Newsgroup: it.cultura.ebraica
Titolo: Kasherut

Buongiorno a tutti,
vorrei avere un chiarimento riguardante una regola.
In Lev 3. 17 , č detto:
Legge eterna per le vostre generazioni in tutti i luoghi in cui risiederete:
non vi ciberete di *nessuna* specie di *chčlev* e di nessuna specie di
sangue.
In una recente intervista Rav Toaff a ribadito:
"...assolutamente no, per il semplice fatto che č la Torah a smentire questo
principio cosě aberrante, affermando che "*qualunque* forma di *grasso* e di
sangue non deve essere mai mangiato".(15/02/2007 Fonte: La Repubblica).
La domanda č questa, io ho sempre ritenuto tareff qualsiasi tipo di grasso,
ma parlando
con conoscenti mi si dice che solamente alcune parti di grasso sono vietate
(quelle che erano destinate per i sacrifici).
Chi ha ragione?
Grazie in anticipo per le risposte.
---
Per il manifesto, le FAQ ed un'interfaccia Web visita 
http://www.e-brei.net/

 Chi ha ragione?
Quelli che dicono che č vietato solo il grasso destinato ai sacrifici, in primis 
quello sopra i reni.
Tb
-- 
Diario di lettura:
http://tonibaruch.blogspot.com/search/label/diario%20di%20lettura%20PDS
Il mio blog:
http://tonibaruch.blogspot.com


 quello sopra i reni.
OK, grazie,
visto che sei cosě gentile, dal momento che sembra in contraddizione con
quanto da me esposto, mi spiegheresti il perchč?
Ciao


 quanto da me esposto, mi spiegheresti il perchè?
La prima ragione, sperimentale, è che i salami e le pancette kosher che compro 
regolarmente sono lì a testimoniare che il grasso è permesso.
La seconda, che un po' azzardo ma con qualche base di letture, è che la parola 
"chelev" [ חֵלֶ×` ]che nell'ebraico contemporaneo si riferisce a qualunque tipo di 
grasso animale, nella Torah si riferisce a "quel" grasso riservato a essere 
bruciato sull'altare o alla mensa dei cohanim
Vedi qui
http://www.ou.org/torah/ti/5764/tzav64.htm
Tb
-- 
Diario di lettura:
http://tonibaruch.blogspot.com/search/label/diario%20di%20lettura%20PDS
Il mio blog:
http://tonibaruch.blogspot.com


 bruciato sull'altare o alla mensa dei cohanim
Continuando la ricerca ho notato che c'è un po' di disparità di opinioni.
attento ai salamini :)
Ciao
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=60&letter=F&search=lev%203%2017
The rendering in the English versions of the Hebrew word "?eleb," an animal
substance of an oily character deposited in adipose tissues. In Judges iii.
22 it is mentioned as covering the human intestines. It is held to indicate
grossness and wickedness of disposition (Job xv. 27). A heart covered with
fat is a sign of irresponsiveness and indifference (Ps. xvii. 10, cxix. 70).
The fat of beasts is mentioned as rich food (Deut. xxxii. 14). Figuratively,
fat connotes the choicest part of anything (of oil, Num. xviii. 12; of wine,
ib.; of wheat, Deut. xxxii. 14; Ps. lxxxi. 17 [A. V. 16], cxlvii. 14).
The fat in the thank-offerings belonged to Yhwh (Lev. iii. 16; Ezek. xliv.
15; comp. Lev. iii.; Ex. xxix.). Like blood, it was regarded as the seat of
life (Lev. iii. 17; Smith, "Rel. of Sem." 2d ed., pp. 376 et seq.). In the
description of the sacrifice at the consecration of Aaron and his sons (Ex.
xxix. 13) the fat covering the inwards, the caul, and the two kidneys with
the fat upon them are specified; in Lev. iii. 3 "the fat that is upon the
inwards" is added to these. The parts mentioned represent: the omentum
(Josephus, "Ant." iii. 9, § 2, ????????); the fat clinging to the
intestines, i.e., net-like adhesions to the colon (but see Paul Haupt,
"Johns Hopkins Circular," 1894, No. 114, p. 115); the kidneys, which,
especially near the loins, are as a rule surrounded by fat; and the
"yoteret" (see Caul), a deposit of fat extending from the portal ("ha?ra")
vein of the liver along the hepatic-duodenal ligament to the duodenum. In
Lev. iii. 9 the fatty tail of the sacrificial animal, if a sheep, is
mentioned as being among the portions which are to be burned upon the altar.
This part, as being the choicest, was offered to the guest of honor (Budde,
in "Z. D. P. V." 1895, p. 98; Geiger, "Urschrift," p. 380; I Sam. ix. 24).
Again, in Lev. vii. 23-25 the fat of three sacrificial animals, the cow,
thesheep, and the goat, is specifically prohibited as food, the punishment
for infraction being "karet" (excision); but in the case of animals which
have died a natural death or have been killed by wild beasts ("nebelah,"
"?erefah"), the fat, while not allowed for food, might be used for any other
domestic purpose. It is thus an open question whether, when slaughtered for
private (non-sacrificial) use, the fat of the three animals enumerated was
prohibited, and it is not plain whether the interdict applied to other
animals.
-In Rabbinical Literature:
For the parts of the sacrificial animal which belonged to Yhwh, and which
had to be burned, the Talmud has in addition to  the term , a word of
disputed etymology (Rapoport, "'Erek Millin," s.v.; 'Aruk, s.v.
???
, 6, and ,
??
2; Solomon Geiger, in "Zion," 1842, p. 6, from
???
; comp. Suk. 55b), probably
from the Greek ??????, ????? (i.e., the choicest parts), of frequent
occurrence (Suk. v. 7; Yoma vii. 5; Pes. v. 10; Zeb. 27b).
The precise delimitations of the Levitical prohibition, violation of which
entailed karet, were a matter of controversy even among earlier Mishnaic
authorities (see Sifra, Lev. 3, the opinions of R. Ishmael and R. Akiba;
comp. ?ul. 49b, 50a, those of R. Jose ha-Galili and R. Akiba; Tosef., ?ul.
viii.) and also among the Amoraim (?ul. 93a, Samuel [see Rashi and RaN], and
?ul. 55a, Abayah). The distinction is made between "shumen" and "?eleb" (see
Ramban to Lev. iii.), the latter being separate from the meat and consisting
of a thin, close-fitting, skin-like layer that may be peeled off (?ul. 49a,
50a; see Wiener, "Die Jüdischen Speise Gesetze," p. 149). The use of "?eleb"
in connection with the fatty tail of the sheep caused confusion (Lev. iii.
9), the Karaites-probably following an old Sadducean interpretation (see
Wiener, l.c. p. 147, note)-extending to the tail the prohibition against
eating fat, but others (Rashi, Targ. Yer., for example) explaining the word
in this connection as "the best that is in the tail," as does Rab Ashi (?ul.
117a; for the controversial points see ?adasi, "Eshkol ha-Kofer," Alphabet
232; Ibn Ezra to Lev. iii. 9, vii. 23, and Na?manides to the same passages;
also Bashya?i, "Aderet Eliyahu," pp. 118 et seq.; Ibn Ezra in "Apirion," ed.
Neubauer, p. 24; "Lebush Malkut," p. 42; Aaron ben Elijah, "Dine She?i?ah";
"Orient, Lit." 1840, No. 30). Maimonides ("Yad," Ma'akalot Asurot, vii.)
makes the point that "?eleb" is used in conjunction with the tail not to
include it among forbidden food, but to assign it to the sacrificial class,
and that the parts so designated are to be lifted up and burned (comp. ?ul.
117; Ker. 4; Tosef., ?ul. 92a, s.v. "Amar Abayi"; Mak. 18a; Men. 78a).
In the Talmud the prohibition is not extended to the ?eleb of a fetus (?ul.
vii. 1, 92b); on the principle that only such fat is forbidden as might
lawfully have been offered up as a sacrifice, that clinging to the animal's
ribs may be eaten (Sifra, ?aw). From the language employed it may be
inferred that the fat around the heart was regarded as not subject to the
prohibition. The general principle is that fat which does not close up a
hole or puncture beneath is unclean, but in the case of the lobe of fat
around the heart the inability to close up a possible puncture beneath is
attributed not to its being unclean fat, but to its helmet-like shape (?ul.
49b; Wiener, l.c. p. 150; "Yad," She?i?ah, vi. 10; Semag, "Asin," p. 63).
Five strings of fat, three on the right and two on the left, in the flanks
or haunches, are not to be used (?ul. 93a). Three thin membranes or layers
of fat, one each on the spleen, the bowels, and the kidneys, are also
prohibited (ib.). The rule that fat covered with flesh is permitted is
qualified by an exception in the case of fat that is uncovered when the
animal is in motion (?ul. 93a; Rashi, s.v.????? ????? ; "Yad," Ma'akalot
Asurot, vii.
7, 8).
As in the case of other Dietary Laws, the hygienic benefits of the enactment
regarding fat have been adduced to explain the prohibition and to defend its
enforcement for all time. Ibn Ezra (see commentary to Lev. vii. 24; Deut.
xii. 15) rightly surmises that it was originally connected with the
sacrificial ritual, and applied only to animals and parts destined and fit
for the altar. Nevertheless, declaring that the "tradition of the fathers"
is his support, he accepts the rabbinical decision according to which all
domestic animals are now included, even though by reason of defects they
were unfit for the altar (Bek. 15a), and even though at present sacrifices
are not offered. Judah ha-Levi ("Cuzari," iii. 11) also is of the opinion
that the sacrificial use of the fat underlies the prohibition. Na?manides'
criticism of this theory in his commentary on Leviticus (vii. 25) is not
convincing, and neither is Ibn Ezra's. Maimonides ("Moreh," iii. 48), on the
one hand, looks upon this prohibition as a health-protective measure, but on
the other ("Moreh," iii. 41) agrees that it was effective in guarding the
distinct character of the altar's portions. Na?manides is another that
ascribes to the observance certain sanitary advantages, as also do Aaron
ha-Levi ("?inuk," § 47) and RaLBaG (commentary to Lev. vii.). Albo
("I??arim," iii. 16), however, does not hesitate to suggest doubts as to the
obligatory character, since the sacrifices have ceased, of the injunction
not to eat the fat.
The final decisions on the eating of fat are these: The fat of ox, sheep,
and goat is prohibited; that of other animals is allowed; but that of the
"koi," an unidentified hybrid (see Yoma 74), is forbidden. By "fat" is
understood a thin, close-fitting layer or membrane that may be peeled off,
but meat (lean) must not cover it. The fatty tail is allowed, but the
arteries (and muscles) on the inner side must be carefully removed. The fat
on the loins and on the membrane above them is forbidden, as is that which
is underneath the loins; and skill, attainable only through practise, is
required to remove these forbidden portions. The fat upon the omasum, the
caul, and the intestines is prohibited. Disregard of the prohibition entails
excision, and so does violation of the provision not to eat the fat which is
on the thick side of the spleen. What is on the other parts of the spleen
should not be eaten, but the person that partakes of it is not liable to
excision. Fat and meat must be neither salted nor rinsed together; the
vessels for rinsing must be distinct, as must be also the knives for cutting
meat and fat. Butchers must exercise care in removingthe forbidden parts,
and if careless they must be admonished. If, after admonition, as much as a
grain of fat is found in the meat which the butcher professes to have
prepared, he shall be deposed; and if the quantity overlooked is of the size
of an olive, he shall be punished with stripes and be deposed (Shulhan
'Aruk, Yoreh De'ah, 64).
