-
""'
The Great Kitniyot Rebellion: Searching for Modern Halakhic
Authenticity 1
[email protected]
1. b. Pesachim 35a
Mishna: These are the items with which a person may fulfill his
obligation during Pesach - wheats, spelt, oats, barley, and rye
Gemara: ...these, yes, but rice and millet no. From where do we
know these words? R. Shimon b. Lakish said the verse states - do
not eat upon it Chametz, all seven days you shall eat [upon it]
Matzot, [meaning] things which can become Chametz, a person may
fulfill with them his obligations for Matzah, excluding those
things which do not become Chametz but rather decay. [This proves]
our Mishna is not like R. Yochanan b. Nuri, for he stated that rice
is a type of grain,
and one is liable for Karet on [eating] its Chametz and one may
fulfill his obligation for Matzah through it.
2. Maimonides, Hil. Chametz uMatzah 5:1
,,,.,,
1Iamindebtedtothefollowingtwoarticles,whichhelpedformthebackboneandthefoundationofthisShiurmaterial:R.DavidBrofsky,HilkotMoadim:UnderstandingtheLawsoftheFestivals[Maggid:2013],ch.45R.ShlomoYosefZevin,haMoadimbHalakha[Heb.,TelAviv:5748]pp.255262
1
-
,,.
,ecir ekil ,toyintiK tub sniarg fo sepyt evif eht fo eno htiw
derrucni ylno si noitibihorp teraK A ro ecir morf devired ruolf
neve ;ztemahC emoceb ton od yeht -- .cte ,slitnel dna ,snaeb
,tellim
ztemahC rehto yna ekil esir ot dewolla dna ,derevoc ,retaw ni
deliob si hcihw taht ekil gnihtemos .yaced tsuj rehtar ,ssecorp
ztemahC ton si siht sa ,tae ot elbissimrep si ,rettab
tovztiM refeS ot yratnemmoC ,)0031 .d ,liebroC( uhayilE .R .b
ztereP .R .3 01:222 ;nataK
""",'''
,,",,"'
,,,,,,
',,,',
,.
no lla ta meht gnitae dibrof ot motsuc a dehsilbatse evah sibbaR
ruo toyintiK gnidrager dnA no snaeb etihw tae ot motsuc eht evah
deedni did leihceY uniebbaR ,ibbaR ym dna hcaseP
eht hcihw gnihtemos timrep ot tluciffid llits si ti tub milodeG
eht etic dluow eh dna hcaseP fo dnA .seitirohtua tseilrae eht fo
syad eht ecnis ,detibihorp sa detpecca ydaerla sah dlrow ztemahC
tuoba snrecnoc yna fo esuaceb dehsilbatse ton saw noitibihorp eht
taht smees ti ,esruoc
ahcalaH denrael evah ohw nerdlihcloohcs neve taht gnihtemos ni
rre ton did elpoep esuaceb ,flesti no toyintiK lla dibrof ot dna
motsuc eht dlohpu ot tcerroc smees ti erofereht dna wonk
ralimis a ni derots dna pu delip era dna ,egdirrop ekil era
esoht dna eseht htob esuaceb hcaseP daerb fo epyt a otni edam neve
era yeht hcihw ni secalp era ereht dna ...]niarg sa[ rennam
esufnoc dna ekatsim a ekam thgim denrael ton era ohw esoht dna
,sniarg evif eht ekil2 ...llew sa niarg sa derots si ti rof
,dratsum ot seilppa neve siht meht
','"",)"(2.
2
-
354# CO ;miruT habrA ,)0381-0721 ,odeloT( rehsA R .b vokaaY .R
.4
((
ot elbissimrep si ti dna ztemahC emoceb ton od osla yeht sa
,seiceps rehto dna ecir htiw ton tub... esoht era ereht dna
;toyintiK fo sepyt rehto lla htiw sa emas eht ,meht morf hsid
dekooc a ekam
yam niarg fo sepyt esuaceb ,meti dekooc a sa toyintiK fo sepyt
rehto lla dna ecir gnitae dibrof ohw ton evah ew dna ,ycnegnirts
suoulfrepus/evissecxe na si siht dna ,meht otni dexim emoceb
.motsuc siht decitcarp
652:2 ;auraZ rhO ,)0721-0021 ,anneiV( anneiV fo ehsoM .b caasI
.R .5
"".'
'
'.
ym taht draeh I drawretfa dna meht tae ton ot tcirts eb ot si
motsuc eht ,toyintiK htiw os dnA dna ,tneinel eb ot ecitcarp ni mih
dewollof ynam dna ,meht tae dluow flesmih aduheY .R rehcaet
...mih morf eussi dluow kcolb gnilbmuts a dibrof doG
,mahcureY uniebbaR ;)0531-0921 ,odeloT( malluhseM .b mahcureY .R
.6 1:14:3 ,5 vitaN
.
hsiloof a si hcaseP no toyintiK dekooc fo sepyt ro ecir tae ton
od ohw esoht fo motsuc eht... .nosaer neddih emos rof sevlesmeht
nopu tcirts eb ot ti gniod wohemos era yeht sselnu ,gahniM
,migahniM,lirahaMrefeS72415631,zniaM(nieloMiveLehsoM.R.bvokaaY.R.7tintik]61[.v.s,hcasePbtorussAtolahcaaMtohcliH
][,"",,,,,,.,
3 . ,
"",3)"""'
TCNITSNILAUTIR(,""""".
3
-
"..,.
,,,.
Kitniyot we have decreed that it is forbidden to cook them on
Pesach even though they do not become Chametz like the five grains
and one should not say that since there is no biblical prohibition
involved here, one neednt worry too much, because anything that the
Rabbis
decreed - one who violates it is liable for the death penalty,
having violated the dictum of thou shall not depart from their
words that they teach you...
8. R. Yosef Karo (Safed, 1542-1620) & R. Moshe Isserles
(Krakow, 1520-1572), Shulchan Aruch w/glosses of Rema; 453:1
(),,()*:.(),[]()
.(),.('")()().(),().()()
("'")
Mechaber: ...they do not become Chametz and it is permitted to
eat them cooked. Rema: And there are those who forbid, and the
custom in Ashkenaz is to be strict on this,
and we mustn't change that. It is obvious that we do not forbid
as dish in which they fell in, and it is permitted to use their oil
to light with, and it is permitted to leave Kitniyot in this
house...
9. R. Yaakov. b. R. Tzvi Emden (Altona, 1697-1776), Mor uKetzia
#453
And in a time of need, for sure we may permit all Kitnityot to
be eaten, for even our Rabbi the Baal ha-Turim, who was an
Ashkenazi, and the strict custom had already taken root in his days
did not pay serious attention to it, writing that it is a
superfluous Chumrah and that he did not practice it. It seems that
our fathers did not fully accept the custom even in his days, and
that it hadnt yet fully spread, and many authorities considered it
foolish, a mistake that doesnt
even require regret or annulment, as is clear from open Talmudic
passages all
4
-
stringencies with Kitniyot were expansions upon rice, and once
we uproot that, the rest of the plant dries out on its own. I can
testify about my own sainted father, how much that holy man would
be annoyed and bothered by this custom - every Pesach he would sigh
and
say if only I had enough power to cancel out this custom...
11. R. Moshe Feinstein (New York City, 1895-1986), Resp. Iggerot
Moshe; OC 3:63
...but you know, that this is not a matter at all, that all
things from which flour may be derived are forbidden due to this
custom, as there is nothing from which you can make flour from
like
potatoes and they never worried about them. And therefore, we
only include in this matter things that were explicitly forbidden,
that
which is known and publicized. And we might also explain the
foundations behind this rule
5
-
- that which was forbidden through Minhag, it was not done so
through a gathering of Rabbis, but rather through the custom of the
people who were led to be strict in this
area but because it was not decided upon formally in a Rabbinic
convocation, we only forbade those types of foods which were
initially singled out and did not expand the prohibition to others
which were not around at the time, like potatoes, for example,
which were not known at the time,
and therefore could not have been included in the prohibition,
even though the exact reasoning which does apply to all other items
included in the prohibition equally applies to potatoes; we do
not learn from that which was customary to forbid to things
which we were not accustomed to forbid.
And so, in regard to peanuts, they were not forbidden in many
places and in the place where there is no pre-existing custom, they
should not be forbidden, because in these matters [i.e., the
custom itself. JR] there is no reason to be strict...
12. R. Avraham b. Yechiel Michel Danzig (Vilna, 1748-1820),
Nishmat Adam; Pesach, klal #129
"""...,
'''"'"","""
,."
','.,'.,,'"""",
And based on this, one neednt ask about the custom for Kitniyot
that is practiced by us - Bnei Ashkenaz - whether or not it was
made through a communal agreement or by the great Rabbis of the
land in those days, because [in any event] it is simply forbidden;
in fact, even if it hadnt been
made through an agreement, since [the Minhag] had already spread
out, no less than that of Jewish women being stringent upon
themselves
it is impossible to permit, unless everyone regrets [the
Minhag], and this is to say that we need all of the countries of
Ashkenaz to regret it, and if so, [still] all agree that the
annulment would not work, and it would still remain forbidden
unless it was a case where there was nothing else to eat and it was
a case of preserving life, but if there was what to eat
than it would be impossible to permit it.
6
-
13. ibid., Chayyei Adam, 127:1 4
,[]""[]""[]"",',.,',,,
,...[,],,
,5
And since our fathers custom was such, it is prohibited for us
to change it, because of [the verse] do not stray from the Torah of
your mother and so too with all customs of Israel that were
enacted with a specific matter, even though they didnt formally
institute it, but rather acted as such on their own initiative;
therefore in a time of need, when a person can only procure what
to
eat with great effort, it is then permitted to cook Kitniyot and
other things...
4 On Potatoes as a staple food in European Jewish life, see
Philologos Blog, 3/2/11 (Jewish Daily Forward),
ATruffle,and10WordsforPotato:
AhumorousYiddishsongaboutbulbestellsusjusthowbasicastapleoftheEasternEuropeandiettheywere.Itsfirststanzagoes:Zuntikbulbes,montikbulbes,/Dinstikunmitvokhbulbes,/Donershtikunfraytikbulbes,/Obershabbesinanovenehabulbekugele./Zuntikvayterbulbes.Thatis,OnSundaypotatoes,onMondaypotatoes,/onTuesdayandWednesdaypotatoes,/onThursdayandFridaypotatoes,/ButonShabbes,forachange,potatokugel./OnSunday,potatoesagain.
5:""""."
7
-
14. R. Avraham Yitzchak ha-Kohen Kook (Jerusalem, 1865-1935),
Resp. Orach Mishpat; no. 108-109 6
Let the self-restricting eat, be satisfied and rejoice in the
great holiday which is upon is [Pesach] in the produce of of
beloved land, and in the handiwork of our brothers, who make it
fittingly
[=Kosher] in good spirit and mindset Dont rely on those who say
it is not Kitniyot but rather all this is dealing with Kitniyot
that have been soaked in liquid but God forbid that we prohibit the
permitted, that is, the sesame oil
made with great circumspection without any moisture, and it is
obvious that there is no suspicion that water is mixed in
afterward, because the custom does not deal with this in any
6SeeBezalelNaor,Haggadah:SpringtimeoftheWorld[Orot:2004]pp.155157,n.325forfurtherdiscussionandsourcesregardingthecontroversythatensuedfollowingR.Kookslenientruling.
8
-
event therefore, there are no grounds to be strict regarding
sesame oil produced under complete supervision for Pesach
PS - and it is also simple that it is forbidden to prohibit that
which is permitted...
15. Tomer Persico, Interview with R. Yuval Sherlo, Lulaot ha-El
[blog posting, 3/10/14]
TP: More than a decade ago, you wrote an article in Akdamot
(vol. 12, 5762) in which you pointed to the understanding of the
tension that exists between the nature of western, modern society
and the tradition of Halakha. You wrote:
the emergence and growth of the subjective, existential
experience of the modern and postmodern world, brings the objective
nature and the patterns of its codification into an awkward,
strange light. The great importance placed in our world on
authenticity and independence, to internal/personal freedom of
choice - stands in direct contradiction to the edifice of
Halakha.
TP: So, explicitly - in direct contradiction to the edifice of
Halakha. How do you think we can reconcile the fact that most of us
live in the same world in which we assign great value to
authenticity, internal freedom and choice, and how that changes
Halakha specifically, and the religious world of those who keep
Mitzvot in our days in general?
9
-
RYS: There is in the Halakha a solid, consistent foundation.
Anyone who learns Torah is able to recognize this ethos of
consistency, the dynamics of Halakha, the subservience to previous
generations - these things are all very, very present in the world
of Halakhic decision making. In our reality, there is a great
movement for change, of subjectivity, of narratives and personal
viewpoints, renewal. So both of these cultures stand in opposition.
In the place where the contradiction stands - and, as mentioned,
regarding the issue we are talking about stands a conflict between
the surrounding culture and the common nature of Halakha - there
stand two possible basic moves: one of them is to
specifically/consciously go and accentuate the contradiction, to
cry out like Eliyahu ha-Navi, until when will you dance at two
weddings!?, to force a choice between one of these two approaches:
complete fealty to the framework of Halakha or absolute loyalty to
the values of freedom and freedom of choice.
The second movement, to which I am much closer, is a soft
movement it reveals that the distinctions/gulf between the two
[approaches] are much less stark, softer on one hand, this new
movement reveals the failures and the problematics that are
inherent with trying to situate everything in the lens of
authenticity and independence, freedom and choice. It reveals the
ethical-moral issue in a world which creates its frameworks based
on narrative alone, the low-key revolution in a world where
ideologies have died; and it learns that even in such a world,
there is a pressing need for a language that speaks also in
objective terms, with strong foundations of fundamental morals and
the stability of tradition On the other hand, the movement that
stands at the other pole reveals that many things said in the name
of Halakha - are in actuality not truly Halakhic in any sense. It
reveals though, that the framework of Halakha has much more space
for freedom and choice [within it]... 7
7,- " : " " " .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD8su0m04lA :
.2014 , 26- The Pursuit of - ' 52-74 ' ,PEOPLE OF THE BOOK , '
the Countertext: The Turn to the Jewish Legal Model in
Contemporary American Legal Theory, 106 Harv. L. Rev. 813
10
-
11