New Book On the Kashrut of Modern Etrogim

On the Kashrut of Modern Etrogim

Sukkot is fast approaching. For many this means selecting a “mehudar” etrog. Depending upon where one is this task can involve not only selecting an etrog with or without a pitum, bumpy or smoother, with or without a gartel, or a host of other considerations, but also selecting which type, Berman or Hazon Ish. Indeed, today, there are variety of types of etrogim identified by the farm or personalities that have ostensibly certified them as Kosher for use during the holiday. But, how do we know that any of these types are preferred? Where did these etrogim originate? Are they really Kosher?
Until recently, the answers to many of these questions have been shrouded in mystery. Sure one may have been told that so-and-so decided (mostly by merely looking at a particular tree) this etrog is Kosher. Today, however, Zohar Amar, who has written extensively on agriculture and other issues involving mesorah as it relates to Kashrut, has published a book where he investigates these questions, Etrogei Eretz Yisrael, Israel, 2010, 85 pp.
In reality, this latest book complements his book published last year discussing all the four species, Arbat ha-Minim, Israel, 2009, 101 pp. The earlier book, as it relates to etrogim focuses on how and when we identified the etrog with the biblical commandment of “prei etz hadar.” Amar seeks to disprove the notion that etrogim were not native to the Middle East until far after the Jews were present. This is important as some want to argue that the use of etrogim for araba minim is of late origin and thus undermine the mesorah associating etrog with prei etz hadar. Amar’s thesis is can be summed up using the talmudic expression “lo raenu enu rayah.” That is, much of what has been said about this point is predicated on the lack of etrogim seeds or evidence that can be dated to an early period – i.e. when Jews were in Israel practicing the Torah.
Amar provides the earliest evidence that we have of etrogim and their use on Sukkot. For example, etrogim appear on some Jewish coins and in mosaics. While some may associate the “gartel” or figure eight shaped etrogim with hassdim (probably because some hassidim wear such belts all year-round), in reality, many of these early depictions show etrogim with a gartel.
Additionally, Amar discusses the development of using etrogim from outside of Israel and then their importation and eventual grafting of those etrogim. The reason these foreign etrogim were used were because, for the most part, etrogim that are indigenous to Israel aren’t what we would consider mehudar today. Typically they lacked the pitum and weren’t shaped nicely and were smoother than our bumpy etrogim. Thus, some began to use etrogim from outside of Israel. This in turn created a controversy as to whether those etrogim were Kosher as well as whether there is a preference for Israeli etrogim over those from outside of Israel.
As part of this controversy the issue of grafted etrogim became a much larger issue. Indeed, the issue of grafting etrogim doesn’t appear in Jewish literature until 16th century. Amar, discusses the development and application of this concept as it relates to etrogim.
Returning to Amar’s latest book, Etrogei Eretz Yisrael. This time around Amar turns his focus to the mesorah of Israeli etrogim. He has extensively researched this topic and his research included visiting the etrogim farms and speaking with the farmers. What emerges is that for most of the etrogim available today, the best we can trace their pedigree is 100 years. For many, it is less than that. That. is, while many claim significantly longer pedigrees, the stories fail to match with fact. That is not to say that today’s etrogim aren’t Kosher or that many are grafted, only that we don’t have evidence that today’s etrogim are the same as were used more than 100 years ago. Amar concedes that more research, including genetic and other scientific testing is necessary to determine which etrogim are pure and ungrafted.
In all, this latest book is an important one as it sets the baseline for further research regarding etrogim, and, additionally, provides more background on the specific types of etrogim currently available in the marketplace today.
The books are distributed by Girsa and Shalem in Israel and is available at Beigeleisen in the US.




Women, Simchat Torah, and Censorship

Women, Simchat Torah, and Censorship
By: Eliezer Brodt
A recent book, Mi-pehem, (Bnei Brak,2008), collects interviews that were conducted with various Gedolim. One interview was conducted with Rebbetzin Ginsburg the daughter of R. Yechezel Levenstein. In the course of this interview she described the Simchat Torah celebration at the Mir in Europe:אבל שמחת תורה בישיבה היה משהו
מיוחד. הנשים עמדו בפינת בית המדרש מאחורי מחיצה, ומחכות בהתרגשות לתחילת
ההקפות! (מפיהם, עמ’ 199).


According to this interview, women in the Mir were behind the Mechetziah. But, I recall hearing from others that witnessed Simchat Torah in the Mir in Europe that the women were not behind a Mechetziah. Indeed, when, looking up this source of this interview I realized it was a Hebrew translation of an English article that appears in Daughters of Destiny published by Artscroll. The quote in the original reads: “The woman would stand in a corner of the bais medrash separated from the men and wait excitedly for the Hakofos to begin” (p.76). Thus, according to the original woman were not standing behind the Mechetziah during the ST celebration.

Avraham Ya-ari in his important work on ST, Toldos Chag Simchas Torah provides additional sources discussing woman’s participation in ST celebration from various communities. These sources parallel the original interview of Rebbetzin Ginsburg that women were not behind a Mechetziah but they came in to the Beis hamedrash on this night to watch the dancing up close (pp.251-252).Aside from woman entering the BM on ST woman participated in other parts of the celebration. For example, in Worms we find:מנהג שמחת תורה… מנהג נשים
בין מנחה למעריב הנ”ל באים במלבושיהן היקרים והנאים הטובים שיש להם. ובאם
בחצר החיצון של בית הכנסת ולפני הפתח החיצון של בית הכנסת דנשים ורוב הנשים בפרט
נשים בחורות מחברי’ יד ליד ובראשם נשי חתן תורה וחתן בראשית, והולכין בעיגול סביב
סביב ומשוררין יגדל, וזמירות שרגילין לשורר לכבוד החתן וכלה והכל לכבוד התורה ואחר
כך הולכין לבית הכנסת שלהם… (ר’ יוזפא שמש, מנהגים דק”ק וורמיישא,
א, עמ’ רכ). In Baghdad R. Dovid Sasson describes another custom with woman on ST:בכפור, בשמיני עצרת ובשמחת
תורה
מוציאם בכל בתי הכנסת את כל ספרי התורה ומניחים אותם בהיכל והאנשים
והנשים הולכים מבית כנסת לבית כנסת לנשק כל ספר וספר וקוראים זאת זייארה (מסע
בבל
, עמ’ רכז)In truth something similar to this (but not on ST only on HR and YK) is found earlier in the letters of R. Ovadia Bartenurah where he describes a custom that he saw:גם ראיתי בליל יום הכיפורים
ובליל הושענא רבה אחר שסיימו הצבור תפלת ערבית, פותחים הנאמנים שני שערי ההיכל
צפונה ונגבה ויושבים שם כל הלילה עד הבוקר, ובאות הנשים משפחות מפחות למשתחוות
ולנשק הספרי תורה, ובפתח האחד תכנסנה ונכחו תצאנה. וכל הלילה, זו נכנסת וזו
יוצאת… (אגרת א”י, עמ’ 106).One other point regarding woman and Simchat Torah is Rivkah Tiktiner (died in 1605) composed a song for Simchat Torah in Yiddish. Tiktiner is famous for being the first Jewish woman who wrote a complete work called Minkes Rivkah. Yaari suggests that this song was song while the woman decorated the Sifrei torah (Toldos Chag Simchas Torah, p.464). This song was recently reprinted by Y. Levine with an introduction and a translation in Hebrew (Simchat Torah Leyad). On Rivkah Tiktiner, see Levine’s Introduction (ibid); Z. Gris, Hasefer Kesochen Tarbus, p.172 and here.

Another custom which women are involved in on Simchat Torah is the throwing of the fruit to the children. On this topic see also Y. Gibralter in his memoirs of Kovno who writes:זלמן טרקניסקי הגבאי הראשי נהג לשבת לאחר הקידוש בשמחת תורה כששק מלא תפוחי עץ גדולים ויפים בידיו ולחלקם לילדים כפי שמבוא בהלכה בבית המוסר דקדקו בהלכה בתכלית הדקדוק (יסור
יסרוני
, עמ’ 110).This custom has been the subject of many articles see recently: Avraham Ya’ari, Toledot Chag Simchat Torah, 231-237; Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Yisrael 6:140-154; Shlomo Hamberger, Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 4:430-461; Yechiel Goldhaber, Minhagei Hakehilos, 2:147-152; . Y. Tessler, Heichel ha-Besht 20:75-100; Ohr Yisrael 41:187.




Pini Dunner – Handbill Defending the Use of the Corfu Etrogim

Pini Dunner B.A (Hons), formerly rabbi of London's Saatchi Synagogue, is an avid collector of polemical and controversial Hebraica, with a very large, diverse private collection of such material. Many items in his collection are unknown and unrecorded, and relate to long forgotten, obscure controversies.
This is Pini Dunner's third post at the Seforim blog. His first post, "Mercaz Agudat Ha-Rabbanim Be-Lita, Kovno, 1931," is available here; his second post, "Unknown Picture of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, c.1930s," is available here.
For background on the controversy over Corfu etrogim, see Yosef Salomon, "The Controversies Regarding the Corfu and Eretz Yisrael Etrogim 1875-1891," Zion 65.1 (2000): 75-106; Yosef Salomon, "The Controversy Regarding the Corfu Etrogim and its Historical Significance," AJS Review 25 (2000-2001): 1-25; Yitzhak Refael, "Corfu Etrogim and Eretz Yisrael Etrogim," Sheragi 2 (1985), 84-90; Dan Porat, "The Controversy over Israeli Etrogim from 1875-1889," (MA thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1993); H. Hamel, "R. Yosef Zehariah Stern's Position in the Corfu Etrogim Controversy," in Sefer Refael (Jerusalem, 2000), 242-251. For a brief discussion about the broadsides authored by R. Gershon Henoch Leiner and his son R. Mordechai Joseph Eliezer Leiner of Izbica-Radzin that were posted throughout Poland, see Pearl Preschel, "The Jews of Corfu," (PhD dissertation, New York University, 1984), 111-112, 113-114, 159.
Regarding the Russian text at the bottom of the broadside, the following is a translation that was obligatory to appear on all non-Russian books:
Condemnation by M.I.Leiner of those rabbis, which, as the revenge for the dwellers of the Greek islands for the disturbances on the island of Corfu, prohibited the paradise apples originating from those islands for using them in the religious ceremony of the holiday of Sukkot.
Included is a protest letter by the rabbi of Corfu about the matter.
—————————
Permitted by the censorship, Warsaw, 15 July 1891 — printing of M.I. Galter Nalevki [St.] 23.for post
Handbill Defending the Use of the Corfu Etrogim authored by R. Mordechai Joseph Eliezer Leiner of Izbica-Radzin  published in Izbica, July 1891
This broadside contains a vigourous and impassioned defence of the practice of using etrogim from Corfu in preference to those from Eretz Yisrael. For centuries the most prized etrogim used by Jews of all communities were those grown in Corfu, and the etrog industry on the island was a mainstay of the local economy. It was said that the etrogim grown in Corfu traced their origins to those used during the second temple period, and were therefore of the most reliable pedigree. The untainted pedigree of an etrog is of primary importance, and as a result Corfu etrogim were highly sought after, making them expensive. Furthermore, the owners of the orchards – many of them non-Jews – fiercely guarded their monopolies, and were extremely careful that their etrogim were of unimpeachable pedigree.
This broadside was issued as a result of the drift away from using etrogim grown on the island of Corfu in the late nineteenth century. Initially this began with a ban on their use that was issued c.1875 and that had its roots in the growing suspicion that Corfu etrogim were no longer reliable in their pedigree and that growers had secretly begun grafting them with other citrus fruits to boost the numbers of fruit that were fit for use, and in addition would be outstanding in their appearance, boosting their value.
Then in 1891, the year of this broadside, the ban against Corfu etrogim was strengthened as a result of the terrible anti-semitism on the island that had led to a vicious blood libel. Jewish communities formerly loyal to Corfu etrogim switched their allegiances to the ever expanding etrogim market of Eretz Yisrael and it was this that R. Leiner was trying to prevent. R. Leiner (1877-1929) was the scion of the Izbica/Radzyn dynasty and in this broadside he quotes his recently departed father, R. Gershon Henoch (1839-1891), the famous 'Baal ha-Techeilet', as saying that there were no better and more kosher etrogim than those that grew in Corfu. He added that those grown in Eretz Yisrael were probably unfit for use and, furthermore, the excuse that they provided income for poor farmers there was utterly inappropriate in light of their unfitness. He added that the chief rabbi of Corfu, R. Elisha mi-Pano, had written to him to say that the ban effected against Corfu etrogim (the annual market for etrogim was of major economic significance to the small island) as a result of the blood libel was making matters worse for the Jews of Corfu.
Despite attemps by R. Leiner and other advocates of Corfu etrogim, the Corfu etrog business went into terminal decline. By the early twentieth century the rival industry in Eretz Yisrael had grabbed the overwhelming majority of the etrogim market, and with the upheaval of the two world wars, and following the creation of the State of Israel, Corfu etrogim disappeared completely from the scene.
Recently, I understand, there has been some effort to revive the fortunes of the Corfu etrog. It would seem that an emissary of R. David Twersky of New Square annually acquires etrogim from Corfu for R. Twersky to use on sukkot. No doubt this action is motivated by R. Twersky's well-known desire to strictly follow the customs of his illustrious forebears who, in the years when the etrogim controversy raged, were devotees of Corfu etrogim over their Eretz Yisrael counterparts. Nevertheless, as any etrog grower will tell you, once an etrog orchard has been abandoned, any fruit that emerge from it in the years that follow, especially if many years pass, no longer have a chezkat kashrut, and more than likely they are murkavim. It would be interesting to know if R. Twersky makes a bracha on these questionable etrogim, or if he first uses an etrog of reliable pedigree and then switches to the murkav simply for sentimental purposes.  




Simchat Torah Book

I was going to post about the most comprehensive book on Simchat Torah, Avraham Ya’ari’s Toldot Hag Simchat Torah, however, Miriam has already posted a very nice summary of it.