Q: We hired a Philippine care giver to live with my mother, who is barely mobile. Until now, others have cooked most of her food. Can the care giver now cook or at least reheat the food?

A: We hope that the care giver will give your mother the help she needs. Most Philippine care givers are kind and cooperative about following the home's rules, including kashrut. It is best for all when the rules avoid creating undue pressure, and a good relation- ship is crucial for the welfare of an infirmed dear one. On the other hand, halacha requires precautions and not relying on general impressions. Some- times more restrictive rules that are simpler to follow work better than following more complex leniencies, which can cause mistakes and the tensions that come with subsequent scrutinizing and perceived recriminations. While we hope to find a golden mean for your situation, there is room for adjustments and further allowances if the situation warrants them.

The basic rules of bishul akum (cooking done by a non-Jew) can be said in a sentence. A non-Jew may not cook food that is not eaten raw, turning it into first-class food, without a Jew's involvement in the process. Let's deal very briefly with each component.

Cooking - Smoking food is permitted (Shulchan Aruch, YD 113:13). Poskim discuss if microwaving is permitted. While few permit it, it can be a mitigating factor (see Yabia Omer V, YD 9).

Not eaten raw - If a non-Jew cooks food that is sometimes eaten raw, even if it is usually cooked, the food is permitted (ibid.:1). A non-Jew may reheat food that a Jew already rendered edible. Not only are boiled milk and water permitted for this reason, but so are coffee and tea, whose principle ingredient is water (YechaveDa'at IV:42). Carrots are another classic example.

First-class food - Only food that nobility would serve is included in the prohibition (Shulchan Aruch, ibid.). This subjective criterion likely excludes farina, oatmeal, french-fries and more.

The latter categories are society based; many cases are borderline or based on machloket. Thus, we gave few details and warn about over-use. The next category enables developing a reliable plan.

Involvement of a Jew - Regarding the related prohibition of bread baked by a non-Jew, the gemara (Avoda Zara 38b) says that it is sufficient for a Jew to light the oven's fire. Shulchan Aruch (ibid.: 7) and Sefardic practice, regarding the more stringent laws of bishul akum, require a Jew to put the food on the fire (or light the fire after the food was put there) or stir the food as it cooks. The Rama (ad loc.) and Ashkenazic practice say that a Jew may light a flame, even at the beginning of the day, and have the non-Jew do all of the actual cooking. Furthermore, the Rama suggests having a Jew light the flame used to light the stove. Some apply this leniency to ovens with pilot lights. We can also use it to have a Jew light a "yahrtzeit candle" to light (the match that lights) a gas stove. The Aruch HaShulchan (113:44) says that one should rely on this last opinion only in a case of acute need and in the home of a Jew, but both lenient factors are present here. The significance of it being in a Jewish house is two-fold. Firstly, it is likely that a Jew will do some stirring (Rama 113:4) and also there is an opinion (Tosafot Avoda Zara 37a) that bishul akum applies only to cooking in a non-Jew's house. Although we do not accept that opinion independently, poskim sometimes use it as a supporting leniency, especially if the one cooking is a hired worker (see Shach 113:7). (Yechave Da'at V, 54 uses that leniency as support regarding Sefardim relying on a Jew lighting the fire in a Jewish-owned restaurant). A Jew would have to turn on electrical appliances.

Due to a few kashrut considerations, it is best that the caregiver brings home only kosher food. For cooking, there are two preferable systems. If your mother can be in or around the kitchen, she can supervise its proper use (especially milk-meat) and light the fire. If she rarely gets out of bed, it is best if the food is cooked by a Jew, when one is around. If the care giver demands freedom to cook for herself, she should have her own clearly marked utensils, which she must clean separately.

Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire Hemdat Yamim at www.ou.org or www.eretzhemdah.org. And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim by email weekly, by sending an email to info@eretzhemdah.org with the message: Subscribe/English (for the English version) or Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew version). Please leave the subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel

[2] Candle by Day
We are sometimes so anxious to get away with things that it never occurs to us that we might enjoy doing them. - From A Candle by Day by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein

[3] CHIZUK and IDUD (for Olim & not-yet-Olim respectively)
And you shall make holy garments for Aharon your brother for honor and for beauty (lekhavod ul-tif'eret)...

Ramban asks: How does one make garments that satisfy the imperative of "lekhavod ul-tif'eret"? He answers that we copy the sartorial style of kings, especially the kings of Persia.

We know a Persian king, Achashverosh. He threw a party: "He made a feast... He showed the riches of his glorious kingdom and yakar tif'eret gedulato - his excellent majesty" (Esther 1:3-5). We translate tif'eret here as "majesty". Still, what at the party showed majesty?

Regarding tif'eret gedulato, Rabbi Yose the son of Hanina said: "This teaches that he wore priestly garments" (Megila 12a). "Tif'eret" alludes to "priestly garments" based on the words "lekhavod ul-tif'eret" found in our parsha.

So, what can this mean? In Ramban, Persia's kings suggest the design for the priests' sacral clothing; in our oral tradition, a Persian king puts on the priestly garments as a special honor for himself.

The Torah states clearly that there must be a High Priest. Not so a king. "Kingship" can be assimilated to the High Priest who will exercise a combined authority described by the term "Eved Hashem - God's servant".

In practice, only Moshe succeeded in combining the two roles. From Moshe, religious authority passed to the priests; kingship went on to have a complicated subsequent history.

Achashverosh would not have desired the priestly dress for its faux Persian style. The sacral dress suggested to him instead the unique role of God's servant, of political and religious leadership combined. He coveted this double-leadership. For that glory, he dressed himself in priestly garb.
In Israel we have achieved a kind of malkhut (kingship). That leadership exercises authority in the political realm but does not inspire devotion to God. Perhaps, this is the enterprise of another generation.
Rabbi Chaim Brovender, Jerusalem

TORAH THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for publication in the Orthodox Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication on Parshat Ha'Shavuah

[4] MicroUlpan
NEEDLE THREADER. The thin wire loop goes through the eye of the needle, put the end of the thread into the loop, and pull the loop and thread back through the eye. In Hebrew? MASHCHELET

[5] A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit
While R' Yoshe Ber was the Rav of Slutsk, he visited Minsk. All the great Torah sages of the city came to meet the distinguished rav and hear him speak in learning. One of them was a former student of his, now a wealthy merchant in Minsk. When R' Yoshe Ber saw the man, he greeted him very warmly and asked him, "How are you doing?"
"Thanks to Hashem," the former student replied, "I am well, and I have a decent income."
They talked about this and that, and a few moments later R' Yoshe Ber again asked, "How are you doing?"
""Thanks to Hashem," the man answered, "my family is well and I am doing well."
Again they talked about this and that, until a short while later R' Yoshe Ber again asked, "How are you doing?"
"Excuse me, Rebbe," the merchant said, "but that is the third time you're asking me the same question. Thanks to Hashem we are well."
"You have not been answering my question," R' Yoshe Ber told him. "I asked you, 'How are you doing?' and you answered that you are well and are doing well. That is not your doing, but Hashem's doing. I want to know what you are doing: Do you have fixed times for Torah study? Do you help others through charity? How are you doing as a Jew?"

Shmuel Himelstein has written a wonderful series for ArtScroll: Words of Wisdom, Words of Wit; A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit; and" Wisdom and Wit" — available at your local Jewish bookstore (or should be).
Excerpted with the permission of the copyright holder

[6] SDTs
Nachalas Chamisha (?) gives a possible source to the printers' practice of writing G-d's name as two YUDs. Towards the end of T'tzaveh, G-d says: V'SHACHANTI B'TOCH BNEI YISRA'EL, and I will dwell amongst the Children of Israel. Note that the last letter of BNEI and the first letter of YISRAEL are YUDs. If G-d dwells amongst BNEI YISRAEL, then His name can be represented by those two YUDs.

Shulchan Aruch Orech Chayim sec. 580 lists dates on the Jewish Calendar that various tragic events occurred and one can take upon himself to fast on such dates. The last date on the list is the 9th of Adar, when the first (?) dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel took place. Although the Mishna praises both "Houses" for the integrity of their disputes and the exemplary behavior vis a vis each other, it is still considered a tragedy of Jewish History that Machloket exists. We're not recommending fasting; just pondering.

[7] Divrei Menachem
Parshat Tezaveh introduces us to the various clothes to be worn by the kohanim in the Mikdash. Besides setting the kohen apart from ordinary people, each article of clothing represented a different aspect of spiritual symbolism. And only when these special vestments were worn could the kohen participate in the holy ritual.

Indeed, the priestly garments were the only dress allowed to be worn when kohanim performed the Service. These garments were to be made of materials that were the property of the nation and that had been specifically contributed by the people for the Temple service. This symbolized the overriding concept that the kohanim were representatives of the people.

The breastplate worn by the Kohen Gadol, which bore the names of the twelve tribes on individualized precious stones, also served the nation through the luminous letters that lit up in response to questions of national import. "Urim " denotes that light while "Tumim" indicates the completeness or truth of the responses to the question.

The Vilna Gaon asserted that the lit-up letters could be misread as when the Kohen Gadol in Shilo misinterpreted Chana's behavior as SH-I-K-O-R-A (drunk) instead of K-E-SH-E-R-A (worthy woman) (cf. Samuel Alef 1:13). Clearly, representing the national interest is not only a matter of asking the right questions: it is also a matter of possessing the Divine Spirit to recognize the correct answers.
Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff