Rabbinical or private kashrut?
Hello, Your Honor,
A question that has been bothering me for a long time and I would be happy if you could give me as comprehensive an answer as possible,
As a member of the Haredi sector, I was accustomed to thinking that all kashrut bodies that aren't exactly "ours" are a "return to the tax haven,"
That is, what is the difference between all the kashrut bodies, private, institutional, etc.
More precisely, my question is, is there any significance beyond the testimony of one witness attesting that the food is kosher? According to what you know, are there any kosher bodies that officially do not strictly adhere to essential things?
And is it possible to say that one can eat kosher food according to the regular rabbinic law, not Mehadrin, without fear of actually violating Halacha? And is there a difference in this between meat and dairy?
Thanks in advance, sorry for the confusion.
לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
0 Answers
Hello.
This is a broad topic and I am not familiar with all the details. I will write to you what I think I understand.
The assertions that anyone who is not of ours is a "traif khazer" are purely political. We can ignore them (and the stories that accompany them) with ease. The fact is that everyone says this about the other, and it is impossible for everyone to be right (kashrut X cannot be both the best and traif khazer). It should be known that kashrut has always been a political tool (even in the community, the rabbi has always had a tool to impose his opinion by removing and granting kashrut).
In general, there are always problems in large, institutionalized kashrut, no matter if it's Badatz or Rabbi Landa or the Rabbinate. I've heard hair-raising stories and testimonies about all of them. Some of the stories are out of the blue, and others are true but exist in all kashruts.
The Rabbinate, whose last advocate I will be, is improving a lot in terms of kashrut. In my opinion, most of the problems were originally due to the Haredi control over the Rabbinate's kashrut. The Haredim, who in any case do not eat from it, did not care about letting those who "do not strictly observe kashrut" (since in their opinion it is a travesty anyway) eat whatever they wanted. As mentioned, in my opinion the situation is improving today, and the Rabbinate is becoming an increasingly professional body in this field, although its conduct is the same as the Rabbinate in other fields and there is no need to go into detail. I do not think that private bodies are run much better. There are a lot of interests involved in this, and so on. The Rabbinate, as a public institution, has mechanisms for improvement and control, which in my opinion are less present in private bodies. Although of course the Rabbinate is a public body, more like the Shtibel, and therefore it is not really like any other public body.
In general, we have accepted that it is possible to follow the laws of trust and after the presumption, and the presumption that a kosher body does not feed the public carrion. Beyond one witness who is faithful to the prohibitions, there is a presumption that an artisan does not harm his own soul. Even if there are problems, and there certainly are, it is permissible to rely on the presumption and eat anyway.
It is true that the regular rabbinate in kashrut sometimes follows standards that are not agreed upon (only for some opinions), but in my opinion there is no trepidation there and you do not fail in anything serious. All this until proven otherwise. Therefore it is better to eat kashrut from the Mehadrin rabbinate, but even that is not really mandatory.
Nowadays, if you don't rely on institutionalized skills, you can't live. You'll have to make everything yourself at home. It's not practical, and the Torah was not given to the ministering angels.
The fear of eating forbidden foods stems from the taboo that it dulls the mind and that there are metaphysical effects to non-kosher food. I don't see it that way. In my opinion, it's a law like any other law, and you can follow the rules of Halacha without fear. If you fail, then it's rape and, thank God, a fungus. Nothing happened. And even if it dulls the mind, it's only if you violated Halacha, not when you were observing it.
There is an interesting answer by the Ben Ish Chai on this matter, see the Responsa of Rav Pe'alim Chd. at the end of the section on the Secret of Yesharim, 5:10:
https://1drv.ms/w/s!Ahr4iW7qjF2o0SrEOTfujow1-dU3
And there, in the body of the Responsorial Psalm Ohacha 62, he recounted an incident in which he was a rabbi of Baghdad, and one day it was revealed to him by a messenger who came to the city that all the tefillin that all the people of the city had put on for generations were not square enough. Their conclusion was that everyone's tefillin were invalid. He discussed there whether it was possible that all of them had not yet fulfilled the commandment of tefillin, and that they all had a "headscarf not to put on tefillin." He proved from several sources that this is not so, and even though tefillin is a positive commandment, and according to the halakha, "one who is not forced to wear tefillin is not a slave," here they are considered to have fulfilled the commandment of tefillin. This is a sensational innovation, but certainly, regarding the Levites among whom one is forced to wear tefillin, one must say yes, as he actually wrote in the answer cited above.
לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
השאר תגובה
Please login or Register to submit your answer