Milk and meat in Jewish law
The mixture of meat and dairy is forbidden according to Jewish law. This dietary law, basic to kashrut, is based on two verses in the Book of Exodus, which forbid "boiling a kid in its mother's milk" and a third repetition of this prohibition in Deuteronomy.
Explanations for the law
The rabbis of the Talmud gave no reason for the prohibition. Later authorities, such as Maimonides, opined that the law was connected to a prohibition of idolatry in Judaism. Obadiah Sforno and Solomon Luntschitz, rabbinic commentators living in the late Middle Ages, both suggested that the law referred to a specific Canaanite religious practice, in which young goats were cooked in their own mothers' milk, aiming to obtain supernatural assistance to increase the yield of their flocks. More recently, a theogonous text named the birth of the gracious gods, found during the rediscovery of Ugarit, has been interpreted as saying that a Levantine ritual to ensure agricultural fertility involved the cooking of a young goat in its mother's milk, followed by the mixture being sprinkled upon the fields. Still more recent sources argue that this translation is incorrect.Some rabbinic commentators saw the law as having an ethical aspect. Rashbam argued that using the milk of an animal to cook its offspring was inhumane, based on a principle similar to that of Shiluach haken. Chaim ibn Attar compared the practice of cooking animals in their mother's milk to the slaying of nursing infants.
The Torah law as understood by the rabbis
Three distinct laws
The Talmudic rabbis believed that the biblical text only forbade cooking a mixture of milk and meat, but because the biblical regulation is triplicated they imposed three distinct regulations to represent it:- not cooking meat and milk together
- not eating milk and meat together
- not benefiting from the mixture in any other way
- Serving mixtures of milk and meat in a restaurant, even if the clientele are non-Jewish, and the restaurant is not intended to comply with kashrut
- Feeding a pet with food containing mixtures of milk and meat
- Obtaining a refund for an accidental purchase of mixtures of milk and meat, as a refund constitutes a form of sale
The term "gedi"
The Book of Genesis refers to young goats by the Hebrew phrase gəḏî-‘izzîm, but the prohibition against boiling a kid... only uses the term gəḏî. Rashi, one of the most prominent talmudic commentators, argued that the term gəḏî must actually have a more general meaning, including calves and lambs, in addition to young goats. Rashi also argued that the meaning of gəḏî is still narrow enough to exclude birds, all the undomesticated kosher animals, and all of the non-kosher animals. The Talmudic writers had a similar analysis, but believed that since domesticated kosher animals have similar meat to birds and to the non-domestic kosher land-animals, they should prohibit these latter meats too, creating a general prohibition against mixing milk and meat from any kosher animal, excepting fish.Consumption of non-kosher animals is prohibited in general, and questions about the status of mixtures involving their meat and milk would be somewhat academic. Nevertheless, the lack of a classical decision about milk and meat of non-kosher animals gave rise to argument in the late Middle Ages. Some, such as Yoel Sirkis and Joshua Falk, argued that mixing milk and meat from non-kosher animals should be prohibited, but others, like Shabbatai ben Meir and David HaLevi Segal, argued that, excluding the general ban on non-kosher animals, such mixtures should not be prohibited.
The term "halev immo"
Rashi expressed the opinion that the reference to mother's milk must exclude fowl from the regulation, since only mammals produce milk. According to Shabbethai Bass, Rashi was expressing the opinion that the reference to a mother was only present to ensure that birds were clearly excluded from the prohibition; Bass argued that Rashi regarded the ban on boiling meat in its mother's milk to really be a more general ban on boiling meat in milk, regardless of the relationship between the source of the meat and that of the milk.Substances derived from milk, such as cheese and whey, have traditionally been considered to fall under the prohibition, but milk substitutes, created from non-dairy sources, do not. However, the classical rabbis were worried that Jews using artificial milk might be misinterpreted, so they insisted that the milk be clearly marked to indicate its source. In the classical era, the main form of artificial milk was almond milk, so the classical rabbis imposed the rule that almonds must be placed around such milk; in the Middle Ages, there was some debate about whether this had to be done during cooking as well as eating, or whether it was sufficient to merely do this during the meal.
The term "bishul"
Although the biblical regulation literally only mentions boiling, there were questions raised in the late Middle Ages about whether this should instead be translated as cooking, and hence be interpreted as a reference to activities like broiling, baking, roasting, and frying. Lenient figures like Jacob of Lissa and Chaim ibn Attar argued that such a prohibition would only be a rabbinic addition, and not the biblical intent, but others like Abraham Danzig and Hezekiah da Silva argued that the biblical term itself had this wider meaning.Though radiative cooking of meat with dairy produce is not listed by the classical rabbis as being among the biblically prohibited forms of cooking such mixtures, a controversy remains about using a microwave oven to cook these mixtures.
Rabbinic additions to the Biblical law
The classical rabbis interpreted to mean that they should create a protective fence around the biblical laws, and this was one of the three principal teachings of the Great Assembly. Mixing of milk and meat is one area of halacha where a particularly large number of "fences" have been added. Nevertheless, the rabbis of the classical and Middle Ages also introduced a number of leniencies.Minuscule quantities
The classical rabbis expressed the opinion that each of the food rules could be waived if the portion of food violating the regulations was less than a certain size, known as a shiur, unless it was still possible to taste or smell it; for the "milk and meat" regulations, this minimal size was a ke'zayit, literally meaning anything "similar to an olive" in size. However, the shiur is merely the minimum amount that leads to formal punishment in the classical era, but even "half a shiur is prohibited by the Torah".Many rabbis followed the premise that "taste is principal" : in the event of an accidental mixing of milk and meat, the food could be eaten if there was no detectable change in taste. Others argued that forbidden ingredients could constitute up to half of the mixture before being disallowed. Today the rabbis apply the principle of batel b'shishim, that is, permissible so long as forbidden ingredients constitute no more than of the whole.
Due to the premise that "taste is principal", parve foods are considered to take on the same "meat/dairy produce" classification as anything they are cooked with.
Physical proximity
Prominent rabbis of the Middle Ages insisted that milk should not be placed on a table where people are eating meat, to avoid accidentally consuming milk while eating meat, and vice versa. Tzvi Hirsch Spira, an early 20th-century rabbi, argued that when this rule was created, the tables commonly in use were only large enough for one individual; Spira concludes that the rule would not apply if the table being used was large, and the milk was out of reach of the person eating meat.The rabbis of the Middle Ages discussed the issue of people eating milk and meat at the same table. Jacob ben Asher suggested that each individual should eat from different tablecloths, while Moses Isserles argued that a large and obviously unusual item should be placed between the individuals, as a reminder to avoid sharing the foods. Later rabbinic writers pointed out exceptions to the rule. Chaim ibn Attar, an 18th-century kabbalist, ruled that sitting at the same table as a non-Jew eating non-kosher food was permissible; Yechiel Michel Epstein, a 19th-century rabbi, argued that the risk was sufficiently reduced if individuals sat far enough apart that the only way to share food was to leave the table.
Classification of foods
To prevent the consumption of forbidden mixtures, foods are divided into three categories.- "meat" or "meaty"
- "dairy" or "milky"
- parve
Classical Jewish authorities argue that foods lose parve status if treated in such a way that they absorb the taste of milk or meat during cooking, soaking, or salting.