Avodah Zarah, Daf Lammed Tet, Part 3
Introduction
Today s section discusses the issue of ensuring that goods passing through gentile hands have not been tampered with such that what was assumed to be kosher is not. The question is whether one seal is sufficient, or whether two seals are needed to ensure that the non-Jew did not open the container and either use or switch the material inside.
אמר רב חבי"ת אסור בחותם אחד חמפ"ג מותר בחותם אחד
חלב בשר יין תכלת אסורין בחותם אחד
חילתית מורייס פת גבינה מותרין בחותם אחד
Rav said: Milk, meat, wine and blue wool are prohibited with one seal;
but hiltit, murias, bread and cheese are permitted with one seal.
The fear with milk, meat and cheese seems to be that kosher ones were switched with non-kosher ones.
The fear with blue wool is that the non-Jew switched the wool with wool dyed with dye not kosher for tzitzit.
The hiltit may have been cut with an unkosher knife.
The murias (fish hash) may have been switched with murias that has non-kosher fish in it.
The wine may have been touched by the non-Jew, which would render it undrinkable.
The issue with the bread is that it may have been switched with bread made by non-Jews, which is forbidden.
Rav requires two seals for some of these things, but only one seal for the others.
פת למאי ניחוש לה? אי משום איחלופי קרירא בחמימא מידע ידיע
דחיטי בדשערי נמי מידע ידיע
אי כי הדדי כיון דאיכא חותם אחד לא טרח ומזייף
Why should we be concerned about bread? Were he to change a fresh loaf for a stale one, the receiver would know.
Or a loaf of wheat for one of barley, he would know!
If they are the same, since there is one seal attached he would not take the trouble to commit a fraud.
With bread, if there is motivation for the non-Jew to switch a good loaf for a bad one, the Jew receiving it would know what had been done (the assumption is that the Jew knows what the other Jew sent him). And if they are the same, then why would the non-Jew go through the trouble of faking a seal. Thus one seal is clearly enough.
ורב מ"ש גבינה דלא טרח ומזייף חלב נמי לא טרח ומזייף?
אמר רב כהנא אפיק חלב ועייל חתיכת דג שאין בה סימן
היינו בשר תרי גווני בשר
And to Rav why is cheese different, in that [the non-Jew] would not take the trouble to commit a fraud [and allows one seal]; likewise with milk he would not take the trouble to commit a fraud [and yet Rav demands two seals]?
R. Kahana said: Strike out the word milk and insert a piece of fish which has no distinguishing mark.
But that is the same as meat.
There are two kinds of meat.
Rav says that cheese only needs one seal but milk requires two seals. Why the difference? R. Kahana affirms that there really should be no difference between the two and therefore allows milk with only one seal. He does not allow pieces of fish with one seal less the non-Jew switch the kosher fish with non-kosher one. Two seals will make this impossible.
ושמואל אומר בי"ת אסור בחותם אחד מח"ג מותר בחותם אחד
בשר יין תכלת אסורין בחותם אחד
מורייס חילתית גבינה מותרין בחותם אחד
לשמואל חתיכת דג שאין בה סימן היינו בשר תרי גווני בשר לא אמרינן
Shmuel said: Meat, wine and blue wool are prohibited with one seal;
but murias, hiltit and cheese are permitted with one seal.
According to Shmuel, a slice of fish which has no distinguishing mark is regarded as the same as meat, and we do not say that there are two kinds of meat.
Shmuel does not include milk or bread on his list. He seems to just not be worried at all that non-Jews would switch the bread, as we said above. And he removes milk, as did R. Kahana. But he does not need to add a piece of fish because the fish is the same as the meat.
ת"ר אין לוקחין ימ"ח מח"ג בסוריא לא יין ולא מורייס ולא חלב ולא מלח סלקונדרית ולא חילתית ולא גבינה אלא מן המומחה וכולן אם נתארח אצל בעל הבית מותר
מסייע ליה לרבי יהושע בן לוי דא"ר יהושע בן לוי שגר לו בעל הבית לביתו מותר
מ"ט בעל הבית לא שביק היתירא ואכל איסורא וכי משגר ליה ממאי דאכיל משדר ליה:
Our Rabbis taught: We do not buy in Syria wine, murias, milk, salkondorit salt, hiltit or cheese, unless it be from a reliable dealer; but if [an Israelite] is the guest of a host there, they are all permitted.
This supports the statement of R. Joshua b. Levi who said: If [a Syrian] householder sends him [as a gift any of these foods] he may eat them. What is the reason? A householder would not leave what is allowed and eat what is forbidden, and if he sends anything to him [it may be assumed that] he sends him from what he himself eats.
The baraita here refers to buying food from Jews in Syria, the area which lies to the north of Israel. This is an area that rabbis usually consider semi-observant. According to the baraita, merchants there are not so careful not to sell to Jews products that were meant for non-Jews. All of these items may be forbidden to Jews. However, he may buy them from a reliable person. He may also eat with Jews there because the Jews there do not themselves eat these foods. Furthermore if a Jew sends him some food as a gift he will send from the food he himself is eating. We can assume that this food is kosher.