Version #1 (in Sura - Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak): Bishul Akum does not apply to anything that can be eaten raw.

Version #2 (in Pumbadisa - Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak): Bishul Akum does not apply to anything not proper for a king's table to accompany bread.

Question: What is the difference between these answers?

Answer: They argue about small fish, mushrooms, and porridge. (Rashi - they are not eaten raw but they are not proper for a king's table; Rashba - small fish and mushrooms are not eaten raw, but they are not proper for a king's table. Porridge can be eaten raw, but it is proper for a king's table.)

(Rav Asi): Bishul Akum does not apply to small salted fish.

(Rav Yosef): If he (a Nochri - Rashba deletes this from the text) roasted them, they (are considered cooked, they) may be used for Eruv Tavshilin;

If a Nochri made Kisa d'Harsena from them (fried them in fish oil with flour), they are forbidden due to Bishul Akum.

Objection: This is obvious!

Answer: One might have thought that the primary ingredient is the oil (and this can be eaten raw) - Rav Yosef teaches, the primary ingredient is the flour (which is not eaten raw).

(Rav Berona): If a Nochri made a fire in a swamp, the grasshoppers (that became roasted) are forbidden.

Question: What is the case?

If one cannot tell whether or not they are Tahor species, even if a Yisrael made the fire, they are forbidden!

Answer #1: Rather, one can see that they are Tahor. They are forbidden due to Bishul Akum.

Objection: Bishul Akum does not apply in such a case!

(Rav Chanan bar Ami): If a Nochri singed a head of an animal, a Yisrael may eat it, even from the tip of the ear (which gets cooked very easily).

Since the Nochri did not intend to cook, only to remove the hair, it is permitted. Also here, he intended to clear the swamp, and not to cook grasshoppers!

Answer #2: Really, one cannot tell whether they are Tahor. A case occurred with a Nochri, so the Halachah was said regarding a Nochri.

(Rav Chanan bar Ami): If a Nochri singed a head, a Yisrael may eat it, even from the tip of the ear.

(Ravina): Therefore, if a Yisrael put raw gourds in an oven, and a Nochri ignited it in order to dry pegs (and the gourds became cooked), they are permitted.

Objection: This is obvious!

Answer: One might have thought that the Nochri intended to cook (soften) the peg. Ravina teaches that this is not so. Rather, he intended to harden it, and this is not considered cooking.

(Rav Yehudah): If a Yisrael left meat on coals, and a Nochri turned the meat over, it is permitted.

Question: What is the case?

If the meat would have cooked even had the Nochri not turned the meat over, obviously it is permitted!

Answer #1: It would not have cooked had the Nochri not turned it over.

Rejection: If so, the Nochri caused it to be cooked, it should be forbidden!

Answer #2: Had the Nochri not turned the meat over, it would have cooked in two hours. Because he turned it over, it cooked in one hour;

One might have thought that because he hastened the cooking, it is considered Bishul Akum. Rav Yehudah teaches that this is not so.

Question: Rav Asi taught that anything cooked (by a Yisrael) like the food of Ben Drusai (a thief who used to eat food one third or one half cooked) is not considered Bishul Akum if a Nochri finishes cooking it.

Inference: If something was cooked less than this amount, if a Nochri finishes cooking it, it is Bishul Akum!

Answer: That is when the Yisrael took it off the fire after partially cooking it. (In Rav Yehudah's case, the Yisrael left it on the fire. It would have finished cooking by itself.)

Support (Beraisa): A Yisrael may leave meat on coals and allow a Nochri to turn it over until he (the Yisrael) returns from the Beis ha'Keneses or Beis Medrash;

A Yisraelis may leave a pot on a stove and allow a Nochris to turn mix it until she returns from the bathhouse or Beis ha'Keneses.

Question: If a Nochri left meat on coals and a Yisrael turned it over, what is the law?

Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): We permit when a Yisrael left meat on coals and a Nochri turned it over (even though the Nochri finished the cooking), and all the more so it is permitted when the Yisrael finishes the cooking!

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): Whether a Yisrael left meat and a Nochri turned it over, or vice-versa, it is permitted;

It is forbidden only if the Nochri began and finished the cooking.

(Ravina): The Halachah is: if a Nochri lit an oven and a Yisrael put the bread in, or vice-versa, or if a Nochri did both and a Yisrael stoked the coals (this increases the heat), the bread is permitted.

Version #1 (Chizkiyah): If a Nochri salted fish, it is permitted;

(R. Yochanan): It is forbidden.

(Bar Kapara): If a Nochri roasted an egg, it is permitted;

(R. Yochanan): It is forbidden.

Version #2 - Rav Dimi (Chizkiyah and Bar Kapara): If a Nochri salted fish or roasted an egg, it is permitted;

(R. Yochanan): It is forbidden.

Question (People of the house of the Reish Galusa (the executive head of Yisrael in exile)): If a Nochri roasted an egg, is it permitted?

Answer #1 (R. Chiya Parva'ah): Yes, because two Chachamim permit it, and only one forbids it.

Answer #2 (Rav Zvid): No, Abaye said that the Halachah follows R. Yochanan.

Version #1 (Rashi): The people of the Reish Galusa's house were upset that Rav Zvid forbade it. They gave him vinegar to drink, and he died.

Version #2 (Pores Yosef): The people of the Reish Galusa's house gave Rav Zevid vinegar to drink. He was comforted. (They hinted that they accept his ruling. One can drink vinegar under duress. If this were called drinking, we would forbid vinegar touched by Nochrim, for it can be offered to idolatry. Since they permit the vinegar, this shows that what can be eaten under duress is not considered proper to eat. Likewise, even though one can eat raw eggs under duress, they are not considered proper to eat, therefore, Bishul Akum applies to them.) (end of Version #2)

(Beraisa): Kafrisin (caper fruit), leeks, Matalya (this will be explained), hot water and dried grain of Nochrim are permitted;

A roasted egg of a Nochri is forbidden;

Rebbi and his Beis Din permitted their oil.

(Beraisa): Matalya is Shi'asa (seeds).

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): Sixty years ago, they brought from Miztrayim seeds of celery, flax and clover. They soaked them together in warm water until they sprouted. They brought a new Keli full of water, and soaked clay in it. They stuck the seeds in the clay, and went to the bathhouse; when they came out, the plants were blossoming. They ate them, it cooled them off from their hair (i.e. heads) until their knees.

Version #1 (Rav Ashi): That is not true (they did not grow so quickly).

Version #2 (Rav Ashi): Witchcraft caused them to grow so quickly.

(Beraisa #1): If refuse of dates (used to make beer) of Nochrim was put in water heated in a big pot of the Nochri, it is forbidden. If it was put in a small pot, it is permitted.

Question: What is considered a small pot?

Answer (R. Yanai): It is small if the opening is too narrow for a wild bird to enter. (There is no smaller forbidden food for which there is concern lest the Nochri cooked it inside.)

Objection: Perhaps the Nochri cut up a bird, and cooked the pieces inside!

Correction: Rather, it is small if the opening is too narrow for a head of a wild bird to enter.

Contradiction (Beraisa #2): Refuse of dates is permitted whether it was put in water heated in a big or small pot.

Answer: (We assume that the pot was not used in the last 24 hours, so any absorbed Isur is li'Fgam.) The Tana of Beraisa #1 forbids Nosen Ta'am li'Fgam, and the Tana of Beraisa #2 permits it.

(Rav Sheshes): Cooked oil of Nochrim is forbidden.

Rejection (Rav Safra): There is no reason to forbid it!

They would not mix in wine. This would make it spoil!

We are not concerned for Bishul Akum. Oil is normally eaten raw!

We are not concerned for forbidden absorptions. Nosen Ta'am li'Fgam is permitted!

Question: Are cooked dates of Nochrim forbidden?

Surely, sweet dates are permitted. They can be eaten raw!

Surely, bitter dates are forbidden. They are eaten only cooked!

The question is about medium dates (that are eaten raw only in pressed circumstances).

Answer (R. Asi): My Rebbi (Levi) forbids them.

(Rav): Shesisa'ah (a cooked dish made with flour of Kelayos) is permitted;

(Shmuel's father and Levi): It is forbidden.

Version #1: All agree that if it was made with flour of dried wheat and barley, it is permitted (vinegar is never added);

All agree that if it was made from lentils and vinegar, it is forbidden (their vinegar probably came from their wine);

They argue about Shesisa'ah made from lentils and water. Shmuel's father and Levi forbid it due to Shesisa'ah from lentils and vinegar. Rav does not decree.

Version #2: All agree that if it was made with lentils, it is forbidden. Even if it was with water, we decree due to lentils and vinegar;

They argue about Shesisa'ah of wheat and barley. Shmuel's father and Levi forbid it due to Shesisa'ah of lentils. Rav does not decree.

(Rav): Barzilai ha'Giladi sent two types of Shesisa'ah to David - "u'Se'orim v'Kemach v'Kali u'Ful va'Adashim v'Kali."

In Neharde'a, people buy Shesisa'ah of Nochrim. They are not concerned for the decree of Shmuel's father and Levi.

(Mishnah): Preserved foods of Nochrim to which wine is often added (are forbidden to eat, but one may benefit from them).

(Chizkiyah): This is only if we do not know that wine was added. If we know, one may not benefit from them.

Question: Why is it different than Muryas? One may benefit from Muryas, even though most people add wine to it (it is as if we know that wine was added)!

Answer: There, the wine merely is Mevatel the broth (its taste is wasted), regarding preserved foods, it improves the taste.

(R. Yochanan): Even if we know that wine was added, one may benefit from them.

Question: Why is this different than Muryas, according to R. Meir (who forbids benefit from it)?

Answer: There, the wine is part of the essence (it is consumed with the Muryas). Here, it is not (it merely preserves the food).