Kosher for Passover Gasoline

There is a certain e-mail circulating around the Jewish e-mail world right now that is supposedly an article written in the Bergen County Jewish Times suggesting that ethanol-free gasoline will be made available for people who do not wish to use a derivative of corn on Pesach.

My wife is subscribed to a community based list-serve where she was sent a copy of this e-mail. This list-serve has dozens of e-mails going back and forth discussing the various halachic reasons why such a product would be good to use on pesach. Only a few people have realized that this is a joke.

Here is the text of the e-mail:

Bergen County Jewish Times
By Danielle Wolfberg and Henry Lorman
Teaneck, New Jersey
March 1,2007

Yaniv Ban-Zaken, a local gas station owner, will be selling Kosher for Passover gasoline during the holiday this year. The move, Ben-Zaken says, has become necessary due to the increased ethanol content in gasoline required by the government. The ethanol is typically derived from corn, which is a forbidden food for Jews on Passover. And, according to Ben-Zaken, underJewish law, it is also forbidden to derive any benefit from corn.

"We will be providing a number of services to anyone interested in making their motor vehicle Kosher for Passover," Ben-Zaken says. Services will include siphoning off the non-Kosher gasoline and replacing it with the Kosher gasoline. The entire process will be supervised by Rabbi Yitzchok Mendelbaum. A special exemption to the EPA rule regarding the plant ethanol content of gasoline had to be obtained from the government to allow for the use of this gasoline.

The move has created some controversy among local community leaders. Rabbi Shalom Silver, of Congregation Ohel Emeth in Teaneck, has recommended to his congregants that they not buy the gasoline. "Although Jews of Ashkenazi descent are not permitted to eat corn on Pesach, they are permitted to derive benefit from corn byproducts, such as gasoline with ethanol additives," he said.

However, Rabbi Mordechai Silver (no relation to Shalom Silver), of Yeshivas Torah Ohr in nearby Englewood, disagrees, and maintains that while it might technically be acceptable to use mass-produced gasoline, those who can afford to purchase the new alternative should. "In Jewish law, we have a principle of lifnim mshuras hadin--going above and beyond the basic requirements of the law," he explained in an email. "Thank G-d, many people in the area can afford to do so in this case."

Some local Jewish leaders have also complained about the high price of the ethanol-free gas, which Ben-Zaken estimates will be $9.69 per gallon, but Ben-Zaken insists that it is necessary. "The Kosher gas is made in small quantities and not mass produced, so the costs are high." In fact, Ben-Zaken, an immigrant from Israel who is not himself religious, claims that he will not be making any profit on the sale of the Kosher gas. "I'm doing this more as a community service. My hope is that people will be more likely to patronize my station the rest of the year." Julio Sanchez, one of Ben-Zakens employees, also expressed some concern over the high price, explaining that it might drive away customers and reduce his income from tips. Co-worker Naveen Samhari disagreed, because, as he says, "Orthodox Jews are among the best tippers in the area."

Ben-Zaken also says he will be contracting with a local car rental agency to provide customers with a Kosher for Passover car if they would prefer not to use their own. This will also save the time of having to clean chametz from the car before Pesach--time that many local two-income families do not have. "Jews use different dishes for Passover. They ought to be able to use a different car, as well." Ben-Zaken says.

There is no such newspaper as the "Bergen County Jewish Times" and the people named in the article only show up (in a Google search) as being linked to this article.

What bothers me is not that someone is still having some Adar fun, but that people are actually believing this. Some of the people responding to the original e-mail are suggesting that this is some sort of Government plot to lift the embargo on Cuba, as well as discussing the halachic problems of eating peanuts on Pesach - since they might be Kitnyot. And even if they are we shouldn't be using derivatives of Kitnyot on Pesach.

[No one seems to remember that until a few years ago only Peanut Oil was Kosher L
L'Pesach when finally other Pesachdik oils came out.]

The discussion came to new hights when raui la achilat kelev was brought up and someone suggesting that we take a bowl of gasoline and give it to a dog.

Well someone has certainly had their fun, but I seriously hope that no one takes this too seriously and next year we actually see this type of nonsense.

Another Historic Cover-up: The Ben Ish Chai

In the recent issue of Hakirah, Dan Rabinowitz wrote a very interesting essay regarding the Halachot of wearing a Yarmulke. He goes on to discuss the trend within the past 50 years that completely removes any discussion regarding the obligation to keep one's head covered at all times.

Rabinowitz printed three photographs to help prove his point (two where the subject's head is uncovered and one where one of the previous photos has mysteriously grown a kippah). He also spoke about - though unfortunately did not provide the picture - that a common photograph of the Lubavitcher Rebbe that originally had him without a kippah.

I find it interesting that we try to re-write history to remove any of that evil "C" word (change). I noticed two months ago a similar revising of history.


This is the Ben Ish Chai, R'Yosef Chaim Baghdadi (1832-1909):
This is the only picture of him that ever existed. As the story goes he refused to have his picture taken, until the rich supporter of his Yeshiva requested one, and he relented. If you notice there is a black stripe on the right side - yes, he wore Tefillin all day long.

This is the cover of Peninei HaBen Ish Chai published by Feldheim.

If you notice he has suddenly grown a Peyah on his left side. I'm pretty sure that he did in fact have peyot, but this is clearly an addition to the photograph. I'm stumped as to why someone would want to add this, the man wore Tefillin all day long, it isn't like there are no signs that he is frum. A friend of mine suggested that the artist who colored the picture may have thought he saw one and drew it in, but until I bought this book I never thought there was a peyah there, if anything the beard in the original just needed to be combed.

This is nowhere near the "scandal" that Rabinowitz speaks about, but peyot are not even Halachikly mandated which is why is seems so strange to me that, of all things, it would be added.

Fine Line: Criticizing Israel Without Anti-Semitism

[I'm in the middle of writing down my thoughts on the diaspora community - especially the frum community - stifling debate on Israel. This seems to be part one of a series (not sure how long) on this topic.]

Adin Steinsaltz

Fine Line: Criticizing Israel Without Anti-Semitism

The term “anti-Semitism” is itself a euphemism for "anti-Jewishness," and it is therefore easy to replace it with other words that may have a similar meaning. In many places, to be “anti-Semitic” has become unacceptable and has thus been replaced with “anti-Zionism” or anti-Israel stances, which are easier to condone.

In my view, anyone, Jew and non-Jew alike, may criticize the State of Israel without being anti-Semitic, but it is walking a fine line. One’s criticism of Israel should be of a certain nature.

The critique must be honest and without other agendas. The first step in making such a critique, as in any other criticism, is to verify the facts. Misinformation and negative propaganda are in abundance today, particularly in this day and age of the Internet. Furthermore, anti-Semitism is not confined only to non-Jews; Jews can be - and sometimes actually become - quite anti-Semitic. Therefore, Jewish, and even Israeli, sources may be as unreliable as Iranian or Syrian sources. When criticizing Israel, one must be careful about truth vs. misinformation, reality vs. prejudice.

In addition to the issue of factuality, there are other, more subtle elements involved here. Anti-Zionism and anti-Israel positions may be a covert expression of a desire to eradicate any concentrated Jewish existence. This desire may not manifest itself in killing Jews physically, but merely as a wish that, somehow, the Jewish people should disappear. A critique of Israel with this intent is, by its very nature, an expression of anti-Semitism.

In a certain way, there is a widespread belief, even sometimes reluctant, in Jewish “superiority,” not only in mundane matters, but also in morality. This results in an attitude that holds Jews, and by extension, the Jewish state, to standards that are not expected of any other nation. One must be aware of this tendency when making a critique of Israel.

Within these limits, anyone – including a faithful Jew – has the right to criticize Israel, even if sometimes the criticism may not be completely right.

On Faith: Washington Post Online February 24, 2007

The Mishkan and Why We Needed to Build it

There is a machloket among the meforshim as to whether the detail given regarding the mishkan had a specific purpose. The two sides basically fall between the Abarbanel, who states that they must have a more important meaning than the pshat, and the Rambam, who believes that the specific details are just that - the blueprints for the more important part, the mishkan - and that we shouldn't try to understand each minutiae.

Nechama Leibowitz's comments in "Terumah 4" present both sides and give supporting evidence and other meforshim who agree with each. In my view I find the opinion of Abarbanel more convincing. It seems to me that if the minutiae meant nothing then why include them? The Torah spends very little time explaining the lives of the avot and goes in to great detail here (and other mitzvot). We have a Torah sh'baal peh to help us understand what is not written down - it seems that God did not want us to forget the detail.

The Midrash Raba on Parshat Terumah begins by saying that v'yichu li - take for me - as opposed to v'yitnu - give to me - means that we have the ability to acquire God through talmud torah. By contributing to the building of the mishkan we are acquiring Hashem. The midrash goes on to describe a parable about a King and his daughter's new husband who wants a room in the new couples house to stay close to her. The midrash says that this is similar to the purpose of the mishkan, that we need to build a place for Hashem so that he can be close to the Torah (the daughter). According to this Midrash asu li mikdash does not just mean build for me a mikdash, but rather as a plea to us - when we learn Torah we are giving Hashem a place to dwell. Talmud Torah is not just a necessary endeavor in the life of a Jew but is k'neged kulam the greatest venture we can take.

The building of the Mishkan has a purpose, in fact it has multiple purposes, to continue the revelation at Sinai, to give korbanot, to make atonement for our sins, but the primary purpose that we built the mishkan and it didn't just fall from the sky was so that we could work for it, to toil in the details. That in order to make a makom for God on earth we must strive and toil to make it perfect, it's an allusion to our selves. In order to make ourselves godly - kadosh - we must make a concerted effort to get there.

Parshat Terumah

Last year I wrote this Dvar Torah on the purpose of the Mishkan. It's still one of my favorite posts.

The Torah of Eretz Yisrael

Rav Kook on Bereishit 2:12:

"And the gold of that land is good" [Gen. 2:12].

Why is the Torah suddenly interested in the quality of gold? Was this verse written for prospectors of rare metals?

The Midrash explains that the land referred to is Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel), and the precious commodity is none other than the Torah itself. The Midrash then declares,

"This teaches that there is no Torah like the Torah of the Land of Israel" [Bereishit Rabbah 16:4].

This is a pretty remarkable statement. Is there really a different Torah in the Land of Israel? And in what way is it superior to the Torah outside of Israel?

Details and General Principles

According to Rav Kook, the Torah of Eretz Yisrael is fundamentally different in its method and scope. The Torah of the Diaspora focuses on the details — specific laws and rules. The Torah of the Land of Israel, on the other hand, uses a more holistic approach. It connects those details with their governing moral principles.

This approach is particularly needed in our time of national renascence. We must reveal the truth and clarity of our Divine treasure. We must demonstrate the beauty and depth of practical mitzvot, by endowing them with the light of the mystical and philosophical side of the Torah. And the true depths and foundations of Torah can only be experienced in the Land of Israel.

Naomi is applying for scholarships to help us finance our move to Israel, one particular one asked why she'd rather study in Israel and not in the US. We had discussions about it and I could not explain myself to her. Much like a conversation I had with a woman waiting by the trempiada on the way to Gush Etzion at 3am. All I could say was unintelligible sentences about Torah feels different in Israel. I think this statement by Rav Kook (as Rav Morrison explains) explains exactly what I was feeling.

Seforim Sale (Year Three)

This was the third year in a row that I've made the trek from Maryland to YU for the Seforim Sale. I was not as "successful" as I was last year, but I did pick up a few seforim that I'm really excited about.

• Nechama Leibowitz Studies on the Torah
• Rav Soloveitchik Days Of Deliverance: Essays on Purim And Hanukkah
• Rav Soloveitchik Festival Of Freedom: Essays on Pesah and the Haggadah
• Aish Kodesh by R' Kalonymus Kalman Shapira of Piasetzno
• Gold From the Land of Israel - Rav Kook onParshat HaShavua
  [The book and more can be found online here]
  
• Naomi bought a few cookbooks for herself

Some comments from the trip:

• They only had one volume of Ayin Aiyeh and it was $42 - I think I'll wait till Israel
• I've been looking for a good printing of Aruch HaShulchan for a while and I found one (the Oz V'Hadar one) but I didn't get it, but noticed that it's printed with "Opinions of the Mishna Berurah". Same thing for new printings on the Chayei Adam. Since when were we not good enough to look at either of these two seforim without knowing what the Mishna Berura ruled.
• I've got two other books of the Rav Soloveitchik series above (Family Redeemed and Worship of the Heart) both are fantastic. There's an article on the Amidah in Worship that is worth the price alone. Absolutely incredible stuff.

Blue 32, Blue 32, Hut - Hut... Reflections on the Parsha

[I wrote this pre-Shabbos but didn't have enough time to post it]

Shmot 13:18:

But God made the people take a round-about way, the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea

This reversal of B'nei Yisrael (or rather their route) is rather odd. Why not take them directly to Yam Suf? Why do they have to wait there? Why send them on one path only to tell them to turn around and go another way? Shouldn't God have just said "Go to Yam Suf"? Yitziat Mizrayim is the seminal event in Jewish history but wouldn't the Exodus have been "good enough" with the Jews leaving, why did God have to drown Pharoah? If as the Rambam suggests that God cannot change his mind what is going on here? Clearly God must have done this on purpose.

The Ben Ish Chai - R' Yosef Chaim Baghdadi - says that Pharaoh is a man who uses trickery and deception and God does this to turn the tables on him. God couldn't just let B'nei Yisrael go without doing something to punish Pharaoh and his soldiers. The reversal of B'nei Yisrael's route was all part of God's plan to convince Pharaoh to send his army out after them - think smoke and daggers.

Maybe I had the Super Bowl on my brain - sorry ADDeRabbi, I'm not having a Super Bowl party this year, the Steelers and Eagles aren't playing - but it seems to me that this sounds like a football play. Fake right draw them into the back field and we'll head left and they'll never know what hit 'em.

Gut Voch.

Marc Shapiro on R' Ovadiah Yosef

Prof. Marc Shapiro wrote a very interesting article on three recent biographies on Rav Ovadiah Yosef. I am a big fan of Rav Ovadiah's and Shapiro provides substance to my feelings. He has entitled the article "Mi-Yosef ad Yosef Lo Kam ke-Yosef" which after reading it I think is a very appropriate title. The article almost makes me want a full biography by Shapiro - like the one he did on the Sridei Eish - on Rav Ovadiah.

Shapiro's exaltation of Rav Ovadiah is nearly perfect until he gets to the section on comparing him to an academic scholar. I think he makes his point very well and I never really thought of it until now but Rav Ovadiah's talents would make him a very poor academic. Photographic memory and an Encyclopedic knowledge are not necessary for success in academia.

As a few of you know I don't particularly like Rabbis getting involved in politics and Rav Ovadiah is the proof text for my reasons. But, as Shapiro mentions, he got involved in politics and stayed involved because he thinks it's the right thing to do despite the fact that his name as a Rav may become tarnished. He's intelligent, committed, head strong, among a thousand other ways to describe him. I truly believe that Rav Ovadiah is the last true Gadol we have. I hope that another generation can produce a person with half the stature of Rav Ovadiah.

If you're a fan of Shapiro (like me) check it out and like wise if you're a fan of Rav Ovadiah (again, like me) check it out.

(Hat Tip: Gil)

You Can Believe in Anything You Want Except...

Steven at Canonist has a nice post about the differences between each movement's theology and what's a no-no for each one. The money quote is this: "An Orthodox Jew saying “the Torah is inspired by God” would most likely be characterized a heretic for his liberal views. This is a good example of how many Christians don’t understand just how right-wing Jewish theology is." I think he's right on.

He's also right on here:

3) No, you can’t believe Jesus is the Son of God in Conservative Judaism, though that has far less to do with Conservative Judaism stating a positive theological doctrine, than with the absolute negative in pretty much every major segment of Judaism declaring Jesus the big no-no. And this is probably a good statement of what mainstream Jewish belief means today: you can believe whatever you want, except for Jesus.

Though I'd probably amend that last sentence with this:
You Can Believe Anything You Want, Except for Jesus and go to Holocaust Denial Conferences.

That's a statement that would pretty much describe Judaism today. All three movements (I don't consider Reconstructionist a movement) have come out and publicly said that Jews for Jesus and the Neturei Karta (well specifically those who went to Tehran) are outside of the fold. If the CJLS and the Reform Movement practiced it today you can bet that the Neturei Karta would have been placed in Cherem. That would have been interesting. Oh well, maybe Joel Roth and reinstitute that.