So, some weeks ago, I managed to launder a fork. (Well, as you can see, the question had to be anonymous.) Having learned that, remarkably, no damage had been done either to the Shabbos table linens (which had been the soley *intended* objects of my laundering), my attention turned to the kashrus of my fork. My initial thought was that there was no change in the fork's status, but after further consideration, I put the fork aside. I started to think of how alike the washer and dishwasher are. Had my dairy fork gone through a dishwasher that was, let's not say fleishig, but rather treif but in which only lightly soiled or prewashed dishes had been run (to complete this analogy) on hot or warm, my poor, unfortunate fork would have been treifed. A washing machine likewise, is host to all sorts of foods in small quantities with similar quantities of water at similar temperatures.
Posts: 78 | Location: The Global Yeshiva | Registered: February 13, 2005
I don't think you need to worry. Even if it had been washed in a treif dishwasher, the strong taste of the detergent would have killed off any forbidden taste absorbed by the fork.
Posts: 797 | Location: London, England | Registered: June 10, 2005
There's probably a few rules that can be brought into play here. For example there's the one that says one shouldn't wash cutlery and laundery together!
Posts: 797 | Location: London, England | Registered: June 10, 2005
The larger point of this question was to point out the similarities between a washing machine and a dishwashwer. Everything we've said about the one could be said about the other.
Posts: 33 | Location: usa | Registered: December 05, 2005
Indeed yes, hence my initial response was to mention the detergent.
There is one crucial difference, however, which is that on the whole a washing machine does not contain any utensils or anything that is either milky, meaty, treif, etc.
Posts: 797 | Location: London, England | Registered: June 10, 2005
(My "of course" was aimed at the assertion that a washing machine "on the whole...does not contain anything milky, meaty, treif, etc." The crystal must first be placed in a bag specially designed for this purpose. )
Posts: 33 | Location: usa | Registered: December 05, 2005
When they're dirty? Then why do we keep separate dishcloths and dishtowels?
I would guess that dish cloths touch the business side of plates and utensils when we dry them, so they should be separate, but that if I tend to spill a variety of foods on my shirt or tie since we generally don't eat the food after it spilled we don't need to worry about picking up taste, and we are not deriving any benefit from the forbidden mixture?
Posts: 897 | Location: USA | Registered: May 30, 2004
But we wash dishtowels, complete with bits of food, in the *washing machine*, and the quantities of food on dishcloths may well exceed those on the items normally placed in a dishwasher, (since the vast majority of people using dishwashers *pre-wash* the vessels and utensils). So, are foodladen dishcloths less likely to transfer their food particles than pre-washed utensils, etc.? As we all are aware, by a leniency, the pots, pans, etc. are only considered to transfer flavors within a day of use, anyway. We are today, of course, strict. But how do we defend applying different standards to these two so similar situations?
Posts: 33 | Location: usa | Registered: December 05, 2005
Originally posted by MosheYisraeli: Yisroel, Wouldn't the 1/60th rule apply here anyway?
Moshe, I've been thinking about the 1/80 rule, and wondering if it applies soley to the percentage of what is being cooking, and *not* to the water in which it's being cooked. Cf. the three egg minimum rule.
Posts: 33 | Location: usa | Registered: December 05, 2005
Besides the Pogem aspect, there are definitely sixty in the water against any residue and the washer machine (and spoon) are probably not used for isuur in 34 hours (Stam washer machine Eino Ben Yomo.)
Quote "Moshe, I've been thinking about the 1/(80)60 rule, and wondering if it applies soley to the percentage of what is being cooking, and *not* to the water in which it's being cooked. Cf. the three egg minimum rule."
If that would be true, then you would need 62 eggs (eggs need an extra one.) Rather, everything is included (YD 92:2). The eggs are a different problem, which I’m still trying to find a Makor why we need it.