Unfortunately this week I will be in transit during our normal shiur time and will be unable to discuss the review questions with you "live" as I had hoped.

In order not to lose another week, I have prepared my own answers to the "thinking questions" of the review sheet, for you to look over. As the questions are somewhat open ended, these are not the only possible answers, but they do summarize the main points that I consider relevant to each question. I invite you to email any additional considerations you may have thought of when looking at the questions.

We will begin our study of hilchot taarovot next week, resuming live shiur at the usual time.

1. A group of friends are eating together. Two bring strictly kosher food, and the third brings pizza (without actual meat on it) from a non-kosher pizza store. That third friend is open to saying birkat hamazon and being in a Zimun. Should the friends encourage him to do so? Would your answer be different if the pizza had actual meat on it?
*For background about birkat hamazon on non-kosher food, see Rambam and Raavad in Brachot 1:19 and Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 196

The Mishna in Brachot is clear that one who ate prohibited foods cannot be included in Zimun. Raavad and Rambam dispute whether the person should say brachot at all. The Shulchan Aruch rules in accordance with Rambam's view, that he should not.

However, the examples given in the Mishna and subsequent sources are of cases where the very bread itself, that which occasions birkat hamazon and zimun, is intrinsically prohibited. For example, bread from which trumot and maasrot were not separated. They don't speak about cases where the bread was essentially kosher but contaminated with a non-kosher ingredient.

The logic of why someone who ate prohibited food can't be included in Zimun may be that his food is not communal with the other people, because they abide the prohibition against eating it. However, this can't be the logic behind saying that he should not recite birkat hamazon at all. There the issue would seem to be that, in the Rambam's view, prohibited food does not occasion Birkat hamazon.

Assuming this is true, it would seem that the standard of "non-kosher" for birkat hamazon should be different than for other applications. When we consider if we are permitted to eat a given food, we are really asking if it contains anything prohibited. If so, we can't eat it. But in the case of birkat hamazon, we are asking if it contains anything permitted. Even if it contains a large amount of prohibited food, if there is some permitted food, a person would have to recite birkat hamazon on that permitted food. So for instance if one had a sandwich of non-kosher meat, it would seem that even the Rambam would have to concede that he should recite birkat hamazon, just because of the bread.

This question might hinge on the issue of chaticha naaseit neveila for other issurim. As we know, R. Efraim and many other rishonim believe that chaticha naaseit neveila applies only to Basar bechalav - the meat and milk both become the prohibited food. But when dealing with other issurim, or when mixing basar bechalav into heter, the heter always retains a distinct identity and is considered to be conceptually intact, even if it can't be eaten because the issur is mixed in with it. According to this view, even a product like pepperoni pizza would be considered to have dough of heter that is distinct and is just practically inaccessible because of the taste of basar bechalav that got onto it. So in this view, the dough should still be viewed as fundamentally heter, and one should have to bench after eating it. (R. Tam disagrees and maintains that chaticha naaseit neveilah is relevant in all cases where a taste of issur is absorbed, this view would deem the dough to be issur through and through, and that would make it "exempt", if one accepts the Rambam's position, from birkat hamazon).

To summarize, there are 2 reasons to say that birkat hamazon should be recited
1. Raavad would say that in all cases where prohibited food was eaten.
2. Even Rambam would probably concede in cases where the bread was intrinsically permitted, which is most cases if you accept the view of R. Efraim, which Rambam does.

The same arguments could be advanced regarding Zimun, but there it is less clear because the functional inability of the whole group to share the food may be the decisive factor. Thus, even if one assumes that birkat hamazon should be recited, it does not automatically follow that the person can be included in Zimun. Still, In cases where there is an overriding educational consideration, like a desire to encourage the person to say brachot in general and to be part of the group that eats kosher etc., it would seem reasonable to include the person in Zimun as well, on the basis of the fact that the bread he ate was not inherently prohibited to the other people, it was just difficult for them to actually eat it without actually getting some taam issur too.

2. Someone cooked you a kosher turkey, but they spread 1 tablespoon of butter on the skin before cooking it. Can you eat the turkey or part of the turkey?
There are 2 theoretical physical possibilities of what would happen when dairy contacts the outside surface of meat and they are heated together:
1. The dairy remains on the surface
2. During the cooking process, it permeates the entire piece of meat.

We generally assume that when something is cooked in liquid, the flavor permeates completely, but when it is dry roasted, it remains on the surface of contact. The exception to this is in a case where the food was fatty enough that the hot fat would carry the dairy throughout the meat as it sizzled during cooking. It is a little hard to be sure how to classify the turkey and its skin, whether they are considered fatty or not, but it seems like we can construct a two pronged argument ("mima nafshach") to permit the turkey:
1. If the butter remains on the skin, only the skin is prohibited.
2. If the butter permeates the entire turkey, it is batel beshishim and the entire turkey including the skin is permitted.
Based on either of these possibilities, if one discards the skin, the rest of the turkey is permitted. (This is provided we don't specifically know that the taste of the butter is apparent in the rest of the meat. Because there is a 1/60 ratio we may assume it is OK by default.)

3. You are invited to someone's house who only uses kosher ingredients, but they don't have separate dishes for milk and meat. They plan to cook you a meat meal that will not include any dairy ingredients, but will be prepared on their equipment. What measures, if any, would you insist on before agreeing to eat the food? Would you come over early and help them cook?
As we have learned, dishes used to cook non-kosher food or basar bechalav are permitted bedieved if they have sat for 24 hours. Furthermore, one is allowed to assume that they have sat 24 hours unless he knows otherwise.
For this reason, if someone cooked strictly kosher ingredients on treif equipment, it would not be prohibited bedieved. The main exception is that spicy foods such as onions cut with treif knives would still be considered prohibited.
Based on this, one could eat food prepared on non-kosher dishes in someones' home, if they were instructed not to include any spicy ingredients such as onions or fresh garlic.
Coming over early to help cook would be counterproductive from a kashrut standpoint, because it would render the cooking "lechatchila", in which case using non-kosher equipment would not be allowed. If coming over early meant you could kasher the pots or bring your own, it would be good, otherwise it would not.
The use of tableware could not be considered "bedieved", because the diner does it proactively at the table. Still, aside from knives, this would not pose a problem, because the food is not so hot when it goes into the dishes on the table as to extract taam from them.

The real issue in such a circumstance is whether the person preparing the food is realistically capable of using only kosher ingredients. If the person may not be familiar with the details of which ingredients to include, this poses a much bigger concern than the status of the pots used.

The extent of social/interpersonal importance of the event should also play a role in deciding whether to eat in such a setting. If the host is a close friend or relative it is more justifiable to accept greater degrees of leniency. Particularly if they are making a good faith effort on their part to accomodate kashrut, it would seem that we should do our best not to make the rules excessively burdensome to them, and certainly not to offend them by refusing to participate altogether.

4. Would you accept a job working as a waiter or chef in a restaurant that serves basar bechalav? Would you own such a restaurant directly or as a stockholder?
One certainly cannot accept a job as a chef in a restaurant that serves basar bechalav, as cooking them together is an independent issur de'oraita regardless of whether they are eaten, or by whom.

One also certainly cannot own such a restaurant outright, as deriving financial profit in this way is hanaa from basar bechalav, which is also an independent issur de'oraita.

The status of stock ownership in a publicly traded company is an issue that has been debated by achronim. Were that to be considered the same as outright ownership, one would not be allowed to own stock in most restaurant chains. Furthermore, one would not be allowed to own most mutual funds that invest in a large number of companies, as it is likely that in the course of their trading they would at least sometimes allocate at least a portion of your investment to buying a stake in a basar bechalav restaurant. The generally accepted consensus of most achronim is that stock ownership is not equivalent to direct ownership, and therefore one may own these mutual funds and stocks, assuming they don't have a controlling interest in the corporation. If not for this heter, investing in mutual funds and the like would always be assur.

Being a waiter is more complicated. If one doesn't specifically know that the customers are Jewish, and the local population is predominantly not Jewish, one would not need to be concerned about the prohibition of lifnei iver. If similar food were available from other sources, one would also not need to worry about this, because lifnei iver is limited to situations where the person could not practically do the issur without your assistance. One would, though, need to be concerned about a lower level of issur, a rabbinic prohibition of "mesaye yedei overei aveira", assisting those who transgress. Serving basar bechalav to Jews would seem to violate that rabbinic prohibition.

5. A Jewish person has just eaten a meat meal and asks you to get them a cup of coffee with milk. Would you do it?
The gemara simply says that one must wait "from meal to meal". We have learned that there are two basic interpretations of this rule:
1. Many baalei hatosfot thought it was adequate to recite birkat hamazon and thus conclude the meal, and then to eat dairy immediately afterwards.
2. Some baalei hatosfot and most sephardic authorities ruled that one should wait the time increment that usually passes between meals, approximately six hours.

The first, lenient view is the conceptual basis for the various "short" customs, like waiting one or three hours. The rama seems to relate to the one hour as insignificant in and of itself, but valid provided that birkat hamazon was recited. Thus we can say that the Rama fundamentally accepts the lenient view.

Based on this background, we do not need to construe giving dairy products to someone who has just concluded a meat meal as lifnei iver. Even if the person doing the requesting doesn't realize it, they are actually in compliance with the halacha as ruled by significant ashkenazi rishonim, and the rama, if they go for coffee immediately after eating a meat meal. It also doesn't seem that birkat hamzon per se is the critical factor, it is only a cutoff because it signifies the end of the meal. If a person ends their meal completely but fails to recite birkat hamazon, although they have wrongly skipped a binding torah commandment, this doesn't make them "more fleishik".

With all this backround in mind, it seems that there is adequate legal justification for getting the person the coffee. However, I believe that if one knows that the person doing the asking would be receptive to being turned down, it might be appropriate to do so. If they realize that it's awkward for you in terms of kashrut, and just asked because they weren't thinking about it, I don't know if it's good to bend over backwards to facilitate them doing what they would probably think is assur. One needs to carefully consider the specific message that it sends within the context of the particular relationship in order to choose the right course of action on this question.

6. You want to set up a buffet event that will be all-kosher, but it will have some meat and some milk items and people are to use their own common sense not to mix them in prohibited ways. Can this be permitted at all, and if so what measures would you insist on before permitting it?

We have learned that one may not serve meat and dairy on the same table, lest someone, in a moment of forgetfulness, accidentally eat them together. The shulchan aruch clearly ruled that this is only true about the table upon which one eats, and that one may put meat and dairy products on the same buffet table.

However, there are a number of reasons not to apply this ruling to a contemporary buffet event. First, the shulchan aruch was assuming that all the patrons are kosher-observant, and the only way that they could end up eating basar bechalav was by momentary forgetfullness, which would be more likely to result while at the actual dining table. But in a case where many of the people might not keep kosher at all, we need to be concerned that we are furnishing them with a basar bechalav meal that they will eat together intentionally. If this is a concern in the particular setting, such a buffet should probably be banned altogether.

Furthermore, in our time the use of artificial products is so prevalent that most people would be likely to assume that at a kosher meat function, anything that appears dairy must certainly be artificial. Therefore, even if we assume that the entire group is meticulous about kashrut, we certainly would be required to label all of the products clearly.

In practice, I think that this should not normally be done at public events or venues today. One possible exception is establishments that fill a role in between a restaurant and a mini-market. For instance, consider a small fast food stand in a bus station or another public place. Such places usually sell a variety of snack foods, perhaps some hot dogs, and perhaps also ice cream, chocolate bars,  and coffee. Because all of the products are very clearly labelled, and because there is no presumption that they are all intended to be consumed together, it seems to me that one could allow the proprietor to carry both meat and dairy products in his stock. This would depend in part on an assesment of the clientele - if one felt that many people were likely to eat them together, it would be more problematic.

Review Questions
These questions pertain directly to the material we learned, and should help you review it. Do your best to cite the relevant opinions of the rishonim, and the ruling of the shulchan aruch/rama.

1. Which meats and milks or milk derivatives are subject to the prohibition of basar bechalav on a Torah level? On a rabbinic level? Be as specific as possible and cite different opinions where relevant.
2. Name 3 practical differences between meat and milk that are subject to the prohibition on a Torah level as opposed to a rabbinic level.
3. What constitutes cooking for the prohibition of milk and meat? Do salting or marinating for 24 hours, which can exchange flavor, constitute cooking for this prohibition?
4. What product constitutes the prohibited food when meat and milk are cooked together?
5. Under what conditions may milk and meat products be served concurrently on the same table? Cite at least 2 possible conditions under which this could be permitted, and define each clearly.
6. What is the earliest source mandating a wait after eating meat and before eating milk?
7. How long must one wait after eating milk and before eating meat (cite at least 2 major opinions, and elaborate on the other variants that derive from them)? Must one take any other measures?
8. What level prohibition does one violate if they eat milk after meat without waiting the appropriate interval?
9. What measures must be taken after eating milk and before eating meat? Beyond these measures, is there a need to wait for a time interval?
10. How hot must food be to be capable of "cooking" for meat and milk purposes? Is there a distinction between kli rishon and kli sheni for this halacha? If you are familiar with this rule in the context of shabbat, please explain whether the 2 contexts are identical or what conceptual/practical differences there might be.
11. When a hot item falls into a cold liquid, or vice-versa, how much of the 2 are considered to be cooked, and what, practically speaking, may be eaten?
12. Does the concept of "chaticha atzma naaseit neveila" apply to milk and meat only, or to other prohibitions as well. Explain the rationale behind each view, and explain the practical ramifications of this rule. How do the Mechaber and Rama pasken on this topic?
13. Why did the Jews in the desert need to kasher the pots captured from midian?
14. Is Noten taam lifgam the same as eno raui le'achila? Explain.
15. When a meat spoon is used to stir a hot dairy food in a pot on the fire, how would 60 be calculated for purposes of bittul (cite different opinions).
16. Explain how bitul of yavesh beyavesh is concepually distinct from bitul of lach belach
17. What is "nat bar nat" and how does it apply practically? Is it applicable to milk and meat, or also to intrinsically prohibited foods like nevelah?
18. When a spicy food is cut with a knife, which halachot are applicable? Explain different views.
What about a non-spicy food?
Under what circumstances might there be reason to be lenient about this rule?

Thinking Questions
These questions should help you analyze and apply what you have learned. Your answer should take into consideration all real-world and social factors, as though you were answering a real-life case. You are also encouraged to draw on your general torah knowledge in order to answer them

1. A group of friends are eating together. Two bring strictly kosher food, and the third brings pizza (without actual meat on it) from a non-kosher pizza store. That third friend is open to saying birkat hamazon and being in a Zimun. Should the friends encourage him to do so? Would your answer be different if the pizza had actual meat on it?
*For background about birkat hamazon on non-kosher food, see Rambam and Raavad in Brachot 1:19 and Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 196

2. Someone cooked you a kosher turkey, but they spread 1 tablespoon of butter on the skin before cooking it. Can you eat the turkey or part of the turkey?

3. You are invited to someone's house who only uses kosher ingredients, but they don't have separate dishes for milk and meat. They plan to cook you a meat meal that will not include any dairy ingredients, but will be prepared on their equipment. What measures, if any, would you insist on before agreeing to eat the food? Would you come over early and help them cook?

4. Would you accept a job working as a waiter or chef in a restaurant that serves basar bechalav? Would you own such a restaurant directly or as a stockholder?

5. A Jewish person has just eaten a meat meal and asks you to get them a cup of coffee with milk. Would you do it?

6. You want to set up a buffet event that will be all-kosher, but it will have some meat and some milk items and people are to use their own common sense not to mix them in prohibited ways. Can this be permitted at all, and if so what measures would you insist on before permitting it?