Comments on: French’s Worcestershire no longer kosher

By: Avi

Avi — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 20:40:34 +0000

Hi i know that some of the twisted smirnoff’s are under KSA the black cherry (my favorite) doesnt say KSA on the label is it kosher?
Thanks

By: arielb

arielb — Sun, 21 Aug 2005 01:21:35 +0000

There are many *other* food combinations listed in the gemara as causing sakana but since the problem was with physical diseases and we don’t seem to have a problem with those combinations, we don’t have a problem with eating those foods. We can say times have changed: maybe we or the food has adapted/bred or perhaps the environment was different.

(on the other hand that can happen in reverse as now we are worried about mercury in our fish!)

So with regards to those other foods we can go by science.

But the combination of fish and meat is different because the disease mentioned is a spiritual disease. So while you won’t drop dead if you eat fish with meat, it will affect your neshoma.

By: arielb

arielb — Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:56:38 +0000

Cholov Yisroel is halacha. The only heter was by Rabbi Moshe Feinstein during the 80’s for American companies when:
1) the FDA regularly checked the milk companies who would be scared of playing with the government. But: the FDA isn’t as strict with their supervision today as in the past and the objection to Rav Moshe’s psak even then was that anyone with $$$ could simply bribe the authorities. And for the thousands of years before Rav Moshe, nobody had any heter to consider American milk to be cholov yisroel. But there is certainly no heter to go to some small farm in mexico and drink the milk without supervision!
2) R’ Moshe’s Heter was only b’shaas hadchak. In those days it was hard to get Golden Flow or New Square and the kids need their milk so there was room for heter. But if you can easily get cholov yisroel milk from the supermarket and you just want to have some non cholov yisroel cream in your coffee…that’s a much harder case to make.

By: HB

HB — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 23:15:37 +0000

jabbet — Thank you for your response.

By: jabbett

jabbett — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:48:48 +0000

HB, you’re right that I owe some more explanation of my statement. My perspective is based on the notion of tzara’at, which the RA teshuva translates as “leprosy.” Those whom I’ve asked about tzara’at have hesitated to translate it as leprosy, which is a specific medical ailment (Hansen’s Disease), as opposed to the affliction described in the Torah, which can affect both people and homes as a punishment for inappropriate behavior between men. (I believe this distinction is discussed in full by Samson Raphael Hirsch.)

I thus understood that tzara’at, though it manifests physically, has a uniquely spiritual cause and a uniquely spiritual resolution.

Like you, HB, I’m not an authority, and, even beyond that, most all of my knowledge is on the practical side of things, which is why I rarely — if ever — start this kind of conversation. But from my limited understanding of tzara’at, I do not see it, as Rabbi Plotkin seems to, in terms of medicine and science. Since Rabbi Plotkin’s teshuva bases its conclusion on strictly scientific grounds — “today we know that there is no sakana affecting tzara’at” — I personally see no halachic elimination of the spiritual hazards inherent in biblical tzara’at.

By: marcharlan

marcharlan — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:44:08 +0000

David: You dont get it. The point I am making is that you should engage in reasoned debate. Your tone dismisses the conclusions of a large group of Rabbis merely because of their affiliation rather than the analysis with which they engage.

By: David

David — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:53:38 +0000

Chalav Yisroel and Pas Yisroel certainly did exist years ago. They were instuted by Hillel and Shammai. They are mentioned in the Gemera, the Shulchan Aruch, and the Mishna Breruah.
There is a longstanding custom, that even if one is not strict about pas yisroel year round, one should be between Rosh Hoshanna and Yom Kippur. How could there be a long standing custom to be strict about PY, if the idea didn’t exist?
It most certainly an issue of Orthodox vs. Conservative, because although there a wide divergance of Orthodox opinions it is still all within certain parameters. NO Orthodox rabbi would say that swordfish or sturgeon is kosher. A C rabbi would. Probably no more than 5 O rabbis in America would say that that gelatin made of non-shechted cattle is kosher, or that rennet made from unshechted cattle makes kosher cheese, but probably every C rabbi does.

By: marcharlan

marcharlan — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:32:02 +0000

Starting “with all due respect” you immediately show disrespect for the audience. The issue here is not Orthodox versus Conservative, because there is a divergence on many kashrut issues within the Orthodox community. Indeed, witness the growth of such extreme positions as “Chalav Yisrael” “Pat Yisrael” which years ago did not exist, indeed many authorities permitted use of milk without any oversight but the mere representation of the herd makeup by civil authorities! Rather the issue is the respect necessary for reasoned debate in a polite atmosphere.

By: HB

HB — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:16:55 +0000

jabbet, I am a curious about your comment, “this prohibition is not something we can just annul based on science, especially because kashrut isn’t based on science.” Yet this particular rule does appear to be based on science… the science of a long time ago.

I say “appear” because I do not consider myself an authority. Yet reading the RA piece, I find it quite compelling. Not only does it lay out the reason for the prohibition as being based solely on an understanding at the time that mixing meat and fish did risk physical harm, it also describes as precedent a case where a different prohibition based on danger was lifted once it became understood that there was no longer a prevalent danger.

Having just now looked at the OU piece that you linked, it appears that the OU is in agreement that mixing meat and fish is not dangerous: “several major poskim point out that the danger Chazal referred to is no longer prevalent”. Although I disagree with the final analysis that they won’t permit what was once prohibited, I respect their choice and most importantly the fact that they understand the history and background of the issue. I only wish that others that read this blog would show the same respect to the RA Teshuva and its authors. Although they may not agree with the final analysis, i.e. it is acceptable to mix fish and meat, they should respect the knowledge and scholarly credentials of the writers.

By: David

David — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:10:50 +0000

Who says I didn’t read it? I read it. I have also read the teshuva from the 50’s that says you can drive on Shabbat and the one that says that a Kohain can marry a divorcee or a convert. They are simply not relevant to me or the vast majority of shomrei kashrus Jews who do not and would not rely on the opinions of non-Orthodox clergy. I have asked a shaila of the Rav I hold by and he has told me that I can’t mix meat and fish. I’d be very surprised if one could find more than mabye two Orthodox pulpit rabbi’s who would say that one could lechatchila mix meat and fish. I would very respectfully suggest that you ask a shaila rather than assuming based on evidence that the halachah has been abolised.