- This topic has 96 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
RE; Butter. In addition to the issues Mark Levin correctly states, Butter could possibly be an issue of Gevinas Akum, depending on the cream source. If they’re adding whey cream (separated after Cheese coagulation) then we must verify the Culture, Stater Media and (microbial) Rennet sources. If the cream is separated from the cook water (Mozzarella and Provolone are cooked and streched), that cream would be gevinas akum.
“By this logic there wouldn’t be gallon containers of Chalav Stam in stores. Yet we see many gallon containers of Chalav stam in stores.”
The strategy of a large retailer such as walmart or target is not the same as the local jewish store. certain products are considered loss leaders. Is why you sometimes see a gas station sell a gallon of milk out of their convenience store for $3.49. Heimishe stores also use this concept, but slightly differently. Before the 9 days for example stores may be selling things such as fish and pasta at lower prices to get you into the store. Some stores actually sell meat at a very low price during the 9 days to get you into the store. Unfortunately, for the chalav yisroel consumer, milk is usually not part of that strategy.
Gavra, ????? ????? ?, ?.
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14334&st=&pgnum=40&hilite=
Are ulcers listed in the ???????
Thank you.
The Chazon Ish basically gives two possibilities. The first is that the Chachomim were Koveah Treifos based on what they could do medically at the time. Had they lived now, they would not have included it in the Treifos. None the less, the Halachah is set by what the Chachomim decided then (interestingly, another proponent of this Shittah is Rabbi Nathan Slifkin).
The second is evolution, and that the Refuos would not have worked on the bodies of people during the time of Chazal, but they can work on ours.
A hole in the stomach is listed as a Treifah by the Rambam; I can’t speak to “The Braisah”. But if you would like, you can switch the example to an amputee above the knee, which we know can live a long life now but still has the “din” of a Treifah.
Disagree about Slifkin.
I’m asking if an ulcer qualifies as a “hole”.
I don’t know why you are dismissing out of hand something which some serious talmidei chachomim hold to be a problem.
I’m not. I just don’t understand why people would think the inspection has gotten worse acc. to Rav Moshe tz”l in more recent years.
Rav Moshe said we needed inspectors by the dairies. There still is. The FDA does not need to know where the milk came from, it just needs to make sure no non-kosher milk is added in. This has not changed.
What has changed, is that the farms are generally not connected to the dairies anymore. But instead there are now state inspectors directly at the farms.
If you can give me a reason how the situation is worse than before, fine. Just quoting Rabbanim saying to be machmir, when it could be bec. of a myriad of different issues why they could say to be machmir (DA cows, the widespread available cholov yisrael, added ingredients such as vitamins) does not prove that inspection is worse than before.
GAW and DY: R’ Moshe has a T’shuvah on this identical issue where he says similar to the Chazon Ish but comes out differently (it’s in CM 2, I think). Also, DY, I think Slifkin is B’feirush on this for Hilchos Treifos, for whatever it’s worth (not much).
Sam2 – a quick Google search yielded CMII:73.
I have to look through it completely, but Rav Moshe asks my question regarding Rotzach.
By the way, I don’t think dairy farms have non-cow animals anymore. It should all be Muttar because of Ein Tamei B’edro anyway.
“When I asked a different well known posek for his opinion, he told me (and asked not to be quoted), “You should be machmer”.”
Yes, YOU should be machmer since you asked for yourself, but the entire frum community need not be machmer since we did not ask this posek and since this posek wanted anonymity, it means that this Psak was for you only.
Being machmer beyond the ikor din is a personal decision. Everyone has their pet Mitzvos where they may want to be machmer, i.e., tzedakah; esrog; glatt; cholov Yisroel.
However, there are certain areas where one must be stringent, i.e., talking in shul; g’zeila; lying; loshon hora.
Sam, the ??”? says:
??? ???? ????? ?????? ???? ?????, ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ????? — ????, ????? ??? ?????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ????
I believe they do allow ???? ????, but we’re discussing where he’s not present at all.
Cherrybim, I never told anyone whom to follow. I’m just pointing out that there’s a possibility that nowadays, cholov stam is not okay mei’ikar hadin (and not just because of the treifah issue).
Part of the teshuvah from the Nirbater Rov:
…???? ???? ?????, ??? ????? ??”? ?? ????”? ?????? ???, ????? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ???”? ?????, ?? ???? ??? ???????, ??????? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ???, ????????? ????? ???????, ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ???????, ??????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ???????? ???????? ?? ?????? ??????????? ?? ?? ?? ????????? ????? ???? ???.
?????? ??? ????????? ????? ??????? ??? ???? ?????? ???????? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??, ??? ??? ??? ????? (????) ???? ?? ?? ?????, ?? ?”? ?????? ?????. ?”? ?? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ????. ??”? ????? ??? ???”? ??? ???? ?? ?? ??????? ?? ????”? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???, ??? ?? ???? ??”? ????? ??? ????? ?????
Thanks, DY.
Where can I get the whole teshuva?
????? ??? ????????? ????? ??????? ??? ???? ?????? ???????? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??,
Don’t really understand. Acc. to Rav Avrohom Gordimer, one of the top experts of this subject, the state makes unannounced visits to farms. If non-kosher animals are present, that would be a glaring violation.
Milk from other animals could be mixed in even if the other animals aren’t present.
Which State consistently and vigilantly visits farms? Not all 50 States have the same rules. And the milk could be produced in any number of States.
I found an online link to that letter. Google “ChalavAkumLetter.pdf”.
Things other than milk could be mixed in too.
But that wasn’t the gezeirah.
Thanks, DY. Much appreciated.
Don’t have time right now to look through the whole thing but saw some emails on the bottom. The Nirbater Rav shlit”a is showing that there are no chemical testing. But, again Rav Moshe tz”l never required chemical testing in the first place. The FDA is watching to make sure the milk is not adulterated. That is what is needed. I don’t really understand.
The e-mails show that State officials indicate that they do not monitor whether the milk producer mixes in non-cow’s milk. The State merely relies on the producer’s following the law prohibiting that even though the State doesn’t test or monitor to prevent it. The State official says they would investigate if they were made aware it occurred ex post facto, but that they do not monitor to see if it is occurring.
FWIW, I’ve seen gallon containers of CY in a couple of stores. I think it was Fresh and Healthy brand, but I’m not sure.
There are some issues here that I don’t quite understand. I just checked my container of Breakstones butter and it has an OUd. I then checked my package of Monterrey Jack cheese and it has an OK Chalav stam. Rav Moshe allowed Chalav stam.
My point being his what is gained by this monthly rehashing of the issue. Who cares what additives may or not have been added to the butter? That’s why you buy butter with hashgacha. People who eat Chalav stam will continue to do so as they don’t hold from the Nirbater Rav, and those who use CY will continue to do so. No minds are being changed.
DY: I assume Yoshev BaChutz is the same as not being there, but I might have to do more research on that.
JT, exactly how is the FDA “watching”? Perhaps Rabbi Gordimer can answer you. I’m sure there’s a rebuttal and a counter rebuttal and a counter counter rebuttal etc. I’m just pointing out what’s out there.
LC, it’s very relevant to those who don’t don’t follow R’ Moshe’s heter, but want to use stam butter. There are people who did in the past but no longer do. As far as the rest of the discussion, feel free to skip it if you don’t find it useful or interesting. Others might.
Sam, ?”?, ?”?, ????. Really, it’s pashtus in the ???? ???”?, although the ????? is ???? a ?”? like you.
DaasYochid:
1: Regarding the CY point, by the OU putting their mark on the product, they are taking responsibility that the milk used (which presumably also has a Hechsher) is also not adulterated. The only issue is the Gezairah of Cholov Yisroel, and on that specific issue the supervision of the FDA (however that is done, I’m not an expert) and resulting fines is sufficient according to Rav Moshe’s Hetter. As for the Nirbater Rov’s teshuva, do you really believe that at the time of Rav Moshe the FDA came down to every single dairy to check?
2: Regarding the Treifus issue, Rav Moshe holds of a combination of the Chazon Ish’s terutzim (Chazal Koveh and evolution), but also holds that the Simanei Tarfus were only set for animals. For people, Tarfus only depends on Mekomo V’shaito if they can live (and brings a Rambam to prove it). L’cheorah, it makes for tremendous Nafkei Mina l’gabei the Dinim of Gozez/Treifah, Eidus, etc. I also don’t see why there should be a Chiluk between people and animals lgabei this din, and ask the Olam for their ideas.
DaasYochid- Thank You. Bli neder, I will try to do more research but I just want to make the point that acc. to Rav Moshe’s teshuvas it is very mashma that chemical testing is not needed.
Gavra, I don’t know what form of FDA supervision R’ Moshe was referring to. It seems that the Nirbater Rov feels that that supervision is no longer in effect. Which leads to my response to JT: I am understanding that the Nirbater Rov is addressing the possibility that the availability and fear of chemical testing would replace the need for human supervision which existed at the time Rav Moshe was mattir, but no longer does exist. He is saying, though, that it does not create a mirsus – because they don’t have any policy to do it, and the only available test is DNA testing, which is expensive.
Again, I don’t personally know what the metzius was, or is now, but the OU itself acknowledges that it did change, although as noted, they say for the better.
The “Yisroel” in “Chalav Yisroel” is a camera focused on the cows while the Yisroel is home watching the milking.
Source?
If they did that, I think CY would be more widely available.
Can’t the hashgacha agencies (i.e. OU-D, OK-D) effectively replace whatever the inspections the FDA did in Rav Moshe’s time that they no longer do?
After all, per Rav Moshe’s heter you could drink any milk in America even if it has no kashrus agency certification or inspection.
In fact, by the kashrus agencies inspecting and certifying the product, does that no suffice? Or did Rav Moshe indicate the food producers needed the fear of the government penalties for violating the law to make the heter effective?
“Can’t the hashgacha agencies (i.e. OU-D, OK-D) effectively replace whatever the inspections the FDA did in Rav Moshe’s time that they no longer do?”
The vast majority of milk changes hands from the farmer to the milking company. The company takes in milk from many different farms. One company I spoke with told me 700 farms. The company gets all the raw milk, pasteurizes it, homogenizes it, and then bottles it. This would present a big problem for any kashrut inspector; even C”Y can’t come from this system. To get C”Y one needs to have a dairy farm that goes all the way from milking to bottling in the same facility.
Besides that logistical problem, the average farmer would probably not appreciate an uninvited stranger coming to oversee his farm.
There was an interesting article a year or so back where a Rabbi made a claim that there was a milk (it had some shark extract mixed in) that is only Kosher if it doesn’t have any Hashgacha but if it had Kosher certification it would be Treif. He’s probably even right.
Joseph-The OU is not involved in making sure the milk is from a cow, what they do is have yotzi vnichnas by the dairy to make sure the milk does not get unkosher ingredients (such as non-kosher vitamins) added in.
But you actually bring up an excellent point, that I have not thought of before. If the OU is inspecting the dairy, then acc. to Rav Moshe tz”l, it could possibly suffice. Again, Rav Moshe holds the gezeriah only takes effect when it reaches the hand of a Jew (IM YD 1:49). Therefore while it is in the dairy, why can’t the OU’s yotzi vnichnas suffice to actually make it chalav yisrael without government inspection needed? Unless you say that the OU would have to be tomid at the dairy for this to work.
Gavra, the chilluk is that r’tzichah is talui in the metzius: was he someone who would have died within twelve months, or not? The onesh misah is only on one who kills the latter.
Treifah by an animal is a din that a treifah is assur. The definition of treifah, as per halachah l’Moshe miSinai, is a nekev which would kill an animal within twelve months [at the time Chazal codified/established the parameters for the din].
Sam, how so?
JT, that level of “supervision” is not enough to create the mirsus necessary for an anan sahadi. The OU already was giving a hechsher on dairy products during R’ Moshe’s lifetime, and he became, if anything, more machmir later on.
Let’s say the OU signs some kind of contract with the dairy, saying if you put in non-kosher milk, you get a fine just like the fine that is given now by the FDA.
Here’s my question:
If we go acc. to the heter of Rav Moshe of “shelo byad yisrael”, what can a Yid do to make it chalav yisrael when it has already been milked but still in the non-Jew’s hand?
DY: Well, it’s Batel. And you won’t say Bittul Lechatchilah is Assur if a Goy does the Bittul. But if he does it Al Da’as Yisrael, you do. So if the milk has a Hechsher, that shows it’s (at least somewhat) Al Daas Yisrael.
I thought you might have meant that. I don’t think a hechsher makes it al daas Yisroel. (I think that’s the only reasonable way to not think Thomas’ English Muffins are assur.)
Gavra, the chilluk is that r’tzichah is talui in the metzius: was he someone who would have died within twelve months, or not? The onesh misah is only on one who kills the latter.
Treifah by an animal is a din that a treifah is assur. The definition of treifah, as per halachah l’Moshe miSinai, is a nekev which would kill an animal within twelve months [at the time Chazal codified/established the parameters for the din].
Meheicha Teisi, and what is the S’vorah behind the chiluk. Pashtus the Mishnayos and Gemorah talk about “Harag es HaTreifah”, not “Harag mi sheino kayam yud beis chodesh”.
Apparently, this is what R’ Moshe saw in the sugya, but it shouldn’t be a big chiddush: zil basar ta’ama. The reason for the chilluk in the onesh of harag as hatreifah is that the consequence of his action isn’t as bad.
His point about HL”M perhaps is based on assuming that it falls under the category of shiurin (gemara Sukkah).
DaasYochid – all of the sudden, we drop the Halacha L’Moshe Misinai and hold like Rav Shimon Darash T’aama D’krah?
I don’t disagree that is what Rav Moshe says, but it is not the Pashtus and there are Rishonim that disagree and hold that the Treifos apply to people as well (with all of the baggage that comes along with them).
Perhaps there isn’t a HL”M for rotzeach regarding a historical date, while there is for animals. I don’t know where R’ Moshe saw it in the sugya.
Perhaps there isn’t a HL”M for rotzeach regarding a historical date, while there is for animals.
If I were a betting Gavra (or a bit more OO), I would say that Rav Moshe (and the RAMBAM!) agreed that it is unconscionable to allow application of the standard “Halacha L’Moshe Mi’Sinai” Treifos to people, and therefore not apply Misas Bais Din to someone who killed a person that could have lived a full life.
Therefore, although Rav Moshe can accept the “Keveiah” by the Chachomim for animals, it would be impossible for Chazal to have done so for people.
Note that Rashi in Maakos seems to disagree, and implies that if a person had a siman Treifah that the Rotzeach would not be convicted by Beis Din.
If I were a betting Gavra (or a bit more OO)
It’s a good thing you’re not, and realize that your theory is shtus.
DY: Doesn’t R’ Moshe give GAW’s logic explicitly in that T’shuvah? That it’s just Lo Yitachen?
DY: Doesn’t R’ Moshe give GAW’s logic explicitly in that T’shuvah? That it’s just Lo Yitachen?
I didn’t see that.
What Rav Moshe does seem to (possibly) say is that since Retzicha is Talui in having a Sanhedrin, when the issue becomes Nogeigh (i.e. when there is a Sanhedrin, B’mhirah byamainu), they will also have the right to redefine Treifos Al Pi the current Metzius of that time.
If I were a bit more OO, I would claim that Rav Moshe is trying to avoid the issue. Halachicly, Rav Moshe is simply saying that we (without Smichah) don’t have the ability to over-ride Chazal’s definitions of Traifah, even though due to evolution they no longer are the metzius.
Doesn’t R’ Moshe give GAW’s logic explicitly in that T’shuvah? That it’s just Lo Yitachen?
I didn’t see it either, although I didn’t read the entire teshuvah.
Besides the fact that you probably imagined that, R’ Moshe’s “lo yitochein” would be based on kol haTorah kulah and nothing else, so it would be a huge bizayon to even use the term OO in the same sentence (which I actually just did…).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.