Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Characterizing Food That Falls Under the Rubik בישול עכו''ם

I never really understood all the gun control brouhaha opposing registration of hand guns until I heard an NRA representative say, "The Second Amendment is not about deer hunting."  Ah... they understand that there is a constitutional right to keep a secret stash of guns in case government goes bad and they need to stage a revolution.  I didn't and don't agree with that stance, but I at least I can now understand why they claim registration is unconstitutional.  (I really, really don't want to get into a discussion of gun control; just noting a place where knowing the background really helped me.)

One of the decrees from Chazal is בישול עכו''ם/food cooked by a non-Jew.  It's not about kashrus.  Proof: if that were the problem, we wouldn't need a decree; we are already not allowed to eat non-kosher food.  The decree of בישול עכו''ם is a barrier to intermarriage, plain and simple.  To that end, Chazal only included certain kinds of foods under the prohibition.  Namely: Only foods that are not eaten raw and are עולה על שלחן מלכים/fit for a royal table.  Nowadays we generally substitute "formal state dinner" for "royal table"  (see end, though).

While there is some discussion about the "eaten raw" requirement -- eaten raw where produced, but not where consumed, for example -- that requirement is usually straightforward.  More interesting is the requirement of "fit for a king's table".  Obviously you are going to find corn flakes at a state dinner, but you might find corn on the cob.  R' Cohen from the CRC breaks the question into three basic categories:

  1. same food and prep, just not done professionally
  2. same basic food, similar prep
  3. same basic ingredient, prepared completely differently
Category (1) would include an unprofessionally cooked baked potato.  I haven't eaten at McDonald's in some years, but I think you might be able to get a baked potato there (at least in California).  That potato (if, indeed, it exists) is certainly not cooked as well nor served as classily (is that a word?) as you get at your standard wedding.  Most agree that the professionalism/quality of the preparation is irrelevant.  Therefore you have another reason not to buy lunch there; whatever other issues exist with those potatoes, they are also forbidden because of בישול עכו''ם.

Category (2) would include potato chips and french fries.  Let's say, for argument's sake, that there are fried potato recipes (latkes!) that are appropriate for a state dinner.  Now, you are never going to find potato chips and french fries at a state dinner, but they are prepared essentially the same was as something that is appropriate for a state dinner.  In that case the poskim are split, many being lenient.  If you want to be stringent, though, you'd have to start looking for "heimische" potato chips.  There is another reason to be lenient on chips, btw, according to the Star-K... potato chips are not usually not eaten with a meal and are one of the quintessential junk foods.  Check out the Star-K summary on בישול עכו''ם for more details.  So, go ahead, eat your Jays.

Then there is category (3), to which almost all poskim agree that בישול עכו''ם doesn't apply.  For example, while you might be very happy to be served a grilled Tuna steak at a formal dinner, steamed Tuna chunks are very, very unlikely to make it to that table.  Good thing; since that's basically canned tuna.  Again, there are heimische brands that proudly declare בישול ישראל; now you know why.

One interesting historical note.  There is a question in the heintege poskim [I would say "modern", but (a), heintege sounds more frum; (b) you think gun control is fodder for raised ire, just try stepping into the "modern orthodox" fray!] about whether עולה על שלחן מלכים refers to a state dinner or even to what the king has at a weekend BBQ.  Interesting, R' Cohen said this question doesn't even appear until quite recently; certainly last 40 years or so.  I am wondering if it is because earlier than that kings and leaders didn't eat differently on a weekend than that ate at a formal dinner.  They viewed themselves as kings and leaders, not common folk who dress up as kings and leaders.  Personally, I think that is a loss for all of us... but I don't have time/space today to add another thought...
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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 Aruch HaRav that referred to the noise of תקתוק
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: Love in the Time of Corona Virus/Anxiously Awaiting the Mashiach

Two scenarios: Scenario I: A young boy awakened in the middle of the night, placed in the back of vehicle, told not to make any noise, and the vehicle speeds off down the highway. Scenario II: Young boy playing in park goes to see firetruck, turns around to see scary man in angry pursuit, poised to attack. I experienced and lived through both of those scenarios. Terrifying, no? Actually, no; and my picture was never on a milk carton. Here's the context: Scenario I: We addressed both set of our grandparents as "grandma" and "grandpa". How did we distinguish? One set lived less than a half hour's drive; those were there "close grandma and grandpa". The other set lived five hour drive away; they were the "way far away grandma and grandpa". To make the trip the most pleasant for all of us, Dad would wake up my brother and I at 4:00AM, we'd groggily -- but with excitement! -- wander out and down to the garage where we'd crawl
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: David HaMelech's Five Stages of Finding HaShem In the World

Many of us "sing" (once you have heard what I call carrying a tune, you'll question how I can, in good conscience, use that verb, even with the quotation marks) Eishes Chayil before the Friday night Shabbos meal.  We feel like we are singing the praises of our wives.  In fact, I have also been to chasunas where the chasson proudly (sometimes even tearfully) sings Eishes Chayil to his new eishes chayil.  Beautiful.  Also wrong.  (The sentiments, of course, are not wrong; just a misunderstanding of the intent of the author of these exalted words.) Chazal (TB Brachos, 10a) tell us that when Sholmo HaMelech wrote the words "She opens her mouth Mwith wisdom; the torah of kindness is on her tongue", that he was referring to his father, Dovid HaMelech, who (I am continuing to quote Chazal here) lived in five worlds and sang a song of praise [to each].  It seems to me that "world" here means a perception of reality.  Four times Dovid had to readjust his perc
Post a Comment
Read more