Sugyot, sources, the underlying hakira, mahlokot of Rishonim and Aharonim,
nafka minot for practice and an examination of the shitot
The subject:
Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah, siman 105 (14 seifim)
with its nosei kelim: Shach (Siftei Kohen), Taz (Turei Zahav), Peri Megadim, Pitchei Teshuva
The basis of the sugya in Shas:
Pesachim 76a (כיצד צולין — tataa gavar, pipua) · Chullin 111b–112a (maliach ke-rotéach, kavush) · Avodah Zarah 38b (kavush)
Editing and study:
Rav Yossef Haim Samama · DAAT
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
אִסּוּר שֶׁנִּשְׁרָה עִם הֶתֵּר מֵעֵת לְעֵת בְּצוֹנֵן — מִקְרֵי כָּבוּשׁ, וַהֲרֵי הוּא כִּמְבֻשָּׁל, וְנֶאֱסַר כֻּלּוֹ. אֲבָל פָּחוֹת מִכָּאן — בַּהֲדָחָה סַגִּי. (הגה: וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁאוֹמְרִים כָּבוּשׁ כִּמְבֻשָּׁל, אֲפִלּוּ מַה שֶּׁחוּץ לַמַּשְׁקֶה נֶאֱסָר, שֶׁכְּבִישַׁת הַתַּחְתּוֹן מִתְפַּשֶּׁטֶת לְמַעְלָה כְּמוֹ בְּבִשּׁוּל; וְיֵשׁ מְקִילִין בְּמַה שֶּׁחוּץ לַמַּשְׁקֶה. וּסְפֵק כָּבוּשׁ — אָסוּר, חוּץ מִבָּשָׂר בְּחָלָב שֶׁמְּקִילִין, דְּמִן הַתּוֹרָה אֵינוֹ אָסוּר אֶלָּא בְּבִשּׁוּל מַמָּשׁ.) וְאִם נִכְבַּשׁ בְּצִיר אוֹ בְּחֹמֶץ — אִם שָׁהָה כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּרְתִּיחַ, נַעֲשָׂה כִּמְבֻשָּׁל; פָּחוֹת מִכָּאן — אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר אֶלָּא כְּדֵי קְלִיפָה (ועיין סימן ע').
« וכל מקום דאמרינן כבוש כמבושל אפילו מה שחוץ לכבישה אסור » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:א)
« ויש מקילין במה שבחוץ » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:א)
The Shach, at his ס״ק א, notes that from the Rama's words in Torat Hatat it appears that the lenient view is the main one, and he concludes that one does not press stringency that far:
« ומדברי הרב בת״ח כלל כ״ב ד״ו נראה שכן עיקר » (ש״ך יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק א)
« לכך נראה דאע״ג דלא מחלקינן בין כחוש לשמן היינו במליחה וצלייה וכה״ג אבל כולי האי לא נחמיר » (ש״ך יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק א)
| Shita | Brine / vinegar | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Plain sense of the Mehaber | Brine and vinegar go together — both hasten, and in כדי שירתיח (a short time) it is as cooked | Mehaber seif 1 |
| The Shach (ס״ק ב), citing the Rosh | Vinegar follows the rule of other liquids — twenty-four hours; only brine, by the force of its salt, pickles in “the time it would boil” | ש״ך ס״ק ב |
« דאף בחומץ בעינן יום שלם » (ש״ך יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ב)
« ל״ד חומץ לציר דציר שאנו אוסרים בשביל כח המלח שיש בו די בשיעור כדי שיתננו על האש וירתיח » (ש״ך יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ב)
The practical nafka mina is large: meat soaked in vinegar for less than twenty-four hours is not kavush according to the Shach, and one does not say of it “the time it would boil”. For brine, however, the Shach specifies at his ס״ק ג that below the measure there is indeed no pickling, but that the salted acts at once like boiling:
« מיהו עכ״פ מליח כרותח הוי מיד לאסור כולו » (ש״ך יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ג)
The Pitchei Teshuva (ס״ק ב) reports in the same place that olive oil, according to Tosafot in Avodah Zarah, absorbs and discharges even when cold:
« דשמן זית בולע ופולט אף בצונן לפי שהוא עז וחריף » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ב)
« ולא אוכל להבין למה יאסור ההיתר בכלי של איסור ב״י » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק א)
His reason: at the very moment the soaking takes effect — after twenty-four hours — the vessel is no longer ben yomo, and whatever it discharges is noten ta'am lifgam. This is unlike the cask of libation wine, whose taste improves:
« והרי באותה שעה נעשה אינו בן יומו ואין לו לכלי כח לאסור ההיתר ששרוי בתוכו » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק א)
He also refuses the Issur ve-Heter's distinction between wood and earthenware on one side and metal on the other, and he concludes:
« העיקר בזה דבכל הכלים אין לאסור אותם בדיעבד ע״י שנשרה בם איסור מע״ל » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק א)
The Rama's chidush — a doubtful kavush is forbidden — and it is on this that the Taz and the Aharonim diverged.
« ויש ראיה ברורה להתיר מסי׳ ר״א סעיף ס״ה במקוה » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ג)
Like a mikveh measured and found lacking: one supposes it lacks now and was full before, by force of its chazakah. So here too, where one has before him only a good chazakah:
« דאין כאן רק חזקה טובה למוקמי אחזקת כשרות » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ג)
| Posek | On the doubt | Source |
|---|---|---|
| The Rama | Forbidden (except for meat-and-milk, where one is lenient) | רמ״א ס״א |
| The Kreti u-Pleti | Like the Taz: only a doubt bearing on two pieces is forbidden; a doubt about the duration goes toward leniency | פ״ת ס״ק ג |
| The Chavot Yair | Objects to the Kreti: the main view is the Rama's | פ״ת ס״ק ג |
| The Noda bi-Yehuda | Kavush as cooked is not a rule that holds for everything: beyond the species named in the mishnayot there is room for leniency in the doubt | פ״ת ס״ק ג |
« אבל אם יש ספק אם מונח כבוש מעל״ע או פחות יש להקל דאוקמינן בחזקת כשרות » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ג)
« וספק כבוש אסור מלבד בבשר עם חלב דאזלינן לקולא דמן התורה אינו אסור רק בבישול ממש » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:א)
The Chavot Da'at, and with him the Peri Megadim, add a precision: while one may eat them, it remains forbidden to cook them afterwards — for if they soaked, taste is present, and one would find himself cooking meat-and-milk, which is a doubt of Torah rank:
« מיהו לבשלן אסור דנגד לבשלן הוי ספק דאורייתא » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ד)
The Minchat Ani (responsum 35), cited in the same place, held the reverse and permitted even cooking, relying on the Taz. The Pitchei Teshuva closes his entry with a tzarikh iyun, and we do not rule.
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: the heat of a kli rishon in which the hand recoils cooks and forbids the whole. But the heat of a kli sheni does not cook; some say it neither expels nor absorbs at all, and some say it expels and absorbs and forbids the thickness of a peel; it is fitting to be careful a priori, but after the fact it is permitted without peeling, and rinsing suffices (see simanim 68, 92 and 95).
| Shita | The kli sheni | Source |
|---|---|---|
| The Maharshal (Yam shel Shelomo) | A kli sheni in which the hand recoils expels, absorbs and forbids the whole, like a kli rishon — at least when a forbidden item falls into a kli sheni of permitted, or the reverse | ט״ז ס״ק ד (בשם רש״ל) |
| The Shach (ס״ק ה) | Disputes — the kli sheni does not cook, and the heat of a kli rishon is required; the Shach sets out there at length the positions of the Rashbam and Rabbenu Tam on iruy | ש״ך ס״ק ה |
« דאף בכלי שני שהיד סולדת בו אוסר כולו » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ד)
And the Pitchei Teshuva (ס״ק ו) reports that the Beit Yosef, in his responsa (סימן ך׳), ruled like the Maharshal — and he adds something worth knowing:
« ובעל ש״ך בעצמו הודה לו » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ו)
At the following ס״ק ז he reports the Bekhor Shor, who holds that we no longer know how to gauge the degree of heat at issue, and that one must therefore be stringent in what is of Torah rank:
« דכיון דאנן לא בקיאין בשיעור שכריסו של תינוק נכוה » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ז)
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: hot forbidden food that fell into hot permitted food of a kli rishon, or even cold forbidden food that fell into hot permitted food — all is forbidden, because the lower prevails: it heats the upper and makes it release its taste. All the more so permitted cold food that fell into hot forbidden food. But if the upper is hot and the lower cold, it forbids only the thickness of a peel, and this even where the hot upper one is the forbidden food. (Gloss: all this applies to the heat of a kli rishon… A forbidden item placed in a permitted vessel, or the reverse, is judged by tataa gavar as between two pieces, see siman 94. And it is forbidden to pour from a vessel holding kosher fat into a burning lamp containing forbidden fat; after the fact there is no cause for concern.)
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: all this applies when the forbidden item fell into a dish containing gravy, for the gravy conducts what the forbidden item releases and mixes it through the whole pot. But a forbidden item — hot or cold — that fell on a roast beside the fire forbids only kedei netila (a finger's thickness around the point of contact). Hence a thigh roasted with its sinew, or a forbidden piece roasted touching a permitted piece: one removes kedei netila around the sinew, or around the point of contact. And a forbidden item that fell on a piece lying outside the gravy, without the pot having been stirred or covered, forbids only kedei netila; but if it is in the gravy (Rashi: entirely; Ri: even partly), or even entirely outside the gravy but one stirred or covered — the gravy conducts the taste throughout.
| Shita | When the gravy conducts | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Rashi | Only when the whole piece is in the gravy | מחבר ס״ד |
| The Ri | Even if part is in the gravy — the gravy conducts throughout | מחבר ס״ד |
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: one removes only kedei netila for a lean thing, which has not the force to penetrate throughout (the thigh and its sinew). But a fat kid roasted with its forbidden fat: if there is not sixty against all that fat, it is forbidden to eat even the tip of its ear, for being fat it penetrates throughout. If it is lean, it forbids only kedei netila, even without sixty. And even if the forbidden piece is lean and the permitted piece fat, the fat penetrates and carries the forbidden matter throughout. And anything that penetrates, having fallen on a recognisable place of the roast — even with sixty, the place must be removed. (Gloss: whatever is cooked without gravy or baked in an oven follows the rule of a roast. And some say we no longer know how to distinguish lean from fat, and therefore forbid in every case up to sixty; and even with sixty the place must be removed, and such is the practice. But this applies to forbidden fat or to a fatty forbidden item; a forbidden item with no fat at all, certainly lean, forbids only kedei netila — see seif 9.) — Seif 6: a thing that penetrates in a roast, if one is hot and the other cold — the lower prevails: hot on cold, the thickness of a peel; cold on hot, if there is not sixty against the forbidden matter, all is forbidden.
« ואפילו חתיכת האיסור כחושה » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק י)
The Beit Yosef derives this stringency from what is found in siman 108 concerning reiha — smell — where even a fat permitted item is forbidden for the view that smell counts, the permitted “fattening” the forbidden which then gives its smell back to the permitted. The Taz objects at length: if it all rests on smell, and for smell one permits after the fact in siman 108, why forbid here even after the fact? He objects further to the Darkei Moshe's answer — which confined the seif to lean forbidden fat — since it is from reiha that it is learned, and there the case is lean meat and not fat. He finally reports the explanation of those who distinguish: where the forbidden item is forbidden of itself, it necessarily gives off its juice, the fat of the permitted mixes with it and carries it throughout; whereas further on, where the forbidden matter is only absorbed, one does not say so. The Taz does not take a side of his own.
From here comes the Rama's gloss — we no longer know how to tell lean from fat:
« וי״א דאין אנו בקיאין איזה מיקרי כחוש או שמן ויש לאסור בכל ענין » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:ה)
« צריך נטילת מקום » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״ה:ה)
And the Taz gives the reason, which he draws from the laws of Pesach:
« שבאותי מקום נחשב האיסור טפי כאלו הוא בעין ונלמד מפסח » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק י״א)
Here is the great question of the siman — an apparent contradiction between seif 7 and seif 9, at which the Taz wonders.
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: a forbidden piece forbids its fellow by contact only when its prohibition comes from itself — like a neveila or meat-and-milk. But if it holds only what it absorbed from elsewhere, it does not forbid the one that touches it, even if roasted together, as long as what is absorbed does not penetrate. But if it absorbed something that penetrates by nature (such as fat), it forbids its fellow (in roasting or in contact, hot against hot, or the lower hot and the upper cold), for the absorbed forbidden matter penetrates and passes from piece to piece. (Gloss: all this for two pieces; but a vessel that absorbed forbidden matter forbids the permitted that touches it, even for a forbidden item that is not fatty.) — Seif 8: a kidney roasted with its fat forbids only the thickness of a peel, the membrane forming a barrier. (Gloss: some forbid, and such is the practice, and it is not to be changed; its rule is that of any fat roasted with meat; and if it was cooked so, the kidney becomes neveila and sixty is required against the whole of it. The same holds for the lobe of the liver.)
« ואני תמה על הש״ע שפסקיו סותרין זא״ז » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ב)
« ואין לומר דלעיל מיירי לענין צלי והכא במליחה דהא מסקינן בגמרא מליח כרותח דצלי » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ב)
He is therefore left with only one conclusion — that the Maharam and the Rashba diverge:
« וע״כ לומר דמהר״מ פליג ארשב״א וס״ל גם באיסור שמן אינו יוצא בלא רוטב כל שהוא בלוע בו » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ב)
And his astonishment finally bears on the Shulchan Arukh itself, which set the two positions side by side without marking the divergence:
« ע״כ תימה על הש״ע שלא הרגיש במחלוקת זו » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ב)
The question remains open, and we do not settle it. The Taz observes besides, at his ס״ק ט״ז, why a vessel behaves otherwise than a piece: a food has something of its own to release, which holds back what is absorbed; a vessel has not:
« אבל כלי שאין בה פליטה מגופה אז יוצא שפיר מה שבלע » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק ט״ז)
and that is why the Rama's gloss teaches:
« אבל כלי שבלע איסור אוסר היתר שנוגע בו אפילו באיסור שאינו שמן » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:ז)
| Shita | Absorbed fat, from piece to piece | Seif |
|---|---|---|
| The Rashba | Absorbed fat penetrates and forbids the piece touching it | שו״ע ס״ז |
| The Maharam | Fat does not penetrate from piece to piece without gravy | שו״ע ס״ט |
« שהקרום מפסיק » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״ה:ח)
But the Rama reports that some forbid, and such is the practice — its rule is that of any fat roasted with meat; and if it was cooked so:
« הכוליא נעשית נבילה וצריך ששים נגד כולה » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:ח)
that is, chaticha na'asit neveila. The same holds for the lobe of the liver.
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: food so salted that it cannot be eaten because of its salt follows the rule of boiling: it releases and forbids the thickness of a peel. If it is the fat of the sinew, the vessels or the membranes, the place must be removed. If it is true forbidden fat, sixty is required to annul it. And if the meat salted with it is fat, even the fat of the sinew requires sixty and the removal of the place, or at least a peel. All this for the piece to which the fat adhered; as for the other pieces salted with it, if there is not in each of them separately sixty, they are forbidden, and they do not combine to annul the fat, for fat does not penetrate from piece to piece without gravy. And if it is unknown whether it touched them all, all are forbidden; if it is known that it touched only one and which is unknown, all are permitted (one among two is annulled, even for pieces fit to be served). (Gloss: some say all salting forbids only the thickness of a peel (Tur, Ravyah, R. Ephraim, Ran, Rashba, Ramban); and because we no longer know how to tell fat from lean, the practice is to measure every salting by sixty as in cooking… And for a forbidden item with no fat at all — such as chametz on Pesach — by all views it forbids only the thickness of a peel.) — Seif 10: all this when the forbidden and the permitted are both salted, and even the forbidden salted with the permitted unsalted; but if the permitted is salted and the forbidden unsalted, rinsing suffices. (Gloss: some forbid if they touch one another, and one may be lenient where there is loss.) — Seif 11: in the case of the salted forbidden and the unsalted permitted, the stringency holds only where the salted forbidden is below and the unsalted permitted above, by tataa gavar; but if the unsalted permitted is below and the salted forbidden above, it forbids only the thickness of a peel. (Gloss: some dispute and say that in salting there is no difference between above and below (Tosafot, Rosh, Semak, Tur), and such is the practice.)
« ואין מצטרפין ביחד לבטל החלב דאין חלב מפעפע מחתיכה לחתיכה בלא רוטב » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״ה:ט)
And when one knows it touched only one, without knowing which — all are permitted, for there is no certain prohibition in each:
« דחד בתרי בטיל אפי׳ הן חתיכות הראויות להתכבד » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״ה:ט)
| Shita | The measure of salting | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Plain sense of the Mehaber | The salted is as boiling, for a peel or for the place; and for forbidden fat — sixty | מחבר ס״ט |
| Some say (Rama — Tur, Ran, Rashba, Ramban) | All salting forbids only the thickness of a peel | רמ״א ס״ט |
| The Rashal's conclusion (Taz ס״ק כ״ו) | Roasting, salting and baking follow the rule of cooking — for stringency only (sixty), and one must in addition remove the place | ט״ז ס״ק כ״ו |
« וי״א דכל מליחה אינה אוסרת רק כדי קליפה » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:ט)
« ולפי שאין אנו בקיאין בין בשר שמן לכחוש נוהגין לשער בכל מליחה בס׳ כמו בבישול » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:ט)
« דדין אלו הג׳ כבישול וצריך ס׳ כשאר איסורין » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ו)
« לא אמרינן באלו הג׳ הוויין כבישול אלא לחומרא » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ו)
« משום דתתאה גבר » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״ה:יא)
The Rama, however, reports that some dispute (Tosafot, Rosh, Semak, Tur), and such is the practice:
« ויש חולקין ואומרים דבמליחה אין חילוק אם הוא למעלה או למטה » (רמ״א יו״ד ק״ה:יא)
The Taz, at his ס״ק כ״ז, gives the reason:
« הטעם דבמליחה אין כח באותו שהוא תפל לבטל כח המליחה » (ט״ז יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק כ״ז)
« אבל אם ההיתר מלוח והאיסור תפל אינו צריך אלא הדחה » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״ה:י)
The Rama adds that some forbid if they touch, and that one may be lenient where there is loss. And the Pitchei Teshuva (ס״ק י״ד) reports the Chatam Sofer (responsum 93) in the case of six salted geese laid one upon another without touching, where the whole analysis bears on the path taken by the ציר that runs between them.
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: cheeses made in gentiles' moulds — even if salted in them — are permitted. (Gloss: the same holds if a permitted item was salted in another forbidden vessel (Rashba), even an unperforated one, for the salted is not boiling enough to draw out of the vessel what is absorbed in it; but only after the fact, for a priori it is forbidden.) — Seif 13: salt or spices that were in a meat bowl may be put into milk. (Gloss: the same holds if they were in a forbidden vessel, since being dry they do not absorb from the vessel, provided the vessel is clean and no forbidden matter adheres to it; and whoever is stringent a priori, may a blessing come upon him.)
« פסק בהדיא שאפילו שמן לגמרי הבולע בכלי אינו אוסר כולו » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד ק״ה ס״ק י״ג)
and the Noda bi-Yehuda (Yoreh De'ah, responsum 30 — the Pitchei Teshuva writes סימן למ״ד, the spelled-out name of the letter ל) is lenient accordingly, writing that one does not set aside what is clear to the Magen Avraham for a doubt of the Shach.
Vocalised condensation of the seif (תמצית) — the full verbatim source text is at level 1.
Translation: salt saturated with blood from the salting of meat, which was put into a pot, or salted meat not rinsed that was put into a pot — if there is sixty against the salt, it is permitted. (Gloss: although the salt still gives taste in the pot, since it is not forbidden of itself but because of the blood within it, wherever what forbids cannot go, what became forbidden does not forbid more than what made it so. See siman 69.)
| The mechanism | The measure / the din | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Kavush (twenty-four hours cold) | As cooked — all is forbidden; below that — rinsing | מחבר ס״א ; ט״ז ס״ק א |
| Brine / vinegar | Brine — the time it would boil; vinegar — twenty-four hours according to the Shach | מחבר ס״א ; ש״ך ס״ק ב |
| Doubtful kavush | Forbidden for the Rama; in meat-and-milk one is lenient | רמ״א ס״א ; ט״ז ס״ק ג ; פ״ת ס״ק ג–ד |
| Kli rishon (hand recoils) | It cooks and forbids the whole | מחבר ס״ב |
| Kli sheni | It does not cook; for the Maharshal it forbids like a kli rishon | מחבר ס״ב ; ש״ך ס״ק ה ; ט״ז ס״ק ד |
| Tataa gavar | Hot on cold — a peel; cold on hot — the whole | מחבר ס״ג |
| Lean roast | Kedei netila (a finger's thickness) | מחבר ס״ד–ה׳ |
| Fat roast (pipua) | Sixty against the fat; and one removes the place | מחבר ס״ה ; ט״ז ס״ק י–יא |
| Salted, not edible | As boiling — peel / sixty; the practice is sixty | מחבר ס״ט ; ט״ז ס״ק כ״ו |
| Salting and vessels / dry | It draws nothing out of the vessel (after the fact); dry things do not absorb | מחבר סי״ב–סי״ג ; פ״ת ס״ק י״ג |
| Salt that drank blood | Sixty against the salt — permitted | מחבר ס״ד ; עיין סימן ס״ט |
| Subject | First shita | Second shita |
|---|---|---|
| Vinegar — the measure of pickling | Plain sense of the Mehaber — like brine, the time it would boil | The Shach — like other liquids, twenty-four hours |
| Doubtful kavush | The Rama — forbidden | The Taz and the Kreti — toward leniency (chezkat kashrut) |
| The kli sheni where the hand recoils | The Maharshal — it forbids like a kli rishon (and so the Beit Yosef's responsa) | The Shach — it does not cook, a kli rishon is required |
| Absorbed fat, from piece to piece | The Rashba (seif 7) — it penetrates and forbids | The Maharam (seif 9) — it does not penetrate without gravy; and the Taz leaves the contradiction open |
| Upper and lower in salting | The Mehaber — tataa gavar holds in salting too | The Rama (Tosafot, Rosh) — no difference, and such is the practice |
DAAT דעת — © 5786 / 2026 · Back to home · סימן ק״ה · ♥ Support