Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Not Exactly A Priori Nullification, Just Sort Of

Yes, Virginia, there is ביטול/nullification; no, Corrigan, that is the wrong way to go (to fix things).

As mentioned, siman 92 of Yoreh Deah is titled: The Laws Concerning Milk Falling into a Pot of Meat, which contains nine סעיפים/sections. I also mentioned there: Also some stuff about חנ''ן -- when a leetle bit of milk or meat makes a big chunk of forbidden meat/milk combination. More about all that later, בעזרת השם.

It is later, ברוך השם.

Perhaps one of the reasons that this siman begins discussing meat falling into hot milk is because that situation is a relatively straightforward case of forbidden milk/meat mixtures. That is because the chunk of meat itself that falls into a liquid bath of milk is, of course, forbidden and must be removed from the pot. The only question is what about the remaining dairy liquid and the pot. A pot of meat, though, tends to have chunks of meat, as well as chunks of other more or less edible ingredients. (Potatoes and broccoli are more edible, brussel sprouts are less edible, IMHO.) Moreover, it is not usually a chunk of dairy (ie, cheese) that falls into a pot, but some milk, which disperses and remains in the pot.

As we all know, milk becomes בטול/nullified in meat when there is 60 times one ingredient over the other. Take a simple example: you make a cholent with 60 oz of ground beef (really good, by the way) and one oz of milk falls into the (liquidy) cholent and immediately becomes mixed into a homogeneous mixture. The magic of ביטול/nullification lets you serve that cholent. (As long as your wife doesn't see, of course; which is why I always go to get the cholent. Just in case.) That's the easy case. Another easy case is one oz of milk falling onto and absorbed into a chunk of meat that is less than 60 oz; in which case you now simply have 60 (or less) oz of forbidden milk/meat.

Things get messier when there is less than 60 oz of meat, but still 60 total oz of cholent -- when you add the barley and potatoes and whatnot. Fascinating, but not for now.

Here's some more fun: Suppose that chunk of meat is situated half in the cholent and half above. (You know, that piece you try to grab before anyone else notices!) In that case we have a machlokes Rashi and the Ri (one of his grandsons, one of the Ba'alie Tosafos). According to Rashi we need to be strict and consider that chunk as completely outside the cholent. Since nearly any splatter of milk will be more than 1/60th of any particular chunk, that chunk needs to be removed. On the other hand, if that chunk had been submerged, or if we hadn't noticed and had stirred or covered the pot, then the milk would be בטול/nullified in the mixture. In fact, according to the Ri, as long as part of the chunk was submerged, we take on that the heat of the cholent and the meat essentially mixes everything immediately; it is immediately considered as if the chunk had been stirred in or the pot covered.

Hmm...

Usually we would be strict like Rashi since it is a machlokes about a Torah prohibition. In this case, though, since Rashi really is an obvious stringency, in the case of a large loss, we can be lenient and just stir the meat through, cover the pot, and serve it up. (מעדני השלחן צב:ב ס''ק כ''ו)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: Why Halacha Has "b'di'avad"

There was this Jew who knew every "b'di'avad" (aka, "Biddy Eved", the old spinster librarian) in the book.  When ever he was called on something, his reply was invariably, "biddy eved, it's fine".  When he finally left this world and was welcomed to Olam Haba, he was shown to a little, damp closet with a bare 40W bulb hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't believe his eyes and said in astonishment, "This is Olam Haba!?!"  "Yes, Reb Biddy Eved,  for you this is Olam Haba." b'di'avad gets used like that; f you don't feel like doing something the best way, do it the next (or less) best way.  But Chazal tell us that "kol ha'omer HaShem vatran, m'vater al chayav" -- anyone who thinks HaShem gives partial credit is fooling himself to death (free translation.  Ok, really, really free translation; but its still true).  HaShem created us and this entire reality for one and only one purpose: for use...