The Cost of Kosher: Rabbi Hausman becomes a Reporter…

(Legal Disclaimer: “The following blog contains conversations that have been highly dramatized due in large measure to the author’s handwriting being illegible and that no one is paying said author to be objective or to check facts.”)

In my ongoing quest for cut-rate Kosher Kedem, I decided to do something that arouses about as much anxiety as parking enforcement in NYC. But there are necessary evils in life—such as alarm clocks and living adjacent elevated trains—that must be endured so that one doesn't go through life sleeping.

So for you dear reader, and for Kashrut consumerism, and for the Jewish people, and for God, and for my wife (note the order), I overcame my inhibitions and decided to pick up the phone and talk to a stranger … which lead to my having to speak with another stranger…and then one more after that…till she hung up the phone, but not before I got what I wanted:

Wholesale prices.

The day began with a call to Kedem Headquarters :

“Good morning, Um, can you tell me something about wholesale sales to individuals?”

Jewish Receptionist: “You’re from Los Angeles right?”  (Note: Only a Jewish receptionist would answer a question with a question.)

Me:  “Um, Yes. Where are you?”

Receptionist: “New Jersey.”

Me: “I’m sorry.”

Receptionist: laughter... “Well, I am from LA originally.”

Me: “Is  that so?”

The next five minutes can be summarized as follows:  Jewish geography.  

Eventually, I got the numbers for Kedem’s LA distributor (Shalom and Sons) and a Kedem Sales Manager in the Valley. Apparently, all the kosher shops in LA get their Kedem products from the same distributor. I tried the Sales Manager first, an amiable chap. “…Well, Ralph’s basically gives the grape juice away around Pesach. Same with matzah. They order from a big distributor: D.P.I. I bought a case of matzah for $2.99, the real cost is over five dollars! It’s how they get you to come in. They give away Champagne at Christmas and New Year’s…’

The receptionist at Shalom and Sons was far less friendly.

“No, we don’t sell to individuals.”

“ What about synagogues?”

“Synagogues yes—and anyone with a resale license.”

"Can you tell me the price for a box of Kedem grape Juice? 64oz?"

“$39”

“How many in a box?”

“8.”

“Well, thank you so—“  Click.

The way the math works, a single 64oz bottle of Kedem grape juice is $4.87, which means that kosher shops have 25-30 percent mark-up. 

In summary, stores like Ralph's and Stop & Shop who sell Kedem for $2.99, are doing so below cost. In contrast, Kosher shops, who purchase Kedem from a single distributor and sell Kedem for profit, must price their grape juice around $5.99 to make a reasonable profit.

Parashat Behar: "You Shall Dwell Securely"

“If you perform My statutes, and guard my ordinances, and do them—then you shall dwell in the land securely.” (Leviticus 25.18) On the surface this makes no sense. We can seek spiritual fulfillment from dawn to dusk, we can preach the Word of God on the corner of every street, but how should this bring about our physical security? Consider the Tibetans—what good are mantras of enlightenment and avowals of non-violence in the face of China’s army?

Rabbi Chizkuni recommends a different reading:  “’You shall dwell therein securely’—[this means] the Land shall give you her strength so that you be not consumed by your enemies.”

In other words, spiritual striving on its own will not grant us physical security—a book of Talmud is not the same as a bayonet. But religiosity will do something of far greater and more lasting significance—it will imbue the nation with confidence. Through the sanctification of ourselves and our land, we draw sustenance.

An analogy comes to mind.  Over the last few years, we saw a lot of banks fail. These banks did not fail because their vaults were insecure. The locksmiths and security guards did their jobs. They failed because there was nothing inside the vault.  CEOs were selfish and greedy. They underwrote bad loans for the promised return of a few extra interest points.  In the end, the very meaning of a ‘bank’—as a repository of trust and security—dissolved to dust.  

This week began with a celebration of Israel’s Independence; it ended though with protests of her Independence.  In Alexandria, Egypt protesters chanted, "With our souls, with our blood, we redeem you Palestine." Make no mistake, they meant and mean all of Palestine.

True. Israel has made its share of mistakes. Some politicians and pundits will try to defend the State while others prefer to admit error and try for a just resolution. But editorials and interviews make no impression upon those who hate us. As Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits once put it, “Whoever denies us the right to human shortcomings is at the bottom of his heart denying us the right to live.”[i]

So let it be said again, the vault is vitally important, but it is from the treasure within—the Sabbaths of the Land—that we draw our sustenance.

Shabbat Shalom

---

[i] Rabbi Berkovits’ Sermon, “The Wandering Amalek” was delivered in February, 1941. Published in his book, Between Yesterday and Tommorow

Who is a Rabbi? Who is a Jew? Round III

For “Who is Rabbi? Who is Jew? Round III” I thought I would translate and present a short responsum of Rav Moshe Feinstein.  (For those who wish to read the previously posted Reform and Conservative responsa on conversion, see Round I and Round II .)

A bit of background. In 1956, Rav Moshe became famous for his Teshuva rejecting the halachic validity of Reform weddings. The decision was motivated by a desire to permit children of 2^nd marriages born within the Reform movement to marry other Jews (Orthodox or otherwise). The Reform movement had dispensed with the obligation of giving a traditional get at the time of divorce—this created the possibility of their being mamzerim—who would be prohibited from marrying nearly every sort of Jew. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes quite a bit about this in his book, “One People?”, concluding that the ends justified the means. (See pages 188-194)

Within Orthodox circles, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin objected to this decision on halachic grounds. Within Reform circles, the decision was look upon (as it was) as the de-legitimization of their movement. To their credit, the Reform movement for a long time now has insisted that women married under Orthodox auspices receive a proper Orthodox get if they wish to remarry using a Reform rabbi . This decision was upheld in a heart-rending case of an agunah: See this 1946 Responsa  as well as in this more recent case involving the question of supporting a citywide religious ban against a man who refused to give his wife a get: Responsa.

In any event, the Teshuva I would like to look at continues our previous theme of boundary crossing. This time the issue surrounds the status of a converted Reform family who seem poised to embrace the Orthodox lifestyle. The Responsa is dated “The Eve of the 9^th of Av, 5720” (August 1^st, 1960). (Found in Igroth Moshe: Yoreh Deah III.105) As Rav Moshe disqualified Reform weddings, so too he disqualified Reform conversions. But observe well dear reader, for here there is an interesting twist.  

The Query: “A woman had a Reform conversion and afterward gave birth to a son. As he was assumed to be a ‘son of Israel’, they circumcised him accordingly (like any other Jewish male.) Now, they have drawn close to Hashem and his Torah. The mother has agreed to immerse her son in a mikvah, but she is unwilling to allow her son to undergo hataphat dam brit—as the boy is weak. Moreover, this boy stands to become a Bar Mitzvah in the coming days…”   [What should we do?]

Response: “In an ideal halachic situation (L’chatchila), one ought to require hataphat dam brit. Nevertheless, in a time of great need like this, one can support the forgoing of the requirement since he was originally circumcised for the sake of Judaism. The case resembles one found in the Talmud Yavamot 45b…”

As Rav Moshe Feinstein simply gives citations, I shall try to explain it in full. The Talmud presents the following case: ‘The servant of Rabbi Chiya bar Ami had a certain idolatress immerse in a mikvah so that he could marry her.’  As this immersion was done for the sake of Niddah, the question arose: Would this immersion count for conversion? The Talmud concludes that it works and both the woman and the daughter (conceived from the union) are to be considered Jewish.  It would seem then that intent to observe the ritual of immersion for Niddah speaks loud enough for the woman’s desire to become Jewish. (Rashi)

(Tangentially, the Gemora does not mention if this woman had previously accepted the mitzvoth before Beit Din. Tosafoth and Tosafoth Chad Mikamei assume as much.)

But here is the critical point. In an explanation brought down by Tosafoth, the issue of concern is not so much that the woman immersed for the sake of Niddah and not conversion—as explained above, her intent to become Jewish was clearly manifest by her actions—rather the issue is that the immersion was done without the knowledge or presence of a Beit Din. The answer offered is that since her immersion was publicly known—which is seemingly why the Beit Din must be present for immersion in the first place—the immersion counts for conversion. (Tosafoth: “Mi  Lo Tavlah L’Niduthah”)

Now back to Rav Moshe: “…if there were three kosher witnesses [=Beit Din] for the original circumcision, it would certainly be good. But if not, one can rely on the fact that the circumcision was publicly known. This accords with the view brought down in Tosafat [above] Mi  Lo Tavlah L’Niduthah…”

The end of the Teshuva is utterly prescient of the woe that has fallen upon the converts of today. Even though Rav Moshe must have been confident of his decision, he predicts that the absence of hataphat dam brit may lead another rabbi to claim that the boy’s Jewish status is in error.  Rav Moshe writes therefore that the mother ought to be made aware of this possibility down the road. Not unlike the tact later evinced by Rabbi Novak, Rav Moshe suggests that this be done quietly and one ought to be careful to use the term “incomplete” instead of “illegitimate” when describing the conversion.

For those who wish, the Teshuva is pasted in Hebrew below: 

שו"ת אגרות משה יורה דעה חלק ג סימן קה

 בדבר תינוק נכרי שנימול בחזקת שהוא יהודי אם צריך הטפת דם ברית ערב ת"ב תש"כ לכבוד הרב נחמן מאיר בערנהארד שליט"א

בדבר אשה שנתגיירה בגירות ריפורמית, ואח"כ הולידה בן, והוחזק כבן ישראל ומלו אותו כאילו הוא בן ישראל ועכשיו נעשו קרובים לשם ולתורתו, והאם מסכימה שיטבול בנה, אבל לא רוצה להניח שיטיפו דם ברית מבנה, מאחר שהוא ילד חלש, והילד עומד להיות בר מצוה בעוד כמה ימים, הנה אף שלכתחלה צריך הטפת דם ברית, מ"מ בשעת הדחק גדול כזה, יש לסמוך שלא להצריך הטפת דם ברית, באשר שמלו אותו לשם יהדות כהא דמי לא טבלה לנידותה (יבמות מ"ה ע"ב) ואם היו ג' כשרים בשעת המילה, ודאי טוב, ואם לא, הא יש לסמוך על פרסום שהולכין למול, כסברת הי"מ בתוס' ד"ה מי לא טבלה בפרט שעצם הטפת דם ברית הוא ספק

ומה שכת"ר אינו רוצה לגלות להם מה באמת הספק לא טוב כי אח"ז רב יוכל לטעון שהיה בטעות לכן צריך לומר להם שלא היתה גרות גמורה ויכול לומר להם בחשאי שלא בפרסום 

גם את האם מכיון שמחזיקים אותה לגיורת גמורה יש לדבר אליה שתטבול כדין 

ידידו, משה פיינשטיין 

Israel's Day of Independence

There is great deal of ceremony and pomp that marks the anniversary of Israel's Declaration of Independence. There is also a good deal of fun in the form of smoky barbecues and parades that mark the occasion. But to fully appreciate what it is to have an independent Jewish State, one must realize what it is to exist without a secure Jewish homeland.

To recall an adage of C.S. Lewis, "A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line." One needs a point of reference. Thusly, I have uploaded a sermon by Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits found in an early book of his, Between Yesterday and Tomorrow (Oxford). The sermon was delivered during the holiday of Passover...in London...in the year 1941. It's title? Tomorrow Will Come    

I urge you to read it. One can argue if the State of Israel is the dawning of the long awaited tomorrow, but one cannot deny that today is much better than yesterday.

To read R. Berkovitz sermon, click here: Tomorrow Will Come

Who is a Rabbi? Who is a Jew? Round II

In yesterday's blog, I posted a Reform Teshuva that sought to determine the Jewish status of an individual who underwent a 'Secular Humanist Jewish' conversion before endeavoring to join a Reform congregation. Along these lines, I thought it would be interesting to present a comparable excerpt from a Conservative Teshuva that is too occupied with issues of Jewish identity.
The fascinating responsum, "The Status of Non-Halachic Conversions" was authored by Rabbi David Novak and adopted by majority vote of the Law Committee in 1982. I should mention that there were several "postscripts" to this Responsum, containing concurrence and dissent.  Thus it would be unwise to base a general statement solely on this Teshuva such as: "Conservative policy on Reform conversion is X..."

Here is the Query:  "She’elah: The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly has been asked on several occasions about the status of persons converted to Judaism in a non-halakhic manner, that is, men who did not undergo milah and/or tevilah and women who did not undergo tevilah. This question has assumed rather dramatic proportions in recent times due to the attempt in the State of Israel to amend the “Law of Return” (Hok Heshevut) so that only those who have undergone halakhic conversions (giyyur kehalachah) are entitled to automatic Israeli citizenship. Also, in America the whole issue of pluralistic Jewish community, which most Conservative Jews recognize as both a fact and a desideratum, raises the question of the status of numerous persons who consider themselves bona fide members of the Jewish community and are considered as such by others, yet who did not undergo the prescribed procedure for conversion. The question therefore calls for renewed attention."

Fascinating as it is, we shall skip to the resounding end:

"Conclusion: I find no cogent basis in halakhah for accepting even ex post facto, converts who did not undergo specific tevilah for the sake of conversion, unless it can be shown that they are strictly observant Jews, particularly scrupulous in the use of a mikvah. The fact that they may have been taken to be Jews by themselves or by others does not change the need for tevilah for the sake of conversion. The fact that most of these conversions have been conducted under Reform auspices makes the matter especially difficult because of the cordial relationships which exist between Conservative and Reform rabbis and lay people. Nevertheless, this halakhic requirement is not meant as a public rebuff to the Reform movement. If a Reform rabbi conducts giyyur kehalakhah, I accept his converts as bona fide Jews. I might also add that I do not accept converts of non-Reform rabbis if the conversion was not conducted according to objective halakhic criteria. These objective halakhic criteria, which alone protect the purity of Jewish identity, should not be compromised in the interests of an ultimately meaningless Jewish unity. However, rabbinical experience has taught me that a Conservative rabbi can exercise compassionate tact in urging proper tevilah in these cases.  I do not tell such converts that their conversions invalid, but rather, that they were incomplete, for even the most liberal conversion involves study, thus minimally fulfilling hoda’at mitvot. I tell them that they inadvertently overlooked an important specific. At the tevilah I ask them to reconfirm their kabbalat ol malchut shamayim and converts have thanked me for helping them to legally assure their unambiguous Jewish identity. […]"

We shall see tomorrow if an Orthodox Teshuva is as tactful. I'll save you a seat for Round III...

Who is a Rabbi? Who is a Jew? Round I

In the last 5-6 years, there has been a great deal of internal debate within Orthodox circles over just which Orthodox rabbis should and should not be able to perform conversions.  Orthodoxy’s near ubiquitous dismissal of non-Orthodox’s converts has been going on for half a century or more, so that’s nothing new, whatever one’s feelings on the matter.  Yet there is a grim irony in the idea of Orthodox rabbis who have dismissed non-Orthodox conversions as illegitimate now finding their own conversions called into question. Call it “measure for measure,” or, “what goes around comes around,” or, to riff a fancy phrase, “the karma of exclusion has run over the dogma of exclusiveness.” Many of us Orthodox have come to know the feeling of being ‘rendered out-of-bounds.’

Over the weekend, I had an opportunity to rehash these thoughts, but they were prompted by an unusual source, a Reform Responsum, titled “Who Is a Rabbi?” (CCAR 5759.3).   Though the actors were different, the plot was very much the same. Here is the query:

“She'elah A new congregation has been formed in my city, founded by a woman who has attended the International Institute for Secular Humanistic Judaism (IISHJ), the rabbinical school of the Society for Humanistic Judaism. She serves as the congregation's rabbi, even though she has yet to be ordained by that school. She has been licensed by the state to perform weddings, and also does conversions. Should we accept these conversions as valid, even though they were supervised by someone other than an ordained rabbi? In general, what is our position with respect to individuals who have received private ordination or who claim to possess ordination from seminaries, schools or yeshivot with which we are unfamiliar? Do we recognize them as rabbis? Do we accept them as colleagues in our communities?”

I shall not paste the entire Teshuva below. But I will tell you the final score: 1-1. The convert was accepted, even  though the greater portion of cited legal sources and various arguments seemed to lead the reader the other way! The "rabbi" though, was not so lucky. Here is the final paragraph:

“To summarize: not everyone who may be called "rabbi" is necessarily deserving of that distinction. Your community is under no obligation to recognize the rabbinical credentials of those individuals who have received "ordination" privately or from lowly-regarded institutions. The rabbis in your city are similarly under no obligation to accept these persons as colleagues and as members of your local rabbinical association. You should, of course, act towards them with grace, cordiality and tact, with all due concern for communal unity, in the spirit of a tradition that calls upon us to follow "the paths of peace." Yet the ultimate message is clear: if we as rabbis truly care about the quality and the reputation of our calling, it is our duty to advocate that membership in the rabbinate be restricted to those who clearly meet the proper educational standards.”

Justified, yes. Sensible, certainly. But I feel the sting.

(To read the Teshuva in its entirety, click here: Who Is a Rabbi?)

The Cost of Kosher Continued

I had the opportunity to continue my review of LA kosher shops, thus two new establishments have been added to the mix: Trader Joe's (Culver City) and the Pico Glatt Mart. They are listed below with the previous vendors. But first, I shall announce a couple of discoveries.

1) Pico Glatt Mart has a website. It doesn't give prices or anything, but maybe with some encouragement they might advertise specials. 21st century marketing didn't evolve in a day.
2) Nevertheless, in the chicken department, Pico Glatt Mart is about as competitive as last week's winner Kosher Club (see below). Unfortunately, I must report that they too are unapologetic members of the "Kedem Cartel"--with the usual $5.99 for a large bottle!

(Those who wish to understand why this irks me so, last year I routinely bought large bottles of Kedem grape juice for $2.99 at the Stop & Shop in Yonkers, NY!)

3) Trader Joe's... If you buy a whole organic chicken it comes out to be $3.99lb--which is only a dollar or so more than the non-organic variety we find at most kosher butchers. For those who do not know, Trader Joe's is trying hard to solicit kosher customers. They have a list of kosher foods on their website with the contact information for the many varied and multinational kosher supervisory organizations that tend to be unfamiliar to most kosher consumers. Here is what they wrote:


"We sail the culinary seas in search of new and exciting products. How does this affect our kosher shoppers? Because our products span the globe, you may spot kosher symbols that you do not recognize. Our list was compiled to help you easily identify the wide range of kosher products we carry in our stores. We have included an appendix of kosher symbols found on Trader Joe's Products so you can become more familiar with the governing agencies that may not be from your neighborhood.
Please note that this list is not all-inclusive, but it's a pretty good overview. Please be sure to check your produce, bakery and dairy sections for even more kosher products (these sections tend to vary by region in order to ensure the utmost freshness!). We try to keep this list as up to date and as accurate as possible, but we do introduce and discontinue products all the time, so keep your eyes open."

And now back to the list. (Remember, prices may vary..)


Pico Glatt Mart (9427 W. Pico Blvd) - 5/6/11
Kehilla Chicken $2.39lb-$2.99lb

Kehilla Turkey Wings $1.59lb

Kedem Grape Juice (large) $5.99 

Trader Joe's (Culver City) 5/3/11

Empire (Whole) Organic Chicken $3.99lb

Empire (Whole) Non-Organic Chicken  $3.99lb
Empire (Pieces) Chicken $3.99-$6.49lb
Empire (Pieces) Turkey $3.99lb


Kosher Club (4817 West Pico Boulevard)
Empire Chicken        $2.69-2.99 lb
King David Chicken  $2.69-2.99 lb
Turkey Drumstick      $1.99 lb
Kedem Grape Juice   $5.99 (large bottle)

Glatt Mart (8708 West Pico Boulevard)
Agristarmeat Chicken $2.79-3.59
Chai Poultry Chicken  $3.69 
Fabrengen Grape Juice  $5.49 

Livonia Glatt Market (Pico & Livonia)
Agristarmeat Chicken   $2.79-$3.29 lb.
Turkey Drumstick $2.19 lb.
Fabrengen Grape Juice $5.99

Ralph's (9616 West Pico Boulevard)
Empire Chicken $3.99-4.19 (Club Card)
Kedem Grape Juice $3.89 (Club Card)