The  Basur  IS  Asur

Gelatin

by Sara Rosenbaum and Frayda Laufer

The word gelatin is derived from the Latin word “gelatus”, which is defined as stiff or frozen. This derivation is appropriate for gelatin because its main use is to coagulate substances.

            According to the McGraw Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology gelatin is defined as, “a protein extracted after partial hydrolysis of collageneous raw material from the skin, white connective tissue, and bone of animals.” Collagen used for gelatin is derived from cattle bones and skin, pork skin, and fish bones and skin. In general, gelatin is not made from kosher or properly slaughtered animals. Although the specifics differ according to its particular source, collagen is involved in a long process which involves boiling water, centrifuges, and acidic immersions. During these processes, the gelatin is transformed into something more similar to a chemical substance than an edible food.

Because of the sources from which gelatin is manufactured and the transformation process that it undergoes, there is tremendous halachick discussion concerning the permissibility of this substance as an ingredient in kosher food products. Firstly, there is a biblical prohibition against eating meat fish which are impure, or tameh; pure but improperly slaughtered, or nivelah; and pure and improperly slaughtered but found to be unhealthy or blemished after being slaughtered, or tarefah. (In (10) Vayikra, 11:3, the law against tameh animals is discussed, “Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is wholly cloven footed, and cheweth the cud, among the beastsm that may ye eat.” It is further discussed in (11) Vayirka, 11:4-7, “Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that only chew the cud, or of them that only part the hoof.” In (12) Devarim, 12:21, the law regarding nevaleh is discussed, “…thou shalt slaughter of they herd and of they flock, which the Lord hath given thee, as I have commanded thee…” It is further discussed in(13) Devarim, 14:21, “Ye shall not eat of anything that dieth of itself…”) Halachik discussion questions whether or not the prohibited status of these animals applies to their bones and skins, which are used for the processing of gelatin. Secondly, if the prohibitions of tameh, nevaleh, and terafeh are, indeed, applicable to the bones and skin, is this forbidden status at all changed by the intense chemical and physical processing used in the manufacturing of gelatin? Lastly, even if there is a kosher source for the gelatin, does it retain the properties intrinsic in its source? For example, if gelatin is derived from a meat product, can it be cooked or eaten with a dairy product, or if the source of the gelatin is fish, can it be cooked or eaten with a meat product?

There is tremendous discussion as to whether or not the bones of non-kosher animals are permissible for consumption. The Rambam addresses this issue by looking at a pasuk in (1) Vayikra, 11:8, “Of their flesh ye shall not eat, and their carcass ye shall not touch; they are unclean unto you.” In (2) Hilchot Maachalot Asurot, 4:18, the Rambam explains, “One who eats from a non-kosher animal source its skin, its bones, its sinews, its horns, its hooves, its nails… even though it is forbidden, he is excused from punishment, because they are not fit for consumption.” According to this statement, the Rambam indicates that although there are no biblical prohibitions against eating the bones of non-kosher animals, it is rabbinically forbidden. In contrast, the (3) Tosafot in Avoda Zara, 69a, starting verse “Hahu”, question the permissibility of eating honey in which bee legs are commingled. The Tosafot quote Rabbeinu Tam, who explains that the legs of a bee “are mere bones”, “deatzamot bealma ninhu.” Based on a case in mesechet taharot, 81, which says that the bones of a donkey are tahor, Rabbeinu Tam concluded that since the legs of a bee are like bones, they, too, are considered tahur and permissible to eat. In (4) Temura 31a and Pesachim 21b, the Talmud brings the principle that when an originally prohibited substance is reduced to dust, the prohibition no longer applies.  The Rosh comments in Avodah Zara, 5:11, that the legs of a bee are comparable to dust, and are thereby rendered permissible. Therefore, it would seem that according to the Rosh and Rabbeinu Tam it is not prohibited to eat the bones of a non-kosher animal.

There is a difference of opinion as to the basis for the discrepancy between the Rambam verses the Rosh and Rabbeinu Tam on this issue. According to Rabbi Yechezkel Abramsky and Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodisnski, the Rambam differs from the others as he maintains that hard bones are permissible, while soft bones are prohibited. In opposition, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and Rabbi Aharon Kotler believe that the Rambam’s opinion prohibits soft bones as well as hard bones. Therefore, gelatin derived from soft bones is definitely prohibited, while gelatin derived from hard bones is debatable. According to kashrut experts, however, it seems that the majority of American gelatin derived from bones is taken from soft bones, so that it would be forbidden for a Jew to consume gelatin made from the bones of a non-kosher animal.

Should gelatin be derived from the skin of a pig, which is the most common source, or another non-kosher animal, a new complication arises. Based on the aforementioned pasuk in Vayikra, 11:8, “Of their flesh ye shall not eat, and their carcass ye shall not touch; they are unclean unto you,” the Gemarrah in (5) Chulin, 117b, states, “In its carcass: and not in the skin which has a piece of meat which is of the measurement of an olive.” This means that the skin of an impure animal is not forbidden if it is not connected to a piece of flesh the size of an olive or larger. However, in (6) Chullin, 122a, this principle is limited by a quoted baraisa, which states, “In the following cases the skin is regarded as flesh: The skin of a man; the skin of the domestic pig; according to Rabbi Yehuda, the skin of a wild pig; the skin of the hump of a young camel…” Therefore, if a pig’s skin is considered to be part of its flesh, it would maintain the same halachik status as the flesh, and therefore be prohibited as a source for the production of kosher gelatin.

However, the hard skin of a cattle is not subject to the same prohibition as is the supple skin of a pig. There is a machloket concerning the halachik status of the blood in the skin. In Vaykira, 4:5, it says, “And the anointed priest shall take of the blood of the bullock and bring it to the tent of meeting.” The gemarrah in (8) Zevachim, 25a, explains, “Our rabbis teach: And the anointed priest shall take the blood of the bullock- this is the life blood, but not of the blood of the skin or of the draining blood…” The Taz, in  Yoreh Dayeh, 23:6, subsection 7.. GET HELP!!!! (According to Rochelle- According to Torah law, it is forbidden to eat blood. Therefore, because it is debatable as to whether or not the skin of the animal absorbs blood which must be removed, it is necessary to salt it before using it for the production of gelatin. In this manner, all opinions regarding the issue are gratified.)

Regardless of the nature of the source used for the production of gelatin, it can potentially be rendered permissible as a result of the thorough processing to which it is subjected. Because the bones or skin from which the gelatin is derived is so changed by certain processing procedures, it almost maintains a new identity, or “panim chadashot.” Therefore, it does not retain the prohibition ascribed to its original identity. This idea is based on the Rosh in Berachot, 6:38, where he cites the opinion of Rabbeniu Yonah. He writes: “Rabbi Zerachia Halevi forbade eating musk out of concern that it originated from blood, and Rabbeinu Yonah explained that it might be permitted because it is a ‘mere secretion.’ Even though it originally was blood, we are not concerned with this because we are concerned only with its present status.” According to Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinski, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, and Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg, Rabbeinu Yonah’s comment concerning musk can be applied to the production of gelatin, as it, too, is being changed from its former identity as bones and skin to a new chemical entity. However, according to Rabbi Yechezkel Abramsky, Rabbeinu Yonah’s logic cannot be applied to the case of gelatin. According to him, it seems that the gelatin always existed within the bones and skin and is simply isolated, not produced, during the chemical procedures.

Besides for its potential identity change, during processing gelatin changes to an inedible state. According to the gemarah, pesachim 21a and 45b, and Avoda Zara 67b-68a, if a non-kosher food loses its taste, it is no longer prohibited for consumption. In (9)  Yoreh Deah, 87: 10, the Ramo quotes the Shibbolei Haleket (2:34), saying that “the stomach lining that is occasionally salted and dried and becomes likened to a tree and subsequently filled with milk, is permissible since it has dried and become ‘mere wood’ as it does not retain any drop of meat.” In other words, because the meat is dried, it no longer retains its status as a meat product, and can be mixed with milk. In Yoreh  Deah, 114:21, the Shach discusses a prevalent custom of his time to eat saffron produced by gentiles. Although there could potentially have been some sort of non-kosher food item mixed in with the saffron, the Shach ruled that, “in these lands, the saffron is as dry as wood; therefore even if a strand of dry meat was introduced to the food, we do not have to be concerned, as the Ramo explained in Yoreh Deah 87:10.” Even if the meat were to be rehydrated and returned to an edible state, the Shach ruled that it is still permissible for consumption. Rabbi Yechezkiel Landau, the Pitchei Teshuva, the Aruch Hashulchan, and the Ritva all support the Shach’s lenient approach. In contrast, many halachik authorities, such as the Pri Megadim (Yoreh Deah 87, 33, and 103) and Teshuvot Chatam Sofer (Yoreh Deah 81), do not approve of this lenient view and believe that dried foods which are rejuvenated do replenish their previous non-kosher status.

Following the pattern of the earlier rabbanim, more recent halachik authorities also have tremendous dissent concerning the permissibility of processed, non-kosher gelatin. Authorities such as Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinski and Rabbi Zvi Pesach Frank support the more lenient approach, which permits the usage of inedible skins and bones of non-kosher animals in gelatin. Rabbi Aharon Kotler, zt”l (Mishnat Rabbi Aharon 1:17) offers interesting insights in support of the more stringent approach. According to Rav Aharon, gelatin is comparable to yeast, a rising agent which is forbidden on Pesach. Although yeast in and of itself is not fit for consumption, it is used to improve the quality of foods. (Mishna Berurah 442:43 and Aruch Hashulchan 442:30, citing Taz) Similarly, although gelatin is not in and of itself fit for consumption, it is used to improve other food items which are fit for consumption. Moreover, argues Rav Aharon Kotler, according to the principle of “achshevai,” it is halachikally prohibited to eat foods which are not fit for consumption. Therefore, if someone is eating gelatin, then it is, apparently, fit for consumption. In argument, Rabbi Grodzinski and Rabbi Frank explain that this principle does not apply to a substance being eaten together with another edible food. The two rabbanim cite the aforementioned example of the permissibility of eating honey in which the legs of bees are mixed. Although bees’ legs are not fit for consumption, they are mixed together with honey and therefore permissible. Rabbi Kotler rebuts this assertion by differentiating between bees legs and gelatin. While gelatin is purposely mixed into a product, the bees legs were found in the honey against a consumer’s preference. Therefore, the principle of “achshevai” does, indeed, apply to gelatin. Because of the tremendous dissent concerning this issue,  and the many faults in both sides’ explanations, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Iggerot Moshe, Yoreh Deah I:37 and II:27) rules that one should simply follow the more stringent approach and not eat gelatin contrived from a non-kosher animal.

In Igrot Moshe, Rav Moshe Feinstein addresses the question of whether or not hides are considered meat. Although under biblical law animal hides are not considered meat in cases where it is mixed with milk, the sages did prohibit such a mixture. However, if the hides are dried and processed, the gelatin that is produced is not included in this Rabbinic prohibition. Therefore, as long as the hides are cleaned to remove any meat residue, gelatin produced from properly slaughtered animal hides can be used with milk. There are, however, opinions which disagree with Rav Moshe on this issue. Harav Aharon Kotler, zt”l, maintains that gelatin produced from kosher hides is considered to be a meat product. Because gelatin is basically tasteless, it is capable of losing its identity when it is nullified by other, permissible, products, when found in a ratio of one to sixty. This principle, however, is not applied to gelatin produced from non-kosher. Therefore, gelatin from a non-kosher animal would be considered meat and, moreover, would be forbidden to be cooked or eaten with dairy products.

Although gelatin derived from a kosher fish’s bones and skin is kosher, there is a question as to whether or not it can be used together with a meat product. According to the Shulchan Aruch, fish cannot be eaten with meat because it is considered unhealthy. In Yoreh Dayeh, 117:2, it states, “One must be wary not to eat meat and fish together because it can potentially cause disease.” The Shulchan Aruch bases this idea on a Gemarrah that says that meat cooked with fish carries disease. Because there are health concerns involved, the halacha is more strict than with potentially prohibited substances. Today, most modern poskim doubt the danger of cooking milk and meat. It seems that the character of foods have changed such that a meat and fish mixture would no longer be unhealthy. (Magen Avrohom Orach Chaim 173:1, Tshuvos Chasm Sofer, vol:1 #101). Moreover, not all types of fish are necessarily dangerous when cooked with meat, as the Gemora only specified one specific species, the Binita, which is unhealthy (Pische’ Tshuvah, Yoreh Deah 116:3). In addition, it is possible that the unhealthy portions of the fish are not present in the bones and fish which are used to create gelatin. Therefore, according to both the Nekudat Kessef and the Pitcheit Teshuva, it is halachikally accepted to apply the “nullified in a sixtieth” clause to fish, and it is permissible to mix fish gelatin with meat. The same logic applies in the reverse case, when meat gelatin is used in a fish product.