- This topic has 369 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Rav Karp discusses prohibition against worms:
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2010/06/rabbi-karp-defends-prohibition-against.html
“Rav Karp discusses prohibition against worms:”
Appropriate name for this discussion.
“I personally witnessed a local proprietor directed to remove any fish not on Rav Bess’s approved list”
Directed by Rabbi Luban?
“Rav Karp discusses prohibition against worms:”
This is the tape of Feb. 18th in which Rav Moshe Karp of Eretz Yisroel expressed his position in Yiddish at a Brooklyn gathering.
EDITED
Hello,
How do you know what their ???? was based on?
Since the worms are longer, the ????? of thinness would be smaller. Imagine a very thin human hair. Do you think it would be invisible? I do not think so. A very thin human hair is merely 17 microns!
cherrybim,
The issue is not since when are there anisakis, but rather when did they start entering fish from the outside en masse.
cherrybim,
About a week ago, you posted an article “From Science and Nature – Natural History of Anisakids:”.
Now, you posted a quote of someone questioning Rav Karp’s knowledge of how anisakis works. I don’t get your point.
“someone questioning Rav Karp’s knowledge of how anisakis works”
It’s on the tape that was introduced to the thread by Kasha. Not everyone understands Yiddish.
cherrybim,
What I mean is, do you also question R’ Karp’s facts, which indicate that these worms come from the outside? If you are merely quoting this questioner but don’t agree with him, then you are being consistent with the article which you posted earlier.
hello,
The ??? of ????? which we discussed is actually a ?”? as explained by the ?????? ??? in ??”? ?”?, ? (on ??”?).
Not a ??”?. Sorry for the error.
What in the article which was posted earlier makes you say that?
cherrybim,
See earlier post:
cherrybim,
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/photos.php?albumid=5475594950756791761&photoid=5475594969937922690
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/photos.php?albumid=5475594950756791761&photoid=5475595006180290770
This from refdoc.fr; I’ll give the link,but I don’t know if the moderator will post it.):
Don’t take this the wrong way, but Hello and Daas can explore all they want; there are great poskim on both sides and like the water filter disagreement, an individual can choose.
The fish issue will probably come up in the shidduch frumkeit questions as well, and will be another item to explore.
“an individual can choose.”
An an individual cannot choose, but rather must follow whatever his regular posek paskened.
“an individual can choose.”
An individual can choose if his regular rav/posek does not assir.
cherrybim,
Halachah is not a free-for-all. There are very specific halachos about which psak one must follow.
See gemara Avodah Zara 7a “B’shel Torah” etc.
On a D’oraiso we follow the stringent view, on a D’rabonon we follow the lenient view.
See also Chazon Ish Y.D. 150 (beginning) for when one follows his own rav even when he is more lenient.
“Don’t take this the wrong way”, I am not paskening for you, but I am trying to make you aware that the only thing in this area which one can choose is who to accept as his rav, (also within limits) but not which psak he finds more convenient “if his regular rav/posek does not assir.”
Wrong again.
If one asked his Rav a shaila concerning the fish worm and he did not assir; don’t you think he would have said that it’s a safek d’oiraisa and you need to be machmir? Don’t you think that the vast majority of American Rabbonim and Poskim and Admorim; if they felt you were right, would hold that it’s a safek d’oiraisa and would paskin to be machmir?
But that’s not the case, so obviously you need to stop darshening and seek the real reason why the vast majority of American Rabbonim and Poskim and Admorim do not assir and hold that the status quo prevails at this point.
“Wrong again.”
cherrybim, again you respond to a reasoned sourced statement, with your own unsourced personal opinion.
“the vast majority of American Rabbonim and Poskim and Admorim do not assir”
You’ve been asked perhaps a dozen times earlier on the thread to backup your statement that “the vast majority do not assir” or even any majority don’t assir, and you’ve continually ignored such request even though others have posted numerous American poskim assiring you’ve posted only one mattiring.
It’s obvious that the vast majority of American Rabbonim and Poskim and Admorim must be assiring this.
Cherrybim,
You say I’m wrong again. Did you look up the sources? Do you know of sources which disagree with mine? I’m definitely open to see information I have not seen before.
I’m also puzzled by your assertion that the determination of majority is based on “local”. Do you have a source? And if I live in NJ, are NY poskim local? LA poskim? Canadian? Where do we draw the line? I ask you please not to answer with your own personal opinion, please back it up with an acceptable source.
“again you respond to a reasoned sourced statement, with your own unsourced personal opinion”
Except for two Rabbonim, the other poskim that were listed as assiring, indeed did NOT assir.
Since the status quo was that kosher fish did not need b’dika, any posek or kashrus agency that does assir now, ipso facto is matir, until such time that they explicitly assir.
Read the previous posts.
“determination of majority is based on “local”.”
What are you talking about?
CORRECTION: “again you respond to a reasoned sourced statement, with your own unsourced personal opinion”
Except for two Rabbonim, the other poskim that were listed as assiring, indeed did NOT assir.
Since the status quo was that kosher fish did not need b’dika, any posek or kashrus agency that does NOT assir now, ipso facto is matir, until such time that they explicitly assir.
Read the previous posts.
“determination of majority is based on “local”.”
What are you talking about?
Cherrybim,
5. “And actually, halacha is regional, as in “minhag hamakom”.
6. “When in doubt, check with the Poskim and Rabbonim of your dor and local.”
I would like to add that the policy adopted by a kashrus agency does not constitute a psak. A psak is a halachic decision issued by a competent authority based on his thorough research in the topic, both halachic and practical (metsius).
Anything less is merely a decision on which psak to follow.
Does your Rav live in the USA?
Yes, as do I. The definition of “My Rov” to allow one to follow his psak l’kuloh is spoken about in that Chazon Ish I mentioned earlier. It’s worth taking a look; not every Rav-talmid relationship qualifies.
Is he one of the “numerous American poskim assiring”?
Daas: I enjoy hearing your ??????, however I’m afraid I cannot agree with them.
The ??”? ?”? ?”? ?”? ?”? (usually the ??”? is referred to by ???? ???) writes, as you quoted, that the worms that were ???? in a live animal are ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? and may not be sold to a ???. You extrapolate from this a general rule that all worms receive the halachic status of their host. This is too big of a leap to make without proof. First of all we see no proof that a worm that comes from outside acquires any status from its host. While you make a good point that since the worm becomes ???? ??????? inside the host it should be similar to being ????, however we would need to understand the underlying reason why the worm that grows in the animal becomes ??? ??? ???. If it is a technical ????? ?????, then it is reasonable to say that the worm was ???? in the shrimp because that is where it technically comes into existence, as you proposed. However if it is because the worm is a ????? ?? ??? and the source of its ????? is ??? ??? ??? then we have no proof. I am not aware of any ??? that explains this halacha.
Secondly, we only see from this ??”? a halacha of ??? ??? ??? but no indication that it would apply to any other sugya in the Torah.
Then you brought another ??”? in ???? ?”? that you would like to use to answer my second problem. This is the ??”? I mentioned in my previous post. The Rema there writes that the minhag is to wait 6 hours after hard cheese. The Taz explains that it must leave a strong taste in the mouth and be wormy. The simple explanation of the Taz would be that when cheese is wormy the cheese itself leaves a strong, lingering taste in the mouth and the worms are a ???? ?????. However, the ??”?, for some reason, writes that one must eat the worms to need to wait 6 hours. Apparently he understands that even when old and wormy the cheese itself does not have a sufficiently strong flavor to require waiting, but the worms do have the required flavor.
You understood the ??”? to be saying that one only need eat the worms without any of the actual cheese itself to need to wait, and deduced from there a general rule that the worms acquire the host status for all halachos. While I cannot disprove this understanding, I do not see that it is ???? and in any event I do not see other Poskim agreeing with the ??”? nor do I have any idea where he would have found a ???? for this assumption. An alternative explanation of the ??”? would be, as I mentioned previously, that one must eat the cheese and worms together and the combination of the two leaves a strong residual cheesy flavor in the mouth. So, while I could not say your understanding of the ??”? is wrong, it certainly is NOT strong enough to invent a new ??? in ????.
Regarding the ????? of ???? ???????. I have a feeling you are off by a decimal point. According to my research the copepods in NYC water are up to 1mm in size and I suspect the ??????? you meant to write were .3mm and .5mm not .03 and .05. Otherwise the discrepancy between the different ????? is too big, as you mentioned. Rav Vaye in his “bug book” writes that the smallest pests that are ???? ??????? are mites which he equates with the ?????? of the ??????? and he writes that they are .2-.3mm. Rav Vaye is known for having the most machmir size for ???? ???????.
If the eggs of anisakis are borderline on this ?????, it is logical to assume that the immature larva immediately upon hatching are SMALLER, not larger as you wrote, because they must fit inside the egg. Even if the krill do not swallow them immediately on hatching, it is doubtful if they grow significantly before they have any source of nourishment as they cannot eat without a host. Furthermore, I have not seen any indication if the scientists know whether the anisakis are swallowed by krill after they hatch or while they are still inside their eggs.
You mention that we should not rely on the very limited knowledge of the scientists in this case and say ??? ???????? ??????, but on the other hand if the only information we do have indicates that they are ???? we should apply the rule of ?? ??????? ??????.
Daas: “A very thin human hair is merely 17 microns”
Actually its closer to 100 microns.
Liberally copied from today’s Daf HaKashrus of the OU.
It seems my source was not accurate.
hello,
Nice to hear from you again (I thought I gave myself a longer vacation from you by sending you that teshuva, but you must be a speed reader! 🙂 )
Thanks for your candor (expected by now).
I do hear your ????? between ?? ???… but if you deny the existance in ??”? of spontaneous generation, then you are forced to say that in these cases (you didn’t address ??????) the worms achieve the status of the host despite the fact that there is only a ????? ?? ???. Or else reject these ???’? of the ??”? and ??????’s understanding of the ????, which I doubt you would be willing to do. It would be quite interesting to find a ???? who is ???? the worms and therefore is now ???? selling ???? ????? to a ?”?! And is now ???? eating meat after wormy cheese! (Alternatively, requiring ????? ?’ ???? even with the worms removed)!
In other words, wheras I would not have such a problem making the ?????, one who says that SG is “a concept alien to ??”?” would be caught in a ??? ????.
You might be right about my decimal point, (I often write these posts way past my bedtime), but here’s a place to check:
http://www.onlineconversion.com/length_all.htm
When I put in 0.03mm, I get: 0.03 millimeter = 30 micron
From wikipedia references (under Orders of magnitude (length) )
I think 100 microns is the average. (It says there 90.) BTW, it says over there that 45 microns is “close to the limit of resolution for the human eye”. I’m not sure how close, and anyway it’s not an extremely precise number.
“If the eggs of anisakis are borderline on this ?????, it is logical to assume that the immature larva immediately upon hatching are SMALLER, not larger as you wrote, because they must fit inside the egg. Even if the krill do not swallow them immediately on hatching, it is doubtful if they grow significantly before they have any source of nourishment as they cannot eat without a host.”
I think you are correct; now we’re even on the candor. 🙂 However, after they hatch, they uncoil and become longer and thinner, which makes them more visible.
“Furthermore, I have not seen any indication if the scientists know whether the anisakis are swallowed by krill after they hatch or while they are still inside their eggs.”
I have. From CDC:
“The eggs become embryonated in water, and first-stage larvae are formed in the eggs. The larvae molt, becoming second-stage larvae , and after the larvae hatch from the eggs, they become free-swimming . Larvae released from the eggs are ingested by crustaceans “
http://www.dpd.cdc.gov/dpdx/html/anisakiasis.htm
I therefore do not believe that the only information available leans to the side of ????, ?????. Besides, I don’t think we would say ?? ??????? ??????; I think the rules of ???? would have us assume that since when we see it in the fish it was visible, it was visible in the water (???? ?????). I’m looking forward to your response; have a good ???! And enjoy your herring!
Cherrybim,
As I’ve said before, I’m not personally into numbers. If you want to know if my rov is lenient, and yet I continue to babble on about why I understand better the psak of issur, the answer is no.
Your answer is a bit confusing.
“Is he (your Rav) one of the “numerous American poskim assiring”?”
Daas Yochid – “the answer is no.”
Or is it – “the answer is yes.”
Which is correct?
Daas: You didn’t address my ????? of ??? ??? ??? which I already used to answer your ???? from ???’.
“It would be quite interesting to find a ????…requiring ????? ?’ ???? even with the worms removed!”
Actually I doubt if any Posek would rely on the ????? of the ??”? against ????? ?? ???????.
You’re right that 30 microns IS .03 mm, but that seems like much too small of a ?????. Even Rav Vaye is not that machmir, and it would render all food and water in the world ???? ???? ?????, because most amoeba and many protozoa are larger then that. Also, regarding the copepods it would not be relevant since they are 10 to 20 times larger than this size.
“45 microns is close to the limit of resolution for the human eye”
Is the term “limit of resolution” equivalent to ???? ?????????
“after they hatch, they uncoil and become longer and thinner, which makes them more visible”
Why do you assume that a long thin line is more visible then a circle of the same surface area???
Also, why do assume we follow the ???? ????? over the ???? ??????????
hello,
The ????? of ????”? is only acc. to ???”?, which is, I think, not like ????? ?? ???????. Also, it only applies if it’s a ????, which I am contending that it is not. The ???”? could agree by ????.
As I’ve said, Rav Feivel is ????? on 30, but it’s a ?????.
“Is the term “limit of resolution” equivalent to ???? ?????????”
I have no idea, but it seems the ?????? use this ?????. So my guess is, yes.
“Why do you assume that a long thin line is more visible then a circle of the same surface area???”
I think experimentation has been done, but I don’t remember the source, so I gave you the example of human hair to show you that it’s intuitively correct.
“Also, why do assume we follow the ???? ????? over the ???? ??????????”
What’s the ???? ?????????? We have no established starting point.
BTW, R’ Belsky’s 1-2mm was the length, (it is thinner than that) which is why what he’s saying is not ridiculous ?”?, just puzzling to me. Reports, though, say up to 5mm.
Regardless of the issue of ????, you are claiming a blanket rule that a worm gets the host’s status without bringing any proof outside of ??? ??? ???. How do you know this is not specific. When the ???? lists the issurim involved in eating a bug it does not mention ???? ??? ?????? which would apply to a worm from grapes.
“As I’ve said, Rav Feivel is ????? on 30”
I still find it hard to believe that Rav Feivel’s ????? is 1/10 of Rav Vaye’s. Is this psak from Rav Feivel written somewhere?
“I gave you the example of human hair to show you that it’s intuitively correct”
The proof from hair would only be relevant if we knew that a 17 micron hair was visible at 53 microns in length, because then it would have the same surface area of a 30 micron square. I don’t think this is likely.
“BTW, R’ Belsky’s 1-2mm was the length, (it is thinner than that) which is why what he’s saying is not ridiculous”
We’re talking about length, so what’s the ??????
“In other words, wheras I would not have such a problem making the ?????, one who says that SG is “a concept alien to ??”?” would be caught in a ??? ????.”
The bottom line is you are admitting there is NO ???? ?????? to your ????? ???.
I found the OU saying 50 microns for water, which is consistent with my assertion that it is mainstream. Wher does R’ Vaye say 300?
I’m still looking… Ez filter does 25-30. Not muchroch, but it makes sense for them to go with the most chomur.
http://israel613.com/books/TOLAIM_WATER_NY.pdf
BTW, my rov told me 30 is best, and I personally am sure that this is the shito l’chumro, I’m just trying to find you a source you’ll be happy with. Let me know when you’re satisfied.
hello,
Sorry, I forgot to say gut voch.
Do you know anyone who argues on the ??”? by cheese?
BTW, the reason I didn’t use the ?”? in ??”? is that they were different in two prints of ??”?.
” “BTW, R’ Belsky’s 1-2mm was the length, (it is thinner than that) which is why what he’s saying is not ridiculous”
We’re talking about length, so what’s the ?????? “
It’s ? ????? he discredits reports of up to 5mm (although I don’t think that’s what you meant.)
The issue here is whether they are visible at a smaller size then 30-50 microns when the length is much bigger (as is even 1-2mm).
Can you see the tiny fibers protruding from a cloth? They are thinner than a human hair.
“The bottom line is you are admitting there is NO ???? ?????? to your ????? ???. “
I believe in SG, as the ???? and ??????? say. Even so, I think it’s likely that becoming ???? would be the same. You find SG illogical and non-compelling. But it forces you to say that there is no ?????. So, bottom line, you should agree that the worm achieves the status of the crustacean. And it’s not a ????? ???. It is, as I’ve said, ???? ??? in the ???? (only the ???”? would possibly say it’s only because od ????”?), a clear ?????? (I believe other ??????? as well, I need to check) and the ??”? in two places, one if them cheese, on which I don’t know of any ?????? (of course, ?? ????? ???? ????, so I’ll be happy to hear of any).
Besides which, if it’s a ??? ???? beforehand then this point is irrelevant, and besides the fact that I believe all information available shows that it is ????, I believe I am correct that there is no ???? ???????, only a ???? ?????.
cherrybim,
The answer is that he feels it is not his place to argue on the ????? ????, who say ????. He’s a huge ?”?, but I don’t know what his personal opinion is, nor is it relevant ???? ?????.
Your Rav’s opinion is not relevant ???? ??????
My Rav’s opinion is very relevent ???? ?????. Isn’t that why you have a Rav?
cherrybim,
Did you read the first sentence of my answer to you? In case it wasn’t clear enough to you, he holds that IT IS OSSUR to eat these worms. The point is, when the ?????? have issued a psak, local rabbonim are obligated to follow. If someone who I considered my rav would rule contrary to the psak of the majority of ??????, I think I would have to get a new rav. ?”?, my rav wouldn’t.
I have a rav so that I can ask him ????? to which I don’t know the answer. I never asked him if I can turn on a light on ???, because I know already. I also know that since the biggest poskim of our generation have issued a psak about the fish, then we are required to follow.
From your earlier posts, it seems that you have a rav in order to ask ????? for things which would be convenient for you to follow, otherwise you can pick and choose. I certainly hope that I have misunderstood you, and that this is not the case.
hello again,
“When the ???? lists the issurim involved in eating a bug it does not mention ???? ??? ?????? which would apply to a worm from grapes.”
Correct. Because when it’s a ???, it’s not ???? ??? ??????. And when it’s part of the grape, it’s not a ???.
hello,
“When the ???? lists the issurim involved in eating a bug it does not mention ???? ??? ?????? which would apply to a worm from grapes.”
Does it mention ??? ?? ????
“[My Rav]he holds that IT IS OSSUR to eat these worms…If someone who I considered my rav would rule contrary to the psak of the majority of ??????, I think I would have to get a new rav.”
So if Rav Rav Belsky was your Rav, or if your Rav was any of the vast majority of American poskim who hold that the fish is not treif, you would get rid of him; while most frum Yiden don’t.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.