Melichah

Rabbi Simon
Summer 2006
Issur Dam: S1
There is an issur dam that we have to get rid of to eat the food. Do we have to get rid of
every drop of blood?
5 pesukim regarding the issur dam
Kreisus (p8) (4b)- Why does the Torah need to specify the issur of dam 5 times?
1) Chullin, 2) Kudshim, 3) Kesui Dam (covered over), 4) Evarim (in the limbs) and
5) Dam Ha-tamtzis (drainage dam), that they are all assur. Some dam has an issur kares,
some is only a lav of malkos and some dam is really mutar to eat.
Dam she’ha’neshama teluah bo
Kreisus (20b) Mishna- says the blood that takes the life of the animal has an issur kares
(ie where the shechitah takes place), “dam she-hanishana teluyah buh.” But, the blood
that is removed from the animal once it is already dead, called dam ha-tamtzis- drainage
blood, is NOT an issur kares.
Human blood
Kreisus (20b)(p10)- Q) What about human blood? A) We don’t even have to be machmir
not to eat the blood of people who walk on 2 legs.
The gemara then says if the dam of a human is piresh then you can’t eat it, but if you
have blood in your mouth then it is mutar, not even an lav.

Dam she’piresh
Chullin (14a)(p12)- the Mishna says, if someone shechts an animal on shabbas, it is still
a good shechitah. How do you eat it? Can you eat it on Shabbas b/c the animal was
muktzah on Shabbas?
R”Y- who holds of muktzah says it is assur, R”S- who doesn’t hold of muktzah, the
animal was a potential ochel b/f Shabbas therefore it is mutar.
Tosefos- how can you permit it on Shabbas, you can’t do melichah on Shabbas even
according to R”S?
1) The guy was already molech it.
2) You can eat it w/o melichah and the only issur of dam aver is if it was piresh, but if it
was still in the aver then it would be mutar.
If you cook the meat, then the dam is piresh into the pot and then it comes back, but dam
that wasn’t piresh isn’t assur.

Dam avarim shelo piresh: What is the standard of piresh?

Does the dam have to leave the animal to be considered piresh, or merely to go from
one part of the aver to another part of the animal?
Chullin (113a)- if a shochet breaks the animal’s backbone at the time of the shechitah,
the blood will not naturally flow out b/c the animal doesn’t have enough strength to get
the blood out. The amount of blood that would have normally come out won’t come out.
This will cause the avarim to be highly saturated with blood. This will cause the shochet
to steal from people b/c he will be selling heavier meat and the meat is sold by weight.
Can he eat the meat himself or is this assur even for him [is there a kashrus issue also]?

Rashba- says the whole question w/ this meat, is whether blood that moved from makom
l’makom (ml”m) is a kashrus problem. The Rashba says it might be an issue.
Ra’ah- says piresh is only l’chutz or else it isn’t considered piresh.
He proves this from the fact that after you salt a piece of meat, all the blood doesn’t
really all come out, but it is still mutar.
What then is the point of melichah? External blood comes out during melichah. Once you
get out the initial blood by using salt for the requisite time period, then putting the meat
into lukewarm water won’t get out any more blood, and boiling water will force the dam
to remain stationary in the meat. But// he says, that the dam that is still in the meat and is
poresh ml’m is mutar!!
Rashba- disagrees and says that melichah gets out all the blood and the rest of the liquid
isn’t called dam and salting is a matir of the meat. It is red stuff.

Dam avarim shepiresh ml’m b’toch ha’aver

Rosh (p17)- says some contradictory things about this issue:
I) If the behaima got a wound (which doesn’t make it a trefah) and the wound caused the
blood to move ml”m, he says that this is considered piresh and dam avarim moving
from ml’m is piresh.

In other places he contradicts himself.

II) Rosh (p18)- Meat can be eaten three ways: 1) raw- mutar b/c the blood doesn’t even
go from ml’m, 2) cooked- the dam leaves and comes back, therefore you need melichah,
and 3) tzli- the aish gets everything out and you don’t need anymore melichah.

Q) Maybe all the dam didn’t come out by tzli? A) Even if all the dam didn’t come out (ie
you didn’t do a proper tzli to get out all the dam) and some dam went from ml’m, the
Rosh says that is not called piresh and is mutar.
Tzli is always fine b/c anything that didn’t come out and went from ml’m is mutar.

III) Rosh (p19)- what if you cooked meat b/f doing melichah with other food that has
60xs the blood? The Rosh says that you need 60xs the whole piece of meat.
Is the meat itself mutar? Some say it is assur and some say it is mutar b/c the blood will
come out and will be batel, so the piece is mutar.
What about if you didn’t get everything out? Any dam that wasn’t piresh is MUTAR.

IV) Rosh- if you salt meat in a pot w/o holes, the blood will come out onto the bottom
and will go back into meat b/c meliach is like roseach. (The salt will cook the blood
inside the meat). The Rosh says that the meat would be assur b/c it is in tzir.
-- If the meat is partially in the tzir, he says that only that part of meat that is in the tzli
is assur, but not that part that is outside the tzir. This machlokes is based upon the fact
that the part of the meat that is outside the tzir has dam that went from ml”m, but it is
mutar b/c it wasn’t piresh.
Rabbenu Peretz disagrees and says even the part outside the tzir is assur b/c the part of
meat that is outside the tzir is going ml”m. The blood from the top can’t come out of the
meat and it is stopped up, so it is assur.
Rosh- asks how R”P knows the dam was ml”m and not that it moved out.

Kesef Mishna (p21) Rambam says that basar chay needs maidiach/salt yafeah yafeah.
Raavad says that basar chay doesn’t need melichah.
K”M- says the Rambam holds that dam avarim shelo piresh is assur, it is only mutar if
you get the dam out or put the meat into vinegar where the dam can’t come out. As long
as the food is rauy lifrosh, it is considered piresh. Dam avarim is considered piresh if
rauy.

How to understand the Rosh

Derishah- says the Rosh was machmir when the animal was alive.
Psak
Mechaber- seems to be makil and says you need the dam to be piresh. He says only the
meat that is in the tzir is assur.
Remah- is machmir for even the part outside (choshesh for R”P).

Basar cooked w/o melichah and 60xs

Chullin (69)(p26) Basar cooked w/o melichah-
Mechaber says all is mutar and batel.
Remah- says to be machmir in this case of 60, except if you have Shabbas guests and are stuck you can
serve this meat (kovod Shabbas/Yom Tov).

Dam shebishlo
Cooked blood is only a derabanan according to most poskim.
Menachos (21a) (p30)- once you are m’vashel the dam aino o’ver aluv.
Rashi- is quoted in many places that dam she’bishlo is an issur deoritta.

Chullin- if you ripped the heart you can eat it or else aino o’ver. The heart is smooth so
there aren’t belios in the heart.
Rashi says aino o’ver is only by an oaf which isn’t a kzais, but a behaimah is more that a
kzais, if you cook it you get kares. This is even if you cook it!!
Rashi (120a) also seems to say that cooked blood is an issur deoritta. He says if blood is
in a solid form it is still assur. Rashi says this is b/c you put it on the fire.
Tosefos- says this can’t be true b/c that would be dam she’bishlo.
Maadane Asher- answers for Rashi- perhaps that was only a havah aminah in the
gemara and dam shebishlo is really not a real principle at all and it only isn’t kasher for
the mizbeach, b/c the mizbeach requires a liquid form (from the Maharal Bach) b/c a
solid can’t spritz.
 Hadachah Kamaissa- S2
1) Hadachah kamaisa- we need to put the meat in water b/f melichah
2) Melichah
3) Hadachah basraisa

What is the purpose of the hadacha kamaisa?

Chullin (113a) you can only get blood out of meat if you salt and rinse it very well.
There is a stirah b/t R’ Hunah who says that the meat needs melichah afterward and the
Braissa that says hadachah b/f and afterward.
A) If the shochet rinsed it, then you don’t need to rinse it again, but if he didn’t rinse it,
then you have to.

Rambam (p2)- says you need hadachah kamaisa, melichah and do a second hadachah.
Why do we soak the meat?
I) Ra’ah (p3) [in the Ran]- says the reason why we soak meat is b/c we are afraid of the
surface blood on the top of the meat and we are afraid that this blood will remain there
during the melichah process. The melichah can’t remove the bain blood only the internal
blood.
While something is being polet it won’t be boleah. If you do the melichah w/o the
hadachah, the outer blood will remain and after the process is over when the blood is not
being polet anymore, we are afraid that this outer blood will become soft and go into the
meat (aide d’pulat lo bulah) and the meat will become assur. Soaking the meat removes
this outer blood.
R’ Yonah (in Rosh) disagrees and says that every time you do melichah there is a
potential problem that the dam will come back in. He says that you must rinse/soak the
meat b/f the plaitah stops or else the dam can come back.
We thought that the meat must be salted for 22/24 minutes and then the plaitah will stop
and there are potential problems. R’ Yonah said that it takes 12 hours b/f the blood will
stop coming out. You must salt that meat after 22/24 minutes, but before 12 hours.
According to the R’ Yonah- if you rinse the meat off afterward, then you don’t need
hadachah kamaisa if you have the Ra’ah’s fear of outer blood coming back into the
meat. You have 12 hours to make sure that the outer blood doesn’t come into the meat,
and therefore the Ran isn’t happy with the Ra’ah’s chashash.
Maybe the Ra’ah has a double insurance policy.
II) Ran isn’t happy with the Ra’ah, but he has a different chashash. He says if I have an
external coating surrounding the meat, it prevents the internal blood that would
normally come out from melichah, from coming out. The salting will not get as much
blood out of the meat and it wouldn’t be a proper melichah. The soaking removes the
outer blood.
III) Mordechai (p5)- if you leave the blood on the meat, as a result of the encounter with
the external blood, the salt will lose its koach to be maflit the correct amount of blood.
[The outer blood blunts the koach of the salt.]
IV) Mordechai brings a 2nd reason: we soak the meat to soften the meat to help the
melichah get the dam out (but the Mordechai is doubtful of this).
V) Smak- if you have dam on top, the salt will hit that dam first and the dam will go into
the meat b/f any plaitah happens. AND// b/c salt can’t get blood that was bain out of the
meat, this would make the meat assur.

What if you cut the meat b/f melichah and after hadachah kamaissa?
S”A- says if you cut the piece of meat after the hadacha, you have to do another hadacha!
Remah says that if you don’t redo the hadacha then it isn’t good at all.
Shach- if the reason is richuk basar, once you washed it off, there was no more blood and
even if you cut it up again you wouldn’t need to re-wash the meat.
BUT// if the issue is the fact that the blood is bain, here you will get new dam bain b/c
there is new external blood and that would be why you need another hadacha.

Shach (p11)- says this is l’rachek (soften) the basar (putting together Mordechai and the
Ran).
Pr”M (p10) is against the Shach. The Pr”M says there are differences b/t the Mordechai
and Ran. The Ran would say is soaking is to soften the congealed blood, but the
Mordechai says it is to soften the actual meat. If it is to get rid of the blood (Ran), if the
blood is gone it is gone. BUT// the Mordechai might require a shiur of time to get the
softness of the meat and this you won’t tell from seeing the blood come off.

What if you did melichah and then hadachah hamaissa?

Shach N”M- According to these 3 reasons, what happens if a person did melichah w/o
the hadachah rishonah and then wants to re-do hadachah and then do melichah again:
1) Smak: you can’t do this, 2) Mordechai: you can, 3) Ran: might say you can (?).

Rosh (p8)- has a different interpretation of understanding the case where you didn’t do
hadachah kaimassa: even though the dam came out in this case, b/c the salt was not at full
strength, the blood won’t slide off of the meat, and b/c the dam can’t get the blood to
slide of the piece, the dam will re-absorb into the meat and therefore the piece of meat is
assur.
Sefer HaTerumah- if you have a piece of salted meat on top of a piece of unsalted meat
and the dam of the top piece fell on the lower unsalted piece and went inside of it, the
SHT says that when the lower piece is salted, it will not only get the blood that was inside
out, but the blood that went into the meat from the top piece will also be shlepped out of
the meat.
Hadachah Muat
Remah- a little hadacha is enough b’de’eved and is mutar b/f melichah.
Shach- says hadacha muat won’t be good for richuk, but if it is b/c of dam bain, the dam
bain will be gone. It must be that the real reason is the dam bain reason.

What about hadachah with fruit juice?

Remah [Toras Chatas] (p18)- says that hadacha sheniah can be with fruit juice, but it
implies not the original one. The other juices make the meat more stiff and water makes
the meat soft. By the first washing we are worried about the blood AND making the meat
soft, but the second washing we are only worried about getting the blood off the meat.
Maharik asks whether a woman can use wine for her hair and not water for chafifah.
S”A (p19)- says that hadachah sheniah can be done with fruit juice.

Shach (p20)- disagrees with the Remah from:

Chullin (mishna)- if you shecht and animal and it has no blood, you can eat it with tameh
hands, b/c the meat wasn’t huchshar l’kabbel tumah. RS says that sometimes something
can be huchshar l’kabbel tumah w/o 7 mashkin.
Tosefos says: when you eat this meat, aren’t you going to salt this meat first and first you
need hadachah, then it will become tumeh anyway (unless you eat it raw) and practically
you will have to kasher your hands?
1) Tzli was done and you don’t need melichah at all and not huchshar.
2) Bishul was done, but hadachah was done with fruit juice.
Shach says this Tosefos is against the Remah.

RA”E (p11) brings another N”M- when it is very cold, put the water on fire for the first
washing. He says that cold water won’t be m’rachek and cold water might stiffen the
meat and not richuk.
Q) What if the first hadacha was with cold water, then melichah and now you want
another hadacha rishonah, could you do teshuvah?
RA”E says that the cold water will get rid of the blood and the second time with create
richuk.

N”M: Maadane Asher [p21] Richuk Bain blood

1) Hadachah Muat NO Remah- b’de’eved fine by
dam bain
2) 60 times the dam NO-no hadacha Smak- GOOD
3) Salted once w/o hadacha can you do YES NO RUINED THE MEAT
it again
4) Cut after hadachah NO YES
5) Cold water NO YES
6) Frozen hadachah NO YES
7) Fruit juice NO YES
8) Hadacha and then the meat became NO YES
stiff again
9) Washed on one side YES NO
10) Whole chicken w/o hadachah NO YES
rishona

Mechaber- says that ikkar is richuk and l’chatchilah he thinks about bain blood.
Remah- not like the Smak (only l’chumrah), he holds of bain blood.
 Melichah S3
You need salting (yafeh yafeh): 1) how much salt, 2) how long, 3) how much of the salt
has to be covered.
Menachos- discussing melichah by korbanos. 1) Not a mound of salt, 2) not salt water, 3)
not a little salt. You should take the meat, put salt on top and bottom and bring it as a
korban and Abaye says this is also true about a pot (regular chullin meat).

How much salt needs to be put?

Rashba (p3)- 1) you don’t need so much salt but it much be aino ne’echal machmas
molcho and 2) he says you don’t need to salt both sides and the gemara is the mitzvah
min ha’muvchar and if it is too hard to get all the side and get the insides (like a turkey)
then you only need one side.
Rosh (p5)- says you need to cover the whole surface and that is the right amount. He
also says that you need to salt the insides as well. (This may be against the Rashba).
Mordechai (p6)- quotes a case in the Rokeach where they only did the salt on the outside
and then they cooked and R’ Yehuda Klonimus said it was assur b/c the salting needed to
be from all sides even b’de’eved.
Tur (p7)- quotes Rashba (both sides are needed only l’chatchilah) and seems to present
the Rosh as arguing.
B”Y- says that the Rosh and the Rashba don’t have to be arguing. In terms of the shiur,
he feels there is no argument and the Rosh just means that you shouldn’t heap up the salt
and the Rosh is l’chatchilah and really agrees. Therefore, he paskins that one side is good
enough.
Issur V’heter (p12)- says that 1 side is NOT ENOUGH even b’de’eved! If you only salt
on side, the blood from that side will come out and back in so it’s assur. If you salt from
both sides, even a thick piece is mutar and you don’t need to cut the piece and get more
surface area. (By kodshim the pieces are cut up.)

S”A (p18)- make sure the whole thing is covered, not to heap it up. If you only do one
side it is fine, b’de’eved.
Remah- says that it is assur even b’de’eved unless there is a big tzoruch.
The whole problem is if you only did one side and already cooked, but if you didn’t cook
it yet, then w/in 12 hours you can salt the other side b/c the meat won’t be boleah
anything yet. After 12 hours do tzli to save the meat.

Shiur of melichah
Rambam (p15)- it is the shiur of walking a mil (18-22.5-24 minutes).
Terumas HaDeshen (p17)- people say the salt needs to be on for an hour! He says that
the world holds like the Or Zeruah and Shaare Durah who say that the shiur melichah is
the shiur of tzli and this shiur isn’t the same for all pieces of meat. An hour will cover all
pieces of meat.
Nevertheless, he brings a proof. The brought the korban tamid on erev Pesach an hour
early from 8.5 hours into the day to 7.5 and if it was erev Shabbas the meat must be
roasted while it was still day, then they added another hour to allow for the roasting in the
daytime, and therefore you see that roasting takes an hour.
 What type of salt should you use?
Tur- quotes the Rashba to use thick pieces of salt, b/c little pieces will make it hard to get
rid of the salt at the end of the salting. (Nikutz- shake off the salt and then rinse it off by
hadacha basraissa). Rashi says if you will use dak then you don’t need nikutz b/c it will
all have been absorbed.
Rashba SHUT- said by dam you need both sides and only one side only b’de’eved, but if
you only did one side then do you lose the meliach k’roseach and if tref fell on the kosher
piece, the kosher piece wouldn’t become assur. The Rashba says that it WILL be assur
and meliach k’roseach still applies even by one side.
Shaare Durah (p13/4)- melichah on one side: he quotes a different shiur of time before
you need to worry. He says the shiur is one full day (24 hours), but the S”A quotes 12
hours.

Pri Chadash (p22)- if you are molech one side, even though we’d normally say that it’s
good b’de’eved, by a chicken, if you only do one side the salt won’t get through b/c there
is air space that wouldn’t make it good.
 Melichah: S4
Pesachim (74a)- mulysa [stuffing] that was put inside (unsalted meat put in the turkey)
and then you want to roast the turkey. Because the meat that was put inside the turkey
was not salted beforehand, once the turkey is roasted, the blood will go from the unsalted
meat into the turkey surrounding it, and it would’ve logically been called assur (from
efshar l’sochto assur)!! The psak is that it is mutar. [This gemara is against everything we
learned, that the belios can come fully out of the meat.]
Q) Why? A) The gemara says this is why b/c of k’boloh kach polto by ochlim (KCP)!!!
Q) We have a din of ain hagalah b’ochlin, b/c even if we assume that the beliah came out,
we can’t be sure that it came out in totality [like the Rav, ain bitul ela b’tichilas
ha’taaroves and efshar l’sochto]?
Attempt 1) The source might be korban Pesach where the innards are put inside the meat
and this is the mitzvah and this is a rayah that roasting meat with dam inside, then the
whole roasting is boleah and polet k’echad? A) No, that is not a rayah b/c in that case
there was an opening and that could be how the blood came out, but here there is NO
OPEN DOOR so we can’t base our chiddush on the pasuk in chumash.
Attempt 2) A heart can be cut and remove the blood- by the heart if you cooked it, it is
totally encased and it is mutar and you can remove the blood after cooking. The answer is
that the heart is different b/c it is smooth (and that would make all our dishes mutar? b/c
something smooth can’t be boleah even in the cooking process.

Chullin (111)(p3)- if you have a spit that have many types of meat on it, liver and below
that a piece of meat and the liver wasn’t koshered and the liver is oozing with blood and
the piece below is getting blood and the gemara says it is mutar. Why? Damah misrak
sarik (DMS)- the blood glides of the lower piece of meat.

Tosefos- says why do you need a new din, just use KCP, why do you need a new din of
DMS. By liver there is super dam so we don’t say KCP, and instead we use DMS.

Chullin- Utter on top of the spit and meat is getting milk dripped on it, is assur (it is
seruche misrach: it sticks to the meat), b/c milk takes hold of the meat, while the blood
will fall off.
Another opinion in the gemara says that the milk is mutar b/c it is only a derabanan and
blood which is a deoritta is assur.
Psak- if the liver/kchal are on top it is assur, but if the liver/kchal are on the bottom
b’de’eved it is fine.

Chullin (112b)- R’ Nachman says that fish and chicken that are salted in the pot together,
are assur if they are in pot together. This can’t be talking about a kli that has no holes, but
rather a kli that has holes (which is why it will be different from oafos and oafos).
The specialty of this case is that fish have soft skin and therefore they are polet for a
shorter period of time and the oaf is still being polet. At this point, aide d’pulat lo bulah
and the fish will be assur.
 What about basar and basar?
If you want to salt meat together it’s mutar, but fish & chicken have different time zones.
Q) What happens if you start one piece of meat and then ten minutes later you put down
another piece of meat, now the pieces have different time zones!! We have created an
issue of fish and chicken!

Tosefos- tries to prove that pieces of meat that started one after the other is still mutar
even though they started at different times. 4 peshatim:
1) Dam is misrak sarek, by belios the dam falls off and fish is different b/c its skin is
susceptible to belios.
2) Even though the first one finished after a certain period of time, there is still liquid that
comes out, so even if the first piece stops its dam, it is polet tzir and will still pump out
the blood from the piece put down last. Why don’t you say this by fish? The fish will
pump out the dam AND the tzir and the chicken will still be pumping out the blood in
when the fish is done pumping out any liquid.
3) Overlap theory: if you have 2 pieces of meat and one began b/f the other, there will be
an overlap period when they were both being polet together. If there was an overlap, then
the holes of the lower piece won’t close, until all the top juice keeps coming down. The
lower meat will only close its doors if there wasn’t an overlap period. By fish and
chicken there is no overlap period b/c the chicken is so slow that the fish is closed by the
time the chicken begins to flow. If this is true then you can’t remove the lower piece
until the uppermost piece is done (which is different from the other reasons).
4) As long as it is being polet tzir it won’t be boleah the dam.

Melichah w/o holes

Rosh (p5)- what if you did melichah in a pot w/o holes? It makes the meat and kli assur.
This pot must be a pot where you put water in and it comes out.
HaGaos Maimini- what about a flat cutting board?
Terumas HaDeshen- it depends if it is smooth and the dam can glide off of it. It needs to
be able to glide off quickly (like misrak sarik).
Rosh (p8)- if you salt some meat in a pot the pot is assur and any food cooked in the food
have belios of dam.
Raavad say that even if you have a kli w/ holes that melichah was done in, it is assur to
use for roasting in the future. He says there was also salty dam in this.
Rosh asks how you can use this kli for salting again if it is assur?
Ran answers- when the next melichah is done, the food is going to be polet and therefore
it won’t be boleah the stuff from the kli.
R’ Peretz- says that misrak sarik is only by a wooden kli and not by a kli cheres (like the
fish).

S”A (p14/5)- don’t put the pot with holes on the ground, but suspend it.
Remah- permits by a smooth piece of wood where the liquid will pour off. Don’t eat hot
in kli w/ holes like Raavad l’chatchilah, but b’de’eved it is mutar. (Machmir l’chatchilah)
Shach- says b’de’eved is mutar by kli cheres based on R’ Peretz.
S”A- only quotes the tzir reason, the it will not be boleah. If dag is salted and the chicken
isn’t there isn’t a problem.
 Basar Kafue: S5
There is a takaneh from the Geonim, that the melichah should take place w/in 72 hours of
shechitah. If you wait more than 72 hours, then the melichah won’t get out the proper
amount of dam (basar she’omed 3 yamim).
Almost all the meat in Israel is from South America b/c Israel doesn’t have enough room
to graze the animals. Rabbanut hechsher needs thousands of pounds of meat each month
and it is not easy to do the melichah in Argentina, so the meat was frozen and shipped to
Israel more than 72 hours. The heter used was that they froze the meat, which would
freeze the time and won’t make the dam harder to remove. This is called basar kafue
(frozen meat).
Badatz doesn’r have so much meat, so they did the melichah in Argentina and didn’t rely
on this heter. R’ Mandel says that he thinks that even the rabbanut today doesn’t rely on
this kullah.

Mordechai- speaks about the geonim who said that meat left over 3 days without salting,
will not be able to polet the dam. This applies to nikur as well (removing the chelev).
This doesn’t appear in the gemara.
Maharam M’rutenberg says if you do tzli then this din doesn’t apply and whatever is
supposed to come out will come out even after 3 days.
Rivash SHUT- says this chumrah isn’t in the Rambam, but it is in the SHUT Geonim. In
Barcelona, they said even tzli was assur after 72 hours b/c the dam dries up in the meat.

Chullin (93b)- a piece of very red meat (black and blue mark), you need melichah and
it’s mutar.
The Rivash says that meat after 72 hours should be equitable to this case and should be
mutar w/ melichah.
Chullin (113a)(p5)- if you shecht the animal and break the backbone, the blood can’t
leave properly, the dam will get soaked into the meat.
What is the status of the meat?
Rif says the gemara is discussing eating the meat raw, and would therefore imply,
according to the Rivash, that tzli or salting would be fine!
Rashi understands that the gemara is discussing whether you can eat this meat at all (not
only raw)!! This girsah would help the Geonim.
BUT// it is mashmah from the gemara that the issur is that you are stealing from
customers and not that it is a kashrus issue.
Shaare Durah- says that the blood will come out in bishul, but not from the melichah
and that is why this is a problem. BUT// he gives a kullah that if you soak the meat w/in
the 72 hours, you prolong your clock and you get extra time.

Tzli and then bishul

Terumas HaDeshen- I) once you do the tzli can you re-cook the meat? He thinks this is
assur from the Marach Or Zeruah (O”Z’s son). There is a chashash that the bishul will
soften the meat and get more blood out.
II) L’chatchilah you shouldn’t leave the meat for 72 hours and say that you are going to
do tzli, b/c there is a fear that you’ll come to eat it cooked. Is it assur even b’de’eved or
not? He says ask the people of your community.
Sefer HaAgur (p16)- if you leave the meat soaking for 2 hours w/in the 72 hours, you
get a new 72 hour period.

S”A (69,12)(p17)- heter of tzli.

Taz- basar that you left w/o salting for 72 hours w/o melichah and then you did melichah
in a kli with holes and then a second melichah in a kli w/o holes and juice came out.
What is the din? Perhaps the second time, salty tzir came out and the meat/pot should be
assur.
Maharshal says it isn’t assur b/c we don’t know what the juice is after 72 hours. (You
could have said it was like something that needed libun and it got hagalah, but the
Maharshal says it is not.)
What about if the first salting was in a kli w/o holes? In this case we say it is assur and
we suspect that dam came out.
What about one piece w/in 72 hours and one after 72 hours being salted together? The
salted piece w/in 72 is polet into the other post-72 piece of meat. We have to be machmir
and say it is assur by any external blood. If we hold that it won’t let out its own dam, it
won’t get out another piece’s dam.
Shach (Nekudas HaKesef)- disagrees and says that blood from other sources can come
out of the piece. You can assume KCPolto.

Remah (p19)- quotes the second Terumas HaDeshen that you shouldn’t keep the meat 3
days.
Shach- don’t do the soaking trick either l’chatchilah, but if you waited 3 days and you
had wet the meat w/in 72 hours, then you can rely on this kullah. By a case of hefsed you
can put it in water based on the S”Durah. Don’t be so machmir b/c it isn’t in shas, but do
a proper soaking.

Pr”M (p23)- what if the meat is frozen and you put it in water, that won’t help extend the
time b/c the meat won’t be soft, but the Pr”M must not hold of the freezing heter.
Frozen meat
Aruch HaShulchan (p25)- frozen meat in liquid won’t help, but you can say the
opposite that the 72 hours don’t count to the 3 days b/c the meat is like a stone.
Rayah from heter agunos: after 3 days the face changes and you can’t recognize the dead
person, but if it is cold, then the dead person didn’t change so fast (vs. Pr”M).
R’ Moshe (p26)- the meat in a freezer, it is hard to be machmir. It would be mutar until
proven assur, if there is a tzoruch.

S”A (p19)- if a piece of meat that was left out for 72 hours got mixed into a taaroves? It
is a derabanan and yb”y and batel b’rov, even reuyah l’hischabed is batel b/c we don’t
apply it by this chumrah.
Shach- is this called yb”y mb”m? The assur meat has dam in the meat?
It is only a chumras geonim, so you don’t need 60, even though you should need 60 OR//
rov doesn’t mean rov, but here you can be m’batel the meat, IN 60!!
 What does Melichah accomplish? S6
Pr”M (Pesichah)- what does melichah accomplish? Does it get rid of all the blood?
1) Ra’ah (p2)- all the blood does not come out, but melichah is able to keep the blood
inside. Once you get out the initial blood by using salt for the requisite time period,
lukewarm water won’t get out any more blood, and boiling water will force the dam to
remain stationary in the meat. But// he says, that the dam is still in the meat and is
poresh ml’m and therefore he says that moving ml’m is mutar!!
2) Rashba (p4)- all the blood comes out during the melichah. Whatever came out during
the melichah is the blood, but whatever comes out afterward is just red juice (after k’dei
hiluch mil). It is called the wine of the meat and you can taste the difference.
[Rambam- We assume the melichah can penetrate the bones and that you don’t have
to break them up.]
a) Rashba says that there should be blood in the meat, so if you cut the meat after the
melichah you should have to do another melichah on the meat.
b) Tzli kedar- is tzli in a pot. The Rashba asks how you can do tzli kedar b/c tzli will get
out the dam inside the meat and then real dam will come out and be assur according to
the Rosh.

Pr”M (p1) brings a N”M- that after you are molech the meat and then you put it in water
for 24 hours. According to the Rashba nothing can go wrong, but according to the Rosh
you have kavush with cold water and the meat will be assur when the blood comes out.

Rambam (p6)- you keep the meat in the second hadacha until the water is clean and then
the meat has to be put in mayim roschim. This is like the Ra’ah b/c it assumes that there
is still blood inside so you need to throw the meat in mayim roshchim.
Raavad- disagrees and says that you don’t need to do this and the red stuff is not dam
and to have chumros you need rayos.
S”A- we assume like the Raavad and the Rashba.

Neputz
Chullin (113a)- R’ Dimi would take big chunks of salt on the meat and then he’d shake
off the salt (m’napetz luh)
Rashba (p9)- Raavad says that this R’ Dimi is NOT saying that small pieces of salt won’t
do the job, so you need big pieces of salt. He says that any types of salt are fine b/c
salting was done before R’ Dimi.
R’ Dimi was m’chadesh neputz, shaking off the salt b/f hadacha sheni. People used to
rinse the meat in a kli w/o holes (or else the melech in the water and the dam in the water
will go back into the piece of meat).
R’ Dimi shook off the salt beforehand, so you could use a pot w/ holes. It is inconvenient
to use a kli that has holes.
Rashba (p11)- first you must either shake off or rinse the salt w/o putting it in any kli
with water, b/c if you will put the meat in water in a kli then the dam will go back into the
kli.
Rosh- the second hadacha is done twice, once to get rid of the salt/dam and the second
time to get rid of the first water. You would need 60xs the salt if you didn’t rinse it off-
from CNN or b/c you don’t know how much it absorbed.
S”A based on the Tur- is against the Rashba. The Tur says that the water of the first
hadachah sheni will stunt MK’roseach of the salt and even though you were supposed to
do neputz, it is fine b’de’eved.

What if a person didn’t do the proper rinsing, but he cooked the meat?
Smak (p13)- if you don’t rinse off the dam/salt, you’d need 60 against the salt and dam
which is na’asis neveilah. It isn’t assur in 1000 (against the salt: avidah l’taamah) because
we don’t extend the issur more than the power of the issur itself. The piece itself is assur
and you need 60 against the piece of meat.
Shach- b/c of piresh from ml”m.

Smak- What happens if you have a goy in the house and we are afraid that they put the
meat on the fire before hadacha basraissa, do you need 60 against the salt?
A) The goy is ne’eman l’fe tumoh and you ask them if they did the hadacha.
B) OR// if there are some Jews around, and people come in and out, and there is a
fear he’ll be fired (yotzeh v’nichnas creates fear) that might be enough.

S”A brings the Smak (p16)- and says you can rely on the goy not ml”t when the goy
knows about what to do and he said he did it (as long as there is a yotzeh v’nichnas
who’ll see if he’s lying) or even ml”t. It is also all a derabanan so ml”t is enough.
If the goy isn’t afraid then he needs 60 against the dam or it is assur b/c we assume the
goy did bishul w/o hadacha sheni.
Remah- ml”t.

S”A (p13)- if you didn’t do neputz or shetifah and you put water on the meat to be
m’vatel the strength of the salt, we saw b/f that it will be assur b/c blood is still around
and it will go into the meat. S”A (Tur) brings down that the water can be m’vatel the
strength of the salt and therefore it is mutar.
Shach- says that the Mechaber doesn’t say CNN by sha’ar issurim, so he is m’sha’ar
against 60 out of safek. It is lav davkah against the melech and really against the dam in
the salt (therefore he is NOT saying that there is CNN.)

Remah (p14)- discussed in the Mordechai: if you put the meat in a kli sheni w/o
hadacha sheniah, the meat is assur even though the kli sheni isn’t m’vashel. (You need 60
times the meat to be m’vatel the dam).
Issur V’heter- discussed the Mordechai about kli sheni. He says that is only b/c there is
heat there, but if it is cold then it is mutar.

Taz- tells us a story about someone who was m’vashel meat and forgot whether she did
melichah or not. We say that the meat is mutar b/c it is a safek derabanan of dam
she’bishlah.
We have a chazakeh that it was salted even if dam shebishlo is a deoritta. The Taz is
makil by the woman and the goy ml”t by hadacha basraissa (b/c they are derabanans).
R’ Soloveichik said you can make a chiluk.

R’ Konegsberg’s sefer (p21)- if a person does melichah w/o hadachah the minhag is to
assur. The Shach only says this by bishul and not tzli unless you waited the shiur
melichah.
 Maaseh D’Rashi S7
Rosh (p2)- A person did hadacha kamaissa and melichah for the proper amount of time
and then he didn’t do the hadachah basraissa. He then put the meat in a pot w/o holes and
the next morning the pot was full with liquid (tzir). What is the psak of this meat?
Rashi- paskined that once the meat was salted in a kli w/ holes, there is no more blood,
so whatever liquid came out overnight is not blood.
Q) The dam that is on the outside of the meat is still there on the meat after the melichah
and before the meat was washed off? How can Rashi be matir, even if all the tzir that
came out was mutar?!

Tosefos (112b)- (leaves out an important part, that there was no hadachah basraissa):
1) the tzir is not dam, it is juice and 2) the dam that is on the meat is dried up in the salt
and swallowed up by the salt, won’t go back into the meat. He also holds like Rashi.
Rosh- 1) the dam in the meat is dried up inside of it (the salt or the meat?) and can’t get
out, to go back into the meat and 2) maybe the dam will come out, but you only have a
beliah if there is heat, but once the dam came out, it loses it’s strength to be MKR.
HaGaos Ashri- adds to this: if you have tzir and you put a kosher piece of meat in that
tzir, it doesn’t make the other piece assur either. It is not dam.

Rishonim disagree with Rashi

Rokeach- says after you do melichah, the tzir is chozer v’nivlah and it is assur, which is
against Rashi.
Rashba (p6)- argues with Rashi’s psak: he says even after a proper melichah you
shouldn’t put it in a kli w/o holes b/c that will assur the meat and MKRoseach. He says
that the salt can still do MKR even after the meliach process.

Is the Rokeach arguing with Rashi the same way that

the Rashba was arguing with Rashi?
1) The tzir might have a din dam (like the Ra’ah would say), like the Shach and the
Maadane HaShulchan say. Those that argue with Rashi might hold that the ‘liquid’ is
dam. Rambam would say that there is still dam left and you need chalitah.
2) Rashba would say that the dam is bain on the piece of meat and not that the dam will
come out.
Shaare Durah (p7)- says that the world is noheg to say it is assur in Rashi’s case and
perhaps you can take off a klipah and eat it. The minhag can be for either of the above
reasons.

Terumas HaDeshen- had a question regarding a bris milah where they had meat and all
the meat was in one kli w/ holes and chicken in another kli w/ holes. At the end they put
the chicken with the meat and then they found that one chicken was a trefah and the
question was whether there was any heter when there wasn’t 60xs the chicken?
A) He says that there may be a kullah in a makom hefsed b/c there is no beliah b/c
MKRoseach and the salt is tired out. There was no heat but the salt heat, there is a
possible heter. (What is the question regarding the dam?)
Taz- the case of the Terumas HaDeshen: says that this case should be mutar even if it
isn’t a makom hefsed. The Taz says that the poskim that are machmir say the salt is
always MKR and those that are makil say the salt isn’t motzeh anymore dam, but when
the meat IS motzeh dam then everyone agrees that the meat is mutar. (----?)

S”A (69,20)(p17/8)- he says that both pieces of meat are mutar, but some say that both
pieces are assur (like the Roseach) and l’chatchilah you should be machmir.
Remah- says even b’de’eved the issur is kelipah.
Maadane Asher understands the Shach as feeling this case is a din dam.

Aruch HaShulchan- is bothered by the Shach: he is convinced that the only legitimate
question to Rashi is the issur bain on the piece of meat (like the Rashba), but the tzir is
not dam according to anyone.
What is the N”M? The HaGaos Ashri’s case: if there is tzir in the pot that a kosher piece
of meat falls into, then there is no dam there is tzir. The Mechaber says that we are
machmir in the HaGaos Ashri’s case too. Why? The Mechaber says that the tzir is dam.
The AHS says that this can’t be and the Mechaber says it must be a taus sofer and it can’t
be correct to say it is dam.

Tur (p14)- found a Rabbenu Yonah SHUT who says that you need hadachah basraissa
and you can’t cut the meat with a knife b/f the hadachah basraissa and if you cut the meat
w/o hadachah then there will be dam into the knife and you’ll need hagalah on the knife.
Mechaber (p19)- quotes this and says you need hagalah on the knife.
Shach (85) says that the discussion of why you need hadacha basraissa: you might need
to get rid of the dam on top, but if there is dam inside, then the hadacha is like the
chalitah of the Rambam and close the dam pores from allowing blood out.
Shach (88)- says that everyone agrees that if salt is the source of meat and it is in the pot,
there is no misrak sarik, but ain melichah b’kelim only is by masrak sarik (when the
blood will slide off).
 Tzli:S8
Kashering meat through tzli gets the blood out and then you wouldn’t need salting.

Tzli doesn’t require melichah

Tosefos Chullin- Molchim basar for tzli: says that people liked to salt the meat (a
minhag) even for tzli. This Tosefos says if you do melichah you don’t need tzli.
Or Zeruah- says tzli doesn’t require salting (from R’ Hai Gaon), this is even
l’chatchilah.
Q) What about the minhag? A) That minhag is not halachic, but it was b/c people liked
having the salt and they could. It wasn’t from a chashash of a shittah.

Rashi Pesachim (74a)(p3)- melichah of tzli, not as an intense melichah for tzli that they
used to do for kederah.
S”A (p13)- tzli doesn’t need melichah, but if other dam fell in the meat then you need
kdei netilah.
Remah- quotes from Rashi that you need a little melichah.

What is the minimum shiur of tzli?

Issur V’heter (p4)- you need half roasted is enough m’ikkar hadin.

Hadacha basraissa
Rashba says that the meat doesn’t need hadachah basraissa or afterward if it had no
salting beforehand, but if you did then you need hadacha basraissa to get rid of the blood
that might do back into the meat or right after the salting.
Ran- (Ramban in Ran) you do need hadachah by tzli beforehand.
Mechaber- minhag is hadacha basraissa and a little salting

Chullin (118a)- if you have a piece of bread and you cut meat on the bread and the juices
fell on the bread, then you can’t eat the bread. But this isn’t dam!! It is from maaris ain
and it really made the bread look red and the blood is thick.
Ran (p10)- if it is properly tzlied and it only looks like dam it’s a problem, but if it seeps
in then it is fine.

Chullin (p8)(118a)- the basar is dripping blood and salt, but at what point can you put a
kli underneath and use that juice? Until all the redness is gone, then you can assume it
isn’t dam. How do you know? When the meat is steaming, then you know then nothing is
left. How do you know for sure, maybe the bottom part is done and not the top part? The
gemara says, you are correct, instead, you need to put 2 piece of salt on the kli or on the
meat to suck up the remainder of the blood and the rest will be mutar.
Tosefos- says, put salt in the food and the salt sucks out the stuff from the mizture and it
can be mutar and even if you hold efshar l’sochto assur, here it can be totally sucked out.
Here, you can be sure that the salt can get out ALL of the dam from the mixture.

What about the spit itself?

The spit has blood dripping on it from the meat, do you need libun?
Raavad says that the spit becomes assur. Take the meat off the spit right away after it is
done being polet or else the issur from the spit will go back into the piece of meat.
Rosh (p12)- disagrees and says that spit won’t get the issur inside of it.

S”A (p16)- he says that the knife and the spit is mutar, b/c the aish is moshech and it is
mishrak sharik and stops the beliah into the kli. The kli underneath would be assur.

Kashering the liver

Chullin (p18)- whatever the Torah said was assur, there is something that is mutar. Blood
is assur and the liver is mutar even though it tastes like blood.
Chullin (110b)- how do we kasher the liver?
Rashi- can we cook it or not, b/c it is polet dam and once the dam is piresh it is assur,
how can you then cook it and not eat it raw (when it isn’t piresh)?
Chullin- maskanah says that (111a) you need to do chaleetah (hot vinegar or water) and
it prevents the dam from coming out.
[It seems from this gemara that chaleetah is the only kosher way, but it doesn’t say that
melichah is an option and therefore it wouldn’t work.]
R”T (110b) says the whole sugyah is when you did NOT do melichah and it would be
fine WITH MELICHAH. The gemara is addressing another method of koshering the
meat. The liquid is mutar even if it is piresh, the question is whether there is an issur
once it came out m’derabanan. Maybe the issur derabanan (needing melichah) doesn’t
apply when you are m’vashel it with other things. Cooking it will make it less nikar and
perhaps it is not even assur m’derabanan.
Pashut pshat- is against the R”T.

Rif- says that he heard in the Yeshiva that they don’t know how to do chaleetah anymore
and the only way to eat a liver is tzli and this is the minhag.
Rashba- says this minhag is from the Yeshiva of the Geonim.

Chullin (110a)(p19)- the liver cooked with something else makes the other thing assur
and not itself b/c it is polet.
Rashba (p21) says that yoreh li that liver is mutar. The gemara is over a flame and not in
a pot so he says yerueh li. He says that kaved goes into a pot, still it won’t be assur b/c it
is polet and not boleah.
Why about the yeshvos? That was l’chatchilah, but b’de’eved you don’t need to.
Rashba says a gadol disagreed with him, he stands by hid position.
Rambam- disagrees with the Rashba and says tzli and then bishul. If you didn’t
roast/chaleetah first, then the pot and the food are assur unless there is 60 times.

Chullin (111a)- another thing you need to do when koshering the kaved is that you need
to cut criss-crosses on the liver.
S”A (p24)- the liver has a lot of blood so you shouldn’t do melichah, (or poking many
holes). Removing the gall bladder from the kaved makes a hole which is also good for
tzli. Yesh mi she’omer as Rambam.
Remah- says that the whole thing is mutar.
Maadanei Asher- if they roast the liver on a grate, does the net become tref (like the spit
case) where people aren’t m’laben afterward.
Do you need actual fire or other means?
 5 Pesulim of Shechitah: S9
Posuk Re’eh- “v’zuvachta ka’asher tzivisechah”- when you are not in the B”M you
should shecht them “as I commanded you.” What was the command?
Chullin (28a)- Moshe was commanded on Har Sinai (the 5 pesulim) and the posuk is
referring back. The 5 pesulim are Halacha L’Moshe.
1) The a chaya needs shechting kaneh and veshet, and a chicken only one.
2) You only need rubah k’kullah of the simanim.

Chullin (27a)- the mishna uses the word “hashochet.” The gemara says that seems to be
b’de’eved to do shechitah?
1) L’chatchilah- you should shecht two simanim of the oaf, b/c if you only do one, you
might not do enough and one siman is only b’de’eved.
2) Even 2 simanim by a behaimah requires fully, and ruboh k’kulloh is not l’chatchilah.

Rambam- there are 5 things that make a shechitah assur: 1) drisah, 2) chaladah, 3) ikkur,
4) shehiyah, 5) hagramah.

Shehiyah: Pausing in the middle of shechitah

How much of a pause (shiur) and at what point of the shechitah does it make it invalid?

Mishna Chullin (p6)- discussed if you shechted at little bit and the knife fell, or he
became tired. The shiur that the mishna gives is “k’dei shechitah.”
Gemara- says “k’dei l’shuchat behaimah acheres”- the shiur is the amount of time that
you can shecht another animal.
What is this shiur? Is it as long of a behaima or an oaf, or is it oaf for an oaf or behaima
for a behaima? A) Rav: Behaimah for behaima etc. and Shmuel says even behaimah for
an oaf (as Ravin said). R’ Chaninah said “as long as it took to get an animal and shecht
it” (to get it on the gorund and then to shecht it). Others say picking it up and down
(depending on the size of the animal).
If you have a dull knife and you are doing the shechitah the whole day, it is fine.
If you go and pause and go and pause, are the pauses added or not?
“Sha’ah b’miut simanim”- Rashi says that rov is a good shechitah, if after rov he stopped
and then he wanted to finish it off, does that pasul the shechitah b/c of shehiyah OR// b/c
he didn’t need it, it’s mutar? Taiku.
I) Rashi says that you must be machmir by a taiku and say it will pasul.
Why doesn’t Rashi say it is talking about a miut kammah and not the miut basrah? A) If
it is the windpipe (kaneh) then even if half is cut from beforehand [chatzi kaneh pagum]
and you cut a little amount then it is still kasher. By a kaneh if you start a little, it is
STILL MUTAR b/f half-way, but by a veshet, even a little bit it is tref and doing a little
cut w/o doing the whole thing is assur. Rashi therefore says that the gemara must be
talking about the miut basrah, or else it is clear what the halachah is.
Therefore, once you finish more than half way, smack the animal or let it die, but don’t
complete the shechitah process.
II) R”T (30b)- says the gemara is discussing the miut kameh, b/c the miut basra is
definitely mutar.
How does he answer Rashi’s question? Veshet he can say that derech shechitah doesn’t
make it a trefah and perhaps it would be fine.
III) Rambam (p8) different pshat: little shehiyas added is considered a shehiyah (safek
neveilah is assur). In this case he says that the case is that you shechted it, but the shiur of
your shehiyah (wherever it was) and the miut simanim was the amount that you paused
(is the amount of cutting miut simanim a shiur of shehiyah). This is a safek neveilah.
Miut simanim is the shiur that you pasued (b/c the shiur of shehiyah is waited the shiur of
‘kdei shechitah” and is the time of miut simanim enough?)

What is the answer in this case?

Mechaber- l’chatchilah you go like Rashi (yesh omrim), but m’ikkar ha-din like R”T.
Remah- the minhag is to be machmir, by miut kameh or basra, whether kaneh or veshet.

Derasah: Pressure on the knife

Shechitah needs to be a gliding motion and not pressing motion.

Chullin (30b)- if you want to shecht 2 animals at once, the fear is that you pressed down,
so you must make sure that the knife is bigger then the head that it is shechting (or else
you couldn’t have done the shechitah in one motion with a small knife.) The knife must
be bigger then the heads (one extra head size).
Rif- the idea (kullah) that a small knife molech and maveh is fine, is only by an oaf, but
not by a behaimah where we are afraid you are doing drasah.
S”A also says that derasah is assur b/c you are pressing down.
Remah- quotes the chumrah of the Rif that he is machmir by a behaimah, and even if you
are molech and maveh, if it isn’t long enough by a behaima and it is even assur b’de’eved
if it isn’t the shiur of one head more (Rach/Rif- we only rely on this by an oaf and not by
a behaimah).
Molech U’mavia even a little knife is good, perhaps only by an oaf.

R’ Moshe- shochet shechted when he was sick and everything feels heavy and perhaps it
caused him to be dores and he connects it to the person who brings the sair hamishtaleach
to the cliff and the ish iti brings the sair on his back to the cliff. But this is only an issur
derabanan b/c chay noseh es atzmoh, so what is the chiddush that the ish iti can carry the
animal? The gemara says that a chay carries part of the weight, but a sick person doesn’t
carry any of its own weight and this is a melachah deoritta and this is the chiddush.
[R’ Moshe says that hotza’ah must be recognizable that someone brought it there, and
this doesn’t apply by a live person. That is why only someone who can walk on its own is
a chay.]

Chaladah: when the knife is covered

If you cut the bottom siman and then the top one, this is chaladah.
What about a hairy animal? Taiku.
Rosh- the whole discussion in the gemara under the “machlis”- is when you have a
handkerchief around the neck and you put the knife b/t the neck and kerchief, is this
chaladah? The Rosh says this is only if the kerchief was tied up, not if the garment falls
on top of the knife and would be mutar.
Rambam (p27)- says 1) knife sandwitched b/t simanim, 2) stick the knife under the flesh
b/f the simanim (poked in) and the Rambam says this is a safek neveilah (from a question
in the gemara), 3) the Rambam argues with the Rosh- even if a cloth was covering is a
safek neveilah.
S”A- says like the Rambam l’chatchilah.
S”A- What if you cut rov and after you were done you wnet underneath to cut? Same
machlokes Rashi (says it is assur) and we are machmir.

Hagramah: Going outside the shechitah area

There is a specific area where you have to shecht within to make the shechitah assur.
What about if part was in the area and part outside?
Machlokes Rambam/ Ramban
Rambam- if it is too high it is not kosher. The Rambam says against Rashi and R”T,
once you did rov shechitah you can’t mess up. If the first third was too high and the rest
was proper, then it is kosher b/c rov was proper and consecutive. If you did a third inside
and third outside and third inside, the Rambam says it is kosher b/c two thirds were in the
makom. If the rov weren’t in the makom shechitah it is pasul. All you need is rov via
shechitah.
Ramban (p33)- you need rov shuchat at one time to be kosher. Either first third is bad
and the second two thirds are kosher, or visa versa. The 51% line will be by a ma’aseh
shechitah. (What about bad good bad?)
S”A- kosher like the Rambam.

Ikkur:

Chullin (8a)(p36)- a person must know hilchos shechitah to be allowed to have his meat
eaten.
Rashi- says that ikkur is when the knife isn’t completely smooth.
Tosefos- you use a knife with a pgam, not completely smooth, so the knife doesn’t pull.
Aruch HaShulchan- It must be cutting and not pulling.
BH”G- says that would be a trefah, but not a psul of shechitah. Ikkur means that the
siman was dislocated from its place but not a trefah. To shecht once it is dislodged is
ikkur.
Rambam agrees with the BH”G.
S”A- like the Rambam. It must be totally disjointed.
Aruch HaShulchan- brings down both shitos.
 Shechitas Akum: S10
An animal is a neveilah if an animal dies itself w/o shechitah. Neveilah is unique among
lavim as it says in the pasukim in Shimini, that when an animal dies w/o shechitah it is
mitameh unlike BBC or chametz b’Pesach.
Tumah and Neveilah
Shechitah accomplishes two things 1) removes tumah and 2) removes the neveilah facet.
Q) Is it all or nothing when it comes to shechitah OR can there be a shechitah that will
work on one level and not another?
A) There can be a split in the shechitah.
Chullin (22b)- if you have a treifah and it is shechted, you can’t eat it b/c it is tref, but it
is m’taher from neveilah. A treifah had a time when it could’ve been kosher and it then
became a trefah, so there is an ability to shecht it and remove the tumah.
Rambam- says this as well.

Goyim and shechitah

Chullin (p9)(13a)-if a goy shechts, it is assur and it is tumeh as well.
Re’eh posuk- “v’zuvachta…v’achaltah.”
Tosefos (Chullin 3b)- says that a person only a bar zevichah (a person who needs
shechitah for himself, commanded to do it) can do a shechitah, but a goy isn’t a bar
zevichah (not a Jew). Tosefos says even a mumar l’hachis is not a bar zevichah (you
don’t care) [not discussing a mumar l’teavon who eats tref only when it is easier].
Tosefta (p8)- akum is pasul, or if a monkey shechts it is also assur, or if it happens by
itself it is also not good (ie the wind). You need a Jew to do the zevichah and the animal
has tumah.

Ki Sisa (34,11)(p10)- don’t make a bris with the other nations and the fear is that
“v’kuruh l’chu v’uchaltuh me’zivcho.’
Rambam (p12)- akum who shechts, even though in the presence of the Jew, even a
katan, it is a neveilah and you get malkos. He says the reason is not “v’zuvachtah” like
Tosefos, he says the issur is from Ki Sisa. Here he is shechting for dinner and not for
A”Z. The Rambam’s chiddush is that any shechitah of a goy is assumed to be for A”Z
b/c that is what the pasuk in Ki Sisa is about (and he doesn’t use the source from
Re’eh!).
The Rambam then says that even a goy that doesn’t do A”Z, but he is a goy, it is kosher,
but the chachamim made a geder that it is assur m’derabanan (and the Torah what say it
is mutar!!).
Rosh/Tosefos- says it is an issur deoritta.
Kesef Mishna- according to the Rosh even a regular goy is assur m’deoritta.
Mechiltah D’Rashbi- could be the source for the Rambam.
N”M- normal non-A”Z goy.

Rambam (p16)- if a goy shechts it is m’tameh (from the mishna), but he says that this is
only m’derabanan against Tosefos, even if he is an A”Z!
The Rambam says “how can this be?” He says that the precedent is the shechting of a
treifah and the split psak by an A”Z b/t eating and tumeh.
Brisker Rav to the Rav: is it a good comparison, treifah to goy? There the issur is a side
issur, treifah, but here the issur itself is the real issur.
A) Treifah is NOT A SIDE ISSUR, the animal isn’t really alive, so the shechitah won’t
work properly. Treifah is like a partial neveilah, and therefore the shechitah won’t apply.

Another N”M- if two people are holding onto the knife, one is a Jew and one is a goy?
If you hold like Tosefos- shechitah is good, and Rambam says it is not good.
Mishna- if one person for A”Z and one w/ proper intent it is not kosher.
Mechaber- yisrael and pasul are holding the knife, he says it is not a good shechitah.
Shach- says that many rishonim argue (HaGaos Ashri) says that it is good and the
mishna is when there is negative kavaneh.
Is a goy a zero, or is he a negative?

RA”E (p19)- Another N”M: there is a halacha “oso v’es b’no”- what about if the goy
shechted the mother that day, that isn’t a shechitah according to Tosefos and therefore
you can shecht the son on that day. The Rambam would say it is assur m’deoritta.

Shach (p21)- has a different girsah in the Rambam: that geder gadol is referring to the
kusim (converts to Judaism for incorrect motives, the lions) and later they found that they
were worshipping a statute. The chachamim revoked their status as Jews. That is what the
Rambam is referring to, but a goy, even if not an A”Z is a deoritta. Only a kusi is a
derabanan, but other goyim it is a deoritta!!

Kesef Mishna- had the girsah of akum.

Taz- disagrees with the Shach.

Ger toshav
Ger toshav- accepted the 7 mitzvos and they can live in E”Y if they agree to this b/f
B”Din. Rambam- not oved A”Z. Shach- ger toshav is deoritta, a regular goy.
Rambam (p16)- discussed a ger toshav
Taz- only derabanan, Shach- deoritta

R’ Shachter (p25) [Pnene HaRav]- said the proper girsah is not like the Shach, but it is
goy. Yet, he feels the Shach is still correct. He said that geder gadol, can be a seyag
deoritta. R’ Yosef Engel said that the seyag can be a deoritta.
 Shechitas Katan: S11
Chullin (2a)- all can shecht, except a cherish, shoteh and katan. You might think this is
b/c they are not bar chiuv, but the mishna says that the reason is that “they might mess up
the shechitah,” but if a gadol was there to watch then it is kosher to use any of these
three.
Is this l’chatchilah or b’de’eved?

Rosh- says that the mishna is b’de’eved, b/c the mishna is about a child that didn’t come
to chinuch, but a child who came to chiuv (b/c he is coordinated), can do the shechitah
even l’chatchilah w/o an omed al gabuv.
HaGaos Ashri- says from the Or Zeruah that a katan who is coordinated who is shochet
by himself, that shechitah is pasul.
[They might be saying the same thing.]

S”A (p3)- he needs to be an uman to shecht w/ omed al gabuv.

Remah- says w/o an omed al gabuv it is not kosher (quotes HaGaos Ashri).

Why is the katan pasul w/o omed?

Shach- says 1) it is b/c there is no ne’emanus for a katan, katan is a bar zevichah.
Lvush (p5) (quoted in Shach)- says that the katan is a lav bar zevichah and that is why it
is pasul even b’de’eved.
This could be called ludicrous! Why would an omed al gabuv help him?
Shach is against the Lvush b/c it is assur to feed a katan trefus and therefore he is
shayach to an issur treifah.

Lvush- says that a katan is not a bar zevichah, but the gadol gives him the ability to make
him into a bar zevichah.

Gittin (45b)(p6)- who can be a sofer for tefillin, only a person who can put on tefillin
(bar keshirah is a bar ketivah).
According to the Lvush the katan is the same (and gadol is l’shma) and it is good.
According to the ne’emanus- why by tefillin is it pasul even w/ an omed al gabuv, but by
shechitah he is mutar?
Gadol makes it l’shmah. (
Pr”M- A) Maybe a mitzvas assay the katan isn’t a chiuv and it is a nothing, vs. a mitzvas
loh ta’aseh. He is not a bar daas, but it is still an averah. By tefillin there is no zivuy, and
by neveilah he is doing an averah and is included in “v’zuvachtah.”

Rambam (p12)- a 9 year old and one day that was boel a half slave and half free woman.
She won’t get killed for an affair, but she will get malkos and the man brings a korban
shifchah charufah (when she was engaged to a free man).
Torah Temimah- what if the m’zaneh is a katan? The gemara says that the pasuk
includes a beah of a boy at age 9 and one day. At that point, a married woman and a katan
who have an affair, the woman gets killed. In this case of shifchah, the woman gets
malkos, but would he have a chiuv korban?
Rambam- says that the katan must bring a korban when he is a gadol and that is what the
pasuk refers to.
R’ Chaim (in R’ Koegsberg’s sefer)(p31)- says that the Raavad is against the Rambam.
How can it be that a katan is chayav for a korban- it mujst be that it is an averah, but he is
not chayav on it, it is a ma’aseh averah with a ptur. The Rav says that the Shach would
hold that he is a bar zevichah.

R’ Koenegsberg (p40)- maybe there is no rayah and the katan isn’t a maaseh.
Kreisus- a person who is masasek (picks up his hands to scratch his head and he hit the
light) he doesn’t need to bring a korban, but by arayos (where you are aware of the
action, it is different and also he got hana’ah so it connects the person to the action). Here
it is hana’ah of beah and therefore he is doing an averah and katan here gets korban b/c it
is beah.
R’ Chaim wanted to support the Pr”M, that a katan is a ma’aseh and shechitah he will
get the hana’ah. Eating tarfus is hana’ah, but not that it is always a ma’aseh averah.

Sanhedrin (p16)(55b)- if a shor kills someone you kill it or if someone had relations with
it. Two reasons to kill the animal (and the person) 1) caused a stumbling block or 2) this
behaimah if it would remain alive, it will cause embarrasement (to the family) so we get
rid of it.
Do you need both reasons or not, ie if the beah was b’shogeg?
A) Proof: if a 9 year old had relations w/ a behaimah, we kill the behaimah even htuogh
no takalah! NO, here this is a takalah and a kalon, b/c the gemara says that “rachamanah
who d’chasi aleh.” [It could be that this is hana’ah and beah.]

Mishkenos Yaakov wanted to use this to answer a Rambam- a kataneh can get married
right away (even as a ubar) and if she was m’zaneh she is assur to her ba’al.
Raavad- But, she is considered an anus, so she shouldn’t be assur to her baal.

Mishekos Yaakov says that Rambam holds not like Yevumos (not an ones) and
machlokes hasugyos and he holds like Sanhedrin (says it is a maaseh averah b’mazid)
and the Rambam holds like this sugyah.

Tosefos on the gemara Gittin- Q) The katan shouldn’t be able to give a get, according to
the Shach b/c he isn’t in the parshah, so why is he able to give a get?
A) He isn’t now in the parsha, but one day he will be.
Q) But that is the same by tefillin?
A) Chachmas Adam- says that Tosefos is good for the Shach for zevichah and then you
don’t need to come to the fact that you are removing with your hand--?, he could’ve said
like Tosefos Gittin that you are b’chlal.
Chachmas Adam- sasy he has a better reason for the Shach (might be derabanan and
deoritta he’s not in the parsha) and tefillin isn’t good and only get and shechitah are good,
not tefillin.
“Ukshartem” means tie now. R’ Zalman Nechemya- tefillin is a mitzvah chiuvi- means
if you are not commanded now then you aren’t b’klal, but shechitah and get are
procedures, and being b’klal is enough.
Nodeh B’Yehudah- says like R’ Zalman Nechemiah’s svara. Zuvachta is never a chiuv
on anyone. You need to be shayach, not chayav now.
R’ Moshe/Rav (p29)- another svara is tumeh and shechitah are connected and a katan is
b’chlal tumeh, so that makes him b’klal, but that might not make it mutar b’achilah (R’
Genack) and R’ Moshe must say that he is matir b’achilah as well.
A katan who ‘doesn’t want to eat neveilah’ needs shechitah, but not bar keshirah b/c it is
a chiuv, so Hashem wasn’t speaking to a katan.

Chelkas Yoel (p33)- claims that there are 3 categories (Pr”M had 2 categories):
1) Assey- patur 2A) Lo taaseh- w/ a maaseh (maaseh katan is not a maaseh unless it has
hanaaeh) 2B) Lo taaseh- doesn’t need a maaseh (would be a maaseh averah even for a
katan) and an averah and would be o’ver.
If a katan has chametz (shev v’al taaseh w/o a maaseh) and the maaseh doesn’t relate to
him and not an action, it is happening m’meilah. Chametz b’Pesach doesn’t need a
maaseh, then it violates baal yirueh.
 Ben Pakuah: S12
If an animal is shechted with a live animal inside, it is considered shechted b/c it was in
the mother. It is halachikally considered dead.

Re’eh- the posuk by the simane kashrus.

Chullin (p2)- says “behaimah . . . ba’behaimah” teaches that an animal in an animal is
kosher. If the animal’s head came out and then back in, it is already considered born and
then it is not a BP. If the hand came out of the animal, then the animal is still considered a
BP, but the hand of the animal is assur to eat b/c it is considered a treifah. Treifah means
‘anything outside its confines’ and it is “basar b’sudeh treifah.” This compares the hand
to a korban removed from the beis hamikdash. The rest of the animal is mutar with the
shechitah of the mother.

Chullin (74a)(p4)- machlokes R”M and Chachamim: when the animal in the mother is
an 8th month live/dead, it is mutar, but 9th month is assur and it is considered a separate
entity. You must shecht the animal on its own right.
Chachamim say that even a 9th month is mutar with the shechitah of the mother.
R”S says even if the animal was 5 years old it is mutar.
(75a)(p5)- if you shecht the mother, and the mother is a treifah, but there is a healthy
animal inside, will the shechitah help? R”M will say that a 9th month baby is mutar and
Chachamim will say it is still assur. If the shechitah of the mother won’t help, then you
can later shecht the baby.
Rava disagrees and says that the Chachamim will still say it is fine b/c “4 simanim
acshevei rabanan.” It can be that there were 2 opportunities to shecht this animal (4
simannim, 2 of mother and 2 of child later) OR there is a connection b/t baby and mother
and a bad shechitah of the mother makes the baby assur. Rava says it is mutar.
(75b)(p6)- Rav Mesharshia- a BP that mates with a regular animal, what is the din of the
children. The gemara says that this animal has no takaneh b/c each animal gives one
siman and the BP gives one shechted siman and it has one healthy one. (This is a psul
shehiyah!!)
Rashi- says that R’ Mesharshia doesn’t hold of “4 simanim achshevei rabanan,” only the
mother’s simanim. One parent gave one and the other gave the 2nd siman. “4 simanim”
always applies.
Tosefos disagrees and he says that each animal is giving half the windpipe and half the
esophagus and half is shechted already. He says “4 simanim” is only said by a treifah or
else everyone agrees that you won’t get another opportunity.

Beis HaTalmud quotes Chullin (74b)- can you use a BP for korban Pesach, Rashi says
you can’t b/c you need “ke yevaled” and you need a normal birth. It can’t be a korban.
Tosefos disagrees and says that it is already shechted, so how can you shecht it again.
BH”T says that Rashi didn’t say like Tosefos b/c RAshi says “4 simanim” you can have 2
ways and you can shecht as a korban and Tosefos says that you don’t have a treifah so
that is why there is no possible shechitah.
Chullin (75b)- what is the difference b/t R”S and Chachamim? One opinion says that
once an animal walks on the ground you need to shecht it and you can’t just shoot it
m’derabanan b/c of MA. One opinion says you don’t even need shechitah even
derabanan.
What if the BP doesn’t have split hooves? It is mutar b/c it was in the mother and people
will know that it is strange and you are eating it, people won’t come to be mized up. BUT
it needs that the mother and the kid’s hooves are messed up for it to be mutar (both
things). People will be talking about it (a weird animal type).

What is the story of the chelev and the dam of the BP? The dam is assur and chelev is
mutar. Why the split (chelev is usually assur b’kares)?
Rambam- says that the chelev is mutar b/c it is like a limb. Even a ben 9 is mutar with
the shechitah of the mother. The chelev is not mutar in a ben 9, only a ben 8.
Kesef Mishnah says that this machlokes is l’shitaso.
If you hold that a ben 8 is good then chelev is mutar. Why does the Rambam fluctuate?
R’ Menachem Zembah (p15)- the Rambam says the chelev is assur and the meat is
mutar! He says that the Rambam held like two stam mishnaos and not like that gemara.
R’ Zembah says 1) is it that the shechitah helps the kid to be mutar and it is like the kid
was shechted, and it is like the child is shechted or 2) there is a special matir that the son
is mutar by himself and there is a heter on the kid, not that the kid is shechted, but it is
mutar w/o shechitah.
Rambam: if it is a ben 9 then the mother is like the kid is shechted and the chelev is assur,
BUT if it is b/f ben 9 (ben 8) then it is a special matir from the mother and it is matir
everything. Ben 8 mes is a matir, but ben 9 chay is like it was shechted.

Ran- discusses dam which is not kosher, why? B/c the heter is from the “tochailu” by
food and not liquid.
The Rambam has a two track system and not everything is like it is shechted and matir
permits the chelev as well.
Rosh (p14) says how can you matir the chelev? It is a gezeras ha’katuv. What about the
dam? It is spread out in the whole body and therefore it is like piresh. The chelev is its
own, but the dam is the mother’s dam that goes into the ubar.
Taz (p22)- says that the ubar is mized with the regular animal and therefore the mother’s
blood is poresh and so is the ubar’s. The chelev is separate.

Two more peshatim to explain the difference of chelev and dam.

Rashba: the BP is not its own animal and the issur chelev is mutar also, but if it needs its
own shechitah then the chelev is assur, but the dam is assur even if it isn’t an animal. The
chelev of a shor is assur and a non-animal is mutar.
R’ Yosef Engle- based on the Rambam (p11) that it is mutar to shecht a pregnant animal
even though it is mother and child killed together b/c the ubar is a limb of the mother. R’
Yosef Engel syas that not all chelev is assur, but all dam is assur. The chelev of a BP is
mutar b/c it is only one limb of the animal and the chelev in it is not in an assur place of
the animal, but the dam in the BP is assur as is all the dam in the body. The chelev is not
in the kilayos/kerev.
There is another discussion: what if the BP is a trefah, does the shechitah of the mother
make the child mutar?
Rashba- treifah isn’t posel the animal
Or Zeruah(p13)- says that the treifah is assur b’achilah and he says that others disagree
that it is included in “tochailu.”
Rambam Perush Mishnaos (p12)- you don’t need to check for treifus.
S”A (p22)- a ben 9 chay doesn’t need shechitah.

RA”E- says do you make a bracha on this shechitah? [Do you need to make bracha on
both sides of house for Chanukah candles by maaris ain? Ran says don’t make bracha and
here some say you do make a bracha. Dealing with bracha on maaris ain.]
RA”E quotes Rashba says you do need a bracha.
B’Samim Rosh (forgery)- says there is no bracha.

Does the shechitah need to be a kosher shechitah?

Is karov enough b/c it is only a maaris ain issue?
Rashba (p21)- says that even chaladah or drasah is mutar, b/c people won’t know.
 Sfaik S’faikah: S13
Kesubos (9a)- if a person said “pesach pusuach mutzasi,” after 12 months he says that
she is a Beulah. Why is she assur, it is a SS? 1) The beah could have happened b/f the
arusin and even w/in that year 2) she may have been raped.
Here the issur is a deoritta, but a SS would be matir a deoritta. The gemara says in that
case it would be mutar, but by a kohen’s wife, even a forced beah would be assur, so
there is no SS, or a regular yisroel’s wife and beah b/f 3 it will grow back, and here it
didn’t grow back, so it must have happened after age three.

I) Pnei Yehoshua (p3)- the chachamim don’t tell us where SS is from and he says from
the Rashba SHUT (p5-7) that it must be from rov which explains the matter. We also kill
someone based upon rov (gemara Makkos). Rashba says safek deoritta is a issur deoritta.

II) Rambam- says that safek deoritta l’chumrah is only a derabanan, and therefore (Pri
Megadim/Pnei Yehoshua) and every SS is a safek derabanan l’kullah b/c safek deoritta is
only a derabanan!!

Rambam continues in brakets: there is an exception to the safek rule, which is fat which I
don’t know whether it is kosher or chelev, is a safek mutar? R’ Shachter says this is
against a parsha in chumash- this is asham talue and the Torah tells you that by an issur
kares that you have to bring asham talue and there is something wrong with eating it.
Something that meizid is kares, the safek is assur deoritta.
Some remove the brakets and what do they do with the pasuk? There is a machlokes in
the gemara: some say that if you have a safek then you don’t need to bring asham talue,
but if you have two pieces and one was vaday chelev, in that case you do need to bring a
asham talue. Safek kares might not be l’chumrah. By arayos (usually kares), but
sometimes not kares. Keeping the brakets you have to split b/t different halachos like
different melachos on Shabbas.
Keeping the brakets, makes the previous lines in the Rambam less effective.

Binas Veradim (p8) Pr”M sefer- explains for the Rambam vs. Rashba of rov.
N”M b/t Rashba and Rambam (using kares is different)- Rashba says kares is mutar also,
Rambam says safek kares is deoritta and then safek l’chumrah (according to the Kesef
Mishnah’s girsah), either Rambam gives in in kares of izchazek issurah (then that will be
the N”M).
N”M is kares or izchaek issurah.

Kesubos (9a)-
Tosefos- why don’t you say SS less than 3 years? We said that the beah must have taken
place before the kidushin, but Tosefos says 1) safek/rutzon and 2) there is a second safek
that it happened when she was a ketanah and by a ketanah even rutzon is considered ones
and it is as if she was raped.
Even tachtus it is SS? Really both sefakos boil down to the same thing, ones or rotzon
and SS in one name “shem echad” [Terumas HaDeshen and Shach] is not a SS. The other
SS was 2 heterim (one before married and one after), but here it is both based upon the
heter of ones.

Shach (p9)- quotes Terumas HaDeshen about twin goats, which is the bechor and they
have issurim on the bechor? [Farmers try to have a shutfus with a goy to prevent having
to deal with kedushah of bechor.] Perhaps you have to be machmir on both?
TH”D says SS- 1) each one could’ve come out first, 2) the mother had milk immediately
and this is a siman that the mother had a previous animal beforehand and that is another
safek.

TH”D (p13) [Shach also discusses this]- is this called shem echad, b/c each animal has a
safek, whether it is the first one or not? This is the safek of “am I the first or not?” The
svara to say it isn’t shem echad is that a previous birth makes them both patur and if the
safek is for now, then only one is mutar and this is NOT shem echad.
By a male and a female, there is no more overarching safek, b/c either way the safek is
whether the male is the first child [one safek is more encompassing.]

Shach quotes Tosefos (A”Z)- goy’s kli and safek b’y and we assume this b/c 1) safek
whether used today or yesterday and 2) even if he used it today, perhaps he used a davar
pogem and it is therefore mutar. The Shach says this is a valid SS b/c the first heter is all
encompassing- you used it yesterday and it is mutar, and the second is that there might
have been a davar ha’pogem.
Remah (p24)- whether you need chadash in chutz l’aretz and Bach’s heter. He quotes
from the Rosh SHUT that you have SS b/c 1) perhaps the food grew after Pesach, but it
might be before Pesach and 2) even if it was from this year perhaps it took root before the
omer and it is mutar.
RA”E quotes- this is a shem echad b/c it is one safek!! Did it root before Pesach or not!!
This is not a SS.
Plesi- says that not everyone agrees to shem echad, perhaps the Rambam says that he
won’t hold of shem echad and the Rambam answers Tosefos’ question differently and
bitoh ketanah isn’t ones and therefore there is no question.

Chachmas Adam (p22)- when one side of the sefak isn’t a question and the other side is
a heter.
Mouse took a piece of something and took it into the house and I don’t know whether it
was chametz or matzoh 1) it may have been matzoh, 2) even chametz might have been
eaten.
If it was chametz 1) eaten it or 2) crumbled it up- this is not a good safek b/c these are
just 2 examples of the same thing. This is two attempts, but neiterh one has more
probability then the other.

Does this work with the original Tosefos- ones and ratzon?
There is still a maaseh beah and I’ll tell you what it is, and the Chachmas Adam would
say that is shem echad.
Maadane Asher- he isn’t sure that the Chachmas Adam will work with Tosefos and the
Chachmas Adam is claiming that he works with Tosefos.
Yad Yehudah- are both the sefakos at the same time (like Tosefos) vs. the Remah
(izzim) where they happened at different times.

Bein Hashmashot

R’ Moshe (p32)- he says 50 minutes after shekiah the stars are already out and this is
R”T’s shittah. Goan ¾ (13.5 minutes) and R”T 4 (72 minutes) mil after shekiah.
R’ Yehudah HaChasid- only in the West or anywhere in the sky (where the sun is in the
West and it will take longer). [R’ Issur Zalman Meltzer said this pshat makes us take
R”T more seriously.]

As you get further away from the equator it takes longer to get shekiah and 72 minutes in
Israel and in America should be more.
R’ Moshe held like the Minchas Kohen that the 4 mil is when you are in a valley and
can’t see the stars and once you can see the stars, then you can’t be more machmir than
that and he says 50 minutes.
If 50 minutes is 4 mil, then ¾ is 9 minutes, but he says nobody can be somech on the
Goan, but the first 9 minutes is a SS: 1) R”T says the first 9 is day and the Goan says it is,
and 2) even according to the Goan, bein hashmashot itself is safek yom / lailah and
therefore it can be yom. So you can treat the first 9 minutes as yom.

Why not ask, it is shem echad? When one of the safeks is broader and Gra is a smaller
safek and then you sak is it day or night.
By bris milah people don’t hold like him and hefsek taharah and R’ Abade says that
hefsek tahareh is only a derabanan anyway!!

Radvaz- child born Friday night after shekiah and he assumed 58-72 is a safek like R”T
and before 58 is yom and if safek when it was born, perhaps it can be on Friday, 1) could
be on Friday it was born and 2) bh”s is safek itself and can be yom.
He says that bh”s is really 3 sefakos- yom, lailah and miktzas yom and part lailah. There
is no SS then and this would mean bh”s isn’t used as SS.

Tosefos (p2)- pesach pusuach- perhaps the husband doesn’t know what he is talking
about and therefore the woman should get her money and SS to get her kesubah when she
is divorced 1) she is raped, 2) he doesn’t know what he is talking about.
Tosefos gives an answer.
Tosefos Yeshanim- says SS needs to be able to go in both directions, but here it isn’t
reversible. If it is b’ratzon, then it doesn’t matter if he is an expert in pesach pusoach and
therefore it is not a good SS.
 Shiur 14: Kavuah and Basar she’nisale min ha’ain
Kesubos (15a)- if 9 kosher butchers and 1 tref and sometimes you go into the kosher
store and sometimes the tref store and you don’t know where this piece is from: safek is
assur.
Q) But there is rov here? A) There is a gezeras ha’kasuv of kavuah. If the safek came
from where the piece came from, if you can trace your steps back, then you consider it as
50/50 and it is assur. This is called kavuah.
If you found a piece of meat in the street then you can rely on rov.
The question is where the safek was started, in the street or the makom kavuah (the
store).
Pasuk: premeditated murder: you are only a murderer if you had kavaneh, this excludes
throwing a stone into a crowd of people and if could be a mixture of Jews and Goyim.
Kavaneh to throw into a crowd and 9 Jews and 1 Goy and you know someone will be
killed, so we should say that you are chayav and w/o the din of kavuah we would’ve
thought this and 9 Goyim and 1 Jew surely you won’t be patur like 5J and 5G.
We learn from “v’urav lo v’kum lo” that people in “one specific place” needs kavaneh
to kill a Jew and there is a safek in a makom kavuah and we learn here that you are not
chayav by rov Jews and 1G and we view it as if it was 5/5 and that is the gezeras
ha’katuv and therefore we also apply it to the store.

Rashba (p3)- kavuah means you yourself went into the butcher store, but you found it
outside the stores, and you first meet the meat outside, then it isn’t in a makom kavuah. If
I see a Jew go into the store and I see him in the store then that is where my laidas
ha’safek begins and that is called kavuah.
Shitah Mekubetzes- it depends when the laidas hakatus was for me b/c it always starts in
a place.
Shemaitah- also says this.

Kavuah L’Mafrayah
If all the 10 stores were kosher and you went into one of them and after you went in one
of the stores states they had a delivery of tref meat and then the ladies ha’safek came after
you took the meat out of the store: 1) do we say that the store was kosher when you went
it and the laidas ha’safek comes outside the store OR// 2) is the laidah from before,
retroactively.
Ra’ah- says that the Rashba seems to be saying that it is NOT called kavuah and the
Ra’ah says that he is wrong and the laidah was which store I went into from before and
that leads back to the makom keviut.
Ran- he says that the question only comes after you left the store, there is no issue of
kevius (like Rashba).

Pesachim (9b)(p8)- 9 piles of matzoh and 1 chametz and a mouse came and took one
piece of one pile and brought it into the house: this is kavuah. This is if I saw the mouse
take the piece from the piles, but if I first saw the mouse with something in its mouth
then it is called parush and is mutar from rov.
Maharam Chalavah (p17)- quotes a gemara Chullin: if I see someone go into the store
that is kavuah, but if I first meet the Jew in the street and he is not sure which store he got
it from and for him it is kavuah, so he gives it to me: I also have the din of kavuah b/c I
take that his level of safek from him. I am an extension of his story!
If I meet a goy in the street and he isn’t sure and he is b’safek and he wants to give it to
me and this is not kavuah, b/c the goy isn’t commanded, so there is no laidas ha’safek so
I am the one that brings the first laidas ha’safek so it is mutar!!

Pri Chadash (p27)- a katan has the same din as a goy. If the katan has intelligence then
treat the food like kavuah.

S”A (110) (p18)- says a goy is mutar (called parush) and aprush means that we didn’t see
the goy leaving the store, but if I saw him leaving the store it is kavuah for ME.

The question is when the question first became a question (and by a goy this is outside
the store.)

Nikar b’makomo
Zevachim- a shor haniskal (nigmar dino) and it is in a taaroves or a chatas ha’maisah
(where the owner died and we are waiting for it to die): the din is that they should all die.
What about if you scattered them from their makom and then say that one is a parush.
Tosefos Pesachim (9b)(p8)- Q) But you already had a safek in a kavuah place, so what is
the havah aminah?
A) Kavuah must be that the issur is understood in its ‘makom’ like the tref meat is
kavuah in its place (the tref butcher store), but here the animals are nikar in its place, so it
isn’t nikar in its place.

If you tell a sheliach- here is a ring and I will marry whoever you want and the guy died
and we don’t know who he married him to. He can’t marry anyone now b/c it might be a
relataive to the woman he married.
Tosefos- Nobody should be able to get married b/c any girl might be married to the other
guy?
A) M’deoritta even this guy can get married from rov and the others also. But for this guy
we make a knas b/c he did something foolish.
Q) Why isn’t it kavuah for other people b/c you are going to the girl’s makom and the
person he was m’kadesh, he may have been m’kadesh?
A) He says that the issur isn’t nikar b’makomo. And the chachamim won’t make a
takaneh on this.

Sefer Ha’Kerisus (p12)- eglah arufah were brought and you can’t plant in the area of the
eglah arufah (the nachal esan), so how can anyone plant in E”Y b/c I should be afraid that
this area is a nachal eisan? A) Rov. Q) Kavuah? A) Nikar b’makomo, so it isn’t kavuah.

Mordechai- why don’t you say a B”D is kavuah? Whatever they said their voice is
parush.
Mordechai seems to hold that it doesn’t need to be nikar b’makomo.
 Kavuah M’derabanan

S”A (110)(p21/2)- all the halachos about kavuah m’derabanan (like beriah) are things
that aren’t batel.
If one of the animals that were sold was a treifah and you bought from that store.
Q) It is a chatichah ha’rauyah and therefore should they make an announcement?
Mechaber- says everything is mutar b/c it is kavuah (Badei- kavuah m’derabanan) and it
is a kavuah l’mafrayah from a kavuah m’derabanan after bitul m’rov b/c the yedeah was
only later. Kavuah deoritta is issur retroactively.

Anything sold afterward in that store is assur b/c it is kavuah from now and further. What
is sold was parush before the laidas ha’safek.

Benas V’radim- is rov by stores or pieces of meat sold (when one store is bigger then the
other store).

Basar hidden from the eye

Chullin (96)(p16)- found in street is mutar and in the store is assur. Even though meat is
parush, Rav says that once meat is covered from your eye it is assur, b/c it might have
been switched from the raven. Levi is not worried.

What about if I am working and there is a fridge, do I need to be worried?

Rambam (p30)- deoritta rov is mutar and take it from the street, but derabanan said that
basar removed from the eye is assur. Unless there is a siman or you knew what your
sandwich looked like. This is even according to those that say it is assur!

Mechaber- quotes the Rambam. At the end he says that there are matirim according to
Levi.
Remah- says the minhag is to be makil like Levi!!
If workers tampered with it, they took it, not switched it and the gemara is by the bird
switching it, unless you have reason to believe it was switched.
 Shiur 15: Tevilas Kelim
Matos- war with Midian after which they took their pots: anything used with fire use
libun and water with hagaleh
“Ach b’mei nidah yischateh”- what does this mean: it seems to be mei chatas and parah
adumeh water seems to be the pshat (from dead bodies) and prevent tumeh in your house.
Rashi- quotes A”Z (35b)- says mayim she’niddah toveles buhem: the same mikveh for a
woman is needed for a keli (and you can’t have a filter even for a men’s mikveh which
can have mayim sheuvim). This is not the pashut pshat of the pasuk.

Can you put kelim in snow? Mechaber says yes and Shach says no and we are machmir.

Is tevilas kelim a deoritta or only a derabanan?

Derabanan
Ramban- says that he feels it is a derabanan and the pasuk is an asmachtah (as Unkelus
says). The original din is only metal and the chachamim add glass as well.
Why metal? B/c they are used for fire and liquid.
P’nei Yerushalaim- tevilah is only for kli seudah
Ramban- most kli seudah were metal therefore that is what was needed to have tevilah.
Rambam (p5)- says it is a divrei sofrim, seems to be derabanan.
Deoritta
Rashba (p7)- a mashkon from a goy (forks and knives), do I need to be tovel them?
Rambam says they don’t need tevilah. Rashba says how can he say they don’t need it,
isn’t tevilas kelim deoritta? Rambam holds it is derabanan.
Smak- (mitzah 199)- quotes tevilah as a deoritta.

Yerushalmi (A”Z)- when a goy owns the object and it goes to a Jew it needs to be tovel.
Issur V’heter- it is like a bris on the kli, but you can use a goy’s kli for cake as long as
they are owned by a goy.
Issur V’heter- herus on the keli.

Issur V’heter (p10)- only things that touch the food need to be toveled, only the kli
seudah, even if they are only used for COLD THINGS they need to be toveled. If it holds
the pot it is not called “kli seudah.”

Sakin shel shechitah- touches the animal, but this is not in food preparation.
Raviah- syas it doesn’t need tevilah.
Maharam- says it does need tevilah with a bracha.
S”A (p26)- says don’t need to.
Remah- tovel w/o brachah.

Is tevilah a mitzvah or an issur?

Rokeach- says it is an issur
Ra’aviah- if you know that the goy is going to let you keep it, it needs tevilah. Here he
says it is not an issur, it is not a mitzah like tefilin either, it is what you need to do to use
it. A mashkon w/o tevilah you can be makil and you don’t need to tovel it.
Avnei Nezer- makes a big deal of the Ra’aviah
Mordechai- by tzitis- you can’t ear 4 cornered garments w/o tzitis, but you can’t tie tzitis
on Shabbas, on Shabbas tzitizs is a mitzah, but anus is patur. So on Shabbas, where it w/o
tzitzis.

In someone else’s house: 1) mitzah on owner or 2) I am an anus [but they you shouldn’t
use it or the garment by the Mordechai].
If the kli is going to break then it is a mitzvah, but you don’t need to break it.

Tovel Kelim on Shabbas

If you are invited over to someone over on Shabbas (and you can’t, then you have the
Mordechai’s heter).
Issur V’heter- gerus on the kelim.

Beitzah- sugyah on behaimah temaiyim: all agree that you can’t be tovel kelim tumeh on
Shabbas for 4 reasons: 1) fear you will carry them 4 amos in RHR, 2) fear of sechitah
(shirts) and gezerah b/c of the shirt, 3) gezerah that you might wait to tovel them on
Shabbas or Yom Tov when you have more free time and we don’t want you to leave
these kelim in the house and it is a michshol and 4) tikun kli (b/c you are making the kli
more usable).
Rif (p17)- only quotes sechitah and shema yish’he.
Rosh- says that if these 2 reasons are the reasons for the issur then kelim being tovel on
Shabbas would be mutar!! This is why the Rif is talking about this non-halacha l’maaseh
gemara.
S”A- some permit, some say it is assur and the person who fears God will give the kli to
a goy as a present and take it back from him. You can make a kinian on Shabbas in
certain cases.
Be’er Halachah- he says there is no problem of leaving over a kli of tevilah (yish’he),
but perhaps you will eat with this kli!! The ochel isn’t assur and the issur of using this kli
is only a derabanan.

Buying and Borrowing

A”Z (5b)(p2)- buying a kli has a chiuv, and not borrowing.
Tosefos- if Reuven bought the kli and lent it is Shimon then Shimon needs to tovel it b/c
the chiuv was chal when Reuven bought it.
Tur (p23)- What happens if you go to someone who wasn’t tovel kelim?
Beis Aviv- not a problem b/c you aren’t the baal ha’bais.
Q) Don’t we see from here that you don’t need to the baal ha’bais? Here he is a shoel
(and like a baalim)..? The guest isn’t a shoel or a baalim and therefore he is patur.
R’ Abade doesn’t think this is a good chiluk and the heterim are incorrect.

Q) What do you do?

A) If there is a big embarrassment and it is a derabanan and we can be makil + a plate
isn’t doing anything vs. a cup which is doing something + really not by paper
[Baal Habais kullah isn’t so good.]
S”A (p30)- give as a mataneh to a goy and then use it.

Electrical Appliances
Some thought it was mechubar l’karkah.
Gedule Karkah- that it was mechubar and R’ Lezer Silver held of this (like a George
Forman).
Aruch HaShulchan- tumeh and tahareh: if it is connected sometimes then it is still
makabel tumeh, but still AHS says it is a kullah here.
Hagalah we go after rov tashmish and therefore if it is used mostly for wood and
sometimes for meat, you don’t need hagalah.

A”Z- real chiuv is on metal and the chachamim added glass to it b/c you can put it make
together like metal and unlike pottery.
Other materials: even disposable plastic (w/o a bracha).

Bought a grapejuice- do you need to tovel it and then return it?

Maharal Diskin- you don’t need to take stuff out, but you are a shev v’al taaseh.
R’ Abade uses this as a heter by a guest.
R’ Shachter- once you drink from the kli you are kum va’asey and you have to pour out
the juice first b/c Snapple is a kli chashuv and you must be tovel
R’ Moshe (p39)- refill the empty grapejuice container with water: chiddish is that the kli
purchased was a drink and the kli is tafel to the drink and it is like a peel and he learns
this from maser sheni and mishnaos in maser sheni: wine is sold with the barrel and you
are paying for the barrel, so how can you spend the money towards the barrel? The barrel
is tufel to the wine and is considered part of the wine and you didn’t buy a kli from the
goy. Now the Jew is making the glass into a kli so you don’t need tevilah.

Buying from a corporation

R’ Shachter- says never make a bracha of ‘al tevilas kelim’ b/c it is from a corporation.
R’ Moshe says a corporation is like a goy.

China
AH”S- we have cheres and people were noheg to tovel and we don’t know the reason
(w/o a bracha) and perhaps it was coated with glass so people toveled it.
We probably don’t have to.

R’ Moshe- aluminum is not listed in the chumash and only the 6 in the Torah are
m’kabel tumeh and perhaps it dones’t need tevilah. He says that it needs tevilah
derabanan.
Hotel- R’ Moshe says if they put the food in your plate, take it with your hand w/o a
knife and fork.

Beis Yosef (p23)- if a Jew buys kelim as a business man, do they need tevilah b/c you
aren’t going there for yourself. If it is bought and not used for kli seudah, it dones’t need
tevilah.
Ramifications: 1) I buy you a cup as a gift and tovel it as well, maybe the guy who
bought the gift can’t tovel it. 2) R’ Ovadyah Yosef (p45)- go to a restaurant, kosher food
w/o toveling, perhaps there is no need to tovel them b/c it is like buying them for cutting
wood.
 Yayin Nesech and Stam Yanum: S16
YN- assur achilah and hana’ah
Ha’azinu-
A”Z (29b)- YN is
Rambam- it is assur b’hana’ah and if you frink it you get malkos.
Kesef Mishnah- Where does it say malkos, there is no lav? He says “pen tichros bris”
and pen is an loh ta’aseh.” This when it is poured for the A”Z itself.
Chachamim made an issur on ‘yayin shel goyim’ and original source of this gezerah
stems from Pirkei D’rabe Eliezer from Pinchas that Pinchas said you can’t drink goyish
wine and also found in Daniel and A”Z (36) quotes that the gezerah was because of their
daughters.
Ramban- asks why the gemara says this gezerah if Pinchas already said this? It could be
that the first gezerah was only by drinking and then added an issur hana’ah by stam
yanum and b/c of their daughters.
Yayin nesech is not normal and the rabanan made this takaneh for stam yanum.

What is the story with stam yanum?

Tur (p15)- the chachamim said this is assur from hana’ah is b/c they treated the wine like
yayin nesech mamash. Not only goyish wine, but even our wine that they touched.
Sha’ar Teshuvah (SHUT Geonim)- says that today the stam yayum is only assur to
drink and not to get hana’ah from and the gezerah doesn’t apply to hana’ah anymore and
therefore we can sell the wine.
Rosh- said that w/in stam yayum there is goyish wine and Jewish wine that was touched.
He says that goyish wine has an issur hana’ah and not Jewish wine that was touched. At
the end he isn’t sure whether goyish wine is really assur b’hana’ah as well.

Mechaber (123)- stam yayum is assur b’hana’ah as well

Remah- quotes the makil opinion

Yayin M’vushal

Why is cooked wine different and what are the parameters?

Gemara- says that there is no din of yayin nesech by cooked wine.
Why?
Rambam (p8)- you only have yayin nesech on things that you can put on the mizbeach
and cooked wine can’t be brought on the mizbeach.
Rosh (p22)- he says that the reason for this gezerah was after yayin nesech b/c of fear of
marrying goyish women, but what does this have to do with cooking plus watering down
wine can’t be put on the mizbeach, so why is m’vushal different from watering down
which should also not have yayin nesech on it!!
A) Milsah d’lo shechichah and that is why there was no gezerah.
[RA”E- just because we don’t do it, maybe they did it?]
Shach (143)- you must the wine on the fire that it diminished from the fire and you have
less then you started with.
R’ Shlomo Zalman (p27) and R’ Elyashiv- about pasteurization (grape juice) is that
caused cooked b/c it is heated? Maybe yayin m’vushal heter shouldn’t be today, b/c then
the fumes went up and the wine tasted differently and that was why it was different and
perhaps by the Rambam it was also b/c the wine tasted differently and today there is no
place to escape.
Meiri- says that m’vushal means “until the taam changes.”
Rambam (p34) by Psule Mizbeach he says that the cooking changes the taam.
R’ Shlomo Zalman- in those days the fumes went up and the taam changed and today it
is with enclosed pipes. Today, they want the wine to have the same taste and people can’t
taste the difference, so how can you be makil.
He then says that once they made the gezerah that they exclude cooking and then it still
applies, but perhaps this is being mosif on the gezeros chazal if the cooking process
changed.
Gris by kesem and we don’t have the bed bugs around and we still subscribe to this
kullah today, so to assur is wrong. But, here that bishul that was mutar was cooking that
changes the taste and here there is no cooking that changes the taste.
Mybe our pasteurization is frequent and therefore he says the kullah shouldn’t apply.
R’ Elyashiv wrote the same idea.
R’ Moshe (p31) said the heter does apply today b/c there is a different taste or it doesn’t
matter. But, what is the shiur bitul? What about a michalel Shabbas in public? He says
that yad soledes is enough. This means pasteurization is enough as well and therefore he
is a double kullah.
Tezlemer Rebbe- said he needs boiling (212 degrees).

What is called touching the wine?

A”Z (60)- goy is carrying a couch with wine on it, and the wine is moving on the couch,
that is NOT called carrying. If you put a spoon in the wine and cause it to move, that is
called moving it.
Some say if the goy is carrying the open bottle with the cap on that doesn’t make it stam
yanum.
Rambam (p37)- if the kli is closed and the wine moves that is not stam yanum.
Rashba (p39)- says even if the kli is OPEN if it isn’t derech nisuch b’kach, then it is still
not considered negiah.
Rambam-touch the wine with your body AND you move the wine as well. If you shake
an open kli that is enough as well.
S”A- touch the wine with your body or another part is negeah. If you pour the wine that
is from kocho that is enough, but picking it up is not enough.
It he puts the chavis on his back and it falls out, it is kocho w/o kavaneh and that is
mutar. The din is kocho b’kavaneh.

What is the shiur of bitul of stam yanum and yayin nesech?

S”A (p44)- says that real yayin nesech isn’t batel, but yayin that is only assur from
drinking is assur with 60. If it mixes with water then it is b’nosen taam.
However, there is another halacha of yayin mixed with water and the S”A says that 6
times water aginst the wine, it loses the taam of wine.
Shach/Nekudas HaKesef- that is only by water (to dilute in 6xs).
Taz (p49)- you can’t buy mashkin from a goy b/c you have to be afraid of wine being put
in, you need 60? Why 60, you need 6? The Taz assumes the 6xs is even by other liquids
and not only by water.

Rashba SHUT in Mechaber (p52)- all maskim that have wine are assur.
What is the chiddush? Rashba says that the din bitul is if IT HAPPENS but if you put it
in as an ingredient it is never batel. This is a big chumrah!
Pischei Teshuva quotes Nodeh B’Yehudah that argues with this. He thinks that the
Rashba is only m’derabanan and others don’t agree. [This is even if goyim do it for other
goyim.]
R’ Bleich (p55)- whiskey blends have up to 2.5% tref wine, so are these blended
whiskeys tref. 1) Perhaps 6 is only for water and 60 is needed and he says to stay away
from this. He quotes SHUT Rashba as an issur as well.
R’ Moshe (p59)- says it is batel b’60 like the Taz and m’ikkar ha’din it is mutar, but a
baal nefesh should be machmir b/c 1) stam yayum might be assur b’hana’ah 2) and some
say you always need 60 and certainly by shaar mashkin, so there is room to be machmir.
OU guide- says they are not recommended/

Single malt whiskey- wine casks.

R’ Shachter (p66)- says that everyone used to drink them, but he says to be machmir.
R’ Belsky uses same svaros.

Chachmas Adam- you can’t drink in a goy’s house, even beer. Perhaps even coffee and
milk is assur (and lounge might be an issur).
Tur- says in a goy’s home, not a lounge.