Talk:Kishka (food)

Old content from Talk:Kishka

Is really kishka Jewish ethnic food? I mean, it is from Polish word ,,kiszka" meaning gut or intestine, and it is name of Polish dish similar to sausage (but much worse in taste) (made from guts).

You are misinformed. Kishka (the kosher variety, as described in the article, made of beef intestine stuffed with matzo meal filling) is indeed a Jewish ethnic food. I can't say I enjoy it that much, but I have indeed eaten it. Just google on kishka and you'll get lots of Jewish links. --Rpresser 15:02, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

It should be added that the word kishkes is Jewish slang for "balls", i.e. the English phrase "He has no balls" would use the word kishkes for balls.

This is also misinformation. Kishkes is definitely not slang for "balls"; it is slang for "guts". In English the two phrases "He has no balls" and "he has no guts" have similar meanings, i.e., the man is a coward, but the body part referred to is definitely different. --Rpresser 15:02, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

My wife now wishes me to add that in Hebrew or Yiddish, the proper word to use when referring to testicles is "baytzim" -- literally "eggs". Rpresser (talk) 03:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not exclusively a Jewish ethnic food. It might be much more accurate to call it an Eastern European food enjoyed by Jews from the region. BTW Kishka is also yiddish for intestines, not just Polish. Beitzim is Hebrew slang for "balls." Yiddish has a word, "Testikles," or "Bawls," they are housed in the Yiddish, "Bawl Sak." You get the point. Yiddish for Beitzim is Oyn and isn't used as a euphamism for man-balls. However, when Yiddish speakers speak in Aremaic or Hebrew they say Beyim not Beitzim, because Beitzim has a harshly negative assosciation with man-balls. It's like if their were a food called a F&*^ Sh^t in English, most people would find something else to call it. 79.177.238.63 (talk) 05:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

There was a popular Yiddish expression, well documented: "Az der bubbe vot gehat baytzim vot zie geven mein zayde." - http://www.columbia.edu/~jap2220/Arkhiv/vol04%20(1994-5)/vol04118.txt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:46 (talk) 19:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

XP Engineers

First of all, I am going to assume that when the article says XP, it is referencing Windows XP. Second, there is no way to validat the claim in the article "'Engineers on XP software teams are known to love Kishka. It is traditionally served at morning standup meetings and eaten to the tune..."Who stole the Kishka'"

Unless the poster is an Engineer for Microsoft, who works on XP software, the claim lacks validity. Third, the whole comment is irrelavent to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FozzyMaple (talk • contribs)

As an FYI for your own personal knowledge, it was likely a reference to Extreme Programming teams. Vandalism nonetheless... — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 21:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Kosher kishkes

So the kosher version doesn't contain blood, correct? That should be emphasized. Rmhermen 19:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Right. In practice, some of the blood ends up staying in the meat despite drainage. If I get up to it, I'll buy a kishke and cook it for pictures. The frozen ones don't look very appetizing, though. --Mgreenbe 19:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Kaszanka

shouldn't this article be merged with Kaszanka ? --83.24.24.147 17:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, kishkes should not have any blood in them, so that'd be kind of the opposite of a blood sausage, one might think?

Wow, so it was merged nevertheless?! The most likely root of the name: Кишка, indeed means gut/intestine/bowel. Kaszanka, however, gets its name from "kasza" (meaning "Groats") - e.g. from "kasza gryczana", the buckwheat in it - and yes, it contains blood which is forbidden in kosher cuisine. So why was this merged? And if merging it was meant to be done, why was the article not edited in order to remove the reference to "kaszanka" which now is a circular reference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.157.236.96 (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Kosher kishke is derived from east European kishka. The derivative merely omits the non-kosher blood, and substitutes beef for pork intestine. I believe it can be made with either matzo meal or buckwheat. —Michael Z. 2008-12-02 21:47 z

Waiting for Guffman

Bubbe made a kishka; She made it big and fat. She brought it to my mother. She said "I can't eat that!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.248.125 (talk) 07:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

blood sausage

Kishka is not blood sausage. All the references in the article describe it as a traditional Jewish dish. Information about Polish/Russian/Slavic sausages made from blood and pig do not belong in this article. Add these to a separate article if you like.--Gilabrand (talk) 05:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. The article has a couple dozen contributors, and has been reasonably stable for 18 months or more. So please don't blow away most of the article without discussing it first, and don't revert-war over it. If you want a reference, you just have to ask. —Michael Z. 2008-12-03 07:42 z

None of the information that I have deleted is sourced, and Kaszanka is a different food altogether. It is made with different ingredients, served at a different meal, and has nothing to do with the Jewish dish called kishka. As I noted above, you are welcome to create a separate article on Kaszanka or any other type of sausage, a food which is defined in the dictionary as being made from chopped meat. While yes, you can add chopped meat to kishka, this is not a standard ingredient. Hence we are talking about two different things. This is an "apples & oranges" approach that does not fit for Wikipedia, where there is no problem creating a new article with a cross reference to this one, if you believe it is warranted. The argument that "other editors" disagree is not a valid argument. There are always disagreements on Wikipedia. In this case, I have added references that describe kishke as a Jewish dish and clearly state the traditional ingredients. If there are references for kishka being made from blood and pigs, and for kishka being this color or that depending on how much paprika is used, I have yet to see any. Furthermore, the bit about the song is trivia as well as completely unsourced. Best, Gila--Gilabrand (talk) 09:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Since Kaszanka is described as blood sausage, it cannot be merged with kishka. I agree with Gilabrand that, despite the etymological similarity, these are two entirely different foods -- in terms of composition, consumption practices, and ethnic background. I have accordingly restored the article Kaszanka in its own right. It deserves standing on its own, just as kishka does. Hope nobody objects too much to that. --Zlerman (talk) 04:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

1. Please stop edit-warring. Please conduct discussion here, and not in the edit field. Don't complain that “Your reversion has also deleted important copyediting”, when you mix it in with wiping out 80% of a stable article. I left in the references which you added.
2. Since you asked for a source, I added one (which you promptly wiped out): Frederic Gomes Cassidy, Joan Houston Hall (1985), “kishka” and “kishke” in Dictionary of American Regional English, p 228, Harvard University Press, ISBN 0674205197.
3. Blood sausage is not being “merged” with Jewish kishke. The first anonymous edit (at kishka) was about everything called kishka,[1] as was the first registered edit,[2] as was the first version moved to Kishka (food),[3] as was the article when you started editing it.[4] You can't just take ownership of the article and change its subject. If you want these topics separate, then I suggest you propose a split of the article to kishka (Jewish), or kishke.

I am again reverting the mass-deletion of material from this article, to its stable version. Let's get another opinion. —Michael Z. 2008-12-04 17:03 z

Pudding???

What does the word pudding do in the first sentence for this food? Pudding is basically a sweet dish, and blood pudding is normally not described as pudding in English. –--Zlerman (talk) 04:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Not in American English. In British English, a pudding can be a large sausage (like a jumbo bologna) or a boiled starch (gel) dish. Kishka is both. Pustelnik (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Do you think a (British English) would help? Because I know calling a sausage pudding is very confusing for us Yanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993, Vol. 2, p. 2406) says under the "sausage" definition of "pudding": "Now chiefly Scottish & dialect or with specifying word (black pudding, white pudding, etc.)." Then the dictionary goes on to a long definition of pudding as a sweet in current sense. So it is not even (British English). Let's just continue without it as the alternative is totally confusing, at least to a large part of the readers. --Zlerman (talk) 02:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

"Sources indicate..."

ChildofMidnight justified his latest revert of this article (04:32, 5 December 2008) by the following edit comment: "sources indicate this dish is not exclusive to the Jewish community." Could we please have a list of such sources in order to form our own informed opinion? Thank you. --Zlerman (talk) 05:50, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Well this is one source: [5]. Are you suggesting that Kishka is a food unique to the Jewish community and that no one else makes this dish? Is it a secret recipe? Like Colonel Sanders original recipe? Seriously, is this a dish that only exists in the one community and nowhere else? How do you explain the linguistic origins and the similar dishes in other cultures and groups? And let me make clear that I am absolutely not an expert on this food, so I'm welcome to being educated on it and I'm very curious about this controversy. I thought my edits made it pretty clear that there was a distinct preparation of the dish although it's shared generally. Am I wrong? What source says it's unique to one group?ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Here's one more source [6], so I satisfy the "sources" qualification. If we can't trust Wiktionary, who can we trust? ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia sources are NOT a source for anything. I don't get this whole argument. Frankly, I find it bizarre that people get on here and make claims without having the slightest knowledge and without bringing any claims apart their own OR to back them up. I have put in a whole slew of references that say it is a traditional Jewish dish. To have such a dish described as blood sausage is not only wrong, but defamatory and insulting. The other material was placed in another article, which is a perfectly fine solution. Maybe you should try adding the material on blood and pig products to an article on some Arab food. Let's see how far you get.--Gilabrand (talk) 06:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, since you don't trust Wikipedia sources, which makes me very sad. :( Here's another source that you may find more reputable:[7]ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

For your information, that source is copied from Wikipedia!! And the No. 5 ref you added above clearly states that kishke is part of Jewish cuisine. If necessary, a sentence (properly sourced) can be added to state that in Europe, the dish also has non-kosher variations.--Gilabrand (talk) 06:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure they stole it without giving any credit? Isn't there a way to report them? I'm outraged. Well, not really, but if what you say is true the proper thing to do would be to mention the source of the information. How about this source [8]? You seem to be very upset that a dish named after intestine isn't Kosher everywhere. I suppose we can try to make a seperate or sub-article on the Jewish version if seeing certain ingredients used by others is offensive to you, but the main article should be inclusive don't you think? ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

No, the main article should not be inclusive: we should have two separate articles. See my comments arranged in two paragraphs below. --Zlerman (talk) 07:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

• The reference ChildofMidnight gave us to The Dictionary of American Regional English is absolutely fascinating -- and extremely useful. But let us first look at standard dictionary definitions (since Wiktionary is really useless as a reference). (1) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (3rd ed., 1992): kishke, also kishka: See derma (2). [Yiddish, from Russian kishka, intestine]; and then derma(2): Beef casing stuffed with a seasoned mixture of matzo meal or flour, onion, and suet, prepared by boiling, then roasting. Also called kishke, stuffed derma [Possibly Yiddish etc.]. Note the connotation of matzo meal!!! (2) Oxford English Dictionary (electronic edition) produces fascinating results: kishka, Beef intestine casing stuffed with a sausage-like savoury filling, and then come the invaluable OED quotes, 9 of them, all referring to kishka in Jewish cooking and Jewish life. The last quote from 1972 (Listener 16 Mar. 341/3): "Kishkeh vaguely resembles a kosher haggis..stuffed with a mixture of flour meal, grated onion and fat." So it seems to me that the weight of the evidence in dictionaries and published literature is that "kishka" or "kishke" is actually identified with a Jewish dish.
• But let us come back to The Dictionary of American Regional English: it actually gives two separate entries: one for the blood sausage (which includes the Polish kiszka) and one for the Jewish kishke or kishka. This is basically what Gilabrand is saying (and I support her in that): we have two totally different foods, and they should be put in two totally separate articles (with cross-references, of course), just as The Dictionary of American Regional English does. It is not reasonable to follow blindly the common etymology (both dishes deriving from the same anatomical organ) and lump together foods with totally different composition, different serving suggestions, and different ethnic origins. My recommendation: take kishka (food) and split it between "East European" blood sausage (in one of its guises) and the Jewish meat- and blood-less variety used as an accompaniment to cholent. Thank you all for your patience in reading my little dissertation. --Zlerman (talk) 07:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • If necessary, I for one, wouldn't oppose anyone making a kosher kishka article in addition to this one. But such wall building and segregation seems regretable. Kishka is one of many great uniters we share in common, whatever our differences. It clearly does not belong to one group, so I would oppose the main article on the subject being exclusionary of any of those who enjoy this delicacy. Kishka (spelled variously) refers to intestine, and as a dish has various preparations. So we must stand together: goyim (gentile) and Jew, Russian and Pole and Slovenian and Czech, the kosher and the omnivore. It's a time for tolerance. We can all have our own sections, but let's not censor one another's kishkas. Let us be wise like King Solomon and not seek to divide the indivisable. Be thankful we don't have to eat each others kishkas, just as we don't have to dance to just one polka. But I say let the shiksas have their kishkas. In the words of Grammy award winning Polka great Frank Yankovic, "Who stole the kishka?" Who's with me?ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

No offense meant, but you seem to have switched from a factual to a highly emotional tone, which is not quite appropriate in our context. Or are you being humorous? Why do you say that kishke is "the great uniter"? Where are the sources and facts to show that it is a "uniter", shared at one table by different communities? Let's consider the facts again: we have two dishes with a common-sounding name, but totally different composition, uses, and ethnic origins. What is the factual justification for keeping them in one article, rather than in two separate articles with cross-links to reflect the common etymology? And please do not take me wrong: I do not observe kashrut, I mix meat and dairy, I eat pork and shrimps -- and I love properly made blood pudding for breakfast. I am not fighting for kashrut here, but nevertheless it seems to me totally inappropriate to have blood sausage and Jewish kishka in one article. Not because blood sausage is not kosher, but because it is a different food altogether. --Zlerman (talk) 08:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Tomorrow I want to know the differences between Klezmer and Polka. But for tonight, I give you CHICOPEE PROVISION CO.'s Kiszka (Blood Sausage)[9], Polana "a Polish experience" Kiszka - Polska Kaszanka [10], and ATK food's Slotkowski brand Kiszka [11]. Google News has a gazillion references mentioning the Polka connection, the popularity of this food with Polish immigrants, etc. etc. It's not surprising that different groups varied the preparation, I've seen it with veal and corn meal. Let's also remember that Eastern Europe was part of various empires and there was quite a bit of cultural mixing. Obviously those who keep kashrut (am I using that right?) would use Matzoh meal and beef rather than any pork. But I still believe Kishka is something we can share, and I'm disappointed you weren't more impressed with my rigorously ridiculous rhythmically robust rhyming. It also appears to be a fairly common surname, so it may come as a surprise to those persons that they are Jewish! In my opinion they have enough to deal with being named after guts, and I'm certainly not saying they wouldn't or shouldn't be pleased if they are in fact of Jewish heritage, like Madeline Albright. I also invite you to join this discussion [12], perhaps they will be interested in your version? Here's a recipe [13] and here's the Kiszka Incorporated Meat Company [14]. So you see we have more in common than maybe you thought, even as we are all different. I want you to know I sat through three versions of "Who stole the Kishka", so I feel that I've sacrificed a lot for this article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 10:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to belabor the obvious, but all your sources only go to show that kiszka (note the spelling!) is Polish for blood sausage, whereas kishka or kishke (again note the spellings) is a Jewish flour-and-onion stuffed casing. Two different things that should be treated in two different articles, with cross-links. --Zlerman (talk) 10:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think it's a question of how big a distinction needs to be made. No one has objected to a separate article for the Jewish version, if that's necessary. But I would point out that there is not really one Jewish version (although it's a more limited version according to dietary traditions and laws). In fact there are many versions even within the distinctive groupings. I think it's good to include the vegetarian version mentioned, it's also been noted that the Jewish version can use chicken OR beef casings, and in fact artifical casings are now used. So is it still Kishke? And I want it noted that Bossie Krapfman does in fact use Paprika [15]. So the ingredients can be varied according to availability, according to dietary guidelines, according to taste, but to draw an artificial line that says our kishke is kishka and yours is something else, and the ingredients of our brother's version can't be included in the same article because their ingredients are offensive to us, seems too much to me. So I respectfully differ with you on that point, even as I respect your opinion. Many Jews lived in Poland and other areas of Eastern Europe, and to diminish the common cultural connections and associations seems a shame to me as well as being rather innacurate. I think it's neat that these communities have these interesting connections, which I suppose is why I bring up Polka and Klezmer, it's not just the sausage, after all, that binds us. And as many Jews have come to eat pork, I think we are perhaps best served by imposing our own values on ourselves rather than our brothers, unless we seek a broken family. But as you have suggested these are not arguments based on the "facts", although the facts also seem to support the commonality based on linguistics, similar ingredients, similar preparations, and similar geographical connections etc. And of course if Adam and Eve started us all off, well then the divisions between us are even smaller. But I digress. I appreciate your tolerance of my asides, and I have said my piece. I'm no great fan of liver and onions, but I am happy to coexist with those who fancy the dish, as long as I'm not made to eat it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 11:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I find it amusing that the only legitimate reference in this version of the article contains only this regarding kishke: "And kishke! Nobody makes kishke anymore. Traditionally kishke is packed in an intestine, but it’s just a starch sausage. I made up my own recipe – I make it in tinfoil. It’s basically nothing but matzoh meal with carrot, onion, and celery. If you want it to have good flavor, you should put some schmaltz in there, but you could make it with olive oil and it’s still very good." This is the evidence that a sausage named after intestine isn't shared by various peoples who lived in eastern Europe? Honestly, it makes me wonder. And this after people were kind enough to alter the article with respect to the concerns expressed, and after numerous sources and substantial evidence of kishke's wider usage was provided. There are words to describe behavior such as this, but it isn't suitable for polite company. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Summary of the situation as of 6 December 2008 (03:30 UTC)

As an outcome of heated discussions and back-and-forth edits during the whole day of 5 December 2008 (see above), essentially all the information included in the "stable" version of the article prior to 2 December 2008 now appears in two separate articles: Kishka (food) for the Jewish flour-based accompaniment to cholent and Kaszanka (Kiszka) for the Polish blood sausage. The two articles are cross-linked and kiszka is explicitly mentioned in a separate paragraph in kishka (food). The only thing that has been omitted from the original version is the humorous reference to "Who stole the kishka?". --Zlerman (talk) 03:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "outcome". What has happened is an editor or two have taken it upon themselves to take over the Kishke article and make it solely about the Jewish version of the dish. The original article has been completely scrubbed. This despite the provision of multiple sources and ample evidence that there are various versions of the dish, and proof that it is widely consumed by Polish Americans (among others). These variants are now completely excluded from this article without good explanation. Apparently those advocating for a sole Jewish version article have no consideration for others who also consume a "gut" sausage, and feel kosher and kashrut laws apply to segregating information in Wikipedia articles. This despite no objections being raised to an article covering solely the Jewish version in addition to the more general article, and the efforts of good faith editors to take into account cultural sensitivities about ingredient descriptions.ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Nothing has been scrubbed. The information about the Polish dish from the original article appears in full in a separate article Kiszka, with additional external links imported from your comments above. As I have written previously, the "segregation" is not based on kashrut laws: it is based on the fact that we are dealing with two totally different foods. And thank you for painting in your comments (here and previously) "the two editors" as unconscionable bullies.--Zlerman (talk) 04:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Please don't pretend nothing has been scrubbed. Putting the words stable version in quotes, doesn't change the fact that an inclusive article existed here before a couple of editors took it over and made it solely about their version of a gut sausage. If you want to write an article about the Jewish version go for it. We can have a dismbiguation for the spellings kishka and kishke leading to the two article versions. But don't come and destroy an article that numerous editors have worked on because your version of kishke doesn't include the same ingredients and you want exclusivity. Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Etymology

Etymology needed. What language was this borrowed into Yiddish from? Badagnani (talk) 06:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

• NOAD (2nd), English kishke comes from Yiddish, in turn from Polish kiszka or Ukrainian kishka (the Ukrainian is more commonly transliterated kyshka).
• Dictionary.com (2006) says kishke, also kishka < Yiddish < Slavic, and refers to Polish kiszka.[16]
• American Heritage (2006) says kishke also kishka < Yiddish < Russian kishka.[17]
• Merriam-Webster says kishke (var. kishka) < Yiddish, of Slavic origin, akin to Polish kiszka.
• Dictionary of American Regional English has headwords for the two spellings, cross-referencing each other[18]
  1. kishka (also keeshka, kiszka) esp. in Polish communities < Polish kiszka
  2. kishke (also kishka) esp. among speakers of Jewish background < Yiddish < Slavic

Rudnyckyj's Etymological Dictionary of the Ukrainian Language (v 2, p 674, djvu format) cites the word from 17th-century Middle Ukrainian, and traces it back to proto-Slavic *kyša/*kyšъka (“intestine, stomach”); it doesn't have clear Indo-European antecedents, but is related to Sanskrit koṣṭha- “intestine” and possibly Greek kýstia “sack”.

This is an Eastern European food which was adapted to kashrut by Jews living in East Europe, who also adopted its name. The word came into broader English use through Yiddish kishke, but is also found in regional English from Polish and other Eastern European sources. As we know from Frankie Yankovic's song, it was also brought to America by Slovenes. [my mistake—the song was written by a Pole in the US, and later popularized by an American Slovene.]

Kishke, kishka, and kiszka are the same word, following different orthographies, and entering English through different transliterations. As to “let's consider the facts again: we have two dishes with a common-sounding name, but totally different composition, uses, and ethnic origins”—all of our dictionaries agree that the Yiddish name comes from the Slavic languages.

The article is fine the way it is. Kosher kishke is a distinct adaptation, and so it deserves a prominent section. If it grows very large, then it can be split off into a separate article. Doing so prematurely, or trying to shove all non-Jewish kishka into an article under the too-specific title kaszanka constitutes an ill-considered POV fork.

If there's any real basis that “to have such a dish described as blood sausage is not only wrong, but defamatory and insulting” then it can be dealt with by rewording. No one is saying that Jews eat blood. It is not “defamatory” to include a non-kosher variation of the dish in the same article. —Michael Z. 2008-12-09 22:28 z

A Second Article

I tried to post this, but my computer crashed and I got distracted. Sorry for any confusion. There is now a second article kishka (Jewish food) and both are included on the kishka disambiguation page. I don't think this is ideal, but I don't want to feud and edit war. Having two articles isn't the end of the world, and I hope this solution is satisfactory to everyone involved. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Moving on...

Does anyone know what kolsheeke or maybe kolczyki is? Who has Polish friends? I would like to know what that song lyric means. Also, we need a photo of a nice big kishka. Cleveland can you hear me? ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Content removal

This content was removed from the article:

A Wallington, New Jersey butcher has taken the name Kiszka Inc Polish Meat Market. ref http://businessfinder.nj.com/257228/Kiszka-Inc-Polish-Meat-Market-Wallington-NJ /ref

and

==Other uses of the term==

The term kishka has also been used to refer to a type of Russian prison cell. The cell design is tall and narrow, like a derma, or a chimney. The prisoner had room to stand, but could not sit or kneel, let alone lie down. Prisoners were held in the unsanitary cells for months, and they were sometimes used to soften up inmates so they would sign confessions.

The term kishke has been carried over to English from Yiddish, where it is used to mean "guts" as well as to refer to the food. The term is often used descriptively to emphasize a point. Examples include:

• "His accusation hit me right in the kishke."
• "Oh, my full kishkes!"
• "I laughed until my kishkes were sore."

• "That's so spicy, it'll burn your kishkes!" ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

References

Attribution

Text and references copied from Who Stole the Kishka? to Kishka (food). See former article for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:54, 5 July 2023 (UTC)