Volume 48 Number 32
Produced: Thu Jun 2 5:16:16 EDT 2005
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Artichoke Hearts
[Yisrael Medad]
Broccoli and Asparagus (3)
[Perets Mett, Orrin Tilevitz, .cp.]
Brocolli in my defense
[Chaim Shapiro]
Bugs in Vegetables
[Yisrael & Batya Medad]
Citing Biblical Verses
[Jay F Shachter]
Heinz Vegetarian Baked Beans (3)
[Martin Stern, Avi Feldblum, HARRY WEISS]
Psak without Sources
[Eli Turkel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:54:36 +0200
Subject: Artichoke Hearts
I visited the Star-K site and found that artichoke hearts cannot be
checked. I am nonplussed. For about four months from December til
almost Pesach, 'live' artichokes are eaten here in Israel in
considerable numbers by a significant portion of the population. In
addition, there are cans of artichoke hearts sold year round.
Does anyone know what the site is referring to?
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:30:04 +0100
Subject: Broccoli and Asparagus
Someone wrote:
If this is the case, what did they do before DDT and other
insecticieds were developed in the mid--200th century? Didn't
people eat broccoli and asparagus?
I am reasonably certain that my father z"l, and others like him who
lived in Eastern Europe, did not eat asparagus or broccoli before WWII.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Orrin Tilevitz <tilevitzo@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 05:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Broccoli and Asparagus
My rav, who is in his 90s, once told me that his grandfather came to the
U.S. from Poland around 1905, long before the pesticide era, to be a
mashgiach. His job was checking cabbage for worms, and he was paid $1
per worm. Even at that high wage, he couldn't make it, and returned to
Poland.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: .cp. <chips@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 20:20:59 -0700
Subject: Re: Broccoli and Asparagus
I think some mis-information is causing some confusion.
There were changes made in early 1990's regarding the use of pesticides
in many areas. Within a couple of years the OU (among others) stated
that broccoli and asparagus had to be checked and that asparagus was so
problematic that it was better to just use the stalks and to throw away
the leafy part.
I have been out of the loop since then and have no idea what the status
is regarding the pesticides or the bugs. But those who say there was
never a problem with broccoli - Baloney!
Back then I took some broccoli (and califlower) over a few weeks period
, ruffled the flowerts then dunked them flowerts first into a large bowl
of slightly soapy water. I saw enough that I simply stopped eating the
flowerts of both. Frozen broccoli was much better as far as bugs went,
probably due to the flowerts opening up, but I try to avoid them as
well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Dagoobster@...> (Chaim Shapiro)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:41:10 EDT
Subject: Brocolli in my defense
One thing I'd like to make clear, I did not make a value judgment either
way on broccoli and its appropriateness. In response to a previous
post, I mentioned that it is possible that those who are stricter with
broccoli today may be doing so because of a change in the Metzius. I am
willing to accept that my presumption regarding DDT is incorrect if
there is proof leading to that conclusion.
I have never studied crops and insect infestation, but in response to a
few posts (Meir Shinnar is excused) I must ask, were people aware of the
bug problem (if it existed) prior to DDT? Were bugs a more or less
serious issue in Europe? Would the thought that vegetables might not be
kosher have been on the radar for our parents 2 generations ago? Were
broccoli and asparagus widely used by American Jews in the first half of
the last Century?
The answers to these questions are important, as they speak to whether
we have adopted new Chumrahs, or have we become more knowledgeable about
things that WOULD have caused a stir had they been widely known 50 years
ago.
Chaim Shapiro
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael & Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 18:37:18 +0200
Subject: Re: Bugs in Vegetables
When I became religious in the mid, late '60's I don't remember hearing
anything about bugs in vegetables. The first I heard about serious
problems was when the late Chaim Mageni taught us how to clean the
lettuce for the Pesach seder. And a few years later we were in England
and discovered that many of the kosher restaurants didn't serve salads.
The Kedassia said that lettuce was traif, and this was in the mid '70's.
Batya
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/
http://me-ander.blogspot.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jay F Shachter <jay@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:11:11 -0600 (CDT)
Subject: Citing Biblical Verses
Several posters to this mailing list have recently cited a fragment of
Psalms 45:14 in support of the principle that Jewish women should
moderate their public exposure. Other people on the list have
challenged this interpretation of the verse, offering different
translations.
I make no comment today on the proper expression of women's modesty.
However, a discussion of the literal meaning of a verse in Psalms is
irrelevant to the point being made. No one on the other side of the
argument cares what the verse means, and your arguments do not speak to
theirs.
Quoting Biblical verses out of context is an old and venerable
tradition. Our Sages, of blessed memory, did it all the time. Most
readers of this mailing list are familiar with Tractate Avot, especially
this time of year, when it is customary to read a chapter every week, so
let us pick an example from this week's chapter. As reported in Avot
4:1, Shim`on ben Zoma said, approximately 1850 years ago, "Who is wise?
He who learns from every man". He then quoted a fragment from Psalms
119:99, "mikkol mlammdai hiskaltiy". The quoted verse, however, has
nothing to do with learning from every man. The fragment cited by ben
Zoma actually means, "I am more enlightened than all my teachers". I am
sure Ben Zoma knew that. He didn't care, and his audience didn't care.
The tradition of quoting Biblical verses out of context is, in fact,
embedded in our liturgy. In our penitential prayers, we misquote Exodus
34:7 in the worst possible way, by quoting part of the verse, and then
stopping abruptly in the middle, in such a way as to twist its literal
meaning around completely, from "naqqeh lo yinaqqeh" (He will surely not
exculpate) to "naqqeh" (He will exculpate). We may have learned the
practice of misquoting Exodus 34:7 from Moshe, who misquotes it in
Numbers 14:18, but Moshe at least had enough respect for the meaning of
the verse to include the complete "naqqeh lo yinaqqeh", even though it
was counter to his purpose. We are bolder than Moshe, though, and cut
off God's words in the middle of a phrase. To what is this similar? To
a man who was ticketed for parking his car underneath a sign that read
"No Parking Allowed". What did this man do? He photographed the sign
without the word "No", and brought the photograph to the Judge. The
Judge saw the photograph of the sign with the words "Parking Allowed",
and said, "by my life, you have cleared yourself".
Similarly, any argument about what the Psalmist meant when he wrote
Psalm 45 is totally besides the point. Argue, if you will, that the
Sages a thousand years later who quoted a fragment of Psalms 45:14 in
support of their notions of female modesty do not constitute the main
current of our tradition, but do not argue about what Psalms 45:14
really means. It doesn't matter.
Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
Chicago IL 60645-4111
<jay@...> ; http://m5.chi.il.us:8080
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 12:41:03 +0100
Subject: Re: Heinz Vegetarian Baked Beans
on 1/6/05 10:50 am, Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...> wrote:
>> However, in the UK, local production of this product does not have any
>> Hechsher, and as a result of this discussion, yesterday afternoon
>> (26th May)I asked Rabbi Conway - Head of London Beis Din Kashrus Dept
>> - whether Heinz Baked Beanz are kosher and he categorically told me
>> that they are not kosher.
>
> This is rather surprising ... here in the US I have never heard a rabbi
> making such a pronouncement (maybe I'm simply travelling in the "wrong"
> circles). The best you can get out of a kashrut supervisor is something
> of the sort "we/I do not recommend/supervise that product" ... I suppose
> that unless there is clear and unambiguous proof of the treifness of the
> item (e.g. bona fide pork chops), a strong pronouncement might be
> slanderous.
Since there is no supervision, there is no guarantee of kashrut. However
it may be that other products containing genuinely treife items are made
on the same factory line which would imply a transference of ta'am
rendering the Heinz Baked Beanz non-kosher. This is a common problem
with manufactured foodstuffs in the U.K. which might otherwise be
kosher.
If one defines the description 'not kosher' as meaning not known
definitely to be kosher, then there is no slander involved.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum@...>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 12:41:03 +0100
Subject: Re: Heinz Vegetarian Baked Beans
While I would not go so far as to call it slander in a case where there
is no stated hashgacha, I do feel it is a lazy use of language to call
something like UK vegetarian baked beans "not kosher". To me, that is
making the definitive statement that according to halacha it is
forbidden to eat that food. While it is clear that for a large number of
us, we do not eat any processed foods without the food being under a
reliable (to each of us individually) supervision, such items are not
necessarily "not kosher". I think it is more accurate to characterize
them simply as not being under supervision and therefore not used.
While it is clear that the supervising authorities all work with the
premise that for a non-Jew to add trace elements of truely non-kosher
items into the food render the food as not being fit to be under
supervision, it is far from clear to me that this falls under the
halachic rules of 'Ain mevatlin'. Thus in an absolute sense, it may well
be that UK Heinz Vegetarian Baken Beans is "kosher" al pi halacha, but
at the same time, it is not supervised and has the clear potential /
probability of having been made on equipment that has absorbed
non-kosher taste - so we choose not to make use of it.
Avi Feldblum
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: HARRY WEISS <hjweiss@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:03:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Heinz Vegetarian Baked Beans
> From: Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...>
> >However, in the UK, local production of this product does not have
> >any Hechsher, and as a result of this discussion, yesterday
> >afternoon (26th May)I asked Rabbi Conway - Head of London Beis Din
> >Kashrus Dept - whether Heinz Baked Beanz are kosher and he
> >categorically told me that they are not kosher.
> This is rather surprising ... here in the US I have never heard a
> rabbi making such a pronouncement (maybe I'm simply travelling in the
> "wrong" circles). The best you can get out of a kashrut supervisor is
> something of the sort "we/I do not recommend/supervise that product"
> K... I suppose that unless there is clear an unambiguous proof of the
> treifness of the' item (e.g. bona fide pork chops), a strong
> pronouncement might be slanderous.
Actually that may be the explanation of the whole issue. Baked beans
are always not kosher. They always contain animal products. If you
look at the can of the kosher Heinz (or Bush) "Baked" Beans you will
notice they are both just called vegetarian beans, not baked beans.
[Note: My can of Bush's says Vegetarian Baked Beans. Mod.]
While some Rabbis will say that hasghacha x is not recommended for the
reason you said, no Rabbi will hesitate in saying that xyz brand pork
and beans or Campbells chicken soup is not kosher.
They never claim that it is kosher.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eli Turkel <eliturkel@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 15:58:12 +0300
Subject: Psak without Sources
<I'm afraid I disagree ... though you rav gives you guidance, I feel (as
I have said before on mail-jewish) that you are ultimately responsible
for your actions...and this does mean (courteously) requesting sources
and verifying opinions.>
There are several stories with R. Soloveitchik where someone asked for a
psak. After receiving the psak they asked for the reasons and RYBS
absolutely refused. He said if you want a shiur that is a separate
issue. You asked for a psak and you got it.
There is a famous story of his grandfather R. Chaim of Brisk who had a
major question. He sent a telegram to R. Yotzchok Elchanan Spektor the
posek of that generation. He gave the question and specifically
requested a psak without any reasons.
When asked he explained that given a psak he will follow it. However, if
he gives reasons then R. Chaim will have to start seeing if he agrees
with the reasons and he doesn't want to do that.
Eli Turkel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 48 Issue 32