Volume 66 Number 04
Produced: Fri, 21 Oct 22 09:06:49 -0400
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Eating at other people's homes (2)
[Martin Stern Prof. L. Levine]
Israeli etrogim have Kedushat Shvi'it
[Haim Snyder]
Minhagei ta'ut?
[Michael Rogovin]
Response to a question (was A sukka under a high tree and a bracelet)
[Carl Singer]
Someone else's heter (was: A sukka under a high tree and a bracelet)
[Leah Gordon]
The Arovoh
[Menashe Elyashiv]
Yash for kiddush (was Another approach to simchat torah)
[Meir Shinnar]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 08:17 AM
Subject: Eating at other people's homes
Robert Rubinoff wrote (MJ 66#03):
> Prof. L. Levine wrote (MJ 65#96):
>
>> ... I personally rely on the OU and 3 heimishe hashgachas only. I know that
>> most people do not do what I do regarding kashrus, and that is certainly
>> their prerogative ...
>
> I hope that R. Levine realizes that he in fact is relying on a lot of other
> hechsherim - as (if my understanding is correct) the OU, OK, Star-K, and Kaf-K
> generally rely on each other - so if you are eating food with an OU hechsher,
> some of the ingredients may have been certified by the other hechshers. (And I
> suspect that the providers certified by the heimishe hechshers use ingredients
> certified by other hechshers - but in particular I think that the big 4 trust
> each other.) Of course, there are some specific issues where they have
> different opinions, so they make sure to avoid items that raise those issues.
> But, in general, food production nowadays is often a very complicated,
> world-wide process and you can't assume that every ingredient was supervised
> by the hechsher that oversees the final product.
I think Robert is reading too much into Prof. Levine's statement. When the
OU gives a hechsher, it means that it is happy to use specific ingredients
manufactured under the other hechsherim. Where it has questions regarding a
particular ingredient, it will not give the final product its hechsher, so
Prof. Levine is relying on it rather than the certification of the other
hashgachas.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Prof. L. Levine <llevine@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 01:17 PM
Subject: Eating at other people's homes
In response to Robert Rubinoff (MJ 56#03):
I have to question his assertions on this matter. While it may be true that the
OU will rely on the supervision of an ingredient by another hashgacha, it is
only after thoroughly checking the ingredient out.
A neighbor of mine emailed the OU asking about their position on using
ingredients under other organizations' hashgachas. The reply was "We do not
comment on other hashgachas."
Professor Yitzchok Levine
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Haim Snyder <haimsny@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 21,2022 at 03:17 AM
Subject: Israeli etrogim have Kedushat Shvi'it
Those of you who don't live in Israel and who bought Israeli etrogim, be advised
that the year 5782 was a shmitta year. This means that, presumably, the etrog
you purchased was from Otzar Beit Din and has Kedushat Shvi'it, with all that
implies.
For example, if you made etrog jelly or jam, then the peels would have had to
have been separated from your other garbage and kept until they showed signs of
rot, usually 3 days. Any left over jelly would require similar treatment.
If you didn't do anything with the etrog, then it must be kept until the
beginning of Nisan and then it must be declared "hefker" (unowned and allowable
to anyone) or it can be burned with your hametz on erev Pesah.
I hope that what I just wrote was just a reminder of what you were told when you
bought it.
--
Sincerely,
Haim Shalom Snyder
Petah Tikva
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Rogovin <michael@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 11:17 AM
Subject: Minhagei ta'ut?
Meir Shinnar (MJ 66#02) reports that the way piyutim are recited (A1, A2B1,
B2C1...Y2Z1, Z2) follows the call and response favored by RYDBS. I have seen
this explanation before and it makes sense IF we recite these piyutim as a call
and response where the chazan states a line 1, the congregation responds with
line 2 and then states the new line 1, the chazan responds line 2 and states the
next line 1, etc.
However, notwithstanding the Rav's views, this is not how almost every
congregation recites these piyutim. They are either sung together communally, or
they are recited by the chazan line 2 and the next line 1 and the congregation
repeating the chazan rather than responding with the next group. So what we have
is the worst of both worlds: reciting the lines incorrectly paired in a
non-responsive way.
My point is simple: either follow the A1, A2B1, B2 C1 pattern and recite it
responsively as suggested by the Rav and as the original tradition may well have
been (not likely) or sing it communally (much more likely to continue) but then
one should (IMHO) recite it A1A2, B1B2, etc. so that the meaning of the poem is
clear. Meaning of tefilah should trump anything else and how it is recited by
baalei tefilah should reflect that, regardless of whether they do it responsively
or communally. However, I have made this argument for years without effect.
Michael Rogovin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 10:17 AM
Subject: Response to a question (was A sukka under a high tree and a bracelet)
Yisrael Medad wrote (MJ 66#03):
> May we ask Carl to ask his wife what her response would have been if the
> question had been phrased:
>
> "That's a great way to get around the prohibition of carrying. Who provided
> you with the heter?"
Having been married for over 45 years I know better than to speak for my wife.
But her response to that question, if she chose to respond, would likely have
been, "My Rav".
Stuart Pilichowski (MJ 66#03) paints a proper interaction -- "grace and dignity",
basically - "I didn't know that, where did you learn ...." Most likely a
private conversation.
In response to well meaning Catholic friends / colleagues ("You took Tuesday
off, but 'Goldberg' came to work, why?") I've replied sincerely to them that
we Jews do not have a Pope. Essentially, that there is no one single decider and
that there are variances among belief and practice within the Jewish Community.
If I may re-tell an old, old story. When my wife and I first moved to a new
community, she received the most warm telephone call from someone welcoming us
to the community. And it was a warm community at that. The individual asked
our names, she replied "Carl & Miriam" -- The individual pressed on -- it seems
"Miriam" appears in the bible -- someone's older sister - but there is no "Carl"
[FYI - "Carl" is the name that the great council of aunts gave me at about age 5
when it was decided that having moved to America, I needed an American name.]
That conversation got nowhere. The caller then asked my wife whether we bought
our home or whether we were renters. She replied, we purchased our home. The
caller then told her that she had 3 days to put up mezzuzahs. [Ours were already
up - first thing we did.] Nonetheless my wife replied, "No, we have 30 days."
The caller said, "Who told you that?" My wife replied, "My Rav". The caller,
"Who's that?" The conversation was apparently heating up. My wife replied,
"Reb ____", a Rosh Yeshiva who is known worldwide by his first name, who
happened to be a family friend. Thus the conversation ended.
Since I'm in a loquacious mood this morning, perhaps I should explain that my
wife is a Litvak from a family of Telzers. and as the above-mentioned Rosh
Yeshiva would say, "The Gaon's ah aynikel"
Now to take down the Succah.
Chuneh Avruhm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah Gordon <leahgordonmobile@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 08:17 AM
Subject: Someone else's heter (was: A sukka under a high tree and a bracelet)
Stuart Pilichowski wrote (MJ 66#03):
> In response to Carl Singer (MJ 66#02):
>
> I think its wonderful and very caring of someone to approach if they think
> a wrong is happening. Of course, the approach must be with grace and dignity.
>
> Too often, unfortunately, this is not the case and thus - the worst case
> scenario - a chilul hashem is perpetrated and a holier than thou scene
> occurs.
On the topic of whether one should "approach" someone else whom one suspects of
using a faulty heter - my sister taught me that there is a halakha that you are
supposed to concern yourself with other people's bodily needs and your own
spiritual needs, never mind that most people do quite the opposite.
--Leah S. R. Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Menashe Elyashiv <menely2@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 09:17 AM
Subject: The Arovoh
David Ansbacher wrote (MJ 66#03):
> It seems to have become a minhag to put the Arovos on top of the Oron
> Hakodesh.
Some do, many do not. We do not, and I announce every Hoshana Raba that saving
the 4 minim may be a "segula", but only in your home. Anything left will be sent
to the trash. That is what we do, however this year, since the etrog is
shevi'it, I found 2 more, and they will be cooked with my etrog as jam.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meir Shinnar <chidekel@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 20,2022 at 08:17 PM
Subject: Yash for kiddush (was Another approach to simchat torah)
Martin Stern wrote (MJ 66#03):
> David Tzohar wrote (MJ 66#02):
>
>> Ashkenazi communities especially chassidim have a custom of making "LeCHaYiM"
>> on an alcoholic beverage before and during the HaKaFoT.
>
> This is definitely NOT the custom of those Ashkenazim who come from the
> Gemanophone lands. I don't know how one can eat or drink anything after
> davening shacharit before making kiddush. I have heard that some people do
> make kiddush on a shot of whiskey but I don't know how they justify it when
> drinking less than a revi'it (or at least melo lugmav [a cheekful]). Perhaps
> someone can enlighten me on this.
Galicia was different.
1) Wine or yash. Wine was expensive and difficult to get. Therefore, it was
common to use yash (abbreviation for yayin saruf - burnt wine (distilled) - BTW
I always heard it pronounced yash rather than yas).
My father told me that several communities in Galicia had communal takanot
mandating that everyone use yash rather than grape wine for kiddusha rabba
(daytime kiddush). This was a social takkanah - as only the rich could afford
wine - so was meant as an equalizer (I have not heard any confirmation of such a
takkanah from others, but believe it was local). At the stage he was able to, he
deliberately chose using yash for kiddusha rabba, and this is my mintage too.
2) Volume of yash. There is a famous Taz (Ture Zahav, 17th century standard
commentary on Shulchan Aruch) stating that as no one can drink a reviit of yash,
the volume needed to require a brachia acharona is not a reviit but less - what
normal people actually drink of yash.
The Taz did not (at least in print) apply this to the volume needed for kiddush,
but it was a natural extension - if the reason for the lower volume for a bracha
is the inability to drink melo lugmav of yash, and one was making kiddish on
yash - how could one require melo lugmav (cheek full) of yash for kiddish?
(I would add that for those of us concerned for too much drinking, as Martin
Stern is, you would not want to require Melo lugmav).
This extension of the Taz was standard in Galicia (see e.g. Eshel Avraham -
major posek from Galicia (and from Agnons home town) on Orach Chaim 289, siman
aleph, who brings it down (even though he himself has dome disagreements with it
on other issues).
I saw an article (third hand, so can't confirm) that some hasidim went even
further - and insisted on making kidusha rabba on small volumes - to show we
hold like the Taz.
So therefore, yes, it is a real minhag to make daytime kiddush on a small volume
of whiskey - even if it wasn't the case for Germany. I would add that there is
a Halacha of being dan lechaf zchut - judging favorably - so one's first
reaction on coming on an unfamiliar mintage should be more that this is
interesting rather than this is assur (forbidden)- even if my customs and
halachic approach might forbid it
Meir Shinnar
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 66 Issue 4
