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
The current chapter will discuss the laws of an Issur which gives a bad taste to the food that it became mixed with. This concept is called Nosein Taam Lipgam. The Torah only prohibited the taste of an Issur if it does not spoil the food it mixed into. Sometimes an Issur is spoiled and hence gives a spoiled taste. In other situations the Issur is not spoiled but gives a bad taste to the food it mixed with. The detailed laws of this spoilage and whether nullification of the taste or body of the Issur is required will be discussed in this chapter. According to all spoiled taste does not require nullification if the Issur was removed. The details of this law will be discussed in Halachas 1-5.
1. The general rule:
Issur is spoiled: Any Issur which is spoiled and hence has a spoiled taste does not prohibit a Heter food which it becomes mixed with.
Issur is not spoiled but gives a bad taste to the food: An Issur which is not spoiled but when mixed with a specific Heter it gives off a bad taste to that food, then it does not prohibit that food.
The reason for why Nosein Taam Lipgam does not prohibit a Kosher food: The law that a spoiled tasting Issur does not prohibit a food is derived from the command of the Torah which states to give Niveila meat to a Ger Toshav for him to eat. From here the Sages derived that only if the meat is fit to be eaten is it called a Neveila [Issur]. If however it is not edible due to spoilage then it is no longer considered a Niveila [Issur].
- Important note:
Regarding if the spoiled Issur requires nullification if it was not removed from the mixture-see Halacha 6!
2. The Issur only gives a spoiled taste due to the spices in the Heter:
Even if the Issur alone does not have the ability to dissipate a bad taste to the food but due to the combination of spices within the Heter [such as salt or other spices] the Issur now gives a spoiled taste, nevertheless the Issur does not require nullification and the food is permitted. [The same applies in the opposite case. If the Issur only gives a spoiled taste due to the lack of spices within the Heter, and if one were to add spices to the Heter the Issur would give a beneficial taste, nevertheless since currently its taste is spoiled it does not require nullification.]
3. The law if the Issur currently gives a spoiled taste but will eventually give a good taste or vice versa:
Example: Vinegar of Yayin Nesech fell into a cold pot of grains and enhanced the taste of the grains. The pot was then cooked and the vinegar worsened the taste of the grains. Does the vinegar now require nullification? Likewise in the opposite case. If vinegar of Yayin Nesech fell into a hot pot of grains and gave a bad taste to the grains. The pot then cooled off and it now gives a good taste to the grains. Does the vinegar require nullification?
The law: The Issur must constantly dissipate a spoiled taste to the Heter for it to not require nullification. Thus if the Issur did not give a spoiled taste when it fell in and only later [i.e. after cooking] did it begin to give a spoiled taste, then it requires nullification. Likewise if at the time that the Issur fell in it gave a spoiled taste but later on [i.e. due to it cooling down] its taste became beneficial for the food then it requires nullification. [However in the latter case this nullification is only required once it begins to dissipate a good taste to the Heter. However as long as it is giving a spoiled taste to the Heter it does not require nullification. Thus, in the example, in both cases the vinegar requires nullification. However if the vinegar fell into the pot while hot and one eats it prior to it cooling down then the vinegar does not require nullification.]
4. To what degree must the Issur give spoiled taste to the Heter for it to not require nullification?
It is not required that the Issur spoil the Heter food completely to the point it becomes inedible, for it to not require nullification. Rather even if the Issur only gives off a slightly bad taste to the food, and the food still remains edible, nevertheless since it is giving spoiled taste it does not need to be nullified and the food remains permitted. However some opinions rule that the above is only applies if the majority of the mixture is made up of the Kosher food, or if the Issur food was removed, as will be explained in the Halacha 6.
Other Opinions: Furthermore some rule that even if majority of the mixture is made up of Kosher food, if the Issur was not removed from the mixture, then the Issur is only nullified if one does not receive greater benefit from the quantity of the mixture over the previous quality. [Meaning if one has more benefit in having this larger quantity of food that the mixture now contains due to the Issur mixing into it, more so than the benefit of having a good tasting smaller quantity which existed prior to the mixture of the Issur, then the Issur needs to be nullified. This opinion will be explained in detail in Halacha 7.]
5. If the Issur dissipates a neutral taste which is neither good or bad:
If the Issur does not give off a bad taste it requires nullification even if it does not give a good taste to the food. [However if the Issur has no taste at all, not even a neutral taste, then if one removes the Issur from the mixture no nullification is needed.]
6. Does the spoiled Issur require nullification if it was not removed from the mixture?
If the mixture is no longer edible for human consumption: In all cases that the mixture is no longer fit for human consumption the Issur does not require nullification and thus may be eaten even if the Issur is the majority content of the food, and was not removed from the mixture.
If the mixture remains edible: If the mixture remains edible despite the spoiled taste it received from the Issur, and the Issur was not removed from the mixture, then some opinions rule that one must have majority of Heter within the mixture. If the majority or even half of the mixture is made up of the Issur food then the entire mixture is forbidden. If the Issur is the minority of the mixture then it is permitted. However some rule that even if majority of the mixture is made up of Kosher food, if the Issur was not removed from the mixture, then the Issur is only nullified if one does not receive greater benefit from the quantity of the mixture over the previous quality. If one does receive greater benefit from the quantity of the food, then the entire mixture is forbidden, unless the mixture has completely spoiled to the point it is no longer fit for human consumption.
If the Issur was removed from the mixture: In all cases that the spoiled tasting Issur food was removed from the mixture it is nullified even if the Issur was a larger quantity than the Heter.
7. The law of a spoiled tasting Davar Chashuv:
Example: A Berya, Charal, or Davar Shebiminyan became mixed within a hot pot of Heter and gave the Heter a spoiled taste. One does not recognize the Issur and hence cannot remove it from the mixture. Do we apply the severity of a Davar Chashuv and the food is forbidden irrelevant of the ratio or do we say the food loses its importance and hence retains the regular laws of nullification?
If one recognizes and removes the Issur: In all cases that the Issur was removed the mixture remains Kosher without needing nullification of the Issur taste, even if there was majority of Issur within the mixture.
If one does not recognize the Issur and it did not disintegrate: If the Issur has remained whole, and one does not recognize it from amongst the other pieces in order to remove it, then if the Issur itself is not spoiled but simply gives off a spoiled taste within this food, then it retains the laws of a Davar Chashuv and is not nullified. If however the Issur itself is spoiled [then it loses its importance] and does not require nullification [in 60x] being that it is spoiled and gives a spoiled taste. [Nevertheless the Heter is required to have majority over the Issur.]
The law of a DSL”M: A DSL”M is not nullified even if it itself is slightly spoiled. If however it is spoiled to the point that it is no longer fit for human consumption then it may be eaten even without majority.
Summary-Spoiled tasting Issur:
A. The Issur was removed from the mixture:
In all cases that the spoiled tasting Issur was removed from the mixture the mixture remains permitted even if the Issur which fell in was of greater size than the Heter, and even if it was a Davar Chashuv, and even if the food is still edible and only received a slightly bad taste from the Issur.
B. The Issur was not removed from the mixture:
The majority of the food is Heter: If the spoiled tasting Issur was not removed from the mixture and there is majority of Heter over Issur within the mixture then no nullification is required unless:
- The Issur is a Davar Chashuv which has not been removed and is not spoiled in it of itself, in which case it is never nullified.
- One receives more benefit from the quantity gained by the Issur then by the spoiled taste, in which case if the mixture is edible it requires nullification.
The majority or 50% of the food is Issur: If the mixture is still edible then it is forbidden. If it is no longer edible then it is Kosher.
The food is no longer edible: In all cases that the Issur spoiled the mixture to the point the food is no longer fit for human consumption the mixture is permitted, even if the Issur is the majority and is a Davar Chashuv that was not removed from the mixture.
Must toothpaste have a Hashgacha?
Toothpaste does not require a Hashgacha. Even if one knows for certain that the toothpaste contains a forbidden ingredient it is permitted to be used to brush ones teeth.
8. What is the law of the pot if a spoiled Issur was cooked together with the food in the pot?
There are opinions which say that even in a case that the Issur gave a spoiled taste to the food and hence the food remained permitted without requiring nullification, nevertheless the pot itself is forbidden.
If one went ahead and cooked food in this pot: If one cooked food in this pot within 24 hours of its use with the spoiled Issur, then if the Issur does not give a bad taste to this specific food and the food does not have 60x the original Issur, then the food is forbidden.
9. What is the law if one inserted a spoon to a mixture that contains spoiled Issur and then used that same spoon to mix other food in a second pot:
Example: An Issur fell into a pot of meat and gave the meat a spoiled taste. The meat remains Kosher. One used a spoon to mix the pot and then entered this spoon into a pot of hot vegetable soup. What is the law of the vegetable soup and what is the law of the pot?
The Law: If the Issur taste that is absorbed within the spoon gives a bad taste to the second food then both the food and the pot are Kosher, [as it is Nat Bar Nat Dihetera]. [However if the Issur that is absorbed within the spoon gives a good taste to the second food then the food and the pot are forbidden unless it contains 60x the Issur.]
10. What is the law of the pot if one inserted a Ben Yomo Issur spoon into a hot pot in which the Issur gives a spoiled taste?
Example: A spoon was used with a hot Issur. One then used this spoon to mix a pot of hot vegetable soup to which the Issur dissipated a spoiled taste. What is the law of the pot?
- Taz; Issur Viheter:
In addition to the previous law mentioned above in the Rama, even in a case that the spoon was used with actual Issur which gives good taste, and was then placed in a food to which it gives bad taste, both the food and the pot remain Kosher as it is Nat Bar Nat Dihetera.
- Shach; Levush:
The pot is forbidden, as we require a triple Nat Bar Nat Dihetera in order for the pot to remain Kosher.
11. The law if the Issur gives no taste at all:
Example: If honey was cooked together with bee legs that were stuck inside of the honey, does the honey require 60x versus the legs and what is the law of the pot?
The Law: If the Issur does not dissipate any taste at all into the food, not even a neutral taste, such as the legs of bees that were cooked in honey, then if the Issur is removed nullification is not required.
12. Does meat give a spoiled taste to honey and oil?
Spoiled taste: Meat gives a spoiled taste to both honey and oil. Thus one may buy oil or honey from a gentile as even if they were cooked in an Issur meat pot since it gives the oil and honey a spoiled taste the Issur does not require nullification and they remain Kosher.
Good taste to pure honey: There are opinions which rule that meat does not give a spoiled taste to actual honey, but does give a spoiled taste to honey water. Practically one is to be stringent unless it involves a great loss.
Good taste to pure honey: Meat gives a good taste to pure honey as rules the Rama. One is to be stringent even in a case of great loss unlike the Rama who is lenient.
Good taste to honey and oil: Meat gives good taste also to oil and hence if oil was cooked with Issur meat one requires 60x.
13. Does meat or milk give a spoiled taste to wine:
Yes, meat and milk give a spoiled taste to wine. [Thus if one cooked Issur milk or meat within wine it does not require nullification.]
14. The law of a pot which is not Ben Yomo:
A. The rule:
Any pot which is no longer Ben Yomo, which means that 24 hours have passed since Issur was last cooked in it, gives off a spoiled taste. Thus if one cooks inside an Issur pot that is not Ben Yomo the food is permitted without needing nullification against the Issur that was absorbed in the pot.
B. The law if the pot was dirty:
Example: One’s maid cooked Issur meat in her pot and did not wash the pot afterwards. Two days later one accidently took this pot which was still dirty from fat of the Issur meat and cooked Kosher food in it.
- First Opinion in Michaber; Taz:
One requires 60x the food: If one cooked food in a dirty Issur pot, such as a pot which still contains the grease of the Issur, the food requires 60x the leftover Issur even if the pot was not Ben Yomo.
- Second opinion in Michaber:
One does not require 60x the food: There are opinions which rule that one does not require 60x the leftover Issur food if one cooked in the pot after 24 hours have passed, [as the leftover food has become spoiled].
- Opinion of Rashal:
One requires 60x the food and pot: The Rashal rules that one requires 60x versus both the food and the walls of the pot, as the good taste of the leftover Issur enhances and un-spoils the Issur taste within the walls of the pot.
- Opinion of Rama:
According to all if the food contains 60x versus the leftover Issur the food is permitted being that the pot is not Ben Yomo, and so is the custom.
Do we assume that a typical pot is clean or dirty? Only if one knows that the pot was not washed and cleaned after it was used with Issur must he assume that leftover Issur has remained in the pot. If however one does not know whether the pot was washed or not then we assume that it was cleaned as a typical vessel is clean.
Summary and Final Ruling:
If one cooked food in a dirty Issur pot that is not Ben Yomo one requires 60x versus the Issur. One does not require 60x versus the pot.
C. One cooked a Davar Charif in the pot:
There are those opinions which say that if one cooks a sharp food inside a non-Ben Yomo Issur pot then the sharpness of the food enhances the spoiled Issur taste, and one requires 60x in the food versus the pot.
What is the law if only some of the ingredients being cooked in the pot are sharp: If majority of the food consists of a sharp food then it enhances the Issur taste that is absorbed within the pot and the food requires 60x. If however only minority of the foods content consists of the sharp food then it is unable to enhance the spoiled Issur taste and the food remains Kosher without requiring nullification. However regarding spices so long as a lot of sharp spices were placed in to the point that the taste is strongly felt in the food then the entire food is considered sharp [even if it is not the majority of the consistency of the food].
D. If one cooked food in a Ben Yomo Issur pot does the 24 hours restart?
Case of Basar Bechalav:
Example: If Basar Bechalav was cooked at 12:00 PM and one then cooked water in the pot at 9:00 PM, do the 24 hours restart its counting from 9:00 P.M.?
The Law: If one cooked Basar Bechalav in the same pot, whether simultaneously or one after the other, and then cleaned the pot and cooked water in it prior to the passing of the night, then the 24 hours restart from when the water was cooked. [Thus in the above example the 24 hours restarts its counting from 9:00 P.M.] Thus food cooked within 24 hours from when the water was cooked requires 60x the pot even if it is already past 24 hours from when the Basar Bechalav was cooked. [However if one cooked the water after the night, meaning the next morning, even though 24 hours have not passed, nevertheless the 24 hours do not restart.]
The reason: Since at the time the water was cooked, the pot was still Ben Yomo according to all opinions, therefore the water has become Chanan and when the pot then reabsorbs back that water it is considered to absorb a new Issur, hence causing the 24 hours to restart. However if one cooked the water after the night, meaning the next morning, even though 24 hours have not passed, nevertheless the 24 hours do not restart being that there are opinions which rule that it suffices for the night to pass for the absorbed taste in the pot to become spoiled. Now although we do not rule like this opinion, nevertheless regarding restarting the 24 hours we are lenient.
If one cooked meat and the next morning cooked milk and then cooked water do the 24 hours restart from the time the water was cooked?
For Example: If one cooked meat at 8:00 A.M. and then the next morning cooked milk in that same pot at 7:00 AM, hence forbidding the pot, and then cooked water a few hours later at 12:00 PM, does the 24 hours restart from 12:00 PM or is it counted from when the milk was cooked at 7:00 AM?
- Rama:The Rama rules based on the previous ruling that in this case since a night has passed in between the cooking of the meat and milk therefore the 24 hours do not restart from when the water is cooked. Thus in the above example since the night has passed we count the 24 hours from when the milk was cooked and not from when the water was cooked.
The Shach writes that the Beis Yosef would disagrees with this ruling of the Rama, and the 24 hours would hence restart from when the water was cooked.
Case of Other Issurim:
- Beis Yosef:The 24 hours never restart as we do not hold of Chanan by other Issurim.
According to those which rule that the law of Chanan applies by all Issurim, then other Issurim have the same law as Basar Bechalav. Thus if the night has not passed and one cooked in a Ben Yomo Issur pot the 24 hours restart. However in a case of loss [even if it does not involve a great loss] one may be lenient by other Issurim to not restart the 24 hours, and thus so long as 24 hours has passed from cooking the original Issur any other food cooked in this pot is permitted.
The Shach rules that in this regard of restarting the 24 hours, there is no difference whether the case involves Basar Bechalav or other Issurim, as the restarting of the 24 hours is independent of the concept of Chanan. Thus if by other Issurim one can be lenient in a case of loss so too by Basar Bechalav, and if by Basar Bechalav one is stringent similarly one must be stringent by other Issurim.
If one cooked Heter in a Ben Yomo Issur pot prior to the passing of the night the 24 hours restart. If one cooked water the next morning the 24 hours do not restart.
Summary of Opinions in Rishonim and Poskim:
- Sefer Hateruma:
Whenever water is cooked in a Ben Yomo pot the 24 hours restart as the water becomes Chanan. This applies even if it was cooked the next day within the 24 hours.
The 24 hours never restarts, as since the actual Issur is not Ben Yomo after 24 hours therefore we are lenient.
- Rabbeinu Tam:
The taste in the walls of a pot becomes spoiled after the passing of the night, even within 24 hours.
- Beis Yosef/Michaber:
By other Issurim this law is irrelevant as we do not hold of Chanan by other Issurim, and hence the 24 hours never restart. However by Basar Bechalav the 24 does restart, although one may be lenient like Rabbeinu Tam that if the water was cooked after the passing of the night the 24 hours does not restart.
- Rama in Toras Chatas:
Whenever the night has passed the 24 hours is counted from when the Issur was cooked and not from when the water was cooked, even if the water was cooked before night.
By other Issurim we are lenient in a case of loss to not restart the 24 hours. By Basar Bechalav we restart the 24 hours unless the night has passed.
Other Issurim and Basar Bechalav have the same law.
How much of the night must pass for the 24 hours to not restart?
The entire night must pass, from the beginning of the night until day break [Alos Hashachar], for the 24 hours to no longer restart. Thus if one cooked the water any time before Alos Hashachar the 24 hours restart.
 Michaber 103/1
 Taz 103/1
 Michaber 103/3
 Shach 103/12
 Michaber 103/2
 Taz 103/5 in name of Tur
 Shach 103/7
 Taz 103/5
The Levush rules that in this case it is permitted even if the food cools down. The Taz questions this ruling.
 Michaber 103/2
 Rashba;; See Aruch Hashulchan Vol. 4 Y.D. 103:6 that this applies according to all opinions, and Michaber does not argue; See also Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 103:10
 Shach 103/2 in name of Beis Yosef and Toras Chatas Klal 85
 A proof to this law can be brought from the law of a disintegrated Gid Hanashe which became mixed with Heter in which case we rule that 60x is required even though the Gid Hanashe has no taste. [Shach ibid]
 Rama 103/2
 Michaber 103/2
 Such as spoiled Issur gravy spilled into Heter gravy. [Shach 103/4]
 The reason for this is because the taste of an Issur and its body are both a Biblical prohibition. Hence just like the taste when spoiled loses its ability of prohibition, similarly the body of the Issur when spoiled is nullified in majority. [Shach 103/3 in name of Toras Chatas Klal 85]
The law regarding a case that the mixture contains a Kezayis of Issur within Achilas Peras: By a innately spoiled Issur the above law applies even if the food contains a Kezayis [within Achilas Peras] of the Issur. 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 104/9 in name of Beis Yosef; Rashba] Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol as there is no opinion here 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]
 The reason it is forbidden according to this opinion is because since one benefits from the greater quantity which the Issur has provided the Issur is therefore not considered nullified to the majority of Heter [being that one gives it importance]. [Taz 103/4]
 Such as a piece of spoiled Issur meat fell into gravy. [Taz 103/3]
 The reason it does not require nullification is because its taste is spoiled and there is no actual mass of Issur in the mixture. Now although we rule that normally one must measure 60x versus the entire Issur, hence implying that gravy has left the Issur into the Heter and there is thus actual mass of Issur in this Heter [and in our case since the Issur is majority the mixture should be forbidden] , this is only because we do not know the amount of taste that has exited from the Issur into the Heter, and therefore we measure versus the entire piece. However in truth we never suspect that the Issur has dissipated its entire amount of gravy into the Heter as is verily seen from the fact the Heter did not double in size. Thus if the Issur gives a spoiled taste we assume that only minority of gravy entered into the mixture and the mixture remains permitted. This is also proven from the law that we ideally rely on a gentile to taste the mixture and do not require 60x thus proving that we do not assume the Issur dissipated more gravy than taste. Likewise it is proven from the fact we permit food cooked in a non-Ben Yomo pot. [Rashba brought in Shach 103/5]
 Rama 103/1
 Taz 103/2; As if the Issur is removed the law of a Davar Chashuv becomes irrelevant, as only the body of a Davar Chashuv is not nullified as opposed to its taste.
 The reason for this is because the Issur dissipated a spoiled taste and was removed from the mixture and hence does not require nullification.
 The reason for this is because the status of a Davar Chashuv is not relevant to its taste. As even if it gives off no taste at all it is still considered a Davar Chashuv and is not nullified. [Shach 103/1] Thus we view the entire mixture as if it is actual Issur, and not like a Taaruvos of Issur. [Taz 103/2; Meaning since the Issur is not nullified we view the entire mixture as Issur in which case even if spoiled one may not eat it. If however we would view the mixture as Heter and Issur together, then it would be permitted due to that spoiled Issur is allowed to be eaten as long as there is majority of Kosher food.]
 Taz 103/2
 Taz 103/2, similar to the stringent opinion in Michaber 103/2
 Peri Megadim 103 M.Z. 2; This can also be derived from the Rama ibid which does not mention a DSL”M as part of the cases brought. [ibid]
 Har Tzevi Yoreh Deah 95
 The reason for this is because the toothpaste is a spoiled taste, and is eaten not Kiderech Achilaso [it is not eaten in the normal way of eating] as it is licked and not swallowed.
 Rama 103/2
 The reason that the pot is forbidden despite the fact that the food is Kosher is because one may come to cook food towards which this Issur gives a good taste.
 The wording of the Rama is it gives “a good taste”.
 One however does not require 60x versus all the walls of the pot as since the Issur gave a spoiled taste to the food that was first cooked in it, the taste that the walls of the pot absorbed never became Chanan. [Shach 103/9]
 As it is similar to a case that at first the Issur gave a spoiled taste and then began giving a good taste. [Shach 103/8]
 Which was Kosher being that the Issur gave a bad taste to this food.
 Rama 103/2
 Taz 103/6; Shach 103/10
As the Issur taste went from the [Issur to the spoon-Shach, and from the] spoon to the food and from the food to the pot and all this time everything remained permitted due to the spoiled taste. Hence the pot does not have the ability to prohibit any other food that is cooked inside of it even if in that food the Issur gives a good taste.
From the Shach it is implied that one requires three times Nosein Taam Dihetera while from the Taz it is implied that two suffice. [P”M 103 S.D. 10]
 So is implied from Taz ibid
The Taz questions why the Rama and Levush do not mention this case and rather mention only a case in which there are three Nat Bar Nats taking place. The Taz concludes that practically it is permitted even in this case and the wording of the Rama and Levush are problematic.
 Klal 32
 Shach 103/10; Nekudos Hakesef
The Shach in Nekudos Hakesef defends the ruling of the Rama and Levush and explains that even the Issur Viheter referred to a case that the spoon absorbed a spoiled Issur, and hence there too it is discussing a case of three Nat Bar Nats Dihetera.
 Brought in Taz 103/6
 Rama 103/2
 As the Issur [in our case the legs] does not give off a taste to require nullification.
 Thus even according to the opinion [Rambam] that rules all vessels are considered Ben Yomo unless known otherwise, nevertheless the oil and honey are permitted. However according to us regardless one may buy the oil and honey from gentiles being that we assume the vessels used to cook them in were not Ben Yomo. [Shach 103/13]
 Taz 103/7
The Taz brings the Mordechai which rules that if Niveila fell into hot honey it is forbidden. He thus concludes like the Mahril that one must say meat gives a good taste to honey itself. Thus even in a case of great loss one may not be lenient.
 Shach 103/14
It is implied from Rama that according to all meat gives a spoiled taste to oil. However the Shach himself brings a list of Poskim which argue that meat enhances the taste of oil, and it thus may not be acquired from a gentile if Neveila meat was cooked in it. One of his proofs is from the Rashba; Ran and Aguda which bring a proof that an unknown vessel is considered not Ben Yomo from the fact the Sages permitted the oil of a gentile. This implies that if the vessels were Ben Yomo the oil would be forbidden due to receiving a good taste from the meat.
 Rama 103/4
 Rashba brought in Michaber 103/5 as the Stam opinion; So rules also Tur; Toras Chatas Klal 85; Rashal 64 [brought in Shach 103/15] Taz 103/8; Levush
 The Taz 103/8 conclude like this opinion.
 As actual Issur food never becomes spoiled even after 24 hours. It is only the absorbed taste that becomes spoiled after this time. [Taz 103/8]
 Ran brought in Michaber as the second opinion with the wording: “there is an opinion”.
 Shach 103/15
 Brought in Shach 103/16
 The Shach ibid however concludes that practically this opinion does not seem correct at all, and so rules the Rama concluding that so is the custom that the pot remains not Ben Yomo.
 Rama 103/5; The Toras Chatas and Rashal rule that the leftover food does not become spoiled, as rules the 1st opinion in the Michaber, and similarly in 122 the Michaber rules plainly like this opinion. [However the Rashal himself holds that one also needs 60x the pot, as explained above.]
 Shach 103/15
 Thus when the Michaber stated that only if the pot is clean is the food permitted, this means that one did not know for certain that it was not cleaned. [ibid]
 First and main opinion in Michaber 103/5; Rama ibid; Shach 103/15; Taz 103/8
Other Opinions: The Michaber brings a second opinion which does not require 60x. The Rashal rules one requires 60x also versus the pot.
 103/6; See also Rama 95/2
 Opinion of Beis Yosef
 Taz 103/9, based on Rama 95/2
 Michaber 103/7
 Rama 103/7; Shach 103/18; Taz 103/10
 Taz 103/10; Beis Yosef brought in Shach 103/18
 And hence the water is forbidden to be drunk in a case that it was cooked the next morning but within 24 hours.
 Rama 103/7
 Brought in Shach 103/18
 Shach 103/20, as in a case of great loss we are always lenient by Lach Belach of other Issurim.
 This applies even if the night did not yet pass at the time that he cooked water in the pot. [Taz 103/11]
 The reason for this leniency is because the rule of Chanan by other Issurim is itself a dispute, hence in a case of loss one may rely on those opinions that hold other Issurim do not become Chanan. [Taz 103/11]
 As also Basar Bechalav has the status of other Issurim once it has become forbidden. [Shach ibid]
 Based on Shach 103/18
 Klal 85
 Peri Megadim 103 S.D. 19
Leave A Comment?
You must be logged in to post a comment.