This Halacha is an excerpt from our Sefer
Buy me here or on Amazon.com
Check out our state of the art Online Taaruvos course
________________________________________________________
Introduction:
In the previous chapter the law regarding an Issur which gives a spoiled taste was discussed. In this chapter this law is discussed with regards to the occurrence of a rat entering one’s food. Does a rat give a spoiled taste? What is the law if one removed the rat from the mixture and what is the law if it cannot be removed or disintegrated. The details of this law are expanded upon in this chapter.
1. Does a rat give a good or bad taste to food?
A. Does a field or desert rat give a good taste to vinegar or beer?[1]
- Michaber:A field or desert rat gives a good taste to beer and vinegar[2] as is seen from the fact that it is served on a kings table.[3]
- Shach:[4]
The Shach concludes based on the Gemara and Rishonim that even a desert rat is questionable if it gives a good or bad taste to the above foods.[5] Thus according to the Shach all rats have the same law.
B. Does a city rat give a good taste to vinegar or beer?[6]
It is questionable whether a city rat gives a good or bad taste to beer and vinegar.
C. Do rats give a spoiled taste to wine or oil?[7]
Rats do not give a good taste to wine or oil.[8] However some[9] learn that according to the Michaber this only refers to city rats, however field rats possibly give a good taste also to wine and oil. According to all city rats do not give a good taste to wine or oil.[10]
D. Do rats give a spoiled taste to honey?[11]
According to all rats give a spoiled taste to honey.
E. Do rats give a good taste to other beverages?[12]
- Michaber; Peri Chadash:Rats do not give a good taste to any other beverages [other than those listed above].
- Taz[13]; Shach[14]; Rashal[15]:
One is to be stringent to consider that rats give a good taste to all other beverages [other than those listed above]. The Taz[16] concludes based on the Rama that in a case of great loss one may be lenient.
F. Do rats give a good taste to fat or lard?[17]
- First opinion:[18] Rats give a spoiled taste to fat.
- Second opinion:[19] There are those which are stringent and say that rats give a good taste to fat.
- Final ruling:[20]
The Rama concludes that one is to be stringent like the second opinion that rats give a good taste to lard, However in a case of great loss one may be lenient like the first opinion.[21]
The practical law if a rat fell into one’s food and was removed
2. A rodent fell into vinegar or beer and was removed:[22]
A. Fell into cold beer or vinegar:
The rat remained 24 hours in the liquid: If the rat remained in the beer or vinegar for 24 hours and one then removed the rat from it, it is considered as if it was cooked in the liquid and one thus requires 60x versus the rat. This applies by both a desert rat and city rat.
The rat was removed within 24 hours: If the rat was removed within 24 hours of falling into the beer or vinegar then everything remains Kosher.[23] This applies by both a desert rat and city rat.[24]
B. Fell into hot beer or vinegar:
If the rat fell into hot beer or vinegar one requires 60x versus the rat. This applies by both a desert rat and city rat.
3. A rat fell into wine or oil and was removed:[25]
If a rat fell into wine or oil and was removed, no nullification is required even if the liquid was hot, as rats give a bad taste to these liquids [as these liquids must have a rich taste]. [However the Shach rules that perhaps according to the Michaber a desert rat gives a good taste even into these liquids.[26]]
4. The law if a rat fell into a food and cannot be removed:[27]
A. The rat completely disintegrated:
If a rat became cooked with a food and the rat completely disintegrated and became liquefied to the extent that no solid particle remain from the rat, then it is nullified in 60x.
B. If there are small pieces of the rodent that remain in the food:
If the rat did not completely disintegrate but rather fell apart and hence there are remnants of solid rat particle within the food, then if one strains the particles from the food to the point that no solid particles of the rat remains, the food is permitted if it contains 60x versus the rodent.
C. If it is not possible to remove all the rat pieces from the food:
If it is not possible to remove all the solid rat particles from the food, such as if the vinegar or beer mixed into a thick mixture of food, then the entire mixture is forbidden irrelevant of the ratio of Heter to the Issur.
The reason why the rat pieces are not nullified in 60x and does this law apply by other Issurim:
- Michaber:The reason why nullification does not help in this case is because we suspect one may come to eat an actual piece of the Issur [rat] for which nullification is not valid.
- Rama[28]; Shach[29]; Bach[30]; Drisha; Rashal[31]; Kreisy Upleisy[32]; Chavas Daas[33]: The reason why the solid particles of a rat are not nullified is because a rat is part of the list of eight rodents[34] [Sheratzim] which carry ritual impurity and a punishment of lashes for even a size less than a Kezayis. [See footnote[35]] From this we see the Torah considers even the smallest piece of the eight rodents as a significant amount, just as is the law by a Berya. Therefore also regarding the laws of Taaruvos we are stringent to give any particle of these eight rodents the status of a Berya and a Berya is never nullified even if the food contains 60x.[36] However the particles of all other Issurim are nullified in 60x as they do not carry the severity of rodents regarding their size for ritual impurity and lashes.[37]
- Taz[38]; Peri Chadash[39]; Peri Toar[40]; Kaf Hachaim[41]:The Taz defiantly argues on the Rama [and Shach] and rules the reason the pieces are not nullified has nothing to do with the severity of the law of a Sheretz [eight rodents] regarding impurity and lashes.[42] Rather the reason why the pieces are not nullified is because the body of an Issur can only become nullified if it has either disintegrated or mixed with other solids to the point that the Issur is completely unrecognizable[43]. However if a solid is mixed with a liquid and the Issur is thus recognizable then the Issur is never nullified even if one is not physically able to remove it. This applies by all Issurim, and there is no difference between a rat and other Issurim in this regard.In the Halachic wording this concept is described as follows: The body of an Issur is only nullified in mixtures of Yaveish Beyaveish [two solids] or Lach Belach [two liquids]. However by mixtures of Yaveish Belach [a liquid with a solid] it cannot be nullified unless the Issur disintegrates. The reason for this difference is because in a mixture of Yaveish Belach the solid Issur is not considered truly mixed with the Heter and hence does not turn into Heter with a ratio of majority.[44] Hence we suspect one may come to eat the Issur alone, and transgress.[45] [The Minchas Kohen[46] brings two explanations in how to understand this Taz. One way of understanding the Taz is that by mixtures of Yaveish Belach so long as the Issur is recognizable it is not nullified even if it is impossible to remove it from the mixture. However if it is not recognizable then it is nullified even in accordance to the Taz. Alternatively the Taz holds that by mixtures of Yaveish Belach even when the Issur is no longer recognizable it is not nullified. Admur[47] rules that the Taz holds like the first explanation, although Admur himself suspects for the second explanation.]
- Ruling of Shach in Nekudos Hakesef: In the Nekudos Hakesef the Shach defends his and the Rama’s ruling against the attacks of the Taz and supports that the reason for why the pieces are not nullified is because of the law of Berya. However he agrees with the Taz regarding the differentiation of a mixture of Yaveish Beyaveish and Yaveish Belach.[48] He rules as follows: If the rat pieces are mixed with other solids and one cannot differentiate between the two solids, then even pieces of rat are nullified in such a case. The reason for this is because this is considered a case of Yaveish Beyaveish as it is only by a case of Yaveish Belach that the rat pieces are never nullified. The reason for this is because the rat pieces are not really a Berya and it is only because they are recognizable within liquid that they are not nullified.
- Ruling of Shulchan Aruch Harav:[49]
We suspect for the opinion of the Taz that an Issur is never nullified in a mixture of Yaveish Belach.[50] Furthermore one is to be stringent like the second explanation in the Minchas Cohen to forbid the mixture of Yaveish Belach even if the Issur is no longer recognizable.[51]
Ruling of Tzemach Tzedek:[52] The Tzemach Tzedek concludes like the Shach that by other Issurim an Issur is nullified in Yaveish Belach even if it is recognizable, so long as it is impossible to remove. Nevertheless he rules that one is to suspect for the opinion of the Taz unless the case involves a great loss. If the Issur is not recognizable he concludes one may be completely lenient.
Final Summary:
*Important note: The Summary below takes into account the ruling of the Shach in Nekudos Hakesef!
If an Issur fell into a food and broke into small solid pieces to the point it cannot be removed, is it nullified?
A. Yaveish Beyaveish or Lach Belach:[53]
All Issurim, including rats [Sheratzim] which are not recognizable within a mixture of Yaveish Beyaveish or Lach Belach are nullified.
B. Yaveish Belach:
- Rama[54];Shach[55] and other Poskim: All pieces of Issurim, with exception to the eight rodents mentioned in the Torah, are nullified in 60x if it is not possible to remove them from the mixture.[56] However the eight rodents [Sheratzim] mentioned in the Torah carry a stringency that their pieces are not nullified unless they have been removed from the mixture or no solid particles of the rodent remain due to it becoming disintegrated and liquefied.
- Michaber[57]; Taz[58]; and other Poskim: If solid pieces of any Issur remains in the mixture it is not nullified, and the food is forbidden. This applies even if it is impossible to remove the Issur from the food.
- Shulchan Aruch Harav[59]; Minchas Cohen[60]:Solids of an Issur are never nullified within liquids even if they are not recognizable and cannot be removed.
- Final Ruling of Tzemach Tzedek:[61]
One is to suspect for the ruling of the Taz although in a case of great loss one may be lenient like the Shach. One may always be lenient if the Issur is no longer recognizable.
5. The law if a rat was found in lard:[62]
- Michaber[63]; Peri Chadash:Gives spoiled taste: Rats give spoiled taste to all liquids other than wine and vinegar. Hence according to the Michaber rats give a spoiled taste to fat, and thus no nullification is needed.
- Rama:[64]
Some are stringent: There are those which are stringent and say that rats do give a good taste to fat.[65] Practically one is to be stringent like the second opinion and require nullification, unless it is a case of great loss in which case one may be lenient like the opinion of the Michaber and not require nullification.[66]
Practically according to the Rama what is the law if one found a rat within fat?[67]
One saw a rat jump into a pot of hot fat: The fat requires 60x the rat unless the case involves a great loss.
One found a rat submerged within a pot of hot fat: If one is accustomed to pour hot fat daily into the pot then the entire mixture is forbidden even if it contains 60x the rat, unless it involves a case of great loss.[68] [If however when one poured the fat for the first time there is 60x in the fat versus the rat, then everything is permitted.]
One found the rat submerged within cold congealed fat: If one is accustomed to pour hot fat daily into the pot then the entire fat is forbidden even if it has 60x versus the rat, as we suspect that perhaps the rat was in the pot before the hot fat was poured into the pot.[69] However if one knows for certain that the pot was empty when the fat was poured in [and hence the rat must have jumped into the pot only after the fat cooled down], then if the rat was discovered within congealed fat it does not even require 60x, but rather simply Netilas Makom[70] surrounding the area of the rat.[71] The same applies if one never poured hot fat into this pot but rather poured cold liquid fat into it and then found a rat within the congealed fat.[72] [However this only applies if one does not know whether the rat fell in when the fat was congealed or when it was still liquidly. If however one knows the rat fell in while it was still liquidly then even if now the fat is congealed, 60x is required, as will be explained in the next case.[73] Likewise if one knows that the liquid fat only congealed after 24 hours 60x is required, as will be explained.[74]]
One found the rat submerged within cold liquid fat:[75] If one is accustomed to pour hot fat daily into the pot then the entire fat is forbidden even if it has 60x versus the rat, as we suspect that perhaps the rat was in the pot before the hot fat was poured into the pot. However if one knows for certain that the pot was empty when the fat was poured in [and hence the rat must have jumped into the pot only after the fat cooled down], or if one only placed cold liquid fat into this pot, then if the rat was discovered within liquid fat it requires 60x if one is in doubt in whether the rat remained 24 hours within the liquid fat.[76]
What is the law if one found a dead rat on top of congealed fat? One is to remove a Netilas Makom from the fat.
6. May repulsive fat be used to light candles in a Shul?[77]
Any fat which is inedible due to its repulsiveness may not be used to light the candles of a Shul as only dignified items are to be used for a Shul.
If the fat is edible but is not Kosher due to not having 60x the rat, may it be used? [78] If the fat is not Kosher due to not having 60x it may not be used for the Shul candles.
If the fat is Kosher but is repulsive may it be used for the Shul candles?
- Shach:[79] It is forbidden to use such fat even if the fat has 60x the rat and is thus Kosher.
- Taz:[80]
If one has 60x the rat, and the fat is thus permitted to be eaten, then it may be used to light the candles of the Shul.
7. The law if a rat was found in honey:[81]
The honey is permitted even without 60x as rats do not give a good taste to honey.
8. List of spoiled items and the law if they fell into a mixture:[82]
A. The Law:
If a repulsive creature which people are disgusted by and thus refrain from consuming them falls into ones food, then even if it disintegrated within the mixture, the food is permitted if it contains majority Heter.[83] Nevertheless even in such a case if one is able to filter out the insect he is to do so. [If the insects did not dissolve then it remains a Berya and is not nullified as explained in chapter 100.]
B. The law of Ants, Flies and Mosquitoes:
If the above insects fell inside beer or vinegar one is to suspect that they give a good taste just like we suspect regarding rats. However regarding other foods the following is the ruling:
- Michaber: The Michaber rules that flies are repulsive and hence do not require nullification if they dissolved within the food.
- Bach and Rashal:[84] The Bach and Rashal rule that they do not give a bad taste.
- Final ruling:[85]
Practically the custom is to be lenient like the Michaber and Rama.
C. The law by Worms:[86]
Worms are not considered repulsive and are hence not considered to give a bad taste.[87]
Q&A
One removed his chicken or vegetables from the oven and found a dead bug sitting in the gravy?[88]
All bugs other than worms are considered to give a bad taste. One is hence to discard the bug and may eat the food.
[1] Michaber 104/1
[2] The Michaber does not mention towards which foods it gives a good taste. However the Shach [104/1] explains the Michaber to be referring to beer and vinegar.
[3] 104/1
[4] 104/1
[5] As the Rishonim do not differentiate between different type of rats and rather simply write that rats are questionable in whether they give a good or bad taste. [Shach ibid]
[6] Michaber 104/1
[7] 104/2
[8] 104/2
The reason for this is because wine and oil are very sensitive tasting foods and hence rats gives these foods a spoiled taste. [Taz 104/2 and Shach 104/5 in name of Rambam]
[9] Shach 104/1 states that according to Michaber field rats possibly give a good taste also to oil and wine. However the Michaber in 104/2 states explicitly that rats do not give a good taste to wine or oil and does not differentiate between rats. Thus the Shach would have to establish the entire Halacha in the Michaber to be referring to city rats and not field rats. Vetzaruch Iyun.
The Peri Chadash rules that no rats give a good taste to wine and oil, including field rats.
[10] 104/2
[11] Taz 104/2
[12] 104/2
[13] 104/2 in name of Rashal and Mordechai
[14] 104/5 in name of Rashal
[15] Perek Gid Hanashe 49 brought in Shach and Taz ibid
[16] 104/5
[17] 104/2
[18] Michaber 104/2 as understood by Rama. The Peri Chadash rules like the Michaber that rats are permitted in all other liquids including fat.
[19] Brought in Rama 104/2 as the second opinion.
Opinion of Rashal: The Rashal rules to be stringent by all liquids other than wine oil or honey. [Shach 104/5]
[20] Rama 104/2
[21] Taz 104/5 as he explains Rama ibid
[22] 104/1
[23] In 105/1 the Michaber rules that vinegar is considered like Tzir and has capabilities of cooking in 18 minutes, and thus the rat does not need to wait 24 hours to prohibit the vinegar. The Shach [105/2] addresses this contradiction and rules that in truth vinegar is not like Tzir and requires 24 hours. [Shach 104/2] The Peri Megadim [104 S.D. 2 in name of Sefer Beis Yisrael] however answers the contradiction by saying that only by the rat case do we give the vinegar a 24 hour period, as there is doubt whether rat gives a good or bad taste to vinegar, and since the entire law of pickling is Rabbinical therefore we are lenient regarding the time measurement for pickling. However if a definite Issur, whether Biblical or Rabbinical, fell into vinegar then the time measurement for vinegar is 18 minutes.]
Vetzaruch Iyun as the Michaber rules that a field rat definitely gives a good taste in vinegar and beer. According to this one would need to establish the entire law in Halacha 1 to be referring to a city rat while by a field rat it would prohibit the vinegar in 18 minutes.
[24] See previous footnote
[25] 104/2
[26] Shach 104/1
[27] Michaber 104/1
[28] 104/1 and in Darkei Moshe brought in Taz 104/1
[29] 104/3
This follows the opinion of Rashi; Raavan; Mordechai; Aguda.
Regarding the opinion of the Ran: At first the Shach learns that the Ran argues with Rashi and holds that by all Issurim the pieces are not nullified as they are considered removable, and whenever one is able to remove an Issur it is not nullified. However in conclusion the Shach suggests that the Ran was only referring to a case that one is able to remove the Issur if he desires, while in a case that it truly is not removable he agrees that it is nullified. [Shach ibid]
[30] Brought in Shach 104/3; Taz 104/1
[31] Brought in Taz 104/1
[32] 104/2
[33] 104/2
[34] Rama ibid
[35] Background & Explanation:
The law states that one can only contract impurity from an item if it is a Kezayis in size. Likewise all Issurim only carry the penalty of lashes for eating them if they are a Kezayis in size. However by eight Sheratzim the Torah made an exception. Even a size as small as a lentil of any of these rodents are able to impure a person and cause him to receive the penalty of lashes for eating it. Hence we see that the Torah gave even a small piece of a Sheretz importance, considering it like a Berya. [A Berya means a whole animal or insect. Eating a whole insect carries the penalty of lashes even if it is less than a Kezayis. Thus we see a lentil size piece of a Sheretz is viewed like a Berya.] Now just like a Berya is never nullified within a mixture, as explained in chapter 100, so too a piece of a Sheretz is likewise never nullified. [See Shach 104/3]
[36] Shach ibid
[37] Rama and Shach ibid
[38] 104/1
[39] 104/3
[40] 104/2
[41] 104/5
[42] The argument of the Taz against the Rama and other Poskim:
The Taz argues that in truth eating less than a Kezayis of every Issur is Biblically forbidden and it is only regarding the penalty of lashes that measurements were given. Hence how can one differentiate between rodents and other Issurim if they are all equally Biblically forbidden to be eaten even less than a Kezayis. The Taz brings proof like his opinion from the Ran which questions Rashi [see previous footnotes; Shach 104/3].
[43] Such as by a mixture of similar looking solids or a mixture of Issur and Heter liquid.
[44] Generally we rule that when there is a 2:1 ratio of Heter to Issur the Issur now turns into Heter. However in this case since the Heter and Issur are not truly mixed, the Issur does not become Heter. [Taz ibid]
[45] Meaning we suspect one may come to eat a piece of rat individually without any Issur. Hence the Issur is not considered nullified to the Heter. If however it would not be possible to separate the Issur from the Heter and one would always eat the Heter together with the Issur, then even in a mixture of Yaveish Belach we would rule the food is permitted if one cannot separate the Issur from the Heter. It is for this reason that the Rashba suggests butter is Kosher even if it has Issur milk fat on it being that it is not possible to remove this Issur fat and eat it individually without the Heter butter. [Taz ibid]
[46] Sefer Hataaruvos 2/3
[47] Shut 18
[48] According to the Taz the entire reason of stringency in the above case is because it is considered a mixture of Yaveish Belach, and based on this the Taz rules that this stringency would apply to all Issurim. However by mixtures of Yaveish Beyaveish the Taz would agree that all Issurim, including rats are nullified. It is to this point that the Shach agrees, that even rats are nullified in mixtures of Yaveish Beyaveish, and the stringency of rats only apply in a case of Yaveish Belach!
[49] 442 Kuntrus Achron 15; 466/9-11; Shut Rabbeinu 18; See Piskeiy Admur Yoreh Deah chapter 100
[50] 466/10
[51] Shut 18
[52] Piskeiy Dinim 104 p. 189/b; Shutim Yoreh Deah 70/4
[53] Taz 104/1 and Shach in Nekudos Hakesef.
[54] 104/1
[55] 104/3
[56] As is the classical ruling by Yaveish Beyaveish that we follow majority. Thus as long as the majority of the solids are Kosher, and the entire mixture contains 60x versus the Issur, everything remains permitted. [Shach ibid]
[57] So is implied from the reasoning of the Michaber here in 104/1, and so he rules in the Beis Yosef brought in Shach 105/3
[58] 104/1
[59] 442 Kuntrus Achron 15; 466/9-11; Shut Rabbeinu 18; See Piskeiy Admur Yoreh Deah chapter 100
[60] Sefer Hataaruvos 2/3
[61] Piskeiy Dinim 104 p. 189/b; Shutim Yoreh Deah 70/4
[62] Rama 104/2
[63] Michaber 104/2 rules that a rat gives a spoiled taste to all other liquids. The Rama deduces from this that if the rat fell into fat it gives a spoiled taste.
[64] Brought in Rama as second opinion.
Opinion of Rashal: The Rashal rules to be stringent by all liquids other than wine oil or honey. [Shach 104/5]
[65] They rule that fat has the same status as beer and vinegar
[66] So explains Taz 104/5 that this leniency of the Rama is going on the original dispute mentioned in the beginning of the gloss.
[67] Rama ibid
[68] As we suspect the rat was in the pot when one first began pouring the fat into the pot and at that point there wasn’t 60x versus the rat. Now although pouring from a Keli Rishon only prohibits a Kelipa worth of the fat, nevertheless since hot fat is a liquid, all the fat touches the rat, even when pouring on later days [as the original fat now gets melted and mixes with the new fat], and hence it is all forbidden. [Shach 104/6 in name of Toras Chatas 22; Peri Megadim 104 S.D. 6]
No Sfek Sfeka: Although whether a rat gives good taste to any food is a doubt in the Talmud nevertheless we do not consider it a Sfek Sfeka in this case [a doubt whether the rat gives good taste, and a doubt whether the rat was there by the first pouring] as perhaps a Talmudic doubt is not considered a Safek. Alternatively this is similar to a matter which one has ignorance in and is not considered a Halachic doubt. [Shach 104/4]
[69] As we suspect the rat was in the pot when one first began pouring the fat into the pot and at that point there wasn’t 60x versus the rat. This ruling applies even if the rat was found on the bottom of the pot. Now although pouring from a Keli Rishon only prohibits a Kelipa worth of the fat, nevertheless since hot fat is a liquid, all the fat touches the rat, even when pouring on later days [as the original fat now gets melted and mixes with the new fat], and hence it is all forbidden. [Shach 104/6 in name of Toras Chatas 22; Peri Megadim 104 S.D. 6]
No Sfek Sfeka: See previous footnotes
[70] This is slightly more than a peels worth.
The reason Netilas Makom is needed: It is needed to be removed due to a mere Chumra and not from the letter of the law. The reason for the stringency is because the area surrounding the rat is considered repulsive. Alternatively, the reason is because the fat of geese is not very well congealed [and hence the surrounding area of Netila becomes Kavush]. [Glosses of Rav Akiva Eiger 104:1; Minchas Yaakov 22:18]
[71] The reason we do not suspect that the rat fell into the fat while it was still liquidly and remained there for 24 hours, hence being considered as if it was cooked in the fat, is because this is a case of Sfek Sfeika [a double doubt] as perhaps 1) the rat entered when the fat was already hard [and hence was never Kavush within the fat] and 2) even if the rat did enter while the fat was still liquidly perhaps the fat congealed within 24 hours. [Rama ibid]
[72] As here too the Sfek Sfeka applies, of whether the rat fell in while it was congealed and even if it fell in when the fat was liquidly perhaps the fat congealed within 24 hours.
[73] Shach 104/7; Taz 104/3; Rama in Toras Chatas and Darkei Moshe
Other Opinions: The Issur Viheter rules that if one found the rat only after the fat was congealed, then even if one knows the rat fell in while the fat was soft the fat is permitted as we judge an Issur in the state it was found in. The Taz negates this opinion.
[74] Shach 104/7; Taz 104/3
[75] Shach 104/7; Taz 104/3
[76] As in such a case there is only one doubt, perhaps it became Kavush [remained 24 hours in the liquid fat which is considered like cooked] perhaps not, and by Kavush we are stringent even in a case of doubt, as explained in chapter 105. Nevertheless in this case 60x suffices as one knows for certain the rat was not in the fat while the fat was still hot. [Shach ibid]
[77] Rama 104/2
[78] Taz 104/4; The Taz interprets the Rama to be referring to a case that there isn’t 60x the rat in the fat.
[79] 104/8
[80] 104/4
[81] Taz 104/2
[82] Michaber 104/3
[83] This applies even if the food contains a Kezayis [within Achilas Peras] of the Issur insect. [Shach 104/9] The Beis Yosef [in name of Rashba] states that in this case, of an Issur that is spoiled in it of itself, this applies according to all opinions. However regarding an Issur that is not spoiled and merely gives a spoiled taste to a specific food then some Rishonim rule that the mixture is forbidden if it contains a Kezayis of Issur within Achilas Peras. [Shach ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol as there is no opinion in 103 that rules the food is forbidden if it contains a Kezayis within Achilas Peras of a non-spoiled Issur that gives a bad taste. [Peri Megadim 104 S.D. 9]
[84] Brought in Taz 104/6
[85] Rama 107/2; Taz 104/6
[86] Beir Heiytiv 104/8
[87] However see Darkei Teshuvah 104 which states that this refers only to worms that grow inside food.
[88] 107/2
Leave A Comment?
You must be logged in to post a comment.