Avodah Mailing List

Volume 29: Number 26

Mon, 27 Feb 2012

• 1. The Light of Shabbos (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals (T6...@aol.com)
• 3. Do I need to support Dad? (Prof. Levine)
• 4. The Superbowl Maariv (Micha Berger)
• 5. Purim and the Environment (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 6. Corporate Entities (Jonathan Baker)
• 7. Clear Thinking about Male Homosexuals (Jonathan Baker)
• 8. Re: The Superbowl Maariv (Harry Maryles)
• 9. girsa d'yankusa (David Riceman)
• 10. The Winners & Losers in the Battle For Your Bucks (Prof. Levine)
• 11. Ibn Ezra on the Moon (Micha Berger)
• 12. Rashi's Cedars (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Why olive oil needs a hechsher (martin brody)

From Cross Currents, by RJRosenblum
<http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2012/0
2/21/the-light-of-shabbos-and-shabbos-without-lights>
(or <http://bit.ly/z5TnBd>):

    The Light of Shabbos, and Shabbos without Lights

    ...
    Rabbi Estreicher presented Shabbos as the key to experiencing life
    with joy, of rejoicing in one's portion. He noted how rare it is to
    meet someone overflowing with joy. If we asked someone how he was,
    and he responded enthusiastically by enumerating at great length
    everything there is to be grateful for, we would likely suspect him
    of having a screw loose or partaking of illicit stimulants.

    But that is precisely what Shabbos allows us to do. On Shabbos, we
    refrain from all melachah -- which, as Rabbi Estreicher explained
    at length, refers not to the expenditure of energy, but to creative
    activity -- and are therefore forced to view the world as complete,
    and not in need of any further improvement. We learn to appreciate
    what we have.

    Rabbi Hutner (Pachad Yitzchak, Shabbos 5) emphasizes this point. He
    writes that in the verse, "And Elokim saw es kol (all) that He had
    made and behold it was very good," kol does not refer to all the
    many things He had created, but is rather the language of completion,
    klila. Elokim saw how the entire creation fit together in one seamless
    whole, and that was the tov meod.

    Thus in the blessing Yotzer Or during the week, we say, "ma rabu
    ma'asecha -- how manifold are Your works," but on Shabbos, we say
    "ma gadlu ma'asecha -- how great are Your works." "Manifold" refers
    to the multitude of infinite detail; "great" refers to the way in
    which all those details fit together in one perfect tapestry.

    It is natural and proper that during the week, we should notice all
    that can be improved and needs to be done. That is part of what it
    means to be partners with Hashem in tikkun olam. But there also has
    to be a time when we cease thinking about all that is lacking and
    acting upon those thoughts, and instead contemplate the world as if
    were complete, without any further need of our creative input. Rav
    Hai Gaon instructs us to view ourselves on Shabbos like someone who
    has finished all the work of building a beautiful house, just as the
    world was complete in Hashem's eyes, "Va'yechal Elokim b'yom ha'svi'i.

    The ability to stop trying to fix things, and to instead step back and
    appreciate all that we have been given and how perfectly apportioned
    it is to our present task in life is the source of the most profound
    joy. Rabbi Hutner notes the difference between the description of
    our approach to Shabbos -- "ve'karata l'Shabbos oneg (You shall call
    Shabbos oneg) -- and that of Yom Tov -- "ve'samachta b'chagecha
    (You shall rejoice on your festival). The latter is expressed in
    terms of concrete acts of simcha -- e.g., eating meat and drinking
    wine. Krias shem, by contrast, is primarily expressed as contemplation
    of the essence of Shabbos, which is oneg. Through the appreciation of
    the perfection of one's world, one experiences a harhavas da'as --
    an expansion of understanding -- that can be expressed in even the
    smallest addition l'kavod Shabbos.
    ...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The trick is learning to be passionate in one's
mi...@aishdas.org        ideals, but compassionate to one's peers.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

 

From: Lisa Liel <_lisa@starways.net_ (mailto:l...@starways.net) >
>But if you  /are/ going to talk about evolutionary
> advantage, you do have to answer  this question:  what possible
> evolutionary or survival advantage  could there be in certain people
> being genetically homosexual?  One  would think that such a trait would
> long since have died out.  [--TK]

Good point.  Clearly it wasn't simple evolution.  It  must be part of
Hashem's plan.

Lisa

 
>>>>
I agree that homosexuality is part of Hashem's plan, along with all other  
physical, emotional and mental handicaps and conditions that cause physical 
and  emotional suffering or that cause people not to be able to marry and  
reproduce.  Not for  a moment would I presume to guess the reasons  behind 
His plans, but I trust that He has reasons, and that every person He  created, 
even those who face the most difficult challenges, has a unique,  Divinely 
ordained purpose and mission in this world.
 
 

--Toby  Katz
=============
Romney -- good  values, good family, good  hair


------------------------------------------------------------------- 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120223/ed2b7b59/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://tinyurl.com/79xw3ye

Q. My father has a very low income, so I send him 
money each month even though it is a hardship for 
me. But he lives in a very valuable house ? is he 
really poor? Also, he has announced his decision 
to leave his entire estate to his wife (not my 
mother), so in a way I feel like I am supporting a stranger.

Please see the above URL for the reply.  YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120224/18ca46a4/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Emanuel Feldman posted the following in Cross-Currents. I found the
question he raises very AishDas-y:

    The Super Bowl Maariv
    from Cross-Currents by Emanuel Feldman
    http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2012/02/24/the-super-bo
    wl-maariv/

    On the morning of the recent Super Bowl football game, a shul in
    New Jersey sent out this e-mail to its membership:

        There will be a minyan for Maariv at __________ Synagogue (name
        deliberately omitted) at ten minutes after the beginning of the
        Super Bowl halftime.

    How should one react to this? One could be benevolent, in the spirit
    of the Berditchever Rebbe who, paraphrasing himself, might have said:
    "O L-rd, how wondrous is Thy people. Even in the midst of the Super
    Bowl, they think of Thee!"

    Or one could be severe and paraphrase Isaiah 1:12: "Mi bikesh zos
    miyedchem -- who asks this of you, saith the Lo-d, to trample on My
    holy ground and daven with trivialities in your heart!"

    Or one could simply laugh, in the spirit of Shakespeare's A Midsummer
    Night's Dream: "L-rd, what fools these mortals be."

    This is one multiple choice where one could choose all three and
    still not be entirely wrong.

    To be benevolent: This is a praiseworthy attempt to assure a minyan
    for Maariv. The membership is watching the football game (together
    with 111 million other people) and unless an accommodation is made,
    there will be no minyan. ...

    The severe view: The Super Bowl Maariv subtly suggests that while
    davening is always primary, on this day the game is primary and
    the davening secondary. The shul is in effect saying: Sorry, G-d,
    you will have to wait for Your Maariv until they finish the first
    half of the game.

    This stringent approach would point to an obvious misunderstanding
    of the nature of prayer. Prayer is not simply a matter of reciting
    the proper words; it is a conversation with our Creator. Such
    a conversation cannot be conducted with hurried, unintelligible
    mumblings, and certainly not with minds cluttered by images of
    forward passes, interceptions, downfield blocks, and sacking the
    quarterback. ...

    Super Bowl Maariv involves an even deeper issue. The perennial
    challenge of the Jew is to be a child of Avraham HaIvri -- Ivri
    meaning "the other side" -- while living within the world, on
    "this side." We live in two worlds but we are bidden to know that
    our essence -- made up of our values and mitzvos -- is on the
    "other side."...

    Even within Orthodoxy there is a divide as to how best to address
    the challenge, ranging from a) those who totally reject "this side"
    and strive for total isolation, to b) those who attempt valiantly to
    maintain the primacy of the "other side" while participating fully
    in "this side." These brave souls traverse a narrow ridge between
    the abyss of assimilation on the one hand and the mountain of total
    separation on the other. This is a noble effort, but it comes with a
    warning sign: "This side" is very attractive and enticing, and if one
    is not careful with his footing, ludicrous consequences await -- such
    as davening Maariv with a minyan without sacrificing the Super Bowl.

    The Berditchever might say: this is a commendable attempt to create a
    living synthesis. But someone pretending to be Isaiah might counter:
    such attempts can create modern observant Jews who are hybrids of
    two irreconcilable worlds, a fusion that becomes confusion.
    ...

RSRH would echo (b).

RYBS would say there is no synthesis. Halakhah gives us a way to live
with the resulting dialectic tension, but there is no resolution. The
conflict is part of what fuels bekhirah.

But I think this essay gets to the essence of what I was trying to write
about when I raised the topic of whether Halakhic Man is a sound ideal for
a community. My argument was that it is not. That halakhah as a creative
process is something only felt by rabbanim; to the masses, nearly all
performance is following instructions. And this notion of a dialectic,
if poorly followed, becomes justification for compromise. Unlike, say,
Chassidus, which when poorly followed still produces a more observant and
loyal Jew than if had no ideal; HM if given to the masses will produce
many weaker Jews. If you forgot this conversation (it's been almost 4
years), see <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2008/07/halakhic-community.shtml>.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I long to accomplish a great and noble task,
mi...@aishdas.org        but it is my chief duty to accomplish small
http://www.aishdas.org   tasks as if they were great and noble.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              - Helen Keller

While researching ideas for a program for eight graders, I was glancing
through posts on the COEJL website.  When it came to Purim, one rabbi noted
that he couldn't find a connection between Purim and the environment so he
recommended talking about food and making Mishloach Manot that were
ecological etc.

So, I decided to write here a short version of a longer article on Purim
(that will be published BE"H shortly) and what it teaches us with regard to
the environment.

Purim actually teaches at least 3 lessons:

1.      The value of the hidden
2.      The value of community
3.      The value of the traditional heritage of a people (I will not
discuss this topic here, it's too long :-))

1.      The value of the hidden
When the sages first discussed the value of the book of Esther, and whether
to add it to the collection of the Bible, one of the reasons against was b/c
it did not contain a reference or the name of the Creator anywhere in the
book.  The question was - how can you have a holy book that does not mention
the Creator?

The answer is that the name is hidden. It can be found behind the scenes;
the presence of the Creator permeates the book, from the tale of how king
Achashverosh can't seem to sleep without hearing a bed-time story about how
Mordechai saved him;  to the way Haman starts at the top and finds himself
at the end of a rope. 
In Permaculture we are taught to observe. Not everything that appears to be
a problem - is indeed a problem. Sometimes, it is a solution for a different
problem!  In Jewish heritage, we find King David asking why do we need
spiders and wasps.  He finds them without merit, just as we many times fail
to observe the hidden elements in the world around us. We know the end of
the story of King David and how the spider and the wasp saved his life.  
From the story of Purim we also learn how hidden rhythms govern our world,
and we should not be so hasty as to ignore things just b/c we don't
understand what we are observing.

2.      The value of community
Worldwide the community has become one of the most sought after factors in a
person's life. From echo-neighborhoods in L.A. to eco villages around the
globe to Transition towns in UK and elsewhere. All of them are built on the
power of community. 
The story of Purim is also the story of the power of community.  The tale
starts at the banquet the king gave, where the Jews joined in with all the
others, thus abandoning their community status to become individuals. But as
things go from bad to worse and Queen Esther finds herself facing the danger
of losing her life in her attempt to gain the attention of the King in order
to save her nation, she turns to the community and asks that they join her
together, as a community and fast for 3 days, making a break with the past
and recreating the Jewish community and regaining its power and support.
Only as a community and as the representative of the community welfare can
Queen Esther approach the King and hope to save her people. Indeed one of
the lessons Am Yisrael is intended to teach the world is how to build
communities.

And so, as we enter the month of Adar, I wish you a happy month!

Shoshana L. Boublil
Israel Permaculture Organization, board member

RMi:
> Thinking legally for a moment, a shituf is being treated as common
> property among multiple owners. Something like a general partnership,
> not even a limited or limited liability partnership.
 
> But achizas habayis is treated like a real corporation, an entity in
> its own right not actually owned by the inheritors.
 
> Which made me wonder what other corporate entities exist in halakhah:
>     heqdeish
>     the tzibur -- and is that only Benei Yisrael as a whole, or can a
>    city own something?

Well, there's the shiva tuvei ha'ir, that are essentially a board that
can make decisions for the community, e.g., to desanctify a shul or to
sell a sefer Torah.  The Sanhedrin, in a more global sense, represents
the corporate body of Israel.

--
        name: jon baker              web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
     address: jjba...@panix.com     blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com

Rn Toby Katz:

> [2]  It is not true that people feel no instinctive revulsion at  
> father-daughter incest.  On the contrary, what Lot did with his daughters  is 
> considered something shameful and disgusting, and the daughter who named her  child 
> "Moav -- from Father" -- is condemned as particularly brazen.  I  believe 

Actually, the evidence you cite, that it is condemned, attests exactly the
opposite of what you want to prove.  Lot's daughters was a natural act,
for stated reasons.  It is condemned BY THE TORAH, which DEFINES incest
as an illegal act.  So Lot's daughters are prima facie evidence that 
incest is natural, if not normative.

In fact, the Gemara in, I think, Shabbos, somewhere in the 80s I think, 
says that Bnei Yisrael cried over their [forbidden] relations when they
were given the Torah, because now those relationships were defined as
forbidden.

So not only is it natural for goyim, it's natural for Jews as well.  Only
God's Law defines it as illegal, therefore we, and societies based on 
Biblical morality, avoid it and treat it as immoral.

> [3]  "Evolutionary advantage"?  Perhaps you should rather have  said, 
> "survival advantage." Evolution is an unproven hypothesis and even if it did 

Evolution is a fact, no matter how many Christian zealots like to claim 
otherwise.  The descent of Man is the unproven hypothesis, the idea that
natural selection is sufficient to explain the diversity of species and
the development of mankind.

> occur, it was Divinely guided.  We have to say that the natural attraction 

Divinely guided, does fit what I believe about evolution.

> between men and women is something that was implanted in us by our Creator so

but not that.  See above for Scriptural and talmudic evidence to the
contrary.

 * * *

Meanwhile, to the unclear thinking in the OP:

I realize this is a bit behind the times, because I batch up Avodah
digests and read them every two weeks or so, but still, the inconsistency
rankled.

JFS:
> Micha Berger wrote on Fri Feb 17 14:13:56 2012:
 
> > Pederasy and homosexuality are different things that usually have
> > very different etiologies.
 
> Etymologically, pederasty is related to pedophilia, because the
> ancient Greeks tolerated male-on-male sexual intercourse only between
> a man and a boy.  But I meant that term in the modern English sense --
> "anal intercourse (especially with a boy)" -- and, more specifically,
> I was just looking for a succinct English word that described
> male-on-male sexual intercourse, I had no intention of conveying the

Mishkav zochor would have been clearer, as you say.  Often halachic 
terms do not translate well to other languages.

Using a term that can be so easily confused, and of which confusion you
admit you were aware, is not clear thinking, unless one is using the 
term for polemical purposes, which goal you claimed was not yours.

When I realized your post was equating pederasty with male homosexuality,
I could not actually read the rest, because you were equating (to make
the analogy to heterosexual relations) all heterosexual relations to 
statutory rape.  All sexual relations are nonconsentual relations
between adults and minors?  You were not thinking clearly, or you were
writing some kind of polemic, therefore you had belied your stated purposes.

To quote from the Wikipedia article on the word, it shows that your
attempt to include normal consentual adult homosexual relations in
"pederasty" does not in fact conform to contemporary usage - almost
all definitions, from the OED to dictionaries of homosexual jargon,
emphasize the adult-minor aspect of the relationship.

* * *

The commonly accepted reference definitions of pederasty refer to a
sexual relationship, or to copulation, between older and younger males.
The OED offers: "Homosexual relations between a man and a boy; homo-
sexual anal intercourse, usually with a boy or younger man as the
passive partner."[24] The concise OED has: ?Sexual intercourse between
a man and a boy.?[25] When describing pederasts, some focus solely on
the mechanics of copulation, such as the Merriam-Webster (on-line edition):
?one who practices anal intercourse especially with a boy?.[26] Other
dictionaries offer a more general definition, such as "homosexual rela-
tions between men and boys"[27] or "homosexual relations, especially
between a male adult and a boy or young man."[28] The limitation of
pederasty to anal sex with a boy is contested by sexologists. Francoeur
regards it as "common but incorrect,"[29] while Haeberle describes it
as "a modern usage resulting from a misunderstanding of the original
term and ignorance of its historical implications."[30]

Academic and social studies sources propose more expansive definitions
of the term. The Encyclopedia of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender &
Queer Culture offers ?The erotic relationship between an adult male
and a youth, generally one between the ages of twelve and seventeen, in
which the older partner is attracted to the younger one who returns his
affection.?[5] The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality suggests "Pederasty
is the erotic relationship between an adult male and a boy, generally
one between the ages of twelve and seventeen, in which the older partner
is attracted to the younger one who returns his affection, whether or
not the liaison leads to overt sexual contact."[31]

--
        name: jon baker              web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
     address: jjba...@panix.com     blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: multipart/alternative
Size: 3922 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120226/4f88e56d/attachment-0001.bin>

I vividly remember one of my high school rebbeim insisting that Yom 
Kippur is a Yom Simcha.  Recently I encountered (Massaches Sofrim 19:6): 
"ein mazkirin bo [on YK] lo moed v'lo simchah she'ain simchah b'lo achilah".

Has my memory failed or am I missing something?

David Riceman

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=5208

I am not a posek and don't know much detailed Halacha, but while our 
mitzvos should be guided first and foremost by halacha, it should 
also penetrate deeper than the letter of the law and touch something 
within us. Hashem is interested in our heart more than our hand.

Today there is so much competition from so many different 
organizations for our tzedaka budget. While competition is usually 
good for the consumer, in this case it complicates matters and takes 
a lot of Ahavas Hashem and Ahavas Yisroel away from our Mitzva of 
tzedaka. We are bombarded with all kinds of incentives from free 
cars, money, and even apartments, to more sublime paybacks like 
brachos for good children and easy shiduchim.

<Snip>

The Volozhin Yeshiva had a Mishulach that they would send around 
Europe to collect funds for the Yeshiva. Before one trip the 
Mishulach came to Rav Chaim Volozhiner and told him that he feels his 
tattered clothing and broken wagon are diminishing his respect in the 
eyes of the donors and therefore they give less money to the Yeshiva. 
Sharpening him up would improve the image of the Yeshiva and would 
bring in more money. Rav Chaim agreed and he paid for a new fancy 
suit and nice wagon to take the Mishulach on his travels.

A few weeks later the Mishulach returned with less money than ever. 
He explained to Rav Chaim that one of his biggest donors refused to 
give anything because he didn't want his money going for the 
Mishulach's clothing and wagon.

I don't remember the exact details but Rav Chaim's response to the 
donor was that each donation ends up being used for as holy a cause 
as was the intention of the donor. Betzalel's greatness in 
constructing the mishkan was knowing whose money should be used for 
the Aron Kodesh because his thoughts were purely L'Sham Shamayim 
while other money was given for reasons of honor. Similarly said Rav 
Chaim if your donation was given for the honor of Torah you can rest 
assured that you money will go for Torah and not for travel expenses.

Based on this thought we have nothing to fear. If we give tzedaka to 
a worthy organization L'Shma we can feel at ease that it went to the 
cause itself and not to the marketing expenses. You will be credited 
in Shamayim with a great mitzva of tzedaka. If however you give it 
for the new car, then let's hope you win because that is where your 
money went.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120226/fc9953ea/attachment-0001.htm>

IE writing about the moon (one sense in which you could take my subject
line) is his Sefer haIbbur.

But I just learned of Abenezra crater, named in his honor, which is on
the moon at 21.0degS, 11.9degE. See
<http://lupuvictor.blogspot.com/2011/06/geber-abenezra-and-az
ophi-moon-craters.html>

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The thought of happiness that comes from outside
mi...@aishdas.org        the person, brings him sadness. But realizing
http://www.aishdas.org   the value of one's will and the freedom brought
Fax: (270) 514-1507      by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook

I was asked a couple of questions about Rashi's discussion of the
qerashim. I couldn't find anything, so I'm appealing for help.

1a- On 26:27, Rashi tells us that when the Torah tells us that each qeresh
was 10 amos tall, it teaches us that the Mishkan was 10 amost tall.

1b- Then in the next Rashi, he does us the favor of multiplying the
1-1/2 amah width of a qeresh by 20 to let us know that the north and
south walls of the Mishkan were 30 amos long.

What is he adding?

Here I had what I considered weak answers, but just to share them:

a- Perhaps Rashi is leading in to a discussion of the yadayim of the
qerashim and the adanim. He is telling us that the qerashim fit all the
way through the adanim to the ground, and thus the height of the Mishkan
was the height of each qeresh.

b- Because the corners are non-trivial, whether they are among the 20 or
not, perhaps someone would misunderstand and so Rashi does the explaining.



2- Someone emailed me the observation that Rashi on 25:5 and 26:15 mentions
the medrash that the wood was the product of Yaaqov's foresight to being
arazim down.

a- Why the redundancy?

b- In 25:5 he gives his motivation, "ume'iayin hayu lahem bamidbar?"
and in 26:15 he does as well "... mahu *ha*qerashim?" Isn't it rare
for Rashi to explicitly say what problem he is revolving?

c- Why does Rashi mention in the first that he is quoting "Rabbi Tanchuma"
but not in the second? OTOH, he says in the second comment that this is
what R' Shelomo bar Yehudah haBavli wrote about in his piut, but not in
the first?



3- About the same Rashis, in the same email: Why does the medrash speak
in the generic term, "arazim" when the pesuqim call them more specifically
"shitim"?
 
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember;
mi...@aishdas.org        I do, then I understand." - Confucius
http://www.aishdas.org   "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 11:10 PM, SBA <s...@sba2.com> wrote [to Areivim -mb]:
> From: martin brody < >
>> Though I strongly doubt that Adam's revelation is as he says it is, Halacha
>> long ago dealt with such issues. See, R. Pesach Frank, Aruch Ha Shulkan,
>> R. Elyashev and many others.

> Can you give us exact sources.

> I only quote the LBD reference because I'm fairly certain that if such
> things still exist, as Adam claims, that they
> are aware of it and still permit it.

> From my brother (a Mashgiach with Kedassia)

>> The LBD only allow all vege oils in the U.K., because there are no vege oil
>> plants sharing with tallow.
>> However, in places such as Australia-where most oil is produced on tallow
>> lines-they would not allow, as per the following letter.
>> Whereas Kedassia are machmir to only allow with hechsher due to Kovush from
>> shared tankers.

> 26 Jan. '04
> Dear Reb Yisroel Abelesz

> I am writing to confirm to you that in order to be 100% sure that what I
> said was correct I have done as you requested and verified with
> the relevant people and found that it is exactly as I said to you
> over the phone yesterday:

> The London Beth Din does not certify or even approve any vegetable
> oil which is refined and deodorised in the same refinery as tallow (Chelev).

> This means that we do not approve oils that are processed on the
> same refinery and using the same steam system even if they are not
> actually processed on the same equipment. On the rare occasion
> that we do certify oils or emulsifiers etc. that are processed in
> facilities that have processed in the past tallow or other Trief
> fats we insist on Koshering the entire facility Kedass ve'Kedin
> and we also drain and change the entire boiler water to ensure
> there is no risk of 'cross-contamination' from the previous
> non-kosher productions.

> Once again I thank you for bringing this matter to my attention
> and giving me the opportunity to state our position clearly and to
> refute any rumours circulating accusing us of such a practice.

> Wishing you Kol Tuv,
> I remain sincerely yours,
>  Rabbi Akiva Padwa
> Senior Rabbinical Coordinator London Beth Din Kashrut Division

Sure. Here you go

Igros Moshe YD 1:55.

Oh and the SA YD 114:7 and the Rema's further comments. And Aruch Ha
Shulkan 114:18

Please think about this. If the LBD permit all 100% or pure vegetable
oils so labelled, then what goes on in an vegetable oil production plant
in Holland or in a container from Spain is no longer relevant.

All due respect to your brother, he is not quite correct for UK or even
Australia. I believe the KA have written on this.

R. Padwa is talking about LBD certification, not their approval policy.

The LBD even approve vegetable oil as an ingredient in canned fish
products (page 59 of The Guide) and nuts (page 76) for example, both
having blanket approvals. We recently went through this on another
product, where an LBD representative admitted he was incorrect
when it came to the LBD's actual policies and not their supervisory
policies. (Even the OU permit regular milk in their products but would
never allow non CY in their restaurants)Their book does not say only oils
processed in the UK. Nor has it ever done. I suggest R. Padwa discuss
with R.Conway.

Wishing you Kol Tuv
I remain (so far this morning, at least)
Martin Brody



------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 29, Issue 26
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."