I heard that Bishul Akum only applies to food that would be fit for a king’s table. Is this true?
If so, what are the qualifications of “fit for a king’s table”?
4 Comments
Netanel Colish
on April 10, 2025 at 6:41 pm
Thank you for explaining! So just to make sure I’m understanding correctly.
I was reading Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 113 and I just want to make sure I’m understanding it correctly.
There are two qualifications that would make something full under it NOT being Bishul Akum and therefore okay to eat if a non-jew cooked it:
1. If it can be eaten raw then it is always allowed to be cooked by a non-jew EVEN IF it would be served at a king’s table (for example: fruits, vegetables, possibly certain kinds of kosher fish)
2. If it is not fit for a king’s table (in alignment with what you wrote above)
Please let me know if I’m misunderstanding anything. Thank you!
1. yes 2. Star K wrote the following “Foods that are not prestigious and would not be served at a kings’ table when hosting an official state dinner (e.g. baked beans or corn flakes). These foods are permitted because a person does not experience deep feelings of gratitude and appreciation when someone warms up a can of string beans. Therefore, cooking non-prestigious food would not bring on feelings of closeness between preparer and recipient. Any food that would not be served at a wedding feast because it is not elegant (e.g. doughnuts) would certainly not qualify for bishul akum.”
I say, “use your judgment,” but his concept is accurate
Thank you for explaining! So just to make sure I’m understanding correctly.
I was reading Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 113 and I just want to make sure I’m understanding it correctly.
There are two qualifications that would make something full under it NOT being Bishul Akum and therefore okay to eat if a non-jew cooked it:
1. If it can be eaten raw then it is always allowed to be cooked by a non-jew EVEN IF it would be served at a king’s table (for example: fruits, vegetables, possibly certain kinds of kosher fish)
2. If it is not fit for a king’s table (in alignment with what you wrote above)
Please let me know if I’m misunderstanding anything. Thank you!
Thank you for explaining! So just to make sure I’m understanding correctly.
I was reading Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 113 and I just want to make sure I’m understanding it correctly.
There are two qualifications that would make something full under it NOT being Bishul Akum and therefore okay to eat if a non-jew cooked it:
1. If it can be eaten raw then it is always allowed to be cooked by a non-jew EVEN IF it would be served at a king’s table (for example: fruits, vegetables, possibly certain kinds of kosher fish)
2. If it is not fit for a king’s table (in alignment with what you wrote above)
Please let me know if I’m misunderstanding anything. Thank you!
You got it. Check out bishul akum in our Jewish law section
1. yes 2. Star K wrote the following “Foods that are not prestigious and would not be served at a kings’ table when hosting an official state dinner (e.g. baked beans or corn flakes). These foods are permitted because a person does not experience deep feelings of gratitude and appreciation when someone warms up a can of string beans. Therefore, cooking non-prestigious food would not bring on feelings of closeness between preparer and recipient. Any food that would not be served at a wedding feast because it is not elegant (e.g. doughnuts) would certainly not qualify for bishul akum.”
I say, “use your judgment,” but his concept is accurate
Thank you for explaining! So just to make sure I’m understanding correctly.
I was reading Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 113 and I just want to make sure I’m understanding it correctly.
There are two qualifications that would make something full under it NOT being Bishul Akum and therefore okay to eat if a non-jew cooked it:
1. If it can be eaten raw then it is always allowed to be cooked by a non-jew EVEN IF it would be served at a king’s table (for example: fruits, vegetables, possibly certain kinds of kosher fish)
2. If it is not fit for a king’s table (in alignment with what you wrote above)
Please let me know if I’m misunderstanding anything. Thank you!