Food From a Non-Jew and Eating Before a Meal

SIMAN 38 - FOOD PREPARED BY NON-JEWS

Rav Ganzfried describes the three kinds of preparation of food by a non-Jew that forbid the food to Jews: baking of bread, cooking, and milking milk.

There is no question that eating together helps cement human relations, and that these restrictions place uncomfortable boundaries on our friendly relations with non-Jews. This is in fact the exact reason for the prohibition. At the same time that our sages decreed that we should be involved in acts of mutual help and lovingkindness with our non-Jewish neighbors (see KSA 34:3, 87:19, 167:13, 193:12) they were concerned that excessive familiarity could lead to intermarriage.

This is why we are generally lenient with bread baked by a baker, as Rav Ganzfried explains in seif 1. Since the baking is done commercially, there is really no concern that eating the bread will lead to familiarity.

THE PROHIBITION ON INTERMARRIAGE

The aversion to intermarriage is one of the most prominent characteristics of the Jews as a religion and even as an ethnicity. Communal organizations of even secularized Jews conduct workshops and committees to deal with this problem.

DILUTION OF FAITH

There are several different concerns in our sources regarding intermarriage. The most explicit concern is that the non-Jewish spouse will draw the Jewish one away from proper Torah observance. The Torah tells us (Devarim 7:3-4) "Don't marry with them - don't give your daughter to his son, and don't take his daughter for your son; LEST HE SHOULD TURN YOUR SON AWAY FROM ME, and they will worship other gods. Then the wrath of HaShem will burn among you, and He will quickly destroy you." As we explained at the end of the last chapter, even those non-Jewish religions which preach monotheism and believe in Moshe's revelation are very far from the way of faith and from a proper understanding of that revelation. The words of the Sages, which for us are the very spirit and continuation of the Torah of Moshe, are for the non-Jew at the very most a collection of inspirational folk sayings. Even a spouse who is favorably inclined towards the Jewish religion is certain to have deep misconceptions which will lead the partner, and especially the children, very far from the faith of Israel.

This concern may be hinted at in the prohibition on non-Jewish foods. Our sages explain that they prohibited ordinary foods "because of their wine, and their wine because of their daughters." (Shabbat 17b). One may ask why it is necessary to mention wine, since the foods themselves also lead to the intimacy that could encourage intermarriage.

As we will learn in chapter 47, the prohibition on non-Jewish wine is more severe than that on other foods, because it relates also to the concern that the wine could function as an idolatrous offering - a libation to a pagan god. Connecting food with intermarriage through the connection of wine may suggest that all along we are worried about the connection with wine - the symbol of pagan worship. (See Likutei Halakhot, Breslav.)

ALIENATION FROM THE FAITH COMMUNITY

Another concern is that even if the Jewish spouse would keep all the commandments, this observance would necessarily be a private rather than a communal observance. It is inconceivable that a person's communal affiliation would be complete if one's spouse was not a member of that same faith community. For the Jew, the highest significance of the observance of mitzvot is not as a private submission to God's command but rather as a sign of the covenant between HaShem and the Jewish people as a whole. The commandments represent our side of the "bargain" in this covenant and are our way of demonstrating our loyalty to HaShem and our devotion to the immense historical responsibility that He entrusted us with - making His name known in the world.

Indeed, the Rambam writes (Teshuva 3:11), "One who parts from the community, even if he doesn't do any transgressions but merely separates himself from the congregation of Israel and doesn't perform their commandments in their generality and doesn't take part in their sorrows nor fast with them but rather goes his own way like one from the nations of the world, as if he is not one of them, he has no portion in the next world." The phrase "in their generality" may refer to the commandments, meaning that he doesn't perform the commandments as part of a general complete system of belief, as an expression of a transcending covenant between HaShem and the people of Israel. Conceivably it means "in the generality" of the congregation, in which case it means he views the mitzvot purely as a personal obligation. Either way, the half-hearted community affiliation which is certain to be the lot of the intermarried Jew will more definitely lean in the direction of one who "parts from the community."

ALIENATION FROM THE SPOUSE

The previous two concerns relate to what the person who intermarries is doing wrong. The final, and perhaps most serious concern, relates to what he or she personally is missing out on. The Torah relates that after Chava was created from Adam's side, God decreed that a man should cleave to his wife so that they should be "as one flesh" (Bereshit 2:24). The ideal of matrimony is not a kind of contract or partnership between two people, but rather the merging of two people into one new personality - a married couple, and a Jewish family. Such a coalescence is impossible between a Jew and a non-Jew. There is an impenetrable psychological and spiritual barrier between those who are a party to HaShem's covenant and those who are not. No amount of sympathy and understanding and encouragement for the Jewish people and their mission can make a person an insider; only membership in the faith community - through birth or conversion - can make someone an "insider."

It follows that a Jew who marries a non-Jew will inevitably experience a marital life marked by alienation from the gentile spouse exactly in the area most central to the Jew's being: his or her connection to the Creator as cemented by the unique covenant at Mount Sinai. Jewish law formalizes this concept by maintaining that true "marriage" between Jew and non-Jew is not merely forbidden, but impossible. "Kiddushin," the ultimate kinyan which attaches the wife to the husband in a bond of spiritual commitment, does not have validity between a Jew and a non-Jew.

 

SIMAN 39 - EATING BEFORE A MEAL

 

This chapter is in its proper place from a chronological point of view, since it relates to eating before a meal, and subsequent chapters discuss the order of a regular meal itself. However, from a pedagogical point of view the siman is a bit out of place, since it relates to the most intricate and advanced concepts in berakhot, both those before a meal and those afterwards. Before we can even begin to explain the "meaning" of the mitzva, we will have to explain the  mitzva itself briefly.

 

All foods require a benediction - a berakha - before eating. Furthermore, anytime we eat a significant amount at once - about an ounce or thirty grams - we must make a berakha following the eating. There are various kinds of berakhot, depending on the kind of food. The main ones are: hamotzi lechem min haaretz ("Who brings bread from the earth" - bread), al hamichiya ("on the sustenance" - grain products), borei pri hagafen ("Who creates the fruit of the vine" - wine and grape juice), borei pri haetz ("Who creates the fruit of the tree" - fruit), borei pri haadama ("Who creates the fruit of the ground" - vegetables), shehakol nihiyeh bidvaro ("that all came into being through His word" - other foods, such as meat and cheese.)

 

A crucial concept in berakhot is that of "main and subordinate foods." A food that is eaten only as an "accessory" to another food is considered to be part of the main food. If a person is eating ice cream in a cone only because he doesn't have a dish and a spoon, such that the cone is only a means to the end of eating ice cream, then the cone is subordinate to the ice cream. If someone drinks water for this sole purpose of to keeping his mouth moist as he eats something very dry, then the water is subordinate. It follows that the subordinate food is included in the berakha - before or after - on the main food.

 

Most foods are considered "accessory" to bread eaten at a meal. Some, such as fruit that is seldom eaten on or together with bread, are not. What if a person eats some fruit BEFORE the meal, blesses "borei pri haetz," and then sits down to eat a regular bread meal, at which he also eats fruit? Is the fruit eaten during the meal considered a continuation of the fruit eaten before, so that the same blessing applies? Or perhaps since we are now sitting down to a bread meal the entire eating is a new one, and we must say an after-berakha on the first fruit and a new "borei pri haetz" on the second?

 

Rav Ganzfried explains that there are varying opinions on this point, and so he advises us to be careful in planning what and when we eat if we intend to eat some food immediately prior to a proper bread meal. The reason for caution is because we are concerned about omitting a necessary berakha, and we are extremely stringent not to say an unnecessary berakha, as we will explain in the following chapters.

 

The Mishna Berura (176:2) rules that only one berakha is necessary. If the person intends to continue eating fruit during the meal, the berakha said before the meal would exempt the fruit eaten during the meal, and the grace after meals  would exempt the fruit eaten before the meal.

 

The critical element here is the proper intention, to view the preliminary eating as part of the future meal. Ideally, we start a major undertaking with the central and foundational element - like starting a meal with bread. However, sometimes we are compelled to start a major undertaking with a partial or minor aspect - like starting a meal with an apple. This could be viewed as jumping the gun, a premature start which will only prevent us from making our project complete - just as the Kitzur warns us that this apple may not be considered part of our meal and may require its own berakha. The key to successfully integrating incomplete beginnings into a major undertaking is to visualize them right from the start as part of something larger - to broaden our horizons so as to view even our minor projects as part of our major life's work.

 

For instance, perhaps a person has plans to spend a year in a yeshiva or midrasha, spending one year in full devotion to Torah study, including challenging texts like Talmud. In the meantime, work leaves only a few hours a week for Torah study such as reading the Kitzur Shulchan Arukh. We should not view our current study as something minor or partial, which will come to an end when we will be able to devote ourselves to "real" study. Rather, we may view our current study as part and parcel of a project of total devotion to Torah - even though a fuller framework for that study will be entered only later on. In doing so, the current study will be integrated into the masterpiece of our future, more in-depth Torah experience.