Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
As I mentioned on other threads, with modern technology, the heter of powdered milk is irrelevant. Today powdered milk can and is manufactured from horse and camel milk.
sunflower seeds absolutey need to be checked. a very high percentange are infested.
canine sounds like Joseph to me
I believe Rabbi Akiva Eiger says it is included in ?? ????? ?????
cherrybim: do I interpret your silence as a concession?
nu
HaLeiVi: “People lump everything they don’t understand into one spoon, and call it Avoda Zara and Kishuf”
So again, you are claiming Rav Elyashiv etc paskened on something they didn’t understand. Am I understanding you correctly?
I think my case is self-evident. You stated that transformation renders a non-kosher entity into a kosher one, but Igros Moshe YD 2:23 and 27 says that it does not. He also clearly equates gelatin from a temea with that from a neveila.
Let’s here your case.
wolf: if you have NO brain you are safe.jk
HaLeiVi: So Rav Elyashiv, Rav Vozner and the dozen or so other Poskim who asser have “no idea” what they are talking about?
“cherrybim
Member
All proofs from past poskim concerning non-kosher soap is not valid bizman hazeh , because even if there were a non-kosher fat in the soap, in our times the process entails a chemical transformation that renders (excuse the pun) the soap a non-fat entity.
There are similar items and foods used today that start out with a non-kosher ingredient but the chemical transformation allows it for kosher use.”
PBA: Sorry for the delay.
When a davar is pogem a ta’aruves, Shulchan Aruch paskens like the Rashba that the ta’aruves is mutar if the majority is heter. The basis for this Halacha is learned in the Gemara from neveila sheina reuya l’ger. This would certainly seem to be the case with our soap, and the ikar hadin should be that soap is mutar.
However, the Rambam writes that neveila serucha sheina reuya l’ger is patur, which implies assur. The Pri Chadash understands the issur to be bal teshaktzu, which would not apply in a ta’aruves. However, the Pri Toar understands that the issur neveila remains. The Chavos Da’as writes that according to the Rambam who explains the heter of neveila serucha is from “shelo k’derech achilaso,” the cheftza is still assur and the heter is on the ma’aseh achila.
Therefore, according to the Pri Toar and Chavos Da’as, while the soap itself is mutar, the non-kosher ingredients in the soap would still be assur. Based on this, it is understandable why many people would want to be machmir to use kosher soap, to avoid putting non-kosher ingredients on their dishes, and by extension, food.
Furthermore, the Teshuvos HaRashba, brought in Shulchan Aruch YD 134 writes that any ingredient intentionally added to a ta’aruves is never batel, no matter how miniscule. This would presumably apply even to a davar pagum that requires bitul b’rov according to the Rashba and SA.
Additionally, the Ran holds that rov heter is not enough. The con of the ta’am pagum must outweigh the pro of the added volume. While SA in YD 103 only brings this opinion as a yesh omrim, according to the Pri Megadim and Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Shulchan Aruch paskens this way in Hilchos Pesach. This may be an issue with soaps if the non-kosher ingredient is critical to its cleaning performance.
According to most Poskim “one brain” is assur miDeoraisa.
Thank you DY
cherrybim: I remember the good old days when the moderators would delete gratuitous, personal attacks.
Anyways, basar b’chalv is not an issue with gelatin because it is a taam kalush that cannot create a new issur, just like nat bar nat. However, temea and neveila are already assur even when only a taam kalush and have not heter of nat bar nat or here with gelatin.
As I have said previously, I consider all soap kosher, but not because of certain Poskim who hold a blanket rule that all transformed products are kosher. You have not answered how you can quote Rav Grodzinsky as an unquestioned fact and ignore Reb Moshe arguing.
cherrybim: “Are you saying that the Rav Hamachshir for kosher gelatin requires that it come from animals that had sh’chita?”
Absolutely. The Poskim who forbid gelatin from a beheima temeia would equalyy forbid from a neveila. All Hechsherim follow the machmir opinions, including Rav Belsky and Rav Shachter at the OU.
“Hello, is that a new shita?”
Not at all.
“I didn’t permit transformed foods, poskim have.
I have not said anything anywhere that would imply that I hold of any shita that disagrees with Rav Moshe.”
But the Poskim who permit transformed foods are disagreeing with Reb Moshe!!!
Not true!!!
“Sorry to disappoint you, but I’m no posek”
True! so why do you make a blanket statement permitting transformed foods.
I am familiar with the teshuva in Achiezer, Rav Abramsky was also matir. But if you are NOT a Posek, why do you take sides in a machlokes.
As I pointed out, neither Reb Ahron Kotler nor Reb Moshe Feinstein agree with you.
The obligation to love a ger only begins after they convert. It is not an obligation to accept them. However, from Hilchos Dayanus it is obvious that accepting gerim was important enough that Beis Din Semuchim delegated the ability to convert to Non-semuchim in Chutz lAretz.
ROB: there is such an opinion in the Gemara, but Shulchan Aruch does not pasken that way.
cherrybim: I don’t disagree that soap is mutar, just with your logic that a chemical transformation automatically converts a non-kosher item into a kosher one.
cherrybim: whether a treif item that becomes inedible in the preocessing looses its non-kosher status is not at all a given. See Mishnas Reb Ahron and Igros Moshe who are machmir on gelatin.
PBA: A more appropriate source would be the discussion in YD 103 if ????? ????? ????? ??? is mutar or patur. According to most Achronim it is not ??? ??????. see Pri Chadash, Pri Toar, Chavos Daas etc
Thomas English Muffins have less than 1/60 milk, despite the OU-D. They are not a cholov stam issue.
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.
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.
oomis: there is no problem destroying (or plucking) the root of a beard hair unless it is done with a blade.
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.
PY: Rav Blumenkranz was concerned that the screen itself is sharp enough to cut, and it is the lower blade. This is NOT my experience.
PY: when the lift-and-cut pulls the hair up it pulls some skin with it, just try to pull a hair w/o skin. The concern is that the skin could be pulled high enough to make contact with the blade.
The concern with other shavers is that the screen today is so thin as to be halachically insignificant and the shave is close enough to be classified as hashchasa. I’m not agreeing with this second opinion, just explaining it.
yitayningwut: Which siman are you learning? I am currently saying shiur on 103.
you’re right. I should have stated that the Halacha does not NECESSARILY follow the Rashba.
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 ????.
pba: only the second of the Shach’s three answers is consistant with the Rashba, the other 2 are clearly NOT.
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.
???’ ????? ?”?. ?”? ???, ????”? ????? ?”?. ?? ???’ ?”? ?????, ??”? ?”? ?? ???? ?’ “???? ??????”, ??? ???? ???? ????? ????? “???? ????? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ???”, ??”? ?”? ?’ ??? ??”? “??? ?? ?????”, ???? ????? ???? ?”? ?’, ??”? ?”? ?’ ????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????, ??”? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ???”? ?”? ?”?, ?”? ?”? ?”? ?’ ??’ ??????? ????? ????”? ??? ??? ??
?’ ??”? ?”? ?”? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ????
Sam2
Member
The source for the Rosh will have to wait about a week until i get back to my notebook.
Posted 6 days ago
did you find the notebook?
Har Tzvi and Rav Elyashiv ybl”c write that nukuvas hakeres is a safek treifa, not vadai
To answer the OP’s question, the Moslems are not building on Kever Rachal, they want the existing structure declared a mosque.
did you see what they added to the magazine this week???
sam: “I think we can say, based on statistical percentages worldwide, that Anan Sahadi that there is more than 1.6% Treifos in any large batch of cows”
Statistics is by definition a probabilty and average. As Rav Shachter demonstrated you could have an elderly herd with close to 100% triefos. On the other hand, my friend says when he schechts in Uruguay they could have days where they schect hundreds of cows and not one is treif.
“And I am not talking about having Kulos. I am just talking about not having Chumros which in other situations we wouldn’t take”
Who is talking about chumros? And where do you find any difference at all between a lav and an asei?
sam: Rav Shachter told me personally 96%, but that’s not important.
“it’s very clear that we have more reasons to add Chumros to a Lav that is Mefurash Bikrah than one which isn’t. I would think that would be Pashut”
Not at all. A drasha is just as much dOraisa as mefurash. Would you be meikil eating Basar bChalav since the Torah only writes cooking and eating is a drasha?
You still haven’t addressed my point that there is NO ta’aruvos on statistical probability alone without vadai issur.
I’m also looking forward to a source for the Rosh an Ra’avad
dy: all milk. sirchos are much more common in the older milk cows than DA
sam: surprising because Rav Shachter told me himself that his research found 96% treifos in milk cows and his son says he stopped eating dairy products 5 years ago. Also, Reb Yudel Shain claims HaRav Elyashiv told him all milk is assur.
First of all why is milk an Aseh, the Gemorra in Bechoros learns it out from “gamal” which is a lav? Also, can you quote any source or example in Issur vHeter where we are more lenient on an Aseh dOraisa than a Lav?
sam: you are making a mistake comparing milk to a ta’aruvos of vadai issur. There is NO certainty that ANY milk from a treifa was mixed in, just a staistical probability. For ruba d’lesa kaman we apply kol d’parish.
What is your source for R’ Elyashiv’s heter?
The cows are different breeds and grow in different climates.
also goodbye and sam2?
cherrybim: yes a number of teshuvos to R Teitz. I believe YD 1:60-63 or so
sam: the hechsherim pasken that 40% may not be eaten and are classified as treif, likely many of those are sfeikos and chumros. But if you won’t eat the meat, why would you drink the milk from such a cow???
BTW South America has a much lower % treifos, but also much tougher meat.
pba: in Chazal’s days it may be that rov were not treifos, but that metzius is not necessarily relevant today
Sorry Sam. According to the OU in North America 40% treifos. According to friends of mine who are shu”bim here in EY also.