Eating in Non-Kosher Restaurants Handout
Eating in Non-Kosher Restaurants – Handout
MaritHaAyin
Babylonian Talmud,Shabbat 146b
Mishnah
If one's garments fall into water on the road, he may walk in them without fear. When he reaches the outermost courtyard he may spread them out in the sun, but not facing the people.
Gemara
Rav Yehudah said in Rav's name: Wherever the Sages forbade for appearance's sake, it is forbidden even in the innermost chambers.
Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 12a
Mishnah
When an idolatrous [festival] takes place within a city, it is permitted [to transact business with heathen] outside it; if the idolatrous [festival] takes place outside it, [business] is permitted within it. How about going there? If the roadleads solely to that place, it is forbidden, but if one can go to it by any other place, it is permitted.
Gemara
Our Rabbis taught: It is forbidden to enter a city while idolatrous worship is taking place therein — or [to go] from there to another city; this is the opinion of R. Meir. But the Sages say, only when the road leads solely to that city is it forbidden; if however the road does not lead exclusively to that place it is permitted.
If a splinter has got into his [foot] while in front of an idol, he should not bend down to get it out, because he may appear as bowing to the idol; but if not apparent,it is permitted.
If his coins got scattered in front of an idol he should not bend and pick them up, for he may be taken as bowing to the idol; but if not apparent it is permitted.
If there is a spring flowing in front of an idol he should not bend down and drink, because he may appear to be bowing to the idol; but if not apparent it is permitted.
One should not place one's mouth on the mouth of human figures, which act as water fountains in the cities, for the purpose of drinking; because he may seem as kissing the idolatrous figure. So also one should not place one's mouth on a water pipe and drink therefrom for fear of danger.
What is meant by 'not being apparent'? — Shall we say that he is not seen? Surely RavYehudah stated in the name of Rav that whatever the Sages prohibited merely because it may appear objectionable to the public, is also forbidden in one's innermost chamber! — It can only mean that if [by bending] he will not appear as bowing to the idol.
Babylonian Talmud, Ketubot 60a
It was taught: Nahum the Galatianstated, If rubbishwas collected in a gutter it is permissible to crush it with one's foot quietly on the Sabbath, and one need have no scruples about the matter. What is the reason? — Such repair is carried out in an unusual manneragainst which, when loss is involved,the Rabbis enacted no preventive measure. R. Joseph stated: The halachah is in agreement with the ruling of Nahum the Galatian.
Babylonian Talmud, Keritot 21b
Said Rav: The blood of fish collected [in a vessel] is forbidden. An objection was raised: [It has been taught:] The blood of fish and locust may deliberately be eaten! This is when it is not collected; whilst Rav speaks of collected blood...In the instance of that Baraitha [the blood] contained [fish] scales; Rav, on the other hand, who rules that it is forbidden, refers to a case where there were no [fish] scales.
Rashi
שכנסו בכלי אסור - דמיחלף בדם בהמה והרואה אומר מותר לאכול דם
It may be confused with the blood of an animal and the onlooker will say it is permitted to eat blood.
Babylonian Talmud, Shekalim, Mishnah 3:2
The appropriation in the chamber was made with threebaskets each of three se'ahs, and on them wasinscribedaleph, beth, gimel. R. Ishmael says: on themwas inscribed in Greek, alpha, beta, gamla. He who made theappropriation did not enter the chamber wearing either a borderedcloak or shoes or sandals or tefillin or an amulet, lest if he becamepoor people might say that he became poor because of an iniquitycommitted in the chamber, or if he became rich people might say that hebecame rich from the appropriation in the chamber. For it is a man'sduty to be free of blame before men as before God, as it is said: “and beguiltless towards the Lord and towards Israel”, and again it says: “soshall you find favor and good understanding in the sight of Godand man”.
Numbers 32:22
then you shall be clean before the LORD, and before Israel, and this land shall be unto you for a possession before the LORD.
Proverbs3:4
וּמְצָאחֵן וְשֵׂכֶלטוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹקים וְאָדָם.
So shallyou find grace and good favor in the sight of God and man
Rabbi Moshe Isserles (16th century Poland), ShulchanAruchYorehDeah 87:3
People make almond milk and put poultry in it, since [even were it real milk] it would only be rabbinically prohibited. However, for beef one should put almonds beside the milk, because of appearances.
Rabbi ChizkiyahdeSilva (17th century Israel), PriChadashYorehDeah 87:7
The Rashba'sprohibition against cooking meat in human milk because of appearances is a novelty, and let us not add to it. We should not decree and prohibit on our own because of appearances, other than the cases explained in the Talmud… And so wrote Tosafot that we should not compare the sages' decrees other than where the Talmud does.
Babylonian Talmud, Kilayim, Mishnah 9:2
Shirayim and kalach silk are not shaatnez, but they are prohibited due to appearances.
RabbenuShimson
One should not prohibit the silk loops they place in a wool robe… for these are very common…
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (20th century USA), Igrot Moshe Orach Chaim 2:40
Even entering to eat foods known to be free of any concern is prohibited due to appearances and suspicion, but if one is especially hungry such that he is in great pain and there is no other place to eat, one may enter and eat food known to be permitted, but this must be in private. The sages did not decree in cases of pain or loss.
Bishul Akum
Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 35b
Mishnah
The following articles of heathens are prohibited but the prohibition does not extend to all use of them: milk which a heathen milked without an Israelite watching him, their bread and oil — rabbi and his court permitted the oil — stewed and preserved foodstuffs into which they are accustomed to put wine or vinegar…
Gemara
MILK - Why should we feel concern about milk [that it is prohibited]? If on account of the possibility that there may have been a substitution [of animals]
THEIR BREAD. R. Kahana said in the name of R. Yohanan: Their bread was not permitted by the Court. Is it to be deduced from this statement that anybody does allow it? — Yes, because when R. Dimi came [from Palestine] he said: On one occasion Rabbi went out into the field, and a heathen brought before him a loaf baked in a large oven from a se'ah of flour. Rabbi exclaimed: How beautiful is this loaf; why should the Sages have thought fit to prohibit it! 'Why should the Sages have thought fit to prohibit it?' As a safeguard against intermarriages!
STEWED AND PRESERVED FOODSTUFFS -Whence is this derived? — R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: Scripture states, “Thou shalt sell me food for money that I may eat, and give me water for money that I may drink.”[Deuteronomy 2:28] A comparison is to be drawn with water — as only water which has undergone no change [is permitted to Jews] so also must the food have undergone no change [at the hand of heathens].
R. Samuel b. Isaac said in the name of Rav: Whatever is eaten raw does not come within [the law of what is prohibited] on account of having been cooked by heathens. Thus was it taught in Sura; but in Pumbedithathey taught this version: R. Samuel b. R. Isaac said in the name of Rav: Whatever is not brought upon the table of kings to serve as a relish with bread does not come within [the law of what is prohibited] on account of having been cooked by heathens. What is the difference between the two versions? — [The permissibility of] small fish, mushrooms and pounded grain.
Coffee & Tea
Pots & Pans
Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 69a
How is it if [a mouse] fell into vinegar? — R. Hillel said to R. Ashi: Such an incident happened with R. Kahana and he prohibited it. [R. Ashi] replied to him: In that case [the mouse] may have been dissolved into pieces. Ravina thought to apply here the standard of a hundred and one since it is not less than with the heave-offering in connection with which we learnt: A heave-offering [mixed with the non-holy] is neutralized when the proportion is one in a hundred. R. Tahlifa b. Giza said to Ravina: Perhaps [the case under discussion] is like spices of a heave-offering [which fell into] a pot of food the taste of which is not neutralized. R. Ahai estimated that with vinegar the proportion must be fifty [to one]. R. Samuel the son of R. Ika estimated that with beer the proportion must be sixty [to one]. The legal decision in either case is sixty [to one], and it is so with all things prohibited by the Torah.
Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 111b
It was stated: If [hot] fish was served on a [meat] plate: Rav says: It is forbidden to eat it with milksauce; Samuel says: It is permitted to eat it with milk sauce. Rav says: It is forbiddenbecause it imparted a flavor to it; Samuel says: It is permitted because it imparted a flavor indirectly.
Numbers 31:23
Everything that may abide the fire, you shall make to go through the fire, and it shall be clean; nevertheless it shall be purified with the water of sprinkling; and all that abides not the fire you shall make to go through the water.
Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 75b
Our Rabbis taught: If [an Israelite] purchases cooking-utensils from a heathen, the unused articles are to be immersed and are then clean; as for those which were used for cold things, such as cups, jugs and flasks, they must be rinsed and immersed and are then clean; but as for those which were used for hot things, such as boilers, kettles and heating vessels, they must be scalded and immersed and are then clean. Utensils used with fire, such as spits and grills, must be made white-hot and immersed and are then clean. If, with all of them, any had been used [by an Israelite] before it was immersed or scalded or made white-hot, one authority teaches that [the contents] are prohibited whereas another teaches that they are permitted. There is, however, no contradiction; for one decides according to him who said that when [the forbidden element] imparts a worsened flavor it is prohibited and the other according to him who said that when it imparts a worsened flavor it is permitted. But according to him who maintains that when it imparts a worsened flavor it is permitted, in which circumstance can the prohibition of the Divine Law against the use of Gentiles' vesselsapply? — R. Hiyya, the son of R. Hunasaid: The Torah only forbade a utensilwhich had been used [by a Gentile] the same day since the effect is not to worsen the flavor. Then let [the utensils which had been used] from then onwards be permitted [without cleansing]! — The decree was made against those which had not been used the same day on account of those which had been used the same day. What of the other authority? — [His view is] that a utensil used the same day also imparts a worsened flavor
Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 97a
Rava said: In the past the following was always a difficulty to me. It was taught: In a pot whereinmeat had been cooked a person may not boil milk, and if he did boil [milk] therein, it dependswhether the pot imparted a flavor [to the milk] or not. [In a pot wherein] terumah food [had beencooked] a person may not cook common food, and if he did cook [common food] therein, it dependswhether the pot imparted a flavor [to the common food] or not. Now in the case of terumah it isclear, for a priest could taste the food; but in the case of meat and milk who may taste it? But nowthat R. Yohanan ruled that we can rely upon a gentile cook, in this case too we could rely upon agentile cook.
Rava also said, [In certain cases] the Rabbis ruled that the test whether or not it imparts a flavor applies, and [in other cases] the Rabbis ruled that one may rely upon a [gentile] cook,and yet [in other cases] the Rabbis ruled that the test is sixty [to one]. Therefore we say, wheresubstances of different kinds, each kind being permitted by itself, were mixed together, the test iswhether or not one imparts a flavor to the other; and if one of the substances was forbidden thenwe rely upon the opinion of a gentile cook. here substances of like kind were mixed together, inwhich case it is impossible to discern whether one imparts a flavor to the other; or where substancesof different kinds, one of which was forbidden, were mixed together, and no [gentile] cook isavailable, then the test is sixty [to one].
Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 76b
BUT A KNIFE MAY BE POLISHED AND IS THEN RITUALLY CLEAN. R. 'Ukba b. Hama said: One plunges it ten times in soil. R. Huna the son of R. Joshua said: That is, in untilled soil.
Cold Foods
Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 111b
Hezekiah said in the name of Abaye: The law is, fish that was served on a [meat] plate may beeaten with milk sauce, and a radish that was cut with a meat knife may not be eaten with milk sauce.This is so only in the case of a radish,since on account of its pungency it absorbs [from the knife]; but in the case of a cucumber one needonly scrape away the surface of the cut and then one may eat it [with a milk sauce]. Turnip stalksare permitted; beet stalks are forbidden, but if one cut these and turnips alternately, theyarepermitted.
1