Pork, Profit, and Halacha: The Innkeeper’s Dilemma

About 250 years ago, in the town of Nedrevor in northern Hungary, a Jewish man named Feyvish Optovski received what seemed like a blessing: a contract from the local nobleman, Battush, to manage his inn. The job was considered a good one where Feyvish and his family would care for travelers, feed them, offer repairs and supplies, and earn a percentage of the profits. Most of the income went to the nobleman, but it provided Feyvish with a respectable livelihood.

However, soon after starting the job, Feyvish discovered a serious problem. Along with kosher meat for Jewish guests, the nobleman also expected him to serve pork to non-Jewish travelers. “For the Jews, serve kosher meat,” the nobleman instructed. “But for my people, give them white, tasty pork.” He may have meant well but to Feyvish, it was a crisis.

According to halacha (Jewish law), a Jew may not trade in forbidden items like pigs or any non-kosher species. The previous innkeeper had been Jewish but lacked proper Torah knowledge. Feyvish, however, knew the law and his conscience wouldn’t allow him to go against it. But he also couldn’t afford to lose the job. What could he do?

After asking around, Feyvish came up with a solution. He formed a partnership with a local non-Jew. Under their agreement, the non-Jew would fully own and sell all the pork. Feyvish would handle only the kosher meat, while the non-Jew would deal with the rest. It sounded like a good compromise.

But it didn’t go as planned.

The non-Jewish partner began taking advantage of the setup. When non-Jewish travelers arrived, he would tell them there was only pork available. He’d sell his own stock and make a profit while Feyvish’s already slaughtered kosher beef and poultry sat unused and spoiled. At that time, there was no refrigeration, and the financial loss was serious.

Feyvish realized the arrangement was hurting his livelihood and not working in practice. He turned to his community rabbi, Rabbi Yosef, with a new question: Could he revise the arrangement so that the non-Jew was no longer a partner but instead acted only as a servant under his command? The pork would belong to Feyvish, but the non-Jew would handle all the sales. Was that allowed under halacha?

Rabbi Yosef saw that this question was too complex to answer alone. So he sent it to the Chatam Sofer, one of the greatest halachic authorities of the time.

In his response (Chiddushei Chatam Sofer, Yoreh De’ah 108), the Chatam Sofer took the question very seriously. He acknowledged the real loss Feyvish was suffering. If the non-Jew refused to sell kosher meat, and travelers only bought pork, it caused financial ruin. The Chatam Sofer searched for a permissible way forward.

He explained that the original reason our sages forbade doing business with non-kosher food was the fear that one might accidentally eat some of it during handling. But if the Jew never touched or tasted the product and the non-Jew conducted the entire sale then this concern might not apply.

Still, the Chatam Sofer didn’t want to rely only on reasoning. So he suggested another clever approach: the non-Jew could borrow money from the Jew, and repay it using the pigs. That way, Feyvish wasn’t really “buying and selling” pork, he was simply collecting repayment in the form of livestock.

From a halachic point of view, since the Jew never physically acquired the pigs (which is necessary for true ownership under Jewish law), he wasn’t violating the Torah’s prohibition. Even if the pigs were legally his under gentile law, halachically he never truly “owned” them. Therefore, no Torah violation occurred.

This remarkable solution allowed Feyvish to continue his work honestly, without compromising on Jewish law.

It’s just one small example of the many challenges our ancestors faced in the long years of exile trying to provide for their families while staying loyal to Torah and halacha. Thanks to the wisdom of great rabbis like the Chatam Sofer, they found ways to remain proud, observant Jews, even in the most difficult situations.