Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 9

Fri, 19 Jan 2018

• 1. Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Prof. Levine)
• 2. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 4. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Isaac Balbin)
• 5. blame (Rich, Joel)
• 6. chazakot (Rich, Joel)
• 7. Re: chazakot (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: Problematic customs (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher (Zev Sero)
• 11. Tzar Ba'alei Chaim (Chana Luntz)

At 12:54 PM 1/17/2018, Ben Waxman wrote:

>Frankly I don't understand the question. One of the main reasons we
>demand hasgacha on a meat restaurant is because we don't believe the
>owner's word when he says "Don't worry, all the ingredients are Badatz".
>The same would apply with a vegan place. Maybe he fries up his french
>fries in lard. Maybe the sauce has butter in it. Maybe he bought lettuce
>directly from the secular kibbutz.

Don't we require hashgacha on all restaurants,  fleishig,  milchig 
and pareve?

YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180117/633a9db8/attachment-0001.html>

.

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> Why is their own religious repugnance not at least as reliable
> as beer industry standards or pride in a true bagette (when in
> France)? (As a she'eila, not a qushya.)

R' Zev Sero wrote:

> In both cases we rely not on the owner's pride but on his fear
> of ruin should he be caught adulterating his product.  Here
> you're asking us to rely on his own conscience, which is a
> different proposition, though perhaps a stronger one.  Maybe
> we can, but those cases don't prove it.

I think you are both raising good points. I think we should be asking:
To what extent can we rely on our understanding  of "industry
standards" and "fear of ruin" and such? It turns out that Chazal
stepped in to protect us from ourselves, using the power of Gezera and
Seyag to keep us safe within specific limits.

Take Chalav Yisrael, for example. Milk is a consumer product which is
ostensibly made of one single, simple, kosher ingredient, and in the
pre-pasteurization era it wasn't even cooked. But because of the
possibility of adulteration, Chazal saw fit to require hashgacha of
that single-ingredient product. Even in situations where Torah Law
would allow us to rely on the probability that a given container of
milk was kosher, Chazal said we *can't* rely on it.

Basar Shenis'alem Min Haayin is another such seyag. It is not enough
that the situation allows me, under Torah law, to presume that this
piece of meat is kosher. There must be a "chain of custody" from one
reliable Jew to the next, preventing any opportunity for a
non-reliable person to exchange the meat for a non-kosher one.
Similarly, there are many situations where Bittul works on a Torah
level, but it was invalidated by Chazal. I am obviously glossing over
many details, but my point is that these are all parts of Chazal's
efforts to protect us from our own mistakes.

It is in this context that I find Pas Yisrael and Bishul Yisrael to be
shockingly lenient.

Despite the many kashrus problems that can and do arise in a
non-Jewish environment, Chazal never required any hashgacha of the
ingredients or keilim. They allowed each individual to rely on his own
vigilance for the ingredients, and to rely on "stam keilim einam bnei
yoma" for the keilim. The only thing they required was Jewish
participation in one small step of the cooking process.

And so it remains today. If you meet a non-Jewish farmer who offers
you some of the milk that he milked himself for his family, that milk
is assur d'rabanan. But if you go into the kitchen of a vegan
restaurant (or even a treif restaurant!) and you look around (and you
know what to look for!) and you are satisfied, then you are on safe
ground. Among the many lessons you can learn from Bishul Yisrael is
this: Chazal did NOT forbid us from eating from a treif kitchen. They
*could* have chosen to forbid that, but *instead*, they said, "If
everything is okay, AND the food is oleh al shulchan melachim, then
you just need to do one more thing, and that is to participate in the
cooking. But if the food is not oleh al shulchan melachim, then you
don't even need to do that."

I'm sure that some people have been reading this thread with only an
academic interest. "Interesting halachos," they say, "but **I** would
never eat in a vegan restaurant." Yes, I'll grant you that. But do you
ever get a hot coffee at a convenience store? Or a fountain-dispensed
soda at the ballpark? If you avoid such risks then I sincerely applaud
you. But if you do these things, it is because you've learned to know
what to look out for. You know that certain realities CAN be relied
on. The coffee and the soda are much simpler than the vegan
restaurant, but it is only a matter of degree. There's no essential
difference.

Akiva Miller

Kashrus is not about guarantees. Every time we eat meat, we are verifying
that it is ASSUMED to be Kosher because we don't check for EVERY possible
Tereifa blemish.

Challav Yisroel also based upon the notion that MOST gym are reluctant to
add non Kosher when the Mashgiach is only around the corner. Although we
KNOW that some are daring enough to try this.

ShA YD 134:11 permits buying bread from a gy if we've seen a Yid selling
bread to this gy. That's why, in places where the custom is to not eat
bread from a gy, if we have wheat over which Yayin Nessech spilled, we may
process it into bread and sell it to a gy, PROVIDED no Yidden witness the
sale.
If Yidden witness the sale, they are permitted to buy that bread.

I don't think ANY of today's well recognised K agencies would permit buying
bread from a gy just because we witnessed a Yiddle selling him bread.
There's no way to identify that particular bread made by the Y.

Has the Halacha changed?
Have circumstances changed?
Or have standards changed?
Is the profit making element of Kashrus distorting Halacha?
Has the profit making element cultivated a branding and tribal following
that obstructs honest discussion of the Halacha?
Which is why this same nonsense gets aired again and again - loyalty must
be to HKBH and Halacha, not to ones tribe.

YD, Siman 114, their hard drinks are Kosher, we're only not permitted to
drink it in their shops, and it need not be pointed out that they did not
have any health or food guidelines that restricted what they brought into
their manufacturing plants. Furthermore, this stuff was on the whole
processed in their home kitchens.

The only warning (Seif 4) relates to them making substitutions with wine,
BUT ONLY when the wine is cheaper than the other drinks they're
manufacturing.
Furthermore, even where wine is cheaper, when there is a risk that their
duplicity will be disclosed, it is Kosher. Seif 5.

Myths perpetrated to reinforce the profit making element of Kashrus
MYTH - employees cook their private non-K food with the restaurant's
equipment.
FACT - A) as we saw, Halacha does not support this.
FACT - B) with today's propensity to sue, food establishments are extremely
vigilant to establish, maintain and enforce, very strict guidelines
regarding what goes on in the kitchen and what the employees may bring into
the premises.

MYTH - the infamous, Halachically incorrect, airplane, meat sandwich swap.
After returning from washing his hands, he realised he'd left his unsealed
meat sandwich exposed to the gym in the next seats, so he chose not to eat
it. The gy in the next seat asked about this unusual behaviour and
expressed his ASTO-NI-SHIMENT "how wise are your laws, praised be the Gd of
the Jews. Whilst you were away, I swapped your meat for mine. I wanted to
know what kosher tastes like."

Siman 63:2 - Rama, "the custom is to follow the lenient opinion" referring
to the Mechaber, "permit Bassar SheNisAlem Mon HaAyin when it's found
undisturbed in the place in which was left."
See BHeiTev 6 & Shach 9, even if he was not really attentive to it's
position and location, as long as it pretty much looks undisturbed, it's OK.

And when it suits them, the kosher agencies trample upon Halacha with
disdain.
In Melbourne Australia, we have the wicked situation that no Kehilla Rav is
prepared to protest, of meat establishments, owned and operated by publicly
MechaShabbos, without full time Hashgacha and without systems that permit
verification to reconcile, how much was bought with how much was sold.

I have communicated with AKO about this matter - as the Kosher certifiers
are members of that group, to be fobbed off by ridiculous assurances "I
have investigated this and everything is 100% Kosher Mehadrin Glatt Lifnim
Mishooras HaDin LeEyLay UleEyLa"

I can be contacted meir...@gmail.com if anyone has any suggestions or
advice or comfort to offer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180118/a67fd0bf/attachment-0001.html>

A number of people have mentioned Bishul Akum. One needs to know *where*
such a vegan restaurant is located. Let us assume it is a Jain restaurant
in Delhi. If someone is travelling in India there are already kulos. There
is almost nothing that can be bought and one eats out of a suitcase
(as I did for many years). As such, one needs to look carefully at
each issue and if there are a series of Rabbinic infractions one may
be able to be meikel beshaas hadchak. For instance one can commence by
knocking out Bishul Akum by following the Baal HaMaor? (not sure if I
remember correctly) that its only food cooked in a Goy's home that is
assur. Anywhere else us fine because we don't worry about Chasnus. Then
one can start to consider the Keilim as 24 hours old and then any laws
of bittul etc I mention this only because the *context* of a question
is also important.

In my "other" world, I noted quite a few folks whose first reaction to a
problem was to find someone (or thing) to blame it on. I tried to encourage
my teammates to first find a fix, there's always plenty of time later to
apportion blame! Please look at the Yosef story in this context and share
your thoughts on all the players' reactions
KT
Joel Rich

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180118/4cc12082/attachment-0001.html>

Is anyone aware of any social psychology experiments which would inform on
the current status of chazakot of chazal? (e.g., ein adam choteh v'lo lo,
ein adam meiz panav lfnei bal chovo). [A person won't sin if he personally
receives no benefit, a person doesn't have the gall to deny a loan to the
lender's face.]
KT
Joel Rich

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180118/32aca155/attachment-0001.html>

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 06:55:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: Is anyone aware of any social psychology experiments which would
: inform on the current status of chazakot of chazal? (e.g., ein adam
: choteh v'lo lo, ein adam meiz panav lfnei bal chovo)

The BY (EH 17) as explained by the Sefei Chemed (Kelalim 1:388) says
that we can no longer rely on ein eishah mei'izah paneha lifnei baalahh,
and should only invoke it lechumerah.

(I seem to recall the AhS recently (first 37 se'ifim of CM) saying the
same about mei'iz panav lifnei ba'al chovo, but now I can't find it.)

In contrast to RYBS's objection to R' Rackman's position that "tav
lemeisiv" doesn't apply. If you recall, I had first thought that his
objection was spoecific to tav lemeisiv, since it can be taken as an
expression of "ve'el isheikh teshuqaseikh", Chavah's onesh in Bereishis
3:16.

However, R' Ari Kahn put a transcription up on line
<http://arikahn.blogspot.com/2013/03/rabbi-soloveitchik-talmud-torah-and.html>:

    Let me add something that is very important: not only the halachos
    but also the chazakos which chachmei chazal have introduced are
    indestructible. We must not tamper, not only with the halachos,
    but even with the chazakos, for the chazakos of which chazal spoke
    rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon
    permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the
    human personality, in the metaphysical human personality, which
    is as changeless as the heavens above. Let us take for example
    the chazaka that I was told about: the chazaka tav l'meisiv tan du
    mil'meisiv armalo has absolutely nothing to do with the social and
    political status of women in antiquity. This chazaka is based not
    upon sociological factors, but upon a verse in breishis...

So it seems leshitaso, the fact that this particular chazaqah is based in
a pasuq makes it normal, an example of the general "the chazakos of which
chazal spoke rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             There's only one corner of the universe
mi...@aishdas.org        you can be certain of improving,
http://www.aishdas.org   and that's your own self.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 - Aldous Huxley

On 17/01/18 23:51, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote:
> 
> Myths perpetrated to reinforce the profit making element of Kashrus
> MYTH - employees?cook their private non-K food with the restaurant's 
> equipment.
> FACT - A) as we saw, Halacha does not support this.
> FACT - B) with today's propensity to sue, food establishments are 
> extremely vigilant to establish, maintain and enforce, very strict 
> guidelines regarding what goes on in the kitchen and what the employees 
> may bring into the premises.

This is *NOT* a myth, it is a widespread practice in the restaurant 
industry, and since you supervise restaurants you must know this very well.

Another *fact* about modern commercial kitchens is that there is no such 
thing as a keli that is not ben yomo.  In a home kitchen we may have a 
piece of equipment that is only used for a specific dish, which we might 
only make twice a month.  In a commercial kitchen if a dish is not 
ordered several times a day it is removed from the menu and if a piece 
of equipment is not used daily it is removed from inventory.  Inventory 
has a carrying cost.  So any purported heter that depends on stam kelim 
einan bnei yoman must be ruled out.

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 05:36:16AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
: On 1/7/2018 11:32 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
: >OTOH, a Gra or RCBrisker would simply tell you to chuck the minhag.

: More or less, someone else told me that it isn't a question of a
: source justifying either method, but of an approach. Chassidim will
: accept "questionable" customs (of course adding in "what do you mean
: "questionable?"", Briskers/Rav Ovadia type Sefardim won't.

The model I developed over years of Avodah discussion (largely due to
RRWolpoe) was that there are four different kinds of concerns that a
poseiq has to weigh. Weigh, as in shiqul hada'as. So that pesaq really
involves comparing apples to oranges, and there is no way to reduce it
to numbers or an algorithm. Different posqim will emphasize different
factors, with certain tendencies among those of certain kehillos.

1- Textual conceptual strength: which sevara / lomdus is more compelling.
2- Textual formal strength: the authority of who said it -- giving
   precedence to the Rambam or the Rosh over a less influential rishonn,
   following the Rabim, etc...
3- Mimetic strength: what was the accepted practice?
4- When all else is balanced or nearly so, one may consider aggadic
   issues to chooce between multiple black-letter viable shitos.

And then last, when all else fails (and I don't consider this a 5th
concern):
5- We can't come up with a real pesaq, so let's treat it as a safeiq
   and apply the rules of safeiq.

The AhS gives more stregnth to #3; he assumes that any long-standing
minhag was peer reviewed by generations of rabbanim and therefore
must be justified. And he will create a sevara to justify it, if he
can. It can be much weaker than that behind other pesaqim, because
the mimetic weight compensates.

What I said quoted above is that the Gra or RCBrisker give heavy weight
to #1, such that all else rarely come into play.

Whereas ROYosef leans heavily on #2 -- what does Maran hold, what do
the rov of contemporary rabbanim hold?

Yekkes lean heavily on mesorah, so that #2 (returning to the pesaqim of
the Maharil, Rama, etc...) carry a lot of weight, as does mimeticism.

Chassidim do indeed value mimeticism more than both Litvaks and
Sepharadim, but they also value aggadic -- in particular Qabbalistic
-- issues. At least, value it more than many other groups. So, while
they too give less weight to aggadita (to be clear: I am not accusing
anyone of anti-nomianism), Chassidim have a much broader sense of what
is balanced enough in terms of black-letter halakhah to consider what
fits the Chassidic worldview.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             What we do for ourselves dies with us.
mi...@aishdas.org        What we do for others and the world,
http://www.aishdas.org   remains and is immortal.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Albert Pine

On 17/01/18 23:51, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote:
> 
> And when it suits them, the kosher agencies trample upon Halacha with 
> disdain.
> In Melbourne Australia, we have the wicked situation that no Kehilla Rav 
> is prepared to protest, of meat establishments, owned and operated by 
> publicly MechaShabbos, without full time Hashgacha and without systems 
> that permit verification to reconcile, how much was bought with how much 
> was sold.
> 
> I have communicated with AKO about this matter - as the Kosher 
> certifiers are members of that group, to be fobbed off by ridiculous 
> assurances "I have investigated this and everything is 100% Kosher 
> Mehadrin Glatt Lifnim Mishooras HaDin LeEyLay UleEyLa"

All Melbourne butchers and meat establishments have full-time 
supervision, plus layers of nichnas veyotzei.

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

Haven't had much time to spend on Avodah recently, but I do stop in
occasionally, and the below caught my eye:

RMB writes:

> The teshuvah is at https://en.tvunah.org/2018/01/07/pets-on-shabbat

> First then RAW discusses the topic I expected to hear about, tzaar ballei
>chaim. He has a fine survey, but of ideas I had encountered before (and
>therefore think it's likely you did too). See the link.


I was reading RAW's discussion of tzaar ba'alei chaim (TBC) in his Minchas
Asher on Devarim in Perek Ki Tavo, siman 51.

RAW there sees TBC as the quintessential example of "Ratzon HaShem" (which
is the heading of the siman) - that it is something that HaShem wants, and
therefore it is incumbent upon us d'orisa, despite the gemora never
mentioning a source for its statement that TBC is d'orisa.  RAW then lists
off 11 different sources as proposed in the Rshonim and Achronim for TBC -
and identifies two different paths by which the meforshim identify Ratzon
HaShem, the first by learning it out from within halachot (such as
unloading an animal or not muzzling an animal) which he brings, and the
second from the narrative text of the Torah.

What is surprising to me is the source that he does not cite: - that of
aiver min hachai!  Despite that being very much common currency as to what
that requirement is about.  Does that mean that nobody or nobody of note
actually says it?

RAW does cite the Rambam (in More Nevuchim) who makes reference to Bila'am
and learning it out from the question "why did you strike your donkey?",
and he also makes a brief reference to the Sefer Chassidim, who also quote
this pasuk.  If one goes and looks at the Sefer Chassidim, the SC does make
it clear there that therefore TBC is incumbent upon Bnei Noach (Bila'am is
both a non Jew and after Har Sinai) - but appears to fudge a bit with the
derivation by pointing out that if Adam was not even permitted to eat meat,
he certainly was not permitted to tyrannise animals, and that even though
Bnei Noach were then permitted to eat meat, they were still not permitted
to tyrannise animals.

But given that even in the machlokus between the Rambam and the Ramban on
the extent of coverage of the shiva mitzvoth Bnei Noach, both extend them
beyond the minimal scope as written (otherwise where does kidnapping
fall?).  So why does it not make sense to say that aiver min hachai is a
specific that indicates the more general obligation of TBC?

Of course, would that not mean that following RAW's logic, Ratzon HaShem is
applicable to non-Jews as well? - which would seem to bring in all sorts of
additional aspects (chinuch, for example!)  (this being true even if we
only see the source for TBC as Bila'am and his donkey).  RAW learns out the
Ratzon of HaShem of Chinuch from Avraham (another non Jew, arguably).


When I have time, I will do a hunt to see if anybody else (perhaps more
obscure) brings aiver min hachai as the source for TBC, but in the
meantime, if anybody has a source for this, I would be interested to see it.

Shabbat Shalom

Chana
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180119/4a89cab1/attachment.html>

------------------------------



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


------------------------------


*************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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
        http://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)