Yated Ne'eman recently reported that the
Division for Land-Dependent Mitzvos of the
Yerushalayim Rabbinate decided to prevent
sefichin (vegetables that grew in the
Shmitta year) from entering the general
market in Yerushalayim. As usual for news articles
the issue was not elaborated on, so please permit
me to write a bit at length about the significance
of this decision.
In previous Shmitta years, both the
rabbinates and the Kashrus organizations provided
mehadrin agricultural produce to Shmitta
observers, but did not have anything to do with
the fruits and vegetables that reached the general
market. Even the mehadrin divisions of
rabbinates that had Shmitta Committees whose
activities were extensive -- such as the Shmitta
Committee of the Yerushalayim Rabbinate which in
the last Shmitta was one of the largest and
supplied mehadrin produce on a large scale
from the north of Eretz Yisroel to the south -- did
not concern themselves with the general produce
delivered to the wholesaler market. Everyone knew
that those are fruits and vegetables of the
"heter mechirah" (that were sold by the Chief
Rabbinate to non-Jews) and ignored the issue.
Every private beis din tzedek too engaged
only in supplying produce to the market of
Shmitta observers and issued special
directives to those Shmitta dealers who
furnished both the chareidi and general public. I
remember as a young boy that we would trudge our
way from the Rechavyah neighborhood in Yerushalayim
(where I grew up) to the faraway large store on
Yaffo Street that was under the Kashrus supervision
of a respectable beis din tzedek. Our parents
would always warn us not to mistakenly buy at the
wrong store since near that store the same owners
run another store with forbidden produce of the
"heter mechirah."
Without any doubt no badatz or mehadrin
rabbinate would agree that the owners of a store
under their supervision sell orlah in a next
door store under the same name. No halachic
organization would possibly agree that even in
kosher stores "not for mehadrin," non-kosher
produce be marketed.
The distinction within kashrus in general and
particularly with regard to land-dependent mitzvos,
between mehadrin and non-mehadrin
produce, applies only to restrictions that we apply
leniently according to most poskim, but some
want to be stringent and eat only mehadrin
produce. For example, supplying fruit of which the
basic halachic status is that we do not have to
fear its being orlah but some want to be
strict and be 100% certain it is not orlah,
or relying bishas hadechak on the separating
of terumos uma'aseros done through
breirah (something that, boruch Hashem,
almost does not exist today). However, it was
always unthinkable that store keepers sell, for
example, tevel (fruit and vegetables of which
the tithes were not separated and are forbidden to
be eaten) in the non-mehadrin stores and the
rabbinical body awarding the kashrus
supervision keep silent.
About forbidden Shmitta produce the customary
situation was altogether different. As mentioned
before kashrus groups overlooked the selling
of forbidden produce such as sefichin.
There were many causes of this disregard. It seems
that the most significant reason -- without
analyzing whether justified or not -- was the
thought that the dealer selling sefichin
produce in his store is not like a dealer selling
neveilos utreifos. Even most people who do
not eat any produce coming from the heter
mechirah thought it impossible to complain to
the store owner. After all, he is acting according
to the directives of the rabbonim who permitted the
mechirah, and especially according to the
directives of the Chief Rabbinate. (See Minchas
Shlomo of Maran HaRav Shlomo Auerbach,
zt'l, 1:44). This created a tacit agreement
to ignore the situation and agree that this fruits
and vegetable store keeper is not a sinner, and
that even on the door of his store he can place a
sign acknowledging its being under rabbinical
supervision.
Some kashrus organizations added to this
kashrus certificate an indication that the
produce is being sold according to the heter
mechirah. This was the state of affairs in the
past.
@Big Let Body=Before the current, 5761 Shmitta,
a change occurred. Our gedolei Yisroel
shlita announced their daas Torah that the
heter mechirah is completely invalid, that
its use causes a chillul Hashem, and annuls
the mitzvah of Shmitta.
If we had thought a little about this subject we
would not have needed our spiritual mentors to
alert us. Even without their warning, every
intelligent person who peruses what the gedolei
Yisroel who originally permitted the heter
mechirah wrote, or reads the material that the
supporters of the heter wrote over the years,
realizes that the heter is similar to a table
whose legs were removed.
The initial need for this heter was at a time
when the economic situation in Eretz Yisroel was
extremely difficult and bordered on being life-
threatening. "The national need" as it was then
called, was because the small community in Eretz
Yisroel depended upon agriculture and especially on
exporting fruits and vegetables, and because of
Shmitta it appeared to be in danger of
collapse.
Despite this, most gedolei Yisroel and
especially Maran the Chazon Ish zt'l,
entirely discredited the heter. Following the
guidance of Maran the Chazon Ish, zy'a, every
Shmitta we strengthened ourselves more in its
observance. Nonetheless, when today we discuss the
need to support the heter, the basic
assumption of all those who once permitted it was
that there is an urgent need for it.
Even after the founding of the State of Israel, at
the first Shmitta on 5712 (1952), supporters of the
heter still tried to explain it as being a
"national need" because of the agricultural export.
I remember many articles in which was argued that
without the heter the State's income would
decrease and we would lack enough revenue to buy
needed military equipment.
Today it is obvious to all that this need does not
exist in 5761. (Today, because of the economy and
the lack of water, it almost seems that the Finance
Ministry might support observing Shmitta
during all years.) We are not endeavoring,
cholila, to belittle the difficult economic
test of those farmers who observe Shmitta
according to halocho, since their living
is from agriculture.
Reflecting at these findings should have caused the
Chief Rabbinate Council to reach a definite
conclusion: "We are exempt from carrying out the
heter mechirah." This is without going into
the halachic question of how it is permitted to
execute the heter (because of the issur
of not being allowed to sell land in Eretz
Yisroel to non-Jews), and without entering into
the question of the obvious invalidity of the sale
for many farmers in Eretz Yisroel and especially
for non-religious farmers. These non-religious
farmers consider this sale not worth the paper on
which it is written.
The Chief Rabbinate should say one thing: Since the
heter mechirah certainly does not any more
cure an economical problem we are free from
carrying it out. Its foundations -- even according
to those who permitted it -- are so problematic
today. After the situation changed the Rabbinate
should have done the minimum and discontinue the
use of this heter.
If the Rabbinate had disassociated itself from the
topic and had stopped automatically putting the
heter mechirah into action, this would have
caused, with Hashem's help, a true revolution so
people would realize that this mitzvah has stopped
being, cholila, uprooted. Unfortunately, not
everyone in Israel's Chief Rabbinate feels that way
and in a meeting of the Chief Rabbinate Council
that dealt with this topic, one member even tried
to expand the heter to find a solution to the
lack of livelihood (that no one, cholila,
minimizes) of the gardeners working for the city
governments, and that the heter mechirah
should be effective even for home gardens,
something never dreamed of in the past.
Even after the announcement of the gedolei
Yisroel was publicized, a delegation from the
gedolei Yisroel requested from the Chief
Rabbis to agree that the Chief Rabbinate will not
engage in the mechirah. Although it was felt
that this request was taken seriously, in actual
practice it was not heeded so that the Chief
Rabbinate will act as the gedolei Yisroel
requested. We still hope that eventually this will
be done.
@Big Let Body=The announcement of the gedolei
Yisroel caused the different rabbinates and
Kashrus organizations concerned with
protecting us from eating tevel and
orlah to consider whether they should act
like they have in the past: Should they continue to
overlook the general market?
This is not at all an easy question. On the one
hand, it is forbidden to assist employing this
heter, but on the other hand if we sever our
connections with the store keepers who sell the
produce of the heter mechirah during the
Shmitta year, who will guarantee us that
after the Shmitta year we will be able to
return them to the Kashrus system. Indeed it
is logical to think that they will find other
Kashrus groups that will be glad to award
them an alternate hechsher.
In meetings and seminars arranged for Kashrus
supervisors we constantly emphasize that our
main duty is not awarding a hechsher for the
chareidi sector, but to save those who buy in the
marketplaces and their connected stores. It is
enough to cite for example that the Department of
Land Dependent Mitzvos of the Yerushalayim
Rabbinate supervises more than two hundred and
fifty locations. If we cut off our connections with
the general market, who knows what will be in the
future?
This was the consideration that also guided
additional Rabbonim, yirei Hashem, who
attempted to save our brethren from any
issur. At a meeting that took place between
two eminent rabbonim in Eretz Yisroel: HaRav Y.
Yakobovitz, the rav of Hertzliah, and HaRav Simcha
Kook, the Chief Rabbi of Rechovot, they discussed
the magnitude of this tremendous problem while
mentioning the fear that such involvement, and the
declaring of an issur to bring sefichin
grown according to the heter mechirah to the
market, will cause factories, restaurants, and
wedding halls to discontinue any Kashrus
supervision at all.
No one should think that organized Kashrus
supervision is something so easy to build up.
Kashrus is built only with much effort, and
if because of this ruling these businesses will be
thrown out of the Kashrus system, no one can
say for sure whether after the Shmitta year
we will be able to bring them back. It is quite
possible that they would get accustomed to working
without any Kashrus standing. This was the
halachic question.
And this was the answer of Rabbenu HaRav S.
Eliashiv:
"Would any rav or Kashrus Committee agree
that in the establishments underneath his
supervision the owners cook chicken with milk
although its being only a rabbinical issur?
Surely not! It is likewise ossur that a rav
or Kashrus Committee feed sefichin to
others."
Maran HaRav Eliashiv later added that what he said
was just a moshol since sefichin is
only forbidden because of two overlaid rabbinical
issurim: First of all the rabbinical
issur itself of eating sefichin, and in
addition that today Shmitta is only a
rabbinical mitzvah. Nonetheless, the lesson we
should learn is one: We should not award Kashrus
certification where forbidden products are
found.
My dear friend, HaRav Avrohom Rubinstein, told me
(and it has been published in Ma'aseh Ish,
3:160) in the name of HaRav Yehoshua Diskin that
his father visited Maran the Chazon Ish and asked
him about his mother, the Rebbetzin, who lived in
Pardes Channah. Doctors had ordered her to eat
certain vegetables that could not be obtained from
non-Jews during Shmitta. His question was if
it is permitted for her to take those vegetables
from the fields of the heter mechirah? Maran,
zy'a, permitted him to do so because of her
life-threatening situation but added how
interesting it is that no one ever comes to ask him
about a sick person who needs to eat chicken with
milk.
We learn from this anecdote that indeed we must
think deeply about what to do. Although we must
weigh the reward of a mitzvah instead of losing it,
we are not allowed to feed people with one
issur to save them from other issurim.
The issur of sefichin is just like any
other rabbinical issur and it should be
observed strictly.
According to this ruling the Department of Land
Dependent Mitzvos of the Yerushalayim Rabbinate
announced to all the dealers with whom they have
connections in the general market, that in addition
to the large organization of supplying
mehadrin produce in the city and the
vicinity, it would not agree that sefichin
enter the general market that during all other
years are under the supervision of the department.
It would cut off any connection with those who
bring forbidden vegetables to their stores.
After the halachic question was ruled, the doubts
have stopped. Now our duty is to attempt to execute
this ruling as forcefully as possible and to pray
that we merit to soon have a Shmitta and
Yovel which we will be obligated to observe
according to the Torah.
We must make public those who do mitzvos. Boruch
Hashem, we are not alone. There are others who
are eager to fulfill the mitzvos as soon as
possible. We heard that the Bat Yam Rabbinate
decided to prevent the sale of forbidden produce in
their supervised market. We are sure that when many
Rabbonim hear that this is the psak halocho
of HaRav Y.S. Eliashiv they will also act like
this. May Hashem help us so we can remain firm
against those who are attempting to frustrate this
matter.
HaRav Yosef Yekutiel Efrati is the head of the
Beis Midrash for Halocho in the Settlements, and of
the Division for Land-Dependent Mitzvos of the
Yerushalayim Rabbinate, as well as the secretary of
HaRav Y. S. Eliashiv.
