Jewish Law Says WHAT? June 11, 2007

In this past week’s Jewish Press, an anonymous Op-Ed piece decries the tzedek hechsher being advocated by the Conservative Movement.

The Conservative movement has long proclaimed its fealty to Torah and mitzvot and the authenticity of Conservative dogma as an expression of halacha. Yet its wanton revisionism has been such that the Conservative claim to halachic legitimacy has been recognized only within its own ranks – and even then not universally. And movement leaders have long chafed at the rejection.So it should not come as a surprise that the Conservative movement would try to burnish its credentials by establishing a halachicniche of its own by way of a “hechsher tzedek.”

I’m right there with you. Textual fundamentalism vis-a-vis the Shulchan Aruch is observance par excellence. I stand with all who see halacha as a Divinely mandated set of legislation to guide each of us on our path to G-d.

The principal advocate for this effort is Rabbi Morris Allen of Beth Jacob Congregation in Mendota Heights, Minnesota….To Rabbi Allen, wrote JTA’s Sue Fishkoff, this means “paying attention not only to what kinds of foods are consumed and how the food is prepared…but also but also how those who produce the food are treated: Are they paid appropriately? Are their working conditions safe? Is their dignity as human beings respected?”

“The new label,” wrote Ms. Fishkoff, “isn’t intended to replace existing kosher certification, which is under Orthodox supervision, but it constitutes a broader definition of kosher food that incorporates ideas of social justice from the Torah and Talmud.”

In other words, according to Rabbi Allen it is no longer sufficient for kosher certification to be granted solely on the basis of proper Jewish methods of inspecting and slaughtering animals.

When was kashrus only about “proper Jewish methods of…slaughtering animals”? At a minimum, Rabbi Moshe Weiner of the Kosher Information and Service of Boro Park and Flatbush, two communities which could under no circumstances be described as “lax” in their observance, already stated that “kashrus certification could not (and must not) be awarded to a food-producing establishment that does not meet all of its required civic and legal obligations.”Furthermore, we have already seen one hechsher be removed for extra-culinary infractions, such as having alcoholic beverages and music too close together.

I have only one question for Mr. Jewish-Press-Editorial-Board — why can’t Hooters in Tel Aviv get a hechsher, then? Were one to import Beit Yosef Glatt meat (one of the highest standards in the world for slaughtering) and clean the kitchen of any remnants of dairy or dairy utensils, would we see — just by virtue of having fulfilled the Divine obligations to separate meat and dairy and to have properly slaughtered meat — kosher certification on a place with half-naked servers?

Yet Mr. Editorial-Board continues, and places his foot squarely into his esophagus with this next line, which I hope “did not come out as intended”:

Moreover, this effort will serve to dilute the place of halacha. Working conditions are fundamentally matters of economics, sociology and labor negotiations. Are issues such as minimum wage, vacation, sick leave and health coverage properly viewed as matters of halacha? Are they on the same level of halachic application as shechita, mixing meat and dairy, soaking and salting, etc.?

The entire 7th chapter of the Talmud Tractate Bava Metzia is entitled ‘He who hires workers’. (ha’socher es ha’poalim) and begins with a Mishnah — the Oral Law transmitted on Mt. Sinai by G-d Himself — which talks about proper work hours for employees. The words of the Mishnah are codified into law in the Code of Jewish Law (Choshen Mishpat 331).Hours are “working conditions”.

Granted, no one would suggest full EEOC or Dept. of Labor audits, and also granted, American Labor Law contains minutiae and legal considerations which are external to Torah. Yet, even so, Rav Weiner said that a kashrus certification requires that one fulfill ALL of their civic obligations, which would include OSHA safety regulations as well as labor laws.

But to, with one fell swoop, doom an entire chapter of the Talmud to invalidity is unconscionable. What makes Yoreh Deah (the volume of the Code of Jewish Law dealing with food and forbidden mixtures) more valid than Choshen Mishpat?

I don’t think the “Editorial Board” realizes the far-reaching implications of what they are saying. For instance, Chiquita Brands International was forced to pay a $25 million fine for the actions of its Colombian subsidiary from which it divested in 2004.

The agreement ended a lengthy Justice Department investigation into the company’s financial dealings with right-wing paramilitaries and leftist rebels the U.S. government deems terrorist groups.Prosecutors say the Cincinnati-based company agreed to pay about $1.7 million between 1997 and 2004 to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, known as AUC for its Spanish initials.

The AUC was responsible for over 1,300 murders in 2000 alone. Were he in charge of the kashrus certification, could the author of this Jewish Press piece feel content sleeping, knowing that he checked the bananas for bugs and forbidden waxes, but 1,300 people died in the time period it took to achieve the certification?The author of said piece needs to wake up and smell the corruption. There is such a thing as mesayei’a l’ovrei aveirah. We are not supposed to assist sinners in committing sins. Exploiting one’s workers or leaving a blood-trail behind one’s product is patently sinful. (And if one of the workers is Jewish, it’s also a question of standing idly by one’s brother’s blood, forbidden explicity in Scripture in Leviticus).

Everything matters. And to restrict kosher certification exclusively to what goes on in the kitchen is an egregious violation of, not the nebulous “spirit of the law”, but of codified case law in the Code of Jewish Law.

It’s either halacha — the whole halacha — or kosher Hooters. And I invite the anonymous op-ed writer to make his or her choice.