Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Don't You Dare Cook A Kid in Its Mother's Milk

A coworker (from India) asked me one day if I was a vegetarian.  I replied that I am not, but that I keep kosher.  Then ensued a very high level of the laws of kashrus, how we know them, and so forth.  I actually find it pretty interesting to speak to someone about these issues who has no preconceived notions; she had heard of the bible, for example, but that was about it.  That night I realized she had asked my about being a vegetarian because she has never seen my eat meat.  (I always eat at my desk, so she has certainly seen what I bring for lunch.)  The next day I explained to her that we are not allowed to eat meat with dairy, so that's why I never bring meat.  "That's interesting... why not?", she asked.  I answered that that Torah states the rule this way: Don't boil a baby animal in the very same thing that gave it life, its mother's milk.  The look on her face together with her response was priceless:  "Oh!  When you put it that way, ewww!"

The Torah actually tells us לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ three times: Exodus 23:19, Exodus 34:26, and Deuteronomy 14:21.  The Torah never repeats itself, of course, so each occurrence comes to teach something different.  The "famous" drash is: once to forbid eating milk & meat casseroles, once to forbid benefiting from milk & meat casseroles (such as selling them), once to forbid cooking milk and meat together.  (That last one and the wording of of the prohibition is why I used the word casserole; at the Torah level we are only talking about cooked mixtures.)  By "famous", of course, I mean the one drash I knew.

One year, though, when I was davening up the Rashi's in parshas R'eh, I woke up long enough to see that Rashi brought a different drash!  Why three times?  Once to exclude the meat of non-domesticated animals from the prohibition, once to exclude chicken (any fowl, of course), and one to exclude the meat of non-kosher animals (which is to say that baked ham and cheese sandwich is no worse than a plain ham sandwich -- it's only 39 lashes per bite, not 78).  After the initial shock -- after all, how can you have the triple repetition mean two different things?! -- I promptly went back to davening up the rest of the Rashi's.

Still, though, the question lingered in my mind for some years.  I've been listening to many excellent shiurim from R' Dovid Cohen of the CRC (you can find them here), and a resolution to my dilemma has finally taken shape.

If the Torah had just said לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב/don't cook a kid in milk (yes; I know the punctuation of בַּחֲלֵב is wrong since it is no longer "milk of", but I it is a quick copy paste), then I would have had the one drosh that Rashi brings that prohibits eating/benefiting/cooking.  Now, however that I have the added word אִמּוֹ, I have another drosh: there are three categories of animals whose meat is excluded from the prohibition.

I finally understood that because of a machlokes that R' Cohen discussed regarding colostrum; that is, the milk like substance that starts flowing before the kid is born.  Since the verse explicitly states "its mother" -- and not simply "mother" -- some want to learn that only milk that is produced after the kid is born is forbidden; to exclude colostrum which is produced from before she is technically a mother yet.  There is actually a kind of sweet cheese made in the Ukraine that contains cow colostrum, called Molozyvo.  (I confirmed that fact with a coworker who is from the Ukraine.)

As long as I was awake, I also noticed that Rashi brings the drosh regarding eating/benefit/cooking on the verses in Exodus where the context is celebrating our holy days.  In Deuteronomy, where the context is which animals we can and cannot eat, Rashi brings the drosh concerning the exclusion of wild animals/fowl/non-kosher animals.  At least one of us was paying attention.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...