[Avodah] Rav Melamed on Metal Pots

[Akiva Miller via Avodah]

Okay, I'm started to understand R' Micha Berger's position, from his post
in 34:126, that bli'ah is not exactly the same thing as chemical or
culinary flavor getting absorbed into a keli. But then, what IS it?

In Avodah 34:112, he suggested that "it could be about the expectation of a
taste rather than the taste itself." To me, this was such a creative
chidush that I dismissed it at first, but now I can see how it fits his
analysis of k'feilah:

> 1- BY, based on the Ramban: There is no bitul beshishim if the kefeilah
> can taste it. So, you need both ratio and taste.

In other words, it is batel only if there is an expectation of no taste and
also an  experience of no taste.

> 2- Rashi: Bitul beshishim is only if the kefeilah can taste it or if
> there are none available. You need ratio, confirm with taste when you can.

In other words, it is preferably as above, but the expectation of no taste
is sufficient alone.

> 3- Ri, Rambam: There is bitul even if the proportion is greater than 1:60
> if the kefeilah cannot taste it. So you need either ratio or taste. (The
> AhS explains that what a chef might taste of a 1:60 minority is so
> weakened, it's not real ta'am.)

In other words, it is batel *either* if there is an expectation of no taste
*or* an experience of no taste.

> So the idea of kefeilah, lekhol hadei'os, is not that ta'am means
> biological taste. Every shitah has a role for bitul beshishim. And since
> biological taste is part of psychological ta'am, this combination of
> ratio and experiment fits psychology more than biology.

No, not really. Given that the kefeilah is a human who puts the food in his
mouth and comments on that experience, ta'am certainly does mean biological
taste. I think what you meant to write is that bli'ah and bitul are not
tied exclusively to biological taste, because indeed, every shita has a
role for shishim, a/k/a expectation of no taste.

Do I agree? Well, I'm certainly persuaded that shishim can refer to
"expectation". I had always understood shishim to be a "presumption", that
biological taste will be detectable at higher concentrations, but not when
more diluted. It is a small jump from presumption to expectation, and I'm
okay with it. I'm also persuaded that shishim plays a more important role
than I had realized, that some shitos allow the bitul even when the kefeila
*can* taste the issur.

But let's go back to the subject line, and recall that this thread is not
about taaroves; it's about hechsher keilim.

And this is where the idea of "expectation" has big problems. Given how
porous pottery is, I certainly sympathize with a view that "expects"
pottery to absorb ta'am but never fully release it. But why do they expect
this even when the pottery has been glazed?

My feeling is to "expect" bli'ah of glazed pottery to be similar to the
bli'ah of glass. But the poskim (at least the Ashkenazi ones) has been the
exact opposite: They view glass as earthenware (it's just sand, right?) and
therefore unkasherable.

This thread began with Rav Melamed's suggestion that modern stainless steel
might be non-absorbent and thus not needing hag'alah. My question, as I
posted in the beginning (and as R' Eli Turkel referenced Rav Eitam Henkin
Hy"d in Avodah 34:113), was how can we assert such things, unless we
compare out pots to the ancient ones? How can we claim that stainless steel
is like glass, and on the other side of our mouth, claim that glaze is
*not* like glass?

POSTSCRIPT: In my learning on this topic, I was surprised to find that some
important data points are not logical or philosophical) svaros, but come
from the world of Gezeras Hakasuv. I had long known that in the story of
Klei Midian (B'midbar 31:22-23), HaShem explicitly tells us that metal can
be kashed via libun or hag'alah. What I learned only recently is that there
is a pasuk (Vayikra 6:21) that teaches us that pottery can*not* be
kashered. I saw this in Rabbi Binyamin Forst's "The Kosher Kitchen"
(ArtScroll) pg 339, based on Pesachim 30b. These Gezeros Hakasuv suggest
several things to me. (1) Klei Midyan explicitly name iron as one of the
metals that need to be kashered, and stainless steel is mostly iron; I
wonder how absorbency experiments can override a d'Oraisa. (2) Similarly,
glass *is* made of sand; to say that it is a new material, unrelated to the
earthenware the the Torah says is unkasherable, seems quite innovative.

Akiva Miler
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161010/61e041ac/attachment-0008.html>