Are all Kosher for Passover foods corn-free?
madero62
for Passover foods are corn-free. Is that true? This is important to
me because most processed foods normally contain corn (corn syrup,
corn starch, etc.). If all Kosher for Passover foods are corn-free, I
can stock up on corn-free food for the year. I know that you can tell
whether food is Kosher for Passover by the letters KP or OU-P on the
label. Is there anything else that I should be looking for? It just so
happens that I am allergic to dairy products (cow's milk) also. I hear
that Kosher for Passover foods are also supposed to be dairy-free.
That is another reason that I want to stock up on Kosher for Passover.
Does anybody make Kosher for Passover year round? Any suggestions will
be appreciated.
Thank You,
cindys
"madero62" <made...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4ae8bd61.03041...@posting.google.com...
> I am allergic to corn, and I need some help. I heard that all Kosher
> for Passover foods are corn-free.
The vast majority of them are, but some of them aren't. Sephardic Jews are
permitted to have corn products on Passover. In the United States, the
Passover products under the supervision of the big supervising agencies
(such as the O-U) do not contain corn products. You would need to be more
careful with purchasing products which do not carry trademarked symbols but
instead just say "Kosher for Passover, under the supervision of Rabbi
So-and-So."
>Is that true? This is important to
> me because most processed foods normally contain corn (corn syrup,
> corn starch, etc.). If all Kosher for Passover foods are corn-free, I
> can stock up on corn-free food for the year. I know that you can tell
> whether food is Kosher for Passover by the letters KP or OU-P on the
> label.
"KP" is not a trademarked symbol, and you're taking your chances. You're
relatively safe with OU-P, KOF-K-P, KAJ-P, O-K-P, Star-K-P, CRC-P (this list
is far from exhaustive but does represent "the big four" and then some).
>Is there anything else that I should be looking for? It just so
> happens that I am allergic to dairy products (cow's milk) also. I hear
> that Kosher for Passover foods are also supposed to be dairy-free.
Not any more or less so than kosher foods in general, although many kosher
foods are pareve (dairy free), not just those for Passover. This is because
Jews are not allowed to consume dairy products in combination with meat
products. Kosher foods which contain dairy will generally have the letter
"D" or the word "dairy" printed next to the kosher mark. The O-U and the
kof-K always display a "D" adjacent to the symbol to indicate a dairy
product. The O-K and KOF-K also have a designation "D.E." (dairy equipment),
which means the food does not contain dairy ingredients but was manufactured
or packaged on the same equipment as other food, which did contain dairy
ingredients. Non-dairy kosher foods are truly 100% dairy free (unlike some
non-kosher foods which may say "non-dairy" on the label but still may
contain trace amounts of dairy ingredients).
Finally, please know that a "P" on a package means "kosher for Passover." It
does NOT mean "pareve" (non-dairy) as many people mistakenly believe.
HTH.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
<txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3EA2FFFE...@austin.rr.com...
> cindys wrote:
> >
> > "madero62" <made...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:4ae8bd61.03041...@posting.google.com...
> > > I am allergic to corn, and I need some help. I heard that all Kosher
> > > for Passover foods are corn-free.
> >
> > The vast majority of them are, but some of them aren't. Sephardic Jews
are
> > permitted to have corn products on Passover.
>
-----------
I think they usually follow the traditions of their adopted Jewish
communities or of the rabbi who oversees their conversions :-)
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
<txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3EA323A3...@austin.rr.com...
> discussion about minhag I have this almost uncontrollable
> urge to ask about minhag waspim.
>
> On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
> next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> controversy that way.
----------
It's not clear to me why that is controversial (assuming you're not serving
it). Even Ashkenazim can have kitniyos in their possession and derive
benefit from them. For one thing, the pet food is filled with kitniyos
(including the pet food permitted by Rabbi Blumenkrantz). Also, when my sons
were babies, the rabbi told us that soy-based baby formula was perfectly
permissible. We just mixed it in the bathroom and kept it away from our
Pesach dishes.
Best regards,
---Cindy s.
cindys
<txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3EA348B0...@austin.rr.com...> > news:3EA323A3...@austin.rr.com...
> > > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> > > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
> > > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> > > controversy that way.
> > ----------
> > It's not clear to me why that is controversial (assuming you're not
serving
> > it). Even Ashkenazim can have kitniyos in their possession and derive
> > benefit from them. For one thing, the pet food is filled with kitniyos
> > (including the pet food permitted by Rabbi Blumenkrantz). Also, when my
sons
> > were babies, the rabbi told us that soy-based baby formula was perfectly
> > permissible. We just mixed it in the bathroom and kept it away from our
> > Pesach dishes.
But the point remains: Were you actually serving kitniyos? Or did you happen
to have a sealed box of rice in your pantry?
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Jess Olson
> cindys wrote:
> >
> > <txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:3EA323A3...@austin.rr.com...
> > > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> > > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
> > > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> > > controversy that way.
> > ----------
> > It's not clear to me why that is controversial (assuming you're not serving
> > it). Even Ashkenazim can have kitniyos in their possession and derive
> > benefit from them. For one thing, the pet food is filled with kitniyos
> > (including the pet food permitted by Rabbi Blumenkrantz). Also, when my sons
> > were babies, the rabbi told us that soy-based baby formula was perfectly
> > permissible. We just mixed it in the bathroom and kept it away from our
> > Pesach dishes.
>
> This was adult people-food.
Even so, there is no reason to be concerned about owning kitniyos. If you
keep it somewhere where you aren't accidentally going to eat it, there is
absolutely no reason to remove it, whether it be for children or adults.
JO
> --
> Julianne Frances Haugh Life is either a daring adventure
> txj...@austin.rr.com or nothing at all.
> -- Helen Keller
>
YZK
txj...@austin.rr.com wrote:
> On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left (in the?) pantry,
> next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> controversy that way.
>
Actually, there's no controversy at all. Kitniyot, which include rice,
corn, and various peas and beans, are not chametz at all, and need not
be hidden away, much less sold.
Yaakov K.
cindys
"YZK" <yaa...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3EA3346C...@earthlink.net...
In a nutshell, that is the point. However, there is a bigger point. The
bigger point is that I don't think Julie's guests truly understood the
distinction between possessing kitniyos and possessing chametz. While most
of us can probably define "what is chametz," "what is kitniyos," I think a
lot of us don't understand the differences in terms of halachic
ramifications (e.g. one is permitted to possess kitniyos on Pesach but not
chametz, one is permitted to derive benefit from kitniyos but not chametz).
And this issue is not limited to kitniyos versus chametz. The same could
apply to many of the threads from the past couple of weeks: Chano's list of
what the *machmerim* do, gebrokts, the Pesach milk, Rabbi Blumenkrantz and
the mushrooms, an Ashkenazic Jew attending a Sephardic seder where kitniyos
may be served, eating roast meat at the seder, and the *important
households* who don't use the oven for 24 hours after it's been kashered.
Sometimes, it's not so easy to know what's the minhag (custom), what's the
halacha (law), what's the chumrah (stringency), and what's the shtuss
(foolishness), especially for people who are new (or maybe not so new) to
Judaism. Then, of course, there's the overlap (minhag Yisrael, torah hee,
and minhag shtuss).
After Pesach, when I have more time, I would like to elaborate on this
subject a little more, but for now, any thoughts? (Other than CYLOR, which
is always the bottom line)
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Boruch Tkatch
(madero62) wrote:
>I am allergic to corn, and I need some help. I heard that all Kosher
>for Passover foods are corn-free. Is that true?
I can't fully answer the question, but I'll give some background.
Ashkenazic Jewry does not eat legumes on Passover. This includes corn.
So, any food certified as kosher for Passover by an Ashkenzic
certifying agency would have to be corn free. For example, Coca Cola
uses both sugar and corn syrup as a sweetner, however, Kosher for
Passover Coca Cola only uses sugar.
I would assume, therefore, that anything certified as Kosher for
Passover by the Ashkenazic certifying agencies, such as the OU, OK,
star-k, etc.. would be corn free. Maybe someone else can better answer
the question. Though the actually agencies generally are very eager to
answer any such questions, whether by phone or email.
> This is important to me because most processed foods normally
> contain corn (corn syrup, corn starch, etc.).
As do many napkins, paper towels, and similar things. There is a good
book by Rabbi Blumenkranz that actually goes through listings,
including which is manufactured where, and which factory it should be
from.
> If all Kosher for Passover foods are corn-free, I can stock up on corn-free
> food for the year. I know that you can tell whether food is Kosher for
> Passover by the letters KP or OU-P on the label.
OU-P is kosher for passover by the OU. KP can be put down by anyone,
and means very little. Especially now that the Supreme Court refused
to hear the the case about New York's Kosher law.
>Is there anything else that I should be looking for? It just so
>happens that I am allergic to dairy products (cow's milk) also. I hear
>that Kosher for Passover foods are also supposed to be dairy-free.
Kosher food, for Passover or not, is usually labeled if it is
non-dairy. This is not always true, however. The OU puts OU-Glatt or
OU-Meat if there is meat, OU-Fish if it contains fish, and usually
OU-D or OU-DE if it uses Dairy Equipment, or just Dairy. Note that
something that is dairy will say OU-D (as opposed to OU-DE), whereas
if it uses Dairy Equipment it may say OU-D, even when it doesn't
contain a milk product.
I believe that if something is not intrinsically dairy, like
chocalate, it will say OU-D if it is dairy. Contact the OU for more
information. <URL:http://www.ou.org>. Some things say OU-Pareve, to
show that they contain no fish, meat, or milk. But, IIRC, that is up
to the company, whether they want it on the label or not.
>That is another reason that I want to stock up on Kosher for Passover.
>Does anybody make Kosher for Passover year round?
Well, I did with Maneshewich's Passover Gold Pizza mix. It made
horrible pizza, but the crust with some sauce was delicious. :-)
Good luck in your endeavor.
Boruch
Joel Shurkin
I think next year I'm going to be sephardic.
j
>
>
>>That is another reason that I want to stock up on Kosher for Passover.
>>Does anybody make Kosher for Passover year round? Any suggestions will
>>be appreciated.
>>
>>Thank You,
>>
>>made...@yahoo.com
>
>
--
Joel Shurkin
Johns Hopkins Medicine
---------------
“It isn’t necessary to have relatives in Kansas City to be unhappy.”
Groucho Marx
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
>> > > > for Passover foods are corn-free.
>> > >
>> > > The vast majority of them are, but some of them aren't. Sephardic Jews
>> are
>> > > permitted to have corn products on Passover.
>> >
>> > What about Jews whose ancestors observed minhag wasp? ;-)
>> -----------
>> I think they usually follow the traditions of their adopted Jewish
>> communities or of the rabbi who oversees their conversions :-)
>
Well, you both used smileys so the sarcasm was easily understood.
> It's just that every time I see a discussion about minhag I have
> this almost uncontrollable urge to ask about minhag waspim.
Why not ask your LWR?
> On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
> next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> controversy that way.
But also less room for discussion.
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
May Mikhah Shemu'el ben Lei'ah Yesharah (Michah Berger) have 1 2!
cindys
<txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3EAD3306...@austin.rr.com...
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>
> > > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> > > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
> > > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> > > controversy that way.
> >
> > But also less room for discussion.
>
> coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
-----------
But the point is that it is perfectly permissible for you to have kitniyos
in your pantry during Pesach. If your guests object to it, and won't eat at
your home because of it, it's because they don't understand the halacha.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Yisroel Markov
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> said:
[snip]
>In a nutshell, that is the point. However, there is a bigger point. The
>bigger point is that I don't think Julie's guests truly understood the
>distinction between possessing kitniyos and possessing chametz. While most
>of us can probably define "what is chametz," "what is kitniyos," I think a
>lot of us don't understand the differences in terms of halachic
>ramifications (e.g. one is permitted to possess kitniyos on Pesach but not
>chametz, one is permitted to derive benefit from kitniyos but not chametz).
>
>And this issue is not limited to kitniyos versus chametz. The same could
>apply to many of the threads from the past couple of weeks: Chano's list of
>what the *machmerim* do, gebrokts, the Pesach milk, Rabbi Blumenkrantz and
>the mushrooms, an Ashkenazic Jew attending a Sephardic seder where kitniyos
>may be served, eating roast meat at the seder, and the *important
>households* who don't use the oven for 24 hours after it's been kashered.
I clarified this one with the lady in question. I did hear it wrong -
what they do is wait 24 hours between using anything with hametz for
the last time and koshering it, which is AFAIK standard practice with
utensils that come in contact with hot foodstuffs - but they do the
same with kitchen counters, tables and everything else that is not
actually kashered, but rather covered over. This created a major
inconvenience for her, as it forced her not to use the kitchen for a
whole day, and then cook for 3 days the night before the yom tov.
On the strength of this apparent nonsense, my wife made me wait 24
hours with the sink, then kasher it with boiling water, and then put
in a plastic insert so as not to actually use the newly-kashered sink!
>Sometimes, it's not so easy to know what's the minhag (custom), what's the
>halacha (law), what's the chumrah (stringency), and what's the shtuss
>(foolishness), especially for people who are new (or maybe not so new) to
>Judaism. Then, of course, there's the overlap (minhag Yisrael, torah hee,
>and minhag shtuss).
>
>After Pesach, when I have more time, I would like to elaborate on this
>subject a little more, but for now, any thoughts? (Other than CYLOR, which
>is always the bottom line)
>Best regards,
>---Cindy S.
>
Yisroel Markov Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for unbiased analysis of the world DNRC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
cindys
<txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3EADE00A...@austin.rr.com...
>
> And no, the woman who made the comments about kitniyos understands
> halacha quite well. However, as I very likely misunderstand halacha,
> making anything involving kitniyos in my kitchen renders it all
> rather un-kasher l'pesach for her, no?
It's my understanding that this is a machlokes (halachic debate). When I
asked the rav of one of my classes, he said it was "not so simple" and that
a book of several inches of thickness had been written on the subject. When
my father died a few days before Passover (2 years ago), my Sephardic
friend's rabbi told her not to bring food to my house unless I didn't have
anybody else to provide food for me. That having been said, there is big
difference between preparing kitniyos in your kitchen during Pesach and
merely having a sealed box of them in your pantry.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
>
> She's quite the bud, too -- she's promised to help me kasher all
> my goodies in another month or three. The nearest mikveh is some
> 15 miles from here. But we've got a really nice spring fed pond
> just around the corner that I think is going to be introduced to
> my Lenox china sooner or later.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> txj...@austin.rr.com writes:
>> > cindys wrote:
>> >> <txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >> > cindys wrote:
>> >> > > "madero62" <made...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >
>> >> > > > I am allergic to corn, and I need some help. I heard that all Kosher
>> >> > > > for Passover foods are corn-free.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The vast majority of them are, but some of them aren't.
>> >> > > Sephardic Jews are permitted to have corn products on Passover.
>> >> >
>> >> > What about Jews whose ancestors observed minhag wasp? ;-)
>> >> -----------
>> >> I think they usually follow the traditions of their adopted Jewish
>> >> communities or of the rabbi who oversees their conversions :-)
>> >
>> > Oh, I knew that much.
>>
>> Well, you both used smileys so the sarcasm was easily understood.
>>
>> > It's just that every time I see a discussion about minhag I have
>> > this almost uncontrollable urge to ask about minhag waspim.
>>
>> Why not ask your LWR?
>
> my "Local WASP Rector".
Will the food be KLW?
>> > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
>> > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
>> > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
>> > controversy that way.
>>
>> But also less room for discussion.
>
> Discussion is fun, but discussion which leads to people not
> coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
You're right. Remove it.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> <txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>
>> > > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
>> > > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
>> > > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
>> > > controversy that way.
>> >
>> > But also less room for discussion.
>>
>> Discussion is fun, but discussion which leads to people not
>> coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
> -----------
> But the point is that it is perfectly permissible for you to have kitniyos
> in your pantry during Pesach. If your guests object to it, and won't eat at
> your home because of it, it's because they don't understand the halacha.
So you would limit Julie's guest list to those who _do_
"understand the halacha"? Sounds too constricting to me.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
>> > > > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
>> > > > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
>> > > > controversy that way.
>> > >
>> > > But also less room for discussion.
>> >
>> > Discussion is fun, but discussion which leads to people not
>> > coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
>> -----------
>> But the point is that it is perfectly permissible for you to have kitniyos
>> in your pantry during Pesach. If your guests object to it, and won't eat at
>> your home because of it, it's because they don't understand the halacha.
>
> give permission to you to refer to me in such terms).
LOL!
> There's the "let's argue loudly and give our brains a good
> stretching!" side and then there's the "let's all get along
> and never have any friction between us" side.
>
> The later tends to make decisions about people coming over for
> dinner. (While the former tends to make decisions about USENET
> posting topics ;-)
We've noticed. <drily>
> And no, the woman who made the comments about kitniyos understands
> halacha quite well. However, as I very likely misunderstand halacha,
> making anything involving kitniyos in my kitchen renders it all
> rather un-kasher l'pesach for her, no?
Did you _make_ anything with the kitniyot? Or was she afraid, that
since it was available, you would/might?
> She's quite the bud, too -- she's promised to help me kasher all
> my goodies in another month or three. The nearest mikveh is some
> 15 miles from here. But we've got a really nice spring fed pond
> just around the corner that I think is going to be introduced to
> my Lenox china sooner or later.
Better make it later. If you make it too much "sooner" you'll have
to do it all over again, "later".
Garry
And does everyone act the same way? And does it then become the
adopted custom that's binding on everyone? And thus new halacha is
created by people who don't understand the old one?
_______________________________________
A haggadah that feeds the hungry! A carefully translated and revised version of the Haggadah, handsomely printed.
The entire purchase price goes to charity. http://www.matzoh.net/hagg/main.html
Feel free to contact me thru matzoh.net. Garry
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> "cindys"<cst...@rochester.rr.com> said:
>
> I clarified this one with the lady in question. I did hear it wrong -
> what they do is wait 24 hours between using anything with hametz for
> the last time and koshering it, which is AFAIK standard practice with
> utensils that come in contact with hot foodstuffs - but they do the
> same with kitchen counters, tables and everything else that is not
> actually kashered, but rather covered over. This created a major
> inconvenience for her, as it forced her not to use the kitchen for a
> whole day, and then cook for 3 days the night before the yom tov.
>
> On the strength of this apparent nonsense, my wife made me wait 24
> hours with the sink, then kasher it with boiling water, and then put
> in a plastic insert so as not to actually use the newly-kashered sink!
Aha. This is _exactly_ what I do. Kasher sinks and counter tops
_after_ waiting 24 hours. _Then_ I cover same sinks and counter tops.
I "only" kasher by pouring boiling water. If I would kasher with hot
metal _besides_ I might not cover them.
So I would not call it "apparent nonsense".
To avoid the rush you describe at the end of your post, you might
consider starting earlier. Of couse, that presents a different set of
problems, espescially with little kids in the house. But did she need
to cook for all three days in one night? It is permitted to cook on
Yom Tov for that day.
cindys
<mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
news:2003Apr2...@mm.huji.ac.il...
> "cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
> > <txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> >> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >>
> >> > > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
> >> > > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
> >> > > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
> >> > > controversy that way.
> >> >
> >> > But also less room for discussion.
> >>
> >> Discussion is fun, but discussion which leads to people not
> >> coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
> > -----------
> > But the point is that it is perfectly permissible for you to have
kitniyos
> > in your pantry during Pesach. If your guests object to it, and won't eat
at
> > your home because of it, it's because they don't understand the halacha.
>
> So you would limit Julie's guest list to those who _do_
> "understand the halacha"? Sounds too constricting to me.
All I said was that if the guests objected to the kitniyos in the pantry, it
was because they incorrectly believed that it to be halachically forbidden
to possess kitniyos on Pesach (i.e. they didn't understand the halacha). I
never said anything about limiting the guest list.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Chano
[snip]
But did she need
> to cook for all three days in one night? It is permitted to cook on
> Yom Tov for that day.
>
> Moshe Schorr
Hey! Wait a minute Moshe, the women want to enjoy yom tov too, ya know! They
don't want to spend it in the kitchen. :-)
Chano
Fred Rosenblatt
In Los Angeles the second day didn't begin until after 8:30 pm (the later time),
which is too late to begin cooking for the seder. Most of the prep has to
be done before yom tov, the actual cooking is the least of it.
Yisroel Markov
>ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) writes:
>> "cindys"<cst...@rochester.rr.com> said:
>>
>> I clarified this one with the lady in question. I did hear it wrong -
>> what they do is wait 24 hours between using anything with hametz for
>> the last time and koshering it, which is AFAIK standard practice with
>> utensils that come in contact with hot foodstuffs - but they do the
>> same with kitchen counters, tables and everything else that is not
>> actually kashered, but rather covered over. This created a major
>> inconvenience for her, as it forced her not to use the kitchen for a
>> whole day, and then cook for 3 days the night before the yom tov.
>>
>> On the strength of this apparent nonsense, my wife made me wait 24
>> hours with the sink, then kasher it with boiling water, and then put
>> in a plastic insert so as not to actually use the newly-kashered sink!
>
>Aha. This is _exactly_ what I do. Kasher sinks and counter tops
>_after_ waiting 24 hours. _Then_ I cover same sinks and counter tops.
>I "only" kasher by pouring boiling water. If I would kasher with hot
>metal _besides_ I might not cover them.
What do you mean by "hot metal?" I thought there were only two methods
- hagala (boiling water) and libun (fire, e.g. a blowtorch).
>So I would not call it "apparent nonsense".
The point is, did the boiling water kasher it or not? If yes, why
cover it? If no, why not just clean, cover and not bother kashering?
BTW, do you have metal or granite countertops? I thought anything else
was non-kasherable, at least for Pesakh.
>To avoid the rush you describe at the end of your post, you might
>consider starting earlier.
*We* did start early (Sunday). I'm talking about someone else.
>Of couse, that presents a different set of
>problems, espescially with little kids in the house. But did she need
>to cook for all three days in one night? It is permitted to cook on
>Yom Tov for that day.
Except nobody wants to do it.
cindys
<txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3EAE801C...@austin.rr.com...
> cindys wrote:
> >
> > <txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:3EADE00A...@austin.rr.com...
> > > And no, the woman who made the comments about kitniyos understands
> > > halacha quite well. However, as I very likely misunderstand halacha,
> > > making anything involving kitniyos in my kitchen renders it all
> > > rather un-kasher l'pesach for her, no?
> >
> > It's my understanding that this is a machlokes (halachic debate). When I
> > asked the rav of one of my classes, he said it was "not so simple" and
that
> > a book of several inches of thickness had been written on the subject.
When
> > my father died a few days before Passover (2 years ago), my Sephardic
> > friend's rabbi told her not to bring food to my house unless I didn't
have
> > anybody else to provide food for me. That having been said, there is big
> > difference between preparing kitniyos in your kitchen during Pesach and
> > merely having a sealed box of them in your pantry.
>
> herb dish to go with the yummy BBQ chicken and sausage."
>
> Went with the equally yummy matzah stuffing instead.
>
> And I finished off the last of the matzah last night. Matzah
> and sliced turkey breast is a great late night snack.
-----------
Okay. So the REAL situation was that you intended to prepare and serve
kitniyos (and would have had the woman not objected). This is completely
different from merely having them in your possession (as a sealed box in the
cupboard). The woman now has the (very reasonable) concern that even if you
didn't serve the kitniyos to her, clearly you (did or would) prepare and
serve kitniyos on your Pesach pots and pans. That does get rather sticky
(no pun intended :-) or shall we say it's a bean of a different color? I
believe the situation now falls into the category of CYLOR (if you want a
real psak). However, if you don't mind having the Cindy S. psak (which is
the same as the Julie psak): If you want your friends to eat at your house,
and they object to the kitniyos, ditch the kitniyos (as a courtesy). Now
what is this about the sausage?????
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Art Werschulz
"cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
> Now what is this about the sausage?????
What's the problem with sausage? Best had OU-P hot and sweet Italian
sausages this year. Unfortunately, we never got a chance to use them
during Pesach, so they're languishing in the freezer for now.
Hmmm ... I'm now trying to figure out how my chicken breast and hot
sausage casserole with green peppers and onions would've gone over at
the seder. (Recipe available on request.)
--
Art Werschulz (8-{)} "Metaphors be with you." -- bumper sticker
GCS/M (GAT): d? -p+ c++ l u+(-) e--- m* s n+ h f g+ w+ t++ r- y?
Internet: a...@cs.columbia.edu<a href="http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~agw/">WWW</a>
ATTnet: Columbia U. (212) 939-7061, Fordham U. (212) 636-6325
Fred Rosenblatt
> Hi.
>
> "cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
>
> > Now what is this about the sausage?????
>
> What's the problem with sausage? Best had OU-P hot and sweet Italian
> sausages this year. Unfortunately, we never got a chance to use them
> during Pesach, so they're languishing in the freezer for now.
>
> Hmmm ... I'm now trying to figure out how my chicken breast and hot
> sausage casserole with green peppers and onions would've gone over at
> the seder. (Recipe available on request.)
Request.
Art Werschulz
fre...@juno.com (Fred Rosenblatt) writes:
> > Hmmm ... I'm now trying to figure out how my chicken breast and hot
> > sausage casserole with green peppers and onions would've gone over at
> > the seder. (Recipe available on request.)
>
> Request.
File this as another of Art's Easy Recipes (tm). This goes along with
Art's Ridiculously Easy Chicken, Almonds, and Mandarin Oranges
Art's Obscenely Easy Brisket
Art's Pretty Easy Cholent (with or without Pumpkin)
Note that I'm not particular makpid on measurements. You can probably
insert your own joke here; I'm sure Rav Josh knows a few (e.g., the
knaidelach joke). Perhaps if I were a baker, I would be forced to
concede the usefulness of measurements, but OTOH I've never
successfully baked anything that didn't start with an Oronoke Farms
Pie Shell or a cake mix.
Anyway ... Art's Shamelessly Easy Chicken and Sausage Casserole:
(1) Either microwave or saute (in olive oil) the sausages to remove
the grease. Drain the sausages well, and cut into smaller pieces.
Clean the frying pan (if you used same).
(2) Saute some chicken filets in olive oil. Add appropriate spices
(such as white pepper, bay leaves, oregano, parsely, [no sage]
rosemary, thyme) to taste. Remove to a casserole.
(3) Saute some mushrooms, green peppers, and onions in the pan (add
more olive oil, as needed).
(4) Place the mushrooms, green peppers, onions, and sausages over the
chicken filets.
(5) Deglaze the frying pan with wine or cooking wine; I would suggest
sherry or red wine. Pour into casserole.
(6) Maybe add more wine, so that there's enough liquid in the
casserole.
(7) Bake at 300 degrees (Fahrenheit!) for an hour.
Variation: Add some tomato sauce, tomato paste, or spaghetti sauce if you
like.
Another variation: Before you add the chicken to the casserole, throw
in a cup or two of rice. [Clearly, this variation is not suitable for
Pesach if you're Asheknazi.] You'll need a bit more liquid (wine) in
this case. Presto ... you now have an Italianesque arroz con pollo.
Enjoy. This makes a good Shabbat dish during non-hot weather.
Depending on your personal tastes, this may be too heavy to eat during
the summer.
BTW, if anybody cares, I will *not* be making this for the next couple
of weeks, since we just started the Atkins Diet Program. We're
allowing ourselves the obvious modification [fancy way to say "cheat"]
of eating a minimal amount of challah (actually, we're going to buy
challah rolls to keep ourselves on the straight-and-narrow) three
times on Shabbatot; frankly, I'm looking forward to same with *great*
anticipation.
BAC...@vms.huji.ac.il
>From: Art Werschulz <a...@cs.columbia.edu>
>Subject:Re: Are all Kosher for Passover foods corn-free?
>Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 17:38:14 +0000 (UTC)
>Message-ID:<ylahe8e...@smolyak.cs.columbia.edu>
>Hi.
>
>fre...@juno.com (Fred Rosenblatt) writes:
>
>> > Hmmm ... I'm now trying to figure out how my chicken breast and hot
>> > sausage casserole with green peppers and onions would've gone over at
>> > the seder. (Recipe available on request.)
>>
>> Request.
>
>File this as another of Art's Easy Recipes (tm). This goes along with
>
> Art's Ridiculously Easy Chicken, Almonds, and Mandarin Oranges
> Art's Obscenely Easy Brisket
> Art's Pretty Easy Cholent (with or without Pumpkin)
>
>Note that I'm not particular makpid on measurements. You can probably
>insert your own joke here; I'm sure Rav Josh knows a few (e.g., the
>knaidelach joke). Perhaps if I were a baker, I would be forced to
Jeffrey Nathan, move over !
>concede the usefulness of measurements, but OTOH I've never
>successfully baked anything that didn't start with an Oronoke Farms
>Pie Shell or a cake mix.
>
We interrupt this program to bring you a special news bulletin: the
renowned French chef Joel Robuchon just jumped out of his 8th story
apartment after reading SCJM :-)
Gevaldig !
Josh
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>txj...@austin.rr.com writes:
>>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>>> txj...@austin.rr.com writes:
>>>> > cindys wrote:
>>>> >> <txj...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>> >> > cindys wrote:
>>>> >> > > "madero62" <made...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> >
>>>> >> > > > I am allergic to corn, and I need some help. I heard
>>>> >> > > > that all Kosher for Passover foods are corn-free.
snip
>>>> > On the other hand, after the discussion with the couple we had
>>>> > over yesterday about the corn and rice which I left pantry,
>>>> > next year it's going to be removed. Much less room for
>>>> > controversy that way.
>>>>
>>>> But also less room for discussion.
>>>
>>> Discussion is fun, but discussion which leads to people not
>>> coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
>>
>>You're right. Remove it.
>
> And does everyone act the same way?
AFAIK, all Ashkenazim remove the kitniyot from the pantry and kitchen.
Unless it is needed for an infant, in which case it is clearly labeled
and handled seperately.
So the answer to your first question apparently is "yes".
> And does it then become the adopted custom that's binding on
> everyone? And thus new halacha is created by people who don't
> understand the old one?
You bring up a good point. It reminds me of Jinathan Baker's post
complaining of "rule by the 'mob'". You were more polite. :-)
I though a bit about his point. I'll use your post to respond to his.
There _are_ halachot whose sole basis is "Yisrael kedoshim..." - the
"holy" Jewish People accepted it upon themselves. A person looking at
it from a different angle, could easily call it "mob" rule. But
apparently, is _is_ a valid means of developing a _stricter_ "new
halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> <mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
Of course. I just pointed out the _praticle_ application for Julie if
she would follow your post.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> txj...@austin.rr.com writes:
>
>> > LOL! In another post I mentioned my plans to have lunch with
>> > my "Local WASP Rector".
>>
>> Will the food be KLW?
>
> organ meat, is kasher l'waspim.
Oy, why are just those three off-limits? Also, I seem to recall
threads discussing brain as a food. I know that halachicaly, if the
animal is kosher so are those parts. (OK Josh, shoot me down.)
Unless of course I don't know what "organ meat" is.
>> > Discussion is fun, but discussion which leads to people not
>> > coming over during Pesach doesn't sound all that fun.
>>
>> You're right. Remove it.
>
> Especially someone like her and her husband. Very cool peeps.
You see lucky with your friends.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
>>>give permission to you to refer to me in such terms).
>>
>>
>> LOL!
>
> permitted forms of address? Off the auto-mod list with
> you, I say!
Hmm. I'm having an e-mail discussion withsomeone who has left this
Newsgroup <sigh>. One of his complaints is that there's little humor
anymore. I suggested that it _might_ be because the modration policy
has produced an _atmosphere_, that humor was not welcome. He denied
that the Charter forbade it. Which is true. But that fact that Julie
could make such a joke, seems to imply that such a "feeling" does
exist. More's the pity.
>>>The later tends to make decisions about people coming over for
>>>dinner. (While the former tends to make decisions about USENET
>>>posting topics ;-)
>>
>> We've noticed. <drily>
>
> Have you at least noticed that the yetzer h'ra is getting
> the keyboard less often these days?
I've been off for a while so it's hard to comment.
>>>And no, the woman who made the comments about kitniyos understands
>>>halacha quite well. However, as I very likely misunderstand halacha,
>>>making anything involving kitniyos in my kitchen renders it all
>>>rather un-kasher l'pesach for her, no?
>>
>> Did you _make_ anything with the kitniyot? Or was she afraid, that
>> since it was available, you would/might?
>
> As I mentioned elsewhere, she wasn't afraid without reason
> that I might. I =had= intended on making rice to go with
> the BBQ.
So my question was right on-target.
>>>She's quite the bud, too -- she's promised to help me kasher all
>>>my goodies in another month or three. The nearest mikveh is some
>>>15 miles from here. But we've got a really nice spring fed pond
>>>just around the corner that I think is going to be introduced to
>>>my Lenox china sooner or later.
>>
>> Better make it later. If you make it too much "sooner" you'll have
>> to do it all over again, "later".
>
> We'll continue to disagree on this point.
Here you go getting serious again. What do you mean by "continue to
disagree". If you mean that you may toivel your china even before
your gerus, _even though_ you know that you will have to toivel it
again afterwards, I will give you no argument. _But_ if you maintain
that if you toivel it before, you will not _need_ to toivel it
afterwards, then indeed we disagree strongly. I wonder though what
your halachic basis would be for your position.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
>> > "cindys"<cst...@rochester.rr.com> said:
>
> [snip]
>
>> But did she need to cook for all three days in one night? It is
>> permitted to cook on Yom Tov for that day.
>
> know! They don't want to spend it in the kitchen. :-)
I know. My wife rarely cooked the main meal on Yom Tov itself. I was
_replying_ to Yisroel whose wife complained about needing to cook for
three days all at once. I just wanted to point out an alternative.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il said:
>>ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) writes:
>>> "cindys"<cst...@rochester.rr.com> said:
>>>
>>> I clarified this one with the lady in question. I did hear it wrong -
>>> what they do is wait 24 hours between using anything with hametz for
>>> the last time and koshering it, which is AFAIK standard practice with
>>> utensils that come in contact with hot foodstuffs - but they do the
>>> same with kitchen counters, tables and everything else that is not
>>> actually kashered, but rather covered over. This created a major
>>> inconvenience for her, as it forced her not to use the kitchen for a
>>> whole day, and then cook for 3 days the night before the yom tov.
>>>
>>> On the strength of this apparent nonsense, my wife made me wait 24
>>> hours with the sink, then kasher it with boiling water, and then put
>>> in a plastic insert so as not to actually use the newly-kashered sink!
>>
>>Aha. This is _exactly_ what I do. Kasher sinks and counter tops
>>_after_ waiting 24 hours. _Then_ I cover same sinks and counter tops.
>>I "only" kasher by pouring boiling water. If I would kasher with hot
>>metal _besides_ I might not cover them.
>
> What do you mean by "hot metal?" I thought there were only two methods
> - hagala (boiling water) and libun (fire, e.g. a blowtorch).
I never investigated further, but maybe if you use red-hot stones or
metal, it might be considered libun.
>>So I would not call it "apparent nonsense".
>
> The point is, did the boiling water kasher it or not? If yes, why
> cover it? If no, why not just clean, cover and not bother kashering?
Maybe. IOW, I kasher as if it helps, and I cover as if I didn't
kasher. Maybe _that's_ the "apparent nonsense". <shrug>
> BTW, do you have metal or granite countertops? I thought anything
> else was non-kasherable, at least for Pesakh.
Granite, AFAIK. Or maybe, I was taught this method (kashering _and_
covering) in the States where countertops may not be either.
>>To avoid the rush you describe at the end of your post, you might
>>consider starting earlier.
>
> *We* did start early (Sunday). I'm talking about someone else.
>
>>Of couse, that presents a different set of
>>problems, espescially with little kids in the house. But did she need
>>to cook for all three days in one night? It is permitted to cook on
>>Yom Tov for that day.
>
> Except nobody wants to do it.
I know. It was just a "suggestion".
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
> txj...@austin.rr.com writes:
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>> txj...@austin.rr.com writes:
>>
>>> > LOL! In another post I mentioned my plans to have lunch with
>>> > my "Local WASP Rector".
>>>
>>> Will the food be KLW?
>>
>> I believe most foods, with the exception of tripe, brain and
>> organ meat, is kasher l'waspim.
>
> Oy, why are just those three off-limits? Also, I seem to recall
> threads discussing brain as a food. I know that halachicaly, if the
> animal is kosher so are those parts. (OK Josh, shoot me down.)
> Unless of course I don't know what "organ meat" is.
Of course these parts are kosher (assuming that tripe is the stomach).
[Since the outbreak of Mad Cow disease, brain is no longer being allowed
for sale in butcher stores worldwide]
There are many old Jewish recipes for organ meat: lung, intestine [what
do you think real KISHKE is ?], etc.
Josh
Garry
>Garry <s...@spam.com> writes:
<snip>
>> And does it then become the adopted custom that's binding on
>> everyone? And thus new halacha is created by people who don't
>> understand the old one?
>
>You bring up a good point. It reminds me of Jinathan Baker's post
>complaining of "rule by the 'mob'". You were more polite. :-)
>
>I though a bit about his point. I'll use your post to respond to his.
>There _are_ halachot whose sole basis is "Yisrael kedoshim..." - the
>"holy" Jewish People accepted it upon themselves. A person looking at
>it from a different angle, could easily call it "mob" rule. But
>apparently, is _is_ a valid means of developing a _stricter_ "new
>halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
So in a few centuries more, we'll be down to apples and walnuts . But
wait-- walnuts can be made into oil. Some people might confuse them
with kitniot, and won't eat at our house if we have them on the table.
So I guess it's down to apples...
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>Garry <s...@spam.com> writes:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> And does it then become the adopted custom that's binding on
>>> everyone? And thus new halacha is created by people who don't
>>> understand the old one?
>>
>>You bring up a good point. It reminds me of Jinathan Baker's post
>>complaining of "rule by the 'mob'". You were more polite. :-)
>>
>>I though a bit about his point. I'll use your post to respond to his.
>>There _are_ halachot whose sole basis is "Yisrael kedoshim..." - the
>>"holy" Jewish People accepted it upon themselves. A person looking at
>>it from a different angle, could easily call it "mob" rule. But
>>apparently, is _is_ a valid means of developing a _stricter_ "new
>>halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
>>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
>
> So in a few centuries more, we'll be down to apples and walnuts . But
> wait-- walnuts can be made into oil. Some people might confuse them
> with kitniot, and won't eat at our house if we have them on the table.
> So I guess it's down to apples...
Waddayu mean "in a few centuries"? Didn't you see the post describing
the Pesach menu? Eggs and potatoes, eggs and potatoes, eggs and
potatoes. Then, for variety, you can have some potatoes and eggs!
Garry
>Garry <s...@spam.com> writes:
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>>Garry <s...@spam.com> writes:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> And does it then become the adopted custom that's binding on
>>>> everyone? And thus new halacha is created by people who don't
>>>> understand the old one?
>>>
>>>You bring up a good point. It reminds me of Jinathan Baker's post
>>>complaining of "rule by the 'mob'". You were more polite. :-)
>>>
>>>I though a bit about his point. I'll use your post to respond to his.
>>>There _are_ halachot whose sole basis is "Yisrael kedoshim..." - the
>>>"holy" Jewish People accepted it upon themselves. A person looking at
>>>it from a different angle, could easily call it "mob" rule. But
>>>apparently, is _is_ a valid means of developing a _stricter_ "new
>>>halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
>>>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
>>
>> So in a few centuries more, we'll be down to apples and walnuts . But
>> wait-- walnuts can be made into oil. Some people might confuse them
>> with kitniot, and won't eat at our house if we have them on the table.
>> So I guess it's down to apples...
>
>Waddayu mean "in a few centuries"? Didn't you see the post describing
>the Pesach menu? Eggs and potatoes, eggs and potatoes, eggs and
>potatoes. Then, for variety, you can have some potatoes and eggs!
>
On shabbos, for a treat, potato-egg kugel.
Just pray that no one finds a way to extract oil from potatos...
>Moshe Schorr
>It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
>May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
>May Mikhah Shemu'el ben Lei'ah Yesharah (Michah Berger) have 1 2!
_______________________________________
janet rosenbaum
>halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
Unfortunately, this type of repeal only includes the voices of the
observant. As halacha becomes stricter and stricter, it becomes more out
of reach for the non-observant (and sounds sillier to them as well).
Janet
janet rosenbaum
>Just pray that no one finds a way to extract oil from potatos...
Actually, the Rema says that potatoes would have been asur if they had
known about them when the Ashkenazim stopped eating kitniyot.
Janet
Yisroel Markov
That's it, exactly. What's the rationale for doing so?
[snip]
Garry
The principle "belt and suspenders" comes to mind.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>Garry <s...@spam.com> writes:
>>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>>>Garry <s...@spam.com> writes:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> And does it then become the adopted custom that's binding on
>>>>> everyone? And thus new halacha is created by people who don't
>>>>> understand the old one?
>>>>
>>>>You bring up a good point. It reminds me of Jinathan Baker's post
>>>>complaining of "rule by the 'mob'". You were more polite. :-)
>>>>
>>>>I though a bit about his point. I'll use your post to respond to his.
>>>>There _are_ halachot whose sole basis is "Yisrael kedoshim..." - the
>>>>"holy" Jewish People accepted it upon themselves. A person looking at
>>>>it from a different angle, could easily call it "mob" rule. But
>>>>apparently, is _is_ a valid means of developing a _stricter_ "new
>>>>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
>>>
>>> wait-- walnuts can be made into oil. Some people might confuse them
>>> with kitniot, and won't eat at our house if we have them on the table.
>>> So I guess it's down to apples...
>>
>>Waddayu mean "in a few centuries"? Didn't you see the post describing
>>the Pesach menu? Eggs and potatoes, eggs and potatoes, eggs and
>>potatoes. Then, for variety, you can have some potatoes and eggs!
>>
> On shabbos, for a treat, potato-egg kugel.
>
ROTFLOL!
Actualy, one halachic descisor _did_ want to add potatos to the
kitniyot rubric. But it was pointed out to him that it was "potatoes
or starve", so he relented.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
Hmm, you bring up a good point. But think about it. If a group is not
"really" interested in keeping halacha (that's how I define
"non-observant") then why _should_ their opinion be considered in
determining halacha.
OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
big problem of _education_.
Anybody else want to comment?
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il said:
>>ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) writes:
>>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il said:
>>>>ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) writes:
>>>>> "cindys"<cst...@rochester.rr.com> said:
snip
>>> The point is, did the boiling water kasher it or not? If yes, why
>>> cover it? If no, why not just clean, cover and not bother kashering?
>>
>>Maybe. IOW, I kasher as if it helps, and I cover as if I didn't
>>kasher. Maybe _that's_ the "apparent nonsense". <shrug>
>
> That's it, exactly. What's the rationale for doing so?
Dunno, that's what I was taught., Maybe because it's Pesach, we use
_both_ "belt and suspenders". Or maybe because we're afraid the
covering may come off so the counter should be kashered. But OTOH
maybe the kashering wasn't too good so we cover.
Remember, we're talking about kitchen counters where most of the
food preparation gets done. And the rules of Pesach are stricter
than all year long. No "1 in 60" rule.
Josh?
Yisroel Markov
>jero...@hcs.harvard.edu (janet rosenbaum) writes:
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il writes:
>>>halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
>>>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
>>
>> Unfortunately, this type of repeal only includes the voices of the
>> observant. As halacha becomes stricter and stricter, it becomes
>> more out of reach for the non-observant (and sounds sillier to
>> them as well).
>
>Hmm, you bring up a good point. But think about it. If a group is not
>"really" interested in keeping halacha (that's how I define
>"non-observant") then why _should_ their opinion be considered in
>determining halacha.
>
>OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
>and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
>big problem of _education_.
>
>Anybody else want to comment?
It's an old problem - how to encourage people to actively find out why
they're doing things?
Jewish Action, the magazine of the OU, has a section called
"Legal-Ease: What's the Truth about..." in which they explore common
practices, and often report rather uncommon halakhot. The upshot,
nearly always, is that much of the observant world has this particular
practice wrong. I wish this were more common. Such sections ought to
appear in shul bulletins, be taught between minha and maariv,
mentioned in drashot, etc...
Education, education, education.
Jess Olson
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>
> > OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
> > and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
> > big problem of _education_.
> >
> > Anybody else want to comment?
>
> Yes. How do people go about educating the Orthododx that they
> are looking sillier and sillier?
And I'd say the education should be given to those who think the Orthodox
should _care_ how "people" think they look. In my mind it's not the
Orthodox who have a problem here.
JO
> --
> Julianne Frances Haugh Life is either a daring adventure
> txj...@austin.rr.com or nothing at all.
> -- Helen Keller
>
cindys
"Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.44.030506...@elaine30.Stanford.EDU...
> On Tue, 6 May 2003, Julie wrote:
>
> > mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >
> > > OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
> > > and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
> > > big problem of _education_.
> > >
> > > Anybody else want to comment?
> >
> > Yes. How do people go about educating the Orthododx that they
> > are looking sillier and sillier?
>
>
> And I'd say the education should be given to those who think the Orthodox
> should _care_ how "people" think they look. In my mind it's not the
> Orthodox who have a problem here.
>
> JO
I think Julie was only joking. Julie?
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Jess Olson
Ooops! Sorry if you were joking, Julie.
JO
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
>
>
cindys
Look again at the word order in the previous statement, and you will see
that the sentence is ambiguous. Julie was having a little fun playing with
the words. However, on first glance this was not so obvious.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
janet rosenbaum
>> As halacha becomes stricter and stricter, it becomes
>> more out of reach for the non-observant (and sounds sillier to
>> them as well).
>Hmm, you bring up a good point. But think about it. If a group is not
>"really" interested in keeping halacha (that's how I define
>"non-observant") then why _should_ their opinion be considered in
>determining halacha.
Probably fewer than 5% of non-observant Jews made a conscious decision to
be non-observant, and most of those who did probably received poor
Jewish educations.
Speaking from experience, much of halacha sounds silly or offensive in
the way that non-frum people know about it. For that matter, take the
movie Kadosh --- I don't think that Gitai intended to portray
halacha incorrectly, and yet there are probably 20 major halachic errors
(such as the premise of the movie that a woman must be divorced if she
hasn't had kids after 10 years), and 50 more minor ones in the movie.
All he had to know was that neither the Satmar nor Lubavitcher rebbes
had any children and obviously didn't divorce their wives.
>OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
>and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
>big problem of _education_.
There's a big problem of education in general for the non-observant. If
there were better Jewish education, the secular-religious gap wouldn't be
as large. Still, even with education, we're already asking people to
accept some ideas which don't entirely make sense --- two day yontiff,
chicken being fleishig, 7 clean days, kitniyot, no longer being able to
eat locusts :-) --- and these are leaps that people absolutely have to take
if they want to be frum Ashkenazic Jews in the Diaspora.
There's an entirely different set of leaps that people have to take if
they want to be frum which aren't so closely part of the system --- they
involve things which aren't really laws, or are fences to fences, and
yet they're a big obstacle.
One of the largest is the increasing unacceptability of coed interactions
and many activities which were once fairly mainstream among Orthodox
Jews, like the YU and Young Israel mixed dances or mixed swimming.
Others are the increasing tendency among frum Jews to move away from
conventional modest dress, the mixed messages given about women's
learning (such that many Stern students look askance at their classmates
who learn gemara seriously).
Bottom line is that there are lots of Jews who are intrigued by the idea
of shabbat, and if they experienced half a dozen or so observant shabbats,
the idea of being shomer shabbat would be appealing to them, in spite of
the fact that being shomer shabbat requires mesiras nefesh on a level
that few of us remember.
Currently, the only Jews who go to the trouble of attempting Orthodox
shabbat observance are the ones who buy the apologetics --- while I
truly respect the views of e.g. Chabad and Aish and Neve on the role
of women and men in Judaism, and I hope they always exist as a strong
alternative within Orthodoxy, they're not for everyone. They're
enormously successful kiruv organizations, and yet their % yields are
still low, and I think that part of the reason for their low yields is
that the apologetics are simply not enough to cause people to invert
their views of the world.
Most people respond to this idea by saying that we don't bring the Torah
down to the people --- people must go up to the Torah --- but this case
isn't one where there is a clear up and down. There is an established
tradition or at least precedent to be lenient, and yet it's become
beyond the pale because of a desire for stringency.
Janet
janet rosenbaum
>completely wrong. I'm also sure that their level of kashrut
>is just as much a snap for them as mine is for me -- it's a
>habit for both of us and probably runs on mental auto-pilot.
Yes. I totally agree.
I recently read an article about a woman who started wearing a wig but
still went to Wendy's for non-kosher hamburgers. She eventually stopped
because she saw the contradiction, but I was shocked that she decided to
cover her hair before not eating non-kosher meat, even though I imagine
that's something I might have done at one time.
>Yes. How do people go about educating the Orthododx that they
>are looking sillier and sillier?
I'm not sure, but I'm up for the challenge.
The first step is make the Orthodox Establishment realize that New York
is not the center of the universe and people that you didn't go to
elementary school with, or even high school or college, are just as
Jewish.
Janet
Garry
As an educator in the non-orthodox community, one of the things I try
to do is help people understand that a lot of O practice is not as
silly as it looks. Understanding the basis for rules doesn't
necessarily make my students eager to follow them, but it helps them
see the internal logic of the halacha, so at least they don't think
that other Jews are just ridiculous. (or at least see them as less
so). The laws of kitniot, which are an easy target for ridicule ("You
can't make flour out of string beans!") seem much less arbitrary when
you stress the love for the Jewish community and the importance of its
behavior that these laws express.
However, when it comes to the expansion of the laws of kitniot beyond
the original custom, I usually change the subject. I can't think of a
way to make this look anything but silly.
janet rosenbaum
>Jewish Action, the magazine of the OU, has a section called
>"Legal-Ease: What's the Truth about..." in which they explore common
>practices, and often report rather uncommon halakhot.
Thanks for the reference. It's very interesting, and it turns out to be
written by a guy who I recently corresponded with, who I didn't even know
was a rabbi.
http://tinyurl.com/b4tk
>The upshot,
>nearly always, is that much of the observant world has this particular
>practice wrong. I wish this were more common.
Mimetic vs. Textual. . .
Janet
janet rosenbaum
>And I'd say the education should be given to those who think the Orthodox
>should _care_ how "people" think they look. In my mind it's not the
>Orthodox who have a problem here.
You don't care that there are many Jews who never give Orthodoxy a
second look because it seems silly, or worse, explore a little and then
never give it a tenth look?
Janet
janet rosenbaum
>so). The laws of kitniot, which are an easy target for ridicule ("You
>can't make flour out of string beans!")
Actually, you can.
Bring them some bean thread noodles which are, btw, kosher without a
heksher if it's just grain and water, according to R Eidlitz.
Janet
cindys
"janet rosenbaum" <jero...@hcs.harvard.edu> wrote in message
news:b992p9$cm0$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu...
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il writes:
>
>
> Currently, the only Jews who go to the trouble of attempting Orthodox
> shabbat observance are the ones who buy the apologetics --- while I
> truly respect the views of e.g. Chabad and Aish and Neve on the role
> of women and men in Judaism, and I hope they always exist as a strong
> alternative within Orthodoxy, they're not for everyone. They're
> enormously successful kiruv organizations, and yet their % yields are
> still low, and I think that part of the reason for their low yields is
> that the apologetics are simply not enough to cause people to invert
> their views of the world.
>
I would agree 100%. MO is not for everyone. There are UO women who want to
engage in serious learning, without the feminist approach that often
accompanies it outside of the UO world. In the UO world, women who want to
engage in serious learning must face obstacle after obstacle until most of
them decide it's simply not worth it and just give up. I was recently
reading a debate about women and learning torah in which one woman stated
that women who are new to Judaism are coming with the tumah (impurity) of
the secular world and therefore are unable to acknowledge their true motives
and attitudes. She stated that when women immerse themselves in torah,
gemara, and other intellectual pursuits, we become "prisoners of our
intellect," arrogant, and ignore our families because we are too busy
learning. We need to be redirected into the proper roles of wife and mother.
The problem with this approach is that there are many women who require
intellectual pursuits to sustain them emotionally. When a college-educated,
professional woman becomes a ba'alas tshuvah (newly-observant) and is told:
"Learning beyond the halachos of candlelighting is not for you. As a woman,
your fulfillment derives from running a house and supporting your husband's
learning. This is your *natural inclination,* and you must come to accept it
whether you like it or not," rather than attempting to derive fulfillment
from keeping house, the woman's *natural inclination* is to run as fast as
she can back to the secular university classroom where she can continue to
derive fulfillment from intellectual pursuits without any arguments or
barriers at all.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
janet rosenbaum
>There are UO women who want to
>engage in serious learning, without the feminist approach that often
>accompanies it outside of the UO world.
In the US, there's Stern's higher learning program and in Israel there's
Nishmat, and neither is feminist by any measure. The thing which is
interesting is that there are some incredibly educated Charedi women
--- Rebbetzin Tzipora Heller who runs Neve, Lisa Aiken, Simi Peters
who teaches at Nishmat. I don't know many people in these circles, but
there are many more, and they do learn somewhere.
Btw, I don't like the derogatory use of the word "feminist" because it's
frequently an arbitrary division. The members and graduates of the
Drisha Scholars' Circle are maamins and just as frum as anyone at YU or
Stern. They spent their days learning the laws of milk and meat, nidah,
and shabbat, and all the other issues where there is no "feminist" bend.
They did get a bit of a shock when they came out into the world and
realized how unemployable they were within Orthodox day schools ---
Yeshiva of Flatbush hired a woman to teach gemara to girls and Maayanot
(a serious girls high school) hired a graduate or two, but otherwise,
day schools just aren't interested in women as gemara teachers.
>The problem with this approach is that there are many women who require
>intellectual pursuits to sustain them emotionally. When a college-educated,
>professional woman becomes a ba'alas tshuvah (newly-observant) and is told:
>"Learning beyond the halachos of candlelighting is not for you.
Strictly speaking, this isn't true. A woman is required to learn the
halachot that she personally must observe, which basically includes much
of 3 of the 4 volumes of Tur/Shulchan Aruch and most of the questions
in every volume of ShuT ever written. A woman could spend 120 years
learning these before getting to anything "lishma".
Janet
Jess Olson
Well, to be honest, I guess I have to say that no, I don't care. To my
mind, Orthodoxy is not a system that requires an explaination of itself.
It is, to my mind, a system that asks only one thing of the person who
would seek to gain some understanding of it: the humility to realize that
they aren't as smart as they think they are, and that if something seems
odd or strange to them, it is _they_, and not the Orthodox practitioner,
who needs to reflect. This I believe firmly.
If someone who is not religious looks at Orthodoxy and dismisses it
because it "looks silly" or "seems silly" or what have you, I fault the
person's inability to take a moment to set aside their flawed assumptions
about what is and isn't "silly". And if they can't get over
this after ten or twenty or thirty looks, well, to my mind that is their
loss, and not ours. Because in the end, they will be the ones who are
missing the boat. They are the ones who are missing out on what I regard
as the most intellecually exciting system in which one could be engaged.
(Not that intellectual excitement is all there is to it, but to me it's a
biggie).
JO
>
> Janet
>
janet rosenbaum
>Well, to be honest, I guess I have to say that no, I don't care. To my
>mind, Orthodoxy is not a system that requires an explaination of itself.
>It is, to my mind, a system that asks only one thing of the person who
>would seek to gain some understanding of it: the humility to realize that
>they aren't as smart as they think they are, and that if something seems
>odd or strange to them, it is _they_, and not the Orthodox practitioner,
>who needs to reflect. This I believe firmly.
I agree, but this argument still does not justify making chumrot into
requirements.
Janet
cindys
> "cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
> >There are UO women who want to
> >engage in serious learning, without the feminist approach that often
> >accompanies it outside of the UO world.
>
> In the US, there's Stern's higher learning program and in Israel there's
> Nishmat, and neither is feminist by any measure. The thing which is
> interesting is that there are some incredibly educated Charedi women
> --- Rebbetzin Tzipora Heller who runs Neve, Lisa Aiken, Simi Peters
> who teaches at Nishmat. I don't know many people in these circles, but
> there are many more, and they do learn somewhere.
But herein lies the problem. If a woman is fortunate enough to live in New
York City or Jerusalem, there are a couple of places she can go. If she
lives elsewhere, forget it. I live 2 miles away from a perfectly good
yeshiva, which would never let me through the doors of the beis medrash. As
a woman, there is no equivalent place I can go. There is also a beis medrash
in the shul, for men only. When I complained, I was redirected to the lady's
halacha class on hachnasas orchim. When I wanted to attend another halacha
class, I was told "no" because there is one man in the class who would
object. When I wanted to find someone to learn gemara with me, I was told
that if the one other woman in the community who had learned in the past was
willing to learn with me, great, otherwise I was out of luck. And by the
standards of many other communities, my community is relatively liberal.
>
> Btw, I don't like the derogatory use of the word "feminist" because it's
> frequently an arbitrary division. The members and graduates of the
> Drisha Scholars' Circle are maamins and just as frum as anyone at YU or
> Stern.
I wasn't referring to frumkeit. Do Drisha and YU ever have women's prayer
groups with women leyning torah? I thought they did, but I may be mistaken.
If this is the case, this is what I meant by "feminist."
>They spent their days learning the laws of milk and meat, nidah,
> and shabbat, and all the other issues where there is no "feminist" bend.
> They did get a bit of a shock when they came out into the world and
> realized how unemployable they were within Orthodox day schools ---
> Yeshiva of Flatbush hired a woman to teach gemara to girls and Maayanot
> (a serious girls high school) hired a graduate or two, but otherwise,
> day schools just aren't interested in women as gemara teachers.
I'm not surprised.
>
> >The problem with this approach is that there are many women who require
> >intellectual pursuits to sustain them emotionally. When a
college-educated,
> >professional woman becomes a ba'alas tshuvah (newly-observant) and is
told:
> >"Learning beyond the halachos of candlelighting is not for you.
>
> Strictly speaking, this isn't true.
But this is the l'ma'aseh.
>A woman is required to learn the
> halachot that she personally must observe, which basically includes much
> of 3 of the 4 volumes of Tur/Shulchan Aruch and most of the questions
> in every volume of ShuT ever written. A woman could spend 120 years
> learning these before getting to anything "lishma".
This may be, but the reality (in my experience) has been quite different. I
can personally guarantee that if I wanted to find someone to learn Shulchan
Aruch with me, and I mean the primary source material with all the
commentaries NOT _The Women's Guide to Practical Halachah_ [not a real title
as far as I know], I would be advised (again!) to attend the "Women's
halacha class" [where the rabbi "presents" the material of his choosing in
translation from the KSA]. And the other point is, some women don't want to
devote 120 years to learning about niddah and shabbos. I really enjoy
learning about the temple and the korbanos, and as far as I'm concerned,
there is no reason not to. A man who had this interest would be encouraged,
but a woman with this interest would be redirected back to niddah and
shabbos.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
>
> Janet
Garry
wrote:
I'm surprised. I thought it was a significant halachic value to bring
every Jew closer to Torah and Mitzvot. For the posters who equate
these with Orthodoxy, isn't it madatory to care about Jews becoming
O?
cindys
rather harsh in some areas. This is because I feel very strongly about this
subject. Any strong sentiments I have expressed are directed at the
situation not at you (Janet).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
"cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:rvWta.132633$M_2.1...@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
janet rosenbaum
>N.B. Upon rereading my post, I can see where the tone of my response seems
>rather harsh in some areas. This is because I feel very strongly about this
>subject. Any strong sentiments I have expressed are directed at the
>situation not at you (Janet).
Not at all. I have also been to that type of spoon-fed halacha class,
and it's irritating. Still, you could bring sources that highlight
difficulties in the halacha and see whether you can promote discussion
in the class.
You may also want to organize classes in your house with
similarly-minded friends, and for appropriate topics, seek out
non-Orthodox Jews as well. There are two mishna yomit programs
(one organized by toracc.org(?) and one by the Conservative movement)
and the shul here who has participated in one of them has really done a
lot of good --- some of its members could hardly read Hebrew when they
started, much less Rashi script --- and while a mishna or two a day isn't
much, it's better than what many people do on a daily basis and over
time they get through a lot.
Also, check out the virtual beit midrash --- they have gemara shiurim
that they email out. there are probably others. Have your husband
subscribe to the shema yisrael online smicha program, and you can learn
kashrus that way.
>> I wasn't referring to frumkeit. Do Drisha and YU ever have women's prayer
>> groups with women leyning torah? I thought they did, but I may be
>mistaken.
>> If this is the case, this is what I meant by "feminist."
Oh, okay. YU --- no way. I don't think Drisha really sponsors minyan
on a regular basis --- people go to neighborhood shuls --- but I'm sure
they occasionally do something all together. The Drisha people I know
have a range of feelings about tefilah groups --- most seem like me, in
that I'm not particularly interested in them and tend not to go to them,
but I think they're permitted and I would go if there was some reason to
(like a friend wanted me to). I did really enjoy doing the megillah
with them, and since women are equally obligated, I didn't have a
halachically inferior experience. This year, I had to go to class on Purim
morning so ended up with a two-person megillah reading --- Yoel read and
I corrected him if necessary.
Janet
Steven Goldfarb
>Well, to be honest, I guess I have to say that no, I don't care. To my
>mind, Orthodoxy is not a system that requires an explaination of itself.
>It is, to my mind, a system that asks only one thing of the person who
>would seek to gain some understanding of it: the humility to realize that
>they aren't as smart as they think they are, and that if something seems
>odd or strange to them, it is _they_, and not the Orthodox practitioner,
>who needs to reflect. This I believe firmly.
The bottom line IMO is that it comes down to trust -- trusting the O
practioner, as you say, ALL O practioners, that what they claim to be the
requirements of God are in fact the requirements of God. This is not a
matter of trusting God -- it's a question of trusting people.
Now, some claim that we don't need to trust people, because we Jews
instinctively know what God wants. I think this is nonsense -- if that
were the case there'd be no need for yeshivas, after all. So we don't
know. We have to trust. We have to trust people.
Nothing wrong with that, of course.
HOWEVER -- following false stringencies erodes that trust. If God doesn't
require that I avoid corn on Pesach, then why should I believe you that he
requires x, or y, or that a certain word means what you say it means? The
more false stringencies, the less confident I am in your other claims.
That's the danger of false stringencies, and it's not silly.
(there is another way to look at it, as I've posted before, which I
consider to be an intellectually viable approach -- the concept of "I
grant you that it's not perfect, but it's the best we've got, and
therefore we must follow it as we have it." But that approach requires the
admission that it's not perfect, today, which only one or two O posters
here have been willing to admit)
--sg
>If someone who is not religious looks at Orthodoxy and dismisses it
>because it "looks silly" or "seems silly" or what have you, I fault the
>person's inability to take a moment to set aside their flawed assumptions
>about what is and isn't "silly". And if they can't get over
>this after ten or twenty or thirty looks, well, to my mind that is their
>loss, and not ours. Because in the end, they will be the ones who are
>missing the boat. They are the ones who are missing out on what I regard
>as the most intellecually exciting system in which one could be engaged.
>(Not that intellectual excitement is all there is to it, but to me it's a
>biggie).
>JO
>>
>> Janet
>>
--
---------------------------------------
Steve Goldfarb Eppur si muove
s...@stevegoldfarb.com (and still, it moves)
http://stevegoldfarb.com/ - Galileo
Talqcom
>From: Steven Goldfarb s...@panix.com
>So we don't
>know. We have to trust. We have to trust people.
Why? You can always evaluate whether what someone tells you is true or not, or
first acquire the criteria with which to do so, and then proceed to do so.
Ray
Talqcom
>Date: 5/6/2003 3:37 PM Eastern Standard Time
>There is an established
>tradition or at least precedent to be lenient, and yet it's become
>beyond the pale because of a desire for stringency.
Which is forbidden under Jewish Law. To prohibit the permitted is equivalent
to permitting the prohibited. Talmud Eres Yisra'el, Massekheth Bikkurim.
Ray
toichen
> learning about the temple and the korbanos, and as far as I'm concerned,
> there is no reason not to.
Maybe you could enrol in Ms. Janet's new yeshiva.
toichen
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
Steve G.
You certainly CAN do that -- if what you're saying is to learn
everything you can and then evaluate each element for yourself to
decide if you think it's "authentic" or not, if you trust the source
or not. In my opinion that would be a commendable thing. BUT it would
require that you would NOT take on certain things if you couldn't
prove to yourself that you trusted the truth of it. That is, you'd be
accused of "picking and choosing" the rules that you wish to follow.
But my understanding is that in "mainstream O" you can't do that --
you have to take the entire package, because the concept of "following
your elders" or "adhering to tradition for its own sake" trumps
everything else.
--sg
> Ray
janet rosenbaum
>Maybe you could enrol in Ms. Janet's new yeshiva.
What a great name for it! "Ms Janet's New Yeshiva".
Much better than what I was considering:
"Miss Janet's Finishing Shul for Girls"
Seriously, it's not mine by any measure. I'm just helping out a friend.
And it is a traditional yeshiva, albeit without the "No Girlz Allowed"
sign on the beis midrash door.
Janet
cindys
"toichen" <toi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:dd1c0ee8.03050...@posting.google.com...
> > I really enjoy
> > learning about the temple and the korbanos, and as far as I'm concerned,
> > there is no reason not to.
>
> Maybe you could enrol in Ms. Janet's new yeshiva.
> toichen
First I would need to find out who is going to be the rosh yeshiva (to see
if he can meet my exacting standards).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
Seriously...at the risk of raining on your friend's parade, which big-name
rabbi (or even little-name rabbi) would accept a position as rosh yeshiva at
a yeshiva which allowed girlz in the beis medrash?
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Jess Olson
Well, I agree with you on that, no question. However, it seems that when a
non-Orthodox person asserts that they think the Orthodox "look silly" when
they do such and such --- including when they embrace humrot to high
heaven --- is making a judgement they aren't entitled (or able) to make.
That's my point...I'm not saying that within the Orthodox world we don't
have our share of problems and mishigas, however, it is one thing to have
a "family argument" within Orthodoxy (which I would consider the debate
over the normalization of humrot) and an outsider calling us all silly.
But it seems from your posts that we are probably of one mind on this
issue.
JO
>
> Janet
>
Yisroel Markov
(janet rosenbaum) said:
>"cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
>>N.B. Upon rereading my post, I can see where the tone of my response seems
>>rather harsh in some areas. This is because I feel very strongly about this
>>subject. Any strong sentiments I have expressed are directed at the
>>situation not at you (Janet).
>
>Not at all. I have also been to that type of spoon-fed halacha class,
>and it's irritating.
[sigh] Apparently too many people read too much into the
oft-encountered grouping of women and minors in halakhic texts...
[snip]
>(like a friend wanted me to). I did really enjoy doing the megillah
>with them, and since women are equally obligated, I didn't have a
>halachically inferior experience. This year, I had to go to class on Purim
>morning so ended up with a two-person megillah reading --- Yoel read and
>I corrected him if necessary.
R' Yehuda Henkin wrote an article advocating such readings. He
finished it by saying that if the choice is between having a learned
woman or a male teenager read the megilla, choosing the latter may
actually be forbidden as insulting to women.
Yisroel Markov
<s...@panix.com> said:
>In <Pine.GSO.4.44.030506...@elaine9.Stanford.EDU> Jess Olson <j...@stanford.edu> writes:
>
>>Well, to be honest, I guess I have to say that no, I don't care. To my
>>mind, Orthodoxy is not a system that requires an explaination of itself.
>>It is, to my mind, a system that asks only one thing of the person who
>>would seek to gain some understanding of it: the humility to realize that
>>they aren't as smart as they think they are, and that if something seems
>>odd or strange to them, it is _they_, and not the Orthodox practitioner,
>>who needs to reflect. This I believe firmly.
>
>The bottom line IMO is that it comes down to trust -- trusting the O
>practioner, as you say, ALL O practioners, that what they claim to be the
>requirements of God are in fact the requirements of God. This is not a
>matter of trusting God -- it's a question of trusting people.
Hmm. ISTM that from your standpoint, you can only talk about trusting
people that they *believe* those requirements to be Divine.
>Now, some claim that we don't need to trust people, because we Jews
>instinctively know what God wants. I think this is nonsense -- if that
>were the case there'd be no need for yeshivas, after all. So we don't
>know. We have to trust. We have to trust people.
>
>Nothing wrong with that, of course.
>
>HOWEVER -- following false stringencies erodes that trust. If God doesn't
>require that I avoid corn on Pesach, then why should I believe you that he
>requires x, or y, or that a certain word means what you say it means? The
>more false stringencies, the less confident I am in your other claims.
Nothing here that full disclosure wouldn't cure. Sure, a
less-than-educated O practitioner might believe - sincerely - that
kitniyot is a d'oraita prohibition, or that one has to get rid of
kitniyot before Pesakh. But what about an educated one? Here - I will
admit that God doesn't require us to avoid corn on Pesakh, we came up
with that ourselves. How does this affect your willingness to believe
my other claims?
[snip]
Jess Olson
> On Tue, 6 May 2003 21:39:54 +0000 (UTC), Jess Olson <j...@stanford.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 6 May 2003, janet rosenbaum wrote:
> >
> >> Jess Olson <j...@stanford.edu> writes:
> >> >And I'd say the education should be given to those who think the Orthodox
> >> >should _care_ how "people" think they look. In my mind it's not the
> >> >Orthodox who have a problem here.
> >>
> >> You don't care that there are many Jews who never give Orthodoxy a
> >> second look because it seems silly, or worse, explore a little and then
> >> never give it a tenth look?
> >
> >Well, to be honest, I guess I have to say that no, I don't care. To my
> >mind, Orthodoxy is not a system that requires an explaination of itself.
> >It is, to my mind, a system that asks only one thing of the person who
> >would seek to gain some understanding of it: the humility to realize that
> >they aren't as smart as they think they are, and that if something seems
> >odd or strange to them, it is _they_, and not the Orthodox practitioner,
> >who needs to reflect. This I believe firmly.
<snipped> >>
> I'm surprised. I thought it was a significant halachic value to bring
> every Jew closer to Torah and Mitzvot. For the posters who equate
> these with Orthodoxy, isn't it madatory to care about Jews becoming
> O?
A fair question, I think. And the answer (at least IMHO) is that yes, we
certainly DO see it as very important to bring Jews closer to Torah and
Mitzvas (although mandatory? I'm not so sure -- it probably depends on
who you ask), but not at the expense of having to be apologetic for our
practices. If the target of kiruv is incapable of realizing the importance
and gravity of the Torah and the seriousness of those who take it
seriously, I don't think it is appropriate to lower ourselves to the level
of scoffing just so that the person feels better about it. I also think
that if such a person is really in the end unable to get beyond themselves
and try to in some way understand Orhtodoxy on its own terms, there is a
real question of just how worth the effort of kiruv is in their case.
Better to move on to greener pastures, I say.
JO
Jess Olson
> In <Pine.GSO.4.44.030506...@elaine9.Stanford.EDU> Jess Olson <j...@stanford.edu> writes:
>
> >Well, to be honest, I guess I have to say that no, I don't care. To my
> >mind, Orthodoxy is not a system that requires an explaination of itself.
> >It is, to my mind, a system that asks only one thing of the person who
> >would seek to gain some understanding of it: the humility to realize that
> >they aren't as smart as they think they are, and that if something seems
> >odd or strange to them, it is _they_, and not the Orthodox practitioner,
> >who needs to reflect. This I believe firmly.
>
> The bottom line IMO is that it comes down to trust -- trusting the O
> practioner, as you say, ALL O practioners, that what they claim to be the
> requirements of God are in fact the requirements of God. This is not a
> matter of trusting God -- it's a question of trusting people.
>
> Now, some claim that we don't need to trust people, because we Jews
> instinctively know what God wants. I think this is nonsense -- if that
> were the case there'd be no need for yeshivas, after all. So we don't
> know. We have to trust. We have to trust people.
>
> Nothing wrong with that, of course.
>
> HOWEVER -- following false stringencies erodes that trust. If God doesn't
> require that I avoid corn on Pesach, then why should I believe you that he
> requires x, or y, or that a certain word means what you say it means? The
> more false stringencies, the less confident I am in your other claims.
I see your point, however I disagree on the following grounds: You use the
term "false stringency". This, as I see it, is the problem right here.
When a non-Orthodox sees an O person doing what they regard as
"stringency," they feel justified in assuming that it is "false," which I
take to mean that they see it as a practice which is based on some kind of
sociological hooey rather than on some important aspect of Jewish law. The
fact of the matter is, many, if not most of the stringencies that people
accept on to themselves, are done not for the sake of "looking more
religious" but rather out of a sincere desire to do things the best way
they are able. The problem is, to the person _removed_ from the framework
of halakhic Judaism, it is impossible to make a determination of whether
the act is justifiable or not. Thus most (in my experience) non-Orthodox
critiques of Orthodox practice, in particular of the sticky issue of
humrot, go whole-hog and assume that _all_ Orthodox people are just being
crazy in order to make everyone else look bad. Which is simply not the
case. And if the non-O person in question to the time to figure out what
they are talking about, to understand the meaning of humrot and why
Orthodox Jews adopt them, they might be a little less quick to judge.
JO
Jess Olson
> Jess Olson wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 May 2003, Julie wrote:
> >
> >
> >>mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
> >>>and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
> >>>big problem of _education_.
> >>>
> >>>Anybody else want to comment?
> >>
> >>Yes. How do people go about educating the Orthododx that they
> >>are looking sillier and sillier?
> >
> >
> >
> > And I'd say the education should be given to those who think the Orthodox
> > should _care_ how "people" think they look. In my mind it's not the
> > Orthodox who have a problem here.
>
> Ah, but now you're getting into an entirely different area
> which is are the Orthodox silly because the non-Orthodox
> think so, or is there something wrong with the non-Orthodox
> which makes them think the Orthodox are silly?
>
> All rather a question of perspective, I'd say.
Definitely a question of perspective. But isn't everything?
JO
> --
> Julianne Frances Haugh Life is either a daring adventure
> txj...@austin.rr.com or nothing at all.
> -- Helen Keller
>
toichen
Seriously.... traditional yeshiva..... without the "No Girlz Allowed"
That made me laugh.
toichen
> Janet
janet rosenbaum
>Seriously...at the risk of raining on your friend's parade, which big-name
>rabbi (or even little-name rabbi) would accept a position as rosh yeshiva at
>a yeshiva which allowed girlz in the beis medrash?
One whose wife would be very upset if she couldn't use it.
I'm not sure of the policies at each yeshiva, but there's no reason not
to treat a beit midrash like a normal library where anyone can walk in
and use the books and sit at the tables.
Nishmat lets men learn in its beit midrash, Chovovei lets women.
Others that might: Maalei Gilboa, Gush, HaMivtar, . . .
Janet
cindys
> "cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
> >Seriously...at the risk of raining on your friend's parade, which
big-name
> >rabbi (or even little-name rabbi) would accept a position as rosh yeshiva
at
> >a yeshiva which allowed girlz in the beis medrash?
>
> One whose wife would be very upset if she couldn't use it.
Lol.
>
> I'm not sure of the policies at each yeshiva, but there's no reason not
> to treat a beit midrash like a normal library where anyone can walk in
> and use the books and sit at the tables.
Well, that's how I see it...but unfortunately, the UO world doesn't share my
opinion. (Of course, it wouldn't be exactly like a normal library, since a
normal library is quiet and a beis medrash is noisy).
> Nishmat lets men learn in its beit midrash, Chovovei lets women.
> Others that might: Maalei Gilboa, Gush, HaMivtar, . . .
And how are the shiurim set up? Are they unisex or co-ed?
Jess Olson
I sincerely doubt Gush would.
JO
>
> Janet
>
Jess Olson
>
> "janet rosenbaum" <jero...@hcs.harvard.edu> wrote in message
> news:b9bmop$7mp$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu...
> > "cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
> > >Seriously...at the risk of raining on your friend's parade, which
> big-name
> > >rabbi (or even little-name rabbi) would accept a position as rosh yeshiva
> at
> > >a yeshiva which allowed girlz in the beis medrash?
> >
> > One whose wife would be very upset if she couldn't use it.
>
> Lol.
> >
> > I'm not sure of the policies at each yeshiva, but there's no reason not
> > to treat a beit midrash like a normal library where anyone can walk in
> > and use the books and sit at the tables.
>
> Well, that's how I see it...but unfortunately, the UO world doesn't share my
> opinion. (Of course, it wouldn't be exactly like a normal library, since a
> normal library is quiet and a beis medrash is noisy).
Ummm...if one uses the situation at YU as a barometer of the "MO"
world...which I think is a fair thing to do given YU's general bent,
the MO world doesn't share your opinion either. Both women and men do use
Gottesman library (I'm thinking now of the Washington Heights campus),
but women most certainly do NOT use any of the battei midrash. And I doubt
any of the big or little name rabbis at that particular institution would
head up a co-ed yeshiva.
JO
cindys
"Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.44.03050...@elaine9.Stanford.EDU...
I specified UO only because I perceive myself as being a part of that world
as opposed to the MO world (and my original post was a litany of complaints
regarding lack of learning opportunities for women in the UO world
specifically). I didn't mean to imply that the MO world, in contrast, would
allow women in the beis medrash. I know that YU certainly does not. The most
miserable thing in the world is to have a talmud question and to have to ask
a man to approach one of the rabbeim in the beis medrash with the question
(as opposed to being able to ask the rabbi yourself).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Garry
_He_?
Jess Olson
Understandable. Although when I was/am in the beys midrash, I never wanted
to ask the rabbi...I was always afraid my questions were too stupid. Not
the same thing, of course...but at any rate...
JO
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
>
>
cindys
Actually, I understand that. As a woman, it's a double whammy, i.e.
sometimes I think: "Not only is my question stupid but the rabbi is going to
attribute the stupidity of the question to the fact that I am a woman (by
extension *proving* that it really is a waste for women to be studying
talmud)." So, maybe it is better if a man asks the question, then *he* can
be the one to look *stupid* :-)
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Joel Shurkin
<jero...@hcs.harvard.edu> wrote:
> "cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> writes:
> >There are UO women who want to
> >engage in serious learning, without the feminist approach that often
> >accompanies it outside of the UO world.
>
> In the US, there's Stern's higher learning program and in Israel there's
> Nishmat, and neither is feminist by any measure. The thing which is
> interesting is that there are some incredibly educated Charedi women
> --- Rebbetzin Tzipora Heller who runs Neve, Lisa Aiken, Simi Peters
> who teaches at Nishmat. I don't know many people in these circles, but
> there are many more, and they do learn somewhere.
>
>
.......
All this is why we have so many formerly O families with daughters in
our C synagogue and why my daughter is being raised C. She has the
choice of learning as much as she can or not. She doesn¹t have a bunch
of old guys with beards saying no.
J
> Janet
--
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
Grouch Marx
Joel Shurkin
Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions
Baltimore
Henry Goodman
"Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.44.030507...@elaine27.Stanford.EDU...
Ah but Cindy's questions are not stupid (judging by the ones she asks here).
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Steve G.
> >
> > HOWEVER -- following false stringencies erodes that trust. If God doesn't
> > require that I avoid corn on Pesach, then why should I believe you that he
> > requires x, or y, or that a certain word means what you say it means? The
> > more false stringencies, the less confident I am in your other claims.
>
>
> I see your point, however I disagree on the following grounds: You use the
> term "false stringency". This, as I see it, is the problem right here.
> When a non-Orthodox sees an O person doing what they regard as
> "stringency," they feel justified in assuming that it is "false,"
Let me stop you there -- I was referring to practices that O people
themselves agree are "false," to one degree or another. Some of these
were referenced in other threads. One might ask "what's the harm of
following such a stringency?" I'm saying that there is a harm.
which I
> take to mean that they see it as a practice which is based on some kind of
> sociological hooey rather than on some important aspect of Jewish law. The
> fact of the matter is, many, if not most of the stringencies that people
> accept on to themselves, are done not for the sake of "looking more
> religious" but rather out of a sincere desire to do things the best way
> they are able.
I don't doubt that. However, I would contend that it creates a
"blurring," when as Lisa points out much of halacha is in fact about
making distinctions. The problem, it seems to me, is that "stricter"
and "more onerous" aren't synonyms. God said "eat lamb, don't eat
pork." So if one decided not to eat beef either, is he being stricter,
or more lenient? Or just plain wrong?
The problem is, to the person _removed_ from the framework
> of halakhic Judaism, it is impossible to make a determination of whether
> the act is justifiable or not. Thus most (in my experience) non-Orthodox
> critiques of Orthodox practice, in particular of the sticky issue of
> humrot, go whole-hog and assume that _all_ Orthodox people are just being
> crazy in order to make everyone else look bad. Which is simply not the
> case. And if the non-O person in question to the time to figure out what
> they are talking about, to understand the meaning of humrot and why
> Orthodox Jews adopt them, they might be a little less quick to judge.
>
This is true -- but then it gets back to that concept of trust.
--sg
>
> JO
Steve G.
But you DO claim that God requires us to avoid corn on Pesach.
Otherwise, why on earth would you do it, if it isn't what God
requires? You agree that God didn't directly command it -- but you
still maintain that God requires us to follow it, since it has become
a binding custom, and God requires us to follow binding customs.
The mother leaves the house and tells the babysitter "don't let the
kids have any of the junk food in the cupboard." A neighbor brings
over some junk food. The babysitter says "even though it wasn't in the
cupboard, it's still junk food, so you can't have it." So the kids
don't have any. Did the babysitter follow the mother's commands? I'd
say yes.
Every night the children go to the library. The mother tells the
babysitter "don't let them go to the video arcade." The babysitter
thinks about it, and decides that the children can't go out at all,
since they might go to the arcade on the way to the library. Did the
babysitter follow the mother's commands? I'd say no. So while "you
can't go outside" might seem like a stringency, in fact it's heresy.
Hard to tell sometimes, right?
--sg
Arthur Kamlet
Joel Shurkin <jo...@nasw.org> wrote:
>"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
>Grouch Marx
Not to be confused with Groucho Morx, who wasn't French.
--
__
Art Kamlet ArtKamlet @ AOL.com Columbus OH K2PZH
cindys
"Henry Goodman" <henry....@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:b9c1pf$pcj$2...@falcon.steinthal.us...
Henry, what a kind thing to say. Thank you!
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> jero...@hcs.harvard.edu (janet rosenbaum) writes:
>> > mos...@mm.huji.ac.il writes:
>> >>halacha". Also, in regards to Rabbinically decreed halachot, there is
>> >>a mechanism for repeal if it is apparent that it "cannot" be followed.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, this type of repeal only includes the voices of the
>> > observant. As halacha becomes stricter and stricter, it becomes
>> > more out of reach for the non-observant (and sounds sillier to
>> > them as well).
>>
>> Hmm, you bring up a good point. But think about it. If a group is
>> not "really" interested in keeping halacha (that's how I define
>> "non-observant") then why _should_ their opinion be considered in
>> determining halacha.
>
> Because, as I've pointed out several times, "habit" is much
> easier for those who've made the habits than those who haven't.
> Many things which were difficult for me to "get right" a year
> ago are now fairly simple and the friends I have who have no
> intention of keeping kosher are simply amazed. Yet I'm sure
> the Orthodox would consider my level of kashrut to be, uh,
> completely wrong. I'm also sure that their level of kashrut
> is just as much a snap for them as mine is for me -- it's a
> habit for both of us and probably runs on mental auto-pilot.
Sorry, I don't see how this responds to my question.
>> OTOH, if all the observant are managing to do, is to look sillier
>> and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
>> big problem of _education_.
>>
>> Anybody else want to comment?
>
> Yes. How do people go about educating the Orthododx that they
> are looking sillier and sillier?
LOL! Shouda seen it coming. One serious answer to you t-i-c
question, is; "post to SCJM". :-)
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
May Mikhah Shemu'el ben Lei'ah Yesharah (Michah Berger) have 1 2!
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> On Tue, 6 May 2003, Julie wrote:
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>
>> > and sillier in the eyes of the non-observant, then there is a
>> > big problem of _education_.
>> >
>> > Anybody else want to comment?
>>
>> Yes. How do people go about educating the Orthododx that they
>> are looking sillier and sillier?
>
> Orthodox should _care_ how "people" think they look. In my mind
> it's not the Orthodox who have a problem here.
Thank you Jess. After reading Julie's and Yisroel's responses, I was
begining to think I didn't phrase it right. Glad that you realized
what I meant.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) wrote
>>
>> Nothing here that full disclosure wouldn't cure. Sure, a
>> less-than-educated O practitioner might believe - sincerely - that
>> kitniyot is a d'oraita prohibition, or that one has to get rid of
>> kitniyot before Pesakh. But what about an educated one? Here - I will
>> admit that God doesn't require us to avoid corn on Pesakh, we came up
>> with that ourselves. How does this affect your willingness to believe
>> my other claims?
>
> But you DO claim that God requires us to avoid corn on Pesach.
> Otherwise, why on earth would you do it, if it isn't what God
> requires? You agree that God didn't directly command it -- but you
> still maintain that God requires us to follow it, since it has become
> a binding custom, and God requires us to follow binding customs.
Steve, you do see the difference, you even state it. One is a "direct"
command, "Eat matza on Pesach" the other is an "indirect" command,
"obey the Rabbis who ordered the lighting of Chanuka candles".
> The mother leaves the house and tells the babysitter "don't let the
> kids have any of the junk food in the cupboard." A neighbor brings
> over some junk food. The babysitter says "even though it wasn't in the
> cupboard, it's still junk food, so you can't have it." So the kids
> don't have any. Did the babysitter follow the mother's commands? I'd
> say yes.
>
> Every night the children go to the library. The mother tells the
> babysitter "don't let them go to the video arcade." The babysitter
> thinks about it, and decides that the children can't go out at all,
> since they might go to the arcade on the way to the library. Did the
> babysitter follow the mother's commands? I'd say no. So while "you
> can't go outside" might seem like a stringency, in fact it's heresy.
Thanks for two good examples.
> Hard to tell sometimes, right?
Right.
Chano
"Steve G." <alfief...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:afeedc37.03050...@posting.google.com...
> ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) wrote in message
news:<3eb931e6...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>...
> > On Wed, 7 May 2003 03:43:11 +0000 (UTC), Steven Goldfarb
> > <s...@panix.com> said:
> The mother leaves the house and tells the babysitter "don't let the
> kids have any of the junk food in the cupboard." A neighbor brings
> over some junk food. The babysitter says "even though it wasn't in the
> cupboard, it's still junk food, so you can't have it." So the kids
> don't have any. Did the babysitter follow the mother's commands? I'd
> say yes.
>
> --sg
>
> > [snip]
Hey hey! hold it a minute will ya? Why are you assuming that the mother was
opposed to junk food per se? Her instructions only concerned the junk food
in the cupboard (maybe she was saving it to give the kids a treat for being
good). Don't assume that she would have objected to them having junk food
from elswhere e.g. the neighbour. If the babysitter did not allow the kids
to eat the junk food in the cupboard, that is following the mother's
command. By allowing the kids to eat the neighbour's junk food the
babysitter in no way infracted the mother's wishes.
Chano
Talqcom
>From: Jess Olson j...@stanford.edu
>When a non-Orthodox sees an O person doing what they regard as
>"stringency," they feel justified in assuming that it is "false," which I
>take to mean that they see it as a practice which is based on some kind of
>sociological hooey rather than on some important aspect of Jewish law.
Which is often true. The modern trend towards more and more humroth is an
expression of piety, not an expression of law.
When the Orthodox get farther and farther from the law their only basis becomes
not Judaism, but a kind of personal and pietistic zeal applied to Judaism. It
goes without saying that extremes breed extremes, which explains some of the
defections from -- and ridicule of -- Orthdoxy.
Ray
Talqcom
>Date: 5/8/2003 4:02 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Steve, you do see the difference, you even state it. One is a "direct"
>command, "Eat matza on Pesach" the other is an "indirect" command,
>"obey the Rabbis who ordered the lighting of Chanuka candles".
>
But following a local/regional custom is not following a Rabbinic misva as in
Haunka. The "Rabbis" in the Hanuka example are the Sanhedrim, which has the
power to legislate. The rabbis/people who promulgated the kitniyoth custom had
no legislative power.
As a matter of law, I am not at all convinced that a custom follows its
practitioners' descendants to a new locale (e.g., the US) where the original
circumstances no longer prevail.
It is interesting that the Tosafoth often applied the principle "batla hata'am
batla hagezera" "if the basis has become null the injunciton is invalid" to
**Talmudic** laws (which under Talmudic Law cannot be done), but Orthodox Jews,
who accept the rulings and tradition of Tosafoth even against the Talmud, will
not apply this legal principle to "customs" invented post Talmud.
There are extra-legal motiviations at work here.
Ray
Sheldon Ackerman
news:20030508073245...@mb-m21.aol.com:
> It is interesting that the Tosafoth often applied the principle "batla
> hata'am batla hagezera" "if the basis has become null the injunciton
> is invalid" to **Talmudic** laws (which under Talmudic Law cannot be
> done),
Only Tosafoth? I thought we all agree on that as long as when the gezereh
was set up specific reasons were given. I don't recall where I've seen a
discussion on this topic that there are 3 kinds of gezeiros. One was put in
place without any reason given. The second was instituted without a reason
but years later the rabannon did give their reason. And the third kind was
where the reason was immediately given.