Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 208:17-23

Sugya Map

• Issue: The laws of temi'ah (ritual impurity) in the context of kashrut (dietary laws), specifically concerning the status of food cooked by a non-Jew (bishul akum). The Arukh HaShulchan grapples with the extent to which temi'ah affects bishul akum, and the permissibility of eating food that has been ritually impure.
• Nafka Mina:
  • The permissibility of eating food that has been rendered impure, even if it is otherwise kosher.
  • The status of food cooked by a non-Jew, and whether temi'ah can render it permissible if it otherwise would be forbidden.
  • The interplay between different categories of prohibition: temi'ah versus bishul akum.
• Primary Sources:
  • Talmud Bavli, Masechet Chullin 110b-113a (especially the discussions on temi'ah and bishul akum).
  • Talmud Yerushalmi, Masechet Terumot (relevant discussions on impurity of food).
  • Rambam, Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot.
  • Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 112 (on bishul akum), and Orah Hayim 208 (related to Shabbat preparations).
  • Arukh HaShulchan, Yoreh De'ah 112, and Orah Hayim 208.

Text Snapshot

The Arukh HaShulchan, Orah Hayim 208:17 states:

וְעַל זֶה יָסְדוּ הַפּוֹסְקִים דְּאִם בָּא לְבַשֵּׁל בְּשַׁבָּת וּפֵרֵשׁ לִבּוֹ שֶׁלֹּא לְהַאֲכִיל לְאָדָם אֶלָּא לְבְהֵמָה אוֹ לְחַיָּה, אֲפִלּוּ הִיא טְמֵאָה, מֻתָּר לְבַשֵּׁל. וְכֵן אִם פֵּרֵשׁ לְהַאֲכִיל לְגוֹי, אֲפִלּוּ אִם יִתְבַּשֵּׁל בְּטֻמְאָה, דְּהָא אֵין טֻמְאָה בְּמַאֲכַל גּוֹיִם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּיוֹרֶה דֵּעָה בְּסִימָן קכ"ח. אֲבָל אִם פֵּרֵשׁ לְהַאֲכִיל לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, וְהוּא כְּבָר טָמֵא, אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל.

Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: The phrase "וּפֵרֵשׁ לִבּוֹ" (and his heart intended/specified) is crucial. It highlights the importance of kavanah (intention) in determining the permissibility of an action, particularly when an otherwise forbidden category (like bishul akum) is involved. The Arukh HaShulchan explicitly contrasts an intention to feed an animal or a gentile with an intention to feed a Jew. The reference to "דְּהָא אֵין טֻמְאָה בְּמַאֲכַל גּוֹיִם" (for impurity does not exist in gentile foods) points to a fundamental principle regarding the susceptibility of food to impurity based on its intended consumer.

The Arukh HaShulchan, Orah Hayim 208:19 continues:

וּבְמִקְצָת מְקוֹמוֹת נוֹהֲגִין לְהַחְמִיר וְלֹא לְבַשֵּׁל לְשַׁבָּת מִן הַחֹמֶר שֶׁהִתְחִיל לְבַשְּׁלוֹ בְּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, אֲפִלּוּ אִם הוּא טָמֵא, וְיֵשׁ לְחַזֵּק אֶת הַמִּנְהָג הַזֶּה. וְהָרַמְבַּ"ם כְּתַב שֶׁאָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בְּשַׁבָּת מַאֲכָל הַמְּפֹרָשׁ לִפְנֵי בֵּית דִּין, וְהוּא מִשּׁוּם טוּמְאָה.

Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: "וּבְמִקְצָת מְקוֹמוֹת נוֹהֲגִין לְהַחְמִיר" (And in some places they are accustomed to be stringent) indicates that there are differing customs regarding this matter. The Arukh HaShulchan's endorsement "וְיֵשׁ לְחַזֵּק אֶת הַמִּנְהָג הַזֶּה" (And one should strengthen this custom) reveals his personal inclination towards stringency. The Rambam's statement "אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בְּשַׁבָּת מַאֲכָל הַמְּפֹרָשׁ לִפְנֵי בֵּית דִּין, וְהוּא מִשּׁוּם טוּמְאָה" (It is forbidden to cook on Shabbat food that is designated for the court, and this is because of impurity) offers a reason for this stringency, linking it directly to temi'ah. This implies a concern that food prepared for a formal, potentially public, context might be subject to stricter impurity concerns.

Readings

The Arukh HaShulchan's discussion here hinges on the fundamental concept of temi'ah and its application to food, especially when contrasted with other prohibitions like bishul akum.

Rambam

The Rambam, in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 17:1, discusses the prohibition of bishul akum and its underlying rationale. He states:

בִּשׂוּל עוֹבְדֵי כּוֹכָבִים אָסוּר מִדְּרַבָּנָן, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא לַחְשֹׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יַחְזֹר וְיִבָּלַע בְּמַאֲכָל הָאִסּוּר. וְהַדָּבָר הַמַּחְמִיר בְּכָאן, הוּא הַמַּאֲכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִתְבַּשֵּׁל בְּלֹא אֵשׁ, וְהַמַּאֲכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּא לְסַכָּנָה בְּלֹא אֵשׁ, וְהַיַּיִן וְהַשֶּׁמֶן וְהַדְּבַשׁ וְהַחֹמֶץ וְהַמֶּלַח, וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְתַבְלִינִין. וְכָל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ, אֲפִלּוּ אִם בִּשְּׁלָן עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, מֻתָּרִין.

The Rambam's primary concern for bishul akum is that the non-Jew might inadvertently add forbidden ingredients. However, he notes exceptions for foods that don't require significant cooking or are used as seasonings. The Arukh HaShulchan, in contrast, is focused on the temi'ah aspect, particularly in the context of Shabbat.

Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 112)

The Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 112:1, codifies the prohibition of bishul akum:

מַאֲכָל שֶׁבִּשְּׁלוֹ עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, אָסוּר בְּמַאֲכָל, כְּדִכְתִיב (שְׁמוּאֵל א', ל', כ"ב): "וְכִי יִקְרַב הַמִּלְחָמָה אֶל הַבָּתִּים, וְהָיוּ מְבִיאוֹת וְאוֹכְלוֹת, וְהֵן בִּנְעָרִים, וְהֵן בַּנְּעָרוֹת, וְהֵן בְּנָשִׁים", וְכֵן כָּל מַאֲכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִתְבַּשֵּׁל בְּלֹא אֵשׁ, הַכֹּל אָסוּר.

The Shulchan Aruch, following the Gemara, establishes the prohibition based on its interpretation of a verse concerning spoils of war. The Arukh HaShulchan, however, is operating in a slightly different domain here, where the primary prohibition might be temi'ah, and the question is whether bishul akum is a factor at all.

Chiddush of Arukh HaShulchan

The Arukh HaShulchan's chiddush lies in his nuanced application of the temi'ah concept to the laws of bishul akum, especially within the specific context of Shabbat. He differentiates based on intention (kavanah) and the intended recipient of the food.

• Regarding food cooked by a non-Jew: If the kavanah is to feed an animal, a gentile, or even if the food itself is temei (impure), it's permissible to cook it on Shabbat. The reasoning is that temi'ah does not apply to gentile foods, and animals are not obligated by kashrut laws.
• Regarding food for Jews: If the kavanah is to feed a Jew, and the food is already temei, then it is forbidden to cook it. This implies that the temi'ah of the food is a primary concern, overriding any considerations of bishul akum or Shabbat cooking itself, if the food is destined for a Jew.

This suggests a hierarchy of concerns: temi'ah for a Jew is paramount. The permissibility of cooking on Shabbat is then considered, with bishul akum as a secondary layer of concern. If food is already temei and intended for a Jew, the act of cooking it on Shabbat, even by a Jew, would be problematic. The Arukh HaShulchan's reference to the Rambam in 208:19, linking stringency to temi'ah even for food prepared for the court, further solidifies this focus.

Friction

The core tension arises from the potential overlap and interaction between the prohibitions of temi'ah and bishul akum. The Arukh HaShulchan seems to posit a scenario where temi'ah can render food forbidden even if bishul akum would otherwise be the primary concern, or vice versa.

Kushya

If food is cooked by a non-Jew (bishul akum) and is also temei (impure), is it forbidden due to bishul akum, or because it is temei? The Arukh HaShulchan states in 208:17 that if the intention is to feed a Jew, and the food is already temei, it is forbidden to cook. This seems to imply that temi'ah can be a more stringent prohibition. However, the entire premise of bishul akum is that the food is forbidden because it was cooked by a non-Jew. If the food is already temei, does the act of it being bishul akum add another layer of prohibition, or is it rendered entirely impermissible by the temi'ah itself?

Consider a piece of meat that is temei (e.g., it came into contact with a sheretz). If a non-Jew cooks this temei meat on Shabbat, and the intention is to feed it to a Jew, the Arukh HaShulchan says it is forbidden to cook. This is because the food is already temei. But what if the temi'ah is less severe or the primary concern is bishul akum?

The critical point of friction is the interplay between the two prohibitions when both are present. Does one absorb the other? Does one take precedence? The Arukh HaShulchan's formulation suggests that temi'ah for a Jew is a fundamental barrier that can preclude even permissible Shabbat cooking, let alone cooking by a non-Jew.

Terutz

The Arukh HaShulchan's approach can be understood by considering the hierarchy of prohibitions and the nature of temi'ah and bishul akum.

1. Nature of Prohibitions:

   • Temei'ah is a status of the food itself, rendering it unfit for consumption by those who must maintain ritual purity, particularly Kohanim eating terumah or the general populace eating korbanot. In a broader sense, it affects the ability to fulfill certain mitzvot.
   • Bishul akum is a rabbinic decree aimed at preventing assimilation and intermarriage, specifically targeting the act of cooking by a non-Jew. It renders the food forbidden for consumption by Jews.

2. Hierarchy: The Arukh HaShulchan implies a hierarchy where temi'ah for a Jew is a more fundamental disqualifier for consumption than bishul akum, particularly when the latter is a rabbinic prohibition. If food is inherently temei and intended for a Jew, it is already in a problematic state. The act of cooking it on Shabbat, regardless of who does it, becomes an issue because the food is not in a state suitable for a Jew to consume.

   Therefore, when food is temei and intended for a Jew, the prohibition against cooking it on Shabbat (as per 208:17) stems from the fact that one should not be preparing impure food for consumption. This prohibition is independent of whether a Jew or a non-Jew is doing the cooking. The bishul akum aspect becomes secondary because the food is already fundamentally unfit. If the food were tahor (pure), then the bishul akum prohibition would be the primary concern if a non-Jew cooked it.

   The Rambam's reference in 208:19 about food prepared for the court being forbidden due to temi'ah reinforces this. It suggests that certain contexts demand a higher standard of purity, making the food's status as temei a more potent prohibition.

In essence, the Arukh HaShulchan is saying: if the food is temei and intended for a Jew, it's forbidden to cook it on Shabbat. This prohibition exists irrespective of bishul akum. If the food were tahor, then bishul akum would be the concern. The kavanah of the cook determines which prohibition is relevant.

Intertext

Tanakh

The concept of temi'ah is deeply rooted in the Torah. The prohibition against eating food that has become impure is foundational. For example, in Vayikra 11:44:

וְטִמָּאתֶם, נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם, בְּכָל הַשֶּׁרֶץ הַשֹּׁרֵץ עַל הָאָרֶץ, לֹא תִהְיוּ טְמֵאִים וְלֹא תִטַּמָּאוּ בָּהֶם. "You shall not defile yourselves by any swarming thing that swarms on the ground, and you shall not make yourselves impure with them."

This verse establishes the fundamental principle of avoiding impurity. The application of this to food, particularly in the context of when it can be cooked or prepared for consumption, is a direct extension. The Arukh HaShulchan’s concern that one should not cook temei food for a Jew on Shabbat is an application of this broader directive to maintain ritual purity in one's diet and practices. The act of cooking itself, normally a permitted activity on Shabbat, becomes forbidden when the object being cooked is already rendered unfit by impurity for the intended recipient.

Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 112:1)

As previously cited, Yoreh De'ah 112:1 states:

מַאֲכָל שֶׁבִּשְּׁלוֹ עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, אָסוּר בְּמַאֲכָל...

The Arukh HaShulchan's discussion in Orah Hayim 208:17-23 operates on a parallel but distinct layer. While Yoreh De'ah 112 focuses solely on the bishul akum prohibition, Orah Hayim 208, in the sections discussed, is concerned with the permissibility of cooking on Shabbat itself. The Arukh HaShulchan integrates the two: the temi'ah of the food can become a more overriding concern, even on Shabbat, than the potential bishul akum issue if the food were tahor.

The Arukh HaShulchan's insight is that if the food is already temei and destined for a Jew, it's forbidden to cook it on Shabbat. This is not because of bishul akum, but because one is forbidden to prepare impure food for consumption. If the food were tahor, and a non-Jew cooked it, then the prohibition would be bishul akum. The kavanah dictates which prohibition is relevant and what the status of the food becomes in relation to Shabbat cooking.

Psak/Practice

The Arukh HaShulchan's ruling in 208:17 and 208:19 suggests a practical implication regarding the preparation of food on Shabbat, particularly when dealing with potentially impure ingredients or scenarios involving non-Jews.

1. Stringency in Intention: The emphasis on kavanah means that if one is cooking on Shabbat, it is crucial to be clear about the intended recipient. If there is any doubt, or if the food is destined for general consumption, one must ensure it is tahor.

2. Prioritizing Purity: If food is already known to be temei and intended for Jewish consumption, one should not cook it on Shabbat. This implies a need for proactive measures to ensure food is tahor before Shabbat begins, if it is to be cooked.

3. Custom of Stringency: The Arukh HaShulchan's endorsement of the custom to be stringent about cooking food that was already started before Shabbat, even if it becomes temei, suggests a cautious approach. This means avoiding situations where one might have to cook temei food on Shabbat, even if there's a leniency in other circumstances.

In essence, the psak leans towards ensuring that food destined for Jewish consumption on Shabbat is tahor. The prohibition against cooking temei food for a Jew on Shabbat is a strong one, independent of bishul akum.

Takeaway

The sanctity of food for a Jew on Shabbat demands a higher standard of ritual purity; temi'ah can override concerns of bishul akum. This underscores that the intrinsic state of the food, especially its purity, is paramount when preparing it for Shabbat.