58
edits
Pat Akum: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
m
→What Breads and Foods are Included
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
==What Breads and Foods are Included== | ==What Breads and Foods are Included== | ||
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref> | # Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref> | ||
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref> | # When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref> | ||
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref> | # Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref> | ||
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12</ref> Based on this, cakes and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8</ref> | # Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref> | ||
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in '' | # A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref>However, others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3 | ||
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 </ref> | # Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 </ref> | ||
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref> | # Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref> | ||
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref> | # Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref> | ||
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref> | # Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref> | ||
==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking== | ==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking== | ||
