- This topic has 56 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
I know this is quite obscure, but about a month ago I mentioned* a Rashba that says that the stagnant object is always the ???? and the moving one the ?????, and hello99 claimed that the halacha does not follow the Rashba. I just want to say for the record that the Shach brings it down in Siman 91, and I haven’t seen anyone arguing. I asked my rav, and he said that the halacha is indeed in accordance with the Rashba. Ok, now I can go to sleep peacefully.
*Here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/how-do-i-kasher-a-microwave
siman 92?
Anybody want to explain how this fits with modern ideas of heat transfer, that do not distinguish between upper and lower levels in contact. (Heat rises when air is involved since it becomes less dense from molecular motion, and rises to the top.)
Pesachim ??: Rashi says even though generally we pasken like Rav, here people pasken like Shemuel that tatah gavar.
“Anybody want to explain how this fits with modern ideas of heat transfer, that do not distinguish between upper and lower levels in contact. (Heat rises when air is involved since it becomes less dense from molecular motion, and rises to the top.”
The question is not how the heat transfers, its how a “bliye” or trace amount of taste transfers that according to chazal is one way, meaning that while something “exports” taste it can’t “import” at the same time, so if we pasken tatah gavar then the bottom one exports and the top imports.
pardon my failure to respond in a timely enough fashion, I have been both very busy and not feeling well. Here are some sources that disagree with the Rashba, feel free to ask for clarification of any of them.
???’ ????? ?”?. ?”? ???, ????”? ????? ?”?. ?? ???’ ?”? ?????, ??”? ?”? ?? ???? ?’ “???? ??????”, ??? ???? ???? ????? ????? “???? ????? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ???”, ??”? ?”? ?’ ??? ??”? “??? ?? ?????”, ???? ????? ???? ?”? ?’, ??”? ?”? ?’ ????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????, ??”? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ???”? ?”? ?”?, ?”? ?”? ?”? ?’ ??’ ??????? ????? ????”? ??? ??? ??
?’ ??”? ?”? ?”? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ????
now this is a mans thread!
yitayningwut:
You are correct. I thought you were referring to 92:36, where he says the same thing.
pba: only the second of the Shach’s three answers is consistant with the Rashba, the other 2 are clearly NOT.
yitayningwut: anyways the Rashba would not help you for microwaves as the particle or droplet continues to be bombarded by waves on the wall of the microwave and is ?? ??? where we don’t say a cold ???? is ????.
you’re right. I should have stated that the Halacha does not NECESSARILY follow the Rashba.
yitayningwut: Which siman are you learning? I am currently saying shiur on 103.
For once- this thread is truly illuminating…I am in full agreement with ‘dayazooger’ that this is a “man’s thread” (I wish there were more of these)and I stand in awe before iytai,hello99,popa and all of you who are contributing to this thread. It takes me back many years to the days of learning the sugyos in chullin and joreh deah and it gives me an incentive to go back and look at the sources again.Thank you all.
Without intruding upon the erudite discussion between our two “beki’im”, I have to remark upon hello99’s point that a microwave is “al ho’aish” ….where is the heat? particles being bombarded by waves a “kli rishon” do not make. I would imagine this is the cornerstone of the arguments between those who are mattir a microwave for everything (iytai?) and those who maintain that it is a “kli rishon” (al ho’iash, which makes it even more chomur). I have felt the inner walls of a microwave countless of times just after heating food and never did it show any significant amount of heat.Please explain why this should be ever considered as kli rishon or aish.
yitay- My point is that ,if there is no real heat- certainly not “jad soledes bo” (which is, at least, 145 degrees), then there is absolutely no reason to say that there are any “bliyot” in the microwave. regardless of your understanding of the psak of ilo-oh or taso-oh govar, there is no heat to include this kind of cooking in the field of “cooking”.
yitay are u having a better day today? i hope so 🙂
ROB: bishul needs the ????? ?????? of a ??? ?????,however ??? ?? ??? does not. The food in a microwave would be more similar to ??? because it receives its heat by direct radiation.
yitai- The food itself may reach the temperature of “bishul’ but it is absolutely not in touch with anything else,certainly not the walls-especially if the food is covered (as it should be) No food ever touches the walls and I do not believe that the walls ever reach a temperature even near ‘bishul’.
hello99- I am not sure how ‘zeli aish’ helps you here. Basically, the argument about microwaves is ,very simply, whether you can use the same oven for both fleishig and milchig (leave pessach aside for now) Especially if you cover the food, I cannot see any reason why not to use it for that purpose.
rob: “The food itself may reach the temperature of “bishul’ but it is absolutely not in touch with anything else”
I’m referring to the particles and droplets of condensation stuck to the walls and roof of the microwave.
hello99- i always cover any food I put in the microwave (unless it is totally parve,like bread or a potato) Condensation does not appear in these circumstances. The only condensation you may see is from an open cup of water as it gest heated, thereby manufacturing steam. IF you would put a plate of soup- uncovered- in the microwave, you might have condensation and hence, if it is chicken soup, they stick to the walls. It still is a question whether the walls are hot enough to absorb it, and maybe that the condesantion just sticks to it, without being absorbed. (remember kdei kelipah)
rob: if your microwave is spotless I am very impressed. I was not referring to unique people like you. Most microwaves that have not been cleaned very recently have pieces and spots on the walls and ceiling. Those objects literally boil on the surface of the oven.
back to ???? ???:
what would you say if the hot bottom item was tiny and 1 degree above yad soledes and the top one was huge and frozen solid?
Does ???? ??? tell us that the top one is hot despite our observation to the contrary, has a din kli rishon when observed hot, or can be presumed hot when we don’t know?
Good. To summarize your position, you are suggesting that ???? ??? only applies when the top object actually becomes hot. Correct?
In addition to the Aruch HaShulchan you quoted, this is also the view of the Da’as Kedoshim 91:4, andclearlyy implied in the Yam Shel Shlomo 7:45 and many other Achronim.
Now if ???? ??? is primarily a ??????, what would say to this follow-up.
What if the top item was the hot one, and we clearly see that it significantly warmed the bottom one, maybe even reaching ?? ??????
Do you have a source that explains Rav and Shmuel that way. It is a huge Chiddush. I don’t disagree, I just suggested the same in a Shiur a gave this week, but couldn’t find any supporting source. In fact, the Binas Adam 48 clearly does not learn this way. He writes that a red hot milchig pan placed on raw meat does make it Assur because ???? ???.
In fact, it creates a huge problem. If we don’t require a Din of Kli Rishon, why wouldn’t a Kli Sheini Yad Soledes Bo or Iruyi be Mevashel the entire item if we see it became hot. The Beis Yosef on 105:2 writes that there is never Bishul w/o Kli Rishon, implying a “Din” is necessary.
I have a partial answer for this as well, but I want to hear what you think.
Could I pose a question for you Halachah Technicians out there. Maybe this is the place maybe not, pardon. Here goes;
Is there a problem pouring hot water from an electric urn, parve into a COFFEE cup that has milk? Does that make the urn milchig?
yitay: nice chabura. I thought something a little simpler.
1) It seems Pashut to me that it is impossible to have either Bishul or Bliyos in something that remains very cold. Therefore, while I have numerous proofs that the Sugya must be discussing where both ended up hot, I think they are superfluous.
2) There are 2 possible ways of explaining ???? ???, in my opinion. Either the dispute relates to the Metzius of whether the cold one became hot or not, or it is assumed hot and the dispute is whether it has a Din Bishul similar to a Kli Rishon or no Din Bishul similar to a Kli Sheini.
That will have to wait for a different day.
yitay: regarding the Aruch HaShulchan, I must disagree. He writes ??”? ?”? ???? ??? ??? ??? with liquid it is Mamash instantaneous. He only agrees for solid, and quantifies the time span at ?? ??????
ZeesKite: it may be done without any problem, and the urn remains Pareve. Provided you are VERY careful the milk does not splatter on the urn.
Do you want detailed sources?
hello99 –
So there’s no vapor that goes back up into the urn?
correct, unless you see a cloud of milk vapor rising to the urn. While Shulchan Aruch 105:3 mentions such a concept,it is not relevant to this case. Only pouring cold into hot. Even then, it is only a questionable chumra
So, even if ???? ??? certainly heated the cold item, there would still be a necessity to determine its Halachic status.
yitayningwut: you there?
Isn’t the Tur at the beginning of YD 87 the ?? ???? ??? requires ??? ????? sufficient? Isn’t the Halacha that a piece of metal heated in a fire is Chayav on Shabbos, but the same piece heated to the same temperature in the sum is not, enough?
I think there is very conclusive proof that Bishul in the Torah is more than a chemical reaction.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.