16,374
edits
Koshering a Kitchen: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Hagalah
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned even for a minority of uses of a utensil. Tosfot Avoda Zara 74b s.v. darash, Hagahot Maimoniyot (Hilchot Hagalah), and Tur 451:6 agree. Shulchan Aruch 451:6 follows the Rashba and Rama 451:6 is concerned for the Ravyah. | * However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned even for a minority of uses of a utensil. Tosfot Avoda Zara 74b s.v. darash, Hagahot Maimoniyot (Hilchot Hagalah), and Tur 451:6 agree. Shulchan Aruch 451:6 follows the Rashba and Rama 451:6 is concerned for the Ravyah. | ||
* How does Rov Tashmisho work? The Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that following the main use of a utensil is only effective if we’re unsure if the utensil was ever used for the other type and we’re allowed not to be concerned for an abnormal use. This is also the opinion of Tosfot Chullin 8a s.v. shlibna, Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim, and Raah cited by Nemukei Yosef Pesachim 30b. | * How does Rov Tashmisho work? The Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that following the main use of a utensil is only effective if we’re unsure if the utensil was ever used for the other type and we’re allowed not to be concerned for an abnormal use. This is also the opinion of Tosfot Chullin 8a s.v. shlibna, Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim, and Raah cited by Nemukei Yosef Pesachim 30b. | ||
* However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata absolutely holds that we follow the majority of uses even though it is certain that it was used for the other type of use. Ramban Avoda Zara 76a s.v. umah sh’amru and Rashba a”z 76a s.v. vkatav agree. This is also implied by Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata. Kaf Hachaim 451:100 follows that approach and cites many who agree including: Sharei Kneset Hagedola 451:6, Pri Chadash, Olot Tamid, Eliya Rabba 451:17, Chok Yakov 451:31, Bet Dovid 212, Gan Hamelech 53, Erev Hashulchan 451:11, Chemed Moshe 451:12, and Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:31. How can that be explained? | * However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata absolutely holds that we follow the majority of uses even though it is certain that it was used for the other type of use. Ramban Avoda Zara 76a s.v. umah sh’amru and Rashba a”z 76a s.v. vkatav agree. This is also implied by Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata. Kaf Hachaim 451:100 follows that approach and cites many who agree including: Sharei Kneset Hagedola 451:6, Pri Chadash, Olot Tamid, Eliya Rabba 451:17, Chok Yakov 451:31, Bet Dovid 212, Gan Hamelech 53, Erev Hashulchan 451:11, Chemed Moshe 451:12, and Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:31. Rama Mpano 96, Chazon Ish 119:15 agree. See Darkei Teshuva 121:5 for someone who pasken like the Raah. How can that be explained? | ||
* The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that the reason that we can follow the majority of uses is even though it is known that it was used for another type of use but after 24 hours the absorptions are negative tasting and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established to follow the majority of uses. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96. | * The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that the reason that we can follow the majority of uses is even though it is known that it was used for another type of use but after 24 hours the absorptions are negative tasting and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established to follow the majority of uses. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96. | ||
* Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer it can’t be used for a spice grinder since a dvar charif extracts tastes even though they weren’t used within 24 hours. However, the Mishna Brurah 451:80 seems to apply the rule of rov tashmisho even to a grinder. Chazon Ish answers that it is referring to a concern that it was used for chametz but we don’t know that it was ever used for chametz otherwise we couldn’t use the majority of uses. | * Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer it can’t be used for a spice grinder since a dvar charif extracts tastes even though they weren’t used within 24 hours. However, the Mishna Brurah 451:80 seems to apply the rule of rov tashmisho even to a grinder. Chazon Ish answers that it is referring to a concern that it was used for chametz but we don’t know that it was ever used for chametz otherwise we couldn’t use the majority of uses. | ||
