“What do you mean? Of course. Starbucks cup.” There was a guy at the Super Bowl couples party. He said he was there. I love that class. He said, “I was there.” I talked about it, and I laughed at him. Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech ha'olam shehakol nihyah bidvaro (Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, King of the universe, by whose word all things came to be). Amen (so be it). Fools—they missed one of the best Super Bowls in history. Idiots! That night, they wanted to have a class. Little did they know. These guys don’t have TiVo. Kids of today, man. Unbelievable. They don’t know what’s important.
Okay, what do you feel? You’re at Ateret Torah, Joe? Yeah, 100 percent. Mitzvah overet (a passing mitzvah). All right, chachamim (wise men), we are learning hag'alah (kashering by boiling). What we basically came out with yesterday was a beautiful chidush (novel Torah insight) of Maran: there are six things you don’t have to worry about if you do hag'alah kodem sha'at isur (kashering before the time of prohibition). As long as you do the hag'alah before the fifth hour on Erev Pesach (the eve of Pesach), there are six things you don’t even have to worry about or think about; they’re not an issue.
However, once you do it after sha'ah chamishit (the fifth hour), those six things come into play. That’s why you have to make sure it is pagum (impaired in taste). Before then, even if it’s not pagum, even if it’s a ben yomo (used within the previous 24 hours), you can do hag'alah. Pri Chadash argued with Maran, but Maran is Maran, and therefore Chacham Ovadia accepted his view.
If somebody calls you and says, “Chacham, what’s this business about waiting 24 hours before you do hag'alah?”—if he calls you today, Sunday, or Monday morning at 5:00 a.m.—you tell him, “No problem. Don’t worry about that. It’s not something you should be concerned about.” But if he calls you Monday morning, Erev Pesach, at, I don’t know, 11:00 a.m., then it’s too late. Now you have to be concerned about these issues, and it has to be pagum.
Should a person be choshesh (concerned) for the Pri Chadash? For the Pri Chadash? If he can… Mah tov umah na'im (how good and pleasant), you know. It’s always good if you can satisfy all opinions. There’s no mitzvah (commandment) to go and… Sometimes it’s easy. Most of the time, in our house, most of the kelim (utensils) are going to be stam kelim (ordinary utensils). The kelim you use regularly—
“Oven. Milk pot.” “Oven. They say you soref (burns) it—you burn it.” “The oven is different, honey. The oven is a libun (kashering with direct heat) story.” “Aha.” So libun has a different geder (category or framework) for it.
Okay, chachamim, let’s go. What about appliances? What about a water urn? Are we concerned about the… Burekas (savory filled pastry)? Well, not the Burekas on top, but let’s say someone makes hot cereal and pours it—what do you call it?—like you’re saying. Do we worry about the vapor that comes off? He puts the cereal here and goes like this, and there are havalim (vapors) over here. Right, the oatmeal smell goes up into the spout. Right, into the spout.
You can do that during the year. The question is whether you can use it during Pesach. “On Shabbat?” “Oh, no. Shabbat—that’s cooking.” “Who uses the urn on Shabbat?” “Why? No, during the week, yeah. We have an urn set up sometimes, even Saturday night, let’s say, from Shabbat.” “Yeah, you take oatmeal or something and stick it into the thing.” I don’t think you have to be concerned about that vapor. Look, the keli (utensil) is over here. You’re putting this here. That vapor—what is it, from a keli rishon (a primary vessel)? The vapor now…
“At Ateret, it’s…” “Oh, Ateret? You’re asking about Ateret? You can use it during the week. What do you mean? At Ateret, you can use it; they’re more than lenient.” “More than lenient? They’re lenient.” “Yeah, sometimes they’re more lenient.” Okay, they’re unpredictable. They always keep you… You couldn’t believe it. I mean, once you put on a black hat, you get to do anything you want. You know the rule, man: once you wear a black hat, finish! That compensates for a lot of other chumrot (stringencies). You’ve got to wear a black hat, Joe. You’ve got to compensate. You can’t go to the kulot (leniencies), huh? “Floppish or not Ateret are lenient.” That’s why you’ve got a flap. That’s the trick.
haTur further wrote. I’m just joking around, rabotai (my rabbis). I learned with the number two man; I can tell you that, so I can joke. No, I’m not joking about flaps. Flaps, I mean it. haTur further wrote. Look at letter chet. “Od katav haTur vezeh leshono (The Tur further wrote, and this is his wording): Katav Rashbam shetzarich lehag'il techilah hayorah hagedolah shemag'ilim bah shear hakelim, vechen horah Rashi vechen Riva, vechen yesh bitshuvot hage'onim: medi'ach hayorah hagedolah umag'ilah berotchim umachshirah veshotfah betzonen umefaltah mechametz shebalu'a bah, vegam mati'ach bah mayim rotchim beli shi'ur, uvilvad shelo yanuachu hamayim mertichatan, she'im yanuachu asur lehag'ilah, vehem kelim venotnim venotnam veshotfam betzonen, ve'achar kach memale hayorah hagedolah vesovev al sefatah mag'ilah kemishpatatah yashuv veshofchah veshotfah ve…”
Okay. So this whole rule says that you have to kasher (fit for use under Jewish law) the hag'alah pot first. I don’t know why, but he’s saying you have to kasher the hag'alah pot before you kasher the kelim and put them inside. And you have to make sure the water is boiling, and all that. Lich'orah (seemingly), according to us, if you hold hetera bala—the permitted substance was absorbed—what do I care if there’s chametz (leavened food) in the hag'alah pot? The chametz will come out, nat bar nat (a transfer of taste through two stages), and go back in: nat bar nat dehetera (two-stage transfer of permitted taste). Whatever we say about the keli you’re kashering, we’ll say about the keli you’re kashering it in.
But for some reason, Rashi, Rashbam, and Riva all say that unless they hold issura bala—the prohibited substance was absorbed. If they hold issura bala, then you’re right: you have to get rid of that beli'ah (absorbed taste). “Va'adoni avi haRosh zichrono livracha (And my master, my father, the Rosh, of blessed memory) wrote that the law of the large pot is like the law of the other utensils: if it is not used that day, or even if it is used that day but it is before the fifth hour, it does not have to be kashered first.”
“Ha, Baruch Hu!” So haRosh comes along and says, “No, mechilah, rabotai, there’s no difference between the big pot and the small keli. As long as it’s before sha'ah chamishit, the permitted substance was absorbed. Have a good day. But if it’s from the fifth hour on…” Then you’re right. “If it’s used that day, it has to be kashered first, because with the first hag'alah the water becomes forbidden, since there aren’t sixty parts in it to nullify what the pot releases, because we estimate according to the whole pot.”
What does that mean, that we estimate according to the whole pot? When you have this hag'alah pot and fill it with water, you won’t have sixty against the walls of the pot. That’s the general rule of a keli. When we say there is prohibition in it, we assume the whole thing is prohibited. Otherwise, how are you going to judge it? How are you going to know how much prohibition is in the walls? So you always have to assume the most. We measure as if all the walls have prohibition in them, and therefore you’re measuring against the entire wall. If the entire walls of the pot are released into the water, there won’t be sixty in the water to nullify it. And it’s after sha'ah chamishit, so it’s not nat bar nat dehetera; it will be nat bar nat de'isura (a two-stage transfer of prohibited taste). One transfer is in the pot, the second is in the water, and the water will be forbidden. That water will then go back into the kelim, and they’ll be forbidden. Therefore, if you’re doing this after the fifth hour, don’t forget: you have to do hag'alah not only on your kelim, but also on the large pot.
“Venimtza shehamayim kulam ne'esarim venivla'im bakelim hanig'alim betocham, im hish'ah otam betocham ad shehitchilu liflot pelitatam.” It’s true. What happens? As long as the water is boiling and you leave the utensils in there, they’re expelling absorbed taste. But if you leave them in there too long, what ends up happening? It starts going the other way. And we don’t know how long that measure of time is. Maybe you’ll tell me, rabotai, “No problem. Drop it in for two minutes and let it expel the taste.” You don’t know when the direction changes. You don’t know when it stops expelling and starts going the other way. So you can’t do it.
But before the fifth hour, even though it goes back in, there’s no concern, because it’s a time of permissibility. It’s like someone giving taste, after taste has been given, and that is the end of his wording. That’s the Rosh. You just read the whole shitah (opinion or position) of the Rosh, by the way. Nobody should say we don’t need the Rishonim (early rabbinic authorities); we just read the whole position of the Rosh.
“Vezeh shekatav im masheh otam betocham, de'im lo chen, kol zman detaridi lemifleta lo bal'ei. Vegam kan, ikar machloktam deraboteinu sovrim dechametz mikeli issura bala, vehaRosh sover demikeli hetera bala.” The same prohibition applies here, whether you hold that the permitted substance was absorbed or that the prohibited substance was absorbed. “Vehineh, lefi mah shenitba'er deharbeh meraboteinu sovrim dechametz mikeli issura bala, issura bala…” That’s also a mistake. Okay, issura bala. In your computer, do you have it as belo or bala? Which section am I at? Tet? Bala? Okay, our books are wrong.
“Vehineh, lefi mah shenitba'er deharbeh meraboteinu sovrim dechametz mikeli issura bala, dela kehaRosh, ve'im kol zeh, raboteinu ba'alei haShulchan Aruch pasku kevateih.” Maran ruled like the Rosh. What does that mean? Chametz is considered as if the permitted substance was absorbed. His reasoning is logical: during the year, in practice, it is permitted.
“Ve'af al gav debesiman tav-mem-zayin lo hitarnu devarim shenitbashlu bichli chametz kodem haPesach mita'am nat bar nat, vetafasnu hasvara dechametz bikli issura bala, kemo shekatavnu sham se'if kaf-tet, ayen sham, devadavai le'inyan le'echol bePesach atzmo mita'am hetera denat bar nat, ein anu somchim al zeh neged kol hani rabvata, mah she'ein ken behag'alah kodem haPesach…” That means he won’t be lenient on Pesach to eat something on the basis of nat bar nat. I guess that means we won’t allow you to create a nat bar nat on Pesach in order to eat it. But we will allow you to rely on nat bar nat before Pesach by means of hag'alah. He’s just saying it—don’t catch me, because in section tav-mem-zayin I told you not to rely on this nat bar nat business. That was about eating something on Pesach and creating a nat bar nat dehetera somehow. I’m not going to allow that, but I will allow it on Erev Pesach or before Pesach with hag'alah. Fine.
“Vezeh lashon” (and this is the wording). Look at yud for a second: “Vezeh lashon raboteinu ba'alei haShulchan Aruch bese'if alef: Yesh lehizaher lehag'il kodem sha'ah chamishit, kedei shelo titztarech ledakdek im hakelim benei yoman o lav”—that’s the first thing—“o im yesh shishim bamayim neged keli shemag'il, im lav”—that’s the second thing—“vechen im mag'il kelim shebli'atan mu'etet bikelim shebli'atan merubah”—that’s the third thing—“vechen im masheh hakelim betoch hayorah yoter midai”—that’s the fourth thing—“ve'eino masheh otam kol kach”—the fifth thing—“vechen kedei shelo yitztarech lazeh shelo yanuchu hamayim meretichatan”—the sixth thing—“veshelo yachnis hakeli ad sheyartichu hamayim”—the seventh thing—“vechen, kedei shelo yitztarech lehag'il hayorah hagedolah shemag'ilim bah techilah vasof.” Beautiful.
So Maran said that, since the permitted substance was absorbed, you don’t have to worry about any of these things. All of them. And know, in yud-alef, regarding the statement that the water shouldn’t stop boiling: one of the things Maran said you don’t have to worry about is the water cooling down. If the water cools down, what is in the pot could go back in. If you hold that the prohibited substance was absorbed, you would have to be concerned about that. But since we hold that the permitted substance was absorbed, let it go back in. Therefore, even if the boiling has gone down a little, we’re not concerned.
Rema discusses this. “Veda de'al zeh shekatvu shelo yanuchu hamayim meretichatan, katav Rabbeinu haRema vezeh, ach rabim cholkim vesvira leih de'ein hag'alah mo'elet kelum im ein hamayim rotchim.” Some say that hag'alah won’t help unless the water is boiling the whole time. “Al ken yesh lehizaher afilu kodem zman issuro shelo yanuchu meretichatan kol zman shemag'il.” That doesn’t make any sense. The Rema says some say that if it’s not constantly hot, it won’t work. Why wouldn’t it work? Let’s say I put it in, and for the first two minutes, while it’s boiling, it expels the taste. Now it cools down. What do I care if it goes back in? What is the Rema saying?
The Rema says, “No, to do hag'alah, it has to be hot the whole time.” But he isn’t arguing with Maran about whether the prohibited or permitted substance was absorbed. Why does it have to be hot? I put the fork in while it was boiling hot. What happened? It expelled the taste. All right, now it cooled down. Let’s say it goes back in. Let it go back in. “No, hag'alah doesn’t work in such a case.” Why wouldn’t it work?
Chok Ya'akov says, “Ve'eino muvan klal, umi hu hacholek al zeh?” It isn’t understood at all. Who argues about this? Everybody agrees that if it isn’t boiling, hag'alah doesn’t work. Maran agrees, too. All Maran is saying is that you don’t have to worry that after you put it in and it boiled, it cooled down. Maran isn’t saying that you don’t have to worry about whether the water is boiling at all. Of course, according to Maran, the water has to boil.
It sounds as though the Rema understood Maran to be saying, “Here, you don’t have to worry about whether it’s boiling.” And the Rema says, “No, no, no, no. You do have to worry about boiling.” Who argues about whether you have to worry about it boiling? Of course you do. “Harei gam da'at Rishonim soveret she'ein hag'alah ela bish'at retichah, verak dek'amri dekodem zeman issur yuchlu hamayim lanu'ach miretichatam.” All Maran said is that you can let it cool down afterward, and it won’t become forbidden. That’s not the case after the time of prohibition, because then it can absorb again. But it’s obvious that hag'alah only works while the water is boiling.
What did the Rema think Maran was saying when he said that if you do it before the fifth hour, you don’t have to worry if it cools down? Then the Rema comes in saying, “No, rabotai, that’s not the minhag (custom). We hold that for hag'alah to work, it has to be boiling.” Did Maran argue? “Maran argues?” “Ah, for what happens afterward?” What, Maran argues about that? Does he have to come and shout? Maran agrees about that. He agrees… “So I’m giving get over Sefer Ha'etzot, Rabbi Nachman, is giving you advice.” Okay.
“Uchvar hisigu alav hamparshim, vehaLevush tafas shede'ah hakodemet mo'il hag'alah gam keshenachu hamayim miretichatan, mipnei shemikol makom maklish hata'am.” Because of this, Levush understood Maran to mean that it would work even if the water wasn’t hot, because it’s only nat bar nat; Maran holds that it doesn’t have to be hot. But he says, “Udvarav temuhim” (and his words are puzzling). It can’t be. The Chacham Aruch takes it as an obvious matter that, according to everybody, it has to be hot. Okay, we’ll leave the Rema with a question instead of changing the whole Torah around.
“What does he say?” He’s saying it’s puzzling. If you look at the letter there, it’s probably the Levush. “Does it say poskim (halachic authorities)?” “Poskim.” “Okay, the Levush is a posek (halachic authority).” “Yes, but it’s about nat bar nat.” So why did he focus on one of the six? He should have said all six items! All six concerns could go back in. He focused on this one: “Ah, this one!” What’s the difference between this one and the others?
Okay, yud-bet, rabotai. We’re moving, as you see. “Veyera'eh li deshapir ka'amar.” Ah, now he’s going to answer the Rema, boys. Here’s one of the benefits of Aruch Hashulchan, where he comes in and adds his approaches. “Veyera'eh li deshapir ka'amar”—Moshe, you spoke well! He tells the Rema, Rabbi Moshe Isserles, “Vedavar gadol hishmi'anu, hishmi'anu bazeh.” He taught us something important here.
“Dehineh, kevan denitba'er sheyesh letzamtzem hazeman shetehe hakeli betoch hamayim, lo zeman mu'at kerega mishum de'ein zeman lifleitah, velo zeman merubeh de'im ken chozer uvole'a.” We said earlier that when you put the keli in the water, you have to try to get the timing right: enough time for it to expel the taste, but not so long that it really goes back in. Remember, we said we don’t know that measure of time.
“Ve'af al gav dechishemag'il kodem zeman issuro lo ichpat lan, im chozer uvole'a, uvifrat im hakelim einam bnei yomam, mikol makom lechat'chilah lamah lanu la'asot ken? Sof sof tivla sham chametz! Ve'ein nachon la'asot ken.” Even though we don’t care if you’re doing it before the time of prohibition and it goes back in, especially if the utensils weren’t used that day, why should we do that initially? At the end of the day, chametz will be absorbed there. It isn’t right to do it that way.
“Ach mi hu asher yuchal letzamtzem hazeman?” But who can get the timing right? Who knows how long that time is, when it goes in one direction and then reverses? Most people leave it in longer than the required time. But as long as the pot is boiling and bringing the water to a boil, there’s no concern, because then it only expels and doesn’t absorb. That’s different from when it stops boiling.
That’s what he means when he says that, according to the earlier opinion, before the time of prohibition you don’t have to be precise about whether the water stops boiling. And that’s why he says that some disagree and hold that hag'alah doesn’t help at all unless the water is boiling: that is, it’s as if you didn’t kasher it, since it goes back in and is absorbed again. Even though it is permitted, what benefit is there in hag'alah if it goes back in? Therefore, you have to be careful throughout the entire process of hag'alah…
So it’s as if he’s telling the Rema, “Keep it boiling the whole time, because why should you rely on nat bar nat? I guess if you did, it would be okay. But better to do it only while it’s boiling.” Maran is telling you, “Why do you have to? Once…” So let it go. It isn’t chametz going back in. Nat bar nat is not… If it were chametz going back in, Maran would say it’s forbidden too. The Rema is saying, “Better.” Better than nothing. He brings that here as an extra stringency—“they’re all the amsa in the bottom.” An extra stringency. Okay, that’s the Rema. Why this one? Exactly, why did he focus on this one? Or because it goes back in each time. You’re right. Good question.
In any event, rabotai, David, are you up? How’s your voice today? Good. Yud-gimmel. “Lo, im lo hig'il kodem zeman issuro, yachol lehag'il ad haPesach.” So you can do hag'alah until Pesach. “Aval bePesach atzmo ein lehag'il.” Ah! That was the question we had: can you do hag'alah on Pesach? On Pesach, you can’t. Why? “Mipenei she'az chametz bemashehu, ve'eino mo'il hag'alah shelo kedei shelo tachzor vetivla ketzat.” How are you going to get around that? Chametz is the smallest amount. Where is it? In the walls of the pot. “I don’t see it.” So why don’t you eat a bagel with your eyes closed? What does it mean, “I don’t see it”? The point is that it’s there.
“Under a microscope…” Take a microscope… “No, no. What do you mean, under a microscope? What does a microscope…” There’s absorbed taste in the keli. Chametz is forbidden even in the smallest amount. “Yes, the smallest amount means…” “Exactly!” A crumb? “A crumb.” “It’s not a crumb. Not even a crumb.” The point is, it’s the smallest amount. There’s definitely some in the pot. You’re going to ask me if it’s pagum. Leave that aside; let’s say it’s within 24 hours. I used it that very Pesach morning. Now, on the first night of Yom Tov (festival day), it’s still within 24 hours, so I want to do hag'alah on this pot. How can you do hag'alah?
“Oh, but I have sixty.” Let’s say I have sixty. How will you have sixty? Sixty doesn’t nullify the smallest amount. Chametz is forbidden even in the smallest amount. Sixty won’t help you. “But the smallest amount is also in the taste.” Right. That’s the question here. The smallest amount is also in the taste. Before, we had sixty, so obviously the taste is really there. I can’t… But if it were pagum, seemingly I should be able to do hag'alah.
“But didn’t you say, Rabbi, that even if it’s pagum, it’s forbidden?” If I cooked in a pagum pot, after the fact the food is kasher (fit for use under Jewish law) on Pesach. After the fact. If I cooked in a chametz pot that was pagum, the food is kosher after the fact. So can’t I do hag'alah on a pagum pot? Seemingly, I should be able to. Let’s see what he says.
“Aval mutar lelaben keli toch haPesach, mipenei sheha'esh motzi et kol habalu'a, ve'eino chozer umavli'a.” You’re allowed to kasher a utensil with direct heat during Pesach, because the fire removes all the absorbed taste, and it doesn’t go back in. “Oh, that’s a good one!” Do libun! Because libun just takes it out; it won’t go back in. “It’s like burning chametz.” “Oh, burning, yes, especially according to those who say it burns.” There’s a dispute about how libun works, right? Either libun extracts everything, or it burns it.
“We’re talking about the fifth hour.” “We’re talking on Pesach.” “On Pesach! Fire!” It won’t go back in. Right. So do libun. That’s a good way to do hag'alah on Pesach. Continue. “Ufashut hu dizehu bechol hamo'ed, debeyom tov asur mitzad melachah.” Ah, so it’s only on Chol HaMo'ed (the intermediate days of the festival). You can’t do libun on Yom Tov. Why, to repair something? “No, I guess why can’t you do it on Yom Tov? The fire is already there; it’s a need.” “Okay, I guess Yom Tov has rules. Chol HaMo'ed…” Okay, continue.
“Veda.” Know that when you do hag'alah on Erev Pesach after the time of prohibition, you have to be careful about all these things. Right, all seven things we mentioned. Once you’re doing it on Erev Pesach, you have to be concerned about all of them. “She'ein tzarich lehizaher bahem mikodem, shelo yihyu benei yoman. Im hem benei yoman, tzarich sheyihyeh bamayim shishim kenegdan. Ve'az nitbatel hapelitah bamayim.” Even though one is not required to be careful about them before that time, if they were used that day, the water has to contain sixty against them. Then what they release is nullified in the water.
Even though one may not nullify a prohibition initially, here your intention isn’t to nullify the prohibition, but to kasher the utensil. If it wasn’t used that day, it’s permitted, and there is also a case where there are sixty. “Ve'af denoten ta'am lifgam asur lechatchilah… Asur lechatchilah, hacha bevalu'a ve'ee efshar be'inyan acher, velo betorach merubah mutar.” Okay, he’s giving you some rules. We have the rule that one may not nullify a prohibition initially. Let’s say I’m doing hag'alah at the fifth hour. One way is for the utensil not to have been used in the previous 24 hours. But if it was used that day, we say the pot needs sixty against what comes out, to nullify the prohibition, because it’s still before Pesach and there is still a requirement of sixty. The prohibition of even the smallest amount doesn’t take effect until night. On Erev Pesach, we still use sixty.
So why are you allowing me to use sixty? Seemingly, you’re nullifying a prohibition initially. I’m putting sixty in the pot to nullify the taste—to nullify the prohibition initially. He says your intention isn’t to nullify the prohibition. I’m not trying to nullify it; I want to extract it. There’s a difference. Nullifying the prohibition is when I put a drop of milk in a pot of meat, knowing there’s sixty, and I nullify it. What are you doing here? Your intention isn’t to make a prohibition; your intention is to get rid of the prohibition. You want to extract it from the pot. The problem is that you don’t want it to go back in. So you have to nullify it in the water so it won’t go back in. That isn’t considered nullifying a prohibition initially. Okay, beautiful. One more, David.
“Od yesh davar echad sheyesh lehizaher achar zman isuro, vehainu shelo yag'il keli miktzat miktzat, shelo yimalet shemiktzat min hanigal lo yikanes od pa'am, kegon shehu hayoreh, veharei hu chozer uvole'a, ela yag'il bevat achat.” There’s one more thing to be careful about after the time of prohibition: don’t kasher a utensil bit by bit, so that some of what was kashered doesn’t go in again. For example, if it’s the pot, it can absorb again. Instead, kasher it all at once.
Right, he’s telling you not to do it halfway. Before, you could do half; not after. What is he concerned about? When you put it in, some of what was released from the utensil can go back into the pot. It’s very hard to mark the halfway point. Part of the utensil you just kashered could go back in. The chametz that comes out of the pot could go back into that side.
“Umikol makom bedi'avad umikol makom bedi'avad uvish'at hadechak ein le'esor bechol hadevarim shenitba'aru… kevan… veyesh sovrim de'afilu bema'achal eino chozer veni'or, kol sheken bli'at kelim.” In any event, after the fact, and in a pressing situation, one should not prohibit it based on all the things explained, since… Some say that even in food it does not return and reawaken; all the more so with taste absorbed in utensils.
So that’s in the fifth hour, not on Pesach itself. On Pesach itself, there’s no way to do hag'alah on a utensil used within the previous 24 hours, because of the smallest amount; you’re stuck. But what happens if you nullify the prohibition in sixty before Pesach? Some say—there’s a big question, and we haven’t seen it yet—let’s say I nullified something in sixty before the holiday. You can nullify chametz in sixty before the holiday. What happens on Pesach? It reawakens. It returns and reawakens.
If it reawakens on Pesach, sixty won’t help, because now chametz on Pesach is forbidden even in the smallest amount. Therefore, the sixty from before Pesach won’t help. Understand what I just said? Before Pesach, I nullified chametz in sixty. What happens on Pesach, according to many opinions? Now that the chametz becomes forbidden, it wakes up. It returns and reawakens. If it wakes up on Pesach, sixty won’t help; it’s forbidden in even the smallest amount. So the sixty from before Pesach won’t help.
However, sixty works for taste absorbed in a utensil. Even the opinions that say it returns and reawakens apply only to food, not to taste absorbed in a utensil. Therefore, if I kashered a pot before Pesach and the chametz went into the pot and was nullified in sixty, and then it went back into the pot, we don’t say that on Pesach the smallest amount wakes up. We say you can nullify absorbed taste in sixty before Pesach. The law of returning and reawakening, even according to those who rule stringently, applies only to food, not to absorbed taste. Okay.
Continue, David, one more. “Veyag'il techilah kelim.” Yes. By the way, we read all this already. This is all halachah alef. “Hig'ita ila.” “Veyag'il techilah kelim shebli'atan mu'at, ve'achar kach kelim shebli'atan merubah. Velo yashen bayoreh yoter midai. Velo yanuachu hamayim, im tehiyim yag'il hayoreh techilah.” What are we talking about here? This is all after sha'ah chamishit. After the fifth hour, you have to be stringent about all seven things.
But look what he says here: “Ach im ein hayoreh ben yomo, ein tzarich lehag'ilo techilah.” If the pot wasn’t used that day, it doesn’t have to be kashered first. And at the end? “Ach nahagu lehachmir bechol hachumrot afilu kodem he…” Here’s the line. You see? He’s saying that Ashkenazim are stringent about everything even before the fifth hour: the taste should be impaired, you shouldn’t put a lot in the pot, and so on. They’re as stringent as they can be. They make the taste impaired, which solves that problem. They wait 24 hours.
“Veyesh… Veyesh mi shehikshah, eizeh to'elet yesh behag'alah.” Look at this. It’s a great question. Some ask, “What in the world is hag'alah going to help? What benefit is there in hag'alah?” Continue reading. “Deha behechreach sheyivle'u hakelim mashehu mimei hahag'alah, veyachzor veni'or bePesach.” Ah. If you hold that it returns and reawakens, how will hag'alah work? The taste comes out and goes into the pot. Some amount goes back into the pot, so there’s some chametz in the pot. Unless you also say that we don’t say it returns and reawakens with absorbed taste, as we just said.
“Ah, kivaneta yafeh. Lo amrinan chozer veni'or.” Well done and blessed. “Shemag'il keli katan, kemo sakin shel issur, bikderah sheyesh shishim kenegdo, yachol lehag'ilo afilu bekederah kesherah.” When you dip a small utensil, like a knife with prohibited taste in it, into a pot with sixty against it, you can kasher it even in a kosher pot.
Let’s say the knife has Chazir (pork) in it. I can dip that knife into a kosher pot as long as there are sixty against the knife. Why? The prohibition is going to come out into the pot, and the water will nullify it. Now it’s permitted. What happens next? The water goes back into your kosher pot. Let it go back in; it has already been nullified. And the water remains kosher.
“It isn’t like…” Ah, it isn’t nullifying a prohibition initially. When I do that, I’m trying to extract it. You’re right: you’re nullifying it in sixty as you extract it. That isn’t called nullifying a prohibition initially. Understand the difference? It isn’t considered nullifying a prohibition initially, even though you’re extracting it into sixty. There, I’m extracting it. Nullifying a prohibition initially is taking the prohibition and putting it into permitted food. Here, I want to get it out. How else am I going to get it out? If I don’t have sixty, it will go back into the pot. Therefore, when extracting it, we don’t say it’s considered nullifying a prohibition initially.
If you throw a hundred of those in, one at a time, they’ll still be… But at some point it’s going to become more than sixty. “Yeah, because every time—right? No, yeah, because kama kama batil (each one is nullified as it comes).” Each one is nullified as it comes. You nullify it. Now all this water is kosher water. Then you do another one; it’s nullified, and all that water is kosher, and so on. Your intention is to kasher it, to remove the prohibition, all the more so if it wasn’t used that day, since there’s no concern at all.
“Veda de'anu nohagim lehag'il hakelim kodem haPesach bemerchatz shel hatzibur.” Know that the custom was to kasher the utensils before Pesach in a public bathhouse. Ah, like Landau. They used to do it because they wanted a supervisor there. They wanted someone overseeing the hag'alah process. They would make it a public event: rabbis there, people bringing their pots, and someone giving them all the laws of how to kasher. They didn’t want to leave it to every person in his house because they didn’t trust that people would do it the right way. Nice. Okay, mazal tov (congratulations). Unbelievable.
Tet-zayin. All right, all right. “Yesh lehizaher.” Now we get to other cases. “Yesh lehizaher shelo yag'il keli basar ucheli chalav beyachad, ela im ken echad mehem eino ben yomo. De'im lo chen, harei yivle'u zeh mizeh, de'avad dahavei noten ta'am bar noten ta'am, kemevo'ar beYoreh De'ah besiman tzadi-heh…” All right, slowly. Meat and milk. I have a milk pot, which is permitted. I have a meat pot, which is permitted. I want to purge them, clean them, bring them back to the manufacturer’s status. I want to kasher them—really, they don’t need kashering because they’re kosher; I just want to purge them together. So I want to put a meat spoon and a dairy spoon together in the hag'alah water. Permitted or forbidden?
The Shulchan Aruch doesn’t like it. “Yesh lehizaher”—you have to be careful. Why? Unless one of them wasn’t used that day. As long as one of them has impaired taste, it’s going to be okay. Seemingly, what’s the problem, rabotai? It’s nat bar nat. Why is it a prohibition? Nothing is prohibited here. “Could there be a problem cooking meat and milk, Rabbi?” The cooking? “They’ll be pieces of meat and dairy cooking…” Did they make a prohibition against cooking the taste? If you put two tastes together, I’m asking, does the water become meat and milk? Before you get to separate them…”
“What are you cleansing?” I’m cleansing a meat spoon and a dairy spoon together in the same hag'alah pot. They were both used that day. The Shulchan Aruch says to be careful; don’t do it. I’m asking why not. Each utensil on its own is permitted. Meat is permitted, and milk is permitted. The meat taste comes out into the water; that’s already nat bar nat. The nat bar nat goes back in, and it’s already permitted. So what am I worried about? The milk taste comes out as nat bar nat. Once it meets in the water, what do I care? When it went into the water, it was nat bar nat dehetira. The water itself is still only one transfer of taste. Why is it nat bar nat de'isura? It isn’t basar bechalav (meat and milk). They’re both in the water now, the meat and the dairy. But when they went into the water, they were nat bar nat dehetira.
“Okay, but they’re going to meet together before…” “Yeah, but they met as nat bar nat. The first time they met, they were already nat bar nat.” The utensils… When they met, they were already nat bar nat. This is one transfer from the spoon into the water. “Well done and blessed; my name is ‘one transfer after another.’” The other one’s meat comes out: “Hello, my name is ‘one transfer after another.’” Nat bar nat is permitted. So why is he telling you that one of them has to be not used that day? As long as one has impaired taste, that solves the problem. When the impaired taste goes into the water, it’s nothing, really nothing. The other one can be impaired by that taste. Why is he so stringent?
Okay, read it again. “Yesh lehizaher melehag'il keli basar vecheli chalav beyachad, ela im ken echad mehem eino ben yomo. Ve'im lo chen, harei yivle'u zeh mizeh”—and after the fact, they’ll absorb from one another. What does it mean, they absorb from one another? It goes into the water and then into the other utensil. So you’re going to have what? Nat bar nat bar nat. Continue. “Uvedi'avad havei nat bar nat.” After the fact, it is nat bar nat. Well done and blessed. After the fact, it’s permitted, really. Kerovei hayode'a.
“Vechol sheken keli issur ela lihyot benei yoman.” All the more so with a prohibited utensil: you can’t permit it if it was used that day. That we understand, because it’s nat bar nat de'isura. You have a pot that is already basar bechalav. You cooked milk and meat in the pot, and it’s forbidden. You want to kasher it. If you kasher it within 24 hours, what happens? The basar bechalav goes back into the water and into the pot. You can’t say nat bar nat, because it’s a prohibition. You don’t say nat bar nat de'isura. There, you have no choice but to wait 24 hours.
Open the Shulchan Aruch for a second, rabotai. In this case, when he says “used that day,” does that mean it was used in hot water, like in a keli rishon or something? “Because if it was used only cold—” “Yeah, I agree. We don’t mean you used it as a drum. We mean it was used in a way that the prohibition entered it.” Open up tav-nun-bet. I want to see this law here. Yes, halachah bet, by the way.
“Yesh lehizaher melehag'il keli habasar vecheli chalav beyachad, ela im ken echad mehem einam benei yoman.” Why? “Yesh lehizaher.” According to the Rema in Yoreh De'ah, section tzadi-heh, subsection gimel, in the gloss, even after the fact it is forbidden. “Ulehag'il kelim shemamashit kemetav basar bechalav beyachad.” Wait, he changed the case. He puts both together in the same pot. How did he change the case? That’s exactly what we’re talking about: the meat spoon and the milk spoon together. He put them together in the pot. Together, together—not one after the other. One after the other is permitted. “Veheta'am diflitat habasar vechalav mit'arbevim beyachad, venivla'im betoch hakelim.” They meet in the water. They meet in the water and make a prohibition.
But when they met, they were nat bar nat! We’re going to say it’s nat bar nat de'isura. You’d say they come out and simultaneously become nat bar nat and prohibited; there was no time when they were permitted. Right, they meet together. You drop two spoons. Look at the Mishnah Berurah on “one of them”: “The one used that day is permitted, because it receives only impaired taste from the one not used that day. The one not used that day is also permitted, because the taste released by the one used that day is nat bar nat dehetira, and the taste is not significant.”
Now you see why it works if one of them has impaired taste. The one used that day receives from the impaired one. Big deal; let it receive from the impaired one. That’s okay. The impaired one receives from the one used that day, and the one used that day becomes nat bar nat. Right, he holds that way. Wow, Maran holds this way.
“To go back to the dishwasher: if there’s no soap now, all the dishes are going to be—” “Correct. After the fact, maybe we can say it’s okay. But the question is, there’s actual substance there too. I don’t know if you have taste. The dishwasher is worse. Here, it’s taste.” Okay, so Maran holds that initially you have to be stringent. Where’s Yalkut Yosef? Look over there by my chair. We have the Yalkut Yosef. No, I want the new one. I’ll see if he discusses this law. Thank you very much. Taf-nun-bet. Here we are. He doesn’t say much in taf-nun-bet.
“Ein lehag'il keli basar vecheli chalav bevat achat, ela keshe'echad mehem eino ben yomo. Aval im sheneihem benei yomam yag'ilem bezeh achar zeh.” Maran goes straight to subsection dalet. He says here: “Uvediavad shehig'il keli basar vechalav beyachad, da'at Maran beShulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah lehachel, shekatav ke'arot shel basar shehudchu beyoreh cholevet bechamin shehayad soledet bo”—you took meat pots and cleaned them in a dairy pot with hot water—“afilu sheneihem benei yoman mutar, dehavei noten ta'am bar noten ta'am dehetera. Vehu sheyomar bari li shelo hayah shum shuman davuk bahem”—as long as you’re certain no fat was stuck to them, because if there was food on them, that’s not nat bar nat—“ve'im hayah shum davuk hutzrach sheyiheyeh kenegdo shishim.” If anything was stuck to them, you need sixty against it.
“Ve'omnam da'at haRema she'im sheneihem benei yoman vehidi'ach otam beyachad hakol asur, vechen nohagim benei Ashkenaz. Umah shemutar lehag'ilam zeh achar zeh min hashurah, im eino ben yomo, vaharei hem bol'im echad mehasheni, hu mishum shenifgam hata'am, venoten ta'am lifgam mutar bePesach. Vechen da'at haTosafot vehaRosh, vechen naktinan. Shekatav haRav Yalkut Yosef she'ein lachosh lesevarat haRashba.” Fine. So initially Maran is stringent about not putting them together. Why? I guess he’s saying that they meet in the water and it isn’t nat bar nat. You don’t kasher the water? What—when they go back together, they’re the same thing. Why is Maran discussing basar bechalav here? Because you’re doing hag'alah for Pesach, and he’s telling you to be careful not to put them together.
“Oh, simply—you didn’t mean…” “No, I mean chametz meat and milk.” “Yeah, chametz. They want to kasher them.” He’s talking about the hag'alah process. First of all, what’s the difference? I’m saying that when you kasher for Pesach, make sure you put your meat and dairy utensils in separately. Don’t have them together. One of them should not have been used that day.
He says, “Uvediavad im hayu sheneihem benei yoman ne'esru. De'ihi demishum chametz leika”—because you know chametz is considered as though the permitted substance was absorbed, so what do I care?—“Aval mishum basar bechalav ika, shesheneihem notnim ta'am leshevach.” Wow. That’s where some say the Ashkenazim got the custom of always waiting 24 hours. They put milk and meat together, and since they’re putting milk and meat together, they wait. It has nothing to do with whether the permitted substance was absorbed. They don’t want to get into this problem.
You hear what he just said? One reason Ashkenazim are stringent about waiting 24 hours even before Pesach is that they kasher all their pots, some meat and some dairy, and they’re concerned they might put them together in the same pot. By waiting, everything has impaired taste, and that solves this issue. That’s a good point. If you tell people, “Go ahead on Pesach; whatever you want, don’t worry about anything,” you still have to tell them, “Don’t put meat and dairy together.” But if you just tell them to make sure nothing has been used for 24 hours, you’re set.
Now we have to go back to that lady who calls you and asks, “Do I have to be concerned about impaired taste?” You have to tell her, “No, don’t worry, even if they were used that day.” But you have to remind her not to put meat and dairy together initially. If she did it after the fact, you have nat bar nat. But what’s the reasoning? They meet in the water. They meet in the water at the same time, so you can’t call it nat bar nat. Here, they became one thing at the same time. After the fact, we’ll call it nat bar nat. “Hacham Maran, I got it.”
“Would it prohibit all the other utensils in there, too? Let’s say someone put these together and there are other utensils in there.” “Other, parve utensils? Whatever utensils they are?” “Or they put them in afterward, now that the water…” “No, after the fact. But initially…” “Right. After the fact, he calls it nat bar nat. Initially, don’t do this.” “But it’s only a precaution?” “Right. So really, if you did it, there’s no real halachic problem?” “After the fact, exactly. Just don’t do it initially.”
“Somebody’s biggest pot is a dairy pot. They’re going to use it…” That’s exactly Maran’s case. You have a dairy pot that was used that day, and you’re cleaning meat pots in it—everything absorbed, no visible substance. Maran says it’s okay after the fact. “Ke'arot shel basar shehu dachan beyoreh cham whatever, shehu dachan”—it was done. After the fact, it’s permitted. But initially, he’s stringent.
Oh! What do we do on Pesach? Can we do hag'alah? What did we say about that? We said no, from the Aruch, right? We said no. We’re still concerned about the smallest amount. Look what he says here: “Kelim shemachshirim otam leFesach behag'alah. Before Pesach or libun. Ein bahem kol chashash lehishtamesh bahem beFesach.” There’s no concern about using them on Pesach. Being stringent and buying new utensils is just extra care and a good feeling. “Tavo aleihem berachah” (may blessing come upon them). Just to feel good. “Not even ‘may blessing come upon them’?” Without any halachic concern. It’s good. He’s just trying to tell you not to… We need encouragement for this in our generation. He thinks it’s after the fact.
“Okay, I buy new. I buy new.” Buy new? You eat foolishly—why buy new? He’s right. You have one guy who doesn’t know anything: “I’d rather buy new. I don’t like relying on hag'alah. I like to buy new, whatever.” Then you feel like an idiot for relying on the hag'alah you did. So he’s telling you that hag'alah… I know a rabbi who throws away a dairy or meat spoon if someone who desecrates Shabbat, who eats nonkosher, uses it for cold cereal. That’s hysteria.
Okay, last question, rabotai. Kashering by a non-Jew. I’m in the kitchen, I’m the supervisor, and everything is there. I tell the maid, “Por favor, take these spoons over here, dame el agua.” Permitted or forbidden? What’s the din (law)? Does the Jew have to put it in? Without a blessing? I understand that maybe a Jew has to do tevilat kelim (immersing utensils). Maybe. I don’t even know that. Bishul akum (food cooked by a non-Jew)? What’s the problem here? Is there a matter of the Jew having to do the hag'alah? What do I care who puts it in?
On the contrary—no, on the contrary, I don’t want… I don’t want the opposite. Put the Arab in front of the thing; let him get burned, God forbid. That’s… “Look, the son he had lived down here.” Well, I’m there. I’m not relying on him saying, “I did hag'alah for you.” I’m there watching him. Exactly. Why would it have to be done by a Jew?
Chida writes in Avodat HaKodesh: “Yishtadel me'od beseder hag'alat kelim sheyehe kedin kahalacha, vechamah chumrot venekiyot osim she'einam nitzrachim, upochatim meha'inyanim hanitzrachim al pi hadin.” He says that there are things that are required by law that people don’t do, and things that aren’t required by law that they do. So know what you’re doing. They don’t know what the sefer says. Therefore, a person knowledgeable in the law has to be there at the time of the hag'alah. Like the Rema said—or the Aruch HaShulchan said—the custom was to go to a public place.
Rav Chemdat Yamim wrote: “Ki hinei ha'adam al yedei chet'o pogem ba'avonotav harbeh bakelim hakedoshim veha'elyonim hanikra'im klei Hashem. Umishtamesh bahem chametz, which is the sitra achara, umachnis zarim ba'olamot…” Oh, Kabbalah. When a person sins, he damages his holy vessels, the upper ones called the vessels of Hashem. He uses them with chametz, which is the sitra achara (the other side), and brings strangers into the worlds. That is, he brings avodah zarah (idolatry) into the worlds.
“Vehineh al yedei hama'aseh sheya'aseh kan begashmi, when he's making hag'alah in the kelim, lehag'il et hakelim, uma'avir mehem hachametz, ken yir'u sho'ei shamayim bichlei Hashem hatehorim vehakedoshim sheye'oreru chesed hanikra El zo'em bechol yom, umimerom dinam she'enam mayim notarim nichnas kelip…” Wow. So he’s saying that the hag'alah we do is a tikkun (spiritual repair) for your own spiritual hag'alah of your own spiritual items. You should be mechaven (have in mind) that… “Vechen al yedei ma'aseh halibun sheya'aseh kan begashmi”—the same applies to the act of libun done here physically. Unbelievable.
In Kav HaYashar, our sefer, it says: “Vehineh bayamim elu kol Yisrael oskim bemitzvot rabot, be'esek bi'ur hachametz, uvehag'alat kelim, uvelibun, uvahadachah.” Interesting—that’s considered many commandments. Hag'alah; I didn’t know it was a mitzvah. Hag'alah is practical. “Velachen nachon vera'ui shelo la'asot shum melachah min hamelachot hanizkarim al yedei arelim, ki im bidei Yisrael.” Therefore, it is proper not to have any of these labors done by non-Jews, but to have them done by Jews. Kav HaYashar doesn’t want the hag'alah done by a non-Jew.
“Kemo chen ra'ui lehader achar asiyat hamatzot hamitzvot bachodesh zeh, hamatzot. Vechen kol yereh devar Hashem ya'asok be'inyan sichlo lechadesh devar Torah. Ki gam zeh nichlal be'esek.” It’s also proper to prepare words of Torah for the Seder. Okay, so he holds according to the mystical tradition. That’s the title: “Yesh sod behag'alat hakelim ushe'ar hachanot haPesach, velachen tov lehishtadel be'atzmo velo al yedei goy.” There’s a mystical reason for kashering utensils and the other preparations for Pesach, so it’s good to try to do it yourself and not through a non-Jew.
According to the mystical tradition, that’s a good reason to do it. But if you don’t want to, and you didn’t… Yeah, it won’t invalidate it. This is according to the mystical tradition: do it yourself, have it in mind, and so on. What was the Chida’s point? People don’t know the law, so they’re stringent about things that aren’t required by the strict law, and for things that are required by the strict law they say, “Oh, okay.” They have stringencies and leniencies, and they don’t know. All right, we’ll stop here.
Baruch Hashem le'olam amen ve'amen (Blessed is Hashem forever, amen and amen). Rabbi Chananya ben Akashya omer, ratzah HaKadosh Baruch Hu lezakot et Yisrael, lefikach hirbah lahem Torah umitzvot, shene'emar: Hashem chafetz lema'an tzidko yagdil Torah veya'adir (Rabbi Chananya ben Akashya says: The Holy One, blessed be He, desired to make Israel meritorious; therefore He gave them abundant Torah and commandments, as it says: Hashem desired, for the sake of His righteousness, to make the Torah great and glorious).