Koshering a Kitchen: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 01:10, 25 August 2024

Utensils Used for Cold

Any vessel that is usually used for cold can be koshered by cleaning it well with cold water.^[1] Ashkenazim are lechatchila (initially) strict for the opinion that if it was used for non-kosher cold that it should be koshered with hagalah.^[2]

Hagalah

A pot that absorbed something via a liquid medium can be koshered^[3] with boiling^[4] water^[5]^[6]
A pot that is usually used for cooking with liquids, but is sometimes used for roasting without liquids: according to Sephardim, this can be koshered with hagalah, and there's no need for libun, since we follow the majority of its use.^[7] Initially (lechatchila) Ashkenazim are concerned even for a minority of uses, and would require libun in this scenario.^[8]
Hagalah means immersing the vessel with non-kosher absorption into boiling water on the fire that is bubbling.^[9] Some poskim hold that it always needs to be a bubbling boil, while others hold that it is sufficient even if the pot was removed from the fire in a case of a permitted absorption (hetera baala).^[10] If a knife is only used in hot water off the fire, it can be koshered with hagalah off the fire.^[11]
Usually it is necessary to kosher a pot on the inside and the rim but if it is used on the outside of the pot such as a ladle it needs to be koshered on both sides.^[12]
If one has a big pot and can't put it into another pot, one should have a rim added to it, and when the pot boils, the water will splash onto the rim and kosher it. Alternatively, one can boil a pot and drop a rock in, so that the pot boils over the rim.^[13]
If a pot is used on the inside, but became non-kosher on the outside, it needs to be koshered on both sides.^[14]
If one is doing hagalah of iruy on a large item, one should do so bottom up.^[15]
Hagalah works for pots that were used for liquids, even though in the course of being used they were used for temperatures above 212 degrees.^[16] Additionally, in altitudes where it is possible to boil water at lower than 212, one can use this boiling water (even though it's less than 212 F) for hagalah.^[17]
With regards to a pressure cooker, which can cook foods at temperatures higher than 212 F, many poskim hold that the boiling water used for hagalah only needs to be 212 F.^[18]
The utensils put in the boiling water should be left there for a few seconds; some recommend that they be left for ten seconds.^[19]

Libun

It is possible to do Libun on Pesach but not hagalah.^[20]
Libun Chamur can be accomplished with a minimum temperature of 752 F, because metal would become visibly red hot in the dark at that temperature. Self-clean of a typical oven is 850 degrees and certainly counts as libun chamur.^[21]
Libun Kal is certainly achieved at 451 F because paper burns at that temperature.^[22]
Libun chamur with a blow torch should be done on each spot for approximately 9 seconds. This could be dangerous and damage the oven thermostat.^[23]
Anytime the absorption was permitted (hettera balah), the utensil can be koshered with hagalah and doesn't require libun.^[24]
If someone did hagalah when a kli needed libun, then the kli is still considered not-kosher, even bdiavad (after the fact).^[25]

Koshering a Knife

A knife should be koshered with hagalah.^[26]
The minhag is to have designated meat and milk knives.^[27] Preferably one should have three knives, one for meat, one for milk, and one for parve.^[28]
It is forbidden to use a dirty meat knife to cut cheese. It is even forbidden to use it to cut bread which will be eaten with cheese.^[29] The same is true vice versa.^[30]

Using a non-Kosher Knife

It is permitted to use a non-kosher knife on a one-time basis for cold if you first stick it into hard earth ten times.^[31] But in order to use the knife for hot, even once, one needs to do a proper hechsher.
Similarly, to use a meat knife on a one time basis to cut cold bread that will be eaten with cheese, it is sufficient to stick it in hard earth ten times. However, in order to use a meat knife to cut cheese, one should do a proper hechsher.^[32]
1. Some poskim say that if one doesn't have a knife, cleaning the knife with soap is considered the equivalent of sticking it in the ground ten times.^[33]
If one wants to use a meat knife on a consistent basis for cold dairy, then one must do a hechsher of the knife.^[34]

Using Non-Kosher Utensils

It is permitted to use a clean cold non-Kosher utensil to eat cold kosher food on an irregular basis for a one-time use. See footnote regarding earthenware.^[35] Knives have to first be stuck in the ground ten times.^[36] See section on using non-kosher knives.
It is initially (lechatchila) forbidden to place cold kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-Kosher if the container wasn’t washed since the kosher food that goes into the container will have some non-kosher on it and one might forget to wash off the kosher food. If the kosher food is usually washed before being eaten it is permitted to initially place it in a cold pot used for non-kosher.^[37]
It is initially permitted to place kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-kosher if the container was washed.^[38] However, one shouldn’t use non-kosher earthenware utensils even for cold.^[39]
It is permitted to own a non-kosher utensil and not use it as there’s no concern that you’ll come to use it for a forbidden use.^[40]

Frying Pan

A frying pan that became non-kosher can only be koshered with libun chamur.^[41]
A frying pan that was used for chametz can be koshered for pesach with libun kal or hagalah.^[42] See Kashering_the_Kitchen_for_Pesach#Pans for Ashkenazic minhag and fuller discussion.
A frying pan that is milk and one wants to make it parve, or if one wants to make a meat frying pan parve, one can kosher it with hagalah or libun kal.^[43] However, if it was used for meat and milk, it needs to be koshered with libun.^[44]
If it is used for meat and 24 hours later is used for milk it can be koshered with hagalah or libun kal. The opposite is true of the opposite (unless it is used for a sharp food - Dvar Charif).^[45]

Not Switching Between Meat and Milk

The Ashkenazic minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk except before Pesach when one is koshering the utensils for Pesach anyway.^[46] Sephardim never had this practice.^[47]
Some say that it is permitted to kosher a utensil that used to be Parve and now became dairy or meat to become parve again.^[48]
It is permitted to switch over utensils after 12 months have passed.^[49]
Some have the practice that if one has a utensil which one wants to switch from meat to milk that one intentionally makes that utensil non-kosher and then it is fine to kosher it and use it for the other type.^[50]

Glass

According to Ashkenazim, glass can not be kashered for Pesach. For other prohibitions ,such as meat and milk, it is a dispute whether it does not absorb anything, does absorb and can be kashered, or does absorb but can not be kashered.^[51]
According to most Sephardim, glass utensils don't absorb any taste and do not become non-kosher, both for meat and milk as well as chametz on pesach. However, the common practice is to have two sets of dishes, one for milk and one for meat.^[52]

Sources

↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.
↑ Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149
↑ Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and instead posits that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest are batel (nullified). This is why hagalah cannot be done on pesach, as there's no concept of bittul for chametz on pesach, as chametz is assur b'mashehu (even a little bit is forbidden). [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]
↑ Does hagalah need to be 212 F? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah, the water needs to reach 212 F. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that strictly speaking, if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more, then it can be koshered with heating water in it to that temperature. Only initially (lechatchila) do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6); otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).
↑ Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah specifically with water; however, after the fact, other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.
↑
When is hagalah effective?
1. Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.
2. Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.
3. Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.
↑
Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
- The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.
- The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.
- However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned for a minority of usages 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? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? 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 minority usage. We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. 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 holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. 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 even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96.
- Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) 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 Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.
- However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189 explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.
↑ Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45
↑
Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute if hagalah must be performed with a kli rishon that is still on the fire, or if a kli rishon can be used for hagalah even once it's been removed from the fire. Bet Yosef notes that by hilchot Shabbot, whether or not it's still on the fire, we still consider it to be a kli rishon. Bet Yosef explains that the two opinions in the Tur are dependent on whether or not we can learn hagalah from the definition of kli rishon by hilchot Shabbat. The reason not to is because the absorbed taste might only be removed in the way that it entered the keli, namely when it was directly on the fire.
- Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.
- Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.
- Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that rotchin is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.
↑
Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve this question, but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
- Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.
- Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.
- Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.
↑
Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
- Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, Physics Stackexchange).
↑ Magen Avraham 452:11 quoting the Maharil
↑ Shulchan Aruch 452:6
↑ Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3
↑ Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.
↑ Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 F (such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure), it is acceptable to do hagalah with 212 F alone. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.
↑ Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered, and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.
↑ Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55
↑
The OU writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the Kof K writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately, unlike the Taz who says that it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it in for a little bit of time.
- Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.
- Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.
↑ Rama 452:1
↑ Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315
↑ Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315
↑ Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353
↑ Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.
↑ Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7
↑ Rama 89:4
↑ Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 8:8), Badei Hashulchan 89:111
↑ Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4
↑ Rama YD 89:4
↑ The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife, one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says that one should stick it in the ground three times, one should be strict and do it ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck on it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly, that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold, it should be stuck into the ground ten times. Shulchan Aruch notes that this procedure is sufficient even if one wants to use the knife to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion). The Rama adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis, then one must do a proper hechsher.
↑ The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy using the knife, it just needs to be cleaned. But if one intends to use it for cheese, then it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher.
↑ Maadenei HaShulchan (M'taamei Hashulchan YD 89:17 p. 62)
↑ Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5
↑
*The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil has to be broken, if it ostensibly can be used for cold kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold food, because one might come to use it for hot food. The Ran notes that this is limited to earthenware which can't be kashered, as there's a greater likelihood that you'll come to use it with hot food. The Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) disagrees with Ran and thinks that this rabbinic prohibition extends to vessels of all materials, that one shouldn't use them with cold, lest one come to use them with hot. Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food, but one may not do so on a consistent basis, out of concern for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
- Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use, unless you're in a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.
↑ Shach 121:9
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur
↑
Shach 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, Kaf HaChaim 91:5. Is there a concern of beliyot when using a utensil for cold?
- The Orchot Chaim states that it is permitted to store spices in a non-kosher utensil since there are no beliyot of non-kosher being transferred by storing the spices in the utensil. The Bet Yosef 105 cites this. The Tur 451 permits storing cold matzah in a chametz utensil.
- However, the Tur 91:2 cites the Baal Haitur who writes that it is forbidden to place meat in a dairy utensil since one might forget to wash it off afterwards.
- Question: The Rama (Torat Chatat 17:2 and Darkei Moshe 91) is bothered with this contradiction. He answers 4 answers:
1. We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.
2. We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.
3. We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).
4. We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.
- Rama 91:2 implies that he accepts answers 1 and 3 and requires both but Taz 91:3 explains that either is sufficient. Shach 91:3 only accepts the fourth answer.
↑ Shach 91:3, Pri Chadash 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15. Pri Chadash 91:3 explains that the reason to be strict is that we're concerned that a person is going to use it for hot. However, for a metal utensil we're not concerned for a short usage that one will use it with hot since one would first do hagalah. See Kaf HaChaim 91:10 who permits using non-kosher earthenware utensils that belong to a non-Jew for cold.
↑
Kaf Hachaim 91:9. See Chashukei Chemed Yoma 66a who cites the Panim Meirot 1:23 who says that there's no concern that if one owns a non-kosher utensil one will come to use it. However, the Ketav Sofer YD 28 holds that it is a concern. It is similar to the Gemara Yoma 66a and Pesachim 20b where chazal are concerned about holding onto something forbidden because you might use it.
- Rambam Trumot 12:12 implies that there's a prohibition to keep impure trumah and we don't allow keeping it in order to sprinkle on the floor periodically since we're concerned that a person is going to make a mistake and eat it. Mahari Kurkus explains that the rambam held this even though the Gemara Pesachim 20b implies that Bet Hillel isn't concerned for that because in several places the Gemara (Shabbat 17b) is concerned. Bet Halevi 1:52 adds that Sotah 48a is another proof. However, the Rabbenu Chananel Pesachim 20b and Rashba b"k 115b s.v. vtakala hold like Bet Hillel.
↑ The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun as it's comparable to baking. On the other hand, the Ravyah held it needed hagalah as it's comparable to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the food is cooked in a liquid medium (oil) in a pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering for pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, but is strict to generally require libun chamur. When it comes to pesach, since there are some who hold that chametz is hetera baala and would only need hagalah, we can suffice with hagalah. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree.
↑ The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun, since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat, it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:13 and 25 who implies that even if a pot is used for meat and milk within 24 hours, it can still be koshered with hagalah since meat and milk is called hetera baala. However, this seems to be at odds with the rishonim. Divrei Shalom 451:98 on Shulchan Aruch Harav and Maharsham 2:42 understand Shulchan Aruch Harav as only discussing liquid milk after meat. In that case hagalah is sufficient because the milk entered as a liquid. But if the meat and milk were both solids, then the pot would require libun. Also, Isur Veheter 58:23 writes explicitly that a meat pot which a drop of milk made non-kosher needs libun.
↑ Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7
↑ Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether it's currently meat or milk. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered, and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach, it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7), Badei Hashulchan 89:112, and Rav Schachter (Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23) agree. However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays, and there's no issue to switch utensils from meat to milk.
↑ Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4
↑ Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.
↑ Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei citing Maharsham 2:241
↑ Pri Megadim EA 509:11 (cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei), Rav Schachter (Basic Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23). Badei Hashulchan questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.
↑ Rabbi Jachter quotes Rav Schachter who holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions.
↑ Rabbi Mansour on dailyhalacha.com writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient, but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.

Category	Topics
General Laws of Kashrut	Bishul Akum - Checking for Bugs - Gelatin - Kosher Food without Kosher Supervision - Kosher Food Packaging for Deliveries - Kosher Food Left with a Non-Jew - Koshering a Kitchen - Kashering for Pesach - Kosher in the Workplace - Medications - Pat Palter - Selling Non-Kosher Foods - Serving Guests - Sharp Foods - Shechitah (Kosher Slaughter) - Tevilat Keilim - Tzaar Baalei Chayim - Yashan
Meat and Milk	Dairy Bread - Eating Dairy and Meat at the Same Table - Kosher Cheese - Kosher Milk (Chalav Yisrael) - Milk and Meat in the Kitchen - Non-Dairy Milk - Waiting between Meat and Milk
Principles of Kashrut	Items That Cannot Be Nullified - Transferring Taste - Nullification - Zeh Vzeh Gorem - Trusting Others for Kashrut
Shechitah	Shechitah_(Kosher_Slaughter) - Who_Can_Be_a_Shochet - The_Shechitah_Knife - Modern_Day_Industrial_Shechitah - Glatt Kosher Meat - Kashering Meat

[1] Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.

[2] Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149

[3] Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and instead posits that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest are batel (nullified). This is why hagalah cannot be done on pesach, as there's no concept of bittul for chametz on pesach, as chametz is assur b'mashehu (even a little bit is forbidden). [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]

[4] Does hagalah need to be 212 F? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah, the water needs to reach 212 F. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that strictly speaking, if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more, then it can be koshered with heating water in it to that temperature. Only initially (lechatchila) do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6); otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).

[5] Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah specifically with water; however, after the fact, other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.

[6] When is hagalah effective?
Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.

Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.

Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.

[7] Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.

[8] Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.

[9] Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.

[7] Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.

The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.

However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned for a minority of usages 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? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? 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 minority usage. We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. 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 holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. 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 even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96.

Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) 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 Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.

However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189 explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.

[11] The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.

[12] The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.

[13] However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned for a minority of usages 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.

[14] How does Rov Tashmisho work? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? 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 minority usage. We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. 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.

[15] However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. 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?

[16] The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that the reason that we can follow the majority of uses even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96.

[17] Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) 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 Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.

[18] However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189 explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.

[8] Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45

[9] Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute if hagalah must be performed with a kli rishon that is still on the fire, or if a kli rishon can be used for hagalah even once it's been removed from the fire. Bet Yosef notes that by hilchot Shabbot, whether or not it's still on the fire, we still consider it to be a kli rishon. Bet Yosef explains that the two opinions in the Tur are dependent on whether or not we can learn hagalah from the definition of kli rishon by hilchot Shabbat. The reason not to is because the absorbed taste might only be removed in the way that it entered the keli, namely when it was directly on the fire.
Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.

Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.

Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that rotchin is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.

[21] Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.

[22] Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.

[23] Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that rotchin is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.

[10] Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve this question, but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.

Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.

Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.

[25] Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.

[26] Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.

[27] Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.

[11] Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, Physics Stackexchange).

[29] Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, Physics Stackexchange).

[12] Magen Avraham 452:11 quoting the Maharil

[13] Shulchan Aruch 452:6

[14] Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3

[15] Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.

[16] Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 F (such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure), it is acceptable to do hagalah with 212 F alone. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.

[17] Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered, and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.

[18] Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55

[19] The OU writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the Kof K writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately, unlike the Taz who says that it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it in for a little bit of time.
Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.

Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.

[38] Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.

[39] Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.

[20] Rama 452:1

[21] Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315

[22] Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315

[23] Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353

[24] Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.

[25] Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5

[26] Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7

[27] Rama 89:4

[28] Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 8:8), Badei Hashulchan 89:111

[29] Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4

[30] Rama YD 89:4

[31] The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife, one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says that one should stick it in the ground three times, one should be strict and do it ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck on it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly, that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold, it should be stuck into the ground ten times. Shulchan Aruch notes that this procedure is sufficient even if one wants to use the knife to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion). The Rama adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis, then one must do a proper hechsher.

[32] The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy using the knife, it just needs to be cleaned. But if one intends to use it for cheese, then it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher.

[33] Maadenei HaShulchan (M'taamei Hashulchan YD 89:17 p. 62)

[34] Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5

[35] *The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil has to be broken, if it ostensibly can be used for cold kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold food, because one might come to use it for hot food. The Ran notes that this is limited to earthenware which can't be kashered, as there's a greater likelihood that you'll come to use it with hot food. The Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) disagrees with Ran and thinks that this rabbinic prohibition extends to vessels of all materials, that one shouldn't use them with cold, lest one come to use them with hot. Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food, but one may not do so on a consistent basis, out of concern for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use, unless you're in a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.

[56] Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use, unless you're in a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.

[36] Shach 121:9

[37] Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur

[38] Shach 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, Kaf HaChaim 91:5. Is there a concern of beliyot when using a utensil for cold?
The Orchot Chaim states that it is permitted to store spices in a non-kosher utensil since there are no beliyot of non-kosher being transferred by storing the spices in the utensil. The Bet Yosef 105 cites this. The Tur 451 permits storing cold matzah in a chametz utensil.

However, the Tur 91:2 cites the Baal Haitur who writes that it is forbidden to place meat in a dairy utensil since one might forget to wash it off afterwards.

Question: The Rama (Torat Chatat 17:2 and Darkei Moshe 91) is bothered with this contradiction. He answers 4 answers:

We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.

We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.

We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).

We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.

Rama 91:2 implies that he accepts answers 1 and 3 and requires both but Taz 91:3 explains that either is sufficient. Shach 91:3 only accepts the fourth answer.

[60] The Orchot Chaim states that it is permitted to store spices in a non-kosher utensil since there are no beliyot of non-kosher being transferred by storing the spices in the utensil. The Bet Yosef 105 cites this. The Tur 451 permits storing cold matzah in a chametz utensil.

[61] However, the Tur 91:2 cites the Baal Haitur who writes that it is forbidden to place meat in a dairy utensil since one might forget to wash it off afterwards.

[62] Question: The Rama (Torat Chatat 17:2 and Darkei Moshe 91) is bothered with this contradiction. He answers 4 answers:

[63] We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.

[64] We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.

[65] We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).

[66] We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.

[67] Rama 91:2 implies that he accepts answers 1 and 3 and requires both but Taz 91:3 explains that either is sufficient. Shach 91:3 only accepts the fourth answer.

[39] Shach 91:3, Pri Chadash 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15. Pri Chadash 91:3 explains that the reason to be strict is that we're concerned that a person is going to use it for hot. However, for a metal utensil we're not concerned for a short usage that one will use it with hot since one would first do hagalah. See Kaf HaChaim 91:10 who permits using non-kosher earthenware utensils that belong to a non-Jew for cold.

[40] Kaf Hachaim 91:9. See Chashukei Chemed Yoma 66a who cites the Panim Meirot 1:23 who says that there's no concern that if one owns a non-kosher utensil one will come to use it. However, the Ketav Sofer YD 28 holds that it is a concern. It is similar to the Gemara Yoma 66a and Pesachim 20b where chazal are concerned about holding onto something forbidden because you might use it.
Rambam Trumot 12:12 implies that there's a prohibition to keep impure trumah and we don't allow keeping it in order to sprinkle on the floor periodically since we're concerned that a person is going to make a mistake and eat it. Mahari Kurkus explains that the rambam held this even though the Gemara Pesachim 20b implies that Bet Hillel isn't concerned for that because in several places the Gemara (Shabbat 17b) is concerned. Bet Halevi 1:52 adds that Sotah 48a is another proof. However, the Rabbenu Chananel Pesachim 20b and Rashba b"k 115b s.v. vtakala hold like Bet Hillel.

[70] Rambam Trumot 12:12 implies that there's a prohibition to keep impure trumah and we don't allow keeping it in order to sprinkle on the floor periodically since we're concerned that a person is going to make a mistake and eat it. Mahari Kurkus explains that the rambam held this even though the Gemara Pesachim 20b implies that Bet Hillel isn't concerned for that because in several places the Gemara (Shabbat 17b) is concerned. Bet Halevi 1:52 adds that Sotah 48a is another proof. However, the Rabbenu Chananel Pesachim 20b and Rashba b"k 115b s.v. vtakala hold like Bet Hillel.

[41] The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun as it's comparable to baking. On the other hand, the Ravyah held it needed hagalah as it's comparable to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the food is cooked in a liquid medium (oil) in a pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.

[42] Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering for pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, but is strict to generally require libun chamur. When it comes to pesach, since there are some who hold that chametz is hetera baala and would only need hagalah, we can suffice with hagalah. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree.

[43] The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun, since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat, it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.

[44] Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:13 and 25 who implies that even if a pot is used for meat and milk within 24 hours, it can still be koshered with hagalah since meat and milk is called hetera baala. However, this seems to be at odds with the rishonim. Divrei Shalom 451:98 on Shulchan Aruch Harav and Maharsham 2:42 understand Shulchan Aruch Harav as only discussing liquid milk after meat. In that case hagalah is sufficient because the milk entered as a liquid. But if the meat and milk were both solids, then the pot would require libun. Also, Isur Veheter 58:23 writes explicitly that a meat pot which a drop of milk made non-kosher needs libun.

[45] Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7

[46] Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether it's currently meat or milk. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered, and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach, it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7), Badei Hashulchan 89:112, and Rav Schachter (Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23) agree. However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays, and there's no issue to switch utensils from meat to milk.

[47] Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4

[48] Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.

[49] Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei citing Maharsham 2:241

[50] Pri Megadim EA 509:11 (cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei), Rav Schachter (Basic Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23). Badei Hashulchan questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.

[51] Rabbi Jachter quotes Rav Schachter who holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions.

[52] Rabbi Mansour on dailyhalacha.com writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient, but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.

[83] Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.

[84] Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.

[85] Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.

[86] We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.

[87] We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.

[88] We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).

[89] We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Utensils Used for Cold==
-# Any vessel that is usually used for cold can be koshered with cleaning it well with cold water.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.</ref> Ashkenazim initially are strict for the opinion that it was used for non-kosher cold it should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149</ref>
+# Any vessel that is usually used for cold can be koshered by cleaning it well with cold water.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.</ref> Ashkenazim are lechatchila (initially) strict for the opinion that if it was used for non-kosher cold that it should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149</ref>
 ==Hagalah==
-# A pot that absorbed something through liquids can be koshered<ref>Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and prefers that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest is batel and that’s why it is ineffective on pesach. [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]
+# A pot that absorbed something via a liquid medium can be koshered<ref>Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and instead posits that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest are batel (nullified). This is why hagalah cannot be done on pesach, as there's no concept of bittul for chametz on pesach, as chametz is assur b'mashehu (even a little bit is forbidden). [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]
-</ref> of that absorption with boiling<ref>Does hagalah need to be 212? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah the water needs to reach 212 degrees fahrenheit for hagalah. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that essentially if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more it can be koshered with heating water in it at that temperature. Only initially do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6) otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).
+</ref> with boiling<ref>Does hagalah need to be 212 F? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah, the water needs to reach 212 F. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that strictly speaking, if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more, then it can be koshered with heating water in it to that temperature. Only initially (lechatchila) do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6); otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).
-</ref> water<ref>Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah with water specifically but after the fact other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.</ref>.<ref>When is hagalah effective?
+</ref> water<ref>Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah specifically with water; however, after the fact, other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.</ref><ref>When is hagalah effective?
-# Rabbenu Tam: Immediately when the kli is placed in the boiling water it will give off its taste and reabsorb taste from the water. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.
+#Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.
-# Rashbam: First the kli absorbs new taste and only afterwards it starts to give off its taste. Accordingly you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.
+#Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.
-# Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water and only gives off its taste once it is removed or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.</ref>
+#Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.</ref>
-# A pot that is usually used for cooking and sometimes used without liquids, according to Sephardim can be koshered with hagalah since we follow the majority of its use.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
+# A pot that is usually used for cooking with liquids, but is sometimes used for roasting without liquids: according to Sephardim, this can be koshered with hagalah, and there's no need for libun, since we follow the majority of its use.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
-* The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives need hagalah for pesach even though it discussed possibly needing libun. What was the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire yet it can be koshered with hagalah. Either because Rashi and Raavad hold that chametz is hetera baala. Or according to the Ramban that it is isura baala we only need hagalah because we follow the majority of uses of the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.
+*The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.
-* The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of uses because otherwise how could the Torah establish different categories of utensils that some are used for cold, some for hot liquids, and some directly with the fire. Rather we only concern ourselves with the way that the utensil is normally used. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.
+*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.
-* 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 for a minority of usages 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? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? 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 minority usage.  We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. 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. 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?
+*However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. 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 even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. 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, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) 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 Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.
-* However, there is a small group of rishonim that imply this even for ben yomo utensils biblically. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshered based on majority uses. [https://books.google.com/books?id=CcdVDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT180&lpg=PT180&dq=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91+%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95+%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94+%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&source=bl&ots=RhBy-LvyzG&sig=ACfU3U1MLaZxsX1byp3l0bG8-4nlp0KLkQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj7qOu2c_hAhWLTd8KHZDeCJIQ6AEwB3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95%20%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94%20%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&f=false Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189] explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.</ref> Initially Ashkenazim are concerned even for a minority of uses.<ref>Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45</ref>
+*However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. [https://books.google.com/books?id=CcdVDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT180&lpg=PT180&dq=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91+%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95+%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94+%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&source=bl&ots=RhBy-LvyzG&sig=ACfU3U1MLaZxsX1byp3l0bG8-4nlp0KLkQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj7qOu2c_hAhWLTd8KHZDeCJIQ6AEwB3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95%20%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94%20%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&f=false Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189] explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.</ref> Initially (lechatchila) Ashkenazim are concerned even for a minority of uses, and would require libun in this scenario.<ref>Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45</ref>
-#Hagalah means boiling water on the fire that is bubbling.<ref>
+#Hagalah means immersing the vessel with non-kosher absorption into boiling water on the fire that is bubbling.<ref>
-Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute whether or not it is sufficient to do hagalah on a pot with a kli rishon only if it is still on the fire or even if it is removed from the fire. Bet Yosef explains that it depends on whether you learn the definition of kli rishon from hilchot Shabbat in which case it is a kli rishon even off the fire or we should say that the taste is only removed in the way that it entered which is the temperature of a kli rishon on the fire.
+Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute if hagalah must be performed with a kli rishon that is still on the fire, or if a kli rishon can be used for hagalah even once it's been removed from the fire. Bet Yosef notes that by hilchot Shabbot, whether or not it's still on the fire, we still consider it to be a kli rishon. Bet Yosef explains that the two opinions in the Tur are dependent on whether or not we can learn hagalah from the definition of kli rishon by hilchot Shabbat. The reason not to is because the absorbed taste might only be removed in the way that it entered the keli, namely when it was directly on the fire.
-* Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.
+*Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.
-* Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain that possibility that yad soledet is enough. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.
+*Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.
-* Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that ''rotchin'' is the same as yad soledet and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7 and boiling is necessary that the taste doesn't reenter the pot. </ref> Some poskim hold that it always needs to be a bubbling boil, while others hold that it is sufficient even if the pot was removed from the fire if the reason for the hagalah is a permitted absorption (''hetera baala'').<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve that question but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
+*Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that ''rotchin'' is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.</ref> Some poskim hold that it always needs to be a bubbling boil, while others hold that it is sufficient even if the pot was removed from the fire in a case of a permitted absorption (''hetera baala'').<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve this question, but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
-* Bach 451:8 is bothered by the discrepancy in the Tur and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if that is how the utensil is used off the fire.
+*Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.
-* Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah that would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.
+*Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.
-* Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.</ref> If a knife is only used off the fire it can be koshered with hagalah off the fire.<ref>Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
+*Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.</ref> If a knife is only used in hot water off the fire, it can be koshered with hagalah off the fire.<ref>Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
 * Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, [https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/380748/why-does-water-stop-boiling-immediately-after-turning-off-the-heat Physics Stackexchange]). </ref>
 #Usually it is necessary to kosher a pot on the inside and the rim but if it is used on the outside of the pot such as a ladle it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Magen Avraham 452:11 quoting the Maharil</ref>
-#If one has a big pot and can't put it into another pot it should have a rim added to it and when the pot boils up the water will splash onto the rim and kosher it or one can boil a pot and drop a rock in so that the pot boils over the rim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 452:6</ref>
+#If one has a big pot and can't put it into another pot, one should have a rim added to it, and when the pot boils, the water will splash onto the rim and kosher it. Alternatively, one can boil a pot and drop a rock in, so that the pot boils over the rim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 452:6</ref>
-#If a pot is used on the inside but became non-kosher on the outside of the pot it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3</ref>
+#If a pot is used on the inside, but became non-kosher on the outside, it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3</ref>
-# If one is doing hagalah of iruy on a large item through pouring one should do so bottom up.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.</ref>
+# If one is doing hagalah of iruy on a large item, one should do so bottom up.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.</ref>
-# Hagalah works for pots that were used for liquids even though in the course of being used were used for temperatures above 212 degrees.<Ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure and in all these cases it is acceptable to do hagalah. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.</ref> Additionally, in altitudes where it is possible to boil water at lower than 212 that is also effective hagalah.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.</ref>
+# Hagalah works for pots that were used for liquids, even though in the course of being used they were used for temperatures above 212 degrees.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 F (such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure), it is acceptable to do hagalah with 212 F alone. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.</ref> Additionally, in altitudes where it is possible to boil water at lower than 212, one can use this boiling water (even though it's less than 212 F) for hagalah.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered, and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.</ref>
-# A pressure cooker which can cook foods at higher temperatures than 212 and yet many poskim hold that it can be koshered with hagalah of boiling water at 212.<ref>Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55</ref>
+# With regards to a pressure cooker, which can cook foods at temperatures higher than 212 F, many poskim hold that the boiling water used for hagalah only needs to be 212 F.<ref>Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55</ref>
-# The utensils put in the boiling water should be left there for a few seconds and some recommend ten seconds.<ref>The [https://oukosher.org/passover/articles/kashering-for-passover/ OU] writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the [https://www.kof-k.org/articles/040408080457W-21%20Hagolah%20(Rabbi%20Neustadt).pdf Kof K] writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately unlike the Taz who says it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it for a little bit of time.
+# The utensils put in the boiling water should be left there for a few seconds; some recommend that they be left for ten seconds.<ref>The [https://oukosher.org/passover/articles/kashering-for-passover/ OU] writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the [https://www.kof-k.org/articles/040408080457W-21%20Hagolah%20(Rabbi%20Neustadt).pdf Kof K] writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately, unlike the Taz who says that it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it in for a little bit of time.
-* Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that such is the minhag.
+*Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.
-* Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that certainly the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.</ref>
+*Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.</ref>
 ==Libun==
 # It is possible to do Libun on Pesach but not hagalah.<ref>Rama 452:1</ref>
-# Libun Chamur can be accomplished with a minimum temperature of 752 degrees fahrenheit, because metal would become visibly red hot in the dark at that temperature. Self-clean of an typical oven is 850 degrees and is certainly libun chamur.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
+# Libun Chamur can be accomplished with a minimum temperature of 752 F, because metal would become visibly red hot in the dark at that temperature. Self-clean of a typical oven is 850 degrees and certainly counts as libun chamur.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
-# Libun Kal is certainly achieved at fahrenheit 451 because paper burns at that temperature.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
+# Libun Kal is certainly achieved at 451 F because paper burns at that temperature.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
-# Libun chamur with a blow torch should be done on each spot for approximately 9 seconds. The could be dangerous and damage the oven thermostat.<ref>Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353</ref>
+# Libun chamur with a blow torch should be done on each spot for approximately 9 seconds. This could be dangerous and damage the oven thermostat.<ref>Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353</ref>
-# Anytime the absorption was permitted the utensil can be koshered with hagalah and doesn't require libun.<ref>Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.</ref>
+# Anytime the absorption was permitted (hettera balah), the utensil can be koshered with hagalah and doesn't require libun.<ref>Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.</ref>
-# If someone did hagalah when a kli needed libun it doesn't work even after the fact.<ref>Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5</ref>
+# If someone did hagalah when a kli needed libun, then the kli is still considered not-kosher, even bdiavad (after the fact).<ref>Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5</ref>
 ==Koshering a Knife==
@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 #A knife should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7</ref>
 #The minhag is to have designated meat and milk knives.<ref>Rama 89:4</ref> Preferably one should have three knives, one for meat, one for milk, and one for parve.<ref>Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 8:8), Badei Hashulchan 89:111</ref>
-#It is forbidden to use a dirty meat knife to cut cheese or even bread which will be eaten with cheese.<ref>Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4</ref> The same is true vice versa.<ref>Rama YD 89:4</ref>
+#It is forbidden to use a dirty meat knife to cut cheese. It is even forbidden to use it to cut bread which will be eaten with cheese.<ref>Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4</ref> The same is true vice versa.<ref>Rama YD 89:4</ref>
 ==Using a non-Kosher Knife==
-#It is permitted to use a non-kosher knife on a one-time basis for cold if you first stick it into hard earth ten times.<ref>The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says three times one should be strict to stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck to it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold it should be stuck into earth ten times. The Rama carefully adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis one must do a proper hechsher. </ref> But in order to use the knife for hot one even once one needs to do a proper hechsher.<ref>Rav Huna in Gemara Avoda Zara 76b, Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7. Shulchan Aruch explains that this procedure is sufficient even to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion).</ref>
+#It is permitted to use a non-kosher knife on a one-time basis for cold if you first stick it into hard earth ten times.<ref>The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife, one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says that one should stick it in the ground three times, one should be strict and do it ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck on it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly, that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold, it should be stuck into the ground ten times. Shulchan Aruch notes that this procedure is sufficient even if one wants to use the knife to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion). The Rama adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis, then one must do a proper hechsher. </ref> But in order to use the knife for hot, even once, one needs to do a proper hechsher.
-#Similarly, to use a meat knife to one time cut cold bread that will be eaten with cheese it is sufficient to stick it in hard earth ten times. However, in order to use a meat knife to cut cheese one should do a proper hechsher.<ref>The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy use the knife just needs to be cleaned, however, for cheese it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher. </ref>
+#Similarly, to use a meat knife on a one time basis to cut cold bread that will be eaten with cheese, it is sufficient to stick it in hard earth ten times. However, in order to use a meat knife to cut cheese, one should do a proper hechsher.<ref>The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy using the knife, it just needs to be cleaned. But if one intends to use it for cheese, then it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher. </ref>
 ##Some poskim say that if one doesn't have a knife, cleaning the knife with soap is considered the equivalent of sticking it in the ground ten times.<ref>Maadenei HaShulchan (M'taamei Hashulchan YD 89:17 p. 62)</ref>
-#If one wants to use on a consistent basis a meat knife for cold dairy one must do a hechsher of the knife.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5</ref>
+#If one wants to use a meat knife on a consistent basis for cold dairy, then one must do a hechsher of the knife.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5</ref>
 ==Using Non-Kosher Utensils==
-#It is permitted to use a clean cold non-Kosher utensil to eat cold kosher food on an irregular basis for a one-time use. See footnote regarding earthenware.<ref>*The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil had to be broken if it could just have been used for cold uses for kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold because one might come to use it for hot. However, that's only true by earthenware which can't be fixed. On the other hand, the Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) uses this logic to say that one shouldn't use any material non-kosher utensil for cold lest one come to use it for hot. The Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food but not consistently to be concerned for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
+#It is permitted to use a clean cold non-Kosher utensil to eat cold kosher food on an irregular basis for a one-time use. See footnote regarding earthenware.<ref>*The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil has to be broken, if it ostensibly can be used for cold kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold food, because one might come to use it for hot food. The Ran notes that this is limited to earthenware which can't be kashered, as there's a greater likelihood that you'll come to use it with hot food. The Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) disagrees with Ran and thinks that this rabbinic prohibition extends to vessels of all materials, that one shouldn't use them with cold, lest one come to use them with hot. Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food, but one may not do so on a consistent basis, out of concern for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
-*Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use unless it is a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.</ref> However, knives have another requirement that they first be stuck into the ground ten times.<ref>Shach 121:9</ref> See section on using non-kosher knives.
+*Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use, unless you're in a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.</ref> Knives have to first be stuck in the ground ten times.<ref>Shach 121:9</ref> See section on using non-kosher knives.
-#It is initially forbidden to place cold kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-Kosher if the container wasn’t washed since the kosher food that goes into the container will have some non-kosher on it and one might forget to wash off the kosher food. If the kosher food is usually washed before being eaten it is permitted to initially place it in a cold pot used for non-kosher.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur</ref>
+#It is initially (lechatchila) forbidden to place cold kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-Kosher if the container wasn’t washed since the kosher food that goes into the container will have some non-kosher on it and one might forget to wash off the kosher food. If the kosher food is usually washed before being eaten it is permitted to initially place it in a cold pot used for non-kosher.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur</ref>
 #It is initially permitted to place kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-kosher if the container was washed.<ref>Shach 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, Kaf HaChaim 91:5. Is there a concern of beliyot when using a utensil for cold?
@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
 ==Frying Pan==
-#A frying pan that became non-kosher can only be koshered with libun chamur.<ref>The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun and is comparable to baking but the Ravyah held it needed hagalah and is comparabale to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the oil serves to intervene between the food and the pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.</ref>
+#A frying pan that became non-kosher can only be koshered with libun chamur.<ref>The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun as it's comparable to baking. On the other hand, the Ravyah held it needed hagalah as it's comparable to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the food is cooked in a liquid medium (oil) in a pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.</ref>
-#A frying pan that was used for chametz can be koshered for pesach with libun kal or hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering from chametz to pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, however in general we're strict to require libun chamur. Yet, for pesach since anyway some hold that chametz is hetera baala and certainly hagalah is sufficient for this case we can rely upon that opinion. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree. </ref> See [[Kashering_the_Kitchen_for_Pesach#Pans]] for Ashkenazic minhag and fuller discussion.
+#A frying pan that was used for chametz can be koshered for pesach with libun kal or hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering for pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, but is strict to generally require libun chamur. When it comes to pesach, since there are some who hold that chametz is hetera baala and would only need hagalah, we can suffice with hagalah. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree. </ref> See [[Kashering_the_Kitchen_for_Pesach#Pans]] for Ashkenazic minhag and fuller discussion.
-# A frying pan that is milk and one wants to make it parve or the opposite, one can kosher it with hagalah or libun kal.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.</ref> However, if it is used for meat and milk it needs to be koshered with libun.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8</ref> If it is used for meat and 24 hours later is used for milk it can be koshered with hagalah or libun kal. The opposite is true of the opposite (unless it is used for a sharp food - [[Dvar Charif]]).<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7</ref>
+# A frying pan that is milk and one wants to make it parve, or if one wants to make a meat frying pan parve, one can kosher it with hagalah or libun kal.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun, since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat, it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.</ref> However, if it was used for meat and milk, it needs to be koshered with libun.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:13 and 25 who implies that even if a pot is used for meat and milk within 24 hours, it can still be koshered with hagalah since meat and milk is called hetera baala. However, this seems to be at odds with the rishonim. Divrei Shalom 451:98 on Shulchan Aruch Harav and Maharsham 2:42 understand Shulchan Aruch Harav as only discussing liquid milk after meat. In that case hagalah is sufficient because the milk entered as a liquid. But if the meat and milk were both solids, then the pot would require libun. Also, Isur Veheter 58:23 writes explicitly that a meat pot which a drop of milk made non-kosher needs libun. </ref>
+# If it is used for meat and 24 hours later is used for milk it can be koshered with hagalah or libun kal. The opposite is true of the opposite (unless it is used for a sharp food - [[Dvar Charif]]).<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7</ref>
 ==Not Switching Between Meat and Milk==
-#The Ashkenazic minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk except before Pesach when one is koshering the utensils for Pesach anyway.<ref>Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether currently it is meat or meat. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7) and Badei Hashulchan 89:112 agree. (See [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/950128/rabbi-hershel-schachter/piskei-corona-3-kashering-a-dishwasher/ Rav Schachter (Piskei Corona #3)] who seems to be strict not to change even when kashering for Pesach.) However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays and there's no issue to kosher from meat to milk.</ref> Sephardim never had this practice.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4</ref>
+#The Ashkenazic minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk except before Pesach when one is koshering the utensils for Pesach anyway.<ref>Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether it's currently meat or milk. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered, and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach, it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7), Badei Hashulchan 89:112, and [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)] agree. However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays, and there's no issue to switch utensils from meat to milk.</ref> Sephardim never had this practice.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4</ref>
-#Some say that it is permitted to kosher a utensil that used to be Parve and now became dairy or meat to become parve again.<ref>Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.</ref> Some are strict not to allow changing something dairy or meat to Parve.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/950128/rabbi-hershel-schachter/piskei-corona-3-kashering-a-dishwasher/ Rav Schachter (Piskei Corona #3)]</ref>
+#Some say that it is permitted to kosher a utensil that used to be Parve and now became dairy or meat to become parve again.<ref>Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.</ref>
 #It is permitted to switch over utensils after 12 months have passed.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei citing Maharsham 2:241</ref>
-#Some have the practice that if one has a utensil which one wants to switch from meat to milk that one intentionally makes that utensil non-kosher and then it is fine to kosher it and use it for the other type.<ref>Pri Megadim EA 509:11 cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei. He questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.</ref>
+#Some have the practice that if one has a utensil which one wants to switch from meat to milk that one intentionally makes that utensil non-kosher and then it is fine to kosher it and use it for the other type.<ref>Pri Megadim EA 509:11 (cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei), [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Basic Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)]. Badei Hashulchan questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.</ref>
 ==Glass==
-#According to Ashkenazim, glass can not be kashered for Pesach. For other prohibitions such as meat and milk it is a dispute whether it does not absorb anything, does absorb and can be kashered, or can not be kashered.<ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/kashering-glass-part-ii-by-rabbi-chaim-jachter Rabbi Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions. </ref>
+#According to Ashkenazim, glass can not be kashered for Pesach. For other prohibitions ,such as meat and milk, it is a dispute whether it does not absorb anything, does absorb and can be kashered, or does absorb but can not be kashered.<ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/kashering-glass-part-ii-by-rabbi-chaim-jachter Rabbi Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter who holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions. </ref>
-#According to most Sephardim, glass utensils don't absorb any taste and therefore, do not become non-kosher, between meat and milk or chametz and pesach. However, the common practice is to have two sets of dishes, one for milk and one for meat.<ref>Rabbi Mansour on [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=855 dailyhalacha.com] writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S"A 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.</ref>
+#According to most Sephardim, glass utensils don't absorb any taste and do not become non-kosher, both for meat and milk as well as chametz on pesach. However, the common practice is to have two sets of dishes, one for milk and one for meat.<ref>Rabbi Mansour on [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=855 dailyhalacha.com] writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient, but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.</ref>
 ==Sources==
 <references />
+{{Kashrut}}

Anonymous

Search

Koshering a Kitchen: Difference between revisions

Namespaces

More

Page actions

Latest revision as of 01:10, 25 August 2024

Contents

Utensils Used for Cold

Hagalah

Libun

Koshering a Knife

Using a non-Kosher Knife

Using Non-Kosher Utensils

Frying Pan

Not Switching Between Meat and Milk

Glass

Sources

Navigation

Halachic Topics

Categories

Wiki tools

Wiki tools

Anonymous

Search

Koshering a Kitchen: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 01:10, 25 August 2024

Utensils Used for Cold

Hagalah

Libun

Koshering a Knife

Using a non-Kosher Knife

Using Non-Kosher Utensils

Frying Pan

Not Switching Between Meat and Milk

Glass

Sources

Navigation

Wiki tools

Page tools