3452 —ניתוח הלכתי: דבש כאוכל או כמשקה בשולחן ערוך

B"H, 6 Iyar, 5715.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g Haraha"ch iy"a nu"n tznm"s oseik b'tzt"z etc. Moharshi Yechiel Zevin

Shalom u'Vrachah!

Regarding what you raised about our Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, section 158 at the end of paragraph 7, and the question you posed as explained in your letter:

In my opinion, the explanation is as follows: Our Rebbe writes there: "And there are those who disagree about this; therefore one may be lenient," etc. From this it is understood that "there are those who disagree"—is a leniency compared to the previous opinion, namely that of the Magen Avraham as explained by our Rebbe. This view is found in the Taz, as noted in the references.

The point is that according to the Magen Avraham, one must have intent for food at the time the honey leaves the wax. Two opinions disagree with this: one is most lenient—the Taz brings it in the name of 'I heard'—that even if one intended it for liquid, he can later change it to food through an action. The second opinion holds that when one harvests honey without specific intent—an action later designates it as food, and there need not be explicit intent for food at the start; this is the Taz's own view.

Since the Taz himself strongly rejects the 'I heard' opinion and to avoid increasing disputes—it is almost certain that our Rebbe refers to the Taz's own view.

Seemingly, there is also room for the 'I heard' logic if the owner of the hive is a non-Jew; then perhaps his intention does not determine whether honey is set as liquid or food. Even if a Jew owns it—if he harvests for sale, perhaps it is determined by the buyer's action—especially if at harvest he knows it will be sold later. There are many examples of this in Shas (the Talmud), but this is not the place to elaborate...

Summary

This letter explores nuanced halachic perspectives on how intent and action affect whether honey is classified as food or drink according to various authorities. The Rebbe highlights careful analysis of sources and practical implications for different ownership scenarios.