Selected Halachos from the “One Minute Halacha” project
By HaRav Yosef Yeshaya Braun, Shlita,
Mara D’asra and member of the Badatz of Crown Heights
IS IT A BUBBE MEISEH?
Our elders often caution us not to walk around the house without shoes. Is this just a bubbe meiseh (grandmothers’ tale), or does it have a source in halacha?
The importance of wearing shoes is found in Gemara: “One should sell all his possessions—even the roof over his head—and wear shoes”. However, this refers specifically to walking outdoors, not indoors.
We are also cautioned against walking barefoot, and the reasons mentioned in poskim are due to the chill factor or for issues of modesty. By wearing socks both these issues are resolved: it’s not as cold, and it’s not immodest.
Kabbala s’farim cite another reason for not going barefoot: when traversing the ground, the tuma (impurity) therein can cling to the feet. This, too, does not apply when wearing socks in the house. Floors indoors are all covered nowadays; someone going barefoot at home does not come in contact with the ground.
From a halachic perspective, therefore, there is no issue with walking around the house sock-footed. Though some may argue that walking around in socks is reminiscent of the practices of mourning, this idea is not mentioned in Gemara, and indeed has no clear source in Jewish tradition.
Yet, those who are cautious regarding bubbeh meisehs—as per the famous t’shuva (responsum) of the Rashba who advises that we should not take what our grandmothers say lightly—may act accordingly when contemplating going shoeless in the house.
THE HALACHA OF BACH FLOWER REMEDIES
As the popularity of homeopathic and alternative supplements grows, consumers concern for the kashrus of Bach Flower Remedies (BFRs) has become a common halachic shaila (query). The stock products of BFRs contain brandy as a significant minor ingredient, which is an issue of stam yainam (wine that has been prepared by non-Jews). However, when prepared in the conventional manner as a consumable remedy by mixing only a few drops of various products with water or other liquids,* does the minute amount of brandy in the mixture still pose a halachic issue?
Bittul (nullification) of non-Jewish wine, according to most poskim, would entail a ratio of battel b’shesh (nullified by six [times other ingredients relative to wine]). (In most kashrus applications the ratio is one to sixty; stam yainam, as a purely Rabbinic prohibition, is less stringent.) The small amount of brandy in the prepared (and diluted) mixture of BFRs easily conforms to this formula. (Even if one opts to be more stringent with brandy than with regular wine, and even if using the maximum recommended number of drops, the brandy will still total less than one sixtieth, and is therefore battel.)
But there are many other factors to consider. There is the halachic principle of chanan (chatichah na’ases neveilah—“a piece” [of non-kosher substance is absorbed in the whole and] creates [complete] non-kosher status), and it causes the entire product to be assur, so that we would need sixty times added liquid to dilute the amount of stock product used. This is possible with a few drops of the product in the prepared mixture, but not with the maximum recommended amount.
There is also a halachic concept of ein mevatlin issur l’chat’chilla (we cannot nullify something forbidden in the first place). The act of taking the stock BFR products and mixing them with water to dilute them can well fall into this category of exemption to halachic bittul. In addition, there are numerous exceptions to nullifying non-kosher ingredients, even in minute amounts: a davar hama’amid (ingredient used to substantiate [a product]) never becomes nullified due to its significance within the mixture. Another exception is if the prohibited substance is present because derech asiyaso b’kach (it is a regular ingredient in the recipe)—as indeed is the case here.
There are, however, various halachic counter-arguments that may allow us to rely on leniencies and permit BFRs. Most significantly, there is a heter (dispensation) for a choleh (a person who is ill) to use tasteless non-kosher medication that is swallowed. However, for this heter to apply it must be ascertained that the remedy is considered a refua bedukah (well-researched medicine). In addition to resolving whether alternative supplements are considered medicine in this context (and specifically in the case of BFRs, which have failed many clinical studies), there is the question whether these particular remedies—which are marketed to promote general physical and emotional wellness—would be included in the heter designed for a choleh.
There may still be some leniencies to be found for allowing the consumption of these and similar remedies. A knowledgeable rov should be consulted regarding individual cases and products.
* Since BFRs are considered harmless even in larger quantities, some consumers use the stock product by directly applying it to the tongue. Aside from the fact that most proponents of BFRs consider this a less effective use of the remedy, it can introduce even greater halachic issues: Even if we wouldn’t consider applying the drops to the tongue “consumption” in the normal manner of eating and drinking, merely absorbing them into the body can still be assur (called sichah k’shtiya). In addition, stam yainam is assur b’hana’ah (deriving any benefit [from the forbidden substance] is prohibited) according to many poskim. Although these concerns are mitigated where a person’s health is concerned, there is less reason to apply these leniencies when alternative administration—through dilution—is available (and also therapeutically recommended).
THE CASE FOR A PAREVE CUTTING BOARD
There is hardly a more caustic combination in a Kosher kitchen than duchka d’sakina (the pressure of a [sharp] knife) on a davar charif (a pungent food, e.g. onions, garlic, pickled foods, etc.). While most hairy cross-contamination incidents can be mollified by a component that is clean and eino ben yomo (was not used in twenty-four hours),* no such heter (leniency) exists in the case of a knife cutting into sharp food. A davar charif draws out even “stale” properties from the knife—whether it is treif (non-kosher), fleishig (meat) or milchig (milk)—which will convert what is chopped or sliced to the status of knife.
Some poskim suggest that this rule is extended to the cutting board on which the davar charif is cut, so that if the cutting board is treif, fleishig or milchig, this status is transmitted via the cutting action to extract the “taste” into the sharp food sitting on it. Other halachic authorities differentiate between the various intensities of the knife’s contact with the food and board—limiting it to food that is being crushed or zealously chopped or, alternatively, cut with due haste. We are usually stringent in this regard, l’chat’chilla (initially), to avoid chopping a davar charif on a milchig cutting board if it is to be used with fleishig or vice versa. Likewise if the sharp food was cut on either type of board, we should not l’chat’chilla mix it with food of a different status.
However, a typical chopping block or board is usually not capable of actually turning a particular sharp food milchig or fleishig. Used primarily for vegetables and cold foods, it would be difficult to imagine the existence of a milchig, fleishig or treif chopping block unless it was used for hot food. A board used for cutting sharp food with a milchig or fleishig knife in a particular manner may theoretically be considered milchig or fleishig—but even then, only according to the stricter opinions mentioned here, as well as other stringent criteria. Practically speaking—and certainly b’dieved, in a case where the sharp food was prepared and then used across the divide—we are lenient with cutting boards used in all cold food preparations.
* A clean kli (vessel) usually transmits its status to food only in situations where it can conceivably enhance it—and not after it has turned stale (taamo lif’gam). In other words, a treif kli does not render kosher food treif if it was not used within the past twenty-four hours; the same applies to milchig in a fleishig kli that was not recently used (and vice versa)—and also when considering whether a pareve (neutral) food becomes milchig or fleishig when cooked in the designated pot.
“One Minute Halacha” is a succinct daily presentation on practical Halacha in video, audio, and text formats, and can be accessed by phone at 718.989.9599, by email, halacha2go@gmail.com, or by WhatsApp 347.456.5665.