Certification smackdown: Kashrut *and* ethics
Agudath Israel Statement on Magen Tzedek (hat-tip: EFink)
Magen Tzedek responds
Funny, I haven't heard any complaints from Agudath Israel about Tav HaYosher. Maybe that's because it's run by Uri L'Tzedek.
Magen Tzedek responds
Funny, I haven't heard any complaints from Agudath Israel about Tav HaYosher. Maybe that's because it's run by Uri L'Tzedek.
posted by Shira Salamone at 10:09 AM
17 Comments:
man, you really don't understand the Orthodox. To the Aguda, Uri l'tzedek is the equivalent of Conservative or Reform. It doesn't matter that they are modern ortho, they're just as treif as the non-ortho movements.
To my mind, I object to Uri l'tzedek because they are trying to create a religious link to left wing politics, such as trade unions.
jdub --
Trade unions aren't left wing politics. They were part of Bismarck's approach to pacifying the proletariat, along with workers comp, which successfully deflated in Prussia the revolutionary zeal then upsetting the established order throughout Europe.
Sigh. Sorry. I forgot that many of our more right-wing Orthodox brethren don't consider Modern Orthodox Jews Orthodox.
"pacifying the proletariat" I will gladly be pacified by trade unions and worker's compensation.
Re "modern ortho, they're just as treif as the non-ortho movements", as Garnel Ironheart commented to this DovBear post
. . .
. . . when it comes to Orthodoxy, there is a definite left edge beyond which a person is no longer considered to be practising Orthodoxy. Rabbi Weiss seems to revel in pushing his followers as close to that edge as possible . . . . Hence the strong reaction to Rabbit [sic] Hurwitz.
However, and I think this is a huge problem to which there is no satisfactory answer, there is no right edge to Orthodoxy. The most cuckoo-nuts Satmar who burns an Israeli flag daily before putting on his tefillin and thinks that burkas are minimalist clothing when it comes to tznius [modesty] is still considered Orthodox. Even those NK's [Neturei Karta?] who have been banned by other UO [ultra-Orthodox] groups are still Orthodox -the banning is for politlcal, not religious reasons."
If the right-wing Orthodox aren't talking to the left-wing Orthodox, it's not surprising that they have no kind words for the non-Orthodox.
"Such issues are worthy ones but they are well covered by governmental regulations and other areas of halacha, as determined by recognized Torah authorities. They have nothing to do with kashrut."
Ah, the Cafeteria Judaism that is Ultra Orthodoxy. They'll slit the throat, check the lungs, and bleed it out. . . but matters of not withholding the workers' pay and not abusing the animal prior to slaughter . . . these are matters for "government regulations."
And should the government enforce those regulations . . . the cries of anti-semitism go out in the land.
Here's my question: What makes the sh'chitah of a sabbath observant Jew who withholds his workers' wages more "kosher" than the sh'chitah of a Jew who drives on Shabbat and pays his workers on time. Both are violating the comandments d'oraita.
My religious outlook is probably more in line with Uri l'tzedek, and my politics closer to the Aguda. I think there is no need for a pseudo-ethical "hashgacha". Kashrut is kashrut. The laws are well defined. Either something is objectively kosher or it is not. (Ok, admitting the subjectivity that the supervising rav has, of course).
I don't have a problem, however, with some kind of third party certifying agency to say that something sold to kosher purchasers is organic, or fair trade, or even the nonsense Uri l'tzedek pushes (I say nonsense because I expect basic compliance with the law and fault both the companies and the state for failure to enforce the law. Further, I don't expect companies pursuing legitimate profits to necessarily go beyond the law).
With all that, don't pretend it has anything to do with kashrut. It doesn't. It's no different than organic or fair trade. It's not objectionable, but it's not an issue of kashrut.
What's a Whole Foods shopping, upper middle class Jewish woman supposed to do? Her non-Kosher friends all get fair trade certified foods, etc. She's supposed to eat whatever the OU sticks their stamp on?
Sorry, according to the OU's publication, the Kosher symbol isn't about Jewish customers, it's seen as a "good house keeping seal of approval."
So I have NO objection to an organization giving certification that the company complies with Jewish law in an operational sense, I think that it is as legitimate as any other non-Kosher related certification (and there are several).
I think that "government regulation is fine" argument by the Agudah is stupid and unreasonable for an organization promoting it's own slaughter process.
Regardings, "What makes the sh'chitah of a sabbath observant Jew who withholds his workers' wages more "kosher" than the sh'chitah of a Jew who drives on Shabbat and pays his workers on time. Both are violating the comandments d'oraita"
By Rabbinic definition, a Jew that publicaly keeps Kosher, keeps Shabbat, and keeps Taharat Hamishpacha is considered a Shomer Mitzvot Jew. For purposes of Halacha that requires an observant Jew, that Jew qualified.
The Jew that violates paying wages on time is sinning and violating Hashem's laws. However, he is still a "Shomer Mitzvot Jew" for these sort of ritual matters.
So that's the difference.
So the company's not paying wages is prohibited, but their food is still Kosher.
I get that.
I don't get the problem with a Jewish group saying, "this COMPANY is a "Kosher Company," complying with Halacha in business matters."
Now, if they were certifying companies that make non-Kosher food as "Kosher Companies," I would see the objection, because of potential confusion (I don't have a problem with certifying that a pork processing company pays its workers fairly, I just wouldn't want a not so knowledgable Kosher company to get confused by the symbol).
But since you can only use the symbol on certified Kosher products, I see no problem.
No offense, but the economic argument is specious. The companies selling these products with "extra ethical certifications" aren't selling through the food stamp accepting market distribution chains that the Agudah customers are shopping at.
al,
to whom are you responding, me or the Aguda? Because I think you and I are in agreement, I just don't want it called Kosher or Kashrut, since it's an abuse of those words.
jdub
That's why a Tav Yosher (Certificate of Integrity?) or Magen Tzedek (Shield of Righteousness) is a better name than the Conservatives' original choice, Hechsher Tzedek, which would have been too confusing. The product already has a hechsher. This is more about fairness to employees (embodied in the Torah by the prohibition against delaying wage payment) and kindness to animals (embodied in the Torah's command to feed one's animals before onesself).
On the other hand, Reform Baal Teshuvah has a point. Why is there such an emphasis on the "ritual" mitzvot (bein Adam l'Makom--between a human and G-d) rather than the "ethical" mitzvot (bein Adam l'Chaveiro--between a human and another human) that a person who observes the Sabbath but cheats on his/her taxes is considered an observant Jew but a person who's scrupulous in her/his business dealings but drives on Shabbat is not?
The only difference I can discern is that the "ritual" mitzvot--let Agudah object to that term all they want--differentiate Jew from non-Jew and the ethical ones do not.
jdub, disputing the Agudah, in agreement with you.
However, I am okay with calling it Kosher, providing the certification is ONLY available to be placed on food bearing a Kosher symbol from a "recognized" Orthodox institution.
The lack of emphasis on interpersonal mitzvot is simply a sign of moral decay in that community, nothing more, nothing less.
Violating the non-ritual mitzvot leaves you up for divine punishment. Violating the riutual mitzvot leaves you up for divine punishment AND community exclusion.
In fairness, there ARE criminal penalties for violating all sorts of Mitzvot under Jewish law. However, there hasn't been a Jewish court authorized in criminal matters in quite a while. So I don't know how much is lack of emphasis on them, and how much is lack of jurisdiction.
A modern Beit Din simply has no jurisdiction over interpersonal crimes.
@shira:
b/c there are plenty of chareidi (and sadly some non-chareidi) rabbis that say that it's not an issur d'oraita to cheat a non-Jew or withhold their wages, that those issurim only apply to Jews. Don't get me wrong, if any rabbi in my shul said that, I'd first work to get him fired and then if I couldn't, I'd quit.
But there is a clear strand of halachic thought that says that cheating a non Jew isn't an issur at all. Everyone orthodox agrees that driving a car on shabbat is an issur d'oraita.
The comments to this post seem to have been deleted due to Blogger.com/Blogspot problem, so I'm copying here whichever comments I was able to save in my Word archives before the outage. I'll have to do this in several comments, due to the character limit:
10 Comments:
jdub said...
man, you really don't understand the Orthodox. To the Aguda, Uri l'tzedek is the equivalent of Conservative or Reform. It doesn't matter that they are modern ortho, they're just as treif as the non-ortho movements.
To my mind, I object to Uri l'tzedek because they are trying to create a religious link to left wing politics, such as trade unions.
WED MAY 11, 02:21:00 PM 2011
TOTJ Steve said...
jdub --
Trade unions aren't left wing politics. They were part of Bismarck's approach to pacifying the proletariat, along with workers comp, which successfully deflated in Prussia the revolutionary zeal then upsetting the established order throughout Europe.
WED MAY 11, 02:30:00 PM 2011
Shira Salamone said...
Sigh. Sorry. I forgot that many of our more right-wing Orthodox brethren don't consider Modern Orthodox Jews Orthodox.
"pacifying the proletariat" I will gladly be pacified by trade unions and worker's compensation.
WED MAY 11, 03:00:00 PM 2011
Shira Salamone said...
Re "modern ortho, they're just as treif as the non-ortho movements", as Garnel Ironheart commented to this DovBear post
. . .
. . . when it comes to Orthodoxy, there is a definite left edge beyond which a person is no longer considered to be practising Orthodoxy. Rabbi Weiss seems to revel in pushing his followers as close to that edge as possible . . . . Hence the strong reaction to Rabbit [sic] Hurwitz.
However, and I think this is a huge problem to which there is no satisfactory answer, there is no right edge to Orthodoxy. The most cuckoo-nuts Satmar who burns an Israeli flag daily before putting on his tefillin and thinks that burkas are minimalist clothing when it comes to tznius [modesty] is still considered Orthodox. Even those NK's [Neturei Karta?] who have been banned by other UO [ultra-Orthodox] groups are still Orthodox -the banning is for politlcal, not religious reasons."
If the right-wing Orthodox aren't talking to the left-wing Orthodox, it's not surprising that they have no kind words for the non-Orthodox.
WED MAY 11, 05:22:00 PM 2011
The Reform Baal Teshuvah said...
"Such issues are worthy ones but they are well covered by governmental regulations and other areas of halacha, as determined by recognized Torah authorities. They have nothing to do with kashrut."
Ah, the Cafeteria Judaism that is Ultra Orthodoxy. They'll slit the throat, check the lungs, and bleed it out. . . but matters of not withholding the workers' pay and not abusing the animal prior to slaughter . . . these are matters for "government regulations."
And should the government enforce those regulations . . . the cries of anti-semitism go out in the land.
Here's my question: What makes the sh'chitah of a sabbath observant Jew who withholds his workers' wages more "kosher" than the sh'chitah of a Jew who drives on Shabbat and pays his workers on time. Both are violating the comandments d'oraita.
WED MAY 11, 09:25:00 PM 2011
jdub said...
My religious outlook is probably more in line with Uri l'tzedek, and my politics closer to the Aguda. I think there is no need for a pseudo-ethical "hashgacha". Kashrut is kashrut. The laws are well defined. Either something is objectively kosher or it is not. (Ok, admitting the subjectivity that the supervising rav has, of course).
I don't have a problem, however, with some kind of third party certifying agency to say that something sold to kosher purchasers is organic, or fair trade, or even the nonsense Uri l'tzedek pushes (I say nonsense because I expect basic compliance with the law and fault both the companies and the state for failure to enforce the law. Further, I don't expect companies pursuing legitimate profits to necessarily go beyond the law).
With all that, don't pretend it has anything to do with kashrut. It doesn't. It's no different than organic or fair trade. It's not objectionable, but it's not an issue of kashrut.
THU MAY 12, 07:58:00 AM 2011
Miami Al said...
What's a Whole Foods shopping, upper middle class Jewish woman supposed to do? Her non-Kosher friends all get fair trade certified foods, etc. She's supposed to eat whatever the OU sticks their stamp on?
Sorry, according to the OU's publication, the Kosher symbol isn't about Jewish customers, it's seen as a "good house keeping seal of approval."
So I have NO objection to an organization giving certification that the company complies with Jewish law in an operational sense, I think that it is as legitimate as any other non-Kosher related certification (and there are several).
I think that "government regulation is fine" argument by the Agudah is stupid and unreasonable for an organization promoting it's own slaughter process.
Regardings, "What makes the sh'chitah of a sabbath observant Jew who withholds his workers' wages more "kosher" than the sh'chitah of a Jew who drives on Shabbat and pays his workers on time. Both are violating the comandments d'oraita"
By Rabbinic definition, a Jew that publicaly keeps Kosher, keeps Shabbat, and keeps Taharat Hamishpacha is considered a Shomer Mitzvot Jew. For purposes of Halacha that requires an observant Jew, that Jew qualified.
The Jew that violates paying wages on time is sinning and violating Hashem's laws. However, he is still a "Shomer Mitzvot Jew" for these sort of ritual matters.
So that's the difference.
So the company's not paying wages is prohibited, but their food is still Kosher.
I get that.
I don't get the problem with a Jewish group saying, "this COMPANY is a "Kosher Company," complying with Halacha in business matters."
Now, if they were certifying companies that make non-Kosher food as "Kosher Companies," I would see the objection, because of potential confusion (I don't have a problem with certifying that a pork processing company pays its workers fairly, I just wouldn't want a not so knowledgable Kosher company to get confused by the symbol).
But since you can only use the symbol on certified Kosher products, I see no problem.
No offense, but the economic argument is specious. The companies selling these products with "extra ethical certifications" aren't selling through the food stamp accepting market distribution chains that the Agudah customers are shopping at.
THU MAY 12, 09:41:00 AM 2011
jdub said...
al,
to whom are you responding, me or the Aguda? Because I think you and I are in agreement, I just don't want it called Kosher or Kashrut, since it's an abuse of those words.
jdub
THU MAY 12, 11:08:00 AM 2011
Shira Salamone said...
That's why a Tav Yosher (Certificate of Integrity?) or Magen Tzedek (Shield of Righteousness) is a better name than the Conservatives' original choice, Hechsher Tzedek, which would have been too confusing. The product already has a hechsher. This is more about fairness to employees (embodied in the Torah by the prohibition against delaying wage payment) and kindness to animals (embodied in the Torah's command to feed one's animals before onesself).
THU MAY 12, 01:06:00 PM 2011
Shira Salamone said...
On the other hand, Reform Baal Teshuvah has a point. Why is there such an emphasis on the "ritual" mitzvot (bein Adam l'Makom--between a human and G-d) rather than the "ethical" mitzvot (bein Adam l'Chaveiro--between a human and another human) that a person who observes the Sabbath but cheats on his/her taxes is considered an observant Jew but a person who's scrupulous in her/his business dealings but drives on Shabbat is not?
The only difference I can discern is that the "ritual" mitzvot--let Agudah object to that term all they want--differentiate Jew from non-Jew and the ethical ones do not.
THU MAY 12, 01:22:00 PM 2011
Sorry--I'm pretty sure there were two more comments, but the blog went "dark" before I was able to copy them. Please feel free to re-post.
Shabbat Shalom.
Here's the link mentioned in the copied comments: DovBear's Hirhurim double standard. It's a good think I copied Garnel Ironheart's comment--poor DB lost all of his comments to that post in the shut-down.
Post a Comment
<< Home