkenazim: If the heart was attached to a piece of chicken then that piece must contain 60x versus the heart otherwise all the food in the pot requires 60x versus the heart and the attached piece.
Sefaradim: The entire pot always joins to nullify the heart in 60x.
11. The law if a whole cow was cooked with its heart:[81]
A whole cow does not have 60x versus its heart. Hence if a whole cow was cooked with its heart attached [even if the meat was salted for its blood prior to cooking] everything is forbidden. [However this only applies if the cow had its head, legs, forbidden fats and skin removed prior to the cooking, as is the usual practice, otherwise even a cow may have 60x its heart.[82] In any event there are cows that can contain 60x the heart even without these parts and hence if one measures 60x the food is permitted.[83]]
12. A goose that was cooked with its heart:[84]
If one cooked a whole goose together with the heart, without removing the inner blood of the heart, then if the goose had its skin removed it is forbidden being that a goose does not contain 60x versus its heart unless it is wearing its skin. [However if there is other food in the pot which joins the goose for a total of 60x versus the heart then the goose is permitted even if it was cooked without its skin and the goose was attached to the heart.[85]]
13. Removing the Arlas Haleiv:[86]
It is customary to initially cut off the Arlas Haleiv[87] as well as the inner sinews of the heart [prior to cooking the heart]. This custom [is not required by the letter of the law and] is a mere stringency and precaution.[88]
14. Salting the lungs:[89]
The lungs are not required to be torn [prior to salting] however the custom is to tear it and open its large inner tubes [and salt its inner and outer part]. This is a fine custom. [However Bedieved if one cooked the lungs without tearing it open and salting the inside it remains kosher.[90]]
Q&A
May one eat lungs of chicken?
Some[91] write that one is not to eat the lungs of chicken and it is thus to be discarded.[92] Others[93] however rule that the lung may be eaten and that Gedolei Yisrael[94] would specifically eat the lung of geese on Rosh Hashana.
Is the lung of chickens to be cut open prior to salting?
Some Poskim[95] rule that the lungs of chickens are not required to be opened at all even according to the custom and the above ruling of the Michaber only applies to lungs of animals.[96] However other Poskim[97] write that one is required to check the lungs of fowl for bruises being that such bruises are common in the lungs of fowl.
May a chicken be salted together with its lungs?[98]
One is to remove the lungs from the ribs of the chicken prior to salting. If one did not do so some Poskim[99] rule that the lungs are to be discarded. Others[100] rule the lung is permitted.
Summary of how to prepare the heart:
- Cut off the Arlas Haleiv and the inner veins.
- Cut open and remove the inner blood.
- Hadacha Rishona [Soak for 30 minutes]
- Salt like all other meat and then cook. Some are stringent to roast the heart prior to cooking.
Q&A
Is there any reason to beware against eating hearts in a Kosher restaurant?
Unfortunately many non-Mehadrin supervisions have failed to verify that the inner blood of the chicken heart is removed prior to salting or cooking. Therefore one should only eat heart at a restaurant that has a reliable Mehadrin Hashgacha.
[1] Rambam Hilchos Machalos Assuros 6/3
[2] Tractate Horiyos 13b; Magen Avraham 170/19; Shach 72/2 in name of Tashbatz 561; Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 2 “and so is the custom”.
[3] Tractate Horiyos 13b mentions animal hearts. The Magen Avraham 170/19, and Shach Yoreh Deah 72/2 adds hearts of poultry, and so is the ruling in Achronim [Kaf Hachaim157/28; Mishneh Berurah 170/45].
Other Opinions: Menachem Meishiv 1/19 rules that it is permitted to eat hearts of chickens and that eating it does not lead to forgetfulness.
[4] This falls under the acronym of “Melach” Moach, Leiv, Kavod. [Kaf Hachayim 157/28]
The reason: Based on the Arizal the Nefesh, Ruach and Neshama reside in the heart mind and liver and is thus not to be eaten. [Kaf Hachaim ibid]
[5] Kaf Hachayim ibid
[6] Magen Avraham 170/19 writes that although by olives those which have correct intentions do not need to beware from eating them, nevertheless regarding the heart he writes that all are to be stringent.
[7] See Chavas Daas 72; Beis Lechem Yehuda 72/3; Darkei Teshuvah 72/5
[8] 72/1
[9] Darkei Teshuvah 72/10
[10] Chesed Liavraham 34; Bashamayim Rosh 27; as the blood congeals within the 24 hours and it is hence not considered Kavush.
[11] Yad Yehuda 72; Tuv Taam Vadaas Telisai 147
[12] 72/1
[13] Shach 72/1; This is the novelty of the Rama’s seemingly superfluous mention of the lenient opinion which is already mentioned by the Michaber. The novelty is that according to the Michaber it may be cooked even with other meat. [Shach ibid; See Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 1]
[14] Shach 72/1
[15] This is due to a decree that one may forget to tear the heart and remove the inner blood prior to the cooking. [Shach 72/2; Taz 72/1]
Vetzaruch Iyun as this suspicion should apply even when roasting the heart [that one may come to eat it without tearing it open]. One can answer however that when one comes to eat it we are sure that one will notice that it has not been torn open. However by cooking we suspect that he may cook it prior to removing the blood and hence forbid the food in the pot.
[16] Shach 72/2; This is due to a decree that one may forget to tear the heart and remove the inner blood prior to the cooking. [Shach ibid]
[17] Klal 27 brought in Shach 72/2
[18] 72/2
[19] Taz 72/1
[20] Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 2
[21] Shach 72/2
[22] If one desires to cook the heart then according to the stringent opinion mentioned in Rama ibid it is always required to roast it beforehand.
[23] Michaber 72/2
Opinion of Bach: The Bach understands the Rama to rule that the heart itself is always forbidden if it was salted or roasted prior to removing its external blood. The Shach negates this opinion and states the Rama is only stringent regarding cooking [see Halacha 4] and not regarding salting or roasting. [Shach 72/12; See Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 12 which explains that the Bach understands the Rama to rule that the inner blood always dries up in the heart and cannot be removed, even if it is salted] To note the Bach himself rules that by Melicha all the meat including the heart remains permitted. [Shach 72/11; see Halacha 5]
[24] How is the heart able to expel the absorbed inner blood? The Michaber writes that we apply the rule of Kebolo Kach Polto. The Mahriy asks on this ruling of Michaber claiming that the rule of Kebolo Kach Polto does not apply by Dam Beiyn, and the blood that is in the heart is considered Dam Beiyn. A number of answers are recorded:
- The Hagahos Sheid answers that since the blood of the heart congeals within the compartments of the heart therefore the blood which liquefies is considered like absorbed blood and is able to dissipate through salting. [brought in Taz 72/2; Shach 72/3]
- Alternatively the reason is because the heart is a very smooth and thus does not absorb much blood and regarding the little amount of blood that it does absorb we apply the rule of Kebolo Kach Polto. [Toras Chatas brought in Shach 72/3]
- Others write that the heart is so smooth that it does not absorb any blood at all. [Ramban and Rashal brought in Shach ibid]
The practical ramifications: The practical ramification between the reasons is regarding if other meat was salted with the heart. According to the first reason the other meats are also permitted. However according to the second reason they are forbidden. [Shach 72/3] Another ramification is regarding if Dam Beiyn falls onto a heart. According to the first reason the heart is forbidden. According to the second reason it is permitted being that its smoothness prevents absorption. [Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 3] A third ramification is regarding if the heart falls into Tzir after it has been salted. According to the first two reasons the heart does absorb some of the Tzir and since it contains no more of its own blood the heart becomes forbidden. However according to the reason of the Ramban that the heart does not absorb any blood at all then the heart remains permitted. [Shach ibid] The main reason is like the first reason that the blood congeals. Hence we rule stringently in a case that Dam Beiyn fell onto the heart, or if the heart fell into Tzir after Shiur Melicha. [Peri Megadim ibid]
[25] Rama 72/2
[26] Shach 72/13; Taz 72/8
There are two novelties in this ruling: A. Even if the heart was closed the heart remains Kosher and one is to simply tear it open and remove its inner blood after the salting or roasting. B. Even if the heart was open on its top it must be torn and have its blood removed after the salting or roasting. [Shach ibid in name of Toras Chatas]
Opinion of Issur Viheter and Bach: The Bach and Issur Viheter rule that if the heart was open during Melicha or roasting it does not need to be torn afterwards and if the heart was closed then the heart is forbidden. The Toras Chatas, Taz and Shach negate their opinion. [Shach and Taz ibid; Peri Megadim 72 S.D 13]
[27] 72/2
[28] Although the heart is smooth it is able to absorb through cooking. Likewise during cooking the concept of Kebolo Kach Polto does not apply as all the blood leaves into the pot. [Shach 72/4]
Opinion of the Rambam: The Rambam rules that even if one cooked the heart without salting it prior to the cooking the heart remains permitted as it is a very smooth substance and hence does not absorb the blood. Hence this opinion of the Michaber is coming to negate the opinion of the Rambam. [Taz 72/3]
[29] Shach 72/5; Taz 72/4; Rama in Toras Chatas Klal 57; Mahril
The above Poskim rule that the above law applies even if one had previously salted the heart for its blood and merely did not remove the congealed blood within its compartments. The reason for this is because we are not expert regarding how much blood is in the heart and hence we must measure 60x versus the entire heart. [Shach ibid] However see Taz 72/4 from which it is implied that even if we know the amount of blood contained within the compartments of the heart we still require 60x versus the entire heart. [However see Peri Megadim 72 M.Z. 4 which understands the Taz differently]
[30] Shaareiy Dura and Rashal brought in Shach and Taz ibid; Peri Chadash 72/5
The Rashal learns that in a case that the heart was already salted for its blood one only needs 60x versus the gathered blood, as we know exactly how much gathered blood the heart contains. Thus he rules that the Michaber here is referring to a case that the heart was not previously salted or roasted and hence he requires 60x versus the entire heart.
Opinion of the Tur: The Tur writes that one requires 60x versus the entire heart being we do not know how much blood left from it. The Rashal explains that the Tur is referring to a case that the heart was not previously salted and therefore he requires 60x versus the entire heart. However the Shaareiy Dura refers to a case that the heart was already salted and hence there is no contradiction between the Poskim. The Taz 72/4 agrees that the Tur himself must refer to a case that the heart was not previously salted as otherwise why would he write that we are not able to measure how much blood left the heart. [However see Peri Megadim 72 M.Z. 4 Vetzaruch Iyun]
Opinion of Michaber: The Shach ibid concludes with a Tzaruch Iyun regarding the opinion of the Michaber although he sides to explain that according to the Michaber if the heart was salted one does not require 60x the entire heart. [See Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 5 and Kaf Hachaim 72/10]
Final ruling of Taz: After the Taz ibid brings the dissenting opinions he concludes that being the Mahril is stringent “who can be lenient against him, as he was the greatness of Achronim”.
[31] Rama ibid
[32] This is because the blood of the heart dries up inside of it and cannot be removed. [Taz 72/5; Shach 72/7 in name of Mahriy in Hagahos Sheid] The heart is not forbidden due to an Issur Davuk being that it is smooth and hence does not absorb the blood any more quickly than any other food in the pot. [Mahriy ibid] This is unlike the opinion of the Levush which rules the heart is forbidden being that it becomes Chanan. [Shach ibid]
[33] Shach 72/6; Peri Chadash 72/6; List of Poskim brought in Kaf Hachaim 72/11
[34] Kaf Hachaim 72/11
[35] Rama ibid
[36] see Halacha 9
[37] Rama as explained by Shach 72/8
The reason a peel worth is required to be removed is because prior to cooking the chicken it was salted together with its heart and salt penetrates a Kelipa worth of the chicken. [Shach ibid] This is a mere stringency to suspect for those opinions [Hagahos Sheid, brought next] which are stringent to forbid the other pieces of meat that were salted together with the heart prior to it having its inner blood removed. Now although the Rama normally rules that Melicha forbids 60x, in this case he is lenient to only require a Kelipa being that some hold even a Kelipa is not required being that we apply the rule of Kebolo Kach Polto even to other pieces of meat. [Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 8; Shach 72/11]
[38] Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 8
[39] Rama ibid
[40] Shach 72/13; Taz 72/8
Opinion of Issur Viheter and Bach: The Bach and Issur Viheter rule that if the heart was open during Melicha or roasting it does not need to be torn afterwards and if the heart was closed then the heart is forbidden. The Toras Chatas, Taz and Shach negate their opinion. [Shach and Taz ibid; Peri Megadim 72 S.D 13]
[41] Taz 72/8 in name of Toras Chatas
[42] Rama 72/2
[43] Hagahos Sheid
[44] Shach 72/9; Taz 72/6
The reason the heart remains permitted: As the heart is smooth and hence only absorbs a minute amount of its inner blood which it is able to expel with its own blood as this small amount of blood is considered like absorbed blood. However regarding the other pieces of meat which are not smooth they absorb actual Dam Beiyn which cannot come out through salting. [Shach and Taz ibid in name of Darkei Moshe]
[45] Hence when the other pieces of meat absorb the blood of the heart they are not able to expel it and they thus become forbidden. However the heart itself is smooth and does not absorb its Dam Beiyn as explained in the previous footnote. [Shach 72/9; Taz 72/6]
[46] So rules also Bach [brought in Shach 72/10] that even a Kelipa is not required.
[47] In chapter 22/1 the Rama rules that if one salted a chicken together with its veins that contain blood the chicken is permitted although it is best to be stringent to remove a peel worth from the chicken in the area of the veins.
[48] Shach 72/11
Other Opinions: The Minchas Yaakov [26/6] argues on the Shach and rules only if the heart is attached is one to remove a Kelipa. [brought in Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 11]
[49] By being stringent to remove a Kelipa from the meat one fulfills his obligation according to all opinions as most Poskim rule that one only requires a Kelipa by salting. [Toras Chatas brought in Shach 72/11]
[50] Shach 72/12; This is unlike the Bach which explains this statement of the Rama to refer to that the heart itself is permitted. [See Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 12]
[51] Brought in Shach 72/10
[52] 72/10
[53] To suspect for the stringent opinion which forbids the meat and also due to the fact we rule that even Bedieved a Kelipa worth is to be removed. [Shach ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun why the Shach needed to resort to this dispute to explain why one should not initially salt the heart with other meat if it still contains inner blood, if we always rule, as stated in the beginning of this chapter, that one is to tear open the heart and remove its inner blood before the salting even if one is salting it alone. [Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 10]
[54] Rama 72/2; Shach 72/8 and 9; Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 8
Opinion of Bach: According to the Bach the meat remains completely permitted. The Shach negates this opinion. [Brought in Shach 72/11]
Opinion of Rashal: According to the Rashal the meat is completely forbidden. The Shach negates this opinion. [Brought in Shach 72/11]
[55] This is a mere stringency according to the Rama to suspect for those opinions [mentioned in Halacha 5] which are stringent to forbid the other pieces of meat that were salted together with the heart prior to it having its inner blood removed. Thus although the Rama normally rules that Melicha forbids 60x, in this case he is lenient to only require a Kelipa being that some hold even a Kelipa is not required. [Peri Megadim 72 S.D. 8]
[56] Shach 72/9 based on ruling of Rama in Halacha 5
Opinion of Bach: According to the Bach the meat remains completely permitted. The Shach negates this opinion. [Brought in Shach 72/11]
Opinion of Rashal: The Rashal rules that by roasting one is not required to remove any part of the meat even according to the Hagahos Sheid. However the Shach negates this opinion. [Shach ibid]
[57] This is a mere stringency to suspect for those opinions [brought in Halacha 5] which are stringent to forbid the other pieces of meat that were salted together with the heart prior to it having its inner blood removed. This ruling follows the final ruling of the Rama in Halacha 5, as just like the Rama is stringent to forbid a Kelipa worth of the other meat by Melicha to suspect for the opinion of Hagahos Sheid, so too regarding roasting. The reason a Netila worth is required to be removed even though in general the Rama requires 60x by roasting is because some hold the meat is completely permitted and hence in this case the Rama would stand his stringency to only require Netila. [Shach 72/9]
[58] 72/3
[59] This means to say that even without entering the other food in the pot into the equation the food is permitted as the chicken itself definitely contains 60x the heart. If however only part of the chicken was cooked then everything in the pot is needed to join to nullify the heart in 60x. According to the Michaber this applies even if the heart was attached to one of the pieces of chicken as according to the Michaber we do not apply the concept of Issur Davuk, as will be explained in the next footnote. [Shach 72/15]
The idea that every chicken contains 60x its heart is a tradition of the Sages and is not to be juxtaposed to other scenarios of Issur. [Taz 74/1; Toras Chatas Klal 24]
[60] Michaber ibid
The novelty of this statement is as follows: Even if the heart was attached to only a piece of the chicken, if the entire chicken was in the pot then everything is permitted as according to the Michaber we do not apply the concept of Issur Davuk to Issurim and hence the attached chicken does not become Chanan. [Shach 72/15] However according to the Rama one would require 60x versus the heart and the entire piece of chicken that is attached to it if the piece of chicken itself does not contain 60x the heart. This will be explained below.
[61] Shach 72/16; As a chicken contains 60x its entire heart and not just versus the inner blood that it contains in its compartments. Thus even if a heart become forbidden due to other reasons [such as it was cooked with Niveila] and was then cooked with the chicken, the chicken is permitted being it contains 60x its heart. [Shach ibid]
[62] Shach 72/18
[63] Rama ibid
[64] This is unlike the opinion of the Mahril which rules a chicken only contains 60x its heart if it still has its head and legs. Practically we do not rule like this opinion. [Taz 72/10]
[65] Taz 72/7; Thus the wording here of the Rama that everything is permitted refers to the food in the pot and not the heart. This is unlike the Bach which understands the Rama here to be contradicting his earlier ruling. [Taz ibid]
[66] Riy Mintz brought in Taz 72/9
[67] As they claim that a chicken contains 60x its heart even without the wings.
[68] Taz 72/9
[69] As a chicken contains 60x its heart even without its skin.
[70] Shach 72/19
[71] Rama 73/6; Taz 72/10; See Chapter 73 Halacha 16
[72] Taz 72/10
Opinion of Rashal: The Rashal differentiates between a stuffing of meat and a stuffing of eggs. If the stuffing is meat then it joins the 60x in the pot if the heart is not attached to the chicken. If the stuffing is eggs then it does not join the 60x even if the heart is not attached to the chicken. Furthermore if the heart is attached to the chicken and the chicken is filled with eggs one requires 60x in the chicken versus the heart and the egg stuffing combined. If one does not have 60x then the entire chicken is forbidden and the pot requires 60x versus the entire chicken. If the chicken is stuffed with eggs and meat then if the chicken was salted for its blood together with this filling then we view the entire stuffing like it is eggs. If however the chicken was not salted with the stuffing then the stuffing is viewed as meat. The Taz negates this opinion of the Rashal and rules as above that there is never a difference between eggs and meat in this regard.
[73] 72/3
[74] As explained in Shach 72/15
[75] Even if the heart was attached to only a piece of the chicken, if the entire chicken was in the pot then everything is permitted as according to the Michaber we do not apply the concept of Issur Davuk to Issurim and hence the attached chicken does not become Chanan. [Shach 72/15]
[76] Mordechai brought in Darkei Moshe which holds that the rule of Chanan applies by any Issur Davuk. [Taz 72/10]
[77] The reason for this is because the attached piece absorbs the blood prior to any other piece and hence becomes forbidden prior to the taste being able to spread throughout the pot and become nullified in 60x. [Shach 72/18] Alternatively the reason is because we suspect perhaps the piece came out of the gravy for even one moment and hence forbade its attached Heter. [Tur brought in Taz 72/10; Peri Megadim 72 M.Z. 10]
[78] Taz 72/9; See Peri Megadim 72 M.Z. 9
The reason for this leniency is because it is probable that even the body of the chicken [without its legs, wings and skin] still contains 60x its heart and hence regarding Issur Davuk one may be lenient. [ibid]
[79] Shach 72/18 as rules Rama 72/2 being that the blood dries up within the heart. [Shach ibid]
[80] Shach 72/17
Other Opinions: The Rashal rules that even if the heart became attached to one of the pieces through the cooking it is considered an Issur Davuk and that piece requires 60x. The Shach negates this opinion.
[81] Rama 72/3
[82] Shach 72/19
Background:
The Levush argues on the ruling of the Rama stating that a cow certainly has 60x its heart as is veritably witnessed. The Shach explains that the Rama here is referring to a normal cow that is cooked after having the above mentioned parts removed.
[83] Peri Megadim 72 S.D 19
[84] Rashal brought in Shach 72/16 and Taz 72/4
[85] Taz 72/9 as explained in Peri Megadim 72 M.Z. 9
Now although according to the Rama an Issur Davuk becomes Chanan if it does not contain 60x the Issur, and hence in this case one should require 60x in the pot versus both the heart and the goose, nevertheless since possibly a whole goose does contain 60x its heart even without its skin therefore one can be lenient regarding Issur Davuk to allow the entire pot to join. [Peri Megadim ibid]
[86] Rama 72/2
[87] This refers to the sharp end at the bottom of the heart.
[88] It is done in order to remove the powers of impurity of the heart, which is similar to the impurity of the foreskin of a Bris. [Shach 72/14 in name of Rikantiy Lech Licha]
[89] 72/4; See Taz 69/13
[90] Shach 72/20
[91] Sifrei Hanikur brought in Harit Vayil 17; Zivcheiy Tzedek 72/26 that so was the custom in Bagdad. [brought in Kaf Hachaim 72/48
[92] As a possible reason for this it is because the lung of chicken is repulsive. [Zivcheiy Tzedek ibid]
[93] Hahrit Vayil 17; See Darkei Halacha 72/4
[94] Rav Hai Gaon would specifically eat it being it is good for eyesight.
[95] Kneses Hagedola 72/43; Shulchan Gavoa 72; Kaf Hachaim 72/48; Harit Vayil 17; See Darkei Halacha 72/4
[96] As the lungs of chicken are small and do not contain blood inside them.
[97] Poskim brought in Darkei Teshuvah 72/40
[98] Hakashrus 9/79
[99] Avnei Yishpa 136
[100] Sheivet Haleivi 7/128
Leave A Comment?
You must be logged in to post a comment.