The Disappearing Melaveh Malkah

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The melaveh malkah, the Saturday night meal bidding Shabbos farewell after its completion, has long suffered widespread abandonment. Despite its codification in Jewish law (Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 300:1), many otherwise observant Jews observe it minimally, if at all. This can be somewhat explained by the difficulty of eating a meal when Shabbos ends very late, mentioned already in the seventeenth century by the Magen Avraham (300:1). I suggest that such practice is justified and that minimal observance of the meal, which we will explain shortly, is actually a stringency.

Kabbalists see mystical value in the melaveh malkah. Accordingly, Chasidim emphasize its importance and maximize its observance. They generally eat a full meal, replete with bread and meat. Non-Chasidim who observe kabbalistic customs, such as followers of the Vilna Gaon, also embrace the melaveh malkah as a full, festive meal. However, mainstream Orthodox Jews tend to eat whatever they desire, if anything.

Shulchan Arukh (ibid.) lists the order of preference for foods in this meal. Many people do not eat any bread, which is at the top of the list, and instead eat food with the blessing of mezonos. Others eat fruit or vegetables, and still others drink hot beverages. And some people eat nothing because they are not hungry. Do all these people reject an explicit law and adopt either unpreferrable or unacceptable practices?

The Eliyahu Rabba (340:1 – link) records an important leniency he “heard.” He reports a ruling that any food eaten after sunset on Saturday counts for melaveh malkah. Therefore, someone who begins “Shaleshudis,” the third Shabbos meal, close to sunset and continues eatin has fulfilled the requirement of melaveh malkah. Significantly, the Ba’eir Heitev (340:1 – link) quotes this view without dissent. The Arukh Ha-Shulchan (340:3 – link) also adopts this position as normative. The Shemiras Shabbos Ke-Hilkhasah (63:6) quotes it and adds that some disagree.

If this lenient view is normative, then the common practice of beginning Shaleshudis right before sunset obviates the need to eat melaveh malkah. If so, the practice of eating food with the blessing mezonos or drinking a hot beverage as melaveh malkah is actually a stringency. Even though you have fulfilled your obligation, you are eating or drinking something “just in case,” as a chumrah.

Please note that I fully recommend this stringency, and practice it myself. The Arukh Ha-Shulchan adds that during Shaleshudis you should eat a minimal measure (ke-zayis) of bread after sunset so that you legitimately eat a meal during the night. While the other authorities do not mention such a requirement, it seems to me to be a stringency that is easy to fulfill if you start Shaleshudis close enough to sunset.

About Gil Student

Rabbi Gil Student is the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of TorahMusings.com, a leading website on Orthodox Jewish scholarly subjects, and the Book Editor of the Orthodox Union’s Jewish Action magazine. He writes a popular column on issues of Jewish law and thought featured in newspapers and magazines, including The Jewish Link, The Jewish Echo and The Vues. In the past, he has served as the President of the small Jewish publisher Yashar Books and as the Managing Editor of OU Press. Rabbi Student serves on the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America. He also serves on the Editorial Boards of Jewish Action magazine, the Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society and the Achieve Journal of Behavioral Health, Religion & Community, as well as the Board of OU Press. He has published five English books, the most recent titled Search Engine volume 2: Finding Meaning in Jewish Texts -- Jewish Leadership, and served as the American editor for Morasha Kehillat Yaakov: Essays in Honour of Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks.

68 comments

  1. “Non-Chasidim who observe kabbalistic customs, such as followers of the Vilna Gaon, also embrace the melaveh malkah as a full, festive meal.”

    GRAs insistence on this mitzvah was strictly halachic. His source was the Gemarah.

  2. I vaguely remember a gemara saying they weren’t makpid about Shaleshudis.

  3. “He reports a ruling that any food eaten after sunset on Saturday counts for melaveh malkah.”

    One might think that all the sources you quoted would agree this is true even a minute after sunset. But that’s a very novel reading of these sources. IIRC later poskim understand “laila” and “achar chasheicha” as Tzeis.

  4. The Gra’s practice of a full meal with hot bread went well beyond the Gemara’s statement.

    Who reads “chasheichah” as tzeis? I find that hard to acccept. We aren’t allowed to start a new meal after shekiah because the zeman for havdalah has arrived.

  5. 1. Can you please quote the gemarahs directive for the 4th meal (not just the minimal obligation) and the actual minhag of the GRA as described in Maase Rav?

    2. The chiddush is that you can connect 3rd and 4th meal into one, not that right after shkiah counts as motzei shabbos. Everybody agrees that 4th meal needs to be eaten on motzei shabbos.

  6. Interesting source “I heard” – worth a post on its own.

    Almost seems like another unclear bdieved became lchatchila(e.g. davening mincha right before shkia followed by maariv)

    KT

  7. I might be mistaken here, but it seems to me that you are also projecting what is know as “geonic zmanim” (i.e. astronomical sunset) on poskim who followed shittas Rabbeinu Tam.

  8. Bottom line though: Melaveh Malka is a mitzva, not a chiyuv.

    Ari Enkin

  9. Shimon S: I don’t think this is in Ma’aseh Rav.

    It could be I’m confusing “chasheichah” between the two views on zemanim. I could be I’m not. Who are these poskim you mentioned as saying “tzeis”?

  10. abba's rantings

    R. Enkin:

    “Bottom line though: Melaveh Malka is a mitzva, not a chiyuv.”

    what’s the difference?

  11. Its really the only time of the week I get to enjoy a delicious turkey (low-fat) sandwich. Yummy!

  12. The interplay between chasheichah and tzeit hakochavim is discussed here in Dr. Gerwitz’s article, starting around page 71

    http://zemanim.net/docs/Bein_Hashemashot.pdf

    https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ASx6sZjO1KzmZDhwbW5jal8xZndoOHJuZ3Q&hl=en_US

  13. Okay, lets see if the GRA follows the Kabbalah here:

    Bavli Shabbos 119b:

    אמר ר’ אלעזר לעולם יסדר אדם שלחנו בע”ש אע”פ שאינו צריך אלא לכזית ואמר ר’ חנינא לעולם יסדר אדם שלחנו במוצאי שבת אע”פ שאינו צריך אלא לכזית חמין במוצאי שבת מלוגמא פת חמה ר’ אבהו הוה עבדין ליה באפוקי שבתא עיגלא תילתא הוה אכיל מיניה כולייתא כי גדל אבימי בריה א”ל למה לך לאפסודי כולי האי נשבוק כולייתא ממעלי שבתא שבקוהו ואתא אריא אכליה

    Rambam MT Zmanin, Shabbos 30:5:

    מסדר אדם שולחנו בערב השבת, ואף על פי שאינו צריך אלא לכזית, וכן מסדר שולחנו במוצאי שבת, ואף על פי שאינו צריך אלא לכזית–כדי לכבדו בכניסתו, וביציאת

    HaGRA: Maase Rav (Nusach Tosfos MR) 148 and for details TM”R 39:

    http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=35342&st=&pgnum=22

    לסעודת מלוה מלכה יסדר שולחנו ויאכל לא פחות מכזית פת

    For his sources see Biur HaGRA on O”Ch 300.

    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22238&st=&pgnum=223

    His whole shitta for Melave Malka is to somehow mirror the Friday night meal, and that is his understanding of the Gemarah.

  14. R’ Ari,

    “Bottom line though: Melaveh Malka is a mitzva, not a chiyuv.”

    Mitzvah can mean anything (chiyuv, rshus, cool thing etc). Also I’m sure you know all the rishonim and acharonim who do say explicitly it is a chiyuv so I don’t see the point of such a general statement.

  15. Abba / Shimon-

    Most achronim write clearly that it is a “mitzva” not a “chiyuv”. Shaloshsheudos is a ‘chiyuv’ – you must eat the third meal on Shabbat. Melaveh Malka – you need not eat it, but you get a “mitzvah” if you do.

    Ari Enkin

  16. R’ Ari,

    “Most achronim write clearly that it is a “mitzva” not a “chiyuv”.”

    How do you count that? Can you list them? Where does it leave RM Sternbuch, RCh Kanievsky, RYSh Elyashiv, RN Karelitz or RO Yosef?

  17. Why the need for absolute “bottom line” pronouncements about mitzvah vs hiyuv, or for creative bediavad solutions? Just eat a kezayit of bread after havdalah. It is not such a big deal. And you thereby fulfill the position of the Rambam and GR”A as well as the simple, straightforward meaning of the Gemara.

  18. R’JM,
    Because people don’t do it but want to feel good about themselves.
    KT

  19. Many of the questions raised in the comments on this article may be answered if you read the Mishnah Acharona comments available here:
    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=50327&st=&pgnum=372

    The kula of the Elya Rabah is based on the Ohr Zarua (i.e. eating after shkia counts toward fulfillment of Melave Malka). This approach is questioned by Tehila LeDavid who points out the incongruity in considering the seudah shelishit meal as leviyah when it is still Shabbat with all its strictures and when you are going to say Retzai in benching. Therefore, the seudah of the
    Melave Malka should most properly be eaten after Havdalah. IMHO this is a very compelling point.

  20. Shimon / RJM-

    I need not go further than the Mishna Berura who says that MM is optional (300:2).

    Make no mistake — I am not adovcating abandoning MM. The chiyuv vs. mitzva thing is an issue of halachic honesty. As Joel R points out — let’s not make those who dont eat MM feel like sinners.

    Ari Enkin

  21. Joel Rich,

    You hit the nail on the head….

    I hate to say it, but the same goes for people who insist on carrying on Shabbat relying upon eruvin and eating hadash when qemah yashan is amply available, and then criticize those who are maqpid for disrespecting their heterim.

    It is really not that hard to keep halakha properly. Leave your siddur at synagogue and get a Shabbat lock for your front door. Skip Entenmann’s donuts from Rosh Hashana through Pesah – especially if you live in NY, yashan products are plentiful.

    Forget the qulot and heterim and follow the Torah as written. It’s not as difficult as it sounds.

  22. Ari Enkin-
    It is unfair to quote the mishna berura as saying it is a mitzva not a chova and not citing the nafka mina he gives between a mitzva and a chova. He says since its “only” a mitzva, if one cannot be mekayem shalosh seudos and melave malka then better to be mekayem only shalosh seudos. However, it does not mean that one can refrain from performing it for whatever reason they would like. Your description of it as “a mitzva not a chova” seems to lend itself to the latter.

  23. MiMedinat HaYam

    entennman’s — never a pblm.

    its pure chemicals.

    any flour in it is batel be meah ve-shishim

  24. Most achronim write clearly that it is a “mitzva” not a “chiyuv”. Shaloshsheudos is a ‘chiyuv’ – you must eat the third meal on Shabbat. Melaveh Malka – you need not eat it, but you get a “mitzvah” if you do

    Funny you should mention it, since among Lubavitchers,for example, the idea of shaleshudos has completely gone out the window. In fact, you stand a better chance of finding a minyan for hallel on yom haatzmaut in a satmar shul than a shaleshudos in a chabad shul.

  25. R.W. – no different from disregard for zmanei tefilah, or changing the nusach of prayer :), or a hundred other hasidic practices that contradict halacha…

  26. The Chabad disregard for Seuda Shelishis (SS) is based on the Zohar (don’t ask me where) that one can be mekayem SS on divrei Torah. The Aroch HaShulchan writes that this Zohar was intended to apply to when Erev Pesach falls on Shabbos and one cannot (in his view) fulfill SS. Far it be for me to defend Chabad, but they do have a source for their practice.

  27. Lawrence Kaplan

    RJM: And what about baby carriages?

  28. Lawrence Kaplan,

    Without an eruv, would you push the carriage? I assume not.

    I grew up in a neighborhood without an eruv. None of the observant people carried. Period. My understanding is that in Chicago there is a substantial segment of the Orthodox community that doesn’t carry anything at all, because they don’t rely on eruvin.

    My point is that it is possible to observe halakha as written, without far-fetched heterim that are invoked for convenience only. If convenience and social acceptance are paramount, then halakha becomes something to be “worked around” instead of observed.

  29. RJM,

    not that I disagree, but what about the mitzvah of living in Eretz Yisrael?

  30. I’ve raised (or am raising) four children without using an eruv. It isn’t that hard.

    Shimon S: It’s not entirely clear that there is such a mitzvah. R. Moshe Feinstein holds it is not an obligation.

  31. RJM – What tremendous chutzpa! The Minchas Elazar and many, many great poskim were makpid davka to use an an eruv, many of our contemporary eruvin are built on extremely solid halachic foundations, and you have the gall to criticize those legitimately following their poskim who encourage the use of eruvin. The halachic basis of our eruvin is stronger than for many other common practices.

  32. Gil – The Chasam Sofer says that it’s impossible to be careful about tiltul on shabbos unless there’s an eruv, so I think he would disagree with you about how hard it is to keep shabbos properly without one.

  33. Hadardai-

    That’s not why Chabadskers dont eat shalosheudos. The primary reason is because Shabbat afternoon is too holy to eat. Kinda like the sleeping in the sukka thing.

    I have a post brewing on this issue in the future.

    Ari Enkin

  34. RMJ-

    You preach chadash but ‘allow’ chalav stam Entenmans? Am I halucinating?? Oh. Only after Pesach, of course.

    With all due respect,-lechol hadeot- chalav yisrael comes before being makpid on yashon in chutz la’aretz.

    Ari Enkin

  35. R’ Gil,

    “It’s not entirely clear that there is such a mitzvah. R. Moshe Feinstein holds it is not an obligation.”

    R’ Moshe is just questioning if it is a mitzvah chiyuvis, he is not saying there is no mitzvah or even an inyan.

  36. R’ Ari,

    “lechol hadeot- chalav yisrael comes before being makpid on yashon in chutz la’aretz”

    I’m getting more and more disturbed by your generalizations. Does your “lechol hadeot” include all those who hold that chadash is assur min hatorah mamash even in chu”l? You do know that there are many who are “makpid” on yashan meikar hadin, right?

  37. J: The Chasam Sofer says that it’s impossible to be careful about tiltul on shabbos unless there’s an eruv

    I don’t know what that means. Are you saying that R. Moshe Feinstein carried in the Lower East Side?

    Shimon S: R’ Moshe is just questioning if it is a mitzvah chiyuvis, he is not saying there is no mitzvah or even an inyan.

    Exactly, hence the “is not an obligation.”

  38. For an interesting discussion of the various approaches to chadash/yashan amongst different kehillos, see footnotes 7 & 8 here:
    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=46449&st=&pgnum=87

  39. I’m not saying anything about R. Moshe – as is well known he had an approach to be the halachic and hashkafic aspect of eruvin in which (apart from his talmidim) he was literally a daas yachid. I’m not going to explain the Chasam Sofer’s words, I think they speak for themselves.
    וזה לשון מרן החת”ס (שו”ת או”ח סימן צט): “בשעה שתיקן שלמה עירובין ונט”י יצאה בת קול ואמרה אם חכם בני ישמח לבי גם אני. והקשה תוס’ הא גם שניות תיקן, וי”ל לפי הנ”ל במה שהוסיף חומרא לאיסור שניות אע”ג שהוא מצוה לעשות סיג לתורה, מ”מ לא שייך ישמח לבי, כי אולי יכשלו בזה בני אדם שאינם הגונים, אבל כשעשה סיג לשמירת שבת וגם עשה תיקון שלא יקלקלו בו, היינו שיערבו עירובין, אז ישמח לבי גם אני… דהאי ברכה על מצות עירוב, היא על מצות התיקון הגדול הלז להשמר מאיסור הוצאה – אשר ממש אי אפשר להזהר ממנו”.

  40. R. Moshe Feinstein wasn’t quite a da’as yachid (R. Aharon Kotler…) but in my community his view on this is accepted as binding. My rabbi even mentioned it this year in his Neilah derashah (along with honesty in business and other issues).

  41. Here’s another quote from the Chasam Sofer:
    וא”כ כל בר דעת ישפוט בשכלו שאי אפשר בשום אופן לקהל ישראל לשמור את כל בני ביתם קטנים כאלו, וגם לא נשותיהם וחלושי דעת, לשמרם בכל יום השבת מבלי להוציא מפתח ביתו החוצה דברים קטנים ומטפחת וקטנים ופתם בידם, וכמה צער ודוחק יסבלו הגדולים הנזהרים, ובפרט בענין תפלה בבהכ”נ ביום שבת קודש בהבאת הסידורים להתפלל מתוכו וטליתים וכדומה עיין ט”ז סימן שמ”ו סק”ו, א”כ השכל הפשוט גוזר שראוי ומחוייב לתקן החצרים והמבואות בעירוב המתיר טלטול.

  42. So it’s a machlokes ha-poskim, with the Mishkenos Ya’akov and R. Moshe Feinstein (and others) on the other side. I can deal with a machlokes in halakhah.

  43. R. Aharon Kotler’s view and R. Moshe’s were totally different. R. Aharon didn’t hold of shishim ribo and he had a different understanding of the definition of mefulash than R. Moshe. R. Moshe also would allow eruvin built of mechitzos, like the current ones in Brooklyn.

  44. R. Moshe’s view had nothing to do with the Mishkenos Yaakov – they disagreed on most significant points. R. Moshe held of shishim ribo ‘midin vadai’ – he just had an original way of interpreting it. And the ‘hashkafic’ points against certain modern eruvin are R. Moshe’s alone.

  45. J: Yes and no. They all had different views but they all agreed that often cities have to exist without eruvin.

  46. You preach chadash but ‘allow’ chalav stam Entenmans? Am I halucinating?? Oh. Only after Pesach, of course.

    With all due respect,-lechol hadeot- chalav yisrael comes before being makpid on yashon in chutz la’aretz.

    R. Enkin, WADR, can you cite a single poseik who takes this position. Because frankly it appears completely backwards. Chodosh is a question of a deoraysa — the gemara expressly states that Chodosh in Chu”L is deoraysa. The hetterim are widely accepted, but they are dochak.

    Cholov Yisroel, OTOH, is at most a derabbanan. R. Moshe’s hetter is very solidly based on a Shach. The chances of there being non-cow milk in what one buys in the store or supermarket are virtually nil (at least in America, can’t speak for other countries necessarily).

  47. I believe that the option of learning Torah to fulfill Shalosh Seudos is cited by the Mechaber in SA:OH.

  48. Rafael: Where? I don’t see it in 291 or 444.

  49. Rafael Araujo,

    And what makes you believe so? See O”Ch 191. Not even Sh”A HaRav (Graz) says that.

    R’ Ari is correct, and here is an “official” Chabad source – Minhagei Chabad (R Moshe Bogomilsky) p. 24-25

    “The purpose of eating tasty food on Shabbos is strictly to experience “oneg” – delight. If eating, however, is detrimental to a person’s health he does nto have to agonize himself to eat … Hence, one who has reached the level at which he truly feels the exalted spiritual aura during the time of the third meal … to such a person, eating is a tzar – agony – and he accomplishes his delight by refraining from eating.

    “The Rebbes of Chabad ‘felt’ the spiritual light which shines during the time designated for Shalosh Seudot and therefore refrained from eating. Consequently, the Chassidim who are attached to them follow in their footsteps”.

  50. Correction: “See O”Ch 191” should be 291 of course. Maybe the confusion is with the shitta about fruits, quoted in 291:5.

  51. I’m sorry, the proper quotation for the sefer on Minhagei Chabad should be: Rabbi Moshe Bogomilsky, Vedibarta Bam, Birkat Hamazon, p. 24-25.

    http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/vedibarta-bam/159.htm

  52. Shimon S-

    I am unsure what bothers you about my generalization.

    Please accept that it is unanimous (yes, unanimous) that if one has to choose between taking on the chumra of “chalav yisrael” or the chumra of “yashon”, the former takes priority. (in chutz la’aretz)

    Ari Enkin

  53. R’ Tal-

    I really dont want to get into the yashon vs. chalav yisrael thing, but to offer one empirical example: even the most mehadrin hechsherin in America have been giving a hecher to chadash products but not ‘chalav stam’ ones.

    Being makpid, en masse, on yashon in chu”l is essentailly a recent development that still hasnt been mainstreamed by anyone (again, en masse).

    Ari Enkin

  54. Hence, one who has reached the level at which he truly feels the exalted spiritual aura during the time of the third meal … to such a person, eating is a tzar – agony – and he accomplishes his delight by refraining from eating.

    And every Chabadnik, moreover anyone who ever visits a Chabad community, has that kind of spiritual experience? Please.

    Not to mention how many Chasidic authorities, for example the Baal Shem Tov, would not have agreed that eating and spirituality are mutually exclusive…

  55. R’ Enkin,
    There is no question that on purely halachic grounds it makes much more sense not to eat chadash then to drink chalav yisrael. Chadash is an issur d’oraysa while chalav akum is a gezera d’rabbanan.

    The reason why the situation is reversed is because of sociological/historical reasons. In Eastern Europe on one hand they were mekil on chadash (out of necessity), on the other hand, they drank chalav yisrael (which was not difficult as there was no milk production, people got milk from a local Jew’s cow). When they came to America they continued acting the way they acted in Europe and therefore they were makpid on cholov yisrael and not on chadash. In recent years, more and more people are realizing 2 things:
    1. The heter of chadash in chu”l is very weak nowadays
    2. It isn’t that difficult to eat only yashan.

    The fact is that more and more products and businesses are advertising kemach yashan.

    The bottom line is that chadash is a safek issur d’oraysa with a weak heter the and chalav stam is a din d’rabbanan with a strong heter.

    See here 2 difficult leniencies in halacha for a more in-depth analysis as to why the heter of chadash is a weak heter nowadays.

  56. Marty – You are simply mistaken about shishim ribo being a difficult leniency. Firstly, the problem that this tenai is coming to rectify when building an eruv, is at the very worst a d’rabanan according to most poskim, who accept that a tzuras hapesach works to remove reshus harabbim status mide’oraysa. Secondly, many of the locations in which we build eruvin are not reshuyos harabbim for other reasons according to the vast majority of poskim, either because they have mechitzos omed merubah al haparutz and/or the streets are not mefulashim u’mechuvanim mishaar leshaar. The tenai of shishim ribo itself was accepted by the overwhelming majority of rishonim, and appears in the Behag. Halevai all the other kulos we rely on were anywhere near as well established as shishim ribo, which, according to the majority of poskim, is not a kula at all.

  57. Tal – Regarding whether there are poskim who would encourage being machmir on chalav yisrael before chadash, I don’t think there’s a single chassidish posek in the world who wouldn’t do this.
    What many people here seem to be missing, is that halacha is not simply a bunch of rules to be impartially applied, and then analyzed from the perspective of sociology and economics when the minhag was not like what we would expect it to be. Rather there is something called a hachra’a and mesorah (there are obviously different mesoros of halacha, and differing schools of thought would attach various levels of value to minhagim, partly depending on who originated them).
    For chassidim, who have a strong mesora to be meikel on chadash and machmir on chalav yisrael, and who attach strong value to such mesoros, I think it’s obvious that they would choose the latter before the former. For litvakers (again depending on their ‘schnit’ and general approach), the opposite may be true.

  58. R’ Ari,

    “Please accept that it is unanimous (yes, unanimous) that if one has to choose between taking on the chumra of “chalav yisrael” or the chumra of “yashon”, the former takes priority. (in chutz la’aretz)”

    How can I accept something that is simply not true (yes, not true)?

    Please answer my simple question: Do you believe that according to all poskim yashan in chu”l is just a chumrah? Sometimes you DO have to go further than the Kitzur or Mishnah Berura…

  59. Shimon-

    I am well aware of the issues. But l’masseh yashon was at best a chumra in chu”l until very late 20th century.

    I am solidly of the opinion that chalav yisrael comes before yashon.

    Of course NOTHING is UNANIMOUS in Judaism. But this is an issue that as is unanimous as one can get.

    Ari Enkin

  60. R’ Ari,

    among the non-ashkenazi poskim it is truly “as unanimous as one can get”…

  61. Regarding whether there are poskim who would encourage being machmir on chalav yisrael before chadash, I don’t think there’s a single chassidish posek in the world who wouldn’t do this.

    For litvakers (again depending on their ‘schnit’ and general approach), the opposite may be true.

    J.: I don’t deny that there are many chassidische poskim who hold as you say. But R. Enkin asserted that ALL opinions hold that way, which is not correct.

    Furthermore, the discussion here is, assuming that meikar ha din one relies on the hetterim, and that one is looking to be machmir, which chumrah should take precedence, all other things being equal. As to that, I have yet to see a single source cited.

    R. Enkin, you surely are well aware that the Soloveichik family both held of what is generally called “Chalav Stam” (and which R. Moshe Feistein called “chalav ha companies”), and yet R. Aharon Soloveichik was a strong advocate of keeping yoshon. I know quite a few of his talmidim who do just that. Frankly, I think you owe the poster who keeps yoshon but eats Entemann’s (from Pesach to Rosh ha Shanah) an apology. There is nothing incongruous about holding like that halakhically (although sociologically such a position is uncommon.)

    Meanwhile, I have yet to see single poseik cited who holds that it is silly to keep yoshon if one relies on R. Moshe’s hetter for chalav ha companies. Just repeating that it is “unanimous” does not prove anything.

  62. R’ Gil
    Everyone maintains that an eruv is a chiyuv. The poskim gave multiple reasons for this chiyuv including the Perishah (O.C.395:1) who argued that it’s part of oneg Shabbos. R’ Moshe zt”l was the only one to question if the chiyuv is applicable today. Those who state cavalierly that an eruv is not needed today do not realize that this is a daas yachid and is surely not the consensus of the poskim. I reiterate, no one besides R’ Moshe made this argument. It’s simply a mistake to argue that those who objected to the current eruvin agreed with R’ Moshe that there is no chiyuv today to establish an eruv.

    Therefore, when one cites the poskim that an eruv is a mitzvah and even a requirement, they are just stating the accepted halachah pesuka mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch. Moreover, R’ Moshe allowed an eruv for Queens and mentioned that it’s even a very good thing. In his Detroit teshuvah, the last responsa regarding eruvin, R’ Moshe stated that an eruv could be an important issue and that maybe one should even strive to establish them.

    Furthermore, there are poskim who maintain that R’ Moshe would allow the current eruvin. I challenge anyone to prove that R’ Moshe would argue against an eruv consisting of mechitzos. R’ Moshe admitted that his shitos in eruvin were chiddushim and that the poskim did not agree with him. What right do we have to add to his chiddushim? Moreover, R’ Moshe never gave a p’sak din barur regarding Brooklyn (Igros Moshe, O.C. 4:87). In essence, those who oppose an eruv want us to follow kol koreis over teshuvos.

  63. R’ Enkin,

    How can halav Yisrael, which is a derabbanan, possibly precede yashan, which is deorayta even in hutz laaretz according to nearly all Rishonim???

  64. RJM – That’s a bit like asking how yom tov sheni comes before using an electric shaver which is assur m’deoraysa according to many (the majority?) of poskim. Some things are subject to hachra’a, and that’s it. That said, I can understand that somebody who does view chalav stam as muttar lechatchila (this has been quoted in the name of Rav Soloveitchik) would still have good reason to be machmir on yashan.

  65. Cholov Yisroel/Yoshon

    Not to disagree with the Tal’s general point, but R’ Ahron Soloveichik was also makpid on Cholov Yisroel. (Before cholov yisroel was even sold in Chicago).

  66. MiMedinat HaYam

    i recall a chassidic custom to eat (non yoshon) cake (with stam chalav) milk at shalashidus (?sp?) after “tzeit” when sunday is rosh chodesh. (so as to say “extra” ya’aleh ve’yavo at birkat hamazon.)

    ( first two parens for purim edition)

  67. MiMedinat HaYam

    zohar re torah instead of seuda shilishit is mentioned in SA (?MB?) regarding erev pesach on shabat.

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to our Weekly Newsletter


The latest weekly digest is also available by clicking here.

Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter

Archives

Categories

%d bloggers like this: