Meeting the OU

Igud HaKohanims 194 page book about the national priestly due from the nation to kohanim

Meeting highlights of Rabbi Rivkin of Igud HaKohanim and Rabbi Genack and Rabbi Klarburg of the OU
Attendees: Rabbi Genack (OU), Rabbi Klarburg (OU), Rabbi Rivkin (Igud HaKohanim)
Meeting location: OU Headquarters – 11 Broadway New York NY
Meeting time: 15 Menachem-Av 5775, July 31st 2015, 11:30 AM
Topic: Applying the mitzvah of giving the זרוע לחיים וקיבה to the kohen

Note: These highlights are written as per Rabbi Rivkin’s notes and memory and may not be wholly accurate

Rabbi Genack researched the mechaber’s opinion (yoreh deah 61:21) and noticed that the התחייבות in chutz learetz is the first opinion quoted, thus indicating that the mitzvah is fully applicable bezman hazeh and in chutz learetz. We then discussed the mechaber’s derech of paskening like שלושת עמודי העולם – the רי”ף, רמב”ם and רא”ש – and that this psak is in line with the Rambam and Ri”f. Rabbi Genack then queried as to the opinion of the רא”ש, upon verifying his opinion (Gemara chullin and kitzur piskei harosh) it became apparent that he too applies this mitzvah in chu”l.

Rabbi Genack then queried Rabbi Klarburg what is done about it. Rabbi Klarburg replied nothing as the mechaber states וכן נהגו like the second opinion. Rabbi Genack then stated that the mechaber in fact opines as per his first opinion. Rabbi Genack then instructed that action be implemented but did not specify a specific action course.

Rabbi Rivkin pointed out the discrepancy between Rashi’s responsa and Rashi’s pirush to shabbos 10b with the latter lacking Rashi’s opinion of אורויי לא מורינן (we do not instruct) to be lenient in chu”l, its arichus not fitting in to the flow of the sugya, its being out of line with rashi’s derech to gemara as parshan and not posek, noting that its proper place ought to have been in perek hazroa of maseches chullin instead of maseches shabbos, and that all original Rashi manuscripts to shabbos are lacking the arichus entirely. Rabbi Klarburg entertained the thought that the madpissim may have doctored the rashi yet pointed out that the tur (5029 – 5103, earliest tur MS dated to 5156) is also found to quote Rashi as opining that the mitzvah is inapplicable in chu”l and he lived prior to the first print of shabbos (5280). Rabbi Rivkin pointed out how the tur also quotes the maharam of rothenberg as opining the mitzvah is inapplicable whereas the responsa of the mahara”m shows his adamancy about its applicability and concludes וכל עדת ישראל יעשו אותו.

Rabbi Genack then stated that nonetheless the rosh (father of R”y Baal HaTurim) and mechaber clearly pasken that it is applicable lehalacha and instructed to begin acting on the mitzvah as relevant to the two slaughterhouses supervised by the OU where the animals belong to Yisroelim.

Rabbi Rivkin then brought up the mitzvah’s applicability when slaughtering a goy’s animal when the shochet’s intent is not for the goy’s consumption but for kllal Yisroel, as per the difficulty of applying אין ברירה to be מיקל with regards to a מצוות עשה של תורה, moreso when doing so on a massive scale with intent to market to the ציבור הרחב – an act which חז”ל sought to preempt through תקנת זקני דרום – this issue was not addressed at this meeting.

Rabbi Rivkin mentioned the halacha of reshima (se’if 25) and the Rambam’s pirush that this is to be done so the actual foreleg, cheeks and abomasum stay there with the goy and not come into the yisroel’s reshus – this issue was not addressed at this meeting.

Rabbi Rivkin also brought up the mitzvah of kohanim to consume the actual parts צלי וחרדל (roasted and with mustard) whereas substituting the said parts for money removes this option for all kohanim – this issue was not replied to at this meeting.

Rabbi Rivkin also brought up the חסרון יפוי כח (lack of authority) of any kohen to “sell” these gifts on behalf of all kohanim, and that a kohen chaver (whom the macheber is sei’f 7 gives precedence in receiving the gifts) would never give up this mitzvah of צלי וחרדל in lieu of money – this issue was not replied to at this meeting.

Rabbi Rivkin pointed out that only when actual gifts are given to the kohanim can they be מקיים the mitzvah of למשחה as our forefathers did, and thus precedence should be given to those kohanim who agree to consume the gifts in this manner. And, since the actual disbursement of the gifts to kohanim chaverim is decided by beis din (gemara chullin), they should bear this important act in mind when deciding the chaluka.

Meeting adjourned


See also

Mitzvah detail (Video – viewer discretion advised)

About the Author


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All original content on these pages is fingerprinted and certified by Digiprove