SHERETZ LIST

1. Choled: Weisel, Martin, Ermine, Rat, Mole, Field Mouse
2. Achbar: Mouse, Rat, Gerbil
3. Tzav: Ferret, Lizard, Salamander
4. Anakah: Hedgehog, beaver, mole, shrew, Gecko
5. Ko'ach: Chameleon, Lizard, Monitor Lizard
6. Chomet: Snail
7. Tinshemet; Mole
8. Let'ah: Lizard

Review Answers Shiur 14 12/11/05

Review Answers Shiur 14
PLEASE NOTE QUESTION 4 WAS CHANGED AND A NEW VERSION OF THE SHIUR WAS PUBLISHED, 4.1

1) Heter can not mevatel issur.

In a case of three pieces, which are yavesh, and I don't know which one piece is assur, and which two are mutar, then I say the heter does mevatel the issur, since I don't know which two of the three are mutar. There is a general rule issur is batel brov. However, 10 pieces of heter, and one piece looks like the neveilah piece that just fell into the taaruvot. Now you have 11 pieces, two of them look the same. One is neveilah. I don't say the 9 pieces are mitztaref to mevatel the issur, they are not part of my heter, since they are not part of my safek. The only part that is safek, is the peice that looks like neveilah. At this point I only have one against one, this is not enough because it is not batel brov. Another example is solid in a liquid, since the liquid is not the part of the safek it does not help to be mevatel the solid b'rov. In simon 109 we see that this is a Machlokes between the Shach and Minchas Yaakov whether we need 2:1 or just a bit more

2) One receives malkos by the eight shratzim for eating the size of a lentil while sha'ar issurim only receives malkos for a k'zayis. This is a chumra regarding the 8 shratzim. Because an adasha of sheretz brings tuma, the same quantity receives malkos. Further, according to the Rama, the Rabannan gave that quantity of a sheretz the din of biriah.

3) The Shach and Taz disagree in the case that the achbar was cut up in such a way that it cannot be removed.

The Taz holds that the achbar is not batel because it is a case of yaveish b'lach. This makes the achbar nikar even if it can't be strained and even if it can't be seen.
The Shach holds that if the issur cannot be separated it has the din of yaveish b'yaveish. The reason the achbar is ossur is because we are choshesh that when eating you will eat an adasha which is ossur.
The nafka mina is by sha'ar issurim. If this were not a sheretz, the Shach would matir it because you are not going to come to eat a kazayit of identifiable issur, or as a whole piece. The Taz would ossur it because it is yaveish b'lach.

4) Bees' legs are botal in honey even though they are nikar because...
According to the Taz it is nikar by feeling, according to the Shach it is nikar by seeing

5) Yaveish b'yaveish min b'aino mino is batel if the issur is not nikar. For example, if I have diced baked apple that is ossur (because it was cooked with yayin nesech) and a piece of it gets mixed in with 60 times as much diced baked pear (which was cooked in kosher wine), the mixture is yaveish b'yaveish min b'aino mino. There is no way to identify the diced apple so it is not nikar, but it is batel b'shishim in the pears.

6) According to the Mechaber the shuman is mutar since the achbar gives a bad taste. According to the Rama, if it possible that hot shuman was poured on the achbar then the shuman is assur even if there is 60. This is because the achbar will osser every klipa. If hot shuman was not poured on the achbar and the shuman is hard then all that is needed is a n'tila since it is a safek s'faika.

7) According to Chasam Sofer they do. The Pischei Tshuva brings sources that indicate they don't.

8) 60 is needed against the blias of a fly if the fly is kavush in whiskey and then removed.

9) Gilyon Marsha (8) in the name of the Shach (84:30) states that worms are not repulsive, therefore you need 60x. The Taz (84:15), Minchas Yaakov and Mishb'tzos Zahav disagree and consider them repulsive.




Sheretz List
1. Choled: Weisel, Martin, Ermine, Rat, Mole, Field Mouse
2. Achbar: Mouse, Rat, Gerbil
3. Tzav: Ferret, Lizard, Salamander
4. Anakah: Hedgehog, beaver, mole, shrew, Gecko
5. Ko'ach: Chameleon, Lizard, Monitor Lizard
6. Chomet: Snail
7. Tinshemet; Mole
8. Let'ah: Lizard

Review Answers Shiur 13

Review Answers Shiur 13

1) because the blias from the kli are lifgam and nt"lf is mutar b'dieved.

2) It is  a gezaira lest we come to use a ben yomo kli.

3) A 12-month-old kli that was used the food...
1. ...is mutar because the blias are like afar. (Chacham Tzvi)
2. ...is mutar if it was originally only used for cold food, but if it was used for hot food is ossur. (Panim Meiros)
3. ...is ossur even if it was only used for cold food, but we are maikil if the issur was yayin nesech. (Davar Shmuel)

4) According to Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam, a kli is considered to be aino ben yomo if it has not been used for cooking during the night. The blias then become lifgam.
According to the Rashbam, a kli is considered to be aino ben yomo if it has not been used for cooking for a period of 24 hours.

5) Leinas Laila starts at shkiya. According to the Kaf Hachaim everyone agrees that it ends at daybreak. According to the Darchai T'shuva it is a machlokes.

6) If a pot is balua with sha’ar issurim and it was used to cook water it is aino ben yomo...
...from the time of the issur. (Smak)
...from the time of the water. (Sefer Hatrumah)
The Sefer Hatrumah holds that the water becomes ch'n'n and "re-ossurs" the pot, so we start counting from the water. The Smak holds by ch'n'n but only in the case where there is mamashut. Since this is a case of blias only, there is no ch'n'n in the water.

7) According to the Mechaber we only count from the water by basar b'chalav. According to the Rama we count from the water even by sha'ar issurim unless there is a hefsed.

8) The Shach holds that since the water has the din of haba m'basar b'chalav which has the din of sha'ar issurim, therefore the Mechaber should agree that even by basar b'chalav we do not have to count from the water.

9) By Basar B'chalav the Mechaber holds in accordance with the Sefer Hatrumah. If the water was boiled before night began, the water is assur and 24 hours is counted from the time of boiling the water. The Rama, however, holds that we can be maikil and count 24 hours from the time of the issur rather than the time of boiling the water, because linat layla cause the blias to become lifgam. By sha'ar issurim the Mechaber agrees that we count from the issur.

10) Question 10 should read "Is there a difference between the above case and if the water was cooked after the night and there was leenas lyla beforehand?"
The Beit Yosef holds that although we normally rule in accordance with the Sefer Hatrumah, we can rely on the Smak in this case, because we have the opinion of Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam that linat layla causes the blias to become pagum. So we count 24 hours from the time of the issur and not from the time of the boiling of the water. The Rama's conclusion in this case is the same.

11) The Rama holds that if there was linat layla between cooking the meat and cooking the milk, and the water was boiled afterwards, the 24 hour period runs from the time of cooking the milk. According to the Shach and Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Beit Yosef holds otherwise. The Shach says that there is no heter of linat layla here according to the Beit Yosef, so 24 hours are needed from the time of boiling the water. Rabbi Akiva Eiger adds that the Beit Yosef is machmir when the water is cooked before night because the water becomes a neveila. Thus, 24 hours are needed from the time of boiling the water But if the water is cooked after night has passed, since ch'n'n in this case is a d'rabbanan we can be maikil.

Review Answers Shiur 12

Review Answers Shiur 12

1) We learn nt"lf from neveila l'ger. The pasuk says that we should give a neveilah to the ger who lives among us; we learn that food which is suitable for the ger to eat is neveilah but that which is unsuitable is not neveilah -- rather it is mutar.

2) The taste of a bad tasting bug is batel. Regarding the bug itself, if the bug originally tasted good and is now l'fgam (not fitting to eat) that it is batel. If the bug originally tastes bad then it is not batel. However, the Chavas Da'as holds that even a bad tasting bug that tastes worse than its original taste is batel.

3) The Rashba holds that as long as the issur is in the minority it is batel if it is Lifgam.

The Ran holds that if the issur makes the food taste bad but increases the volume of the food such that you are happier with the increased volume than you are saddened by the lifgam taste, the food is ossur even though it is l'fgam.

4) If the issur gives no taste, the Shach learns from gid haneseh that it is batel b'shishim, R' Akiva Eiger holds that it is batel b'rov if it gives no taste.

5) While the food is hot, the food is mutar according to the Shach. The Pri Chadash holds that even when it is l'fgam it is ossur. The Pri Megadim is maikil, and the Kaf Hachaim is maikil in a hefsed m'rubeh. Later, when it cools, it is ossur according to all opinions.

6) The Rama does not rely on not bar not in our case because:
1. He is worried that the spoon will touch the side of the pot and give taste without going through the food and thus not be not bar not d'hetera (The Taz in 94:7 says that the Rama is not worried about this).
2. By cooking in order to be muter we need 3 no'ts of heter in order not to ossur a pot that is l'shvach. Therefore if the spoon has ossur blias in it (because they came from something that was l'shvach) there will only be 2 no'ts, one from the spoon to the food and one from the food to the pot.

7) He wants to teach us that the taste imparted to the honey is lifgam even in the case of a ben yoma pot.

8) It is a machloket whether meat in honey is lifgam. The Taz says that it is not lifgram; the Rambam says it is. The Mechaber holds that it is lifgram but not if there are also onions and spices present.

L'ma'aseh for Sefardim in a hefsed m'rubeh one can be maikil that meat in honey is lifgam but for Ashkenazim it is lishvach.