This article is an excerpt from our Sefer

Buy me here

Check out our state of the art Online Basar Bechalav course

________________________________________

Chapter 93

Used a dairy pot for meat or vice versa

Introduction: In the previous two chapters [91-92] we dealt with mixtures of meat and milk, where meat and milk have come into direct contact with each other and have thus transferred taste and or substance to each other. In this chapter we will explore a new scenario where the two foods do not come into direct contact with each other, but nevertheless, there is worry that the taste of one food has penetrated the other. How can this occur? If one uses the same cooking utensils for dairy and meat. This chapter officially commences the section dealing with the necessity to separate utensils for milk and meat, and the possible prohibitions that occur if they are used for cooking both foods. Absorption in vessels: Externally, a vessel appears like a 100% solid item which blocks absorption of food, although in truth, materials contain pores which can allow for the absorption of food. Upon a material receiving heat, its pores expand and receives substance and taste of the food that is cooked in it. This matter is discussed in the Talmud[1] and Poskim and has been scientifically proven in experiments which show unequivocally that materials do absorb.[2] If one were to go ahead and cook a second food in that pot, that second food would receive the taste and substance of the first food that became absorbed in the pores. Obviously, in the laws of Kashrus and meat and milk this scientific reality poses a major obstacle in using the same vessels for meat and milk, or Kosher and not-Kosher, as doing so will cause transfer of taste from meat to milk, or non-Kosher to Kosher. This is why it is forbidden to share the same vessels for meat and milk, or Kosher and not-Kosher, and Bedieved if one did so, the food can possibly become forbidden, depending on the factors discussed in this chapter. Vessels that do not absorb: Being that the entire issue with sharing cooking vessels for meat and milk is the issue of absorption, if it were to be verified that a certain material vessel does not absorb, then technically there should be no issue with using the vessel for both meat and milk, or Kosher and not-Kosher. In truth, we find such a precedent of a ruling regarding glass, as many Rishonim and Poskim[3] rule it does not absorb, and hence may be used for cooking both meat and milk foods. Accordingly, some individuals have entertained the theoretical idea that perhaps today’s vessels no longer carry any absorption prohibition, as the laboratory testing shows that their absorption is less than 1:175,000 which is less than .0006 percent![4] This amount is Halachically meaningless as a forbidden taste cannot prohibit a food unless it contains at least 1.5% of taste [less than 1:60 ratio]. Nonetheless, in truth, this laboratory research cannot be accepted according to Halacha to change the accepted Talmudic and Halachic rulings that has been accepted amongst all Jewry since the times of Moshe Rabbeinu and has been rejected by the Poskim.[5] It is not to be used even as a “joining” for other reasons to be lenient.[6] This, however, is only regarding materials that we already know to have been listed by the Sages or Poskim as taste absorbing [i.e. all forms of metal, earthenware, etc]. However, new materials that are discovered, and have not been discussed in the Talmud or Poskim would be able to go through an absorption test to verify their  status. So we find that when porcelain was first invented, the Radbaz had it taken through an absorption test, which came out positive and he thus ruled that it is not similar to glass, and cannot be used for meat and milk.[7] This, however, only applies Bedieved, as Lechatchilah, even regarding glass many Rishonim are stringent and prohibit its use, and so is the Ashkenazi custom. Thus, we see that even if a new material is shown to not absorb a significant amount, nevertheless, it is forbidden to be used for meat and milk, or from Kosher to non-Kosher. See the supplement at the end of this Sefer where this matter is discussed in length regarding glass materials. Ben Yomo versus not Ben Yomo: A major fundament in the laws of foods that have received forbidden taste through the pores of a vessel, is the concept of freshness, or Ben Yomo. One of the central rules in the laws of Taaruvos is that an Issur can only prohibit a food if it gives it a good taste. If, however, its taste is spoiled or damaging to the taste of the food, then it does not prohibit that food even if it contains a ratio of more than 1:60. The Talmudic Sages received that after the passing of 24 hours from when a food becomes absorbed in the pores of a vessel, that food becomes spoiled and can no longer prohibit another food, unless the food is spicy. This is formally known as “not-Ben Yomo.” This matter is more fully discussed in The Laws of Taaruvos chapter 103. Throughout this chapter, the subject of Ben Yomo versus not-Ben Yomo will play a pivotal role in the Halachic decisions regarding a food that was cooked in a meat/milk pot or used with a milk/meat vessel.

 

1. Cooking milk products in a meat pot:

A. Lechatchila:^[8]

It is initially forbidden to cook dairy in a meat pot even if the pot is clean and is not Ben Yomo.^[9] The same applies vice versa.

 

B. Bedieved:

If one went ahead and cooked dairy in a meat pot, the law of the food and the law of the pot is dependent on a number of factors:

1. Was the pot Ben Yomo?
2. Was the cover of the pot also used?
3. Was a Charif food cooked in the pot.

In Halacha 2 will be explained the law if the pot cover was not used at all during the cooking or while the pot was hot. In Halacha 3 will be explained the ruling if the pot cover was used.

 

C. If a meat pot had Pareve foods cooked in it, may it now be used for dairy?^[10]

• Tur in name of Rashba:

If one cooked vegetables in a meat pot, the pot may now be used to cook milk as the vegetables have weakened the meat taste that was absorbed within the pot to the point that it can no longer become Basar Bechalav. It is hence considered as if one Koshered the pot.

• Taz:

Apparently, the above only refers to metal pots, as metal does not absorb much taste. Furthermore, it only applies if one cooked an equal amount of water in the pot in comparison to the amount of meat that was cooked in it. If, however, one cooked less water than meat, such as the meat reached up to 3/4 of the pot while one cooked vegetables in water that reached to only half the pot, then the pot remains meaty.

 

• Rashal:

The pot remains meaty irrelevant of how much water was cooked in it afterwards. He argues on the Rashba.

Compilation & Final Ruling: It is initially forbidden to cook dairy in a meat pot even if the pot is clean and is not Ben Yomo.[11] The same applies vice versa. One cooked Pareve in the pot: Some Poskim[12] rule that if one cooked Pareve water/vegetables in a metal meat pot, then the pot is considered as if it had Hagalah performed and it may even initially be used for cooking dairy [even within 24 hours of meat use]. The same applies vice versa, from dairy to meat. Other Poskim[13], however, negate this ruling and rule that it remains forbidden to ever cook dairy in a meat pot even if a Pareve food was cooked in it in between. This applies even if the pot is no longer Ben Yomo and if the pot is Ben Yomo from the meat, then if dairy was cooked in it, the dairy becomes forbidden. Practically, we rule like the latter opinion. However, in a time of great need, such as on Erev Shabbos and one has no other pot available, one may be lenient to cook meat in a dairy pot if Pareve foods were cooked in the pot after the pot was no longer Ben Yomo from dairy use.[14]

 

2. Cooked milk products in a meat pot without the cover:^[15]

A. Ben Yomo:

Status of the food:[16] If one cooked milk in a meat pot then if the pot is Ben Yomo, the food is forbidden [unless its meat taste is nullified as explained in Halacha 3].

Status of the pot:[17] If one cooked milk in a meat Ben Yomo pot, then the pot is forbidden to be used even with Pareve foods, and needs to be Kashered. This applies even if the food in the pot contains 60x the pot walls.^[18] [Thus, if the pot is made of non-Kasherable material, such as earthenware, it can no longer be used for foods, and must be sold to a gentile or discarded.[19]]

 

B. Not Ben Yomo:

Status of the food: If one cooked milk in a clean and not Ben Yomo meat pot without its cover [then if the food is not defined as a sharp food], the food remains Kosher. [However, if the food is sharp, everything is forbidden even if the pot is not Ben Yomo.[20] If the cover was used-See Halacha 4]

Status of the pot: If the pot is not Ben Yomo, then it is initially forbidden to cook either milk or meat in this pot.^[21] [This applies even after 24 hours have passed.^[22]] However, it is permitted even to initially cook Pareve foods in this pot.^[23] [Nevertheless, the custom of Ashkenazi[24] Jewry is to forbid using the pot even for Pareve.^[25] Bedieved, if one cooked meat or milk in this pot the food is permitted, so long as it was cooked after 24 hours from the opposite use.^[26]]

Q&A Does food become not Ben Yomo after 24 hours?[27] Ø  If a potato from a chicken soup fell into a pot of milk 24 hours after it was cooked in the chicken soup, what is the law of the milk? No. The concept of an absorbed taste spoiling after 24 hours and becoming not Ben Yomo is only relevant to a vessel which has absorbed a taste. However, a food that absorbed a taste retains a fresh taste even after 24 hours, so long as the food is edible. Thus, in the above example, the food requires 60x versus the potato. Is the 24 hours [i.e. Ben Yomo] measured from the last time the meat was cooked or from when it was cleaned from the meat?[28] Ø  Example: One cooked milk in a dairy pot at 12:00 pm and the milk remained in the pot overnight. At 9:00 am the next morning one removed the milk from the pot and washed it. At 2:30 pm one cooked meat inside. Is the pot considered Ben Yomo? The pot is not considered Ben Yomo, as we follow the last time that hot Keli Rishon milk was in the pot, and being that 24 hours have passed since the milk had cooled off, therefore the pot is considered not-Ben Yomo even though its milk was removed only hours ago. Accordingly, in the above case the meat is permitted while the pot is forbidden. [If, however the milk remained in the pot for 24 hours, then it is considered Ben Yomo until it is removed and 24 hours have passed.] What is one to do if in middle of cooking meat one realized the pot is dairy but not Ben Yomo?[29] One is to immediately remove the meat from the pot and he may then continue cooking it in a meat pot. How does one Kosher a pot or pan that became forbidden due to Basar Bechalav? All vessels made of earthenware, or other non-Kosherable materials, are only valid if they are Koshered through Libun Gamur.[30] All vessels made from Kosherable materials only require Hagalah even if they absorbed meat or dairy without liquid.[31] This, however, only applies in the case that the dairy vessel had meat cooked in it or vice versa, however, if one cooked actual meat and dairy together in the vessel, then Libun Chamur is required in all cases that the food was roasted/baked without liquid.[32]

 

3. How to measure if there is meat taste in the milk, if one cooked milk in a meat pot?

In the previous Halacha we discussed that if the pot was Ben Yomo at the time of use, it requires 60x versus the meat taste. In this Halacha we will discuss how this 60x is measured.

The Opinions:

*This dispute is a repetition of the dispute brought in 92:1

• Michaber:^[33]

Gentile taste: A gentile is to taste the food to see if it has a meat taste, and if it he does not detect a meat taste, the food is Kosher even if it does not have 60x versus the meat/pot. [Practically, today even the Sephardim follow the Rama in this regard and do not rely on the tasting of a gentile.[34]]

• Rama:

60x versus pot:^[35] [If one does not know how much meat was cooked] then he must measure 60x versus the entire pot.[36] [This applies to all material pots, whether metal, wood, or earthenware.[37]]

Knows how much meat was cooked:[38] If one knows how much meat was cooked in the pot within the past 24 hours, one may measure either versus the meat or versus the pot, whichever amount has a lesser volume. One does not measure versus meat that was cooked in the pot prior to 24 hours, even if one knows the amount, and meat was cooked in the pot a second time within 24 hours.[39] [If the meat that was cooked in the pot within the past 24 hours was cooked together with other foods, then one is only required to measure versus the estimated amount of meat that the pot absorbed, as explained in the Q&A.[40]]

Can a food ever contain 60x versus its pot?^[41] When measuring against the pot, there will never be 60x in the food versus the pot, and hence the food is automatically forbidden. However, if the pot is very wide pot and can hold a very large volume of food, it is possible that its food can have 60x the pot.

Summary Halachas 1-3: It is initially forbidden to cook dairy in a meat pot even if the pot is clean and is not Ben Yomo. The same applies vice versa. If one cooked dairy in a meat pot, or vice versa, then if the pot is Ben Yomo [or the food contains a Davar Charif], the food is forbidden unless there is 60x in the food versus the pot, or 60x in the food versus the meat used in the pot within the past 24 hours, whichever is less. If one is unsure of the amount of meat used, he requires 60x the pot. In all cases, the pot itself is forbidden. If the pot is not Ben Yomo and the dairy food does not contain a Davar Charif, then if the meat cover was not used, the food is permitted while the pot is forbidden and must be Kashered. If the meat cover was also used-See next Halacha!   Q&A How does one measure the size of the vessel for having 60x against it?[42] The measurement is done based on volume and not weight.[43] The measurement is done as follows: One takes the pot/vessel and places it into a larger vessel filled to capacity with water. The excess water that spills out of the vessel upon doing so is the volume of the pot. If one has 60x that volume in the volume of the food, the food is Kosher. Alternatively, one can fill a large vessel with water to capacity, then empty it to another vessel and then place the forbidden vessel into it. One then pours the water into the vessel until capacity and whatever water is left is considered the volume of the forbidden vessel. If one cooked 1000 grams of water with 100 grams of meat in a 500-gram pot, and within 24 hours one cooked 2,000 grams of milk in the pot, how does one measure the 60x?[44] One is to calculate the amount of meat that the pot absorbed and measure against it. The calculation is as follows: One views the water and pot as equal absorbents of the meat and divides how much each one absorbed based on their size and ratio. Thus, in our case, the water which is 1000 grams has absorbed 2/3 of the meat which is 66 grams of the meat. The pot which is 500 grams has absorbed 1/3 of the meat, which is 33 grams of the meat. One now measures 60x in the 2000 grams of milk versus 33 grams of meat. If it contains 60x [as it does in the above scenario of 2000 grams of milk], the milk remains permitted.   If a piece of meat was cooked together with Pareve in a dairy pot and there was 60x in the Pareve versus the meat, what is the status of the food and the pot? Ø  Example: One placed a slab of meat into a dairy pot and filled it up with water to the point that there is a 60:1 ratio between the water and the meat. What is the status of the meat and the pot? The Pareve food [i.e. water] remains Pareve. Likewise, seemingly even the pot remains Kosher, as the meat taste had to pass through the water to get into the pot, as certainly there was liquid between the meat and the pot, and this taste was nullified in 60x.[45] However, if it was fried with oil, then seemingly the pot would be forbidden even if there is 60x in the oil, as frying is debated if it has the status of baking or not, and hence perhaps we view that the meat sent direct taste into the pot. According to this, the meat itself would also be forbidden if the dairy pot was Ben Yomo, even if the liquid contained 60x the meat. Vetzaruch Iyun!

 

4. One cooked milk in a non-Ben Yomo meat pot with its cover/The status of a non-Ben Yomo cover:

*See compilation below regarding glass pot covers!

 

A. Cover is Ben Yomo:

If one cooked dairy in a non-Ben Yomo meat pot using a Ben Yomo meat cover, one requires 60x in the food versus the entire cover [if the food began to boil and release steam[46]].

 

B. Cover is not Ben Yomo:^[47]

If one cooked dairy in a non-Ben Yomo meat pot using a clean non-Ben Yomo meat cover, then from the letter of the law the food remains permitted.^[48] [If the non-Ben Yomo cover is dirty with food, then the dairy requires 60x versus the food and not versus the cover.[49]] However, there are those[50] who are stringent to always apply a Ben Yomo status to a cover, even if in truth the cover is not Ben Yomo. Accordingly, in the above case, the dairy food requires 60x versus the non-Ben Yomo meat cover.^[51] Practically, some [Ashkenazi[52]] communities are accustomed to being stringent [although other communities are accustomed to being lenient[53]].[54] The Rama himself is stringent due to the custom, even though he rules it’s a stringency that has no logical basis. In any event, one may be lenient for a Shabbos need or in a case of loss, or if there is another leniency involved.[55] [This, however, only applies if the pot cover is clean, otherwise one requires 60x versus all the leftovers that are on the pot cover.[56]]

A flat cover: Some Poskim^[57] rule that the above stringency to consider a non-Ben Yomo cover as if it were Ben Yomo, only applies to covers that contain curved rims which are difficult to clean. However, a flat cover which does not contain cracks or a curved rim and is easily cleaned, retains a full non-Ben Yomo status after 24 hours.[58] Hence, if a flat meat cover was placed on top of a hot pot of milk, then if the cover is not Ben Yomo the food is permitted and there is no need to be stringent even if it is not a time of need. [However, from other Poskim[59] it is evident that the stringency applies even to a flat cover. Practically, one may be lenient.[60]]

According to the stringency, does one measure 60x versus the entire cover or versus the possible food residue on the cover: The Rama/Shach^[61] rule one needs 60x versus the entire cover. However, the Taz^[62] rules that even according to the stringency one only measures 60x versus the curved areas of the cover which are difficult to clean, and hence contain possible food residue, and not versus the entire pot cover. [Practically, many Poskim^[63] rule like the Taz, as anyways the entire law is a mere stringency.]

The law of the cover: In all the above-mentioned cases, the pot cover is forbidden and must be Kashered!

The reason behind the stringency to consider a non-Ben Yomo cover as Ben Yomo:

• Rama:

The Rama says the above stringency to consider a non-Ben Yomo cover as if it is Ben Yomo is a stringency without reason/logic.^[64] However, in the Toras Chatas^[65] he offers an explanation saying that vapor and smell of a food are more stringent than mere taste, and since the cover constantly receives from the vapor of a food, it therefore does not become repugnant after 24 hours.

• Rashal:^[66]

The Rashal explains that the above stringency to consider a non-Ben Yomo cover as if it is Ben Yom  is because pot covers are difficult to properly clean due to their cracks and narrow curved areas. As a result, we suspect that perhaps some meat residue has remained in the cracks and this meat residue, upon getting mixed with the rising milk vapor, becomes Basar Bechalav. This in turn prohibits the entire cover if the cover does not have 60x its residue.^[67] Based on this reasoning, a flat cover which has no cracks and was cleaned has no basis for the stringency, and hence if it is not Ben Yomo the food is permitted.

 

Other Opinions regarding a non-Ben Yomo cover:

• Levush/Peri Chadash:

There is no need to follow this custom, and a non-Ben Yomo cover has the same status as a non-Ben Yomo pot.

• Admur:^[68]

In Hilchos Pesach Admur writes: “It is the custom of some communities to forbid the cover of a pot even if it is not Ben Yomo.” From this wording it is implied that Admur does not accept the stringency of the Rama as universal, and it remains community based.^[69]

Compilation & Final Ruling Cooked dairy using a non-Ben Yomo meat cover:[70] Letter of the law: If one cooked dairy in a non-Ben Yomo meat pot using a Ben Yomo meat cover, one requires 60x in the food versus the entire cover  [if the food began to boil and release steam[71]]. If the cover was not Ben Yomo, then from the letter of the law the food remains permitted [and if the non-Ben Yomo cover was dirty with food, then the dairy requires 60x versus the food and not versus the cover[72]].[73] The stringency: However, there are those[74] who are stringent to always apply a Ben Yomo status to a cover, even if in truth the cover is not Ben Yomo.[75] [Accordingly, in the above case, some Poskim[76] rule that the dairy food requires 60x versus the non-Ben Yomo meat cover. However, most Poskim[77] rule that even according to this stringency, one only measures 60x versus the curved areas of the cover which are difficult to clean, and hence contain possible food residue, and not versus the entire pot cover. Accordingly, some Poskim[78] rule the entire stringency is limited only covers that contain curved rims which are difficult to clean, while clean flat covers retain  non-Ben Yomo status according to all.] Final ruling: Practically, some [Ashkenazi[79]] communities are accustomed to being stringent [although other communities are accustomed to being lenient[80], and each is to follow his custom].[81] Even in stringent communities, one may be lenient for a Shabbos need or in a case of loss, [or by a flat cover[82]], or if there is another leniency involved.[83] [This, however, only applies if the pot cover is clean, otherwise one requires 60x versus all the leftovers that are on the pot cover.[84]] In all the above-mentioned cases, the pot cover is forbidden and must be Kashered. Glass pot covers: Many Poskim[85] rule that glass material does not absorb, and hence if a clean glass Ben Yomo meat pot cover was used for cooking milk, one only requires 60x versus the non-glass material that is on the pot [i.e. the metal rim, or screw for the handle]. If the cover was dirty with meat food then one requires 60x versus the food, but not versus the glass material. Practically, the Sephardim are lenient and it is possible that even Ashkenazim may be lenient in this matter, upon discussing with a Rav.[86] Certainly if the cover was not Ben Yomo the food is permitted, even in the communities who are stringent to give a non Ben Yomo cover the same status as Ben Yomo.   Summary: If one cooked dairy using a Ben Yomo meat cover, then if the food reached a boil and released steam, the food requires 60x versus the cover. [If the pot was also Ben Yomo of meat, then one requires 60x versus both the pot and the cover, unless one knows the original amount of meat used within the past 24 hours.] If the cover was not Ben Yomo, but was clean, then the food is permitted although some communities are stringent to require 60x in the food versus the curved areas of the cover. Even those who are stringent may be lenient regarding flat covers, or in a time of need, or loss even if the food does not contain 60x the curved areas of the cover. In all cases, the cover is to be Kashered.   Questions the Rabbi must ask the asker when asked the law of dairy cooked in a meat pot? 1. Was there residue of meat in the pot? 2. Was the pot Ben Yomo? 3. Did you use the pot cover? 4. Is the food a Davar Charif?   Q&A Does the above non-Ben Yomo stringency apply even to non-designated covers?[87] Ø  If a clean non-Ben Yomo dairy plate was placed on top of a hot pot of meat, what is the law? The above stringency to treat a non-Ben Yomo cover as Ben Yomo, only applies by designated covers. However, a plate that is temporarily being used as a cover does not receive this stringency, and hence so long as it was clean and not-Ben Yomo, the food remains permitted according to all [although the plate is forbidden].  Does the above non-Ben Yomo stringency apply even towards covers placed on Pareve foods?[88] No. Everyone agrees that if a clean non-Ben Yomo meat cover was used to cook a Pareve food, the food remains Pareve.

 

5. Placed a Ben Yomo meat cover on a milk pot or vice versa:^[89]

*See previous Halacha regarding glass pot covers and covers that are not Ben Yomo!

 

A. Cover and pot are both hot:

If one took a hot [Yad Soledes[90]] cover from a pot of meat and placed it on a hot [Yad Soledes] pot of milk, one needs 60x in the milk versus the cover, otherwise everything [i.e. the food, pot and cover^[91]] is forbidden.^[92] [This applies even if one immediately removed the cover from the pot[93], and the vapor that reached the cover was not Yad Soledes.[94] Even when there is 60x of milk versus the cover, the cover must be Kashered.]

Summary: If one took a hot [Yad Soledes ] cover from a pot of meat and placed it on a hot [Yad Soledes] pot of milk, the cover, pot and food, are forbidden unless the food contains 60x the cover, in which case only the cover is forbidden.

 

B. Cover is cold and pot is hot:

If one took a cold [Ben Yomo] meat cover and placed it on a hot [Yad Soledes] pot of milk, then if the cover remained on the pot until its inners side became moistened with [Yad Soledes[95]] milk vapor, then everything [i.e. the food, pot and cover^[96]] is forbidden unless the milk contains 60x versus the cover.^[97] [Even in such a case that there is 60x in the milk versus the cover, the cover is forbidden and must be Kashered. If the cover is not Ben Yomo, this follows the same ruling as brought above in Halacha 4. If the cover was removed prior to it moistening, then everything remains permitted. It makes no difference in this case if the cover was wet or dry when it was placed onto the dairy pot.[98]]

Summary: If one took cold meat cover and placed it on a hot [Yad Soledes] pot of milk, then if the milk began to boil or steam, then pot, food and cover is forbidden, unless the food contains 60x the cover, in which case only the cover is forbidden.

 

C. If the cover is hot but the pot is cold:

• Rama:

Everything permitted-Peel food: If one took a hot [Yad Soledes] meat cover and placed it on a pot of cold dairy, everything [i.e. the food, pot^[99] and cover] remains permitted.^[100] Nonetheless, one is required to [wash the area of contact of the pot and cover[101] and] remove a peels worth from the food, if relevant [i.e. a solid].^[102] If it is not possible to remove a peels worth from the food, such as if it is a liquid, the food is permitted even without a peel being removed. [Some Poskim^[103] rule one is only required to remove a peels worth from the food if the cover was moist and hence hot drops of liquid fell from the cover onto the food in the pot. If, however, one knows that the pot cover was dry, there is no need to remove a Kelipa from the food.]

• Shach:^[104]

Pot and cover forbidden if wet: If the cover contained moisture, then both the pot and cover are forbidden, as the moisture of the cover automatically transfers taste into the pot by the area of contact.[105] Nonetheless, the food remains permitted. If the cover was dry, then everything remains permitted as ruled the Rama. If one is unsure, then we assume that the cover was moist.

Final Ruling: Majority of Poskim[106] rule like the Shach that if there was moisture on the cover, both the cover and pot are forbidden. However, in a case of loss, if one already cooked food in the pot, one may be lenient like the Rama.[107]

Summary: If one took hot Yad Soledes meat cover and placed it on a cold pot of milk, then the food requires a Kelipa and the pot and cover are forbidden, unless one knows that the cover was dry at the time, in which case the pot and cover are also permitted.

 

D. Cover and pot are hot but no food inside:^[108]

If a hot meat cover was placed on an empty hot dairy pot, everything remains permitted [even if both the pot and cover were hot and Ben Yomo].[109] [However, some Poskim^[110] rule that when both the pot and the cover are hot and Ben Yomo, the pot and cover are forbidden due to the moisture of the cover.]

Compilation & Final ruling A meat cover was placed on a dairy pot or vice versa:[111] Cover and pot are both hot:[112] If one took a hot [Yad Soledes[113]] cover from a pot of meat and placed it on a hot [Yad Soledes] pot of milk, one needs 60x in the milk versus the cover, otherwise everything [i.e. the food, pot and cover[114]] is forbidden.[115] [This applies even if one immediately removed the cover from the pot[116], and the vapor that reached the cover was not Yad Soledes.[117] Even when there is 60x of milk versus the cover, the cover must be Kashered.] Cover is cold and pot is hot:[118] If one took a cold [Ben Yomo] meat cover and placed it on a hot [Yad Soledes] pot of milk, then if the cover remained on the pot until its inners side became moistened with [Yad Soledes[119]] milk vapor, then everything [i.e. the food, pot and cover[120]] is forbidden unless the milk contains 60x versus the cover.[121] [Even in such a case that there is 60x in the milk versus the cover, the cover is forbidden and must be Kashered. If the cover is not Ben Yomo, this follows the same ruling as brought above in Halacha 4. If the cover was removed prior to it moistening, then everything remains permitted. It makes no difference in this case if the cover was wet or dry when it was placed onto the dairy pot.[122]] Cover is hot but the pot is cold: If one took a hot [Yad Soledes] meat cover and placed it on a pot of cold dairy, then some Poskim[123] rule that both the pot and cover are forbidden while the food remains permitted after removing a Kelipa, unless one knows for certain that the cover was dry at the time, in which case the pot and cover are also permitted. Other Poskim[124], however, rule everything [i.e. the food, pot[125] and cover] remains permitted [even if the cover was moist].[126] Nonetheless, even according to their opinion, one is required to [wash the area of contact of the pot and cover[127] and] remove a peels worth from the food, if relevant [i.e. a solid].[128] If it is not possible to remove a peels worth from the food, such as if it is a liquid, the food is permitted even without a peel being removed. [Some Poskim[129] rule one is only required to remove a peels worth from the food if the cover was moist and hence hot drops of liquid fell from the cover onto the food in the pot. If, however, one knows that the pot cover was dry, there is no need to remove a Kelipa from the food.] Practically, we rule like the former opinion that if there was moisture on the cover, both the cover and pot are forbidden, however, in a case of loss, if one already cooked food in the pot, one may be lenient.[130] Cover and pot are hot but no food inside:[131] If a hot meat cover was placed on an empty hot dairy pot, everything remains permitted [even if both the pot and cover were hot and Ben Yomo].[132] [However, some Poskim[133] rule that when both the pot and the cover are hot and Ben Yomo, the pot and cover are forbidden due to the moisture of the cover.] Q&A regarding Pareve If one placed a Ben Yomo meat cover on a hot Pareve pot of food, what is the law? If the cover was hot, or the food began to boil and give off steam, then if the food does not contain 60x the cover, the custom is to consider the food and pot as meaty, although from the letter of the law everything remains Pareve. See Chapter 94 Halacha 4 for the full details of this matter!   If one placed a Pareve cover on a hot dairy or meat pot, what is the law of the cover?[134] If the cover was hot or the food began to boil and give off steam, then the cover is considered dairy/meaty until it is Koshered.   What is the law if one placed a dairy cover on a hot meat pot which contains Pareve food?[135] If the cover was hot or the food began to boil and give off steam, then if both the cover and the pot are Ben Yomo, everything is forbidden unless the food contains 60x the cover in which case the food is permitted. If either the cover or the pot are not Ben Yomo, then from the letter of the law everything remains permitted[136], although the custom is to consider the food like the Ben Yomo vessel, and the non-Ben Yomo vessel needs to be Kashered, as explained in Chapter 94 Halacha 4.   What is the law if one placed a hot fish cover over a hot pot of meat or poultry? The food remains Kosher.[137] However, the pot cover should not be used for cooking until after 24 hours.[138] After 24 hours the cover may be used as usual.

 

6. A pot which had cold milk stored in it for 24 hours?^[139]

A vessel which stored milk for 24 hours is considered Ben Yomo until it is cleaned of its milk and 24 hours have passed. Thus, if one cooked meat in the vessel, the meat and vessel is [Biblically[140]] forbidden unless the meat contains 60x. in which case only the vessel is forbidden. [However, some Poskim[141] rule the pot is not considered Ben Yomo if milk soaked in it for 24 hours, and hence the meat is permitted. Practically, one may be lenient in a time of great loss.[142] However, according to Admur[143], seemingly the food is forbidden even in such a case.]

 

7. Does earthenware absorb cold liquids?

• Taz:^[144]

Earthenware has the ability to absorb cold liquids even if the liquids do not remain for 24 hours in the vessel. However, once a vessel has absorbed liquid three times, it’s absorbing capacity is filled and it can no longer absorb any other liquid, unless one cooks in it, or leaves liquid in it for 24 hours.^[145]

• Shach:^[146]

Vessels, including earthenware, do not absorb cold liquids unless they remained in the vessel for 24 hours.^[147]

Compilation & Final Ruling: Some Poskim[148] rule that during its first three times of use, earthenware has the ability to absorb cold liquids even if the liquids do not remain for 24 hours in the vessel. [Thus, if milk was placed in a new earthenware pot for even a few moments, it is now a dairy pot and cannot be used with meat. If it was used to cook meat within 24 hours, the meat requires 60x.] Other Poskim[149], however, rule that vessels, including earthenware, do not absorb cold liquids unless they remained in the vessel for 24 hours. Practically, we rule like the latter opinion and hence a new earthenware pot that was used for cold milk for less than 24 hours, may be cleaned and designated for meat use.[150]

__________________________________

[1] Pesachim 30b based on the verses in Parshas Matos in where we were commanded to immerse the vessels of Midian

[2] See Pesachim ibid and Avoda Zara 33b that the change in the vessel was evident;  Radbaz 3:844; Sdei Chemed Asifas Dinim Mareches Hei 21; Hamayan Tishreiy, Teves-Nissan 5773

[3] See the supplement in the end of the Sefer for the full details of this subject!

[4] See Hamayan Tishreiy, Teves-Nissan 5773

[5] The Sages and Poskim certainly knew of this idea of laboratory testing and even used it with regards to other materials, and hence from the fact it is not mentioned anywhere in the rulings of the Talmud and hundreds of Poskim Rishonim and Achronim, is a proof that they negated its acceptance.  

[6] Rav SZ”A in Halichos Shlomo Hagalas Keilim footnote 63

[7] Radbaz 3:844; See also Sdei Chemed Asifas Dinim Mareches Hei 21

[8] Michaber 93:1; Chulin 97a

[9] The reason: As it is initially forbidden to give even spoiled meat taste to milk.

[10] Taz 93:2

[11] Michaber 93:1; Chulin 97a

The reason: As it is initially forbidden to give even spoiled meat taste to milk.

[12] Tur 93 in name of Rashba, brought in Taz 93:2; Taz ibid rules that this applies only to metal pots and only if one cooked an equal amount or more of water in the pot in comparison to the amount of meat that was cooked in it.

[13] Rashal, brought in Taz ibid; Implication of Beis Yosef 93; Peri Chadash 93:4 that so rule majority of Poskim; Peri Toar 93:4 [although is lenient if pot was not Ben Yomo]; Kehilas Yehuda 93:1;

[14] Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:22; Kaf Hachaim 93:31; Peri Toar ibid is lenient even initially if pot was not Ben Yomo

[15] Michaber 93:1

[16] Michaber ibid

[17] Peri Chadash 93:4; Lechem Hapanim 93:5; P”M 93 S.D. 3; Kehilas Yehuda 93:1; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:12; Kaf Hachaim 93:17

[18] Ruling of the Baal Haitur that if there is 60x the pot, it may be used after 24 hours even if earthenware: The Tur brings the Baal Haitur who rules that if there is 60x the walls of the pot in the food, the pot may be used for either milk or meat [after 24 hours have passed], even if the pot is earthenware. His reasoning is because when the food in the pot contains 60x, the pot is considered as if it was Kashered within that food, and all of its taste has left. Now although Biblically an earthenware vessel can never be Kashered due to that some taste always remains in the pot, the Baal Haitur understands that this Biblical statement was only said regarding Kodshim, however by Chulin earthenware can be Kashered from a Biblical perspective. Now although the Sages decreed that earthenware cannot be Kashered even by other Issurim, and hence if one cooks Issur in an earthenware pot it is forbidden in use even if one went ahead and Kashered it, even after 24 hours. Nevertheless, this Rabbinical decree was only made regarding other Issurim, however by Basar Bechalav they never decreed that the cooking within a meat vessel should prohibit the vessel. The reason for this is because cooking milk in a meat vessel Biblically effects Hagalah within the vessel and hence there was never a status of Issur within the vessel to begin with, unlike by other Issurim. Now we see that the Sages did not forbid foods cooked in a vessel that is not Ben Yomo, and only Lechatchilah did they say one should not do so. Hence, so too in this case the Sages did not decree that Bedieved the earthenware pot is forbidden in use. However, regarding Kodshim, even Bedieved we hold that Issur never leaves an earthenware pot as this is the Biblical law. Likewise, regarding other Issurim the Sages decreed it is forbidden in use . [Taz 93:1] Practically we rule like above that the pot is forbidden for either meat or milk. [Tur; Michaber]

[19] Radbaz 3:617 that it cannot even be used for cold foods as one may come to forget and use it for hot foods, and hence one must sell it to a gentile; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:9; Kaf Hachaim 93:13-14

Case of great loss: Some Poskim rule that in a case of great loss, one may be lenient to use a non-Kasherable item after 24 hours. [Dvar Shmuel Nachalas Yaakov 42-43; Minchas Yaakov 85:64; Maharil Ben Chaviv 121; Erech Hashulchan 93:9] Other Poskim, however, limit this only to a case of a Rabbinical prohibition. [P”M 93 S.D. 3] See Chochmas Adam 55:7; Kaf Hachaim 93:15

[20] See Chapter 96!

[21] Michaber ibid

[22] The reason: As the pot now contains milk and meat taste which will enter into the meat/milk which one cooks inside. This is forbidden even past 24 hours as it is forbidden to Lechatchilah give a spoiled meat/milk taste to milk/meat. [Shach 93:3; Peri Chadash 93:3; Lechem Hapanim 93:4; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:3; Chavas Daas 93:2; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:12]

[23] Rama ibid; Shach 93:3; Peri Chadash 93:4; Lechem Hapanim 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:16

The reason: The reason for this allowance is because the meat and milk taste in the pot have never combined to become Basar Bechalav, as the meat was not Ben Yomo. Thus, the taste of meat and milk which enters into the Pareve food is not an Issur taste.

[24] Kaf Hachaim 93:16 that Sephardim never accepted this custom and hence they may use the pot for Pareve. Nonetheless, even Sephardim may not use this pot on a set basis.

[25] Shach 93:3 based on Rama in 94:5; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:4; Chavas Daas 93:3; Kaf Hachaim 93:16; 94:54 

The reason: As we suspect one may come to use the pot with meat or milk. [Kaf Hachaim 93:16]

[26] Meaning, Bedieved, if one cooked meat in this pot, the food is forbidden if it was cooked within 24 hours of cooking the milk, and is permitted if it was cooked after 24 hours of cooking the milk. If one cooked milk a second time in this pot, even within 24 hours of cooking the first milk, then it always remains permitted as the pot was not Ben Yomo from meat during the first cooking of milk, and hence did not become Ben Yomo due to the milk. [Shach 93:3; Peri Chadash 93:3; Lechem Hapanim 93:4; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:3; Chavas Daas 93:2; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:12]

[27] Bach 93; P”M 93 S.D. 20; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:15; Kaf Hachaim 93:23

[28] Chavos Yair 101; Lechem Hapanim 93:2; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:2; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:7; Kaf Hachaim 93:11

[29] Issur Viheter 35:3; Kol Eliyahu Y.D. 1:10; Erech Hashulchan 93:7; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:13; Kaf Hachaim 93:18

[30] Admur 494:16; and 461:1; 451:7 regarding Chametz

[31] Admur 451:13 in gloss; 1^st approach in Shach 121:7; unlike 2^nd approach in Shach ibid, based on ruling of Ramaz, 96 that requires Libun Chamur even by Basar Bechalav if it absorbed meat or dairy directly without liquid

[32] See Admur ibid

[33] Shach 93:1 based on Michaber/Rama 92:1

[34] Shulchan Gavoa 92:3; Zivcheiy Tzedek 92:2; Ben Ish Chaiy 92:1; Kaf Hachaim 92:2; 93:1

[35] Rama ibid

[36] The reason: As it is possible that it absorbed the maximum amount of meat that it can hold. [Michaber 98:4; Levush 93; Kaf Hachaim 93:9]

[37] Shach 93:2; Kneses Hagedola 93:1; Peri Chadash 93:2; Lechem Hapanim 93:3; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:1; Chavas Daas 93:1; P”M 93 S.D. 2; Chochmas Adam 46:1; Beis Yitzchak 1:1; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:6; Kaf Hachaim 93:10 unlike Ravaad

[38] Shach 93:1; Peri Chadash 93:1; Lechem Hapanim 93:2; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:1; Chavas Daas 93:1; P”M 93 S.D. 1; Chochmas Adam 46:2; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:4-5; Kaf Hachaim 93:5-6

[39] Poskim ibid

The law by Issur: The above law only applies regarding Heter [meat and then milk]. However, if one cooked Heter in an Issur Ben Yomo pot and one knows the amount of Issur cooked, then one must measure against all the Issur cooked within 24 hours, as well as any Issur cooked within 24 hours of those 24 hours, and so on and so forth. The reason for this is because the pot becomes Chanan each time something was cooked in it. [Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:7]

[40] Chavas Daas 93:1; Kaf Hachaim 93:8

[41] Shach 93:1; Beis Yosef 93; Peri Chadash 93:1; Lechem Hapanim 93:2; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:1; Chavas Daas 93:1; Chochmas Adam 46:1; Beis Yitzchak 1:1; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:2; Kaf Hachaim 93:2

[42] Darkei Moshe 93:3; Mordechai end of Gid Hanashe in name of Ravayah; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:3; Kaf Hachaim 93:3; Hakashrus 10 footnote 8

[43] Poskim ibid; Some Poskim record a custom to weigh the vessel and then give it an approximate volume based on that weight, such as 15 cc for every 100 grams. [See Ben Ish Chaiy Korach 2; Kaf Hachaim 93:4]

[44] Kaf Hachaim 93:8; See also Kaf Hachaim 92:77; 94:8-9; Birkeiy Yosef 94 Shiyurei Bracha 1; Erech Hashulchan 94:2; Pischeiy Teshuvah 95:1; Zivcheiy Tzedek 94:7; Kaf Hachaim 94:8-9; 93:8

[45] See regarding one who inserted a dairy spoon into water cooking in a meat pot: Chochmas Adam 48:6; Hakashrus 10:98; See Taz 95:8; Shach 95:5 in name of Ran

[46] Rama 92:7; Shach 92:37; Taz 92:28; Toras Chatas 56:4; Minchas Yaakov 56:12 based on Hagahos Sheid and Issur Viheter; Peri Chadash 92:33; Lechem Hapanim 92:53; Kreisy 92:29; P”M 92 M”Z 28; Chochmas Adam 45:9; Beis Yaakov 37; Pischeiy Teshuvah 92:5; Zivcheiy Tzedek 92:66; Hakashrus 10:82-83. 

[47] Rama 93:1

[48] The reason: As both the pot and its cover are not Ben Yomo and hence have no ability to forbid the food.

[49] Kaf Hachaim 93:19

[50] Hagahos Sheid in name of Koveitz

[51] See below that Rama, and Shach rule one needs 60x the cover however the Taz rules that one needs only 60x the food remnant on the cover.

[52] Kaf Hachaim 93:20 that the Sephardic custom is not to be stringent

[53] Kaf Hachaim 93:20

[54] Rama ibid; Admur 451:41; See Piskeiy Admur Yoreh Deah 93:3

[55] Rama ibid; Apei Ravrivi; Shach 93:4; Peri Chadash 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[56] Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[57] Shach 93:4; Taz 93:2; Rashal, brought in Shach and Taz ibid; Apei Ravrivi; Peri Chadash 93:5; Aruch Hashulchan 93:16; Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[58] The reason: See below in opinion of Rashal!

[59] So is evident from Rama ibid who does not differentiate, and from Toras Chatas who writes the reason is due to the vapor.

[60] Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[61] Shach 93:4 as he explains the entire cover becomes forbidden due to the spread of the Basar Bechalav taste; Chochmas Adam 46:3; Peri Megadim 93 S.D. 4

[62] Taz 93:2

[63] Halacha Pesuka 93:7; Chavas Daas Biurim 93:4; Peri Megadim 93 M.Z. 2; Erech Hashulchan 93:11; Aruch Hashulchan 93:16; Kaf Hachaim 93:19

[64] Rama 93:1

[65] Toras Chatas 85:4; Brought in Shach 93:4

[66] Rashal Ateres Shlomo 35, brought in Shach 93:4; Taz 93:2; Peri Chadash 93:5

[67] So explains Shach ibid, however Taz ibid learns it does not spread to the entire pot.

[68] Admur 451:41; See Piskeiy Admur Yoreh Deah 93:3

[69] From this wording it is implied that Admur does not rule like the Rama and leans more like the Peri Chadash that one can be lenient in the above, and it is not even a widespread custom to be stringent. This is unlike the stringency of non-Ben Yomo on Pesach of which Admur writes “in accordance to the custom of these provinces” from which we see it is the accepted custom. However, regarding other Issurim it is simply “a custom in some communities.” The change is in two terms “some” instead of all and “communities” instead of “provinces.” Now, although the Rama himself brings such a wording and hence just as the Rama himself is stringent like the custom, perhaps Admur would hold the same, nevertheless, from the fact Admur does not record the final ruling, as is usually his way when bringing a Halacha from elsewhere, it implies that in actuality he holds the custom is limited to a few communities, and does not have to be followed by one who does not have this accepted custom. [Meaning Admur did not accept the custom of the Rama as the general custom to which Ashkenazi Jewry must abide, but rather maintains that it remains limited to those communities which accepted it.]

[70] Rama 93:1

[71] Rama 92:7; Shach 92:37; Taz 92:28; Toras Chatas 56:4; Minchas Yaakov 56:12 based on Hagahos Sheid and Issur Viheter; Peri Chadash 92:33; Lechem Hapanim 92:53; Kreisy 92:29; P”M 92 M”Z 28; Chochmas Adam 45:9; Beis Yaakov 37; Pischeiy Teshuvah 92:5; Zivcheiy Tzedek 92:66; Hakashrus 10:82-83. 

[72] Kaf Hachaim 93:19

[73] The reason: As both the pot and its cover are not Ben Yomo and hence have no ability to forbid the food.

[74] Opinion in Rama ibid; Hagahos Sheid in name of Koveitz; Admur 451:41 “It is the custom of some communities to forbid the cover of a pot even if it is not Ben Yomo.”

[75] The reason: The Rama says the above stringency to consider a non-Ben Yomo cover as if it is Ben Yomo is a stringency without reason/logic. [Rama 93:1] However, in the Toras Chatas  he offers an explanation saying that vapor and smell of a food are more stringent than mere taste, and since the cover constantly receives from the vapor of a food, it therefore does not become repugnant after 24 hours. [Toras Chatas 85:4; Brought in Shach 93:4] The Rashal explains that the above stringency to consider a non-Ben Yomo cover as if it is Ben Yom  is because pot covers are difficult to properly clean due to their cracks and narrow curved areas. As a result, we suspect that perhaps some meat residue has remained in the cracks and this meat residue, upon getting mixed with the rising milk vapor, becomes Basar Bechalav. [Rashal Ateres Shlomo 35, brought in Shach 93:4; Taz 93:2; Peri Chadash 93:5] This in turn prohibits the entire cover if the cover does not have 60x its residue.  [So explains Shach ibid, however Taz ibid learns it does not spread to the entire pot] Based on this reasoning, a flat cover which has no cracks and was cleaned has no basis for the stringency, and hence if it is not Ben Yomo the food is permitted.

[76] Implication of Rama ibid; Shach 93:4; Chochmas Adam 46:3; Peri Megadim 93 S.D. 4

[77] Taz 93:2; Halacha Pesuka 93:7; Chavas Daas Biurim 93:4; Peri Megadim 93 M.Z. 2; Erech Hashulchan 93:11; Aruch Hashulchan 93:16; Kaf Hachaim 93:19; See Hakashrus 10:72 footnote 185

[78] Shach 93:4; Taz 93:2; Rashal, brought in Shach and Taz ibid; Apei Ravrivi; Peri Chadash 93:5; Aruch Hashulchan 93:16; Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[79] Kaf Hachaim 93:20 that the Sephardic custom is not to be stringent

[80] Kaf Hachaim 93:20

[81] Rama ibid; Admur 451:41; See Piskeiy Admur Yoreh Deah 93:3

[82] Shach 93:4; Peri Chadash 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[83] Rama ibid; Apei Ravrivi; Shach 93:4; Peri Chadash 93:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[84] Kaf Hachaim 93:21

[85] See supplement in the end of the Sefer for the full details of glass material!

[86] See supplement in the end of the Sefer for the debate amongst the Poskim as how to rule in a case that the glass is on the fire.

[87] Bnei Chayi; Pischeiy Teshuvah 93:4; Kaf Hachaim 93:22

[88] Peri Megadim 93 S.D. 4

[89] Rama 93:1

[90] Peri Chadash 93:6; Lechem Hapanim 93:8; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:6; Kaf Hachaim 93:24

[91] Peri Chadash 93:6 and 10; Lechem Hapanim 93:8 and 12; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:6; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:16; Kaf Hachaim 93:24-25

[92] The reason: As most certainly the meat cover that was on a cooking pot contains moisture of meat that has absorbed into it and this moisture then mixes with the steam that is released from the hot dairy food and falls back into the milk. [Peri Chadash 93:6; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:8; Kaf Hachaim 93:24]

[93] Implication of Rama ibid who qualifies “if it started to moisten” only in the case that the cover is cold.

The reason: As since the cover was hot, it instantly gave off meat taste to the pot upon contact.

[94] P”M 92 S.D. 5; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:18; Kaf Hachaim 93:28

[95] Rama 92:8; Shach 93:5; Peri Chadash 93:8; Lechem Hapanim 93:10; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:7; Chavas Daas 93:5; P”M 92 S.D. 5; Chochmas Adam 46:4; Beis Yitzchak 2:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:28

[96] Peri Chadash 93:7 and 10; Lechem Hapanim 93:9 and 12; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:17; Kaf Hachaim 93:26-27

[97] Although the cover is cold, since the milk is hot we apply the rule of Tatah Gavar. [Rama ibid]

[98] Peri Chadash 93:7; Lechem Hapanim 93:9; Kaf Hachaim 93:26

[99] Shach 93:6 in name of Darkei Moshe and Issur Viheter

The reason: Even the pot is permitted, as the moisture on the cover is considered a Keli Sheiyni, similar to a drop of hot milk falling on a pot. [Shach ibid]

[100] The reason: As we apply the rule of Tatah Gavar, [Rama ibid]

[101] Shach 93:6 in name of Darkei Moshe and Issur Viheter

[102] The reason: As the heat of the upper item has ability to penetrate a peels worth of the lower food, following the rule of Tatah Gavar.

[103] Chochmas Adam 46:5; Hakashrus 10:73

[104] Shach 93:6; Darkei Moshe 93:2; Hagahos Shaareiy Dura 56

[105] The reason: Since the cover is hot, it is not possible that the dairy pot did not absorb from its taste. It is similar in law to a drop of hot milk which drops onto a meat pot, in which case it absorbs milk taste even if the pot was cold.

[106] Peri Chadash 93:9; Lechem Hapanim 93:11; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:8; Chavas Daas 93:6; P”M 92 S.D. 5; Birkeiy Yosef 93 Shiyurei Bracha 2; Peri Toar 93:3 is stringent regarding pot although not regarding cover; Chochmas Adam 46:5 is lenient in a case of great loss if one already cooked in it; Kaf Hachaim 93:29; Hakashrus 10:73

[107] Chochmas Adam ibid

[108] Rama 93:1; Beir Heiytiv 93:6; Peri Chadash 93:6; Lechem Hapanim 93:8; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:6; Chavas Daas 93:7; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:21; Kaf Hachaim 93:24 and 30

[109] The reason: As taste cannot transfer without liquid, and it is thus similar to two pots touching each other. [Rama ibid]

[110] Chochmas Adam 46:5; Gloss of Rav Akivah Eiger 93

[111] Rama 93:1

[112] Rama ibid

[113] Peri Chadash 93:6; Lechem Hapanim 93:8; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:6; Kaf Hachaim 93:24

[114] Peri Chadash 93:6 and 10; Lechem Hapanim 93:8 and 12; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:6; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:16; Kaf Hachaim 93:24-25

[115] The reason: As most certainly the meat cover that was on a cooking pot contains moisture of meat that has absorbed into it and this moisture then mixes with the steam that is released from the hot dairy food and falls back into the milk. [Peri Chadash 93:6; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:8; Kaf Hachaim 93:24]

[116] Implication of Rama ibid who qualifies “if it started to moisten” only in the case that the cover is cold.

The reason: As since the cover was hot, it instantly gave off meat taste to the pot upon contact.

[117] P”M 92 S.D. 5; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:18; Kaf Hachaim 93:28

[118] Rama ibid

[119] Rama 92:8; Shach 93:5; Peri Chadash 93:8; Lechem Hapanim 93:10; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:7; Chavas Daas 93:5; P”M 92 S.D. 5; Chochmas Adam 46:4; Beis Yitzchak 2:5; Kaf Hachaim 93:28

[120] Peri Chadash 93:7 and 10; Lechem Hapanim 93:9 and 12; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:17; Kaf Hachaim 93:26-27

[121] Although the cover is cold, since the milk is hot we apply the rule of Tatah Gavar. [Rama ibid]

[122] Peri Chadash 93:7; Lechem Hapanim 93:9; Kaf Hachaim 93:26

[123] Shach 93:6; Darkei Moshe 93:2; Hagahos Shaareiy Dura 56; Peri Chadash 93:9; Lechem Hapanim 93:11; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:8; Chavas Daas 93:6; P”M 92 S.D. 5; Birkeiy Yosef 93 Shiyurei Bracha 2; Peri Toar 93:3 is stringent regarding pot although not regarding cover; Chochmas Adam 46:5 is lenient in a case of great loss if one already cooked in it; Kaf Hachaim 93:29; Hakashrus 10:73

[124] Rama 93:1

[125] Shach 93:6 in name of Darkei Moshe and Issur Viheter

The reason: Even the pot is permitted, as the moisture on the cover is considered a Keli Sheiyni, similar to a drop of hot milk falling on a pot. [Shach ibid]

[126] The reason: As we apply the rule of Tatah Gavar, [Rama ibid]

[127] Shach 93:6 in name of Darkei Moshe and Issur Viheter

[128] The reason: As the heat of the upper item has ability to penetrate a peels worth of the lower food, following the rule of Tatah Gavar.

[129] Chochmas Adam 46:5; Hakashrus 10:73

[130] Chochmas Adam ibid

[131] Rama 93:1; Beir Heiytiv 93:6; Peri Chadash 93:6; Lechem Hapanim 93:8; Beis Lechem Yehuda 93:6; Chavas Daas 93:7; Zivcheiy Tzedek 93:21; Kaf Hachaim 93:24 and 30

[132] The reason: As taste cannot transfer without liquid, and it is thus similar to two pots touching each other. [Rama ibid]

[133] Chochmas Adam 46:5; Gloss of Rav Akivah Eiger 93

[134] Hakashrus 10:73

[135] Peri Megadim 93 S.D. 4; Hakashrus 10:74

[136] This applies even if the pot is Ben Yomo, and one is stringent to consider the non-Ben Yomo cover as Ben Yomo, as this stringency only applies when one is cooking meat or milk in the pot and not when one is cooking Pareve. [Peri Megadim ibid]

[137] The reason: As the taste of fish absorbed in the cover does not prohibit the meat, as brought in Taz 116:2 regarding the allowance to cook fish/meat in a meat/fish pot that is Ben Yomo. Furthermore, even if there was fish gravy condensation on the cover, and this condensation then fell into the meat, one can surely assume that there is 60x against it and it is hence permitted.

[138] As the cover most likely contained fish condensation on its bottom and has now become forbidden due to the  meat vapor that became mixed with it. Now, although when one has cooks meat with fish some Poskim rule the pot becomes forbidden and must be Kashered, nevertheless, the final stance on this subject is that waiting 24 hours is suffice. [See Darkei Teshuvah 116:28; Kaf Hachaim 116:13]

[139] Taz 93:2; Shach 93 in Nekudos Hakesef; Chavos Yair 101; Erech Hashulchan 93:4; P”M 87 M.Z. 1; Machazik Bracha 87:20; Zivcheiy Tzedek 87:10; 93:23; Kaf Hachaim 93:32

[140] P”M ibid; Machazik Bracha ibid; Zivcheiy Tzedek ibid; Kaf Hachaim 87:15

The reason: As the vessel has absorbed milk and this milk is now being cooked with meat, and is hence Biblically forbidden. [Poskim ibid]

[141] See The Laws of Taaruvos chapter 105 Halacha 1 and Kaf Hachaim 105:1 for Poskim who rule we do not apply Kevisha by vessels.

[142] Zivcheiy Tzedek 87:10; 93:23; Kaf Hachaim 87:15; 93:32; 105:1

[143] Admur 451:61; See Piskeiy Admur Yoreh Deah p. 235

[144] Taz 93:2 in name of Riy Halavan brought in Hagahos Sheid, brought in Beis Yosef 93

[145] The Taz ibid explains that even according to the Riy Lavan that the capacity of absorption is filled by an earthenware vessel after three times, nevertheless, through cooking or even soaking for 24 hours, taste can be absorbed. Hence, if milk was left for 24 hours in an old earthenware vessel, it becomes dairy and if one cooks meat in it within 24 hours the meat is forbidden.

Other Opinions: The Levush and Bach rule that according to the Riy Halavan an old earthenware vessel does not absorb even if liquid is left in it for 24 hours, as the material is already filled to capacity and cannot absorb any further. The Taz ibid negates their ruling and understanding of Riy Halavan.

[146] In Nekudos Hakesef on Taz ibid

[147] The Shach in Nekudos Hakesef explains that practically we do not hold of the Riy Halavan’s stringency by earthenware that it absorbs with even less than 24 hours. He takes task with the Taz ibid who seems to accept the ruling of the Riy Halavan. 

[148] Taz 93:2 in name of Riy Halavan brought in Hagahos Sheid, brought in Beis Yosef 93

[149] Shach in Nekudos Hakesef on Taz ibid; Chavos Yair 101; Erech Hashulchan 93:4

[150] Kaf Hachaim 93:17

Bookmark