- This topic has 15 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
The Malbim says (http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=40102&st=&pgnum=168) that the meat of an animal created using Sefer Yetzira is parve. Could this be applied to in vitro meat. Would it at least be kosher if the animal is kosher? If the animal is not first killed is it ever min hachai?
There’s OU certified imitation pork.
Is chicken meat? M’doraisa chicken is pareve.
“Could this be applied to in vitro meat”
not necessarily. IT depends what you mean by”in vitro meat”
Usually the starting cell is a cell that allowsfor rapid proliferation like an animal embryonic stem cell. Now if this cell is fleishigs (or treif) arguably it is never batul as it is a davar hamamid. Thus it isnt quite the same as using completly artificial means or Sefer Yetzirah. OF course completly artifricla meat using chemicals in a lab with no animal derivatives would be pareve.I’m not sure why you mention ever min hachai, In vitro meat isnt a living animal
Avi,
Sefer Yetzirah as per the Talmud in Sanhedrin is basically totally Artificial.
The very same issue pertains to Chanukah – there is the famous question (it is repeated in the name of Rav Chaim of Brisk) about the Nes on Chanukah, according to the ones that the vesel refilled itself with new “miracle” oil – how can it be used for “Shemen Menorah” – after all it is not “shemen Zayis” , it is rather some artificial “miracle oil” which is not “Olive Oil”.
Some dispute the above from the Gemora in Menachos regarding Omer – wheat that came through a Nes, that the problem is not the “miracle” but rather, that it is not from Eretz Yisrael…
Meat from fish is parve (a now rejected view was that chicken was parve).
If one manages to clone meat such that the “steak” was never part of a living animal, it might be considered parve (the question will become answerable in the near future when that technology moves to fruition).
“it is a cell of a living animal.”
what is?
As I mentioned IF it is from a living animal, (it doesnt have to be they can (and have) used embryonic cells and of course they cfan shecht an animal and use its cells) then that cell might not be batul as arguably it is a davar hamamid. Adavar hammaid is an ingredient that is necessary for the finished product. The classic example is rennet without which you wouldnt have cheese.
On the other hand maybe a microscopic cell is less of a davar hammamid since it isnt even viible to the eye.
Though perhaps it is worse since it literally leads to every other cell being produced.If it isnt a davar hamamid youd have less of a problem. while of course chatzi shiur is assur. a cell might be batul
Avi,
“There will have to be a pesak on this”
I recall the Tzitz Eliezer wrote about this years ago… I will have to look it up.
Would be easier (albeit less tasteful) to simply rely upon protein-based “feaux” meats, chicken, fish etc. plant and vegetable-based products are certainly much more healthy although unlikely to ever achieve the taste and texture these new “in-vitro” products claim to have
One would also have to consider the media in which it is grown- does it have animal products added like bovine calf serum, common sources of growth factors for maintaining cells in culture, which are unlikely to be produced from a shechted animal, even if it is kosher (there is also horse serum). And if they use plant products instead of animal products as growth media, then there may be issues of chametz to consider.
AviK I think your ever min hachai question is fascinating. Say they take a muscle fiber biopsy from a live cow, isolate the stem cells or muscle progenitors from the tissue, and then grow it/differentiate into a steak, is eating the steak considered eating ever min hachai?
“the burger is grown from a cell of a live cow”
It doesnt have to be
“. Shechting it would defeat the purpose,”
that depends what the purpose is.
If the purpose is to have cheap meat it wouldn’t defeat the purpose (in the long run). IF the purpose was to have pareve meat and this is deemed pareve, again it wouldnt defeat the purpose. If the purpose was to minimize slaughtered cows then shechting one and creating, say, 10 cows worth of meat wouldnt defeat the purpose.…not being as tasty can allow shechting an animal and cooking
the meat on Yom Tov rather than erev YT. Thus we see that it is an
important consideration.I think you may be giving that too much importance.
Ubiq
If a cell is a davar chashuv in halacha then we wouldn’t be able to drink water with all the microscopic organisms in it
why would this be different?Mentsch
A cell is not a davar chashuv nor is rennet. However even a non-davar chasuv, if it is a “maamid” Ie without it there is no final product (this may not be the best explanation I am open to others). Just like since without rennet you wouldn’t have cheese, that minute amount of rennet isnt batul, likely here too since without that original cell you wouldnt have your In vitro meat, that cell cannot be batul.
On the other hand, clearly rules of bittul dont apply to microscopic organisms, otherwise bacterium wouldnt be batul as they are beryeh a creature. Clearly on a microscopic level even a beryeh is batul perhaps a davar hamamid too (of course the rules for bitul are not necessarily equivalent and it is quite possible that while a LActobacillum acidophulus is batul althoug a beryeh a stem cell might not be batul) I’m not sure if the fact that it is deliberately added is necessarily relevant, since yogurts often advertise “live cultures” which are sometimes added and nonetheless certified kosher.
Furthermore hwen a cell divides its DNA is split between the 2 cells. So discussing which is hte “original stem cell” doesnt really make sense when there are 2 cells the “original cell” is gone and half of the DNA of each new cell came from the original cell. so the idea of bitul might not make sense at all. (I’m not sure if this makes it better or worse)
Of course all this ignores a perhaps more pertinent issue of davar habah min hatamei.
As in general shailah, The Gemorah in Sanhedrin (59b) reads:
כי הא דר”ש בן חלפתא הוה קאזיל באורחא פגעו בו הנך אריותא דהוו קא נהמי לאפיה אמר (תהלים קד, כא) הכפירים שואגים לטרף נחיתו ליה תרתי אטמתא חדא אכלוה וחדא שבקוה אייתיה ואתא לבי מדרשא בעי עלה דבר טמא הוא זה או דבר טהור א”ל אין דבר טמא יורד מן השמים בעי מיניה ר’ זירא מר’ אבהו ירדה לו דמות חמור מהו א”ל יארוד נאלא הא אמרי ליה אין דבר טמא יורד מן השמים:
I would assume based on the above Gemorah that the reason it is mutar is entirely based on the fact that it is אין דבר טמא יורד מן השמים, meaning, that anything else even if it is unnatural it has the same status as natural regarding Tumah etc. As after all a donkey is still a donkey.
However Rashi says:
הא אמרו ליה אין דבר טמא יורד מן השמים : ודבר שאינו הוא ואם ישנו טהור הוא:From Rashi’s added words :
“- ודבר שאינו הוא – ואם ישנו we can say that Rashi is implying that being that it was unnatural it has a status of “דבר שאינו הוא –However, as Ubiq pointed out, the fact that it is taken and grown out of a natural’s cell might give it a diff status, although we might argue that is completely as ‘Panim Chadashos’ and is entirely a diff Min, or perhaps it has the status of ‘Yotzeih Min Hatomeh’ etc as well…
In any case, it is indeed a fascinating shailah with many angles to ponder…
Why are bacteria different from plants?
Until their is actual “lab grown meat” in commercial production, anyone writing an halachic analysis is writing science fiction, not Torah (similar to: if I miss the time for saying Shma and then hop in a “Tardis” and go back a few hours and Shma on time, have I fulfilled the requirement of saying Shma b’Zman).
My prediction, is that Bnei Torah and Bnei Torah wannabees, will consider lab grown meat to be fleishig, and require a heckcher showing that the original cells were taken from a properly slaughtered kosher animal. If the “meat” is created by some sort of 3-D printer, with the material used being inorganic to begin with, it will be parve.
“Until their is actual “lab grown meat” in commercial production, anyone writing an halachic analysis is writing science fiction, not Torah”
At what point does it cross over from science fiction to Torah?
Does it have to be commercially available?
what if is developed but not mass produced yet?
does it have to be in stores? cna we discuss it once its on the ruck on the way to the store?
What if I can do it but nobody else, is it Torah for me and science fiction for you?Does this rule apply to practical questions that havent happened, for example discussing throwing a get that lands between the husband and wife, is that only Torah once such a metzius has occured? IF yes why is that different?
what about Cases that will never occur like te man deamor who says so regarding Ir hanidachas?Thanks
I found a מאירי on the above Gemorah I mentioned, regarding eating the donkey that came down from heaven:
“הרבה פעמים מהלכים באוויר, מתוך עיפוש האדים ולסיבות אחרות, שרצים ושאר בריות שפלות שבמיני הרחישות והשריצות, ויורדות בארץ, ודברים אלו אין פקפוק באיסורן כלל. ולא אמרו “אין דבר טמא יורד מן השמים” אלא בדברים שאינם מדרך טבע ותולדות, אלא מדרך מופת, והוא שנלקחו הדברים במיני הבהמות טהורות וטמאות שהן דברים שאי אפשר בהם אלא מדרך שינוי הטבעים וחידוש הבריאה
I wonder if the above statement
שאי אפשר בהם אלא מדרך שינוי הטבעים וחידוש הבריאה can be applied to the above unnatural process and thus will be proof that is permitted. The way I understand it, he is basically saying that the above שרצים created via bacteria and mold etc is all part of nature, but something that is מדרך שינוי הטבעים is a diff category.Udder nonsense!
…not being as tasty can allow shechting an animal and cooking
the meat on Yom Tov rather than erev YT. Thus we see that it is an
important consideration.You didn’t mean that regarding kashrus, right?
(I just realized that now.)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.