Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 5

I mentioned in passing in my last post, about the issue of medications on Shabbat. The ancient rabbis forbade medication on Shabbat, as the herbal medicines used in those days (and by modern day practitioners of herbalism), often involved grinding an herb, and then cooking it. Grinding is one of the thirty nine melachot. But what if one already has an herbal formula prepared? The rabbis feared that someone experiencing pain or discomfort might be so agitated that he might prepare such a remedy on Shabbat. Therefore, they forbade the use of a remedy, even if it had been prepared before Shabbat. Jewish law recognizes three degrees of illness. One who is, or might be, dangerously ill (holeh sheyesh bo sakanah), one who is not in danger, but is experiencing pain all over his body, or else is so uncomfortable that he must lie down, or else is so uncomfortable that he is unable to sleep. (Holeh she'ein bo sakanah), and lastly, someone who has a localized, not unbearable pain (miktzat holi, or meihush).An example would be a moderate or slight headache. In the first case, nearly all commandments, even Biblical commandments, may be, and must be violated, if necessary in curing the person. (Exceptions are idolatry, adultery, incest, murder). In the second case, no Biblical command may be violated, but rabbinic commands may be, including taking already prepared medicines. In the third case, we may violate nothing. Both Ashkenazi and Sepharadic rabbis agree that even now, when medicines are rarely made from herbs, the prohibition still applies, based on the principal of "lo pelug" (no differentiating). That is, if the rabbis forbade "medicine", they made no distinction. It is also clear that they made no distinction between a medical preparation made at home, and one purchased from a physician or herbalist. However, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (1920-2013), in my opinion the greatest halachic authority in the last seven hundred years, issued a responsum shortly before his death, that all medications purchased in a store or pharmacy, are now permitted. His reasoning was that we not only do not make our own medicines, but don't even buy them from an herbalist. We buy them from a store, that in turn buys them from a pharmaceutical company, that makes it in a factory, that is connected with a laboratory, There is no longer any reasonable fear of making it up on Shabbat. We are at least five steps removed from the person who prepares the formula. This is even too far to apply the principle of "lo pelug", as this is way beyond a reasonable doubt that our sages could have envisioned. He did not present this as a "heter", a dispensation for an emergency situation. Rather, he felt that this is an absolute reality in modern circumstances, that must be accepted. This has been a great boon to allergy sufferers, people with an annoying itch, as well as countless others. Strictly speaking, this is not a Sepharadic-Ashkenazic issue, but it illustrates the willingness of great Sepharadic rabbis to meet the challenges of new realities, while Ashkenazi rabbis are more determined to preserve the eighteenth century..

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 4

We go to Synagogue, come home, make Kiddush on the wine, and have our meal. Although there are different nuances in the prayers, and the foods served at the meal, none of these differences are terribly significant. Our next big "shocker" comes when we stand in the bathroom, ready to brush our teeth. Sepharadim will, Ashkenazim won't. Here we find one of the most basic differences between the two groups. As we have discussed, there are thirty nine labors forbidden on Shabbat. They are based on the thirty nine activities involved in the building of the Sanctuary in the wilderness. The labor of making fire is mentioned specifically in the Torah. But extinguishing is also one of the thirty nine. It was an action used in the manufacturing of charcoal, used in the burning of incense. There is a Talmudic debate about extinguishing a burning object NOT for the purpose of making coal. One view is that such an activity is still forbidden Biblically. Others say that it is forbidden only rabbinically. This situation is known as "melachah sheeinah tzerichah L'gufah" (A labor not intended for it's designated purpose).The view of nearly all medieval authorities, other than RAMBAM, is that it is a rabbinic prohibition. But what if one is not at all interested in the RESULTS of the action, but rather in the action itself? For example, one of the labors is "spreading". If a viscous coating is spread on an object, such as glue or cement intended to fix a crack in a utensil, that would be the prohibition of "spreading". What about toothpaste? We certainly spread it. However, we are not interested in the toothpaste covering our teeth, but rather in the effects of the toothpaste. In fact, we quickly spit it out, and rinse our mouths in order to get rid of the last traces. Ashkenazim still consider this to be a prohibition of "spreading"; either by Biblical or rabbinic law. Sepharadim argue that, as I am not interested in having the toothpaste remain in my mouth, only in the effects, there is no prohibition whatsoever. The same applies to a bar of soap. Ashkenazi rabbis see in it two prohibitions; "spreading" and "wearing down" (an offshoot of "grinding").Sepharadic rabbis say that as I have no desire to keep the worn down soap on my body, but rather I quickly rinse it off, there is really no issue. Going even further, salves and creams, that I DO NOT wash off, but my intent is that they be absorbed in my skin, also constitute no problem. (I will discuss the issue of medications in another post). This idea will be applied not only to toiletries, but in many areas of food preparation, as I shall discuss. Indeed, there is a very different mood to a Sepharadi Shabbat.

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 3

Now that the candles have been lit, let's take a peak into the kitchen. As the Torah clearly forbids lighting a fire on Shabbat, we will find either a gas jet left on, covered by a piece of metal (blech or plata), or an electric hot plate. In the Ashkenazi home, the blech is covered with many dishes to be eaten both on Friday night, and on Shabbat day. The ones for the day might be only partially cooked, in which case, they may not be stirred, as this will hasten the cooking. Once they are fully cooked, they may be stirred, but only while not directly over the flame, lest, unbeknownst to us, there might remain some morsel of food that has not yet been completely cooked, which may become cooked when we stir it.  While serving the food, the pot must at all times be held in one's hand, or else it will not be permitted to return to the blech. In the Sepharadic home, we will be surprised to see none of this, and the above restrictions are likely to be unknown. Friday night's food will, indeed, be on the blech, already fully cooked, waiting to be enjoyed by the family, once the men have returned from Synagogue. We will find the food for Shabbat day, fully cooked, stored in the refrigerator. It will be placed on the blech in sufficient time to become piping hot when served. Why the difference? The Talmud clearly states a principle "There is no cooking after cooking". This means that once food has been fully cooked, there is no prohibition to warm it up; it does not "cook" again. There are, however,  minority opinions in medieval rabbinic literature, that this applies only to a solid dish. Liquids can cook again. Most Yemenites ignore this, even replacing a pot of previously boiled water on to the blech. Sepharadim do consider those minority opinions, but will put back on the blech a mostly solid dish, even if it contains some liquid from the cooking. No new liquid will be added. Although some Ashkenazim will put a previously cooked dish on the blech, they will be sure to check that there is no visible liquid. Most, however, will NEVER do this, as there is always likely to be at least a trace of liquid, which will boil once placed on the heat. Some even fear that fat present in meat will melt, and then boil. Thus, the principle of "no cooking after cooking" is seen as completely theoretical. Let us remember that the idea of previously cooked liquids being able to boil,is a minority opinion, and hence a mere stringency. Once the food is served, it may freely be returned to the blech or the refrigerator. A dish that is mostly liquid, such as soup, will either be kept on the blech, or refrigerated and put on the blech on an upside down pan or plate, so that it will only get warm, and not cook. Sepharadim will use a timer on an electric hot plate. They will even put soup on the hotplate before the hot plate switches on, allowing the soup to thus become hot automatically. If the plate has become hot already, it must be considered as similar to the case of the blech over the fire. Ashkenazim consider many of these actions to be forbidden. If I may editorialize a bit; most hot plates are of shoddy construction, imported from the Far East. Overheating and fire are not uncommon. There have already been tragedies. Those rabbis who insist on stringency with hot plates on timers will, I believe, have to give an accounting in the Heavenly Court for having spiled blood.. Having the hot plate go on only shortly before the meal, when the kitchen is supervised, saves lives.Once again, we see that the Serpharadi approach is not really a leniency, but rather does what Talmudic law requires, without theoretical constructs  reading into the text ideas that never occurred to our Sages. "Her ways are the ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace".(Proverbs 3:17)

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 2

We will first encounter a difference between an Ashkenazi and Sepharadi Shabbat already with candle lighting. Among Ashkenazim, the last thing that the lady of the house does before Shabbat begins, is to light the candles. With the blessing on the candles, she accepts Shabbat and may do no more "melachah" (labors). However, we have a halachic principle, that a blessing is always said BEFORE a mitzvah is done. The sole exception to this mentioned in Talmud, is the immersion of a convert. Before the immersion, the convert was not Jewish, and thus unable to say the blessing as a Jew. The Talmud says that he or she should immerse, come out of the water, put on some clothing, and recite the blessing without delay. But since Ashkenazi women accept Shabbat with the blessing, reciting it before candle lighting would mean that she can no longer light. The accepted practice is to light first, then cover her eyes, and only afterwards look at the candles. The vast majority of Sepharadic authorities have great problems with this procedure. First of all, there is no Talmudic basis for saying that Shabbat begins with the blessing, or even with the lighting. That is an idea that first is suggested in medieval Franco-Germany. In fact, even the Ashkenazi rule is that if a man is lighting candles, in the situation where no woman is present in the home, he is to first say the blessing, light, and sometime between the lighting and sundown, accept upon himself the sanctity of Shabbat. He may even drive to the synagogue (as long as the Sun has not yet set), and accept Shabbat when he gets there. Similarly, Sepharadic women first say the blessing, then light, and shortly afterwards make a declaration of accepting Shabbat. Moreover, most (but not all) Sepharadic rabbis insist on extinguishing the electric lights in the room, and only then bless on the candles and light, putting the electric lights back on once the candles are lit. The reason for this being, that the primary function of the Shabbat candles is to have light in the home on the eve of Shabbat. If the electric lights are on, there is already light, and the candle is then superfluous. In fact, most Sepharadic rabbis agree that the electric lights can also serve a Shabbat "candles". Therefore, we turn of the electric lights, recite the blessing, light the candles, and only then put the electric lights back on. One Sepharadic posek (halachic decisor), Rabbi Yitzchak Abadi, considers the electric lights to be the main "candles", recommending that the blessing should be said on them, and only afterwards lighting actual candles, which then becomes only a custom.Most Sepharadic authorities consider the recitation of the blessing after lighting as the grave sin of a blessing in vain. Ashkenazim would counter that custom trumps law; an idea  nowhere to be found in the Babylonian Talmud.,In practice, some Sepharadic communities have accepted the Ashkenazic custom, while some Ashkenazim have gone over to the Sepharadic practice. But most follow in the guidelines I have described., When I went to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef in 1991 to inquire if I could become Sepharadic, he asked me how my wife blesses on the candles. I said "before lighting, as is proper!". He smiled, and welcomed me into the Serpharadic fold.

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 1

Political correctness would dictate that we should say that all systems of halachah and tradition are equally valid. But truth be told, few people actually beleive that. When we win the confidence of members of different communities, we will often here why "our" way is by far the best. One online Kashrut "expert" even wrote that the opinions of Sepharadic rabbis can be ignored, as "our" rabbis are far greater. Words like these can be heard in many groups and sub groups, even between Ashkenazim themselves. Sepharadic Jews, however, tend to be more open to outside criticism, and have, at various times and in various places, abandoned their own ways, out of respect for someone whom they consider to be a great personage. Recently, my wife, Sima, read a posting for a dinner being held by a Sepharadic synagogue in our area, that boasted of the authenticity of the Sepharadic  cuisine that will be served. The keynote speaker...a popular Ashkenazi rabbi.Over the course of the last two centuries, many communities have adopted Ashkenazi customs and halachah. The tide began to be turned by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef,(1920-2013, who made his motto "To restore the Crown to its former glory", preaching far and wide about the validity of Sepharadic tradition. Privately, he went much further, declaring Ashkenazi ways to be "confusion", and the Sepharadic way to be infinitely more valid.I have come to accept that view. Elsewhere, I have discussed the reasoning behind these ideas. The great Sepharadic rabbis of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, were the heirs to the heritage of the great Yeshivot of Babylon, where the Talmud had been composed, while their Ashkenazi counterparts received primarily a written text, which begged interpretation. Subsequent generations of Sepharadic rabbis put their efforts into arriving at the true meaning of Tanach and Talmud, while Ashkenazim sought to read between the lines. One must question how much of this reading between the lines is actually uncovering true intent, and how much is reading into the text ideas that are alien to it? In this series, I will not go into difference of cuisine or melodies; but into the actual differences in observance of Shabbat between the two groups. I hope to show that the Sepharadic way is almost always faithful to sources, while the Ashkenazi approach emphasizes custom and "svara" (theoretical constructs). Also, where there is some doubt in the intent of a Talmudic principle, Sepharadim will attempt to clarify which interpretation is the most valid, while Ashkenazim will often rule that all interpretations, even contradictory ones, must be upheld in practice. Although these differences can be found in all areas of Jewish life, they can most readily be found in Shabbat observance. The Sepharadic way seems like it is more lenient; but in fact, it is stricter where sources call for strictness, whereas Ashkenazim will be lenient where custom has spoken. On the other hand, Sepharadic authorities see no problem for Shabbat in such everyday amenities as brushing teeth, washing with soap, reheating foods that have been previously cooked, squeezing a lemon into a cup of tea, or many other little ways that make Shabbat less restrictive, so that one can concentrate on its transcendent spirituality,.Ashkenazi understanding has declared these same actions as possible Biblical prohibitions.Moreover, its not that Sepharadim  are bending over backwards to be lenient, but are merely following the sources to their logical conclusions, rather than reading in layer upon layer of insecurity. Only in the area of Passover observance is the difference more evident. But a Sepharadic Shabbat is, I believe, a less obsessive one, filled with more joy and celebration.