Milk and Meat in the Kitchen: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
Milk and Meat in the Kitchen (view source)
Revision as of 21:50, 29 November 2021
, 29 November 2021Seems to be a typo; 8 not 86
(→Reycha) |
m (Seems to be a typo; 8 not 86) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
* The Sefer Hatrumah (61) holds that it is true only if the fish was cooked in the meat utensil but not roasted. The Rosh Chullin 8:30 agrees. | * The Sefer Hatrumah (61) holds that it is true only if the fish was cooked in the meat utensil but not roasted. The Rosh Chullin 8:30 agrees. | ||
* Rashi (111b s.v. nat) writes that it is true whether the fish was cooked in the meat pot or was roasted on meat utensil. </ref> | * Rashi (111b s.v. nat) writes that it is true whether the fish was cooked in the meat pot or was roasted on meat utensil. </ref> | ||
# Parve food cooked in a dairy pot is considered dairy equipment and according to Ashkenazim it shouldn't be eaten together with meat but after the fact if it was cooked with meat it would be permitted to be eaten. According to Sephardim it is permitted even initially to eat the parve food made with dairy equipment with meat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama | # Parve food cooked in a dairy pot is considered dairy equipment and according to Ashkenazim it shouldn't be eaten together with meat but after the fact if it was cooked with meat it would be permitted to be eaten. According to Sephardim it is permitted even initially to eat the parve food made with dairy equipment with meat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama Y.D. 95:1 | ||
* A few rishonim (Smak, Hagahot Maimoniyot, and Rabbenu Yerucham cited by Bet Yosef 95:1) write that nat bar nat is only permitted to be cooked with milk after the parve food was cooked in the meat pot and this is also the consensus of the majority of the achronim. The achronim debate why nat bar nat is only permitted after the fact. (See next note for discussion of those who hold it is totally permitted even initially.) | |||
* Some ([https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=44929&st=&pgnum=154 Minchat Cohen 1:12 s.v. vheneh dino] as understood by Pri Megadim M"Z 95:4) say that it is like ''ein mevatlin isur lechatchila'' because nat bar nat is similar to nullification. Others (Pri Chadash 95:1) hold it is a unique prohibition in this context. This argue whether after the fact if one intentionally created nat bar nat whether it would be forbidden. | |||
* Why is nat bar nat d'isura, secondary taste of something forbidden, forbidden? Rashba (responsa 1:516) and Ran Chullin 41a hold that it is forbidden because nat bar nat leaves over only a weak taste of the original food (Heb. טעם קלוש; trans. ''taam kalush'') and for forbidden foods any remnant of the original taste is forbidden. For permitted tastes we are lenient since that weak taste in the first food became permitted, as though it is not there, and it is impossible to become forbidden even when it is later cooked with milk. They compare it to the leniencies we have for kashering spits for kodshim which began as something permitted as opposed to other prohibitions (Avoda Zara 76a). On the other hand, Smak (Hagahot Smak 213 Bitul n. 6, cited by Bet Yosef 94:5) forbids nat bar nat of something forbidden because we say that the forbidden taste makes the entire first food forbidden and is measured as though it is completely forbidden (Heb. תחיכה נעשה נבילה; trans. ''chaticha naaseh nevelah''). For permitted things there is no concept that the food that was infused with a permitted taste is considered as though it is completely filled with that taste. This approach seems to think of nat bar nat as as way of permitting using nullification. | |||
* Nat bar nat with ''isur mashahu'': Ritva Chullin 112a s.v. garir writes that nat bar nat does not even leave a minute amount of the original food and as such is permitted. See also Magen Avraham 447:31. Gra YD 108:9 uses this to explain why nat bar nat is permitted after cooked and does not need to be avoided at that point. This seems to work best with the Rashba and Ran's approach above, but according to the Smak there is always a minute amount of the original taste that remains in the secondary taste although it is nullified.</ref> Some even permit cooking the parve food in the meat pot to eat it with dairy.<ref>Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer YD 9:4 and Rav Shlomo Amar in Shema Shlomo 1:2, 2:4-5. Or Hahalacha (by R' Makis 95:1) is lenient and cites Halichot Olam (Korach n. 11) and Tefila Lmoshe 3:12. However, Horah Brurah 95:1 holds that it is only permitted after the fact. He cites Zivchei Tzedek 95:2 Kaf Hachaim 95:1, Ben Ish Chai Korach 13, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul, and Shemesh Umagen 2:42 who hold that nat bar nat is only after the fact.</ref> | |||
# If the meat pot wasn't used within 24 hours for meat, then if something parve cooks in it, the parve food can be eaten together with dairy even initially. However, one shouldn't use a meat pot even if it hasn't been used within 24 hours to cook parve food that one intends to eat with dairy. The same is true of dairy and meat vice versa.<ref>Rama 95:2 writes that if the pot was eino ben yomo there's no issue of nat bar nat. Badei Hashulchan 95:33 and Chachmat Adam 48:2 clarify that this means after the fact that the parve food was cooked in a meat pot it is considered parve and can be eaten with cheese even initially. However, one shouldn't cook the parve food in an eino ben yomo meat pot if one plans to eat that food with dairy. Yet, the Gra argues that it is permitted even initially. Laws of Kashrut p. 162 fnt. 44 cites Rav Elyashiv has holding like the Chachmat Adam unlike the Gra. Rav Mordechai Willig in Chevrusa Oct. 1990 p. 5 agrees. </ref> According to Sephardim all cases of cooking parve food in a meat pot in order to eat it together with dairy are permitted.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 95:1</ref> | # If the meat pot wasn't used within 24 hours for meat, then if something parve cooks in it, the parve food can be eaten together with dairy even initially. However, one shouldn't use a meat pot even if it hasn't been used within 24 hours to cook parve food that one intends to eat with dairy. The same is true of dairy and meat vice versa.<ref>Rama 95:2 writes that if the pot was eino ben yomo there's no issue of nat bar nat. Badei Hashulchan 95:33 and Chachmat Adam 48:2 clarify that this means after the fact that the parve food was cooked in a meat pot it is considered parve and can be eaten with cheese even initially. However, one shouldn't cook the parve food in an eino ben yomo meat pot if one plans to eat that food with dairy. Yet, the Gra argues that it is permitted even initially. Laws of Kashrut p. 162 fnt. 44 cites Rav Elyashiv has holding like the Chachmat Adam unlike the Gra. Rav Mordechai Willig in Chevrusa Oct. 1990 p. 5 agrees. </ref> According to Sephardim all cases of cooking parve food in a meat pot in order to eat it together with dairy are permitted.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 95:1</ref> | ||
# Parve food cooked in a meat pot can be eaten with dairy utensils but the parve food shouldn't be poured directly from the meat pot onto a dairy utensil. The same is true of the opposite case.<ref>Rama 95:2. The Shach 95:5 explains that one shouldn't pour directly from the meat pot onto the dairy utensil as the Rama writes however after the fact it is permitted since the infusions of nat bar nat taste are consecutive. Badei Hashulchan 95:27 agrees that we should be strict about pouring. He explains that the reason that we're lenient about using utensils of the other type for nat bar nat is because the entire concern of meat and milk here is rabbinic since there's no combination of actual meat or milk but only its tastes.</ref> | # Parve food cooked in a meat pot can be eaten with dairy utensils but the parve food shouldn't be poured directly from the meat pot onto a dairy utensil. The same is true of the opposite case.<ref>Rama Y.D. 95:2. The Shach 95:5 explains that one shouldn't pour directly from the meat pot onto the dairy utensil as the Rama writes however after the fact it is permitted since the infusions of nat bar nat taste are consecutive. Badei Hashulchan 95:27 agrees that we should be strict about pouring. He explains that the reason that we're lenient about using utensils of the other type for nat bar nat is because the entire concern of meat and milk here is rabbinic since there's no combination of actual meat or milk but only its tastes.</ref> It is permitted to even initially indirectly pour ([[Iruy Shenifsak Hakiluach]]) the food into the dairy utensil from a meat pot.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 95:72 quoting the Kereti Upeleti and Pri Megadim</ref> | ||
# According to Ashkenazim and some Sephardim one shouldn't cook the parve in a meat pot in order to eat it with dairy or vice versa. After the fact even if one intentionally made the food in a meat pot in order to eat with dairy most poskim hold that it is nonetheless permitted to eat with dairy.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva Shraga p. 185 cites Pri Chadash 95:1, Kereti 95:1, Zivchei Ztedek 95:5, and Kaf Hachaim 95:5 as lenient, against Pri Megadim MZ 95:4 citing Minchat Kohen, Bet Meir 97 s.v. bs"a, Aruch Hashulchan 95:10 as strict. Ben Ish Chai Shana Sheniya Korach n. 14 is lenient.</ref> | # According to Ashkenazim and some Sephardim one shouldn't cook the parve in a meat pot in order to eat it with dairy or vice versa. After the fact even if one intentionally made the food in a meat pot in order to eat with dairy most poskim hold that it is nonetheless permitted to eat with dairy.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva Shraga p. 185 cites Pri Chadash 95:1, Kereti 95:1, Zivchei Ztedek 95:5, and Kaf Hachaim 95:5 as lenient, against Pri Megadim MZ 95:4 citing Minchat Kohen, Bet Meir 97 s.v. bs"a, Aruch Hashulchan 95:10 as strict. Ben Ish Chai Shana Sheniya Korach n. 14 is lenient.</ref> | ||
# Tasting transferring from food to food isn't considered nat bar nat. Nat bar nat needs to involve a utensil.<ref>Pri Megadim MZ 95:1, Chavot Daat 95:1</ref> If there is a transfer from food to utensil to food that is nat bar nat. From utensil to food to food or food to food to utensil are questionably nat bar nat.<ref>Pri Megadim MZ 95:1 holds that nat bar nat must be from a food to a utensil and then utensil to food. However, the Imrei Binah 95:1 writes that from the Shaarei Dura 60 nat bar nat can't be from food to food but with any utensil that is sufficient.</ref> | |||
===Roasting, Baking, Soaking=== | ===Roasting, Baking, Soaking=== | ||
# Some Ashkenazim are more strict if the parve food is roasted or baked as opposed to cooked in a dairy equipment to treat it like dairy food, while others consider it like the general category of dairy equipment. This has ramifications even after the fact if that parve food is mixed with meat. The same is true of parve food roasted or baked with meat equipment.<ref>The Rama Y.D. 95:2 rules that after the fact whether the parve food was cooked, roasted, or baked with the meat equipment it is considered parve. Shach explains that once the parve food is mixed together with the dairy it is permitted. However, the Maharshal (Isur Vheter 57:2) is concerned for the opinion of the Rosh that even after the fact if the parve food was roasted or baked with meat equipment they are considered meat. Shach 95:4 cites this opinion. The [https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/i-bought-a-box-of-cornflake-crumbs-that-were-labeled-ou-d-the-ous-webbe-rebbe-kosherqou-org-told-me-that-this-ou-d-product-does-not-contain-dairy-ingredients-but-it-was-made-on-dairy-equ/?category OU (Halacha Yomi, Feb 12 2020)] was lenient in a case where dairy equipment bread crumbs were baked on chicken, even though it is a dispute between the Rama and Maharshal, since it is possible that the bread crumbs were made with utensils that weren't used within 24 hours. See Shaarei Deah 95:2 cited by Darkei Teshuva 95:17 who is lenient with nat bar nat on chicken. Badei Hashulchan 95:23 is strict.</ref> Most poskim hold that roasting is no different than cooking.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 95:25 is lenient for the Rama after the fact based on the Pri Chadash, Minchat Yakov, and Chachmat Adam 48:1. Aruch Hashulchan 95:12 is lenient. The Laws of Kashrus by R' Forst p. 159 leaves the dispute unresolved.</ref> | # Some Ashkenazim are more strict if the parve food is roasted or baked as opposed to cooked in a dairy equipment to treat it like dairy food, while others consider it like the general category of dairy equipment. This has ramifications even after the fact if that parve food is mixed with meat. The same is true of parve food roasted or baked with meat equipment.<ref>The Rama Y.D. 95:2 rules that after the fact whether the parve food was cooked, roasted, or baked with the meat equipment it is considered parve. Shach explains that once the parve food is mixed together with the dairy it is permitted. However, the Maharshal (Isur Vheter 57:2) is concerned for the opinion of the Rosh that even after the fact if the parve food was roasted or baked with meat equipment they are considered meat. Shach 95:4 cites this opinion. Pri Chadash 95:4 and Minchat Yakov 57:3 disagree and hold that roasting is only forbidden initially not after the fact. The [https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/i-bought-a-box-of-cornflake-crumbs-that-were-labeled-ou-d-the-ous-webbe-rebbe-kosherqou-org-told-me-that-this-ou-d-product-does-not-contain-dairy-ingredients-but-it-was-made-on-dairy-equ/?category OU (Halacha Yomi, Feb 12 2020)] was lenient in a case where dairy equipment bread crumbs were baked on chicken, even though it is a dispute between the Rama and Maharshal, since it is possible that the bread crumbs were made with utensils that weren't used within 24 hours. See Shaarei Deah 95:2 cited by Darkei Teshuva 95:17 who is lenient with nat bar nat on chicken. Badei Hashulchan 95:23 is strict.</ref> Most poskim hold that roasting is no different than cooking.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 95:25 is lenient for the Rama after the fact based on the Pri Chadash, Minchat Yakov, and Chachmat Adam 48:1. Aruch Hashulchan 95:12 is lenient. The Laws of Kashrus by R' Forst p. 159 leaves the dispute unresolved.</ref> | ||
#If the parve food soaked in a meat or dairy pot there is an unresolved discussion if that would render the food meat or dairy equipment.<ref>Rabbi Akiva Eiger 95:2 poses a question whether food soaked in meat or dairy equipment is considered like food cooked in meat or dairy equipment or it is less of a concern. Badei Hashulchan 95:24 cites this. Darkei Teshuva 95:17 quotes a discussion about it including the Kereti who is strict and Shaarei Deah who is lenient.</ref> | #If the parve food soaked in a meat or dairy pot there is an unresolved discussion if that would render the food meat or dairy equipment.<ref>Rabbi Akiva Eiger 95:2 poses a question whether food soaked in meat or dairy equipment is considered like food cooked in meat or dairy equipment or it is less of a concern. Badei Hashulchan 95:24 cites this. Darkei Teshuva 95:17 quotes a discussion about it including the Kereti who is strict and Shaarei Deah who is lenient.</ref> | ||
| Line 179: | Line 184: | ||
===Zeyia=== | ===Zeyia=== | ||
# The primary reason that cooking in an oven could transfer taste from the food to the walls or the opposite is through the mechanism of zeyia, steam, or more accurately defined water vapor. Generally, the poskim hold that the zeyia of a food that is cooking contains the taste of the food and transfers its taste.<ref>Rosh responsa 20:26, Shulchan Aruch 92:8. The source for zeyia is either from Mashkin 5:11 (Rosh) or Chullin 98b regarding pot covers (Gra 92:39). This is against the Mishkenot Yakov who denies the concept that zeyia can transfer taste.</ref> | # The primary reason that cooking in an oven could transfer taste from the food to the walls or the opposite is through the mechanism of zeyia, steam, or more accurately defined water vapor. Generally, the poskim hold that the zeyia of a food that is cooking contains the taste of the food and transfers its taste.<ref>Rosh responsa 20:26, Shulchan Aruch 92:8. The source for zeyia is either from Mashkin 5:11 (Rosh) or Chullin 98b regarding pot covers (Gra 92:39). This is against the Mishkenot Yakov who denies the concept that zeyia can transfer taste.</ref> | ||
## Some say that zeyia is only a rabbinic transfer of taste.<ref>Yabia Omer 5:7:6 suggests this based on [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22440&st=&pgnum=17 Sh"t Peni Yehoshua 13], Yesodei Yeshurun v. 6 p. 158</ref> However, some say it is biblical.<Ref>Horah Brurah 92: | ## Some say that zeyia is only a rabbinic transfer of taste.<ref>Yabia Omer 5:7:6 suggests this based on [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22440&st=&pgnum=17 Sh"t Peni Yehoshua 13], Yesodei Yeshurun v. 6 p. 158</ref> However, some say it is biblical.<Ref>Horah Brurah 92:8</ref> | ||
# Some poskim hold that there is no issue of zeyia in an open area<ref>Bach Chadashot 24, Aruch Hashulchan 92:55, Yaskil Avdi 7:4</ref> but most poskim disagree.<ref>Trumat Hadeshen Ketavim Upesakim 103, Rama 92:8</ref> Therefore, it is advisable not to pour salt from a saltshaker into an open pot cooking on the fire since the zeyia from that food will get absorbed in the saltshaker. If that happens if the food is meat then the salt becomes meat and if the food was dairy then the salt becomes dairy.<ref>Horah Brurah 92:8 s.v. im is concerned that zeyia gets into the salt that is above the pot and becomes meat or dairy like the food in the pot. He says that it is an issue even if the zeyia isn't Yad Soledet Bo since there is a bit of transfer though it could be cleaned off. However, since salt or a spice can't be cleaned off it is an issue. Even though the amount transferred would be nullified it is an issue of bitul lechatchila to use that salt for milk if it was used over a meat pot.</ref> | # Some poskim hold that there is no issue of zeyia in an open area<ref>Bach Chadashot 24, Aruch Hashulchan 92:55, Yaskil Avdi 7:4</ref> but most poskim disagree.<ref>Trumat Hadeshen Ketavim Upesakim 103, Rama 92:8</ref> Therefore, it is advisable not to pour salt from a saltshaker into an open pot cooking on the fire since the zeyia from that food will get absorbed in the saltshaker. If that happens if the food is meat then the salt becomes meat and if the food was dairy then the salt becomes dairy.<ref>Horah Brurah 92:8 s.v. im is concerned that zeyia gets into the salt that is above the pot and becomes meat or dairy like the food in the pot. He says that it is an issue even if the zeyia isn't Yad Soledet Bo since there is a bit of transfer though it could be cleaned off. However, since salt or a spice can't be cleaned off it is an issue. Even though the amount transferred would be nullified it is an issue of bitul lechatchila to use that salt for milk if it was used over a meat pot.</ref> | ||
# Some poskim considered the possibility that zeyia doesn't get into a food that is itself steaming. It certainly isn't accepted but some poskim use it as a factor.<ref>Rosh 20:26 isn't sure if the zeyia of a bottom pot affects a top pot if the top pot itself is steaming. His reason is that in the laws of tumah having two hot pots doesn't transfer liquids. Aruch Hashulchan 92:55 considers this possibility. Maharsham 3:208 and Horah Brurah 92:8 s.v. hakol write that this possibility can be used as a factor in certain cases.</ref> Others disregard this idea.<ref>Bet Shlomo YD 164 disregards this idea since the Rosh rejected it.</ref> | # Some poskim considered the possibility that zeyia doesn't get into a food that is itself steaming. It certainly isn't accepted but some poskim use it as a factor.<ref>Rosh 20:26 isn't sure if the zeyia of a bottom pot affects a top pot if the top pot itself is steaming. His reason is that in the laws of tumah having two hot pots doesn't transfer liquids. Aruch Hashulchan 92:55 considers this possibility. Maharsham 3:208 and Horah Brurah 92:8 s.v. hakol write that this possibility can be used as a factor in certain cases.</ref> Others disregard this idea.<ref>Bet Shlomo YD 164 disregards this idea since the Rosh rejected it.</ref> | ||
# Some poskim hold that solid foods do not have any zeyia and only liquids have zeyia.<ref> Rama in Torat Chatat 35:6 writes that foods don't have zeyia. This can be explained in two ways: (1) The Pri Megadim (seder v’hanahagot hashoel im hanishal b’isur v’heter seder 2 no. 37) says that zeiya is only an issue from liquids and not dry foods based on the laws of tumat mashkin. (2) Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe YD 1:40 says that there is an issue of steam from dry foods if you can see it, otherwise you don’t need to assume that there is steam from dry dishes. This is implied in the language of Rama YD 108:1. | # Some poskim hold that solid foods do not have any zeyia and only liquids have zeyia.<ref> Rama in Torat Chatat 35:6 writes that foods don't have zeyia. This can be explained in two ways: (1) The Pri Megadim (seder v’hanahagot hashoel im hanishal b’isur v’heter seder 2 no. 37) says that zeiya is only an issue from liquids and not dry foods based on the laws of tumat mashkin. (2) Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe YD 1:40 says that there is an issue of steam from dry foods if you can see it, otherwise you don’t need to assume that there is steam from dry dishes. This is implied in the language of Rama YD 108:1. | ||
* Those who hold that there's no zeyia for solid foods: Bet Meir OC 461, Masat Moshe YD 1:4, Igrot Moshe 1:40, Minchat Shlomo 2:51. Horah Brurah 92:86 | * Those who hold that there's no zeyia for solid foods: Bet Meir OC 461, Masat Moshe YD 1:4, Igrot Moshe 1:40, and Minchat Shlomo 2:51. Horah Brurah 92:86 and Rav Moshe Heinemann (Guide to Halachos p. 58) agree with Rav Moshe. For this purpose, Rav Moshe Heinemann (Guide to Halachos p. 58) writes that pizza and lasagna are not liquids.</ref> Many poskim disagree.<ref>Minchat Yakov 35:10 who is bothered with the Rama's statement denying zeyia of solid foods because of Tur and Shulchan Aruch OC 451:15 which assumes steam even from dry dishes. He answers three answers: (1) zeyia of solids causes a transfer of a tiny bit and on pesach that is an issue, (2) food zeyia is minimal but if the utensils are used for zeyia frequently it adds up, (3) when doing kashering we should do so in the most ideal form and remove the small amount of zeyia from solids. Based on these Torat Chatat's answers it sounds like there is zeyia from solid foods to be concerned about lechatchila going forward. This is also the opinion of the Shoel Umeishiv 5:4, Tzur Yakov 68, Bet Shlomo YD 164, Yabia Omer 5:7:5, and Or Letzion 3:10:2. Aruch Hashulchan 92:54 writes that it doesn't depend on whether it is solid or liquid but if it is fatty. </ref> | ||
# A minority opinion holds that zeyia is burnt up in an oven<ref>Even Yikara 3:18 cited by Yabia Omer 5:7 holds that zeyia is burnt up in an oven if it has an exposed fire in the oven but not if it has a fire behind a wall (heseko mbchutz). Rav Ben Tzion Wosner (Or Yisrael 5763 year 8 no. 4:34 pp. 92-102) holds that zeyia is burnt up in an oven. Sheilat Yavetz (1:93) holds that the zeyia is burnt up in the ovens. Maharsham 3:208 applies this reason to be lenient even if the fire is behind the wall of the oven. He isn't ready to be lenient initially.</ref> but isn't accepted.<ref>Igrot Moshe 1:40, Minchat Yitzchak 5:20, Chelkat Yakov 2:136</ref> | # A minority opinion holds that zeyia is burnt up in an oven<ref>Even Yikara 3:18 cited by Yabia Omer 5:7 holds that zeyia is burnt up in an oven if it has an exposed fire in the oven but not if it has a fire behind a wall (heseko mbchutz). Rav Ben Tzion Wosner (Or Yisrael 5763 year 8 no. 4:34 pp. 92-102) holds that zeyia is burnt up in an oven. Sheilat Yavetz (1:93) holds that the zeyia is burnt up in the ovens. Maharsham 3:208 applies this reason to be lenient even if the fire is behind the wall of the oven. He isn't ready to be lenient initially.</ref> but isn't accepted.<ref>Igrot Moshe 1:40, Minchat Yitzchak 5:20, Chelkat Yakov 2:136</ref> | ||
# A minority opinion holds that zeyia dissipates in an oven that has a small vent.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 92:55 writes that there's no concern of zeyia in an open area as he proves from Mishna Machshirin 5:10. Therefore he writes that he isn't concerned for zeyia in ovens where there is a lot of airspace.</ref> | # A minority opinion holds that zeyia dissipates in an oven that has a small vent.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 92:55 writes that there's no concern of zeyia in an open area as he proves from Mishna Machshirin 5:10. Therefore he writes that he isn't concerned for zeyia in ovens where there is a lot of airspace.</ref> | ||
# Zeyia which isn't yad soledet bo can't transfer | # Zeyia which isn't yad soledet bo can't transfer taste.<ref>Trumat Hadeshen Pesakim Uketavim 103, Rama 92:8</ref> Therefore, if meat is hanging above a pot of dairy that is cooking if it is so high above the pot that the steam isn't [[Yad Soledet Bo]] there is no concern.<ref>Rama 92:8</ref> | ||
# A covered pot can't transfer zeyia.<ref>Rama 92:8</ref> | # A covered pot can't transfer zeyia.<ref>Rama 92:8</ref> | ||
===Reycha=== | ===Reycha=== | ||
