Are humans fleishik or are they on a different level? If I were to have a cut in my mouth, would that make me fleishik?
-
3With regard to your second question, the answer is "no". Once it is already assur because of its nonkosher status, there is no additional issur added when it is cooked with milk.– jakeCommented Jul 4, 2012 at 22:09
-
2AFAIK the answer is that we're pareve. I feel like this has already been asked around here before... <commences hunting>– Double AA ♦Commented Jul 4, 2012 at 22:09
-
milk of a woman is parave,Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah, 87:4– samCommented Jul 4, 2012 at 23:05
-
What does "are they on a different level" mean?– msh210 ♦Commented Jul 5, 2012 at 1:09
-
@msh210 I assume it means "do they have a qualitatively unique status?".– Double AA ♦Commented Jul 5, 2012 at 3:20
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
The Rema Yoreh Deah 79:1 says it is assur min HaTorah. Since it is assur I would assume it falls into the same category as a non-kosher animal which the Shach 87:3 says there is no issur basar b'chalav because it was assur from the Torah already.Since it has an issur of non-kosher the other halachos of kosher are not applicable. This is all on assumption no full-proof rye'a.
-
I'm not so sure. The issue has to do with ein issur chal al issur, and if human is only assur as a bittul asei then the lav would be chal (unlike donkeys which are already issur lav).– Double AA ♦Commented Jul 4, 2012 at 23:54
-
-
Ok, no joke intended here, but see my Purim Torah answer to the question about Haman being Basar BeHalav. Human flesh is an Isur 'Aseh (not Bitul 'Aseh) - or else not Asur at all. It has no status as meat. For purposes of BB"H. (Ping @doubleaa)– Seth JCommented Jul 5, 2012 at 3:40
-
@DoubleAA, I don't think there is an ain issur... issue since the second issur adds a restriction of hanaa.– YDKCommented Jul 5, 2012 at 4:51
-
@YDK Well that gets into the Rambam's nekuda niflaah, again not a universally agreed upon principle.– Double AA ♦Commented Jul 5, 2012 at 4:54