(??????? (????? ?????

Home Forums Bais Medrash (??????? (????? ?????

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 154 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #852258
    Jothar
    Member

    just to make it clear in a separate post, pigskin is halachically edible based on a mishna. pork rinds are treif gamur.

    #852259
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Jothar –

    Thanks for the validation 🙂 And I am aware the kashrus organizations are machmir in this. Iy”h I’ll ask my rav why he doesn’t hold it’s a davar hama’amid.

    And just to be clear, nothing I said either would be matir pork rinds.

    #852260
    Jothar
    Member

    yitayningwut , I was just addressing this thought from Sam2, in case someone wasn’t following my long cut-paste post:

    I would assume though that skin is inherently inedible and that we would just say Achsh’vei by skin eaten in certain ways. Who knows? Maybe pork rinds are actually Kosher? That would be an interesting thing to think about

    #852261
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Jothar –

    Yup I got that. I just didn’t want that since I’m being meikil there that someone should think that I hold that’s mutar too. But I read your post of course. And Sam2’s as well. And let it be said I am very grateful to you and everyone who has been contributing.

    #852262
    Jothar
    Member

    And thank you for the incentive to dust off the old Taaruvos. Brought back some memories.

    #852263
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Just asked the rav if gelatin is mutar b’ein. He said yes. I asked if he could explain the reason to me. He said look at R’ Chaim Ozer’s teshuvah.

    #852264
    Sam2
    Participant

    Jothar: I seem to be blanking terribly. Where is this Mishna?

    #852265
    Chacham
    Participant

    haor vharotev in chulin

    #852266
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Jothar –

    I’m kinda proud of this thread. Can I make the case from here that the CR shouldn’t close down? 🙂

    #852267
    sam4321
    Participant

    Yitay hatzlacha rabbah tommorow.

    #852268
    Jothar
    Member

    mevatel issur lechatchila- I believe the shach allows lach belach.

    fatty and lean meat- Not sure where, but a long shach, taz, nekudos hakesef, taz mahadura tinyana on it.

    Gelatin-

    Reb chaim Ozer was one of the mattirim, along with Rav Yechezkel Abramsky. Feel free to read thru is and summarize the key points for us baalei battim, especially if he clarifies if dry bones or even wet marrow-filled bones, length of time for processing, and any indications if pig skin would be different or if he would agree to the yabia omer.

    Sam2, this is literally what they call toeh bedvar mishnah. BTW ohr veharoteiv is one of my favorite perek names in shas- “skin and sauce”. Still not sure what the hava amina was- if everyone eats it as a snack, it’s clearly not achshevei. Leather boots are only eaten in cases of seige, but people WANT to eat pork rinds- it’s a booming business. clearly food.

    And even in a brisker lu yitzur world that the pig skin itself was muttar (which it’s NOT, the cracklins are fried in lard.

    #852269
    Sam2
    Participant

    Jothar: I was clearly just asking. I never claimed to know anything about Ha’or Veharotev. I used a maybe and a question mark because it was an entirely facetious theoretical question. I wasn’t To’eh because I didn’t state anything. I asked the question and received an answer.

    #852270
    Chacham
    Participant

    it might have a nice name but for all daf yomi doers, we know it is from the hardest perakim

    #852271
    Jothar
    Member

    it’s on daf 122a in maseches chullin.

    #852272
    Sam2
    Participant

    How appropo. It was actually the Daf for Daf Yomi two days ago. Oops. I guess I don’t learn Daf Yomi. And Jothar, I don’t see anything of the sort on that Daf.

    #852273
    Jothar
    Member

    mishna in the middle of the page- eilu she’oroseihen kebsaram- ohr ha’adam ve’or chazir shel yishuv.

    #852274
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Jothar –

    2) Sediment of non-kosher wine which has been processed to the extent that it can no longer produce a good wine flavor, yet now it has a new flavor; since the chemical process is such that the sediment cannot be made into the new thing without losing the flavor of issur, it will always retain its status of pagum, even though through the chemical process it now has a good flavor. This is the argument of ???? ?????.

    .

    To answer your specific questions:

    He is not mechaleik between different types of bones. The ikkar is that they have to be dried out, but even if they aren’t naturally like that there’s no difference.

    He does not indicate a length of time for processing. Point #2 would indicate that there is no amount of time, it is rather the metzius of the processed product – is it possible for it to come into existence without a p’gam of the original flavor – if not then the panim chadashos product is always regarded as ta’am pagum of issur. From my limited understanding of point #3 it only applies where the product is still not fit for consumption.

    Regarding pigskin, I would say he would be matir because of #2 and maybe #3 as well. I am not sure about #1. But he is not making a tziruf, he seems to be saying various independent heteirim. Therefore I would say that even if you just had #2 he would be matir.

    #852275
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    Thanks sam4321.

    I just want to thank everyone who participated in this thread, you really gave me a good run for my money! Honorable mention to Jothar, Sam4321, Popa, Sam2, Yungerman1, ItcheSrulik, and Chacham. Thank you people for keeping me on my toes.

    #852276
    Sam2
    Participant

    Jothar: So it is. I was looking at 124. My bad. I thought I made the change in e-daf but apparently not. Though that Mishnah is interesting. That would seem to only still apply to skin that is close to edible on its own. I wonder if making the skin edible involved some really heavy processing would still be Treif. This Mishnah doesn’t go against that.

    #852277
    Jothar
    Member

    google cracklins.

    #852278
    yungerman1
    Participant

    My pleasure. When I learned Issur V’Heter and was asked a shaila, it greatly enhanced my understanding of the halacha, and that one needs to know ALL of Basar B’Chalav and Taaruvos to arrive at the correct halacha.

    #852279
    ItcheSrulik
    Member

    Slightly off topic, but I’m wondering why grape juice has to be mevushal. Isn’t it yayin m’gito?

    #852280
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    A bit random but I must make the following retraction:

    I wrote that I think that there would be no problem of bitul issur l’chatchila for a Jew to make strawberry jam out of infested strawberries, because one is not mechaven to be mevatel, but to make the jam.

    My rav has told me that if they are certainly infested, it is assur. He holds that the only time they were matir to be mevatel by eino mechaven is when one’s kavannah is to separate the issur from the heter, such as the case of the ants in the honey in siman 84, and like the Yad Avraham says there. Since that is not the case here, in his words, “?? ????”.

    So if any of you were relying on my opinion to start your strawberry/bug jam company, I apologize, but I retract it.

    #852281
    Sam2
    Participant

    Yitay: Isn’t there a case in the S”A about grinding up infested wheat into flour that it’s okay because you’re not Mechaven to be Mevatel?

    #852282
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    There it’s also a safek. Ayin sham (I argued my case but I couldn’t convince him, and he kept shlugging me up).

    #852283
    hello99
    Participant

    yitay: not so fast on the retraction. I will try to post later today a number of sources who are lenient for ein kavano l’vatel even when there is no safek.

    #852284
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    I’d be glad to hear. One thing though, my rav holds this is p’shat in the Rashba, so it’s going to take more than simply a list of acharonim who disagree, because he’ll just be madcheh them and show me others who say like him (such as the Yad Avraham). So I’m going to need a convincing argument.

    #852285
    hello99
    Participant

    Yitay: the Terumas HaDeshen, as you certainly know mentioned two different reasons to permit grinding the infested wheat, Safek and Ein Kavanaso. The question is; does he require both factors, or either one is sufficient?

    This Halacha was quoted in Shulchan Aruch 84:14. In Seif 13 the Shulchan Aruch cites the Orchos Chaim that one may heat honey to liquefy it to filter out pieces of the bees. The reason given is because even though inevitably he will be Maflit bee flavor into the honey and make it Batel, this is not his intention. He permits it even though the bees are visible and certainly present. This would appear to be a clear indication that Ein Kavanaso alone is Muttar, even without a Safek.

    Some Achronim (Nachlas Tzvi, Divrei Malkiel and others) understand that the accomplishment of Ein Kavanaso is that previously his Bitul was a Psik Reisha, and this makes it Lo Nicha Lei. This should be enough to permit independently.

    It should be straightforward in the Terumas HaDeshen that if the Safek consideration is sufficient alone, then Ein Kavanaso should operate independently as well.

    #852286
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    hello99 –

    1. I definitely hear where you are coming from. What can I say, my rav holds ein kavanaso is only good when your intention is to remove the issur, what you cite b’sheim R’ Akiva Eiger and you mention is the minority opinion. The psik reishe d’lo nicha leih vort sounds very interesting though, I’ll ask him. My question about it is this: if you’re willing to say that, bear in mind that l’halacha every berya is batel mid’oraisa chad b’trei, so if I had a case where I don’t want to eat it would you say that it’s mutar to eat the ta’aruvos because of p’sik reishe d’lo nicha leih? Furthermore, the Ran (in Chullin or AZ, sorry I don’t have my Gemara in front of me) says mefurash that R’ Shimon is matir p’sik reishe everywhere besides for Shabbos (and yes, Tosafos in Bameh Madlikin by the shaatnez case clearly argues). Would you say that according to him bitul is always mutar by ein kavanaso, even if it’s efshar b’inyan acher? I’m not saying not, I’m just thinking aloud.

    2. Reason for ein mevatlin: You remember correctly; my rav goes like the Rashba.

    3. Safek bitul: I asked him today and he is matir if it isn’t matzuy.

    4. Shitas HaRaavad: I might have a very interesting thing to say about that, but I need to check it up first. Will post tomorrow bl”n.

    #852287
    longarekel
    Member

    Yitay: I’m looking for a good halacha chabura. You seem to realy know your stuff. Please let me know of a good chabura I could join. Thanks. And if anyone else out there has any suggestions I would really appreciate it. Thanks.

    #852288
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    longarekel – Are you in Lakewood? There are quite a few there. What do you want to learn?

    #852289
    hello99
    Participant

    yitay:

    1 Psik Reisha is only a heter for the action of being mevatel, it will not make something batel that would not have been otherwise

    3 so how does he understnd the Terumas HaDeshen? if safek alone is enough why mention Ein Kavanaso, unless it is also sufficient alone.

    #852290
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    I have to run now, will respond to your points after seder.

    #852291
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    hello99 –

    1. But it is batel. It is only not batel mid’rabbanan. So p’sik reishe d’lo nicha leih should be matir you to eat it.

    3. You need both reasons. Safek alone is not enough, unless it is not matzuy. I asked about a regular safek and he said that’s not good enough.

    #852292
    hello99
    Participant

    yitay: 1) not batel miD’Rabbanan is NOT Batel. Psik Reisha will only take off the Knas for transgressing Ein Mevatlin, not the Gezeira of Berya.

    3) OK, that’s a valid opinion. However, I pointed out before that a preponderence of Poskim hold otherwise. Since when is Rav Abadi MACHMIR for a minority opinion?

    #852293
    hello99
    Participant

    Yitay: the Pri Chadash OC also writes the same chiluk as RAE (Shut 77) and your Rav.

    The Divrei Malkiel you expressed interest in who mentioned Psik Reisha is 2:42 and 43

    Which Rashba does he understand supports his Psak?

    #852294
    longarekel
    Member

    Yitay: I’m looking to learn issur v’heter. Lakewood would be fine. Do you know of a specific chabura? It is important that the rosh chabura be a qualified posek. BTW are you a talmid of Rav Abadi? I had a shaychus with him years ago. Can’t say I’m a talmid but I appreciate his halachic expertise. If you don’t want to give info here we could probably work something out with the mods and I’ll contact you directly. Thanks.

    #852295
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    hello99 –

    1. I know it isn’t batel. My point is that at the end of the day it’s only an issur d’rabbanan. Are you saying that the rabbanan somehow make it that now it’s assur mid’oraisa? I’d like to hear how you could possibly support that.

    3. Ha. This is exactly what people don’t understand. He is not a meikil, ?? ????? ??. He simply is bold in his hachra’os when he strongly believes one way over the other, and therefore is seen that way by the hamon am, because occasionally that derech leads him to come up with a “revolutionary” psak. Every real posek from the times of Ravina and Rav Ashi was like that, and you know it. He’s not being machmir for the minority, he’s being machmir on the halacha of ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ?????.

    The Rashba is in Volume 1 Teshuva 495, cited by the Yad Avraham. The Yad Avraham is on 84:13.

    I will iy”h look up the Divrei Malkiel, thank you.

    #852296
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    longarekel – Ask the mods for my email; I’d be glad to help.

    #852297
    longarekel
    Member

    Mods please send yitayningwut’s email to my email that is on file with you, as per his instructions above. Thank you very much.

    #852298
    hello99
    Participant

    yitay: 1) “Are you saying that the rabbanan somehow make it that now it’s assur mid’oraisa?”

    of course not, I don’t know how you could have read that into what I wrote. My point is “Psik Reisha will only take off the Knas for transgressing Ein Mevatlin, not the Gezeira of Berya”

    #852299
    hello99
    Participant

    yitay: “The Rashba is in Volume 1 Teshuva 495”

    Yitay: To borrow from the Rashba you mentioned ?? ??? ?? ???????.

    Furthermore, even if you will insist that the Rashba is describing a general definition of Ein Kavanaso, then his ruling is incompatible with the Terumas HaDeshen cited in SA YD 84 and many other cases I quoted previously from SA and other Poskim. So even if this would be the intention of the Rashba, which I still highly doubt, there is no reason to assume it is the accepted Halacha.

    #852300
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    I don’t think he is coming from the Rashba. I think that he means this chiluk is found in the Rashba; that it’s not a made up chiluk. That’s all.

    #852301
    uneeq
    Participant

    Is the worms in a bottle of tequila considered nosein taam lifgam, or since it’s meant to be there its leshevach?

    #852302
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    uneeq –

    It’s a good question. The Rema says that with beer and vinegar one should be machmir and assume bugs and the like are nosen ta’am lishvach. I would guess the same should apply to tequila, but I’m not certain. However, there is another angle which I think is correct, and that is that the worms are usually less than 1:60 of the contents of the bottle, so their ta’am is batel anyway. So just make sure you take out the worms before you let them sit there when the bottle is only a quarter full, and your good to go.

    #852303
    uneeq
    Participant

    yitay: The Rema says that with beer and vinegar one should be machmir and assume bugs and the like are nosen ta’am lishvach.

    Thanks. What siman is this in? I would like to know what the S”A holds, being that I am sefardic.

    #852304
    yitayningwut
    Participant

    No problem. It’s in YD 104:3.

    #852305
    uneeq
    Participant

    Yitay: Thanks. Correct me if I’m wrong, but there is no machlokeis between them, rather the S”A left it out in 104:3 and only brought it down in the B”Y beshem HaRashba, however the S”A will agree that chala and shichra are more stringent. I only saw the Kaf Hachayim because thats all I have available, and it seems that he doesn’t differentiate for Sfardim.

    #852306
    uneeq
    Participant

    I have a hard time understanding certain aspects the issur of Ein Mevatlin by Bosser BeCholov. In a case where the meat wasn’t cooked yet with the milk, there is no issur that was created yet that has to be mevutal. So I wonder how in this case, where there is no intention to pour the milk on the meat, why would stirring it to save it from creating issur, cause an issue of ein mevatlin? Certainly I would argue that this is not a case of lekatchila being mevatel.

    #852307
    sam4321
    Participant
Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 154 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.