Volume 6 Number 5
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Chodosh
[Zvi Basser]
Dolphins, Tuna and Babies (3)
[Avi Feldblum, Charlie Abzug, Mechael Kanovsky]
Glass, Ceramics, Kashrut
[Len Moskowitz]
Maple Syrup ... a digression
[Max Stern]
Mikvah on Mars, or, What is Ha-aretz? (2)
[Neil Parks, Mechael Kanovsky]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <fishbane@...> (Zvi Basser)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 00:11:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Chodosh
Well we have had the Bach's position that chodosh is permitted, we
should note that the his son-in-law the taz will go along with this only
in emergency situations where nothing else is available. The shach rules
against the heter. The vilna gaon and the hachmas adam rule against it.
The shulchan aruch rules against it and the mogen avraham notes that
rabbenu baruch says it is derobbonon, the mishna berurah rules against
it-- the list is impressive, a yoreh shamayaim would not use the lenient
heter. The aruch hashulchan swings against the tide by trying to show
that there were a lot of rishonim who said it was permissable nowadays.
An examination of his sources shows that he used great ingenuity to
uphold what people in his community were doing but indeed the holocho
must remain that hadash is asur min hatorah-- or derabbanan-- in short,
those who are particular about it are in the line of the majority of
poskim. The bach is not followed as a major posek-- usually he is too
stringent.
Zvi Basser
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mljewish (Avi Feldblum)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:21:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Dolphins, Tuna and Babies
As people respond to this thread, I would like to remind people of a
related topic, that of the famous Glatt Yacht discussion. How does this
topic relate or differ from that one. To recap very briefly, the
question there was should the kashrith supervising organization worry
about things like mixed dancing or New Years parties when they make
decisions on whether to give or remove supervision from an
establishment. Is the question here the same issue, or are there
differences? Are certain things that, while not part of "food kashruth"
are within the jurisdiction of the kashruth supervisor? How does one
bound and define that jurisdiction?
Avi Feldblum
mail.jewish Moderator
<mljewish@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <cabzug@...> (Charlie Abzug)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 19:22:12 -0500
Subject: Dolphins, Tuna and Babies
With respect to Mike Gerver's message regarding the morality of
kashruth certification of products whose manufacturers are guilty of
various dastardly acts, the duty of a kashruth certifying organization
is to set standards and to certify whether particular products comply
with the various halachos pertaining to permitted and forbidden foods.
They perform that service on behalf of two "clients", one being the
kosher consumer who wants to be able to go into the supermarket and shop
to feed his/her family, and the other being the manufacturer who wants
to attract customers. The question of whether to punish manufacturers
for murdering dolphins or for promoting unhealthful practices in
third-world customers is one that should properly be left to the
consumer. So far as I know there is no issur involved in killing a
dolphin (unless it happens to belong to someone). I want you to know
that I do care about the wanton destruction of dolphins, and I certainly
want to preserve the health of third-world babies. I have not
personally evaluated the pro-Nestle and the anti-Nestle evidence - that
would take an amount of time for careful study that I don't have
available, as well as resources to conduct field trips, etc. I note
that almost all kosher consumers eat kosher beef, which comes from
steers - animals that have been emasculated, often painfully. Does Mr.
Gerver refrain from eating beef? On the contrary, while it is not an
issur to kill a dolphin (particularly if the animal's death is not
specifically intended, but is just a by-product of fishing practice),
there is an issur of tza'ar-ba'alei-chayim which prevents an observant
Jew from emasculating an animal. Yet, the common practice is to eat the
meat. Preumably, a non-Jew peprformed the surgery.
I used to sit on the board of directors of a kashruth
supervision organization, and once a question similar to Mike's was
raised in our organization. Our decision was reached very rapidly. Our
seal on a product attests only to the kashruth of the product, not to
the kashruth of the manufacturer. If you ever find yourself stranded in
Yenemsvelt, Idaho, and you go into the supermarket to buy food, the
brand of an immoral manufacturer may happen to be the only one that is
kosher certified.
Looking at it another way, the certifying organization check
into those aspects of the food which its Rabbinic those aspects of the
food which its Rabbinic authorities are expert in checking, namely,
compliance with the halachos of ma'achalos asuros, not into the social
and marketing and other policies and practices of the manufacturer.
These are the things which the kosher consumer wants his Rabbinical
authorities to check and to certify for him/her.
Charlie Abzug
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <KANOVSKY@...> (Mechael Kanovsky)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 13:06:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Dolphins, Tuna and Babies
About having a politicaly correct hashgacha, it seems that if the OU
will start to go by giving its hashgacha to only "moral" companies than
they should remove their hashgacha from all alcholic beverages, caffeine
etc. And what about all the companies that pollute? All that will be
left kosher is mineral water.
mechael kanovsky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Len Moskowitz <moskowit@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 17:04:31 -0500
Subject: Glass, Ceramics, Kashrut
Our local Rav says that for cold food glass utensils may be used for
both meat and milk in turn. If the food is hot however, he says the
glass is considered to be absorbing, and if made treif, can't be
kashered.
Would someone shed some insight into this reasoning and recommend some
relevant sources?
Len Moskowitz
<moskowit@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Max Stern <lms@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 17:27:54 -0500
Subject: Maple Syrup ... a digression
In Mail-Jewish V6N4, Joe Abeles writes:
> The process I've described is used in Vermont, which, as is
> well-known, is the primary maple-syrup producing State here in the
> U.S. (Incidentally, I believe that maple syrup may only be available
> in the U.S. A new hire from England fell in love with the stuff and
> used to guzzle it. If it's indeed produced or sold elsewhere in the
> world, I would like to hear about it for the sake of general
> knowledge.)
Joe, you are going to hear from our Canadian friends! They would claim
superiority over Vermont in maple syrup quality. Like the competition
between French and Califorinan wines, this dispute will never be
settled.
As an Ohioan, I must stand up for Ohio maple products (syrup and
sugar), which were a much-loved part of my childhood Aprils. Better
than either Canada or Vermont!
|\/| /_\ \/
| | / \ /\ <Max.Stern@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <neil.parks@...> (Neil Parks)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 06:06:19 -0500
Subject: Mikvah on Mars, or, What is Ha-aretz?
Mike Gerver says:
-> that we don't have to be boxed into. I invite readers to submit their
-> analysis of the following question: does the requirement that a
-> mikveh be attached to the earth mean only the planet Earth, or any
-> planet? I am particularly interested in valid halachic reasoning,
-> citing psukim, making analogies to other halachot, as opposed to mere
-> idle speculation on one side or the other of this question.
I recently attended a lecture given by a Professor Gans (sorry I don't
recall his first name). He is a brilliant Orthodox Jewish scientist who
uses the latest scientific journals to demonstrate that the scientific
"big bang theory" and the Torah account of creation are really one and
the same.
He says that "Ha-aretz" in Genesis 1:1 does not mean the planet called
Earth. He says that "Ha-shamayim" refers to the spiritual realm, and
"Ha-Aretz" means the physical universe, including all the stars and
planets.
If we understand it that way, then it follows that on any other planet
where we could find a supply of water comparable to the water on planet
Earth, we could have a kosher mikvah.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <KANOVSKY@...> (Mechael Kanovsky)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 13:39:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Mikvah on Mars, or, What is Ha-aretz?
About the mikva on Mars, I don't think that the words adamah or aretz
can be translated into earth the planet but ground as in dirt. Therefore
probably one can build a mikvah on mars
mechael kanovsky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 6 Issue 5