Volume 31: Number 46
Sun, 17 Mar 2013
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:26:08 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] piskei RMF
I looked very briefly in the new book of R. Mordechai Tendler of halachot
and minhagim of RMF.
1) Is "shemen kik" (castor oil?) kitniyot? - It all depends on the minhag.
Since some places give a hasgacha on shemen kik therefore there is no
standard minhag to prohibit and so it is allowed except if one has a family
minhag not to use it
2) Ideally one should give nuts to children an hour before the seder so
they dpnt sleep. In practice everyone is too busy and therfore people are
not careful about this
3) There are 2 things that chazal mention that we are not able to do today
a) dring a reviit of wine in one sip
b) to draw out the dalid of echad
4) To rely on the translation of the Rambam from Ibn Tobon and other
ancients and not Rav Kapach since they were geonim
5) He didn't understand how a dentist could rape a patient since it is
against the chazakah that a professional doesnt ruin his profession "uman
eino mera umnoto"
6) He didnt understand how the US could anyone to carry revolvers,
especially since other countries dont allow it
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130315/b1c8fa45/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:44:20 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] carrying an ID card on shabbat
On 15/03/2013 6:19 AM, Chana Luntz wrote:
> the halachic point that a shvus d'shvus b'mkom mitzvah
> would seem to be pretty standard,
It is standard, but the standard condition is that it is impossible to
observe the mitzvah in even the most minimal way without violating the
shvus dishvus. That's what I'm questioning here.
[Email #2 -micha]
On 15/03/2013 6:19 AM, Chana Luntz wrote:
> I wrote:
>>> I am not going to deal with the issue in detail regarding a shvus
>>> d'shvus letzorech mitzvah - because I note that there is a teshuva
>>> directly on point from the Kol Mevasser chelek 1 siman 79.
>> Who is the author of this sefer?
>> Rabbi Meshulam Rath (1875-1963).
OK, so hebrewbooks.com hasn't got it.
>>> He doesn't mention war or any emergency, rather the question is about
>>> carrying some sort of identity
>>> card (teudat hamishtara) in one's hat purely due to a "gezera hamalchus".
>> When and where did he live, and what were the circumstances at the time?
> What were the consequences at the time for defying a "gezeras hamalchus"?
> Born in 1875 in Poland, was a Rav in Romania for a while. Immigrated to
> Israel in 1949. Died in Bnei Brak in 1963.
Since you have the sefer, can you tell me the date and place of the
teshuvah? My point is that the circumstances in which it was written are
highly relevant. Much of his professional life would have been spent in
times of war and emergency, and even more of it in times when antisemitism
was taken for granted and "gezeras hamalchus" was a serious matter; ignoring
it was not a viable option, and the idea of openly defying or fighting it
was simply inconceivable.
> Earlier I wrote:
>>> If you are a slightly anti-semitic police officer (or even just a
>>> stickler for law
>>> enforcement), you have just been handed a piece of knowledge that
>>> could enable you to have lot of fun harassing Orthodox Jews - all
>>> perfectly legally. [...] After all, if I was a purely mercenary
>>> minded member of the local authority, I might rather appreciate having
>>> found a way of generating yet more money for my budget by way of an
>>> "Orthodox Jew Tax" - and quite happy to authorise my police officers to
> go on a collection mission every shabbas.
> And RZS replied:
>> This is precisely why I think it's important for the Dutch community to
>> resist this, and *not* to find any heterim to comply. A deliberate campaign
>> to harass and mulct shomrei shabbos comes pretty close to "she'as hashmad".
>> An individual may be able to find a heter for himself, but in doing so he
>> only makes it worse for the community.
> Tricky - because while individuals (including police officers) may well be
> motivated by anti-semitism, the overall law is not
I don't see how that matters. It's not the overall law that's the problem,
it's the enforcement. If the enforcement (in your hypothetical) is targeted
at us, then it's close to "she'as hashmad", and since we *can* fight it we
should. And an individual who compromises his observance in order to comply
with it harms that cause.
> If the Orthodox Jewish community
> fights this, and indeed does get the authorities to back down, which again
> will need to happen publically, the same "heter" will then be available to
> the Muslim communities.
How so? What religious requirement do they have that would prevent them
from carrying ID on a given day (or ever)? The Jews wouldn't be campaigning
for the abolition of the ID law (much as that might be desirable on general
civil liberties grounds, the gemeinde is not the DCLU), but for reasonable
accommodation of a genuine religious restraint, such as would be routine in
the USA (and would be legally required in the case of a federal law).
--
Zev Sero
z...@sero.name
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:34:22 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Women Without Names
On 14/03/2013 5:30 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
> whenever Scripture contains a woman's name that appears
> to be unnecessary, there is always a midrash that attempts to give the
> reason why -- e.g., Genesis 4:22 (she must have been Noax's wife), Genesis
> 11:29 (she must have been Sarai -- which is, by the way, preposterous,
> if Avram was older than Haran).
Um, how so? What exactly is absurd about Haran marrying much younger than
his brothers, and having daughters whom they marry? For that matter, how
do we know that Harans' daughters were Avram's and Nachor's first wives?
[Email #2. -micha]
On 14/03/2013 5:30 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
> They no longer announce events for "Shabbos" HaGadol, because that is
> ignorant
How so? What is ignorant about vocalising it in accord with the Shulchan
Aruch's interpretation?
[Email #3. -micha]
On 14/03/2013 5:30 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
> disappearing the names of married women is what the goyim do.
Indeed, Roman women, single or married, had no names of their own at all.
--
Zev Sero
z...@sero.name
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:27:17 -0400
Subject: [Avodah] Tum'ah in a Reshus haYachid
As many of you know from prior iterations, one of my pet theories is an
extension of an idea from Shu"T R' Aqiva Eiger (#136). RAE distinguished
between kol kavu'ah kemechtzah al mechtzah dami and kol deparish meiruba
parish by distringuishing between ways of being mevareir the din, and
those of being mevareir the metzi'us.
In a case where the object is qavuah, the din was once established, and
so our safeiq is what the din is. In such a case, we cannot utilize
rov -- the risk of cheit is too great.
In the case of kol deparish, the goal is to create a din for an unknown
metzius. In which case, something that is probably not the assur thing
gets a definite din of mutar. There is no risk of cheit, because the
din itself is not in doubt.
And I used this distinction between safeiq in the din and safeiq in
the metzius as a theory that would explain trei kemeia, migo, the differences
in authority between chazaqah demei'iqara vs chazaqah disvara, etc...
See <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/04/halakhah-phenomenology-2.shtml>,
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/04/halakhah-and-phenomenology-3.shtml
>
and <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/04/halakhah-and-phenomenology-4.shtml
>
if it interests you.
So why the revisit? Y-mi Yomi. This time, Nazir 9:1 (vilna ed 40a).
As the subject line suggests, the discussion is a nazir who became safeiq
tum'ah brh"y.
R' Hosheiah Rabbah: the nazer cuts his hair
R' Yochanan: he does not
A person who becomes safeiq tamei brh"h -- does he bring a qorban pesach
on Pesach or on Pesach Sheini?
RH: pesach sheini
RY: send him away derekh rechoqah, and then he makes pesach sheini.
The Rambam, Qorban Pesach 7:7. holds like R' Hosheiah.
I couldn't find a parallel in the Bavli. Anyone?
As the Penei Mosheh and Qorban ha'Eidah (the acharonim on the sides
of the daf) both explain, this is the underlying machloqes:
RH: safeiq tum'ah bereshus hayachid makes someone tamei vadai. So, the
nazir is definitely a nazir tamei and must shear his hair and restart
nezirus. And the person definitely is disqualified from his qorban
pesach on Pesach, and eligable for Pesach Sheini.
RY: safeiq tum'ah brh"y is a rule for how to deal with a safeiq. It is
insufficent to permit the nazir to cut his hair because he might be
tahor and a haircut would be assur. (So, he outwaits his nezirus,
cuts his hair then, and then, in case he was tamei, starts over.)
And he needs another reason to force the qorban to Pesach Sheini.
I found this to be the same chiluq as the one I generalized from RAE:
RH: safeiq tum'ah brh"h is a rule in determining metzius. In a case of
encountering maybe tum'ah, the din established is vadei tum'ah.
RY: it's a rule in determining the how to act when the din is
unknown. When the tumah' is in safeiq, if the safeiq was created in
a rh"y, ACT AS THOUGH it's tamei. But the tum'ah is still besafeiq,
and it can't override issurim.
:-)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
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:45:56 -0400
Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
Forwarding from R' Mordechai Torczyner's (CC-ed) blog post at
<http://rechovot.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-different-approach-to-sheidim.
html>:
The sages of the Talmud describe all sorts of experiences with sheidim
-- creatures which are neither human nor beast, which may or may
not be visible or tangible, and which affect our world in numerous
ways. The term sheid is often translated, unsatisfyingly, as "demon".
I have heard all sorts of explanations for the nature of sheidim,
including the idea [attributed to Rambam, as you will see below] that
sheidim are an outdated superstition, but none of the explanations
suits the canon of sheid-related material in the writings of the
sages.
I am indebted to Rabbi Hillel Goldberg for showing me the following
explanation. I must confess that I don't understand it, but the
little I grasp says this is a very interesting idea. It comes from
notes recorded by Rav Yitzchak Hutner, published on page 74 of
a Sefer Zikaron compiled in his memory. The book is available in
the Otzar haChochmah database. Here I present my own translation,
followed by the original Hebrew:
In the declarations of our sages we have found many indications
of the existence of sheidim. This is the way to explain it:
The statement in Avot d'Rabbi Natan 31 is known, that all that
exists in the universe exists in man. The reverse is also true.
The power of imagination is found in Man. With this power, Man
designs for himself a reality which does not exist, at all, in
the universe; this exists only in the realm of imagination. Since
this power exists in Man, its parallel must exist in some creature
in the universe. Those creatures are the ones called sheidim --
theirs is an existence which is not an existence.
When we say of something that it is only imagination, we mean
that nothing like it exists in reality. However, certainly,
for one who deals in human psychology, when he investigates
the activities of the human brain, for him this imagination is
certainly full-fledged reality.
Thus, it is appropriate that Rambam wrote (Commentary to Mishnah
Avodah Zarah 4) that sheidim do not exist in reality, and this
does not contradict, at all, the declarations of our sages which
indicate the existence of sheidim.
Hebrew deleted due to digest software limitations. See URL.
My comment (not that RBM's aren't worth discussing, but he can write
his own post!):
I think the Rambam is saying they're all in the mind, and they DO
exist anyway. In the neo-Platonic model of creation the Rambam
outlines in Moreh sec II and in Yesodei haTorah ch. 2, it's all
about Thought.
Hashem has a Thought, which has a thought, which has a thought, and
so on down 10 levels of angels, the spheres, and us. And a prophet
is someone who can ascend the chain, and therefore experiences
metaphysically higher realities.
This idea is a book, not a blog comment. I did a somewhat longer
but still insufficient explanation at this recap
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2010/01/maimonidian-qabbalah-recap.shtml
>
and the blog posts it points you to.
In any case, it could well be that the Rambam identifies metaphysics
and ideas. The Leshem seems to understand / spin the Rambam that way,
when the Leshem uses the Moreh to explain the Qabbalistic idea that
the matter of one world is the forms of the world below it.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:11:07 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
> The term sheid is often translated, unsatisfyingly, as "demon".
That translation is indeed unfortunate, and I think is the cause of much
misunderstanding. I think a better translation is "fairy" (or "faerie",
if one is into modern fantasy). Sheidim are the Fair Folk, sometimes
helpful, sometimes hateful, who don't quite exist and yet have tangible
effects.
--
Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
the reason he needs.
- Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:29:30 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
On at 03:45:56PM EDT I quoted R' Mordechai Torczyner's (CC-ed) blog post
<http://rechovot.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-different-approach-to-sheidim.
html>:
: The sages of the Talmud describe all sorts of experiences with sheidim
: -- creatures which are neither human nor beast, which may or may
: not be visible or tangible, and which affect our world in numerous
: ways. The term sheid is often translated, unsatisfyingly, as "demon".
RYBS, Confrontation (Tradition 1964 v6n2), cut-n-pasted from
<http://www.bc.edu/dam/files/research_sites/cjl
/texts/cjrelations/resources/articles/soloveitchik>
or <http://j.mp/ZNQjTc>:
Second, the logos, the word, in which the multifarious religious
experience is expressed does not lend itself to standardization
or universalization. The word of faith reflects the intimate,
the private, the paradoxically inexpressible cravings of the
individual for and his linking up with his Maker. It reflects
the numinous character and the strangeness of the act of faith of
a particular community which is totally incomprehensible to the
man of a different faith community. Hence, it is important that
the religious or theological logos should not be employed as the
medium of communication between two faith communities whose modes
of expression are as unique as their apocalyptic experiences. The
confrontation should occur not at a theological but at a mundane
human level. There, all of us speak the universal language of modern
man. As a matter of fact our common interests lie in the realm of
faith, but in that of the secular orders.8 There, we all face a
powerful antagonist, we all have to contend with a considerable
number of matters of great concern. The relationship between two
communities must be outer-directed and related to the secular orders
with which men of faith come face to face. In the secular sphere,
we may discuss positions to be taken, ideas to be evolved, and
plans to be formulated. In these matters, religious communities
may together recommend action to be developed and may seize the
initiative to be implemented later by general society. However,
our joint engagement in this kind of enterprise must not dull our
sense of identity as a faith community. We must always remember
that our singular commitment to God and our hope and indomitable
will for survival are non-negotiable and non-rationalizable and are
not subject to debate and argumentation. The great encounter between
God and man is a wholly personal private affair incomprehensible to
the outsider - even to a brother of the same faith community. The
divine message is incommunicable since it defies all standardized
media of information and all objective categories. If the powerful
community of the many feels like remedying an embarrassing human
situation or redressing an historic wrong, it should do so at the
human ethical level. However, if the debate should revolve around
matters of faith, then one of the confronters will be impelled to
avail himself of the language of his opponent. This in itself would
mean surrender of individuality and distinctiveness.
Different faith communities divide the world in different categories,
look at it from different angles, and thus speak different languages.
Mapping ideas from one religion to another should probably be avoided
for this reason. In recasting one religion's concepts to anothers'
words and categories, one inevitably shifts the meanings of the concepts.
So, I would just leave sheidim as "sheidim". And (as per RSRH's critique
of the Rambam) avoid identifying mal'akhim with Greek notions of pure
intellects or HQBH with Aristo's Prime Mover. No matter how similar,
the parallel concepts are merely parallel -- not actually identical.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger The true measure of a man
mi...@aishdas.org is how he treats someone
http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:23:28 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
> Thus, it is appropriate that Rambam wrote (Commentary to Mishnah
> Avodah Zarah 4) that sheidim do not exist in reality,
Which mishnah in chapter 4? I've skimmed through the PHM for the whole
chapter and didn't find any discussion of sheidim.
--
Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
the reason he needs.
- Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:38:18 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 04:23:28PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> Thus, it is appropriate that Rambam wrote (Commentary to Mishnah
>> Avodah Zarah 4) that sheidim do not exist in reality,
>
> Which mishnah in chapter 4? I've skimmed through the PHM for the whole
> chapter and didn't find any discussion of sheidim.
4:7. There is a list of falsehoods that AZ embraced, and sheidim is
on it.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:48:34 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
On 15/03/2013 4:38 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 04:23:28PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> >>Thus, it is appropriate that Rambam wrote (Commentary to Mishnah
>>> >> Avodah Zarah 4) that sheidim do not exist in reality,
>> >
>> >Which mishnah in chapter 4? I've skimmed through the PHM for the whole
>> >chapter and didn't find any discussion of sheidim.
> 4:7. There is a list of falsehoods that AZ embraced, and sheidim is
> on it.
That is about those who assign powers to the stars, to their various
configuations, and to particular angles they form with other stars, etc.
The only reference to sheidim I can find is an aside about "the people
from whom Avraham Avinu distanced himself and disputed [...] they were
the ones who established the laws of the stars, and the magics, and the
incantations, and the summoning of spirits, and the conversations with
stars and sheidim and the Ov and Nachash and Yid`oni in all their kinds,
and necromancy, and many of these things against which the True Torah
drew its sword and cut off, which are the roots of AZ and its branches."
Now he's certainly not saying that stars don't exist, or that dead
people don't exist, and probably not even that spirits don't exist, so
why assume he's saying that sheidim don't exist?
--
Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
the reason he needs.
- Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 19:55:12 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] lechitin in chocolate
<<The problem is that it was added deliberately. There are of course those
(e.g. R Yitzchok Elchonon) who permit bitul issur lechatchila with kitniyos,
but the Maharil forbids wine into which mustard was added before Pesach.
See Chok Yaakov 464:3.>>
The question is what does it mean "ein mevatlin issue lechatchila"
Sefardim are allowed to eat kitniyot and so these companies are adding an
ingedient that is permitted to half the population.
The chief rabbi of our town is a sefardi who married an ashkenazi wife.
When her family comes during Pesach he tells them to simply take the
kitniyot they see out of the food. Whatever kitniyot were added (assuming
they are a minority)
were not batel "lechatchila" but simply made for the sefardim.
kol tuv
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130316/a6c8782f/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Meir Rabi <meir...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 05:24:28 +1100
Subject: [Avodah] Lecithin in Chocolate KLP
R Micha put this more clearly that i, I apologise for the clumsiness of my
communication.
R Micha wrote, I took this to be RMR's intent... Since it's not being added
for the sake of the KLP market, and it's a mi'ut, it should be bateil.
R Micha also added, Elite and other Israeli brands, though, aren't
necessarily subject to this line of reasoning.
I was even thinking that when they produce Chocolate for All Year Round,
that chocolate is KLP even though it contains Lecithin or lets be really
naughty, lets say 40% rice flour
Best,
Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130317/532fe23c/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 21:31:02 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Fwd: A Different Approach to Sheidim
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 04:48:34PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> >Which mishnah in chapter 4? I've skimmed through the PHM for the whole
>>> >chapter and didn't find any discussion of sheidim.
>> 4:7. There is a list of falsehoods that AZ embraced, and sheidim is
>> on it.
>
> That is about those who assign powers to the stars, to their various
> configuations, and to particular angles they form with other stars, etc.
> The only reference to sheidim I can find is an aside about "the people
> from whom Avraham Avinu distanced himself and disputed [...] they were
> the ones who established the laws of the stars, and the magics, and the
> incantations, and the summoning of spirits, and the conversations with
> stars and sheidim and the Ov and Nachash and Yid`oni in all their kinds,
> and necromancy, and many of these things against which the True Torah
> drew its sword and cut off, which are the roots of AZ and its branches."
1- But is is "a discussion of sheidim".
2- I take it you're reading as "speaking to stars and sheidim" were one
item. But I don't think you're parsing it correctly. I believe it is:
They are the ones who established
- the laws of the stars
- kishuf
- spells
- calling down spirits
- speaking to stars
- sheidim
- qesem
- divination in all their many kinds
- demanding of the dad
- and many of those things against which the Torah...
(I left kishuf and qesem untranslated, because distinguishing between
them is a topic in itself. And one I don't claim to know.)
It would seem the Gra understood the Rambam as I wrote (YD 179:13), in a
commend on se'if 6, where the SA talks about nekhishah not working at all,
but still being mutar on Shabbos:
The Rambam, and this is what is written in Peirush haMishnah to
ch.4 of Aku"M. But all who came after him disagreed with him, for
many lachashim are talking about in the gemara. And he was pulled
after the accursed philosophy, and therefore wrote that keshafim,
shaimos, lachashim, sheidim and kemei'os -- it's all sheqer. ...
> Now he's certainly not saying that stars don't exist, or that dead
> people don't exist, and probably not even that spirits don't exist, so
> why assume he's saying that sheidim don't exist?
He is saying that astrology isn't real, communion with the dead is
impossible, the stars have no power for you to appeal to, and sheidim
and magic don't exist.
Gut Voch!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself
mi...@aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself.
http://www.aishdas.org - Bernard Shaw
Fax: (270) 514-1507
>
> Now he's certainly not saying that stars don't exist, or that dead
> people don't exist, and probably not even that spirits don't exist, so
> why assume he's saying that sheidim don't exist?
>
> --
> Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
> z...@sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
> exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
> the reason he needs.
> - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
Gut Voch!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself
mi...@aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself.
http://www.aishdas.org - Bernard Shaw
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 14
From: "Kenneth Miller" <kennethgmil...@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 02:35:30 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Lecithin in Chocolate KLP
R' Zev Sero wrote:
> The problem is that it was added deliberately....
R' Micha Berger wrote:
> If non-Jews make a product for reasons other than the Jewish
> market, it's not attempting bitul "issur" lekhat-chilah. It's
> not considered deliberate.
Aaahhh! Now I understand R' Meir Rabi's question much more clearly.
I would now like to share some ideas which were discussed here some time
ago, quite possibly before RMR joined us. What I write below is not to be
construed as halacha that I've ever heard from anyone, but merely the
consensus of ideas and observations expressed by some listmembers, as *I*
understood it. Namely, that there is a difference in kashrus between the
terms "supervised" and "approved".
"Supervised" means that there is a contract between the manufacturer and
the rabbi(s); among the terms of that contract is the ability for the
rabbi(s) to conduct inspections, an obligation for the manufacturer to
inform the rabbi(s) of any ingredient changes, and similar conditions. This
is generally the situation whenever you see a hechsher on a package, even
for a hechsher that you might consider to be far substandard.
"Approved" kashrus is very different, and of a very informal nature. It is
very common in other countries, but not so much in the USA. In these
situations, there is no formal agreement between the manufacturer and the
Jewish community at all, but the manufacturer allows rabbis to visit and
inspect the facilities. Based on what the rabbis find, they may conclude
that the products are kosher, and they'll make a list of these "approved"
products for their followers. The manufacturers may - of the goodness of
their hearts - alert the rabbis to any changes that they might make, but
there's no obligation to do so.
As I recall the conversations here on Avodah, we concluded that there is a
great deal of flexibility in the "approved" situations, and I think that
RMR's example of lecithin in chocolate might be a great example of it.
Lecithin in chocolate is NOT like rennet in cheese or gelatin in jello. The
chocolate will be fine without it, although it might turn grey a bit
sooner, and perhaps even that can be compensated for with other
ingredients, but if the manufacturer is a non-Jew, who is making his
product for non-Jews, who are we to tell him not to put it in? And once he
*has* added it in, we are in an after-the-fact reality, and the halacha is
clear that we can eat it with no worries, exactly as RMR suggests.
But, our discussion said, this only applies to "approved" products, not to
"supervised" products. Given the sort of contractual terms which exist
between the manufacturer and the Jews in *this* paradigm, it is very
difficult to call the addition of lecithin "after-the-fact", if for no
other reason than the fact that the manufacturer must submit a list of
ingredients, and the hechsher will be on the label only if the rabbis
approve that list BEFORE-the-fact.
Imagine that you are the machshir, and a manufacturer wants your Pesach
symbol on his packages of chocolate, and he shows you the list of
ingredients, which includes lecithin. What do you tell him? If you tell
him, "This recipe is fine," is that really after-the-fact?
Let me be very clear: If he makes it on his own initiative, I'm not saying
that we shouldn't eat it. All I'm questioning is how we can allow him to
deliberately do so and then market it to Jews with our symbol on the
package.
Actions have consequences. Our refusal to allow that manufacturer to have a
hechsher l'chatchila has led many people to think that such products are to
be avoided even b'dieved. This is very unfortunate. But it is also reality,
and I'm not sure how else to deal with it.
There was a time, only a few decades ago, when "approved" products were
fairly common in America. Every so often, some rabbis -- I wish I knew who
-- inspected the factories of Kellogg's cereal, and let us know which
products were acceptable, such as the Corn Flake Crumbs used by every
heimishe take-out store on their coated chicken. I remember Dannon yogurt
and Hershey's chocolate similarly for year-round use, and Tropicana orange
juice even for Pesach.
But for whatever reason, people grew dissatisfied with this level of
kashrus. Rightly or wrongly, some perceived it as deliberately relying on
b'dieved halacha. And so it came to pass that Kellogg's and Dannon and
Hershey's and Tropicana sought out a regular hashgacha.
To my knowledge, we're now at a point in the NY-NJ area where there are no
"approved" foods which are eaten without knowledge of the ingredients,
based purely on unofficial inquiries and spot-checks, except for liquor. -
And even that seems to be changing, as I have seen a great many of them get
a regular hechsher in recent years.
Getting back to the issue at hand, R' Meir Rabi asked:
> Can anyone explain why chocolate with lecithin is a problem
> during Pesach?
> Even if lecithin is Kitniyos, it is not a majority of the
> chocolate, it is not visible to the naked eye and it is not
> added for the express purpose of making a KLP product?
If such chocolate is purchased before Pesach, maybe it is NOT a problem. I
will cite a few quotes from pp 92-93 of this year's "OU Guide to Passover,
available at http://oukosher.org/pas
sover/passover-guide/
> Lactaid production is likely to involve chametz. This renders
> chewable lactaid tablets problematic. However, our Rabbinical
> authorities have decided that lactaid milk is permissible if
> purchased before Passover since any chametz contained within
> Lactaid milk would be nullified (batel).
And that's for an ingredient which is probably actual chametz, not merely kitniyos!
> Soy Milk - Anyone for whom it is necessary to consume kitniyot
> may drink these products. However, because we are unable to
> verify the kosher for Passover status of the equipment on which
> they are produced, we recommend purchasing these items before
> Passover, at which point any traces of chametz would be batel
> (nullified).
Another example of bitul on actual chometz, if any.
> Although plain whole, low-fat and skim milk (fresh?not long
> shelf-life) may be purchased before Passover without special
> certification, it is proper not to purchase it during
> Passover unless reliably certified for Passover.
This is despite the presence of Vitamin D and other additives. And note that it is for anyone, not just people who "need" Lactaid or soy milk.
So it seems to me that the practice of relying on bittul has not been totally lost, not even today, not even in the USA, and not even for Pesach.
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
5 Diet Pills that Work
2012's Top 5 Weight Loss Pills. Updated Consumer Ratings. Free Report.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/51452c13b5d432c1301a4st04vuc
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 46
**************************************
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..."
A list of common acronyms is available at at
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)