Special Features KASHRUT KOLUMN Behind the Scenes The following is a Kashrut story which should be informative and interesting. It is not intended to worry you, because the issue presented has already been favoraby resolved. In fact, it is the successful resolution of this former "potential problem" that cleared the way for the OU's kashrut supervision of the Yafo Flour Mill, which supplies all four major matza companies in Israel with their Pesach flour. (This, in addition to all year round flour production.) Most wheat in Israel is imported, mainly from the United States. Large handlers of grain in the U.S. (and elsewhere) are always concerned with the danger of grain dust explosions. When grain in large quantity is moved from place to place - on conveyor belts, bin-to-bin, trucks, etc. - very, very small particles of the grainbreak off from the kernel and are suspended in the air. When this happens in a silo, for example, the mixture of this dust and air can become the "perfect" ratio to be set off by a spark, with a powerful explusion and fire resulting. There are three methods used in controling grain dust. One is the use of air cleaning and filtering systems. This is fairly effective, as well as relatively costly. Or, the grain can be sprayed with small amounts of an edible mineral oil. This too is relatively expensive. The third method is to wet the grain with water.This is the least expensive method of controlling the grain dust problem. But it also sends a shiver down the spine of Jews who immediately identify the potential Pesach problem if the grain in question is wheat. Baruch HaShem, wetting grain with water created other problems as well. Not problems specifically of a Jewish nature, but legal and ethical problems in general. You see, wetting grain might help keep grain dust down, but it also lowers the quality of the grain and makes it heavier. The United States government - specifically certain divisions of the Department of Agriculture - do not want American wheat to drop in quality. And they certainly don't want grain growers to be temptedto increase the weight of the grain that is sold by weight. That would be inviting fraudulent practices. So the U.S. government forbids the wetting of grain to surpress dust. Air filtration and use of mineral oil (which is not a potential Chametz problem) is acceptible. As mentioned earlier, this was a situation that existed and was "solved" a number of years back. We need not worry now about this problem. But try to imagine the magnitude of the problem had not the U.S. government found something that they objected to, concerning the practice of wetting grain. Imagine the kosher community asking for changes in standard operating procedures for grain handling. The situation as it was, turned out to be analogous to a food product containing a non-kosher ingredient and also posing a health hazard. The manufacturer might recall the product because of the health issue. There was no intention to serve the Jewish community, but that was the result. (Not really the best analogy, becausewe too would want the product recalled for health reasons, even without the kosher factor.) Don't let your imagination run away with itself. Otherwise, you can conjure up a situation where the Jewish Community would need special flour, not just for Shmura, but for regular matza as well. Prices would skyrocket. It was a good thing that U.S. government interests coincided with our own. The amazing part of this is that the U.S. gov't would not object to a moderated amount of wetting of grain, if they can be sure that people would not be tempted to illegally benefit from it. In other words, if they could properly regulate wetting of grain, then they might allow it, and we'd be in G'hakte Tzoris (as theysay). Remember: nothing to worry about - JTYLTK.
THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW R. Emanuel Quint, Dean Lesson #13 - Powers of the Beth Din (of non-ordained judges - part 5) Continuing the jurisdiction of the Beth Din consisting of non-ordained judges, we come to the following situation: there is a trial in Beth Din wherein Reuven sued Shimon for $10,000 for injuries sustained by Reuven when Shimon's car hit Reuven while he was crossing Ramban Street near Ushishkin Street. Reuven produces twowitnesses, Levi and Yehuda, who testify that they saw Shimon pass a red light when he struck Reuven, who waited to cross the street until the light was green in Reuven's favor. All this occurred on January 4, '98 at 8:14am. Shimon produces two witnesses, Issachar and Zevulun, who testify that they were also standing at the intersection of Ramban and Ushishkin Streets at the same time and they saw that Shimon had a green light in his favor as he drove and that Reuven crossed against the red light. The two witnesses produced by Shimon are contradictedby the witnesses produced by Reuven. The contradicted testimony is known as HAKCHASHA. Thus Beth Din has to determine who is telling the truth, whether the witnesses produced by Reuven or by Shimon. Assume the witnesses, Levi and Yehuda, produced by Reuven testify to the event as stated above that they were on the corner of Ramban and Ushishkin Streets on January 4, '98 at 8:14am and they saw the occurrence and that it was Shimon who passed the red light. Shimon pleads that he doesn't remember Levi and Yehuda beingthere, since to the best of his recollection there were no other people there besides Reuven, who he declares crossed against a red light. There not being any other testimony, on the basis of the testimony of Levi and Yehuda, Beth Din rendered a judgment in favor of Reuven for $10,000; Shimon pays the $10,000 to Reuven according to the Beth Din judgment. Several days after Shimon pays the $10,000 he tells his friend Dan about the entire trial. Dan is amazed and he calls his friend Naftali. They tell Shimon that on January 4, '98, Levi and Yehuda were playing golf in Caesaria, and in fact Levi had a hole-in-one. Shimon makes an application to Beth Din to re-open the caseon the basis of these newly discovered witnesses. Beth Din orders a new trial and at the trial Dan and Naftali testify that on January 4, '98 at 8:14am they were in Caesaria playing golf. They further testify that Levi and Yehuda were also there at the same time playing golf with them in a foursome. They produce photographsshowing them on the golf course and produce records from the golf association showing that Levi and Yehuda were there on January 4, '98 at 8:00am. Neither Dan nor Naftali have any idea as to what occurred on January 4, '98 at 8:14am at the corner of Ramban and Ushishkin Streets in Jerusalem. Based on the testimony of Dan and Naftali, Levi and Yehuda will have to pay to Shimon $10,000, the same amount that their testimony caused Shimon to pay Reuven. Levi and Yehuda are known as ZOMEMIM witnesses. The Torah states that in such cases where the second pair of witnesses do not testify as to the event but ratherplace the first pair of witnesses at a place other than the place of the occurrence, that the zomemim pay to the defendant in the first trial the amount he paid to the plaintiff as a result of their testimony. The Beth Din consisting of non-ordained judges has the power to render judgment against the zomemim witnesses, in this case Levi and Yehuda, only if Shimon has already paid the $10,000 to Reuven, and Reuven is not in the country to repay the money or else Reuven has no money to make the repayment to Shimon. Otherwise BethDin consisting of non-ordained judges cannot deal with cases of zomemim witnesses; only ordained judges can judge cases against zomemim witnesses. Dr. and Mrs. Cohen have been married for 25 years. She takes a course for bored housewives and as a result of her course becomes even more bored with her marriage. She files for divorce ("a get"). Or, Dr. Cohen has a new nurse in his medical office, 20 years younger and 20 pounds lighter than Mrs. Cohen; Dr. Cohen and the nurse fall in love. Dr. Cohen files for divorce. In both situations these are pretty flimsy reasons for a court to grant a divorce. In America until recently, in most of the then 48 states of the Union the only grounds for divorce was adultery. Now some of the states grant divorces on other serious grounds. But even now, a divorce is not granted just because the wife or husband feels like having one. The same holds true in halacha. Not every plaintiff who files for a divorce is entitled to a divorce. The halacha recognizes certain grounds for divorce, whether it is the wife who sues for divorce or it is the husband who sues for divorce. It is clear that according to Torah law only a Beth Din consisting of ordained judgescan compel a husband to give his wife a divorce. However, the Rabbis, in order to protect the wife and enable her to remarry, enacted that a Beth Din of non-ordained judges may also compel a husband to give his wife a divorce if there are valid halachic grounds for a divorce. Of course the Beth Din must follow the proceduresdescribed in Shulhan Aruch Eben haEzer, chapter 154. The last case that I want to discuss on the topic of the jurisdiction of non-ordained judges is a case that has neither a plaintiff nor a defendant. This is the case of accepting of converts. Their acceptance has always been part and parcel of the Jewish heritage commencing with Sarah and Abraham converting "souls" to the belief in Hashem. Only a Beth Din of ordained judges can do this. The two criteria for a Beth Din of non-ordained judges having the power in the matterdo not exist in the case of accepting of converts, namely, that the matter involve a possible loss of money and that it occurs frequently. Yet we know that Beth Din even today, when there are not any ordained judges, accepts converts. Tosafoth offers two solutions. First, in referring to the case of a convert, the Torah uses the words "a statute forever throughout your generations" (Numbers 15:15). From this we may infer that the present-day Beth Din of non-ordained judges are authorized to preside over cases of accepting converts. There is also a second reason given. The non-ordained judges do the bidding of the ordained judges of old where they are given jurisdiction in commercial matters so as "not to close the door to the borrower". Similarly they are given jurisdiction to accept converts so as "not to close the door to those who wish to enter the Divine covenant". There are other situations where the Beth Din consisting of non-ordained judges can act. However, I think that the next lesson should discuss those situations where the non-ordained judges were not given authority to act.
Meaning in Mitzvot by Rabbi Asher Meir These columns are based on the work “Meaning in Mitzvot”, which is serialized on Yeshivat Har Etzion’s OU-supported “Virtual Beit Midrash”, www.vbm-torah.org. Our parsha relates that “Yitzchak went out to confide in the midst of the field towards evening” (Bereshit 24:63). Our Sages learned from this verse that Yitzchak instituted the afternoon mincha prayer (Berakhot 26b). The overall impression we receive from this description is one of exposure. The time is towards evening, but it is still daytime - a time when our actions are exposed to all. The location is the field - an open and exposed place. (We learn in the following verses that Rivka did indeed perceive Yitzchak from afar as a resultof his exposed position.) Furthermore, Yitzchak is identified in the mystical tradition with the attribute of judgment - of having our actions exposed to Divine scrutiny. The Rishonim (Tur OC 232) and Acharonim (KSA 69:1) cite the aggada which admonishes us to be especially careful when praying mincha, insofar as Eliahu was answered only at this time when he prayed at Mount Carmel that his sacrifice should be consumed, and not that of the idolaters. (Melakhim I chapter 18, explained on Berakhot6b. Ahavat Eitan explains how we know that Eliahu wanted the prayer and miracle to be specifically during the day.) Here also we can discern the theme of exposure. The gemara explains that Eliahu prayed that the miraculous fire would be recognized as a real miracle, and not be mistaken for mere sorcery - an activity generally considered hidden and furtive (we call it “black magic”). Furthermore, bringing sacrifices outside of Yerushalaimis normally forbidden - it is only permitted as a special exception for a perfectly righteous Torah leader. Eliahu was careful to pray during the day because he wanted to emphasize that he was not doing something to be ashamed of, something furtive or forbidden. He was making a unique demonstration of the power of faithand prayer, which he wanted exposed to broad daylight. In light of this theme of exposure, it is hardly surprising that the Zohar considers the time of the afternoon prayers a time of harsh judgement. (See e.g. Zohar Yitro II:88b.) As we turn in prayer to HaShem during a busy time of day, He is likely to take a special interest in scrutinizing and judging how we have been occupyingourselves. This idea is really the flip side of another point made by the Tur and Kitzur Shulchan Arukh. They write that our preoccupation with our daily business requires us to be especially careful with our mincha prayer - to avoid distractions. The theme of exposure and judgment suggests that the opposite is also true: that ourmincha prayer requires us to be especially careful with our daily business! During our morning and evening prayers (Shacharit and Arvit), our thoughts may be far from our workday. This makes it easier for us to concentrate on our prayers, but it also makes it easier for us to ignore any incongruity between our work lives and the ideals our prayers are meant to express. By contrast, the sharp transitionmade at mincha from mundane work to standing before HaShem will be awkward if we do business without an active consciousness of G-d’s presence. The paradox of the mincha prayer should be an opportunity for us to examine if our conduct at work is in accord with our religious values. Rabbi Asher Meir is in the process of writing a monumental companion to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch which beautifully presents the meanings in our mitzvot and halacha. Hopefully, Rabbi Meir - who have givien a series on Business Halacha - will be giving a weekly shiur at the Israel Center in the near future. Watch for announcements. [The Chayei Sara Homepage]
|
