Cheese, too, is a most contentious topic. As with milk, the confusion is due to a lack of information. In this case, however, it seems that the Sages did not want us to know. We read in the Mishnah, that right after the decree had been made by the Sanhedrin against "Gevinat Akum" (Idolater's Cheese), a rabbi not on the Sanhedrin asked one who was, for the reasoning behind this decree. The Sanhedrin member quickly changed the topic. The commentators explain that there is a rule that says that any decree of the Sanhedrin, once accepted by the people, becomes law forever (unless nullified by a later Sanhedrin). If the enactment is not accepted within twelve months, it becomes a "dead letter". Indeed, several of the enactments from this period were rejected by the people. This is true, for example, for non Jewish beer and oil. A prohibition on non Jewish baked goods was only partially accepted (more on that in a future post). The rabbis saw this decree as important, yet they knew that the reasoning was so flimsy, it was likely to be rejected. But what was the reason? Many medieval authorities saw it as an additional preventive measure against intermarriage. But if this is the case, the same ruling that allows non Jewish milk, should allow this as well (for those who allow non Jewish milk), as we do not get the cheese from the farmer. Some argue that this is not the reason, but rather the reason is that rennet, an animal enzyme, is used in cheese production. Although the rennet only comprises about a thousandth of a percent of the cheese, and should therefore be considered nullified, it is nevertheless, a "davar hamaamid" an essential ingredient without which the product could not exist. Such an ingredient is never nullified. (Since soft cheese, like ricotta, can be made without enzymes, their presence would not be significant, as they are far less than one in sixty, and are non essential, but only helpful. This is the view of a major seventeenth century authority (SHaCH), and is accepted by most Kashrut agencies). However, the way of making cheese in pre modern times was not to add rennet to milk, but to place milk into a calf's stomach. Most classical authorities consider rennet to be a non food (kihua b'alma; just a secretion) and the real problem is the calf's stomach rather than the rennet. Today, the rennet is extracted, and, according to many, is not a forbidden item, as it is essentially inedible by itself (some differ). Until the last few decades, an alternate way of making cheese was to dry the calf's stomach, and put the powdered stomach into the milk. Since Mad Cow Disease, this is no longer done. Only super expensive gourmet cheeses are still made in a calf's stomach. The issue of this being a milk-meat problem is not a concern, as the meat part of the stomach is very tiny, and dried stomach is no longer food. Until recently, cheese was usually made in Israel using chicken gizzards, instead of calf stomach. The Medieval sources mention some regions where cheese was made by adding flowers (plant enzymes) many rabbis approved. Those who posit that the problem is intermarriage, did not. The generally accepted rule in this case is that in a place where this was accepted, it's OK. Otherwise, it should not be done. Even the Shulchan Aruch is ambiguous. It says that the reason for the prohibition is the enzyme. But a few paragraphs later, it says that if the non Jew did not make the cheese for himself, but was simply filling an order for a Jew, it's OK. Rather shockingly, no lesser authority than Rabbenu Tam (1100-1171) , often considered the greatest authority in the post Talmudic era. (Rabbis love arguing if this honor should go to him or to RAMBAM), provides a lengthy explanation of why the entire topic makes no sense today (in his day). His students report that Rabbenu Tam personally ate non Jewish cheese, unsupervised! In my next post, I shall go into how present day authorities deal with this issue, and how rabbis in different countries handle this matter differently differently.