Volume 20 Number 62
Produced: Sun Jul 23 12:05:23 1995
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Avimelech
[Yeshaya Halevi]
Benefit from non-kosher food
[Micha Berger]
Bombay Bus
[Dani Wassner]
Bombay Shabbat Travel
[Yaakov Shemaria]
Errors in Kriat Hatorah
[Avrom Forman]
Friday Fast days
[Michael J Broyde]
Gelatin
[Shmuel Himelstein (n)]
kolatin gelatin
[Jeremy Nussbaum]
Kosher Cleaning Products
[Bill Page]
Milky Ways from Italy?
[Seth Ness]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <CHIHAL@...> (Yeshaya Halevi)
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 00:16:18 -0400
Subject: Avimelech
<stephenp@...> (Stephen Phillips) said:
>I heard on one of the tapes of Rabbi Isaac Bernstein z"tzl a beautiful
>explanation as to how Avraham could have allowed Sarah to go with
>Avimelech if they were married and how he considered that they would be
>allowed to continue living with her afterwards. Basing himself on the
>Rambam I mentioned above, it seems that Avraham, by stating that Sarah
>was his sister and not his wife, had actually divorced her, divorce
>being brought about by their agreeing to live apart.>>
How about the fact that Avimelech was a king with the power of
life and death over people in his land? It is a historical fact that
despots took any woman they wanted, and woe to the husband who got in
the way.
Would I be correct in assuming that forced adultery/rape is not
a case for yaharog vi'al yaavor ("Let him/her be killed but don't
transgress")?
Ergo, wouldn't Sara have been permitted to Avraham Avinu even
had she been raped by Avimelech?
(It's worth noting this is the second time Avraham resorted to
saying about Sara that "She's my sister." The first time was with
Pharaoh, back in B'raysheet Chapter 12)
Since the circumstances are that Avraham's life was in danger,
why resort to a hypothesis that Avraham actually divorced Sara?
Having said that, let me also say that if Avraham did want to
divorce Sara, deciding to live apart from her need not have been the
only way to do it. Since it was before matan Torah (the giving of the
Torah), he may have followed a Mideastern custom still preserved by the
Muslims: divorcing a woman by saying three times "I divorce you"
<Chihal@...> (Yeshaya Halevi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Micha Berger <aishdas@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 10:19:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Benefit from non-kosher food
There are two different issues being jumbled here:
1- Things that are not edible aren't subject to the whole question of
kashrus. For Pesach this means even food only a dog could eat, since
Pesach's prohibitions include leavening agents that are not normally
eaten. However, most kashrus laws stop at things people can't eat.
2- From the laws we generally lump together as "kashrus" only mixtures
of meat and milk, and chometz are prohibited from other forms of
benefit. (Then there are things one may not derive benefit from,
that happen in this case to be food -- such as the Chinese Restaurant
that lost its hechsher because the owner would burn a portion of each
shipment of meat before his icon. Pity too, the food was great.)
To be really Brisk about it, we need to separate cheftzah and pe'ulah
[the object and the action]. The cheftzah needs to be food, AND the
pe'ulah needs to be that someone is eating it.
On the other hand, meat and milk or chameitz, are prohibitions that rest
entirely on the cheftzah. The food is prohibited as an object.
So, you can toss the pigskin, use a natural sponge on your dishes, even
use non-kosher dish soap -- well, maybe soap needs to be kosher, since
some kids ARE forced to eat it. But these activities should be
permissible for TWO separate reasons: both the cheftzah and the pe'ulah
have nothing to do with kashrus.
At least in theory. CYLOP (... Orthodox posek).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dani Wassner <dwassner@...>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 19:53:41 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bombay Bus
A friend of mine, Michael Perl (<mikeperl@...>) tells me
that his uncle was in charge of the entire public transport system in
Bombay. He explains that the tickets in question were pinned on the
shirts of those who used them on Shabbat. (It seems therefore that the
question of the eiruv is answered here: there wasn't one. The question
of Bombay being an island doesn't necesarily mean that it constitutes an
Eiruv).
Incidentally, Michael's uncle did not use this system as, according to
Michael "he was much frumer than that."
Dani Wassner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yaakov Shemaria <Yaakov@...>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 23:16:51 GMT
Subject: Re: Bombay Shabbat Travel
With regards to the Jews of Bombay riding the tram on Shabbat,their
heter was based on the ruling of the Zevechai Sedek,vol 1 orach chaim
24).His decision to allow riding on a tram on Shabbat was based on the
question, of whether one can benefit from non-Jewish labor, and work
which is normally done on a weekday. The fact that Bombay was an island
was not a factor at all. The only question was one of traveling outside
of the Shabbat borders. Tahum.
Meylech Viswanath understanding of Rav Uzziel heter, does not mesh with
Rav Moshe Malka's ruling on a similar question (Mikveh Mayim volume 2
siman 9) where he was asked about riding the Paris metro on Shabbat. He
ruled that is forbidden becuase of the worry that people might suspect
him of buying the tickets on Shabbat. In his responsum he is surprised
that Rav Uzziel was not bothered by what others might think (Marit
Ayin). We can infer that as far as Rav Moshe Malka understanding of Rav
Uzziel ruling the carrying of tickets was not an issue.
Yaakov Shemaria
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avrom Forman <AS402714@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 08:43:27 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Errors in Kriat Hatorah
Last week the Baal Koreh made an error in the kria, one that caused alot
of controversy in our shul. While the Baal Koreh was reading he said a
word incorrectly and before he was corrected he said hashem's name. As a
result, the Gabbai told the baal koreh to finish to the end of the
posuk, and then repeat the posuk.
Many years ago I tried to find the basis for that halacha in various
seforim. However, there is no mention in any sefer regarding an error
followed by hashem's name. I asked many people, and the only response I
could find was that if the baal koreh were to go back to where he made
the error and repeat the posuk, he would end up saying hashems name in
vain.
I can not understand this logic. Even if the baal koreh were to continue
to the end of the posuk and then REPEAT the entire posuk, hashem's name
would still be said in vain during the first reading. After all the
first posuk doesn't count since it was said in error. Furthermore, I
would even say that our minhag to make the baal koreh continue to the
end of the posuk COULD lead to even more Shein Shomaim Levatolah (Saying
G-ds name in vain). In a posuk that has hashem's name mentioned more
than once, by making the baal koreh repeat the posuk, he would be saying
saying hashem's name in vain more than once.
I therefore do not see any problem with going back to where the first
error was made, and then continuing the posuk.
If someone knows the basis for this halacha or minhag please respond.
Avrom Forman
as402714
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael J Broyde <relmb@...>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 12:09:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Friday Fast days
While our current practice is that only the 10th of tevet falls out on
Friday, that was not always the practice everywhere. In the time of the
rishonim (and until much later) many ruled that when purim fell out on
Sunday, tanit ester was fasted on Friday (See Meiri's famous sefer Magen
Avot, which notes that this is one of the classical differences between
his community and the Ramban's community). Indeed, it was a practice
that was kept by many until well into the 1600's (and if my memory is
correct is cited as a yesh omirim by the minhagai hamaharil (no checked)).
IMHO, it is this fact that explians why Rama, when explaining the rules
for Friday fast days, does NOT limit them to the 10th of Tevet, as even
in his time, some fasted tanit ester mukdam on Friday -- rather than our
practice of fasting on Thursday.
Michael Broyde
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein (n) <himelstein@...>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 04:51:28 GMT
Subject: Gelatin
A number of point in regard to gelatin. This is obviously not meant to
be a basis for any ruling in halachah and one must consult his local
Orthodox rabbi for a definitive ruling.
a) Rabbi Hayyim Ozer Grodzinski (1863-1940) permitted the use of
gelatin. His Teshuvah (responsum) was reprinted posthumously in
HaPardes, January 1948, pp. 19-20. The Teshuvah was written in 1936.
Rabbi Grodzinski, one of the great Gedolim of the interwar era, died in
1940. The editor of HaPardes adds that the Teshuvah also appears in
Rabbi Grodzinski's _Ahiezer_, Vol. III Teshuvah 63.
b) My married son was at a Shiur by Rabbi Ovadya Yosef, who also
permitted the use of gelatin. I could not find it in writing in my
(admittedly incomplete) set of volumes of _Yehaveh Da'at_ and _Yalkut
Yosef_ by Rabbi Yosef.
c) I have been told that there are those who permit gelatin from
non-kosher species only if the bones from which it was made were
completely clean of meat, as the prohibition on the meat (unlike on the
bones) cannot be removed by the processing involved. This would
effectively rule out all general-market (i.e., not specific kosher)
gelatins, because the price of cleaning the bones in this way would be
extremely high and is not done.
d) Decades ago, Bartons used to make a chocolate-covered marshmallow. I
checked with the RCA (Rabbinical Council of America) Kashrut committee
head, who told me that indeed decades ago Bartons arranged to have a
special batch of gelatin made up for it, using only the bones of kosher
species of animals. These animals had not been slaughtered ritually.
The gelatin lasted the company for many years, but when it ran out the
price involved in producing a new batch would have been so prohibitive
that no further batch was ordered.
e) Rabbi David Holzer of Miami Florida has a company which now produces
gelatin from fish bones exclusively. I don't know if his is the only
company which does so, nor so I know the name of his company. I can
obtain this information if anyone needs it.
Shmuel Himelstein
Phone: 972-2-864712 Fax 972-2-862041
<himelstein@...> (that's JerONE not Jer-L)
Jerusalem, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <jeremy@...> (Jeremy Nussbaum)
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 95 23:22:47 EDT
Subject: kolatin gelatin
Ok, I posted the wrong scoop wrt kolatin gelatin. Sorry about that,
chief.
So, here is the real scoop, at least as far as I can find in the
"popular" literature. Someone who has the teshuvot or other source
material on the issue can certainly add good technical detail.
In the Kahsrus magazine published by Yeshiva Birkas Reuven, issue 63
(13:3) Adar 5753 on p28 there is an article by R. Yosef Wikler mainly on
kolatin gelatin. I am still curious about the history of gelatin
acceptance, both in the US and abroad.
Quoting a small part of the article:
"The hides used for "Kolatin" comes from steers slaughtered at the
Rubashkin plan in Postville Iowa, where Breuer's (KAJ), Lubavitch and
Margaretten do their shchitah. After shechitah, the glat hides are
separated from the kosher and the non-kosher. Koltech takes the glatt
hides and transports them to a separate facility where salting is done
(as with meat, to remove any blood) - under special hashgacha; hides are
not otherwise salted. Then an extensive processing of the hides begins.
All chemicals used in processing "Kolatin" are kosher and kosher for
Passover. All equipment is kahserd at 212 degrees. While the hides are
being treated, a mashgiach is present or the equipment is sealed by the
mashgiach.
Upon completion as gelatin, "kolatin" has been reduced to a semi-solid
and finally to a powder form. The final step of grinding the poweder to
the proper mesh is done at a separate plant, because the mill at the
gelatin plant cannot be properly cleaned. Even the grinding of the
"kolatin" is done under a mashgiach temidi."
Jeremy Nussbaum (<jeremy@...>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Page <page@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 09:06:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Kosher Cleaning Products
As an aside in this discussion, Jeremy Nusbaum asked:
"Does anyone avoid benefit from all pig derived items, like pigskin?"
David Carlap raised a similar question.
I have always assumed that pigskin _would_ present a problem because of the
Torah prohibition on touching the flesh of a dead pig. I was reminded of
this in the pet store recently when I saw a box of dried pig's ears, which
are supposedly delicacies for dogs. My dog will have to do without them,
because I would have to touch the things even to give them to her.
Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Seth Ness <ness@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 10:40:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Milky Ways from Italy?
does anyone know if milky ways from italy are kosher?
Seth L. Ness Ness Gadol Hayah Sham
<ness@...>
S++ K++ Fa1 M++ H++ T+ t SY+++M/A AT+++ Te++/Te+++ SC++ FO+++
D+++ P+ Tz+ E
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 20 Issue 62
