Pareve Foods and Pareve Utensils

One of the most confusing areas of practical kashrut is determining the
status of pareve (neutral) foods or pareve utensils that had some interaction
with meat or dairy utensils. In this week's issue, we will explore the basic
principles that govern whether these foods and utensils retain their pareve
status. We will also discuss situations in which pareve food must be handled
specifically with pareve utensils in order for the food to retain its pareve
status. [It should be noted that for purposes of clarity, this article will
always refer to a case where the pareve food first came into contact with a
meat utensil and then with dairy. In reality, the same rules would apply if
the order of contact with meat and the dairy are reversed.]

Nat Bar Nat- The Secondary Taste
Transfer

The concept most relevant to this discussion is the concept of notein ta'am
bar notein ta'am (secondary taste transfer, referred to colloquially as
nat bar nat). The Gemara, Chullin 111b, concludes that fish that
was once placed on a clean meat plate may be eaten together with dairy. The
Gemara explains that this is based on the principle of nat bar nat
d'heteirah (a secondary taste transfer of a permissible variety). The
original taste transfer was from the meat into the plate. The second taste
transfer was from the plate into the fish. If the original taste transfer was
something non-kosher, that non-kosher food would impart taste through multiple
taste transfers. However, in this situation, the meat is inherently kosher.
Therefore, since the primary taste transfer was of a kosher variety, the
secondary taste transfer is insignificant. [This rule only applies if the
plate is clean (i.e. there is no meat residue on the plate).]

The major ambiguity in this discussion is why the Gemara used the case of a
plate as opposed to a meat pot that was used to cook fish. R. Yehuda Bar Natan
(cited in Tosafot ad loc., s.v. V'Hilcheta) explains that nat bar
nat is only permissible in a situation where the food was not cooked in a
meat pot, but rather placed on a meat plate while the fish was still hot. In
such a situation, the taste transfer from the plate to the fish is so minimal
that when you add the fact that it is only a secondary taste transfer of a
permissible variety, one may be lenient to eat that fish together with milk.
However, many Rishonim disagree with R. Yehuda Bar Natan. Rashi, ad loc., s.v.
Notein, implies that one may eat the fish together with milk even if
the fish was cooked in a meat pot. Rashba, Torat HaBayit HeAroch, 3:4
86a, explicitly rules against R. Yehuda Bar Natan's opinion and permits eating
fish cooked together with dairy even if the fish was cooked in a meat pot.
There is a third opinion of Rabbeinu Baruch, Sefer HaTerumah no. 61,
who sides in principle with the opinion of R. Yehuda Bar Natan, but
distinguishes between foods that are cooked in liquid and foods that are
cooked dry. Foods that are cooked in liquid only inherit a tertiary taste.
First, the meat enters the pot, then it enters the liquid and then it enters
the food. Rabbeinu Baruch suggests that a tertiary taste of a permissible item
is inconsequential. However, if the item is roasted or baked in a meat pot
(without liquid), the meat is a secondary taste and one may not eat the pareve
item cooked in that pot together with dairy.

Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 95:1, rules in accordance with the
opinion of Rashba that any pareve food cooked or roasted in a meat pot may be
eaten together with dairy. Rama, Yoreh De'ah 95:2, rules that one
should show deference to the opinion of R. Yehuda Bar Natan. Therefore, one
may not eat pareve food that was cooked or roasted together with dairy.
However, if the pareve food was accidentally mixed together with the dairy
food, one may eat that mixture.

Nevertheless, Rama provides a number of leniencies to his initial stringency.
First, Rama rules that if pareve food was cooked in a meat pot it may be
transferred to a dairy dish. [Shach, Yoreh De'ah 95:5, disagrees
with Rama and limits the leniency to situations where the food was transferred
to the dairy pot accidentally.] Second, Rama rules that if the pot that was
used to cook the pareve food was not used for meat within the last twenty-four
hours, it is permissible to eat the pareve food together with dairy.

There is a dispute between R. Avraham Danzig, Chochmat Adam 48:2 and
the Vilna Gaon, Biur HaGra, ad loc., regarding Rama's second leniency.
According to R. Danzig, it is prohibited to cook pareve food in a meat pot
with intent to eat that pareve food together with dairy. For example, if one
cooked pasta in a meat pot (that was not used for meat in the last twenty-four
hours) one may eat the leftover pasta with dairy. However, one may not cook
the pasta in a meat pot (that was not used for meat in the last twenty-four
hours) if one plans to mix it with dairy. The Vilna Gaon seems to disagree and
maintain that it is permissible to cook the pasta in a meat pot even if one
plans to subsequently eat the pasta with dairy.

According to the Vilna Gaon, there are very few practical uses for pareve
utensils. Pareve utensils are only useful in a kitchen that is constantly in
use and there are a limited number of utensils that have not been used for
meat or dairy in the last twenty-four hours. Otherwise, one can simply prepare
the food in utensils that were not used in the last twenty-four hours and the
food will be just as pareve as food that is prepared using pareve utensils.
Even according to R. Danzig, the need for pareve utensils (above and beyond
the case mentioned previously) only exists if one plans on cooking food items
of which a portion will be eaten with meat and a portion will be eaten with
dairy. [The Vilna Gaon and R. Danzig will both agree that pareve dishes are
also necessary for the preparation of sharp foods. This will be discussed in
the next section.]

Sharp Foods

The Gemara, op. cit., notes an important exception to the rule of nat bar
nat d'heteirah. If a meat knife was used to cut a radish, the sharpness of
the radish maintains the taste of the meat in the knife and one may not eat
the radish together with dairy. There are two important disputes regarding
this law. First, Rabbeinu Baruch, Sefer HaTerumah no. 61, rules that
this rule applies to any sharp tasting item such as onions and garlic.
Rabbeinu Yechiel (cited in Hagahot Rabbeinu Peretz L'Semak 213:9)
disagrees and maintains that this rule only applies to radishes (and a species
called chiltit). Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 96:2, rules
in accordance with the opinion of Rabbeinu Baruch. Rama, Yoreh De'ah
95:2, adds that this ruling not only applies to a knife that cuts a sharp
food, it also applies if a sharp food is cooked in a meat pot. Second,
Rabbeinu Baruch, op. cit., rules that the taste in the knife is imparted fully
into the radish even if the knife was not used in the last twenty-four hours.
Beit Yosef, Yoreh De'ah no. 96, posits that Rambam's opinion (in
Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot 9:21) is that a knife that was not used in
the last twenty-four hours is not subject to this rule. Shulchan Aruch,
Yoreh De'ah 96:1, quotes both opinions, but sides with Rambam's opinion
that this rule is not subject to a knife that has not been used in the last
twenty-four hours. Shach, Yoreh De'ah 96:6, contends that the accepted
practice is that of Rabbeinu Baruch's opinion.

Waiting between Meat and an Item Cooked in a Dairy
Pot

In
a previous issue, the topic of waiting between meat and milk
was discussed. Rama, Yoreh De'ah 89:3, rules that if one ate pareve
food that was cooked in a meat pot, one may immediately eat dairy as long as
one washes one's hands in between. Rama also implies (see Yad Avraham,
ad loc.) that if one eats meat, he may eat a pareve item that was cooked in a
dairy pot immediately after he finishes eating the meat. R. Akiva Eger, ad
loc., adds that even if the pareve food is sharp, one is not required to wait
between it and the meat or dairy. A sharp food is only significant in the
context of eating the pareve food together with meat or dairy and not before
or after.