TB Zevakhim 95 and 96 Basic koshering laws

We learned some basic kashering laws on TB Zevakhim 95 and 96. The rabbis ordained that bread should be parev (neither dairy or meat) lest a person accidentally transgresses by eating meat and milk together.

“§ The Gemara relates: There was a certain oven that was smeared with animal fat all over its walls and floor. Rabba bar Ahilai prohibited eating bread baked in that oven forever, and he prohibited even eating the bread with salt alone, lest one come to eat it with kutaḥ, a dish made from milk, water, salt, and bread crumbs. According to Rabba bar Ahilai, the oven will never fully eliminate the fat.

“The Gemara raises an objection to this from a baraita: With regard to baking bread, one may not knead the dough with milk, and if one nevertheless kneaded the dough with milk, all of the bread made from that dough is forbidden, because one might become accustomed to sin. As one habitually eats bread with meat, he might also eat this bread with meat and unwittingly transgress the prohibition against eating meat with milk.” (Daf 95b, Sefaria.org translation)

Earthenware cannot be koshered. One must break and once it is broken, the taste absorbed into it vanishes. “Concerning the statement in the mishna that these halakhot also apply to a vessel into which a boiling cooked dish was poured, the Gemara notes that the Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to a sin offering, the verse states: “In which it is cooked” (Leviticus 6:21). I have derived only that this applies to a vessel in which one cooked the sin offering. From where do I derive that it applies also to a vessel into which one poured a boiling cooked dish? The verse states more fully: “But the earthenware vessel in which it is cooked shall be broken.” Since the verse employs the phrase: “In which it is…shall be broken,” that teaches that if the hot meat is in the vessel, whether cooked or poured into the vessel, these halakhot apply to it, and if it is an earthenware vessel it must be broken.” (Daf 95b, Sefaria.org translation)

A metal oven is koshered by heating white hot (libun- לִיבּוּן) in inside. “Rav construes that ruling of the baraita, according to which the fat can be burned out of the oven, as referring to an oven fashioned of metal, which cleanses the fat when kindled. ” (Daf 95b, Sefaria.org translation)

A pot is koshered by cleaning it and boiling water hag’alah-הגעלה) in to purge the absorbed taste. “With regard to a pot in which one cooked meat, one may not cook milk in it; and if one cooked milk in it, the meat absorbed in the pot renders the milk forbidden if it imparts flavor to it. Similarly, if one cooked teruma in a pot, one may not cook non-sacred food in it; and if one cooked non-sacred food in it, the absorbed teruma renders the mixture sacred if it imparts flavor to it. Therefore, a pot requires purging with boiling liquid in order to expel the flavor of teruma from it.” (Daf 96b, Sefaria.org translation)

The Mishnah on TB Zevakhim 94b requires metal vessels used in the Temple that has cooked meat of the sin offering needs scouring and rinsing (shetfa umerika- מְרִיקָה וְשְׁטִיפָה) (after koshering it by hag’alah-gg).

What’s the difference between hag’alah and shetfa umerika? The Gemara provides three different explanations.

“1. Three amora’im address the apparent inconsistency that while the Torah excludes vessels used for teruma from the halakha of scouring and rinsing, the baraita teaches that these vessels must be purged. Abaye said: When the verse excludes teruma from the halakha of scouring and rinsing, this is necessary only for that which the Master said: If one cooked in only part of the vessel, the entire vessel requires scouring and rinsing. By contrast, in this case, if teruma was cooked in only part of a vessel, one must perform scouring and rinsing only in the place of the cooking, and not in the whole vessel.

“2.  Rava said: When the verse excludes teruma from the halakha of scouring and rinsing, that is necessary only for that which the Master said: The verse specifies: “It shall be scoured and rinsed in water” (Leviticus 6:21), but the vessel is not to be scoured and rinsed in wine. It must be scoured and rinsed “in water,” but not in diluted wine. By contrast, in this case, i.e., the vessel in which teruma was cooked, it may be scoured and rinsed even in wine, and even in diluted wine.

“3. Rabba bar Ulla said: When the verse excludes teruma from the halakha of scouring and rinsing, this is necessary only for that which the Master said: One must perform scouring and rinsing with cold water, in addition to purging a vessel of its absorbed flavors with boiling water. By contrast, in this case, i.e., with regard to the vessel in which teruma was cooked, one may cleanse the vessel even by performing only the purging with boiling water, which removes the residue of the forbidden food, and omitting the cold water processes entirely.

“The Gemara asks: This works out well according to the one who says that scouring and rinsing are performed with cold water; but according to the one who says that scouring is done by purging with hot water, and rinsing is a different procedure performed with cold water, what can be said? According to this opinion, the verse is also referring to purging; and if the verse excludes vessels used for teruma, how does the baraita teach that such vessels much be purged? The Gemara answers: According to the opinion that differentiates scouring, which is done with boiling water, from rinsing, which is done with cold water, the Torah excludes vessels used for teruma only from the additional rinsing that the Torah requires after the scouring.” (Daf 96b, Sefaria.org translation)

 

I would be remiss to add that it is our tradition to rinse with cold water a pot we have koshered by the means of hag’alah.

Who goes first? Zevakhim dappim 89 and 91

Imagine we’re back when the Temple in Jerusalem still stood and there was a long line of people who were bringing their sacrifices. Some were sin sacrifices, some were Thanksgiving offerings, and some were the daily sacrifices, temidim. Which sacrifices take precedence over others? The procedure wasn’t first-come first-served. Daf TB Zevakhim 89 provides the two considerations who goes first.

The first Mishnah in chapter 10 teaches a more frequent offering takes precedence over a less frequent one. “A offering that is more frequent than another precedes the other offering. Therefore, the daily offerings precede the additional offerings, which are sacrificed only on certain days. When Shabbat and the New Moon coincide, the additional Shabbat offerings precede the additional New Moon offerings (because the Shabbat offering happens 52 times a year while the additional Rosh Hodesh ,New Month offering happens only 12 times and 13 times in a leap year-gg). Likewise, the additional New Moon offerings precede the additional New Year offerings…

The second Mishna provides a second consideration. The more sacred the sacrifice takes precedence over the last sacred sacrifice. “Any offering that is more sacred than another precedes the other offering. The mishna elaborates: If there is blood of a sin offering and blood of a burnt offering to be presented, the blood of the sin offering precedes the blood of the burnt offering because it effects acceptance, i.e., atonement, for severe transgressions punishable by karet. Likewise, if there are limbs of a burnt offering and portions of a sin offering to be burned on the altar, the burning of the limbs of the burnt offering precedes the portions of the sin offering, because the burnt offering is entirely burned in the flames on the altar, whereas only part of the sin offering is burned.” (daf 89a, Sefaria.org translation)

Even though the Temple no longer stands and we no longer offer up sacrifice, the first Mishnah provides us with a practical application today. The rule is formulated thusly: “תָּדִיר וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ תָּדִיר — תָּדִיר קוֹדֵם-When a frequent practice and an infrequent practice coincide, the frequent practice takes precedence over the infrequent practice. (daf 91a, Sefaria.org translation)” We actually apply this rule this Shabbat! On this Shabbat we shall read from three different Torahs because Rosh Hodesh Tevet and holiday of Hanukkah both fall in this Shabbat. We read from one Torah the weekly Torah portion of Meketz. We read from one Torah the special reading for Rosh Hodesh. We read from one Torah the Hanukkah reading for the 6^th day of Hanukkah.

Based on the rule “תָּדִיר וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ תָּדִיר — תָּדִיר קוֹדֵם-When a frequent practice and an infrequent practice coincide, the frequent practice takes precedence over the infrequent practice, we now know the order of the Torah readings. The weekly Torah reading comes first because is the most frequent. Next comes the Rosh Hodesh reading because it is the next frequent reading because it is read 12 times a year or 13 times in a leap year. Finally the Hanukkah reading is read last because it is read only eight times a year.

Go to your synagogue this Shabbat and witness one of the few times we read from three different Torahs.

 

 

 

 

 

#Shabbathanukkah#devartorah Perseverance is the key to success

When a husband built a covered porch on the front of his house, he anticipated that someday a bird might try to build a nest there. So he built the top of the corner post on a slant. Later the husband and wife laughed smugly when we saw robins trying their best to claim squatting rights to a new home. Piles of grass on the porch revealed their wasted efforts. But after 2 days of steady rain, they saw that a nest had indeed appeared in the very spot they thought was impossible. Because of the rain, Mrs. Robin was able to mix up a batch of mud mortar. Weaving it with twigs and grass, this determined feathered friend had built herself a new nest. She had persevered.

Hanukkah teaches us the importance of persistence. The fight against the Syrian Greeks was not easy. That is why we are so grateful. We thank God who, “delivered the strong into the hands of the weak, the many into the hands of the few, the impure into the hands of the pure, the wicked into the hands of the righteous, and arrogant into the hands of those who were engaged in the study of Torah.” (The special Hanukkah prayer added to every Amidah for eight days). Nevertheless, the liberation of the Temple did not end the war. The war against the Syrian Greeks continued for several more years before all of Jerusalem was free. Hanukkah teaches us that when we depend on God to help us through our difficulties, we are empowered to keep going even when we can’t always see the immediate resolution of our problems.

Trying to live a proud Jewish life while experiencing hardship can leave you frustrated and discouraged. Especially after shooting at the Bondi Beach in Australia and the shooting at Brown University of a Jewish professor’s final exam review class, we are very aware of the growing anti-Semitism in the United States and around the world. You might feel powerless as well. So as you meditate on every lit candle of the Hanukiyah, the eight branch Hanukkah candelabra, let this holiday encourage you never to give up and never lose hope. Perseverance is inspiring!

 

Why carry around heavy emotional baggage? #Vayishlakh#parashathashavua#devartorah

In college, my roommate studied William Shakespeare’s writing for a semester. The class required a giant textbook containing everything Shakespeare had ever written. The book weighed several pounds, and he had to carry it for hours at a time. Lugging that weight around caused his back to hurt, and it eventually broke a metal fastener on his bookbag.

Some things are just too heavy for us to carry. Emotional baggage from past hurt, for example, can weigh us down with bitterness and hatred. But God wants us to have freedom through forgiving people and, when possible, reconciling with them. The deeper the pain, the longer this may take. That’s okay. It took many years for Esau to forgive Jacob for stealing his birthright and blessing (Genesis 27:36).

When the two finally reunited, Esau graciously forgave his brother and even “embraced him” (33:4). Not a word was exchanged before they both burst into tears. Over time, Esau had let go of the anger that made him consider murder (27:41). And all those years gave Jacob the chance to see the magnitude of how he’d harmed his brother. He was humble and respectful throughout the reunion (33:8-11).

In the end, both brothers came to the place where neither required anything from the other (vv. 9, 15). It was enough to forgive and be forgiven and walk away free from the heavy baggage of the past. Wayne Chirisa wrote, “Reconciliation is not about forgetting, it’s about remembering without fear or vengeance.”

Why lug around heavy baggage?

 

 

 

 

Rava summarizes the rules of nullification Zevakhim 79

 

On today’s daf TB Zevakhim 79 Rava summarizes the rules of nullification in different kinds of mixtures. These rules will become more and more relevant when we study the laws of kashrut. “Rava says, in summary of these halakhot: The Sages said that the status of an item in a mixture is determined by the taste, i.e., if the taste of one substance is noticeable in a mixture with another substance it is not nullified, and the Sages said that a prohibited item is nullified by the majority, and the Sages also said that the status of an item in a mixture is determined by the appearance, i.e., if the appearance of a substance is recognizable in a mixture it is not nullified. Rava elaborates: With regard to a type of food mixed with food not of its own type, the nullification is determined by the taste (מִין בְשֶאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ בְטַעְמָא). In the case of a type of food mixed with food of its own type, the nullification is determined by the majority (מִין בְמִינוֹ  בְרוּבָא). In a case where there is a possibility to determine the status of an item based on appearance, the nullification is by appearance. (חֲזוּתָא  בְמַרְאֶה)” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rambam elaborates in his Mishneh Torah.

1.    מִין בְשֶאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ בְטַעְמָא “When a forbidden substance becomes mixed with a permitted substance of another type, [it causes it to become forbidden] if its flavor can be detected. When [a forbidden substance becomes mixed with a permitted substance of] the same type and it is impossible to detect [the forbidden substance] by its flavor, its presence becomes nullified if there is a majority [of the permitted substance].

“What is implied? When the fat of the kidneys falls into beans and becomes dissolved, the beans should be tasted. If the taste of fat cannot be detected, they are permitted. If [not only] the taste, [but also] the substance of the fat is present, they are forbidden according to Scriptural Law. If the flavor could be detected, but there is no substance, they are forbidden by Rabbinic Law…

(Obviously a Jew cannot taste mixture lest he actually taste the forbidden food and transgress the law of the Torah. One summons a Gentile to sample the mixture to see if he can taste the forbidden food. But generally we use the following rules of thumb-gg) Into what quantity [of a permitted substance] must a forbidden substance be mixed for it to be considered nullified because of its tiny proportion? [Each forbidden substance according to] the measure the Sages specified for it. There are substances that are nullified in a mixture 60 times its size (non sanctified food like a stew for tonight’s dinner-gg), others in a mixture 100 times its size (terumah-gg), and still others in a mixture 200 times its size. (kelayim and orlah-gg)” (Forbidden foods 15:1-2, 5) (Sefaria.org translation)

 

The Shulkhan Arukh poskins in Yoreh De’ah

 

2.    מִין בְמִינוֹ  בְרוּבָא “If the mixture is composed of two foods of the same nature  (like 2 types of meat, for example a kosher cut of meat and a nonkosher cut of meat -gg) and the pot is overturned in such a way that it is impossible to determine if the quantity of the permitted food was indeed sixty times greater than that of the forbidden food, if it was recognized before the accident that the permitted food made up the majority of the mixture, it is permitted; otherwise, it is forbidden.
GLOSS: Foods with the same name, although of different forms, are of the same nature; in this case, it is the similarity of name, not taste.” (88:1) (Sefaria.org translation)

Rambam gives the example from our daf

3.    חֲזוּתָא  בְמַרְאֶה “A mikveh is not disqualified, neither because of a change of its water's taste, nor a change of its smell, only because its color changes. Any substance that may not be used to constitute a mikveh initially disqualifies one, if it causes its color to change.
What is implied? Wine, milk, blood, or other liquids that are classified as fruit juices do not disqualify a mikveh if three lugim of them fall into it, because it was only said that three lugim of drawn water disqualify a mikveh. They do, however, disqualify it if they change the color of its water.” Mishneh Torah, Sefer Toharah, Mikvaot 7:1) (Sefaria.org translation)