Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is it prohibited to derive benefit from a mixture of milk and meat if the animal was improperly slaughtered? Assume the animal slaughtered, like the milk-giving animal, is kosher, but the slaughter did not meet standards of kashrus. Would one be permitted to derive benefit from the mixture (i.e. feeding it to a pet)?

It seems that Rambam writes about this in his commentary to the Mishna (Keritut 3:4), but that his opinion is not widely considered normative. Why not?

share|improve this question
It seems that Rambam writes about this in his commentary to the Mishna (Keritut 3:4), but that his opinion is not widely considered normative. –  SAH Apr 4 '12 at 20:53
SAH you are indeed correct...but I wonder why you ask when it seems you know the answer? –  Double AA Apr 4 '12 at 20:59
@DoubleAA, ... or if the question is really "Why isn't the Rambam's opinion on this normative?", go ahead and cite the Rambam and ask that question. –  Isaac Moses Apr 4 '12 at 21:40
I'm fairly certain that it is permitted, however I have to look it up. –  Seth J Apr 4 '12 at 21:46
@SethJ I recall concluding that it is a forbidden mixture (assuming cow/sheep/goat). I'll have to find a source as well, but why would you think that it is not a forbidden mixture? –  YDK Apr 4 '12 at 22:39

2 Answers 2

The Rambam calls his opinion on this matter "a wondrous point." (Nekuda nifla'a); other Rishonim disagree with him and say that any bovine meat cooked in bovine milk is prohibited from benefit.

The Achronim (later authorities) followed the non-Rambam opinion, with notable exception of the Dagul Mervava (known to most as Rabbi Yechezkel Landau, aka the Noda Bihuda). His opinion is occasionally employed when combined with other reasons for leniency, but generally is considered a minority one.

share|improve this answer
related –  Baal Shemot Tovot Apr 5 '12 at 5:54
I'm not sure that it is the opinion that he is calling a wondrous point. He seems to take the halacha for granted. His big chidush is being able to circumvent issur mosif. –  YDK Apr 5 '12 at 7:06

The Sha'arei Simcha (Sha'ar2:4; brought in Darkei Teshuva) and Arugas Habosem say it's Mutar Behano. The Dogul Meirvava relies on tha Rambam Bemokom Hefseid that it's Mutar Behano. (See Chasam Sofer Siman 92 about this Dogul Meirvava.) Yad Avrohom says it's Mutar.

share|improve this answer
relies on the rambam that...? –  Baal Shemot Tovot Apr 5 '12 at 5:53
That it's Mutar Behano –  Meir Zirkind Apr 9 '12 at 3:48
Why the rollback? Isn't that what you said in the comment above? –  Double AA Feb 5 '13 at 3:44
Why did you delete the clarifying point? –  Seth J Feb 5 '13 at 3:56
@MeirZirkind As far as I can see, all the grammar was correct in the previous version. –  Double AA Feb 5 '13 at 5:00

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.