One could probably describe this sefer as a work written from the following

perspective: “If I were opening up Hilchos Ta’aruvos for the first time, with what
information1 would I want to be provided?” The sefer is designed to take the
learner from Siman to Siman, supplying information along the way so that
individual ‫ סעיפים‬are more easily understood. I would like to think that, IY”H,
this sefer would also be of help to Musmachim who are doing Chazarah. The
learner is strongly advised to heed the words of my great Rosh Yeshiva, Maran
HaGaon Rav Aharon HaLevi Soloveichik, zatzal. It was he who advised me to go
to shiur of HaGaon Rav Avrohom Yosef Weiss, zatzal, telling me, it is more
important to have a rebbe for Yoreh Deah than it is to have one for
Gemara.

The information is broken up into three sections:

 Halachic Concepts – fundamental concepts that underlie Dinim.

 Biurim – data that supplements and complements the ‫ סעיפים‬so that they
are more easily understood.
 Supplementary Mekoros – a selection of citations that are not crucial
for the understanding of a Siman but deemed worthy of mentioning in
the context of a companion such as this one.

For some Simanim, however, it made more sense to combine the Halachic
Concepts with the Biurim.

It is my sincere hope that the publication of this work leads to the enhanced
knowledge and understanding of Hilchos Ta’aruvos.

Eliyahu W. Ferrell
Passaic, NJ
Av 5777

1 “In our time we have seen a proliferation of likutim, anthologies, that encompass a full
spectrum of Halacha and hashkafah...There are those who are critical of this genre of
scholarship in general because very little, if anything, is new in the work. It is a conglomeration
of what others have already written on the topic or a compilation of halachic decisions and
responsa of the past and present. Yet, such works are in themselves fabulous achievements
[and the] author of such a work is reflecting the Torah light of others and can be called, like the
moon, ‘a great light.’” [Adapted from Rav Sholom Smith’s work, To Be a Ben Torah, based on
the sichos of Rav Pam, zatzal, and published in the Hamodia magazine, 8/7/13.]

1
If a son is born to someone in aveilus for his father, the proud parents almost lose the right to
say that they named their newborn. Born at such a time, the baby essentially names himself.

From that same perspective, this sefer dedicated itself.

I completed the first half of the second draft of this work in a beis medrash in Beitar Illit in
Elul 5775/2015. By the middle of Shevat 5776/2016, these two rebbeim of mine, whose role in
my knowledge and application of Hilchos Kashrus cannot really be described adequately, were
gone.

HaGaon Rav Avrohom Yosef Weiss, zatzal, was a senior Rosh Yeshiva in Yeshivas Rabbenu
Yitzchok Elchanon, having taught there since 1938. Although Rav Weiss was a baki in Shas
and Poskim, and a first-tier lamdan and posek, he is best known for having taught Yoreh
Deah, Chelek Alef, for over half a century to an uncountable number of talmidim learning for
semichah. Rav Weiss’ impact on the American rabbinate is truly of historic proportions. It was
in Rav Weiss’ shiur-room 25 years ago that I was introduced to the concepts in this sefer—and
I still quote my great rebbe.

HaGaon Rav Chaim Yisroel HaLevi Belsky, zatzal, was Rosh HaYeshiva of Yeshiva Torah
Vodaath, and a Senior Posek with my employer, the Kashruth Division of the Orthodox
Union. For almost 16 years, I had the immeasurable zechus to discuss numerous issues in
Hilchos Kashrus with Rav Belsky. The breadth and depth in fields of knowledge sacred and
secular, the heart that pulsated with overflowing Ahavas Hashem and Ahavas Yisroel, the
practicality and the normalcy—Rav Belsky was truly an irreplaceable Chad B’Doro.

2
My previous Chibbur on Yoreh Deah, Chelek Aleph, dealt with Hilchos Basar
B’Chalav. It had the same format as the present work.

This is the Haskamah that Rav Belsky wrote for the earlier work:

3
‫‪This is the letter that Rav Weiss wrote after receiving a copy of my earlier work:‬‬

‫בס''ד‬

‫שלהי אלול תש''ע‬

‫כבוד ידידי הנעלה הרב אלי' וואלף הלוי פאררעל שליט''א‬

‫נהנתי בקבלת ספרך החשוב ביאור השלחן והוא ספר עזר ללומדי הלכות בב''ח מסודר בסדר נכון בהבנת כללי‬
‫ההלכות על פרטיהם בלשון קל ונבון והוא לתועלת ללומדי במקצוע זה באיסור והיתר‪ .‬יהי ד' בעוזרך להמשיך‬
‫בדרך זה בעוד חלקי איסור והיתר לזכות לומדי הלכות בענינים אלה‪.‬‬

‫תכתב ותחתם לאלתר לחיים טובים ארוכים ברוכים ושלו'‪.‬‬

‫אברהם יוסף ווייס‬

‫‪4‬‬
‫הסכמות ומכתבי ברכה לחיבור הנוכחי‬
‫[על סדר האלף‪-‬בית]‬

‫‪5‬‬
 ‫בע''ה‬

‫ו' ניסן [ ] תשע''ז לפ''ק‬

‫שמחתי מאד לראות עוד חבור מידידי הנעלה והיקר הרב אליהו פארעל שליט''א על יורה דעה הלכות תערובות‪.‬‬

‫הרב הנ''ל יראתו קודמת לחכמתו ועוסק בעניני כשרות ממילא לימוד הוא למעשה‪ ,‬לשמור ולעשות‪.‬‬

‫הרב הנ''ל זיכה את הרבים לסדר ענינים של הלכות תערובת כשלחן ערוך שיעלה על שלחן מלכים‪ .‬מאן מלכי‬
‫רבנן‪.‬‬

‫כבודו עמל ויגע לסדר הענינים עם שורשם כדי שיבין הלומד הלכות תערובת בטוב טעם ודעת‪ .‬וגם יש תועלת‬
‫גדולה לסייע מי שחוזר ההלכות שיזכור אותם בבהירות והרי מקרא כתוב ‪,,‬זכרו תורת משה''‬

‫החבור נכתב בשפת המדינה כדי שהלומד יעמוד על הענינים לידע ההלכות של [או''ה] לקיים ללמוד וללמד‬
‫לשמור ולעשות את כל דברי נותן התורה‪.‬‬
‫יהי רצון שהמחבר ורעיתו שליט''א ימשיכו לקדש שם שמים בהליכותיהם וימלא השי''ת כל משאלות לבם‬
‫לטובה‪ ,‬והשי''ת יגמול להם חסדים טובים ויתברכו ממעיין הברכות לנצח‪ ,‬לאריכת ימים ושנים טובים ברוב‬
‫נחת ממשפחתם היקרים והנחמדים עמו''ש‬

‫שמואל צבי בערקאוויטש‬

‫פאסייק נ‪ .‬דז‪.‬‬

‫‪6‬‬
 ‫בס''ד‬

‫לכבוד ידידי היקר הרב ר' אליהו וואלף הלוי פערעל שליט''א‪,‬‬

‫נהנתי לקרוא וללמוד מספרך החדש העוסק בעניני הלכות תערובת‪ .‬והוא ביאור בלשון אנגלית על ענינים אלו‪,‬‬
‫ובודאי שיעזור לאלו בהבנת הל' תערובת‪ .‬וגם הבאת הרבה פסקים הנוגעים למעשה מהגאון ר' חיים ישראל‬
‫הלוי בעלסקי זצ''ל וגם מפוסקים אחרים‪.‬‬
‫וכעת שבדעתך להוציא לאור ספר זה מובטחני שיתקבל ברצון ולתועלת הרבים‪.‬‬

‫בכבוד וידידות‪,‬‬

‫מנחם דוב גנק‬

‫ח' ניסן תשע''ז‬

‫‪7‬‬
8
9
10
11
12
13
 '‫סעיף א‬

Some Principles of Kevishah

#1] The liquid in question must have a viscosity so low, an object introduced
into it will (a) agitate the liquid and (b) move within the liquid (which basically
happen simultaneously anyway).

#2] There are several possible scenarios involving Kevishah:

 The Issur and Heter are solids soaked in a kosher liquid
 The Heter is a solid soaked in liquid Issur
 The Issur is a solid soaked in liquid Heter

#3] When there is Kevishah of Issur and Heter, the Heter will need 60 to remain
Mutar, as well as the removal of a Kelipah.
‫ויש מקילין במה שבחוץ‬
This lenient opinion is the Ikkar.2 However, if the Issur is Shamein, we assume
L’Chat’chilah that it is Osair even the portion of the Heter that is above the
level of the liquid. This is because the Issur Shamein is Mefa’apei’a. When
stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh, one can assume that the Heter above the
level of the liquid does not absorb Issur.3 [Vis-à-vis Kevishah, we do have the
Bekius to distinguish between Kachush and Shamein.4]

Both Kevishah of Heter in Tzir Issur5 and Kevishah of Issur with Heter in Tzir
Heter6 are Osair above the level of the liquid. In this case, we do not have the
Bekius to distinguish between Kachush and Shamein.7

2 Taz #2; Shach #1.

3 BHS #12 and MHS #12.
4 Shach #1.
5 BHS #25.
6 MHS #21.
7 MHS #21; BHS #25. [PH: Both BHS and MHS discuss possible exceptions if the Issur in

question is blood.]

14
‫וספק כבוש אסור מלבד בבשר עם חלב‬
Clearly, the Rema conveys that Kavishah generates Haflatah V’Havla’ah on
D’Oraysa level. In other words, even if a particular Issur in a particular case is
Mi-D’Rabbanan, on a level of D’Oraysa, the Issur is Balu’a in the Heter.

The Safek the Rema has in mind is a Safek about whether the Kevishah lasted
24 hours. The Taz8 disagrees and allows one to be lenient, but the Nekudas
HaKessef affirms the Rema—as do BHS9 and MHS.10

‫אם שהה כדי שיתננו על האור וירתיח ויתחיל להתבשל‬

The reason that 24 hours is not required is because the Charifus is ,,‫''מאיצה‬
[accelerates] the ,,‫פעולת הכבישה‬.''11 ‫ י''א‬that '‫ בכדי שיתננו וגו‬is 18 minutes;12 ‫ כנראה‬that
the OU assumes that it is only six minutes.13 BHS14 states that it depends on
the climate!

‫בתוך ציר או בתוך חומץ‬

The Mishnah Berurah15 endorses the Shach’s opinion16 that Kevishah with
vinegar (no matter the strength) actually takes 24 hours.17 That is the OU’s
vinegar policy, although the OU does assume that Kevishah of Tzir takes only
'‫בכדי שיתננו וגו‬.18

‫כידוע‬, two Dinim are relevant to Tzir:19

 Meliach K’Rosei’ach: The Havla’ah due to Melichah takes place
immediately, and typically (acc. to the Rema), a Davar Maluach will be
Osair Kulo.
 Kavush K’Mevushal: The Havla’ah due to Kevishah takes place after the
elapse of '‫בכדי שיתננו וגו‬, and will be Osair Kulo. If the interval of Kevishah
is shorter than that, it will only be Osair a Kelipah.

Vis-à-vis Tzir, what, then, is the ‫ נפק''מ‬for Tzir from the Din Kevishah?

The ‫ נפק''מ‬is demonstrated in the following case:

 One of the immersed foods is Heter, and the other is Ossur Mi-
D’Rabbanan.

8 #3.
9 #14.
10 #13; when stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh, he allows one to go like the Taz.
11 BHS #17.
12 See Darchei Teshuvah #42.
13 OU Document K-199.
14 #19.
15 447:71.
16 #2.
17 [PH: Rav Gersten pointed out that the Nidon here is a case of B’Di’eved, viz., the Kevishah of

vinegar for less than 24 hours already occurred.]

18 OU Document K-199, citing Darchei Teshuvah #42.
19 #3.

15
  Both foods are completely divorced from fattiness.
 The immersion is in kosher Tzir.

As a function of “Meliach K’Rosei’ach,” only a Kelipah is Ne’esar. As a function

of the “Kavush K’Mevushal,” all of it is Ne’esar.

‫ובפחות משיעור זה לא נאסר אלא כדי קליפה‬

Hadachah does not suffice due to the strength of the liquids in question.20

'‫סעיף ב‬

‫חום של כלי ראשון שהיד סולדת בו‬

The halachic status of “hot” or “heating” requires (at a minimum21) a
temperature of Yad Soledes Bo.22 23

‫חום של כלי שני אינו מבשל‬

According to this opinion, even though it doesn’t cook, it’s still Mafleet U’Mavlia
Kedei Kulo. The unique feature of cooking is that it improves the food; it is not
just Mafleet U’Mavlia.24

The reason for the leniencies associated with a Keli Sheni is that the heat of the
food decreases as the heat conducts into the walls of the utensil.25

‫וראוי לחוש‬
In other words, it is Min HaRa’ui not to put a food into a Yad Soledes Keli
Sheni, even if it’s the Derech to do Hadachah on it, due to the two opinions that
say the Heter will be Bolei’a Issur.26

SUMMARY OF DINIM

A Yad Soledes Keli Sheni is Osair all of the Heter, even B’Di’eved (absent a
Hefsed Merubeh, in which case, you’d only need Hadachah).27 If a Ta’aroves is
Ossur Mi-D’Rabbanan, you can be lenient B’Di’eved and merely do
Hadachah.28 If it isn’t Yad Soledes, it only needs Hadachah.29

20 BHS #24.
21 The Rema’s opinion is that a Keli Rishon is also necessary for the status of “hot” [see his
approach to a Keli Sheni in 94:7].
22 See Shabbos 40/b.
23 The Poskim discuss: Does a Keli Rishon that is not Yad Soledes but is on the flame render a

Kelipah forbidden? See Shach #5; BHS #29; MHS, Mat’amei HaShulchan #6.
24 Heard from Rav Yisroel Reisman.
25 Tosafos, Shabbos 40/b, c.v. V'Shmah Minah. The walls have a cooling effect.
26 Shach #5.
27 BHS #39 and MHS #35. BHS [Biurim, c.v. Lachosh] adds that even though Hadachah

suffices when stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh, one should nevertheless remove a
Kelipah, unless that removal itself entails a Hefsed.
28 BHS, Biurim, c.v. Lachosh; MHS #35.

16
Under certain circumstances, a Yad Soledes Keli Sheni will have the Dinim of a
Keli Rishon:
 ‫ י''א‬when the food is a Davar Gush.30
 During Pesach.31
 ‫ י''א‬when the temperature of the food is ‫יד נכוית בו‬.32
 ‫ י''א‬when the food is a Davar Charif.33

'‫סעיף ג‬

‫הכל אסור דתתאה גבר וגו' אינו אוסר אלא כדי קליפה‬
In many situations, two foods of differing temperatures lay one on top of the
other. Chazal debated a question that arises in such cases:

Which food dominates vis-à-vis temperature, i.e., does the Tata’ah bring
the Ila’ah to its (the lower one's) temperature, or vice-versa? We assume
that "Tata’ah Gavar:" the lower one brings the upper one to the lower
one's temperature. The lower one overcomes, i.e., is ‫גובר‬.34

On the other hand, if the Tata’ah is cold and the Ila’ah is hot, we apply the
principle,
,,‫''אדמיקר ליה בלע פורתא‬

—as the lower one cools35 the upper one, each absorbs only Kedei Kelipah from
the other.

'‫וכל זה לא מיירי וגו‬

The Rema describes three cases,36 the first one being the case to which the
Mechaber applies.

29 Taz #4.
30 Shach 94:30, quoting the Maharshal and the Issur V’Heter. Being that such food is not in
contact with the walls of the utensil, it loses less heat. The Rema (ibid., #7) does not accept this
Chumra. The Taz (ibid., #14) requires one more Tzad Chumra (besides the presence of a Davar
Gush) before according a Keli Sheni the status of a Keli Rishon. MHS (#59) says to follow the
Maharshal and the Issur V’Heter, absent a Hefsed Merubeh. MHS goes so far as to say that one
cannot be lenient even When stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh if Ducheka D’Sakina is in
play. (See the discussion of Ducheka D’Sakina in Appendix 1.) The status of a Davar Gush at
rest in a broth, when it can lose heat into the walls via the broth, is a matter of dispute (BHS
94:101 and 106:21).
31 Rema OC 447:3 & 451:1.
32 Chochmas Adam 59:6
33 Rema 69:9. The Shach there (#37) endorses the Rema in the absence of a Hefsed Merubeh.

The Maharshal and the Yad Yehudah reject the Rema [ODH-T 53].
34 See later in this Siman, Supplementary Mekoros, Tata’ah Gavar: Four Atypical

Approaches, for a fuller picture.

35 Rashi explains that the word ,,‫ ''אדמיקר‬refers to cooling (Pesachim 76/a, c.v. Ad D’Maikar Lei).
36 These descriptions and Dinim are based on MHS #52, 55, 56, 58, 61 and BHS #53, 57, 62.

17
 ‫‪CASE ONE‬‬

‫וכל זה לא מיירי אלא בחום כלי ראשון כגון מיד שהסירו מן האש מניחו עם ההיתר‬

‫‪CASE TWO‬‬

‫אבל אם כבר מונח בכלי שני‬

‫‪—i.e., beyond the point where one would say that it (the Issur) had “just been‬‬
‫—”‪removed‬‬
‫ואחר כך מניח ההיתר אצלו או עליו‬

‫‪18‬‬
 CASE THREE

‫ואם הניחם זה אצל זה‬

‫אם שניהם חמים מחום כלי ראשון‬

—i.e., they were just now removed—
‫ ואם האחד צונן‬37‫הכל אסור‬
—i.e., only one of them was just now removed—
‫ההיתר צריך קליפה במקום שנגע‬

The Rema maintains that Tata’ah Gavar is irrelevant in a case of ‫זה אצל זה‬, since
neither is Goveir on the other. He maintains that even if the Issur is the only one
that’s Yad Soledes, it can only be Osair Kedei Kelipah. The Maharshal
disagrees, stating that all of the Heter is Ne’esar if the Issur is the one that’s
Yad Soledes.38 The Taz39 says that one should go like the Maharshal, absent a
Hefsed Merubeh. BHS40 and MHS41 say to go like the Taz.

‫ואין צריך לומר‬

‫ כנראה‬that he means, “If Issur heated by Heter is Poleit into that Heter, it goes
without saying that Issur that was already hot, before coming in contact with
the Heter, is Poleit into that Heter.”
‫איסור שהניחו בכלי היתר וגו' תתאה גבר‬
One can find within the Poskim the Dinim one would expect, as follows:
 A Kelipah of the Heter/Kli Heter is Ne’esar when only the food is
hot.
 All of the Heter/Kli Heter is Ne’esar when the Keli is hot.
However, it must be noted that there are other voices within the Poskim.42

The Taz43 discusses what happens when that which is ‫ אסור מחמת בלוע‬is placed
into a Keli.

37 The Shach (#9) says that one need only remove a Kelipah.
38 Which, of course, is against the Shach.
39 #5.
40 #62.
41 #61.
42 See Chochmas Adam 57:1-5; AHS 94:34 & 105:28.
43 #16.

19
‫אם חתך בשר בסכין חולבת‬
This case is found in 94:7. ‫ נ’’ל‬that the Rema cites this case because it follows
neither the general guidelines for Tata’ah Gavar nor the general guidelines for a
Keli Sheni; the Rema wanted us to have a fuller picture of these two Inyanim.

‫אסור לערות וגו' אין לחוש‬

The Taz44 brings the concept of Nitzuk Chibbur here and says that the Issur to
pour is due to there being a Chibbur of the Heter with the Issur. In other
words, it is as if all of the Heter is mixed with the Issur, not merely that portion
of the Heter that was poured into the Issur. The hot Issur is the Tata’ah;
consequently, it is Goveir. The Shach45 says that the Issur of pouring here is
due to Zei’ah/Hevel ascending from the non-kosher fat to the kosher fat and
utensil and rendering them non-kosher.46

According to the Shach, how is it that the Mechaber can say ‫ אין לחוש‬for a non-
kosher Beliah? Some47 say that, in a typical case, there is actually no need to
suspect that there was Hevel unless you saw the Shumen giving off vapor due
to the Hevel. Others48 ask the question and leave it unanswered.

'‫סעי' ד‬

NOTE: DIAGRAMS OF THE ANATOMY OF A COW, INCLUDING THE

LOCATION OF THE GID HANASHEH AND THE RELATED TISSUES, ARE
FOUND IN APPENDIX 2

‫במה דברים אמורים‬

In other words, when do we say that all of the Heter becomes Ossur?

‫ירך שצלאו בגידו‬

The Gid itself has no Ta’am; the actual issue is the Shumen HaGid.49
‫צריך להסיר כדי נטילה‬
The Shumen HaGid is described as Kachush;50 51 hence, the need for a Netilah.
Unlike the case in Rema 92:2, requiring 60 is not relevant here.

44 #6.
45 #11.
46 The Pri Megadim says that the approaches of the Shach and the Taz are “Echad.” He says

that the Taz means, ,,‫ע''י נצוק ההבל עולה למעלה‬.''

47 MHS #67, quoting Yad Yehudah.
48 BHS, Biurim, c.v. Ossur L’Aros.
49 Shach #12.
50 BHS #75 & MHS #80 (both quoting Tosafos). BHS #122 describes the Shumen HaGid as

“Ketzas Shamein.”
51 Seemingly, this is what the Mechaber has in mind when he writes ( '‫ )סעי' ה‬that a ,,‫ ''ירך עם גידו‬is

a Davar Kachush.

20
‫סביב הגיד‬
This actually refers to tissue that surrounds the Shumen HaGid. 52

‫אם היא ברוטב לרש"י (כולה ולר"י) אפילו מקצתה‬

The Mechaber here is, of course, referring to the dispute between Rashi and the
R”I regarding the Hispashtus of a drop of milk that lands on a piece of meat
that is only partially-submerged in the Roteiv.53 Rashi maintains that such a
piece is independent of the rest of the pot, Bein L’Chumra, Bein L’Kula. The R”I
maintains that even partial submersion facilitates Hispashtus throughout the
entirety of the pot, Bein L’Chumra, Bein L’Kula.

'‫שהוא חוץ לרוטב ולא ניער וגו' ולא כיסה וגו‬

Doing either Niur or Kisui—immediately after the Tippah falls into the pot—
allows us to include the entire contents of the pot in calculating 60 times the
volume of the drop because they both cause Hispashtus of the Ta'am into all of
the contents; as such, they can be included in the calculation for Bittul.54

‫הרוטב מפעפע הטעם וגו' ונכנס בכולו‬

It is easy to understand the Hachnasah of Ta’am Issur into all of the Heter
when we talk about Niur—it’s an act that physically brings what is outside of
the Roteiv into the Roteiv. How does mere Kisui accomplish that?

Perhaps one can say that when the Mechaber writes, ,,‫הרוטב מפעפע הטעם‬,'' it is ‫לאו‬
‫דוקא‬, and actually includes the aforementioned capacity of Hevel to be Mafleet
Ta’am from the Issur and be Mavlia it into the Heter. Hevel, too, is ‫מפעפע הטעם‬.
‫ כמובן‬that Kisui of the pot caused the vapor/“steam” to thicken in a way that
would not happen if more air-space were available, i.e., the Kisui led to the
formation of Hevel.55

‫שכיון שהוא שמן מפעפע‬

I.e., since the Cheilev is Shamein, it is Mefa’apei’a. It’s Shamein because the ‫גדי‬
is.
‫אם הוא כחוש‬
I.e., if the ‫ גדי‬is.

52 MHS #77 & BHS #75, based on Shach #12.

53 See inter alia Tosafos, Chullin 96/b, c.v. Im Yesh; ibid., Rashi and Tosafos, 108/a, c.v. Tipas
Chalav; Shach 92:3; ibid., Taz #2.
54 BHS 92:31.
55 We find in Bi’ur HaGra 92:29 that when a pot is covered, and a drop of milk falls on the

exterior, every area of the Pot’s exterior is considered to be K’negged the Roteiv.

21
 UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES OF DRY-HEATING
when the Tata’ah is Yad Soledes

1. An Issur Shamein is Mefa’apei’a throughout the Heter and therefore

necessitates 60. The Issur is similar to a B’Ain in the area it lands on
and therefore, we also need to remove a Kedei Netilah.56
2. Typically, an Issur Kachush is Nispasheit a Kedei Netilah.57 58
3. The Mechaber maintains that a Davar Shamein59 is Mefateim a
Davar Kachush, and once the Davar Kachush is Nisfateim, it
functions as a Davar Shamein. According to the Rema, Cheilev is the
only Issur Kachush that Heter Shamein can be Mefateim.60 61 62
4. The Rema requires both Netilah and 60 because typically, we can’t
distinguish between a Davar Kachush and a Davar Shamein. 63 64 As
such, we go L’Chumra, and treat a food as if it is Shamein.65

56 Taz #11.
57 See Shach 94:32, in which he limits the Hispashtus of cheese (even moist cheese) to Kedei
Kelipah.
58 In '‫סעי' ד‬, we see a case of Issur Kachush falling onto Heter and being Osair Kedei Netilah.

The Shach (92:3 and 94:27) points out other cases of dry-heating, but in those cases, the
Hispashtus is B’Kulo. The Shach explains that here, the Kedei Netilah is a function of (at least)
one of three factors:
 The Issur being a solid
 The Heter being Kachush
 There not being any Ducheka D’Sakina
59 According to the Mechaber, even a Beliah of a Davar Shamein in a Davar Kachush is

Mefateim an adjacent Davar Kachush (BHS #85).

60 In some cases, the Heter Shamein will be cold and the Issur Kachush will be hot. Will there

be Pittum in such cases? There are two cases with these parameters that the BHS (#84) leaves
as, ,,‫לדינא צ''ע‬:'' (1) The Heter and Issur are lying next to each other; (2) the Issur is the Tata’ah
and the Heter is the Ila’ah.
61 How does Pittum via Tzeliah work? The BHS (#80) offers two possibilities, both of which may

occur: (1) A Pleitah from the Heter Shamein goes into the Issur Kachush and is Mefateim it.
The Issur, now Shamein, is Mefa’apei’a into the Heter; (2) a Pleitah from the Issur Kachush
goes into the Heter Shamein. The Heter is Mefateim this new Beliah. The Beliah, now Shamein,
is Mefa’apei’a throughout the Heter. The Shach (#19) states that the Issur is Poleit a Kedei
Netilah into the Heter. The Shumen of the Heter “seizes” this Beliah and is Mavlia it into all of
the Heter.
62 Darchei Moshe. The Taz (#10) rejects the Mechaber’s ruling, but most Poskim disagree with

the Taz (MHS, Mat’amei HaShulchan #15). The Shach (see #14 & #19) affirms the Mechaber’s
ruling, but offers an explanation independent of Pittum—in apparent agreement with the Taz
that Pittum does not apply to Tzeliah!
63 An Issur D’Rabbanan completely divorced from fattiness may be treated as an Issur Kachush

(Shach #16).
64 MHS 91:65 brings from the Kaf HaChayyim that this lack of Bekius is presumed for

contemporary Sephardim, as well.

65 Although a Davar Kachush necessitates a Netilah whether or not there is 60, treating the

Issur as Shamein does not lead to a Kula in this area, since even a Davar Shamein necessitates
Netilah. [PH: Even absent the principle that Issur is similar to a B’Ain where it lands (and
therefore requires a Netilah), we would adopt the Chumra of a Davar Kachush and still require
a Netilah.]

22
 5. If a substance is ‫אסור מחמת בלוע‬, and the Beliah came from a Davar
Shamein, the Beliah is Mefa’apa’as throughout the Heter and
therefore necessitates 6066 and a Netilah.67 A Beliah from a Davar
Kachush is not Niflat without a Roteiv. Even if the Heter in which the
Issur Kachush is Nivla is Shamein, a Roteiv is needed, since the
Shumen will not transport the Beliah into the adjacent Heter.68 69
6. The Rema maintains that we’re able to distinguish between a Davar
Kachush and a Davar Shamein when it comes to Pleitos (i.e., we can
determine whether a Pleitah is coming from a Davar Shamein or a
Davar Kachush).70 71

DINIM OF DRY-HEATING WHEN HETER (KACHUSH OR SHAMEIN) HETER (KACHUSH OR SHAMEIN)

(AT LEAST) THE TATA’AH IS YAD MECHABER REMA
SOLEDES72
ISSUR KACHUSH 60 + NETILAH73 [60 NOT NEEDED IF 60 + NETILAH75
HETER IS KACHUSH74]
ISSUR SHAMEIN 60 + NETILAH76 60 + NETILAH77

HETER WITH A BELIAH FROM AN 60 + NETILAH78 60 + NETILAH 79

ISSUR SHAMEIN
HETER WITH A BELIAH FROM AN MUTAR81 MUTAR82
ISSUR KACHUSH80

66 Shach #20.
67 MHS #129, basing himself on '‫סעי' ה‬.
68 Shach #19.
69 Blood is an Issur Kachush, and hence, in the absence of a Roteiv, a Beliah of blood should

not migrate from a piece of meat in which it is Balua to another piece of meat. Yet, we see (a)
that the Rema (102:2) says that the blood “indigenous” to a piece of meat is Balua in that meat,
and (b) that this “indigenous” blood can certainly be Osair a second piece of meat via Melichah
or Tzeliah!

Perhaps the word “Balua” in the Rema is a ‫לשון מושאל‬. In other words, the halachic term “Beliah”
refers to a Pleitah from Food “X” that became Nivlal and Nisareiv in Food “Y.” To be sure,
some of the “indigenous” blood is physically absorbed in the meat—but much of it is distinct
and separate within the meat. The Rema borrowed the term “Balua” when referring to this
blood. Hence, it can migrate even in the absence of a liquid medium.
70 Shach #21, later echoed by the Chochmas Adam.
71 This includes milk absorbed in meat (Shach #17).
72 What if the Ila’ah is the only one that is Yad Soledes? If the Issur is ‫אסור מחמת עצמו‬, it is only

Osair Kedei Kelipah ('‫)סעי' ה‬. If the Issur is only ‫אסור מחמת בלוע‬, all of the Heter remains Mutar,
because we do not apply, ,,'‫עד דמיקר ליה וגו‬,'' since Kirur will already have happened before the
Belias Issur could have been Niflat (Shach #21, and see '‫)סעיפים ו' וז‬.
73 Principles 1 & 3.
74 Principle 2.
75 Principles 1 & 4.
76 Principle 1.
77 Principles 1 & 4.
78 Principle 5.
79 Principle 5.
80 Even though none of the Heter is Ne’esar in this case, the Poskim discuss the need (or lack

thereof) for Hadachah.

81 Principle 5.
82 Principles 5 & 6.

23
‫ולא ניער הקדרה ולא כיסה אותה‬
Doing either Niur or Kisui—immediately after the Issur falls into the pot—
allows us to include the entire contents of the pot in calculating 60 times the
volume of the drop because they both cause Hispashtus of the Ta'am into all of
the contents; as such, they can be included in the calculation for Bittul.83

'‫סעיף ה‬

‫וכל מבושל בלא רוטב‬

It would still be considered ,,‫ ''בלא רוטב‬even if moisture emerged during the
heating.84

'‫סעיף ז‬

‫אוסרת חברתה‬
Either a Kedei Netilah or all of it, as described above.
‫או בשר בחלב‬
The Taz85 holds that Basar B’Chalav in this ‫ סעיף‬is meat that was Bolei’a
cheese. Meat that was Bolei’a milk is not ‫אסור מחמת עצמו‬. In such cases, dry-
heating is not Mafleet U’Mavlia.

The Shach86 maintains that both cases are classified as Guf Ha-Issur;
furthermore, when the Cheftza of Basar B’Chalav and the Heter are both
Kachushim, it is only Osair Kedei Kelipah, even according to the Rema.

‫בין בצלי‬
In other words, during a Ma’aseh Tzeliah.

‫חם בחם בין בנוגעת זו בזו‬

Both coming from a Keli Rishon, as seen in Rema, '‫סעי' ג‬.87

‫כלי שבלע איסור אוסר היתר שנוגע בו אפילו באיסור שאינו שמן‬
'‫סעי' ג‬88 tells us that, whatever the Kli Issur does to the Heter, Tata’ah Gavar will
apply. Here, we learn some of what the Keli can do.

The Taz89 and the Shach90 offer an explanation of this Din, but some say91 that
their Sevora is not easily understood.

83 BHS 92:31. And see above, ‫הרוטב מפעפע הטעם‬.

84 MHS #104.
85 #13. This view is endorsed in BHS #99.
86 #17, cited above in Principle #6. This view is endorsed in MHS #121.
87 MHS #130.
88 See the chart there.
89 #16.
90 #22.
91 BHS #109.

24
 '‫סעיף ח‬

NOTE: A PICTURE OF A KIDNEY WITH ITS MEMBRANE AND FAT, AND A

DIAGRAM OF A COW’S ANATOMY, IS FOUND IN APPENDIX 2

‫כוליא‬
Kidney

‫קרום‬
Membrane
‫ויש אוסרים‬
They hold that the Maskanas HaGemara is that the membrane does not serve
as a barrier and/or that even if, in theory, the membrane could serve as a
barrier, it may have torn prior to the Tzeliah.92

No tissue is Mitz’tareif with the kidney in calculating 60 against the Cheilev

because the Cheilev is Davuk to the kidney and nothing retards the rate of
absorption of the Cheilev.93

‫וה"ה בקרום שעל היותרת‬

Rashi says that the ‫ יותרת‬is the diaphragm.94

Some95 say that the Rema is referring to what he himself wrote in 64:12. There,
he stated that the diaphragm’s membrane does not serve as a barrier between
the diaphragm and the nearby Cheilev. According to this approach, the Rema
says, “V’Hu HaDin” because of the parallel to the previous Din; the Yesh Osrim
had denied the capacity of the kidney’s membrane to serve as a barrier between
the kidney and the Cheilev that envelops it. Others96 say that the parallel has
nothing to do with the diaphragm’s membrane serving (or not serving) as a
barrier. Rather, the issue is that the membrane itself contains Cheilev.
According to them, the parallel to the Din of the kidney is that we apply ‫ חנ’’נ‬to
meat cooked with the diaphragm’s membrane, just as we apply ‫ חנ’’נ‬to the
kidney.

92 Taz #17 and Shach #24.

93 This is based on one explanation of the Din of Issur Davuk, discussed above in Introduction
to Simanim 98 - 99.
94 Vayikra 3:4. Rashi’s view is adopted by BHS (#117) and MHS (#145).
95 BHS #117.
96 MHS #145, quoting the Maharai, the Darchei Moshe, and the Kaf HaChayyim.

25
 '‫סעיף ט‬

UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES OF “MELIACH K’ROSEI’ACH”

1. A prerequisite for the Resichus is the food’s status as “Aino Ne’echal

Mach’mas Malcho.”97
2. For the Issur HaMaluach to actually be Osair, it must be moist due to
the salt.98
3. An Issur Shamein is Mefa’apei’a throughout the Heter and therefore
necessitates 60. According to the Mechaber, a Netilah is typically (and
perhaps always) required, as well,99 arguably because the Issur is similar
to a B’Ain in the area it lands on.100 The Rema requires only a Kelipah
when there’s 60.101
4. An Issur Kachush is Nispasheit a Kedei Kelipah.
5. The Rema maintains that, in general, we lack Bekius in two areas:102
A. We cannot determine when a food’s status is “Aino
Ne’echal Mach’mas Malcho.” Therefore, one must be
Machmir for a Melichas Tzeli103 unless this entails a
Hefsed Merubeh.104 [The Mechaber, on the other hand,
says that a food salted enough to do the standard post-
Shechitah blood-extraction—i.e., Melichah L’Kadeirah—
has the status of “Aino Ne’echal Mach’mas Malcho.”]
B. We cannot distinguish between a Davar Shamein and a
Davar Kachush.105 As such, we go L’Chumra and treat a

97 Chullin 112/a.
98 See 91:5; when both are dry, or both are moist for a reason other than being salted, only
Hadachah is required.
99 The Mechaber here states that Shumen HaGid and Kenok’nos would mandate “the removal

of a Kedei Netilah, or at least a Kedei Kelipah,” if Heter Shamein was Mefateim them. The
Rema is not Masig. The exact meaning of the Mechaber’s statement is not immediately
apprehensible. We have adopted the approach of the Pri Megadim, who says that the Safek
about how much to remove applies only to Shumen HaGid and Kenok’nos, which are Issurei
D’Rabbanan. When the Issur in question is Mi-D’Oraysa—even a Safek D’Oraysa—a Netilah is
required.
100 See Biur HaGra #57.
101 Pri Megadim, Sifsei Da’as #38.
102 Poskim discuss the following question: Do we rule L’Chumra based on two simultaneous

applications of “Ain Anu Beki’in,” viz., our inability to distinguish between Shamein and
Kachush coupled with our inability to distinguish between “Aino Ne’echal Mach’mas Malcho”
and “Ne’echal”?
103 Doing a Melichas Tzeli means salting it slightly more than one would salt a food eaten at a

meal [see Yad Adam, Topic 41, n.5; Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Basar B’Chalav 7:2].
104 Rema 91:5.
105 MHS #170 brings from the Kaf HaChayyim that this lack of Bekius is presumed for

contemporary Sephardim, as well.

26
 food as if it is Shamein,106 unless this entails a Hefsed
Merubeh.107 108
C. The Rema maintains that we’re able to distinguish
between a Davar Kachush and a Davar Shamein vis-a-vis
the Beliah of their Pleitos into another substance.109

106 Shach #34. Although a Davar Kachush necessitates a Kelipah whether or not there is 60,
treating the Issur as Shamein does not lead to a Kula in this area since a Davar Shamein
necessitates a Kelipah [see Principle 3]. [PH: Even absent the principle that Issur is similar to a
B’Ain where it lands (and therefore requires a Netilah), we would adopt the Chumra of a Davar
Kachush and still require a Netilah.]
107 Rema, '‫סעי' ט‬, explicated in BHS #160.
108 An Issur D’Rabbanan completely divorced from fattiness may be treated as an Issur

Kachush. Shumen HaGid, Kenok’nos, and Kromos are each classified as Ketzas Shamein.
109 Shach #21, later echoed by the Chochmas Adam.

27
 MECHABER REMA
PRINCIPLE 6: RESICHUS STARTS AFTER THE SHIUR RESICHUS STARTS IMMEDIATELY112 113
ONCE THE FOOD IS AINO MELICHAH110 111 AND DOESN’T END AND L’CHAT’CHILAH,114 DOESN’T END
NE’ECHAL MACH’MAS WITHOUT EITHER HADACHAH (IF IT WITHOUT EITHER HADACHAH (IF IT
MALCHO, DURING WHAT WAS ONLY A MELICHAH L’KEDAEIRAH) WAS ONLY A MELICHAH L’KEDAEIRAH)
PERIOD IS IT OR SHERIAH (IF IT WAS A MELICHAH OR SHERIAH (IF IT WAS A MELICHAH
K’ROSEI’ACH? L’ARCHA) L’ARCHA)
PRINCIPLE 7: ‫אין הבליעה יוצאת מחתיכה לחתיכה בלא רוטב‬ ‫אין הבליעה יוצאת מחתיכה לחתיכה בלא רוטב‬
IS THERE PIAPUA OF A —EVEN IF IT’S A BELIAH OF A DAVAR —UNLESS IT’S A BELIAH OF A DAVAR
BELIAH FROM ONE SHAMEIN SHAMEIN
CHATICHAH TO THE NEXT?
‫אין הבליעה יוצאת מחתיכה לחתיכה בלא רוטב‬
PRINCIPLE 8: YES, AT LEAST IN CERTAIN CASES115 NO116
IS A CHATICHAH THAT’S
SHAMEIN MEFATEIM A
CHATICHAH THAT’S
KACHUSH?
PRINCIPLE 9: ONLY HADACHAH IS NEEDED 117 THE ISSUR IS CONSIDERED NIMLACH
WHAT IF THE HETER IS BY THE HETER118 AND REQUIRES 60 +
MALUACH AND THE ISSUR KELIPAH, UNLESS THIS ENTAILS A
IS TAFEIL? HEFSED.119 120
PRINCIPLE 10: ISSUR THAT’S MALUACH AND SHAMEIN NO
IS THE DIN OF “TATA’AH (TYPICALLY) ONLY NECESSITATES 60 &
GAVAR” RELEVANT? NETILAH IN HETER THAT’S TAFEIL
WHEN IT (THE ISSUR) IS THE TATA’AH.
IF THE ISSUR THAT’S MALUACH IS THE
ILA’A’AH OR IS KACHUSH, ONLY A
KELIPAH NEED BE REMOVED FROM
THE HETER THAT’S TAFEIL. 121

‫ולהצריכם נטילת מקום‬

Why does the Mechaber not require 60 or not require only a Kelipah? It is due
to the fact that the Shumen HaGid, Kenok’nos, and Kromos are each described

110 This is the Shach’s approach (91:11) to the Mechaber. In ibid., BHS #43, another approach
is brought.
111 This view holds that, before then, its status is not “Aino Ne’echal Mach’mas Malcho” (ibid.,

BHS #43).
112 This is how we pasken according to the Shach, Pri Megadim, Chavas Da’as, and AHS (ibid.,

BHS #43 & ibid., MHS #48).

113 This view holds that all that we need is enough salt to make the food “Aino Ne’echal

Mach’mas Malcho” at some point (ibid., BHS #43).

114 Many Poskim disagree with the Kula implied here (whatever its prerequisites), and hold this

way even B’Di’eved (ibid., BHS #48).

115 The Shach (#28) states that Heter that’s Shamein must be Maluach to be Mefateim Issur

that’s Kachush and Maluach. The Chochmas Adam endorses this, but the Pri Megadim
disagrees (BHS #127).
116 The Pri Megadim and the Maharshal agree. It scarcely bears mentioning that the Taz, who

rejects Pittum in the context of dry-heating, will reject it in the context of Melichah.
117 See BHS 91:61 for background.
118 Biur HaGra #74, quoting the Ran.
119 The Poskim debate: Is this only a Hefsed Merubeh, or is it even a Hefsed Ketzas? Some say

that a Kelipah is needed when stringency causes a Hefsed Ketzas, and nothing need be
removed when stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh (MHS 91:61 & 68 with P’eir HaShulchan
91:284).
120 This cell is based on Rema, '‫סעי' י‬. This Rema might make the limitation(s) in Shach 91:19 &

105:28 irrelevant.
121 Shach 91:12 as elucidated in ibid., MHS #59. The Shach is addressing a seeming Steerah

between 91:5 and 105:11.

28
 as being Ketzas Shamein122 and/or as Kachush.123 The Rema would say you
actually need 60 in the absence of a Hefsed Ketzas.124

‫אפילו בשומן הגיד וקנוקנות שבו‬

The bigger Chiddush would have been to say that a full-fledged Davar Kachush
mandates 60, but the Mechaber wanted to teach that Pittum even applies to an
Issur D’Rabbanan. This is why the Kromos are omitted in this passage—they
are perhaps an Issur D’Oraysa.125

DINEI MELICHAH: ISSUR SHAMEIN ISSUR KACHUSH MALUACH ISSUR TAFEIL (KACHUSH OR
DEVEIKUS126 OF MALUACH SHAMEIN)
COLD ISSUR127 TO
COLD HETER MECHABER REMA MECHABER REMA MECHABER REMA
HETER 60 AND 60 + IF HETER IS 60 + HADACHAH133 SEE CHART
MALUACH TYPICALLY, KELIPAH SHAMEIN: 60 KELIPAH132 BELOW
(KACHUSH OR PERHAPS 129 AND
SHAMEIN) ALWAYS, A TYPICALLY,
NETILAH128 PERHAPS
ALWAYS, A
NETILAH. 130
IF HETER IS
KACHUSH:
KELIPAH131
HETER TAFEIL 60 AND 60 + KELIPAH137 60 +
(KACHUSH OR TYPICALLY, KELIPAH KELIPAH138
SHAMEIN) PERHAPS 136

ALWAYS, A
NETILAH 134
WHEN THE
ISSUR IS THE
TATA’AH;
OTHERWISE,
ONLY A
KELIPAH135

122 BHS #122. In MHS #149, he cites Pri Megadim and describes the Kromos as Ketzas
Shemeinim. In BHS #75, he cites Tosafos and describes the Shumen HaGid as Kachush.
123 MHS #80, citing Tosafos about the Shumen HaGid specifically and citing Pri Chadash,

Lechem HaPanim, and the Kaf HaChayyim about all three.

124 Shach #27.
125 BHS #128; in #122, he cited the Rambam, who conveys this Safek.
126 The Mechaber applies these same Dinim even to mere Negiah. See below for a diagram that

describes the Rema’s approach to Negiah.

127 If the Issur is raw meat, these Dinim apply to its second Melichah, i.e., prior to attaining its

current status as “Maluach,” it had already undergone Melichah and Hadachah (Shach 91:11).
128 Principle 3.
129 Principle 3.
130 Principles 3 & 8 [adopting the approach in Shach #28].
131 Principle 4.
132 Principle 3 & 5.B.
133 Principle 9.
134 Principle 3.
135 Principle 10.
136 Principle 3.
137 If Heter is Shamein: Principles 4 & 8 [adopting the approach in Shach #28]. If Heter is

Kachush: Principle 4.
138 Principle 3 & 5.B.

29
 SHEETAS HA-REMA:
COLD ISSUR TAFEIL IN CONTACT WITH COLD HETER MALUACH
STATE OF ISSUR STATE OF SOLID DIN139
HETER
DRY (OR ‫ )לח קצת‬SOLID140 141 EITHER DRY OR  60 + KELIPAH IF THERE IS NO
‫לח קצת‬ HEFSED
 ONLY A KELIPAH IS NEEDED IF
REQUIRING 60 CAUSES A
HEFSED KETZAS
 EVEN A KELIPAH ISN’T NEEDED
IF IT CAUSES A HEFSED
MERUBEH
LIQUID COMPLETELY HADACHAH142
DRY
LIQUID ‫לח קצת‬ 60143 + KELIPAH144

139 Principles 3, 5.B., and 9.

140 If the Issur is raw meat, these Dinim apply to its second Melichah, i.e., prior to attaining its
current status as “Maluach,” it had already undergone Melichah and Hadachah (Shach 91:11).
141 When the Rema (91:5) says, “Yaveish” here, he doesn’t require absolute dryness. He

includes cases when the Issur is slightly moist (ibid., BHS #65; ibid., MHS #69 [who gives soft,
unmelted fat as an example]).
142 Ibid., BHS #71.
143 Ibid., Rema #5.
144 See Principle 3.

30
A Blias Issur does not go from one Chatichah to another without a Roteiv,
even when the Beliah is from an Issur Shamein.145 146 This is Sheetas
HaMaharam (brought in the Mordechai). Hence, the following Dinim:
1. Any Chatichas Heter known to have touched Issur requires 60 and a
Netilah—and it must have this 60 independently, i.e., it is not
Mitz’tareif with any other Chatichah (even one that it’s touching).
[When the Mechaber says that all of the Chatichos Heter are Ossuros,
the Cheilev is known to have touched each one of them.147]
2. Any Chatichas Heter known NOT to have touched Issur is Mutar,
even if it’s touching a Chatichah that was Ne’eseres.148
3. If we are not sure if any of the Chatichos Heter was touched by Issur,
each Chatichah requires 60 (independently, ‫ )וכנ''ל‬and a Netilah.149 150
4. If we know that only one Chatichas Heter was touched, but we don’t
know which one, the Chatichah that was Ne’eseres is Bateil B’Rov
(since Rov of the Chatichos did not touch the Issur and the Blias Issur
didn’t travel). This Bittul happens provided that the volume of the
Cheilev is no more than 1/60 of the combined volume of the Ne’esar
and the other Chatichos Heter.151

1. Any Chatichas Heter to which the Issur was Davuk—or even if they
merely touched—requires 60 and a Kelipah.152
2. If only one Chatichas Heter was touched, but we don’t know which one,
they are all Mutar.

145 This is Principle #7.

146 This seemingly contradicts what he said in the context of Tzeliah [ '‫]סעיף ז‬.146 Some dissolve
the contradiction by saying that the Resichus of a Davar Maluach is simply not as strong as
the Resichus of a Davar Tzalui (see BHS #134).
147 Taz #21
148 Ibid., #22.
149 Since we say Sefeika D’Oraysa L’Chumra (Biur HaGra #59).
150 The requirement for a Netilah comes from the later Poskim (MHS #161).
151 In case they end up cooked with the Cheilev (Shach #31). There can be Bittul even of a

CHaHaL because the Ne’esar is only ‫( אסור מחמת בלוע‬101:2).

152 The Rema refers to the Kelipah Me’at that needs to be removed from any Chatichah touched

by the Issur, and the Taz (#25) makes explicit that a Kelipah must be removed from any
Chatichah touched by the Issur. The Kelipah is due to a concern that what appears to be
Shamein is actually Kachush and/or a concern that there is a higher concentration of Issur in
the Kelipah underneath where it landed (BHS #148).

31
 3. A Bliah of an Issur Shamein goes from one Chatichah to another,
despite the absence of a Roteiv. 153 This is Sheetas HaRashba. Hence,
the following Dinim:
A. The Cheilev is Davuk to ALEPH. If BEIS and GIMMEL have a
combined volume of 60 against ALEPH,154 BEIS and GIMMEL are
Mutar. Absent 60, BEIS and GIMMEL are Ossur. [ALEPH requires
60 and a Kelipah, ‫וכנ''ל‬.]
B. The Cheilev merely touches ALEPH. If ALEPH, BEIS and GIMMEL
have a combined volume of 60 against the Cheilev, BEIS and
GIMMEL are Mutar and ALEPH only requires a Kelipah.
C. There is Cheilev in ALEPH. If ALEPH’s portion of Heter, BEIS and
GIMMEL have a combined volume of 60 against the Cheilev, BEIS
and GIMMEL are Mutar and ALEPH’s portion of Heter only
requires a Kelipah.

It is to 3.B. and 3.C. that the Rema refers

when he says, ,,‫ואע''פ שיש בזה קצת קולא‬.''155

‫נוהגין לשער בכל מליחה בס' כמו בבישול דאם איכא ס' וגו' הכל שרי מלבד וגו' צריך קליפה מעט‬
The Rema implies (a) that the Minhag to require 60 leads to an adoption of the
Sheetas HaRashba,156 and (b) that not distinguishing between Shamein and
Kachush also leads to an adoption of the Sheetas HaRashba.

Why should this be so?

Answer: The lack of Bekius leads to  not distinguishing between Shamein and
Kachush, which leads to  always requiring 60, which leads to  an excess of
Chumros by Devarim Kechushim, which leads to  the need to compensate by
adding Kulos to Devarim Shemainim, which translates into  affirming the
Hispashtus of a Davar Shamein during Melichah, which is justified by 
ALWAYS requiring a Kelipah so that everything that is declared Mutar actually IS
Mutar AT LEAST according to the Ra’avyah, who says that the most that is ever
Ne’esar by Melichah is a Kelipah.

153 This is Principle #7.

154 Not merely against the Cheilev, since ALEPH is a ‫( חנ’’נ‬Biur HaGra #65). When stringency
causes a Hefsed Merubeh, one need not apply ‫ חנ’’נ‬to Melichah, even when the Issur is
Shamein (BHS #147 and MHS #172).
155 Shach #36 (Principle 3.B.); Taz #25 (Principles 3.B. and 3.C.).
156 BHS #143, quoting the Pri Megadim, describes the adoption of Sheetas HaRashba as a

,,‫ ''תוצאה‬of this Minhag.

32
‫ כנראה‬that this is how the Rema is read and understood:

“Even though a Ketzas Kula is ,,...‫ואע''פ שיש בזה קצת קולא‬...''

generated…”157
“…in assuming that a Davar Shamein ,,...‫אם היה האיסור שמן ומפעפע‬...''
is Mefa’apei’a,…”
“…at least, if we’re wrong, there’s a ‫מ''מ יש לסמוך בכה''ג אדברי המקילין וס''ל‬...''
Deah that says that Issur was not ,,...‫דאינו אוסר במליחה רק כדי קליפה‬
declared Mutar, and we need to use
that Deah as a ‘fall-back’ Deah,…”
“…rather than have to distinguish ,,...‫כדי שלא נצטרך לשער בין איסור שמן לכחוש‬...''
between Shamein and Kachush…”
“…something for which we lack the ,,...‫כי אין אנו בקיאין‬...''
expertise.”

‫הל' חמץ‬
This is a reference to Rema 467:14. The Rema states that if one did Melichah
on chicken and then found Chometz in/on it, some are Osair whatever pieces
were present during the Melichah. The Ikkar, however, says the Rema, is to be
Osair the piece upon/in which the Chometz was found, and merely remove a
Kelipah from the other pieces. The Shach158 conveys that, indeed, this is more
stringent than what one would have thought based on the Rema here.

‫הקרומים או חוטים‬
Membranes or blood vessels. The membranes in question cling to Cheilev and
the blood vessels in question go through Cheilev.

This is a reference to Rema 64:20, which deals with Nikkur Achorayim. The
case involves one who did Melichah on a Beheimah without having removed
the ‫ הקרומים‬and ‫ חוטים‬that are non-kosher (due to their aforementioned contact
with Cheilev). You can be Matir the meat—when stringency causes a Hefsed
Ketzas—by removing a Kelipah after removing the non-kosher ‫ הקרומים‬and
‫חוטים‬. One of the Tzedadei Kula the Rema mentions is that the ‫ הקרומים‬are
Kachushim. AHS159 says that the ‫ חוטים‬are, as well.

‫י"א דבהפסד מרובה‬

This passage is not a continuation of the previous Din. Rather, it is a new and
independent Din.

157 Described earlier.

158 #37.
159 64:56.

33
 160
‫סעיף י''א‬

‫כדי קליפה‬
As we saw in the Dinim of Bishul and Tzeliah, if the Tata’ah is cold and the
Ila’ah is hot, we apply the principle,
,,‫''אדמיקר ליה בלע פורתא‬

—as the lower one cools down161 the hot one, each absorbs only Kedei Kelipah
from the other. In the process of Melichah, which occurs at ambient
temperatures, one might well ask how we can talk about Tata’ah Gavar.

The Biur HaGra162 states that we say the Resichus of Melichah is like the
Resichus of Tzeliah in all matters; hence, Tata’ah Gavar applies, as well.163

‫אין חילוק וגו' והכי נהוג‬

Affirming that one of them is Goveir on the other would mean (a) that a Davar
Maluach can be Molei’ach a Davar Tafeil if the Davar Maluach is Goveir, and
(b) that a Davar Tafeil can turn a Davar Maluach into a Davar Tafeil if the
Davar Tafeil is Goveir. However, this ‫ מאן דאמר‬maintains that the foods in
question lack these capacities. In other words, neither one is ever Goveir on
the other. Therefore, you can say neither Tata’ah Gavar164 nor Ila’ah Gavar.
And therefore, position is irrelevant.

This ‫ מאן דאמר‬implicitly rejects the Ran’s opinion that the Heter Malu’ach is
Molei’ach the Issur Tafeil at their point of contact, resulting in the Issur now
functioning as a Davar Maluach. ‫ נ’’ל‬that the Rema’s directive (in '‫ )סעי' י‬to
follow this Ran (in the absence of a Hefsed165) does not contradict his opinion
here; the Rema clearly holds that the Ran’s opinion there is “only”
L’Chat’chilah, not Mei-Ikkar HaDin (otherwise, the Hefsed to which he refers
there would be irrelevant).

160 This ‫ סעיף‬deals with an Elyon and a Tach’ton. The BHS (Biurim) leaves as ‫ צ''ע‬the question of
a Davar Maluach and a Davar Tafeil resting next to each other.
161 As we saw earlier, Rashi explained that the word ,,‫ ''אדמיקר‬refers to cooling.
162 #75.
163 If the Gra maintains that “Meliach K’Rosei’ach” refers only to the extent of Hispashtus of a

Davar Maluach, and does not refer to an actual change in temperature, ‫ נדמה לי‬that we would
understand his statement here almost as a type of “legal technicality,” as if he were saying,
“Since the Din is, ‘Meliach K’Rosei’ach,’ we must apply the principle of ‘Tata’ah Gavar’ to
Melichah, just as we apply it to Tzeliah, which involves a real temperature change.”
164 When the Shach (#41) says that Hisgabrus is limited to Resichas Ha-Ohr, ‫ נ''ל פשוט‬that his

intent is ‫ לאפוקי‬the Resichah of Melach.

165 The Poskim debate: Is this only a Hefsed Merubeh, or is it even a Hefsed Ketzas? [ODH-T

96]. Hefsedim Merubim caused by a lack of Bekius are separate matters.

34
 ‫סעיף י''ב‬
‫דפוסי עובדי כוכבים‬
Non-Jews’ molds; their non-kosher salted cheese was Nivla into the ‫דפוס‬.

‫שנמלחו‬
The Jew’s cheese was salted.
‫ואפילו אינו מנוקב‬
The Chiddush is that the food in question remains Mutar even in a Keli that is
Bolei’a; during Melichah, a Keli Menukav is not Bolei’a.166

‫אבל לכתחלה אסור‬

Some say that this is a function of “Harcheik Min HaKiyyur V’HaDomeh Lo.”

‫סעיף י''ג‬

‫אינן בולעים‬
And therefore, not only can one put these powders into Heter, one can even
place them L’Chat’chilah in the non-kosher Keli.167
‫תבא עליו ברכה‬
A cold, dry substance cannot be Bolei’a from, or Mafleet into, a cold, clean Keli.
Despite that, this Chumrah is laudatory due to the concern that the Keli might
not have been completely clean.168

‫סעיף י''ד‬

As we saw in the Introduction to Simanim 98 – 99, the Din in this ‫סעיף‬

illustrates the concept, ‫אין הנאסר יכול לאסור יותר מהאיסור עצמו‬.

Salt is typically not Bateil because its Ta’am is so prominent.169 If kosher salt is
Bolei’a blood, we apply ‫—חנ’’נ‬if the salt-blood mixture falls into a pot of food,
we’ll require 60 against the entire mixture. The question is, Why not say that
even 60 doesn’t help, being that the mixture contains salt? Due to the principle
of ‫אין הנאסר יכול לאסור יותר מהאיסור עצמו‬, we say that just as the blood would be
Bateil in 60,170 so too, the salt that was Bolei’a the blood. [60 is required
against the salt, not merely he blood, because we do not know how much blood
the salt absorbed171 (and not, of course, due to ‫חנ’’נ‬, which the Mechaber does
not apply to Sh’ar Issurim).]

166 BHS, Biurim, c.v. Nimlach.

167 Shach #34.
168 BHS #181; MHS #219.
169 Rema 98:8. Exceptions are found in ibid., Shach #28 & #30.
170 See BHS, Biurim, c.v. Yesh Shishim, who addresses the issue of “Midi D’L’Chazusa Lo

Batil.”
171 Shach #46.

35
Havla’ah into Kelim via Kevishah
The generally accepted view is (a) that utensils of all materials absorb via
Kevishah, and (b) that the absorbed substance (with the possible exception of
Yayn Nesech) permeates the entire thickness of the utensil’s walls.172 The
absorption is at least up to the level of the liquid.173

If the Issur is Shamein, BHS174 says to assume L’Chat’chilah that it is Osair

even the portion of the utensil that is above the level of the liquid. This is
because the Issur Shamein is Mefa’apei’a even within a utensil. When
stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh, one can assume that the utensil does not
absorb Issur above the level of the liquid.175 [In discussing the absorption of a
food, we saw that the Shach176 said that we do have the Bekius to distinguish
between Kachush and Shamein vis-à-vis Kevishah. Perhaps he would apply
that here as well.]

Haflatah from Kelim via Kevishah

Rule:
It will require 24 hours for the liquid to be Mafleet Belios from the utensil into
the utensil’s contents via Kevishah. However, at the end of the 24 hours, the
utensil is Nosein Ta’am L’F’gam! Consequently, a clean non-kosher utensil will
never be Osair its kosher contents via Kevishah.177

Exception to the Rule:

A utensil can be Osair its contents via Kevishah if the contents are Charif. If
they’re Charif, the Pleitos from the utensils will be Nosein Ta’am L’Shvach.178

The OU179 adopts the view of the Mishnah Berurah,180 against the Shach181
and the Taz,182 that Tzir is Mafleet from a Keli in the amount of time ‫בכדי שיתננו‬

172 So I am told by the great Talmidei Chachamim with whom I consulted after seeing more
than one discussion of different materials.
173 BHS #11 and MHS #6.
174 #12 and apparently, it is ‫ד''ע‬. Hence, it ought not be surprising that when MHS talks about

Kelim (#6) and Devarim Shemeinim (#12), he does not say like BHS.
175 BHS #12 and MHS #12.
176 #1.
177 Taz #1 and Shach #2, against the Pri Chadash, who maintains that Kevishah functions like

Bishul only at the very end of the 24-hour period, but Nesinas Ta’am L’F’gam only starts after
24 hours have elapsed. BHS (#5) assumes like the Shach and the Taz; MHS (#6) allows one to
follow the Shach and the Taz only when stringency causes a Hefsed Merubeh.
178 A concept described at length in Siman 103.
179 OU Document K-226.

36
'‫וגו‬. Hence, the utensil will still be Nosein Ta’am L’Shvach when the Belios are
Niflatos.

One should not L’Chat’chilah put kosher Tzir, vinegar, or any other liquid that
is Charif183 into a utensil that absorbed Issur via heat.184

How Far Do Belios in a Keli Travel?185

“Rav Schachter said that the Taz Y.D. 121:7 (end)186 says that although flavor
that is absorbed in one side of a utensil spreads to the entire utensil, there is a
limit to how far it would spread. What is the shiur? Rav Schachter said that R’
Chaim Chernoff told him that metallurgists told him that flavor only travels
half of an inch…Although Chasam Sofer (and others) say that flavors travel
even many tephachim, Rav Schachter finds this very hard to accept.”

'‫ ולהתפשטות עד ו‬,‫ שלהתפשטות של חצי אינטש צריכים בודאי לחוש מדינא‬,‫''לכאו' הדברים צודקים‬
,,.‫ וכמש"כ הט"ז‬,‫ ולהתפשטות יותר מזה לכאו' אין צריך לחוש כלל‬,‫אינטשע"ז – לחומרא‬

Rav Menachem Adler, a Rabbinic Coordinator with OU Kashruth, quoted Rav

David Feinstein as saying that his father “wouldn’t have said that flavor doesn’t
travel through thick walls,” because “there’s no basis for that.” [Rav Schachter
expressed his puzzlement at the apparent lack of reckoning with the
aforementioned Taz.]

Ladles
The status of a ladle is the subject of a dispute among the Poskim. On the one
hand, it is inside a Keli Rishon; on the other hand, it is subsequently removed
from the Keli Rishon. The Poskim ask, Does it have the Din of a Keli Rishon, a
Keli Sheni, or is it to be treated as a Safek Keli Rishon? As such, MHS says that
it should be treated L’Chumra as a Keli Rishon when it removes something
from the Keli Rishon.187 BHS says that is considered Al Pi Din to be a Keli
Rishon.188

‫עירוי כלי ראשון‬

Irui Keli Rishon is Mavlia Kedei Kelipah.189 That means that the Kiluach itself

180 447:42.
181 69:67-68.
182 69:41.
183 The Poskim discuss whether or not olive oil is a Davar Charif.
184 In OU Document K-273, Rav Schachter describes this view (Shach 121:10) as the

“Haskamas HaPoskim HaAcharonim.”

185 OU Document K-354
186 The Taz describes the L’Chat’chilah and B’Di’eved of kashering a spit, and in the course of

his discussion, refers more than once to ‫ הגעת האיסור‬to a given pot. [This footnote does not
appear in the OU Document.]
187 #29.
188 106:21.
189 Rema 92:7.

37
will be Nivla Kedei Kelipah and/or the Davar HaMuvla by the Kiluach will only
be Nispasheit Kedei Kelipah in the Davar HaBolei’a.

To be Mavlia a food, the Kiluach must land directly on the food. If it lands to
the side of the food and flows there, the movement of the liquid is not Irui Keli
Rishon.190 Irui is not Mafleet U'Mavlia B'Bas Achas, i.e., Irui is not Mafleet from
a food/utensil and Mavlia this Pleitah into another food/utensil in one
uninterrupted process, as Bishul and Tzeliah do.191

If a hot non-kosher pot [Keli Rishon] overflows onto a cold surface, and the
stream makes contact with a cold kosher pot, there are two possible ways to
classify the stream:192
 If it’s a case of Lo Nifsak HaKiluach, the stream’s movement constitutes
Irui Keli Rishon.
 If it’s a case of Nifsak HaKiluach, the stream is classified as a Keli Sheni
because of the Zechilah on the cold surface. [Had a stream from a Keli
Rishon traveled through the air, its movement would have
constituted Irui Keli Rishon.]193

The Din of Irui raises a number of questions dealt with in contemporary

Hora’ah:
 Since water has to go through a network of pipes when it travels from the
boiler to the faucet, is water coming from the faucet Irui Keli Rishon, or
something more lenient? Or perhaps it is more stringent than Irui, since
it is still connected to the boiler when it leaves the faucet?
 Since the Kulos of a Keli Sheni are based on the cooling effects of its
walls, are there any Kulos generated when we turn on the hot and cold
sink water at the same time and only slightly warm water comes out of
the faucet?

Extended Irui194

Rav Belsky maintained that the prolonged spraying/flowing of Yad Soledes

water—i.e., extended Irui—onto the surface of a Keli Sheni can turn the Keli
into the halachic equivalent of a Keli Rishon. The basis for this is Tosafos in
Shabbos 40/b, c.v. V'Shmah Minah. Tosafos explains that the leniencies of a
Keli Sheni stem from the fact that the walls, having never been on the flame,
have a cooling effect on the food. With the prolonged spraying/flowing of Yad
Soledes water onto its surface, its walls become saturated with heat, i.e., they
190 Igros Moshe, YD I:42.
191 Shach 95:20.
192 Rema 92:7.
193 Pri Megadim. If the liquid in question is not a stream, but rather, `is merely droplets, the

Chumros of Irui Keli Rishon may not necessarily apply; see 92:9 (re fat droplets) and Rema
93:1 (re the placement of a hot meat pot-lid onto a cold dairy pot).
194 I showed this to Rav Gersten first, and what appears here incorporates his corrections.

38
get as hot as they can. Consequently, they cannot and do not cool down the
food, just like the walls of a Keli Rishon.

This approach leads to a Kula and a Chumra:

The Kula involves kashering non-kosher utensils. There are non-kosher

receptacles (like tanker trucks) whose kashering technically requires Hag’alah
but (a) are too large to be immersed and (b) cannot have water boiled inside
them. Through extended Irui, such a receptacle can attain the status of a Keli
Rishon, and at that point, boiling water sprayed onto it will kasher it.

The Chumra involves rendering kosher utensils non-kosher. If a pipe has Yad
Soledes non-kosher liquid flowing through it long enough, its walls may
become saturated with heat. If they do, it will be as if a Keli Rishon became
non-kosher. None of the leniencies related to a Keli Sheni will be applicable.

Momentary Contact
The Chamudei Donneal195 says that if Issur and Heter come in contact for a
mere split-second, there is no Haflatah and Havla’ah. Rav Schachter told me
that this was not the ‫שיטה הנתקבלת‬, but that it could used in formulating a S’fek
Sefeika (i.e., used as a Sefeika D’Dina).196 Rav Schachter added that the
Hisgabrus to which Tata’ah Gavar refers does take some time. Subsequently, I
discussed this with Rav Feivel Cohen. He stated that we cannot be
Metzamtzeim how long the Hisgabrus takes, and therefore, we must go
L’Chumra.

Are These Kelim Sheni’im?

Thermoses and Styrofoam cups are designed to preserve heat. Since the
leniencies associated with a Keli Sheni stem from the cooling effect of the walls
of the vessel, Poskim have had to judge whether or not Thermoses and
Styrofoam cups have the status of a Keli Sheni when receiving food and
beverages from a Keli Rishon. The Minhag Ha-Olam is to treat them as Kelim
Sheni’im.

Does Stainless Steel Ever Become Ossur?

This is an excerpt from the record197 of a shiur that Rav Schachter gave at the
OU Mashigach Conference in 2006:

“[We are obligated] to follow the mesorah as relates to halachic and hashkafic
issues. As a rule, this means that one should follow the exact practices of their
parents and teachers, but there are times where the situation or ‫ מציאות‬changes
to such an extent that to ‘follow the mesorah’ we must do the opposite of what

195 ODH-T 59:2.

196 And see MHS, Mat’amei HaShulchan #11.
197 OU Document K-367.

39
our forefathers did [i.e., applying the norms and values that governed our
forefathers’ lives to new circumstances, we may end up engaging in a different
behavior].”

“[T]he Rishonim didn’t say that come-what-may all utensils have to be kashered
[as we see from their discussion of kashering glass], but rather they viewed new
situations through the prism of established halachos...[T]his is an example of
truly applying the mesorah rather than of ignoring it.”

“[Unlike pots made 50 or so years ago,] modern pots are made via pouring
melted metal into pot-shaped molds[;] Rabbis and scientists rarely report that
food cooked in [such] a pot tastes like another food cooked previously in that
pot. As such, it seems reasonable that in light of the above, contemporary
Rabbis should reevaluate which utensils require kashering, and how intense
that kashering should be[.]

“Of course, such ‘changes’ to the accepted practices have to be made via a
consensus of the leading Rabbis of a generation…”

40
 CASE ONE CASE TWO CASE THREE CASE FOUR

REMA 92:7:
A DAIRY KILU’ACH “LEAVES” A
DAIRY POT AND MAKES
CONTACT WITH A MEATY POT.
SHACH 92:36 (TEIRUTZ #2):
THE MEATY POT IS
CONSIDERED THE TATA’AH
BECAUSE IT IS ,,‫במקומו‬.''
SHACH 92:33:
A MEATY POT ‫ אצל האש‬IS
PLACED ONTO SPILLED
MILK.
SHACH 92:33; BHS 92:144:
THE POT IS GOVEIR EVEN
THOUGH IT IS THE ILA’AH
BECAUSE THE FLAME DOES
NOT ALLOW IT TO COOL
DOWN.
MECHABER & REMA 91:7: REMA 104:2 & DARCHEI
A PIECE OF MEAT FALLS MOSHE199 CITED IN TAZ
INTO A DAIRY POT.198 105:6:
(A) HOT KOSHER FAT IS
POURED ONTO COLD ISSUR
OR (B) HOT NON-KOSHER
FAT IS POURED INTO A COLD
KOSHER LIQUID.
SHACH 91:23; CHOCHMAS SHACH 104:6 & TAZ 105:6:
ADAM 42:7: THE COLDNESS OF THE
THE POT IS THE TATA’AH— TATA’AH CANNOT LIMIT
DESPITE THE FACT THAT HISPASHTUS TO A KEDEI
THE MAJORITY OF THE MILK KELIPAH:
IS ABOVE THE MEAT— (A) WHEN THE HOT KOSHER
BECAUSE THE POT IS FAT MELTS ONTO THE COLD
,,‫ ''במקומו‬AND THERE IS SOME ISSUR, ALL OF IT (THE
MILK UNDERNEATH THE HETER) EVENTUALLY
MEAT. COMES IN CONTACT WITH
ISSUR.200
(B) AS THE HOT NON-
KOSHER FAT MELTS INTO
THE KOSHER LIQUID, ALL
OF IT (THE HETER)
EVENTUALLY COMES IN
CONTACT WITH ISSUR. 201

198 Meat is softened after being heated; hence, it is Bolei’a more than it would have in its raw
state [Shach 91:25]. Adding Tavlin to the meat increases Hispashtus even more (due to their
softening effect), as do its Beka’im (through which it is Bolei’a more than smooth meat would).
[See Rashi, Chullin 112/a, c.v. V’ee Metabel B’Tavlin & c.v. V’ee Ees Bei Pili]. The Yad Yehudah
holds against the Chochmas Adam and assumes that the amount of Tavlin required here is
only that amount that results in the spicy taste being ,,‫מורגש בו היטב‬.'' I heard from Rav
Schachter that he holds like the Yad Yehudah.
199 Self-proven by the Din in Siman 104.
200 From the Shach, ‫ כנראה‬that Tata’ah Gavar really does operate in Rema 104:2, BUT, as the

hot fat melts over the Issur, one Kelipah after the other is rendered Ossur.
201 ‫ כנראה‬that it is this parallelism that allows the Darchei Moshe to derive the Din in Case #2

from the Din in Case #1.

41
The power of Ducheka D’Sakina is described in Hilchos Basar B’Chalav (e.g.,
94:7). Although Siman 96 mostly describes the action of knives pressed into
sharp foods, we see there in '‫ סעי' ג‬that the pressure need not involve knives, or
any other sharp object: It can even be the pressure exerted by a pestle on a
food in a mortar.

42
Definition:
Gid: Any long and thin part of the anatomy (e.g., veins; nerves).202

Scientific Name Halachic Designation

Sciatic Nerve & Gid HaNasheh The small nerves
Tibial Nerve that branch off
Femoral Nerve & Gid HaChitzon – Ashkenazi from the Gid
Saphenous Nerve Tradition HaNasheh and the
Common Fibular Gid HaChitzon – Yemenite Gid HaChitzon are
Nerve Tradition called ,,‫''קנוקנות‬

202Stated by Rav Belsky in “What’s Wrong with this Chicken,” a DVD produced for the public
by the OU on the topic of Treifos.

43
The next two pictures are courtesy of Sefer Temunei Chol, by Rav Yaakov Lach.

The words “going from the lung to the fat of the heart” were added by this
author.

44
45