Halacha
הלכה א
קְדֵרָה שֶׁל חֶרֶס שֶׁנּתִבַּשֵּׁל בָּהּ בְּשַׂר נְבֵלָה אוֹ בְּשַׂר שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים לֹא יְבַשֵּׁל בָּהּ בְּשַׂר שְׁחוּטָה בְּאוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם. וְאִם בִּשֵּׁל בָּהּ מִין בָּשָׂר הַתַּבְשִׁיל אָסוּר. בִּשֵּׁל בָּהּ מִין אַחֵר בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם:
כסף משנה
1.
When the meat of a nevelah or a crawling animal or teeming animal was cooked in an earthenware pot,1If the pot was made out of metal, it is possible to purge the flavor of the non-kosher food the pot absorbed through hagaalah. This process is not effective with regard to an earthenware pot. one should not cook the meat of a ritually slaughtered animal in that pot on that same day. If he cooked a type of meat [in the pot that day], the dish is forbidden.2Since the dish contains meat and the flavor of the forbidden meat was absorbed in the pot, the laws applying to a forbidden substance mixed with its own type apply. Since we do not know how much of the forbidden substance is absorbed in the pot, we assume that the entire pot is forbidden. For this reason, the Rambam does not mention that if there is 60 times the amount of the forbidden food in the kosher food, the kosher food is permitted. For it is very rare that a pot be able to contain sixty times its own volume (Radbaz). If he cooked another substance in it, [it is forbidden if] its flavor can be detected.3According to the Rambam, it should be tasted by a gentile to determine whether the forbidden flavor is detectable or not, as stated in Chapter 15, Halachah 30. As mentioned, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 98:1) accepts the Rambam's premise, but the Rama states that in the present age, we do not rely on the statements of a non-Jew who tasted food to determine whether it is kosher or not.הלכה ב
וְלֹא אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא קְדֵרָה בַּת יוֹמָהּ בִּלְבַד הוֹאִיל וַעֲדַיִן לֹא נִפְגַּם הַשֻּׁמָּן שֶׁנִּבְלָע בַּקְּדֵרָה. וּמִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים לֹא יְבַשֵּׁל בָּהּ לְעוֹלָם. לְפִיכָךְ אֵין לוֹקְחִין כְּלֵי חֶרֶס יְשָׁנִים מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמְּשׁוּ בָּהֶן בְּחַמִּין כְּגוֹן קְדֵרוֹת וּקְעָרוֹת לְעוֹלָם. וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ שׁוֹעִין בַּאֲבָר. וְאִם לָקַח וּבִשֵּׁל בָּהֶן מִיּוֹם שֵׁנִי וָהָלְאָה הַתַּבְשִׁיל מֻתָּר:
כסף משנה
2.
The Torah forbade only [the use of] a pot that was [cooked with the forbidden substance] on that day.4The meaning of the Rambam's words is not clear. Rashi (Avodah Zarah 75b) interprets the term as meaning "which has not been left overnight." Tosafot, by contrast, states that it means "that has not been left for 24 hours." The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 103:5) follows the latter view. For [in that time,] the flavor of the fat absorbed in the pot had not been impaired.5After that time, however, the flavor is impaired and thus will not cause a substance cooked in the pot to become forbidden.According to Rabbinic Law, one should never cook in it again.6This is a safeguard less cooking in a pot that had not been used for non-kosher food for a day lead to cooking in one that had been used for non-kosher food that day (Avodah Zarah, loc. cit.). For this reason, one should never purchase used earthenware utensils from gentiles to use them for hot foods, e.g., pots and plates. This applies even when they are coated with lead. If one purchased such a utensil and cooked in it from the second day onward, the food is permitted.7Our Sages did not enforce their decree after the fact. Nevertheless, at the outset, an earthenware pot that was used for non-kosher food may never be used.
הלכה ג
הַלּוֹקֵחַ כְּלֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ סְעֻדָּה מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם מִכְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת וּכְלֵי זְכוּכִית. דְּבָרִים שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן כָּל עִקָּר מַטְבִּילָן בְּמֵי מִקְוֶה וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִהְיוּ מֻתָּרִין לֶאֱכֹל בָּהֶן וְלִשְׁתּוֹת. וּדְבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי צוֹנֵן כְּגוֹן כּוֹסוֹת וּצְלוֹחִיּוֹת וְקִיתוֹנִיּוֹת מְדִיחָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן מֻתָּרוֹת. וּדְבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי חַמִּין כְּגוֹן יוֹרוֹת וְקֻמְקְמוֹסִין וּמְחַמְּמֵי חַמִּין מַגְעִילָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן מֻתָּרִין. וּדְבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי הָאוּר כְּגוֹן שִׁפּוּדִין וְאַסְכְּלָאוֹת מְלַבְּנָן בָּאוּר עַד שֶׁתִּנְשַׁר קְלִפָּתָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן מֻתָּרִין:
כסף משנה
3.
[The following rules apply when] a person purchases metal or glass dinnerware from a gentile. Utensils that [the gentile] did not use at all should be immersed in the waters of a mikveh. Afterwards, it is permitted to eat and drink with them.8See Halachah 5 regarding the obligation for this immersion.Utensils that he used for cold [food and drink], e.g., cups, flasks, and pitchers, he should wash them thoroughly9Lest any forbidden food be stuck to them. and immerse them. [Afterwards,] they are permitted. Utensils that he used for hot food: large pots, kettles, and pots used to heat food, should be purged through hagaalah,10This will purge any forbidden food that was absorbed in them. There should be at least one day between the last time a pot was used for non-kosher food and the time when hagaalah is performed. and immersed in the mikveh.11See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 121:2 which discusses what must be done if they were immersed in the mikveh before hagaalah was performed. Afterwards, they are permitted. Utensils that he used by exposing them to fire, e.g., spits and grills, should be exposed to fire12That the forbidden article and the utensil were in direct contact with fire without a medium of water or any other liquid. until they become white-hot and their outer surface falls off.13Only then will the forbidden flavor that was absorbed be purged. They may then be immersed and become permitted for use.
הלכה ד
כֵּיצַד מַגְעִילָן. נוֹתֵן יוֹרָה קְטַנָּה לְתוֹךְ יוֹרָה גְּדוֹלָה וּמְמַלֵּא עָלֶיהָ מַיִם עַד שֶׁיָּצוּפוּ עַל הַקְּטַנָּה וּמַרְתִּיחָהּ יָפֶה יָפֶה. וְאִם הָיְתָה יוֹרָה גְּדוֹלָה מַקִּיף עַל שְׂפָתָהּ בָּצֵק אוֹ טִיט וּמְמַלֵּא מַיִם עַד שֶׁיָּצוּפוּ הַמַּיִם עַל שְׂפָתָהּ וּמַרְתִּיחַ. וְכֻלָּן שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַד שֶׁלֹּא הִרְתִּיחַ אוֹ עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֵדִיחַ וְעַד שֶׁלֹּא הִלְבִּין וְעַד שֶׁלֹּא הִטְבִּיל מֻתָּר. שֶׁכָּל הַשֻּׁמָּן שֶׁבָּהֶן נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם הוּא כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
כסף משנה
4.
How is [the purging process of] hagaalah achieved? A small pot is placed into a large pot and they are filled with water until the smaller one is submerged.14In that way, there will not be any portion of it that is not exposed to the water. Then one must boil it very thoroughly.15I.e., we follow the principle: "As it absorbed a forbidden flavor, so it purges it." Hence boiling it thoroughly will cause any forbidden taste that is absorbed to be purged.If a large pot was [forbidden],16And thus it would be difficult to submerge it a larger pot. one should place dough or mud along its edge [so that] he could fill it with water so that it will flow over its edge.17And thus the boiling water will also cover the edge.He [then] boils it.
In all instances, if he used them before boiling [water in them for hagaalah], washing them thoroughly, making them white hot, or immersing them, [the food] is kosher. For any fat [absorbed] in them imparts an unpleasant flavor, as explained.18In Halachah 2.
הלכה ה
טְבִילָה זוֹ שֶׁמַּטְבִּילִין כְּלֵי הַסְּעֻדָּה הַנִּלְקָחִים מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם וְאַחַר כָּךְ יֻתְּרוּ לַאֲכִילָה וּשְׁתִיָּה אֵינָן לְעִנְיַן טֻמְאָה וְטָהֳרָה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. וְרֶמֶז לָהּ (במדבר לא כג) "כָּל דָּבָר אֲשֶׁר יָבֹא בָאֵשׁ תַּעֲבִירוּ בָאֵשׁ וְטָהֵר" וּמִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בְּטָהֳרָתָן מִידֵי גִּעוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם לֹא מִידֵי טֻמְאָה. שֶׁאֵין לְךָ טֻמְאָה עוֹלָה עַל יְדֵי הָאֵשׁ וְכָל הַטְּמֵאִים בִּטְבִילָה עוֹלִין מִטֻּמְאָתָן. וְטֻמְאַת מֵת בְּהַזָּאָה וּטְבִילָה וְאֵין שָׁם אֵשׁ כְּלָל. אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן גִּעוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם. וְכֵיוָן שֶׁכָּתוּב וְטָהֵר אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים הוֹסֵיף לוֹ טָהֳרָה אַחַר עֲבִירָתוֹ בָּאֵשׁ לְהַתִּירוֹ מִגִּעוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם:
כסף משנה
5.
The immersion of the dinnerware that is purchased from gentiles to allow it to be used for eating and drinking is not associated with ritual purity and impurity. Instead, it is a Rabbinic decree.19As the Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zarah 5:15) states, this immersion was instituted to mark the article's transition from the impurity of the gentiles.There is an allusion20Most commentaries understand the Rambam as explaining that the requirement for immersion is an asmachta, i.e., an obligation that is essentially Rabbinic in origin. Although our Sages cited a verse that can be seen to allude to it, the intent is not that the obligation is derived from the verse. Instead, the verse is merely a hint which the Rabbis found to allude to their teaching (Rabbenu Nissim).
There are, however, others who note that the Rambam occasionally employs the term he employs here - midvrei sofrim - to refer to obligations and laws that are of Scriptural origin. They are not explicitly stated in the verse, but instead derived through the principles of Biblical exegesis. According to this view, the obligation is of Scriptural origin (the Rashba, Vol. III, Responsum 255, 259). to this [in Numbers 31:23 that describes Moses' instructions with regard to the spoils taken from Midian:] "Everything that can be passed through fire, you shall pass through fire and it will become pure." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the verse is speaking only about purifying [the utensils] from gentile cooking, not from ritual impurity. For there is no ritually impurity that is dispelled by fire. All those who are impure ascend from their impurity through immersion and the impurity stemming from [contact with] a human corpse is [dispelled] through the sprinkling [of water and the ashes of the red heifer]. There is no concept of fire [employed in this context], rather [it is employed] with regard to purification from gentile cooking. Since the verse states "and it will become pure," our Sages said: "Add to it another dimension of purity after passing it through fire to cause it to be permitted because [of its contact] with gentile cooking."21I.e., after you have purged it from the taste absorbed because of gentile cooking, add another dimension of purity through immersion.
הלכה ו
לֹא חִיְּבוּ בִּטְבִילָה זוֹ אֶלָּא כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת שֶׁל סְעֻדָּה הַנִּלְקָחִין מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם. אֲבָל הַשּׁוֹאֵל מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם. אוֹ שֶׁמִּשְׁכֵּן הָעַכּוּ''ם אֶצְלוֹ כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת. מֵדִיחַ אוֹ מַרְתִּיחַ אוֹ מְלַבֵּן וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַטְבִּיל. וְכֵן אִם לָקַח כְּלֵי עֵץ אוֹ כְּלֵי אֲבָנִים מֵדִיחַ אוֹ מַרְתִּיחַ וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַטְבִּיל. וְכֵן כְּלֵי חָרָשִׂים אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַטְבִּיל. אֲבָל הַשּׁוֹעִין בַּאֲבָר הֲרֵי הֵן כִּכְלֵי מַתָּכוֹת וּצְרִיכִין טְבִילָה:
כסף משנה
6.
[Our Sages] obligate this immersion only for metal22This requirement also applies to glass dinnerware, as stated in Halachah 3.Avodah Zarah 75b explains the association with metal utensils as follows. Our Sages associated this obligation with the purification of the spoil taken in the war against Midian and the verse which mentions those spoils (Numbers 31:22 refers to metal utensils. Glass utensils are also included, because, halachically, they share similarities to metal utensils. dinnerware utensils23I.e., utensils used to prepare, serve, or partake of food. Even utensils that are used in the preliminary phases of preparation of food, e.g., a knife used to slaughter or skin an animal, are required to be immersed according to certain authorities [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 120:5)]. that were purchased from a gentile. When, however, a person borrows [such utensils] from a gentile or a gentile left him such utensils as security, it is only necessary to wash them thoroughly, boil them, or expose them to fire. He does not have to immerse [them].24For even though he has permission to use them, he has not become their owner. The Kessef Mishneh quotes certain opinions that maintain that utensils taken as security must be immersed, because if the debt is not repaid, they are considered as payment [see Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 120:5).
In this context, there are many authorities who question why the utensils that are "purchased" by a gentile before Pesach are not required to be immersed. Similarly, if one purchased wooden or stone utensils, it is only necessary to wash them thoroughly, boil them, or expose them to fire. Similarly, earthenware utensils need not be immersed.25Needless to say, plastic utensils need not be immersed. If, however, they are coated with lead, they are considered as metal utensils and require immersion.26The Rama ((Yoreh De'ah 120:1) states that they should be immersed without a blessing.
הלכה ז
הַלּוֹקֵחַ סַכִּין מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם מְלַבְּנָהּ בָּאֵשׁ אוֹ מַשְׁחִיזָהּ בָּרֵחַיִם שֶׁלָּהּ. וְאִם הָיְתָה סַכִּין יָפָה שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ פְּגִימוֹת דַּי לוֹ אִם נְעָצָהּ בְּקַרְקַע קָשָׁה עֶשֶׂר פְּעָמִים וְאוֹכֵל בָּהּ צוֹנֵן. וְאִם הָיוּ בָּהּ פְּגִימוֹת אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה יָפָה וְרָצָה לֶאֱכֹל בָּהּ חַמִּין אוֹ לִשְׁחֹט בָּהּ מְלַבְּנָהּ אוֹ מַשְׁחִיזָהּ כֻּלָּהּ. שָׁחַט בָּהּ קֹדֶם שֶׁיְּטַהֲרֶנָּה מֵדִיחַ מְקוֹם הַשְּׁחִיטָה. וְאִם קִלֵּף הֲרֵי זֶה מְשֻׁבָּח:
כסף משנה
7.
When a person purchases a knife from a gentile, he must expose it to fire until it become white hot or have it honed in its sharpener.27By exposing the knife to fire, the person will burn away any non-kosher substances. By honing it, he will grind away its surface and together with it, the taste of the forbidden substance it absorbed. If it was a perfectly [smooth] knife without any blemishes, it is sufficient to insert it in hard earth ten times.28One must insert it in ten different places in the earth. It is not sufficient to insert it in the same place ten times [Tur and Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 121:7)]. [Afterwards,] one may eat cold food with it.29For sticking it into the earth will remove any traces of forbidden fat on its surface and the taste of forbidden food that is absorbed will not be released when it is used for cold food. If it had blemishes or it was perfectly [smooth], but one desired to use it to eat hot food or to slaughter with it, he should expose it to fire until it becomes white hot or hone it in its entirety.30These activities may cause any forbidden taste absorbed by the knife to be released. Hence before the knife is used, the traces of the forbidden flavor must be removed as above.The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 121:7) quotes opinions that maintain that honing the knife is not sufficient to allow it to be used for hot foods. He states that this is accustomed practice. Even so, after the fact, if a person slaughtered an animal with a knife that was honed in a grinder, thre is no prohibition involved (Siftei Cohen 121:20). If he slaughtered [an animal] with such a knife before purifying it, he should wash thoroughly the place of slaughter.31To remove any traces of forbidden fat that might be present.
This is permitted only after the fact. At the outset, it is forbidden to slaughter with such a knife unless measures are taken to remove the absorbed fat (Siftei Cohen 10:8). If he removes the surface [of the meat around the place of slaughter], it is praiseworthy.32For according to some opinions, through the slaughter of the animal, the forbidden fat on the knife can become absorbed in the surface of the meat where the animal was slaughtered. Hence it is necessary that it be removed. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 10:1) rules that it is necessary to take this measure and remove the surface of the meat.
הלכה ח
סַכִּין שֶׁשָּׁחַט בָּהּ טְרֵפָה לֹא יִשְׁחֹט בָּהּ עַד שֶׁיְּדִיחָהּ אֲפִלּוּ בְּצוֹנֵן אוֹ מְקַנְּחָהּ בִּבְלָיוֹת שֶׁל בְּגָדִים:
כסף משנה
8.
When a knife was used to slaughter an animal that was trefe, one should not slaughter with it [again] until it is washed thoroughly, even with cold water or wiped clean with worn-out clothes.33To remove any trace of forbidden blood or fat. Nothing more is necessary, we do not say that the blood or fat became absorbed in the knife.The Turei Zahav 10:15 states that unlike a knife used by gentiles mentioned in the previous halachah, it was not used frequently with a non-kosher substance. Hence washing it thoroughly is sufficient.
הלכה ט
וְיֵשׁ שָׁם דְּבָרִים אֲחֵרִים אָסְרוּ אוֹתָן חֲכָמִים וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לְאִסּוּרָן עִקָּר מִן הַתּוֹרָה גָּזְרוּ עֲלֵיהֶן כְּדֵי לְהִתְרַחֵק מִן הָעַכּוּ''ם עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִתְעָרְבוּ בָּהֶן יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיָבוֹאוּ לִידֵי חַתְנוּת. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. אָסְרוּ לִשְׁתּוֹת עִמָּהֶן וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין לָחוּשׁ לְיֵין נֶסֶךְ. וְאָסְרוּ לֶאֱכֹל פִּתָּן אוֹ בִּשּׁוּלֵיהֶן וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין לָחוּשׁ לְגִעוּלֵיהֶן:
כסף משנה
9.
There are other substances which are forbidden by the Sages. Even though there is not a basis for their prohibition in Scriptural Law, they decreed against their use34These decrees were about the eighteen decrees passed when the students of the School of Shammai outnumbered the students of the School of Hillel, as related in Shabbat 1:3 (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, Avodah Zarah 2:6). to separate from the gentiles so that Jews will not intermingle with them and intermarry. They are: It is forbidden to drink [alcoholic beverages] with them35See the following halachah. even in a place where there was no suspicion that the wine was poured as a libation. And they forbade eating from their bread or cooked dishes36See Halachot 12-24. even in a place where there is no suspicion that the food was forbidden.37E.g., the food was cooked by gentiles on Jewish premises (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit.).הלכה י
כֵּיצַד. לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה אָדָם בִּמְסִבָּה שֶׁל עַכּוּ''ם. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא יַיִן מְבֻשָּׁל שֶׁאֵינוֹ נֶאֱסָר. אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה שׁוֹתֶה מִכֵּלָיו לְבַדּוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה רֹב הַמְּסִבָּה יִשְׂרָאֵל מֻתָּר. וְאֵין שׁוֹתִין שֵׁכָר שֶׁלָּהֶן שֶׁעוֹשִׂין מִן הַתְּמָרִים וְהַתְּאֵנִים וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן. וְאֵינוֹ אָסוּר אֶלָּא בִּמְקוֹם מְכִירָתוֹ. אֲבָל אִם הֵבִיא הַשֵּׁכָר לְבֵיתוֹ וְשָׁתָהוּ שָׁם מֻתָּר שֶׁעִקַּר הַגְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִסְעֹד אֶצְלוֹ:
כסף משנה
10.
A person should not drink at a party of gentiles even though boiled wine which is not forbidden38See Chapter 11, Halachah 9. [is being served] or he is drinking from his own utensils. If the majority of the attendants of the party are Jewish, it is permitted.39The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch do not mention this restriction or the accompanying leniency. The Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 112) explains the Rambam's logic as follows: Avodah Zarah 30a relates that one of the Sages, Shmuel was sitting with Abalat, a gentile. They were served boiled wine. Abalat withdrew, lest he touch the wine and cause it to become forbidden. Shmuel called him back, telling him there was no prohibition against boiled wine.Rabbenu Asher asks: Since the prohibition against gentile wine was instituted as a protection against intermarriage, what difference does it make whether the wine is boiled or not? He answers that boiled wine is not common. Hence our Sages did not include it in their decree.
Rambam maintains that boiled wine is common and hence included in our Sages' decree. For this reason, it is forbidden to drink it together with gentiles. How then could Shmuel drink with Abalat? Because there were a majority of Jews at the gathering and such a situation is not included in our Sages' decree. We may not drink the beer that they make from dates, figs, or the like. [This is forbidden] only in the place where they are sold.40Thus according to the Rambam [and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 114:1) who quotes his ruling, it is forbidden to drink at a bar frequented primarily by gentiles. The Rama mentions that it is customary in the Ashkenazic community to rule leniently with regard to alcoholic beverages made from honey and grain. If, however, one brought the beer home and drank it there, it is permitted. For the fundamental point of the decree is that one should not feast with [a gentile].
הלכה יא
יֵין תַּפּוּחִים וְיֵין רִמּוֹנִים וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן מֻתָּר לִשְׁתּוֹתָן בְּכָל מָקוֹם. דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מָצוּי לֹא גָּזְרוּ עָלָיו. יֵין צִמּוּקִים הֲרֵי הוּא כְּיַיִן וּמִתְנַסֵּךְ:
כסף משנה
11.
It is permitted to drink wine from apples, pomegranates, and the like in every place. [Our Sages] did not institute a decree in an uncommon situation. Raisen wine is like ordinary wine and is used for libations.41Hence a gentile's touch renders it forbidden.הלכה יב
אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָסְרוּ פַּת עַכּוּ''ם. יֵשׁ מְקוֹמוֹת שֶׁמְּקִלִּין בַּדָּבָר וְלוֹקְחִין פַּת הַנַּחְתּוֹם הָעַכּוּ''ם בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין שָׁם נַחְתּוֹם יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבַשָּׂדֶה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא שְׁעַת הַדְּחָק. אֲבָל פַּת בַּעֲלֵי בָּתִּים אֵין שָׁם מִי שֶׁמּוֹרֶה בָּהּ לְהָקֵל שֶׁעִקַּר הַגְּזֵרָה מִשּׁוּם חַתְנוּת וְאִם יֹאכַל פַּת בַּעֲלֵי בָּתִּים יָבוֹא לִסְעֹד אֶצְלָן:
כסף משנה
12.
Although [our Sages] forbade bread [baked] by gentiles, there are places where leniency is shown regarding this matter and bread baked by a gentile baker is purchased in a place where there is no Jewish baker and it is in a field, because this is a pressing situation.42Because bread is a staple of life and there is no Jewish bread available, our Sages allowed for leniency when purchasing bread from a commercial baker. For buying from him will not lead to close personal relationships. Nevertheless, according to the Rambam, this leniency is granted only: where there is no Jewish bakers and in the fields, not in the cities. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 112:2) rules more leniently and does not forbid this in a city. The Rama rules even more leniently and allows the purchase of bread from a gentile baker even in places where bread from a Jewish baker is available. There is, by contrast, no one who will rule that leniency may be shown with regard to bread baked by a homeowner.43There are opinions which maintain when there is no bread from a commercial baker available, one may even use bread baked by a gentile homeowner [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 112)]. The Rama states that one may accept this leniency. For the primary reason for [our Sages'] decree was [to prevent] intermarriage. If one will eat the bread of a [gentile] homeowner, [it is likely that] he will feast with him.הלכה יג
הִדְלִיק הָעַכּוּ''ם אֶת הַתַּנּוּר וְאָפָה בּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל. אוֹ שֶׁהִדְלִיק יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָפָה עַכּוּ''ם. אוֹ שֶׁהִדְלִיק הָעַכּוּ''ם וְאָפָה הָעַכּוּ''ם וּבָא יִשְׂרָאֵל וְנִעֵר הָאֵשׁ מְעַט אוֹ כְּבָשׁוֹ לָאֵשׁ הוֹאִיל וְנִשְׁתַּתֵּף בִּמְלֶאכֶת הַפַּת הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת. וַאֲפִלּוּ לֹא זָרַק אֶלָּא עֵץ לְתוֹךְ הַתַּנּוּר הִתִּיר כָּל הַפַּת שֶׁבּוֹ. שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר אֶלָּא לִהְיוֹת הֶכֵּר שֶׁהַפַּת שֶׁלָּהֶן אֲסוּרָה:
כסף משנה
13.
[The bread] is permitted [in the following situations]: A gentile lit the oven and a Jew baked within it, a Jew lit the oven and the gentile baked within it, the gentile both lit the oven and baked, but the Jew stirred the fire or reduced it, since he was involved in the baking tasks, [we rule leniently]. Even though he did not do more than throw one piece of wood into the oven, he caused all the bread in it to be permitted. [The rationale is that this requirement] is only to make a distinction that [a gentile's] bread is forbidden.44The Radbaz states that this leniency applies only with regard to baking bread. With regard to cooking, a Jew must take a more active role in the cooking process. This ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 113:7). The Rama, however, differs and maintains that kindling the oven is sufficient for cooking as well.הלכה יד
עַכּוּ''ם שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל לָנוּ יַיִן אוֹ חָלָב אוֹ דְּבַשׁ אוֹ פְּרִישִׁין וְכַיּוֹצֵא בְּאֵלּוּ (מִכָּל) דָּבָר הַנֶּאֱכָל כְּמוֹת שֶׁהוּא חַי הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. וְלֹא גָּזְרוּ אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל כְּמוֹת שֶׁהוּא חַי. כְּגוֹן בָּשָׂר וְדָג תָּפֵל וּבֵיצָה וִירָקוֹת. אִם בִּשְּׁלָן הָעַכּוּ''ם מִתְּחִלָּה וְעַד סוֹף וְלֹא נִשְׁתַּתֵּף יִשְׂרָאֵל עִמּוֹ בְּבִשּׁוּלָן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין מִשּׁוּם בִּשּׁוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם:
כסף משנה
14.
When a gentile cooks wine, milk, honey, quince,45There is a slight difficulty with the Rambam's statements, because quince are only edible when cooked. or the like, i.e., any entity that is usually eaten raw, it is permitted. [Our Sages] issued their decree only with regard to entities that are not eaten at all raw, e.g., meat, unsalted fish, an egg, and vegetables. If a gentile were to cook them from the beginning to the end without the Jew participating in the cooking at all, they are forbidden because they were cooked by gentiles.הלכה טו
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּדָבָר שֶׁהוּא עוֹלֶה עַל שֻׁלְחַן מְלָכִים לֶאֱכֹל בּוֹ אֶת הַפַּת. כְּגוֹן בָּשָׂר וּבֵיצִים וְדָגִים וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶם. אֲבָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹלֶה עַל שֻׁלְחַן מְלָכִים לֶאֱכֹל בּוֹ אֶת הַפַּת כְּגוֹן תֻּרְמוֹסִין שֶׁשָּׁלְקוּ אוֹתָן עַכּוּ''ם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱכָלִין חַיִּין הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן. שֶׁעִקַּר הַגְּזֵרָה מִשּׁוּם חַתְנוּת שֶׁלֹּא יְזַמְּנוֹ הָעַכּוּ''ם אֶצְלוֹ בַּסְּעֻדָּה. וְדָבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹלֶה עַל שֻׁלְחַן מְלָכִים לֶאֱכֹל בּוֹ אֶת הַפַּת אֵין אָדָם מְזַמֵּן אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו:
כסף משנה
15.
When does the above apply? To [food] that would be served on the table of kings46Today, when monarchy is a point of history, the phrase "fit to be served on the table of kings" refers to food served at a dinner for the President or dignitaries of similar status. to be eaten together with bread,47Avodah Zarah 38a gives this and the leniency mentioned in the previous halachah as alternate explanations when food cooked by gentiles is permitted. Since the matter is left unresolved by the Talmud, the Rambam and the subsequent authorities rule leniently in both situations. e.g., meat, eggs, fish, and the like. When, by contrast, [food] would not be served on the table of kings to be eaten together with bread, e.g., vetch48A legume used as cattle fodder, but also served to humans on occasion. cooked by gentiles, it is permitted despite the fact that it is not eaten uncooked. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. For the fundamental purpose of the decree was to prevent intermarriage, by [hindering] a gentile from inviting [the Jew] to a feast. And when [food] would not be served on the table of kings to be eaten together with bread, a person would not invite a friend [to share a meal] of it.הלכה טז
וְדָגִים קְטַנִּים שֶׁמְּלָחָן יִשְׂרָאֵל אוֹ עַכּוּ''ם הֲרֵי הֵן כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלוּ מִקְצָת בִּשּׁוּל. וְאִם צְלָאָן עַכּוּ''ם אַחַר כֵּן מֻתָּרִין. וְכָל שֶׁבִּשְּׁלוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל מְעַט בִּשּׁוּלוֹ בֵּין בַּתְּחִלָּה בֵּין בַּסּוֹף מֻתָּר. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הִנִּיחַ הָעַכּוּ''ם בָּשָׂר אוֹ קְדֵרָה עַל גַּבֵּי הָאֵשׁ וְהָפַךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּבָּשָׂר וְהֵגִיס בַּקְּדֵרָה אוֹ שֶׁהִנִּיחַ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגָמַר הָעַכּוּ''ם הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר:
כסף משנה
16.
When small fish were salted by a Jew or a gentile,49The Kessef Mishneh states that this is speaking about fish that are frequently served salted even without being cooked (e.g., sardines or herring served in brine). It is permitted to eat such fish for, as the Rambam states in the following halachah, in this context, salting is not considered as cooking. This leniency does not apply to large fish, for they are unfit to be eaten unless they are cooked or roasted. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 103:12) mentions this ruling, but also a dissenting view that allows leniency even with regard to large fish. it is as if they have undergone part of their cooking process. [Therefore] if a gentile roasted them afterwards, they are permitted.50Since they were fit to be eaten before they were roasted, the fact that they were roasted by a gentile afterwards does not cause them to be forbidden. This applies even when a gentile performed the salting. For that salting did not cause the fish to become forbidden and yet, it made it fit to be eaten (ibid.). [Similarly,] whenever a Jew performs a small part of the cooking process, whether at the beginning or at the end, [the food] is permitted. Accordingly, if a gentile placed meat or a pot on the fire and the Jew turned over the meat or stirred the pot or, conversely, the Jew placed [the food on the fire] and the gentile completed [the cooking process], [the food] is permitted.51In his Kessef Mishneh, R. Yosef Caro rules that this applies only when the cooking process would have been completed without the gentile's activity; the gentile merely hastened it. He does not, however, quote this ruling in his Shulchan Aruch. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 113:6) rules that even if the food would not have cooked without the gentile's activity, it is permitted. The Turei Zahav 113:6 and the Siftei Cohen 113:8, however, raise questions concerning that leniency.הלכה יז
דָּג שֶׁמְּלָחוֹ עַכּוּ''ם וּפֵרוֹת שֶׁעִשְּׁנָן עַד שֶׁהִכְשִׁירָן לַאֲכִילָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. מָלִיחַ אֵינוֹ כְּרוֹתֵחַ בִּגְזֵרָה זוֹ וְהַמְעֵשָּׁן אֵינוֹ כִּמְבֻשָּׁל. וְכֵן קְלָיוֹת שֶׁל עַכּוּ''ם מֻתָּרִין וְלֹא גָּזְרוּ עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְזַמֵּן חֲבֵרוֹ עַל הַקְּלָיוֹת:
כסף משנה
17.
When a gentile salts fish or smokes fruit and in this way prepares them to be eaten, they are permitted. With regard to this decree,52In contrast to certain other halachic contexts. salted food is not considered as if it were boiling hot, nor is smoking considered as cooking. Similarly, kernels of grain roasted by a gentile are permitted. They were not included in the decree, for a person will not invite a colleague53See the conclusion of Halachah 15. to [come and eat] roasted kernels of grain.הלכה יח
פּוֹלִין וַאֲפוּנִין וַעֲדָשִׁים וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן שֶׁשּׁוֹלְקִין אוֹתָן הָעַכּוּ''ם וּמוֹכְרִין אוֹתָן אֲסוּרִין מִשּׁוּם בִּשּׁוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁעוֹלִין עַל שֻׁלְחַן מְלָכִים מִשּׁוּם פַּרְפֶּרֶת. וּמִשּׁוּם גִּעוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁמָּא יְבַשְּׁלוּ אוֹתָן עִם הַבָּשָׂר אוֹ בִּקְדֵרָה שֶׁבִּשְּׁלוּ בָּהּ בָּשָׂר. וְכֵן הַסֻּפְגָּנִין שֶׁקּוֹלִין אוֹתָן הָעַכּוּ''ם בְּשֶׁמֶן אֲסוּרִין אַף מִשּׁוּם גִּעוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם:
כסף משנה
18.
Beans, peas, lentils, and the like that have been cooked by gentiles and are sold are forbidden because of [the decree against] gentile cooking in places where they are served on the tables of kings54Implied is that the designation of a food as important enough to be served on the tables of kings is a relative matter, determined by each locale in accordance with its own practice (Makor Mayim Chayim). as a relish. [They are also forbidden,] because of prohibited foods in all places for perhaps they were cooked together with meat55For this is frequently done in order to flavor beans. or in a pot in which meat had been cooked.56I.e., cooked that day. The Kessef Mishneh states that, according to the Rambam, we assume that a pot owned by a gentile had been used to cook non-kosher food that day. This is not the view of the majority of Halachic authorities. Similarly, doughnuts that are fried by gentiles in oil are forbidden because of prohibited foods.57For we fear that the gentile used non-kosher fat or that the fryer in which they are prepared was used that day for non-kosher meat.הלכה יט
עַכּוּ''ם שֶׁבִּשֵּׁל וְלֹא נִתְכַּוֵּן לְבִשּׁוּל הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר. כֵּיצַד. עַכּוּ''ם שֶׁהִצִּית אוּר בַּאֲגַם כְּדֵי לְהַעֲבִיר הֶחָצִיר וְנִתְבַּשְּׁלוּ בָּהּ חֲגָבִים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁהֵן עוֹלִין עַל שֻׁלְחַן מְלָכִים מִשּׁוּם פַּרְפֶּרֶת. וְכֵן אִם חָרַךְ הָרֹאשׁ לְהַעֲבִיר הַשֵּׂעָר מֻתָּר לֶאֱכֹל מִן הַדִּלְדּוּלִין וּמִן רֹאשׁ אָזְנַיִם שֶׁנִּצְּלוּ בִּשְׁעַת חֲרִיכָה:
כסף משנה
19.
When a gentile cooked without intending to cook, [the product] is permitted.58When quoting this law, Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 113:5) emphasizes that if the gentile intends to cook, even if he did not intend to cook a particular substance, that substance is forbidden. For example, when a gentile lit an oven with the intent of cooking food without realizing that there was meat in the oven, the meat is forbidden. What is implied? A gentile lit a fire in a swamp to clean away the overgrowth and grasshoppers were roasted, it is permitted to eat them. [This applies] even in places where they are served on the tables of kings as a relish. Similarly, if he scorches a [kosher animal's] head to remove its hair, it is permitted to partake of the strings of meat and the tips of the ears that were roasted at the time of the scorching.הלכה כ
תְּמָרִים שֶׁשָּׁלְקוּ אוֹתָן עַכּוּ''ם אִם הָיוּ מְתוּקִין מִתְּחִלָּתָן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. וְאִם הָיוּ מָרִין וּמְתַקְּנִין הַבִּשּׁוּל הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין. הָיוּ בֵּינוֹנִיִּים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין:
כסף משנה
20.
[The following rules apply to] dates that were cooked by gentiles. If, initially, they were sweet, they are permitted.59Since they can be eaten fresh, they are not forbidden when cooked (Halachah 14). If they were bitter and the cooking sweetened them, they are forbidden. If they were of intermediate sweetness, they are forbidden.הלכה כא
קָלִי שֶׁל עֲדָשִׁים שֶׁלָּשׁוֹ בֵּין בְּמַיִם בֵּין בְּחֹמֶץ הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר. אֲבָל קָלִי שֶׁל חִטִּים וּשְׂעוֹרִים שֶׁלָּשִׁין אוֹתָן בְּמַיִם הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר:
כסף משנה
21.
Roasted lentils that were kneaded with water or with vinegar are forbidden.60Avodah Zarah 38b relates that it was customary to eat a dish made from roasted lentils mixed with vinegar. This was considered like cooking. As a safeguard against partaking of such a mixture, they also forbade roasted lentils mixed with water. It was not, however, customary to partake of grain mixed with vinegar. Hence, there was no reason to forbid grain mixed with water. When, however, roasted kernels of wheat or barley are kneaded with water, they are permitted.הלכה כב
שֶׁמֶן שֶׁל עַכּוּ''ם מֻתָּר. וּמִי שֶׁאוֹסְרוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה עוֹמֵד בְּחֵטְא גָּדוֹל. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּמְרֶה עַל פִּי בֵּית דִּין שֶׁהִתִּירוּהוּ. וַאֲפִלּוּ נִתְבַּשֵּׁל הַשֶּׁמֶן הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר. וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱסָר לֹא מִפְּנֵי בִּשּׁוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנֶּאֱכָל כְּמוֹת שֶׁהוּא חַי. וְלֹא מִפְּנֵי גִּעוּלֵי עַכּוּ''ם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַבָּשָׂר פּוֹגֵם אֶת הַשֶּׁמֶן וּמַסְרִיחוֹ:
כסף משנה
22.
The oil of gentiles is permitted. One who forbids it commits a great sin, for he rebels61The wording the Rambam uses alludes to the Biblical prohibition of the rebellious elder (see Deuteronomy, ch. 17, and Hilchot Mamrim, ch. 3). The Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zarah 2:8) relates that Rav once refused to partake of gentile oil. Shmuel ordered him to do so. "If not," he threatened, "I will have you labeled a rebellious elder." against [the teachings] of the [High] Court who permitted it.62Avodah Zarah 35b states that Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi and his court permitted gentile oil to be used. Even if the oil was cooked, it is permitted. It is not forbidden because of gentile cooking, because we partake of oil uncooked. Nor is it forbidden, because of prohibited foods,63I.e., the flavor of forbidden meat absorbed in the pot. because meat impairs [the flavor of] oil and spoils it.הלכה כג
וְכֵן דְּבַשׁ שֶׁל עַכּוּ''ם שֶׁנִּתְבַּשֵּׁל וְעָשׂוּ מִמֶּנּוּ מִינֵי מְתִיקָה מֻתָּר מִטַּעַם זֶה:
כסף משנה
23.
Similarly, when gentile honey was cooked and sweets were made from it, it is permitted for the same reason.64I.e., because it is ordinarily eaten raw and because meat spoils its flavor.הלכה כד
כּוֹסְפָן שֶׁל עַכּוּ''ם שֶׁהוּחַמּוּ חַמִּין בֵּין בְּיוֹרָה גְּדוֹלָה בֵּין בְּיוֹרָה קְטַנָּה מֻתָּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנּוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם הוּא. וְכֵן כְּבָשִׁין שֶׁאֵין דַּרְכָּן לָתֵת לְתוֹכָן חֹמֶץ אוֹ יַיִן אוֹ זֵיתִים הַכְּבוּשִׁין וַחֲגָבִים הַכְּבוּשִׁין שֶׁבָּאִין מִן הָאוֹצָר מֻתָּרִין. אֲבָל חֲגָבִים וּכְבָשִׁים שֶׁמְּזַלְּפִין עֲלֵיהֶן יַיִן אֲסוּרִין. וְכֵן אִם הָיוּ מְזַלְּפִין עֲלֵיהֶן חֹמֶץ וַאֲפִלּוּ חֹמֶץ שֵׁכָר אֲסוּרִין:
כסף משנה
24.
Date dregs65Which would be boiled to make beer. of gentiles that were heated in hot water, whether in a large pot or a small pot, are permitted.66Avodah Zarah 38b originally postulates that only date dregs cooked in small pots with openings too narrow to put in non-kosher meat are forbidden. The conclusion of the passage, however, permits even date dregs cooked in large pots for the reason mentioned by the Rambam. For the [flavor of forbidden meat absorbed in the pot] impairs its flavor. Similarly, pickled foods to which it is not customary to add vinegar or wine or pickled olives or pickled grasshoppers that are brought from the storehouse are permitted.67In some halachic contexts, pickling is considered as cooking. Nevertheless, with regard to this prohibition, our Sages ruled leniently. We do not forbid them because of the suspicion that wine or vinegar will be sprinkled over them, because wine or vinegar would not be sprinkled over them in the storeroom, only in a retail outlet [Rashi (Avodah Zarah 39b)]. Nevertheless, grasshoppers and pickled foods over which wine is sprinkled are forbidden.68Because of the gentile wine. Similarly, they are forbidden if vinegar - even vinegar made from beer - is sprinkled over them.69As stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 13, vinegar made from gentile wine is forbidden. And as indicated in the next halachah, other types of vinegar are also forbidden.הלכה כה
וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אָסְרוּ חֹמֶץ שֵׁכָר שֶׁל עַכּוּ''ם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּשְׁלִיכִין לְתוֹכוֹ שִׁמְרֵי יַיִן. לְפִיכָךְ הַנִּלְקָח מִן הָאוֹצָר מֻתָּר:
כסף משנה
25.
Why is gentile vinegar made from beer forbidden? Because they cast the dregs of wine into it. Therefore [vinegar] taken from a storage room is permitted.70For if wine dregs were cast into the vinegar in the storage room, it would spoil (Avodah Zarah 32b). In a store, however, we assume that it will be sold quickly and in that brief time, it will not spoil (Turei Zahav 114:5).הלכה כו
הַמּוּרְיָס בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁדַּרְכָּן לָתֵת לְתוֹכוֹ יַיִן אָסוּר. וְאִם הָיָה הַיַּיִן יָקָר מִן הַמּוּרְיָס מֻתָּר. וְכָזֶה מוֹרִין בְּכָל דָּבָר שֶׁחוֹשְׁשִׁין לוֹ שֶׁמָּא עֵרְבוּ בּוֹ הָעַכּוּ''ם דָּבָר אָסוּר. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְעָרֵב דָּבָר הַיָּקָר בְּזוֹל שֶׁהֲרֵי מַפְסִיד. אֲבָל מְעָרֵב הַזּוֹל בְּיָקָר כְּדֵי לְהִשְׂתַּכֵּר:
כסף משנה
26.
[Gentile] fish brine, in places where it is customary to mix wine into it, is forbidden. If the wine is more expensive than the fish brine, it is permitted. We rule this way in all instances where we suspect that the gentiles mixed a forbidden substance [into a permitted substance]. For a person will not mix something expensive into something that is low-priced, for he will lose. He will, however, mix the low-priced into the expensive, for then he profits.הלכה כז
קָטָן שֶׁאָכַל אֶחָד מִמַּאֲכָלוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת. אוֹ שֶׁעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת. אֵין בֵּית דִּין מְצֻוִּין עָלָיו לְהַפְרִישׁוֹ לְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ בֶּן דַּעַת. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁעָשָׂה מֵעַצְמוֹ. אֲבָל לְהַאֲכִילוֹ בְּיָדַיִם אָסוּר וַאֲפִלּוּ דְּבָרִים שֶׁאִסּוּרָן מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. וְכֵן אָסוּר לְהַרְגִּילוֹ בְּחִלּוּל שַׁבָּת וּמוֹעֵד וַאֲפִלּוּ בִּדְבָרִים שֶׁהֵן מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת:
כסף משנה
27.
When a child eats forbidden foods or performs a forbidden labor on the Sabbath,71Although the Rambam's wording in Hilchot Shabbat 24:11 might lead one to think that one must rebuke a child for performing a task forbidden by Scriptural Law, both the Maggid Mishneh and the Kessef Mishneh explain that his statements there should be interpreted within the context of his statements here. the Jewish court is not commanded to make him cease, because he is not intellectually capable.72Hence, he is not responsible for his actions.When does the above apply? When he acts on his own initiative.73Note, however, the Rama (Orach Chayim 243:1) which quotes opinions that maintain that once a child has reached the age where he is fit to be educated in the observance of the mitzvot, the court - and every individual person - is obligated to rebuke for transgressing. It is, however, forbidden [for an adult] to give him [non-kosher food] by hand. [This applies even] to foods forbidden by Rabbinic decree. Similarly, it is forbidden to make him accustomed to desecrating the Sabbath and the festivals.74To give a contemporary example, a parent cannot have a child turn lights on and off on the Sabbath. [This applies] even to [performing] activities forbidden as a shvut.75As the Rambam explains in Hilchot Shabbat 21:1, the term shvut refers to activities forbidden by Rabbinic Law, because they resemble forbidden labors or because they might lead one to commit a forbidden labor.
Note, however, the Shulchan Aruch HaRav 243:1 which rules that when there is a necessity, not even a severe necessity, Rabbinic prohibitions can be overstepped with regard to a child.
הלכה כח
אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין מְצֻוִּין לְהַפְרִישׁ אֶת הַקָּטָן. מִצְוָה עַל אָבִיו לִגְעֹר בּוֹ וּלְהַפְרִישׁוֹ כְּדֵי לְחַנְּכוֹ בִּקְדֻשָּׁה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (משלי כב ו) "חֲנֹךְ לַנַּעַר עַל פִּי דַרְכּוֹ" וְגוֹ':
כסף משנה
28.
Although the Jewish court is not commanded to separate a child from transgressions, his father is commanded to rebuke him so that he withdraws in order to train him in holy conduct, as [Proverbs 22:6] states: "Educate a child according to his way."76This is a general charge, applying to the Torah and its mitzvot in their totality.הלכה כט
אָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים מַאֲכָלוֹת וּמַשְׁקִין שֶׁנֶּפֶשׁ רֹב בְּנֵי אָדָם קִהָה מֵהֶן כְּגוֹן מַאֲכָלוֹת וּמַשְׁקִין שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בָּהֶן קִיא אוֹ צוֹאָה וְלֵחָה סְרוּחָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן. וְכֵן אָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים לֶאֱכֹל וְלִשְׁתּוֹת בְּכֵלִים הַצּוֹאִים שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְאוֹנֶנֶת מֵהֶם. כְּגוֹן כְּלֵי בֵּית הַכִּסֵּא וּכְלֵי זְכוּכִית שֶׁל סַפָּרִין שֶׁגּוֹרְעִין בָּהֶם אֶת הַדָּם וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן:
כסף משנה
29.
Our Sages77See the notes to the following halachah with regard to whether these restrictions are of Scriptural or Rabbinic origin. forbade [a person from partaking of] food and drink from which the souls of most people are revolted, e.g., food and drink that were mixed with vomit, feces, foul discharges, or the like.78The Radbaz states that one partake of such foods for curative purposes if necessary. Similarly, our Sages forbade eating and drinking from filthy utensils from which a person's soul languishes, e.g., the utensils of a lavatory, the glass79The Bayit Chadash (Yoreh De'ah 116) states that this also applies to metal utensils. The Rambam mentions glass only because that was the ordinary practice at that time. utensils of medical attendants that are used to let blood, and the like.הלכה ל
וְכֵן אָסְרוּ לֶאֱכֹל בְּיָדַיִם מְסֹאָבוֹת מְזֹהָמוֹת. וְעַל גַּבֵּי כֵּלִים מְלֻכְלָכִים. שֶׁכָּל דְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ בִּכְלַל (ויקרא יא מג) "אַל תְּשַׁקְּצוּ אֶת נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם". וְהָאוֹכֵל מַאֲכָלוֹת אֵלּוּ מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:
כסף משנה
30.
Similarly, they forbade eating with unclean and soiled hands and with dirty utensils. All of these matters are included in the general [prohibition]: "Do not make your souls detestable." A person who partakes of these foods is given stripes for rebellious conduct.80See the Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 116) who debates whether the prohibition mentioned in this and the previous halachah are of Rabbinic or Scriptural origin. It is possible to explain that the restrictions were instituted by the Rabbis and they employed the Biblical verse merely as an asmachta, an allusion and a hint, but not a source per se.The wording of the Rambam here and his statements in Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 179) imply that the prohibition itself is Scriptural in origin. The only reason a person is not given lashes is because the simple meaning of the verse refers to the prohibition against teeming animals.
הלכה לא
וְכֵן אָסוּר לְאָדָם שֶׁיַּשְׁהֶה אֶת נְקָבָיו כְּלָל בֵּין גְּדוֹלִים בֵּין קְטַנִּים. וְכָל הַמַּשְׁהֶה נְקָבָיו הֲרֵי זֶה בִּכְלַל מְשַׁקֵּץ נַפְשׁוֹ. יֶתֶר עַל חֳלָאִים רָעִים שֶׁיָּבִיא עַל עַצְמוֹ וְיִתְחַיֵּב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ. אֶלָּא רָאוּי לוֹ לְהַרְגִּיל עַצְמוֹ בְּעִתִּים מְזֻמָּנִים כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְרַחֵק בִּפְנֵי בְּנֵי אָדָם וְלֹא יְשַׁקֵּץ נַפְשׁוֹ:
כסף משנה
31.
Similarly, it is forbidden for a person to delay relieving himself at all, whether through defecation or urination.81See Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Basra 3:11 which mentions several points concerning this restriction:a) Our Sages did not, however, require their ordinance to override considerations of public embarrassment. For example, [a person is allowed to wait] until he finds a private place to relieve himself or until he will not be causing an interruption in prayer.
b) The Rashba maintains that the prohibition "not [to] make your souls detestable" does not apply to deferring urination. c) Whenever one can contain himself, whether from urinating or from eliminating, for the length of time it takes to walk a parsah (a Persian measure equal to approximately four kilometers), all opinions agree that the prohibition "not [to] make yourselves loathsome" does not apply. Anyone who delays relieving himself is considered among those who make their souls detestable in addition to the severe illnesses he brings upon himself and becoming liable for his life. Instead, it is appropriate for a person to train himself [to eliminate] at specific times so that he will not have to separate himself in the presence of others and not have to make his soul detestable.
הלכה לב
וְכָל הַנִּזְהָר בִּדְבָרִים אֵלּוּ מֵבִיא קְדֻשָּׁה וְטָהֳרָה יְתֵרָה לְנַפְשׁוֹ. וּמְמָרֵק נַפְשׁוֹ לְשֵׁם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יא מד) "וְהִתְקַדִּשְׁתֶּם וִהְיִיתֶם קְדשִׁים כִּי קָדוֹשׁ אָנִי":
כסף משנה