Milk and Meat 101

By Rabbi Joshua Flug

For technical information regarding use of

.this document, press ctrl and click here
I. Introduction- The goal of this shiur outline is to provide the sources relating to the
basic laws of basar b'chalav that are relevant to daily life.
II. What is the prohibition of Basar B'Chalav?
a. The Torah records the prohibition of cooking a g'di in its mother's milk three
times:
i. Parshas Mishpatim {}
ii. Parshas Ki Sisa {}
iii. Parshas Re'eh {}
1. There is a difference between the verses in Sefer Shemos and
the verse in Sefer Devarim. In Shemos, it is juxtaposed with
the mitzvah of bikkurim and in Devarim it is juxtaposed with
the prohibition of neveilah.
2. There are a number of explanations regarding the connection
with these other mitzvos:
a. Rambam (1135-1204) writes that the Torah specifically
connects basar b'chalav with the chagim because the
practice of idol worshippers was to cook meat and milk
during their holidays. {}
b. R. Ovadia Sforno (c. 1475-1550) follows this approach
and adds that mixing milk and meat was an avodah
zarah practice to try to help the reproduction and
growth of vegetation and animals. Therefore, the Torah
prohibits using basar b'chalav as a means of growing
fruit for bikkurim and breeding animals. {}
i. R. Naftali Z.Y. Berlin (The Netziv 1816-1893)
adds that the Torah prohibits cooking meat and
milk even for the purpose of growing crops. {}
c. The Mechilta states that if not for the pasuk in Devarim
we might have thought that the prohibition only applies
when the mitzvah of bikkurim applies (when the Beis
HaMikdash is built). The pasuk in Devarim equates the
prohibition to the prohibition of neveilah and therefore,
it applies in all times and places. {}
i. R. Meir Simcha of Dvinsk (1843-1926) writes
that in fact the pshutu shel mikra is that
originally basar b'chalav was only intended to
be observed in Eretz Yisrael. However, once
the cheit hameraglim happened, the prohibition
 expanded and therefore, the Torah had to repeat
it in the context of neveilah. {}
b. The Gemara quotes a Beraisa that teaches that the Torah repeats the
prohibition three times to teach that there are three separate prohibitions: {}
i. Achilah
ii. Bishul
iii. Hana'ah
c. The Gemara quotes Rava that basar b'chalav is only produced through bishul.
{}
i. Rashi explains that since the Torah phrases the prohibition as a bishul-
oriented prohibition, we derive from this that there is no basar b'chalav
without bishul. {}
d. The Mishna states that on a biblical level, the prohibition only applies to meat
and milk from a kosher animal. This excludes non-kosher animals and all
birds. On a rabbinic level, basar b'chalav applies to kosher birds and milk. {}
i. Basar B'Chalav does apply to a neveilah from a kosher animal.
ii. Nevertheless, Rambam notes that there is an amazing point "nekudah
nifla'ah" that emerges from the discussion about neveilah: {}
1. There is a concept of "ain issur chal al issur" that would
prevent one prohibition from taking effect onto another
prohibition. As such, a neveilah, which is already prohibited,
should not be subject to an additional prohibition of basar
b'chalav.
2. However, the concept of ain issur chal al issur does not apply if
the second prohibition adds an additional feature that is not
apparent in the first prohibition. As such, basar b'chalav
should fall under this exception since neveilah does not provide
an issur hana'ah and basar b'chalav does.
3. The nekudah nifla'ah is that the issur hana'ah is a direct
function of the issur achilah. Since the issur achilah can't take
effect on an already prohibited neveilah, the issur hana'ah can't
take effect either.
iii. R. Yechezkel Landa (1713-1793) applies Rambam as a matter of
practical Halacha. He notes that although it seems that some Rishonim
disagree, one may rely on Rambam's opinion in case of loss. {} Some
practical applications may include one who purchased dog food that
 contains basar b'chalav or one who wants to sell basar b'chalav of b'sar
neveilah that came into his possession.
III. Rabbinic Prohibitions Relating to Basar B'Chalav
a. Two People Eating Meat and Milk on the Same Table
i. The Mishna prohibits two people, one eating meat and one eating
cheese, from eating together at the same table. {}
ii. Tosafos note that if there is some item between them to remind them
not to each other's food, it is permissible. Furthermore, if one of them
is eating on a separate tablecloth (or placemat) it is permissible. {}
b. Waiting between meat and milk (this topic requires its own shiur outline-
these are just the basics.)
i. The Gemara quotes Rav Chisda that if one eats meat, he may not eat
cheese afterwards, but if he eats cheese, he may eat meat afterwards.
The Gemara then quotes Mar Ukva that his father's practice was to
wait until the next day to eat cheese after meat. Mar Ukva's personal
practice was to only wait until the next meal. {}
ii. The Rishonim provide two reasons why one may not eat cheese
immediately after meat:
1. Rashi writes that it is because meat is fatty and the taste
remains in one's mouth for longer. {}
2. Rambam writes that it is because meat tends to get stuck in
one's teeth. {}
iii. R. Ya'akov ben Asher (1269-1343) notes that there are two practical
differences between the two approaches: {}
1. According to Rashi, one is only required to wait the required
period of time if he swallowed the meat. However, if he only
chewed on the meat, there is no concern. According to
Rambam, the concern that there is meat stuck between one's
teeth applies even if one only chewed on the meat.
2. According to Rambam, after the required waiting time, it is
assumed that any meat between one's teeth is denatured enough
so that it is not considered meat. As such, even if there is still
meat between one's teeth, he may still eat cheese. According to
Rashi, if there is meat between one's teeth, there is a concern
even after the required waiting time.
iv. Tur and Shulchan Aruch write that one should be concerned for both
opinions. {}
 v. How long should one wait between meat and milk?
1. Rambam writes that one should wait about six hours (k'mo
sheish sha'os). {} Shulchan Aruch follows this opinion (but
writes six hours) {}
2. Tosafos write that as long as one clears off the table and recites
Birchas HaMazon, it is considered a new meal. {} Rama
basically follows this opinion, but adds that one should wait
one hour as well. Rama concludes that it is nevertheless proper
to wait six hours. {}
3. R. Tzvi Hirsch Shapira (1850-1913) quotes from the sefer
Mizmor L'David that there is a practice to wait three hours and
it is based on the idea that the time period is supposed to
represent the time between meals. In the summer, the time
between meals may be six hours, but in the winter it is three
hours. Since it is sufficient for the winter, it should be
sufficient for the summer as well. {}
IV. Meat and Dairy Equipment
a. The Gemara concludes that fish that was once placed on a meat plate may be
eaten together with dairy. The reason is that in order for the meat taste to
enter the fish, it must first be absorbed into the walls of the plate and then into
the fish. Since it is a secondary taste transfer of a permissible taste, we
assume that the taste is weakened. This principle is known as nat bar nat
d'heiterah. {}
b. There is a dispute among the Rishonim regarding the extent of this leniency:
i. Tosafos quote R. Yehuda bar Nassan (Rivan 11th-12th century) that this
leniency only applies to hot fish that was placed on a meat plate. If the
fish was actually cooked in a meat pot, there is no leniency to eat it
with dairy. {}
ii. Rashba (1235-1310) explicitly disagrees with Rivan. He permits
eating the fish with cheese even if it was cooked in a meat pot. {}
iii. Rabbeinu Baruch (13th century) sides in principle with Rivan, but
offers somewhat of a compromise. If the fish is cooked in a liquid in a
meat pot, in order for the meat to transfer to the fish, it must first have
been absorbed previously into the pot, then it must go into the water
and then into the fish. Since it is a tertiary transfer, it is permissible to
eat it with cheese. However, if the fish was baked in a meat pan and
there is no liquid medium, the meat transfer is a secondary transfer and
one may not eat it with cheese. {}
 c. Shulchan Aruch rules in accordance with the opinion of Rashba that even if
the fish was cooked in a meat pot, it is permissible to eat it with cheese. {}
d. Rama rules that l'chatchilah one should show deference to the opinion of
Rivan. However, if b'dieved one did mix the cheese with the fish that was
cooked in a meat pot, it is permissible to eat. Rama also provides two
additional leniencies:
i. If pareve food was cooked in meat pot, it may be transferred to a dairy
dish.
ii. If the pareve food was cooked in a meat pot that was not a ben yomo,
it is permissible to eat the pareve food with dairy.
1. The Vilna Gaon (1720-1797) permits doing this l'chatchilah. It
is permissible to cook pareve food in a meat aino ben yomo pot
knowing that the pareve food will be mixed later with dairy. {}
2. R. Avraham Danzig (1748-1820) disagrees and maintains that
one cannot cook in the meat pot knowing that it will be mixed
with dairy. However, if one cooked the pareve food for some
other purpose and then there are leftovers or one changed his
mind, the food may be eaten with dairy. {}
3. According to the Vilna Gaon, the only need for pareve utensils
exists in a situation where there are no aino ben yomo utensils
available. According to Chochmas Adam, the need for pareve
utensils arises when one wants to cook an item where some of
it will be eaten with meat and some with dairy.
e. The Gemara states that sharp foods serve as an exception to the rule of nat bar
nat d'heiterah. The case of the Gemara is someone who cuts a radish with a
meat knife. The radish is now considered absorbed with meat. {}
i. There is a dispute among the Rishonim as to whether this applies to a
radish or all sharp foods. Shulchan Aruch rules stringently on the
matter. {}
ii. There is another dispute regarding aino ben yomo utensils. Shulchan
Aruch rules that it applies to aino ben yomo utensils. {}
V. Parsha tie in-Parshas Vayeira
a. The Torah records that Avraham gave the three guests butter, milk and meat.
{}
b. The Midrash writes that when G-d decided to give a second set of luchos, the
malachim objected stating that you can't give the Torah to humans who have
shown that they can't keep the Torah. G-d responded that when you went to
visit Avraham, you ate basar b'chalav. {}
c. R. Moshe Sofer (1762-1839) asks: The verse implies that he gave them the
dairy first and then the meat. Why then were they chastised for eating basar
b'chalav? He answers that even between milk and meat, one must still wipe
one's mouth by eating bread or something similar. However, Rashi tells us
that Sarah never brought the bread (because she became a niddah) and
therefore, they did not follow the halacha properly. {}
 ‫‪ .5‬ספורנו שמות כג‪:‬יט‬ ‫‪ .1‬שמות כג‪:‬יט‬

‫‪ .2‬שמות לד‪:‬כו‬

‫‪ .3‬דברים יד‪:‬כא‬
‫‪ .6‬ספורנו דברים יד‪:‬כא‬

‫‪ .4‬מורה נבוכים ג‪:‬מח‬

‫‪ .7‬העמק דבר שמות כג‪:‬יט‬

 ‫‪ .12‬רש"י שם‬ ‫‪ .8‬מכילתא שמות כג‪:‬יט‬

‫‪ .13‬מש' חולין קיג‪.‬‬

‫‪ .14‬רמב"ם פירוש המשניות לכריתות פרק ג‬

‫‪ .9‬משך חכמה שמות כג‪:‬יט‬

‫‪ .10‬חולין קטו‪:‬‬

‫‪ .15‬דגול מרבבה יו"ד פז‪:‬ג‬

‫וכן חלב אסור לבשל בחלב מן התורה ולוקה‬
‫על בישולו אבל באכילה אין בו איסור בשר‬ ‫‪ .11‬חולין קח‪.‬‬
‫בחלב וכל זה מבואר ברמב"ם פ"ט ממ"א הל'‬
‫ו' אם הוא אסור בהנאה אינו מבואר בדברי‬
‫הרמב"ם אבל בפי' המשניות במס' כריתות‬
‫פרק שלישי במשנה יש אוכל אכילה אחת‬
‫מבואר שם בדברי הרמב"ם שאינו אסור‬
‫בהנאה ע"ש בנקודה נפלאה שביאר שם ואף‬
‫שלדברי התו' במס' חולין דף ק"א ע"א בד"ה‬
‫איסור כולל שכתבו שאיסור הנאה לא מקרי‬
 ‫‪ .21‬טור יו"ד ס' פט‬ ‫איסור מוסיף אין הכרח לדברי הנקודה נפלאה‬
‫הא מ"מ לא מצינו להתוס' בפירוש שיחלקו על‬
‫דינו של הרמב"ם שהיכא שאינו אסור באכילה‬
‫משום בשר בחלב אינו אסור בהנאה ולכן‬
‫הסומך על זה במקום הפסד לא הפסיד‪.‬‬

‫‪ .16‬חולין קג‪:‬‬

‫‪ .22‬שלחן ערוך יו"ד פט‪:‬א‬

‫‪ .17‬תוס' קז‪ :‬ד"ה כעין‬

‫‪ .23‬תוס' חולין קה‪.‬‬

‫‪ .18‬חולין קה‪.‬‬

‫‪ .24‬רמ"א יו"ד פט‪:‬א‬

‫‪ .19‬רש"י שם‬

‫‪ .20‬רמב"ם הל' מאכלות אסורות ט‪:‬כח‬

‫‪ .25‬דרכי תשובה פט‪:‬ו‬

‫‪ .26‬חולין קיא‪:‬‬
‫על פני הסכין לפי שאין דרך לקנחו יפה‬ ‫‪...‬‬
‫וכמו שפירש שם רש"י ז"ל ועיקר‪.‬‬

‫‪ .29‬ספר התרומה ס' סא‬ ‫‪ .27‬תוס' חולין קיא‪ .‬ד"ה והלכתא‬

‫‪ .30‬שלחן ערוך ורמ"א יו"ד צה‪:‬א‪-‬ב‬

‫‪ .28‬תורת הבית הארוך ג‪:‬ד‬

‫ויש מי שפירשו שלא נתבשלו אלא‬
‫שהעלום מרותחין לתוך הקערה אבל‬
‫נתבשלו בקערה אסורין דטעם גמור קולטין‬
‫ממנה שכח האש מפליט הכלי הרבה‪.‬‬
‫וראייתם מדאמרינן בפסחים פרק כל שעה‬
‫אין טשין את התנור באליה ואם טש כל‬
‫הפת כולה אסורה עד שיוסק את התנור‬
‫אלמא אע"פ שמדיח את התנור הפת‬
‫‪ .31‬ביאור הגר"א יו"ד צה‪:‬ב‬ ‫אסורה ואע"ג שלא קבלה מן הממש אלא‬
‫וכן אם היה כו'‪ .‬בכה"ג אף בשל איסור מותר‬ ‫ממה שבלע התנור‪ .‬ואין ראייתם ראיה‬
‫כמ"ש בתוס' ע"ז ע"ו א' ד"ה מכאן וכמ"ש שם‬ ‫דהתם היינו טעמא משום קרטופני דאית‬
‫ל"ח ב' ואף בקדירה אין אסור לכתחלה שאינה‬ ‫ביה בתנור שאי אפשר לקנחם ולהדיחם‬
‫ב"י אלא משום גזירה אטו ב"י משא"כ כאן‬ ‫כל הצורך דההיא לאו דוקא בששט אותו‬
‫דאף ב"י מותר מדינא כנ"ל‪:‬‬ ‫כשהוא חם אלא אפילו שט בצונן דהא‬
‫‪ .32‬חכמת אדם מח‪:‬ב‬ ‫סתמא קאמר ומהאי טעמא דאמרן‪ .‬וצנון‬
‫שחתכו בסכין שאסרו בפרק כל הבשר‬
‫לאכלו בכותח התם לאו משום בלע‬
‫שבסכין קאמר אלא משום שומן הקרוש‬
 ‫‪ .38‬מדרש תהלים פרק ח‬ ‫‪ .33‬חולין קיא‪-:‬קיב‪.‬‬

‫‪ .34‬שלחן ערוך יו"ד צו‪:‬א‪-‬ב‬

‫‪ .39‬תורת משה פרשת וירא‬

‫‪ .35‬רמ"א יו"ד פט‪:‬ג‬

‫‪ .36‬חדושי רבי עקיבא איגר יו"ד פט‪:‬ג‬

‫‪ .37‬בראשית יח‪:‬ז‪-‬ח‬