Rabosai, I couldn't understand the intention of the decree of Chazal on meat other than what we see in the psukim about cooking a young goat in its mother's milk. First we learn that the intention of the law is to also prohibit benefiting and eating as well as cooking the baby gedi. But it is said that Chazal made a decree to include other animals such as cows and sheep because people might mix up other meats and somehow make cook/eat/benefit from the forbidden young goat. And of course we know that there is the practice of waiting between "meals" from meat to milk. But people can make all kinds of mistakes in the Torah, but why worry SO MUCH here?!!
Besides, making a decree against all domestic animals doesn't solve the problem of people's confusion in the kitchen! And people in the kitchen know the differences between one animal the other other. PLUS, WHY WOULD IT HAVE TO APPLY AS A SUCH A STRICT DERABBANAN IN PLACES WHERE JEWS DON'T COMMONLY EVEN EAT GOATS AT ALL??!!
Then I noticed this reference from Rashi in Shmos 23 showing that although the word gedi commonly refers to goats, it can also refer to other animals as well!!
Al Tevashel Gedi- A calf and a lamb were also included in the category of a Gedi, because a Gedi means a young and tender as we find in other places in the Torah referred to as a Gedi, and it had to explain after it (Gedi) Izim. For instance "I will send a Gedi Izim (Bereishis 38:17,20) and Shnei Geda'yei Izim (27:9) to teach that whenever it says Gedi alone it also implies a calf and a lamb. And it is written in three places in the Torah, once to teach the prohibition to eat it, once for the prohibition to derive benefit, and once to derive the prohibition to cook it.
Therefore the "decree" was not really about confusing meats on the table, but to clarify that ALTHOUGH IT IS COMMONLY THOUGHT OF AS A GOAT, GEDI ALSO REFERS TO THE YOUNG OF ANY OTHER HERDED DOMESTIC ANIMALS IN THE PSHAT OF THE PSUKIM - THE DECREE IS NOT ACTUALLY ADDING ANYTHING BUT CLARIFYING THE PSHAT SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T THINK IT IS ONLY GOATS!!
So how does the situation of birds fit in? Rabbi Akiva says they are included, Rabbi Yossi Hagelili says they are not! The Sanhedrin followed Rabbi Akiva. Evidently there were TWO DIFFERENT SHITAS ABOUT BIRDS AMONG THE JEWS. But in the shita of Rabbi Akiva it is clear that the shita was actually to make life easier, since people (perhaps in places where people ate alot of birds for economic reasons) might forget and think that gedi only meant goats when eating birds, and not remember that other animals were also not considered gediim.
[THEN THERE IS ANOTHER ASPECT: IT IS TO TEACH US THAT HASH-M DOES NOT ONLY SHOW RACHMANUS ON JEWS WHO ARE "EZIM" (AZ MEANING POSITIVE STRENGTH IN AVODAS HASH-M) BUT ALSO ON ALL OF HIS CHILDREN OF ALL KINDS EVEN THOSE WHO ARE SLOW AND AT LOWER MADREGAS!!!!!!!! RESH PEH BEIS HAMEYVIN YAVIN.......]
David, it is great to hear from you again after a while!
1) In fact, it is not a decree of Chazal that one may not cook other Kosher animals in milk aside from the goat, but rather this is a Din of the Torah itself. The Gemara (beginning of 113b) states that wherever the Torah says "Gedi" alone, with no additional description, this means even a cow or a sheep. The Rambam (Hilchos Ma'achalos Asuros 9:3) writes that the only reason why the Torah says "a goat in its mother's milk" is that the Torah speaks about more usual scenarios, but in fact the Torah prohibits cooking any Kosher animal with any Kosher milk.
2) It is not totally clear whether the Halachah follows Rebbi Akiva's opinion concerning poultry and milk. Tosfos (113a, DH Basar) writes that, according to the Rabanan, birds cooked in milk are forbidden by the Torah, and it is only Rebbi Akiva who maintains that this is not d'Oraisa. The Bach on the Tur (Yoreh Deah, near the beginning of #87, end of DH u'M'SH) writes that the Halachah follows the Rabanan who are the majority opinion. According to the Bach, it is forbidden to eat poultry cooked with milk according to the Torah, and cooking and benefitting from them are forbidden mid'Rabanan. I am not attempting to decide what the Psak is on this matter, but I am just pointing out that since the Bach holds that it is d'Oraisa, it is difficult to say that the Sanhedrin followed Rebbi Akiva.
3) When you wrote "RESH PEH BEIS," I thought you meant Chulin, "beginning of 82a," but I am not sure what you saw there. However, I think you mean the Gemara in Beitzah 25b which states that Yisrael are "AZIM" of the nations. This applies to all of Yisrael.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
I am sorry about the capitalization, I wrote to a couple of friends at the same time from my phone, and that's how words got capitalized in making my point. The Resh Peh Beis refers to the Torah in Likuttei Moharan referring to judging favorably, looking for kaf zechus.
Regarding the Rabbanan and Rabbi Akiva, how would birds be included d'oraisa? And how were there even others who held that fish and locusts were included?
I also don't understand the explanation for cooking in mother's milk in the Torah, since even a generic prohibition against cooking with milk would obviously include any milk, including the mother's.
Thanks
David G.
David, I will try to answer only one of your questions, in the hope that we may be able to get this to you soon, and then I will continue later, bs'd, and answer the other questions.
>>Tosfos (113a, DH Basar) writes that the Rabanan, who disagree with Rebbi Akiva and maintain that it is forbidden mid'Oraisa to cook birds with milk, learn this from the fact that the prohibition against eating a Neveilah, an animal that dies without Shechitah, and the prohibition against meat and milk, are stated in the very same verse in Devarim 14:21. The fact that they are mentioned together teaches us that it follows that for any species for which the prohibiton of Neveilah applies (i.e.. any species which requires Shechitah), the prohibiton of cooking with milk also applies. Therefore, since birds require Shechitah, they may also not be cooked and eaten with milk (see Maharsha on Tosfos).
Now to the question of fish and locusts:
1) I am not aware of any opinion that fish and locusts were included in the prohibition on meat and milk. This is stated in the first Mishnah in the eighth chapter of Chulin, that all meat is forbidden to cook with milk, with the exception of the flesh of fish and locusts.
2) The Beis Yosef on the Tur (Yoreh Deah 87, DH Dagim) writes in the name of the Ran that not only is it permitted to cook milk with fish and locusts, but it is also permitted to eat milk together with fish and locusts. The Beis Yosef continues that, nevertheless, one should not eat them with milk because this is dangerous, as is explained in Orach Chaim 173. The Darchei Moshe #4 comments on this that he had never in his life seen anyone who was careful about this matter, and that the Tur and Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 173) refer to eating fish with meat, which is dangerous, but fish with milk is permitted. The Darchei Moshe concludes (with a certain dose of humor) that it appears that the Beis Yosef "mixed up meat with milk" (in other words, he wrote that it is dangerous to eat fish with milk when he should have written that it is dangerous to eat fish with meat).
3) Many other Poskim also express surprise at what the Beis Yosef wrote. The Taz (Yoreh Deah 87:3) writes that there is a printing error in the Beis Yosef, and the Shach (#5) also writes that this is a mistake. However, the Shach does cite the Levush who also writes that it is dangerous to eat fish with milk. In addition, the Pischei Teshuvah (#9) comes to the defense of the Beis Yosef and Levush. He cites Halachic and medical opinions that fish cooked with milk is unhealthy. See also Rabeinu Bachye to last week's Parshah (Shemos 23:19), who says that there is danger involved with fish cooked with cheese.
4) On the other hand, there are many opinions in Halacha and medicine that there is no problem in eating fish with milk, but even so there are many people nowadays who are careful in this regard.
In conclusion, even though everyone agrees that eating fish with milk is not included in the Torah prohibition of meat and milk, there are those who maintain that it is included in the prohibition of "v'Nishmartem Me'od l'Nafshoseichem" (Devarim 4:15).<<
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Thank you. This is very interesting indeed. The source I had about Rav Yosef on fish and grasshoppers is m. Hullin 8:4; b. Hullin 104a. One of the somewhat confusing things for me in the Shulchan Aruch is where the mechaber (or Rema) presents some kind of recommendation or non-halachic inyan as a HALACHA that must be followed. But this seems to confuse a reader that he will think that something that is a chumra or minhag is actually a Torah halacha.
1) The Mishnah in Chulin 8:4 in fact does not mention fish and locusts, and the Gemara (Chulin 104a) states that fish and locusts together with milk are prohibited neither by the Torah nor by the Rabanan.
2) In this case, according to the Halachic and medical opinions that fish cooked with milk represents a danger, this would not be merely a Chumra or a Minhag, because it is a Mitzvah of the Torah to care for one's health. In fact, the Gemara (Chulin 10a) states "Chamira Sakanta mi'Isura" -- it is more important to avoid danger than it is to avoid Torah prohibitions.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Now to the question of why the Torah describes this prohibition as cooking "in the mother's milk" and does not say the prohibition in a more general way, which would more clearly include any meat and milk.
1) The Rambam (Hilchos Ma'acholos Asuros 9:3) writes that the reason why the Torah talks about cooking in the mother's milk is because "Diber ha'Kasuv b'Hoveh" -- "the Torah spoke about the common scenario."
2) A similar idea is stated in the Mishnah in Bava Kama (54b) which tells us that even though the Torah refers to oxen in many contexts, such as the prohibtion of working with one's ox ("Shor") on Shabbos, in fact it is forbidden to work with any animal. The reason why the Torah says "Shor" is because "Diber ha'Kasuv b'Hoveh.
3) The idea that the Torah speaks about the more common scenario is actually one of the rules that determine how the Torah tells us about its Mitzvos. We find this in the 32 Midos of Rebbi Eliezer the son of Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili. This is printed in the standard editons of Shas, at the end of Maseches Berachos. It appears after the Rosh and before the Rambam's Perush ha'Mishnayos, in the standard editions.
(Every morning before Pesukei d'Zimra we say Rebbi Yishmael's 13 Midos by which the Torah is expounded. The 32 Midos of Rebbi Eliezer is similar to this, but with the Midos broadened to include more.)
4) The 18th Midah of Rebbi Eliezer is, "A matter about which only a part was stated, but nevertheless it applies to everything." The question is why was only a part stated, to which the answer is "Diber ha'Kasuv b'Hoveh."
An example of this rule is in the verse, "You must not eat Tereifah meat in the field" (Shemos 22:30). In fact, it is forbidden to eat Tereifah meat everywhere, not only in the field but also in the city. If so, why did the Torah say "in the field"? The answer is that "Diber ha'Kasuv b'Hoveh," it is more common for a torn-up animal to be eaten in the field.
5) I might suggest that this rule -- that the Torah talks about the common case -- can also be compared to another rule about how the Torah speaks: "Dibrah Torah k'Lashon Bnei Adam" (see Kidushin 17b). The Torah speaks like people speak. Similarly, when the Torah tells us that one may not cook meat and milk, it is does not say it in legal language, but rather it describes it in the popular form in which people are accustomed to speaking.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Here is a short idea, in the way of Derush, about the connection between Yisrael being the Azim of the nations and the milk of the goat's mother.
1) This is based on a Chidush of the Torah Temimah in Parshas Mishpatim 23:19. The Torah Temimah (#148) says that it may be that the word "Imo," the milk of "its mother," is based on the word "Umaso," "its nation." He suggests this in order to explain why the Gemara (Chulin 113b) states that the prohibition of cooking meat with milk applies only to meat from a Kosher animal cooked with milk from a Kosher animal. This is because "Imo" is a word similar to "Umah," nation -- i.e., the same kind as it (he cites a source for this from Yechezkel 19:2). From this we learn that the prohibition applies only if the milk is cooked with meat of the same kind: Kosher milk with Kosher meat.
2) We may add that there is a hint to this in Rashi to Chulin 104a. The Beraisa there says, "I only know Chelev Imo." Rashi (DH Ein) writes "that is to say, an Ez." Why does Rashi say that the mother is necessarily an Ez? We may answer, b'Derech Derush, that "Imo" implies an Ez because "Imo" refers to the mother, the Jewish nation. The Jewish nation is an Ez because we are the Azim of the nations, as the Gemara in Beitzah (25b) says.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Thank you as always. I understand the explanation of the concept, but one could presumably suggest that any lav be expressed that way instead of in general terms, including the 10 commandments. Would it be any less common for the Torah to have said "lo tevashel basar bechalav"? Is Rambam saying it was historically more common for goyim to cook offspring davka in their mother's milk among the Canaanites or Egyptians??
David G
1) The Abarbanel writes (in Parshas Mishpatim) that even in his times (slightly over 500 years ago) the Yishmaelim cooked kid goat meat with milk. Therefore, the Torah spoke about the common scenario, because baby goat meat is the kind that is most frequently cooked with milk.
2) The Abarbanel also writes that it was the way of the idol-worshippers, when they assembled, to cook goats with milk at harvest time, because they believed that in this way they would find favor with their gods. He writes that this was what they did in Spain, even in his times, when all the shepherds would gather together twice a year. Abarbanel writes that he had conducted research on this matter, and his research confirmed that they ate milk with meat. Since the most tasty recipe was to cook the milk with the flesh of the kid, this can help us to understand why the Torah chose this example.
3) The way of the Torah is to speak in a relevant way. Since, at that time, the most common thing was to cook the goat-kid in its mother's milk, this is the way the Torah expressed it, to make it most vivid. If the Torah would have said "Lo Tevashel Basar b'Chalav," it would not have been describing so clearly the contemporary reality.
4) However, the rule "Diber ha'Kasuv b'Hoveh" has another ramification: even though the Torah chooses the most relevant way, this does not mean that it intends to exclude other ways of doing the prohibition. Therefore, Chazal explained that the prohibition includes all kosher milk cooked with all kosher meat.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Thank you. It's still a bit puzzling to me, but that's fine. I don't remember that we ordinarily research taamei hamitzvos based on what goyim do or don't do. Do we say that pork etc. is prohibited nit just because of their hooves and cud, but because goyim eat the pig, or lobster, or other animals??
David G
1) The Rishonim discuss why the Torah prohibited consuming blood. The Ramban (Vayikra 17:11) cites the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim who writes that the Kasdiyim ate blood when they wanted to connect to the Shedim in order to predict the future. The Rambam writes that "the intention of the Torah is always to destroy the buildings of their foolishness by saying the opposite of their thoughts." That is why the Torah prohibited eating blood and commanded that it be sprinkled on the Mizbe'ach.
2) The Ramban comments on this that, in principle, the idea expressed by the Rambam is logical, but in the case of the Mitzvah of blood this does not appear to be what the verses of the Torah tell us, because the Torah always says that the reason for not eating blood is because "the Nefesh is in the blood" (see Vayikra 17:14). The Ramban in general appears to agree with the idea of the Rambam that the Torah wants to "destroy the buildings of their foolishness." In fact, in Devarim (end of 12:22), the Ramban cites the Rambam again and agrees with him, but adds that this is not the main reason for the prohibition, but nevertheless since the Nochrim were obsessed with this, the Torah tells us not to pay attention to any prophecy of those who eat blood, and certainly not to eat it under any circumstances.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom