I saw an ad in the Canadian Jewish News for "Mehadrin" which is through Nachal Yisrael or something. What up with it?

Edited to add:
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v336/mel...nt=mehadrin.jpg

So what's the story? And how are the rabbis going to deal with it?

Absolute strict adherence to ALL Kashrus laws, that will be SOME feat....

Appears to be CMD under a new name. Same people involved in it. Nothing much to get concerned about.

You mean it's the same people giving the certification to that Chinese take-out and to the bagel place at Steeles and Bathurst? So again, how are the rabbis going to respond? Because my understanding was that the excuse to prohibit eating at those two institutions is that 1. the certification is unknown and 2. it's from another city.
But if the certification is now local, doesn't that change the dynamics?

Yes, it's the same people. Nothing will change. You give 2 points why CMD wasn't trusted before. Here's a third one. CMD takes on caterers that were found using non kosher. That, at least to me makes them just as unreliable as before.

They knowingly take on and continue to certify caterers who serve non-kosher food? Why would a kollel rabbi, or any rabbi for that matter, or any orthodox Jew actually, do that?

They take the rejects. One caterer currently under CMD was found by COR to be intentionally using non kosher products. This was being done by the owner himself. COR took away their hechscher, and CMD gladly took them on. The caterer cannot be trusted, yet CMD took them on anyways. That to me makes CMD an unreliable hashgachah.

Fascinating. How do you explain the religious looking Jew with semichah in the picture in the ad with the full religious regalia of beard and black hat who purports to be a kollel rabbi purposefully being machti et ha-rabim? Isn't that a curious phenomenon?

About being machati et ha-rabim: If Yeravam was over on bal tosif and was machati et ha-rabim out of jealousy, and he was a king of Israel, there are great people who make big mistakes. It's a curious phenomenon but not really surprising.

The problem is declaring that this kollel rabbi is machti et ha-rabim. That's a pretty serious allegation but that's what it comes down to. Mjr is claiming, essentially, that this rabbi is knowingly being machti et ha-rabbim.

Curious indeed. I call it as I see it though. I won't claim know the Rabbi representing CMD, but I do know the caterer they are certifying, and they are certainly unreliable and shouldn't have a hechscher. That fact that CMD knows this and still certifies them regardless of the fact that the caterer was caught intentionally using non kosher products makes them an unreliable hashgacha in my eyes.

As well as machti et ha-rabbim, no? Shouldn't we be throwing dishes at that kollel like they did in Monsey when there was unkosher food sold as kosher?
Wouldn't being machti et ha-rabbim make that "rabbi" a rasha? Can I speak lashon ha-ra about him now that he's a rasha? Am I allowed to daven in a minyan there?

I have no answers for your further questions. What I do know though is that CMD knowingly certifies caterers whose kashrus cannot be trusted and because of that, they are unreliable as a hashgachah. What you choose to do with that information is up to you. I've already decided where I stand on this issue. Have you?

It seems to be there are two types of hashgachot I wouldn't hold by:
1. Hashgachot that rely on leniencies that I personally don't hold by. For example, let's say a particular certifying agency has a stand on gelatin or how to slice open a chicken for salting that is at odds with the ruling of my local Orthodox rabbi. So I don't hold by that particular certification, but far be it from me to say somebody else who has received a different ruling from his local Orthodox rabbi is acting contrary to halachah.
2. Hashgachot where the rabbis are machti et ha-rabbim and are knowingly certifying food which they know to be treif.

It seems to me you are putting this new certification in category 2. Is that correct?

Is this your way of avoiding answering my question? By asking me more questions instead of answering the ones asked of you? I already stated my position on this matter and of who CMD are certifying. So yes or no? Do you have any problem holding by the CMD hechscher?

I don't live on the same continent. So, not only don't I know anything about this hechsher or the caterers that they certify, but I also don't have any idea if Melech would, either. So I'm wondering if

a) you feel that your accusations are well-known to be true.
b) you feel that your word ought to be good enough for Melech.

Is there a reason you are avoiding answering whether you think the new certification people are being machti et ha-rabim?
Yes, you have said you don't hold by the new certification. I'm just asking you to clarify your position. You have made an assertion and I need further clarification to understand your assertion.
As for my own position, I'm not sure how that is relevant at all in understanding what your position is.

I can't answer your question about the certification being machti et ha-rabim, because honestly I don't now enough about those halachot to give an educated answer.

Here, I'll make it simple for you to answer my question though. I'm interested to hear your position. That's why it's relevant. This is a message board where we all share our opinions and our views. Isn't that why you're here too? Why are you so scared to answer? You say you need more clarification to answer, and I'm well aware that further clarification could change your position. I'm only interested in what your position is today, based on what you currently know. Either you will currently eat in places under CMD certification or you won't. Would you or would you not, based on what you currently know today?

It's interesting that you would jump to the conclusion that I am "scared" to answer what my personal practice is. Why would think that?

I arrived at that logical conclusion, because you keep avoiding giving an answer. So, what is your answer?

I'm not sure that's the logical conclusion. If I were in the practice on h.com of constantly doing as others do and blabbing about my personal practices or chumrot or whatever, then yes, this would be an exception and you could jump to the conclusion you do. However, as a general rule of thumb on h.com [although admittedly there are some exceptions, but those are usually for a specific reason] I don't feel a particular need to announce what my particular practices are. For example, after 25000+ posts of mine and numerous discussions on the topics, do you (or anyone else on h.com) have any idea if I wear a hat when davening? Or if the women in my family wear pants? Or if I go to davening 3 times a day? Or if I only have chalav yisroel? Or if I fast on BeHa'B?

On the other hand, you have announced your practice of not relying on this certification. So I think it's fair to explore the reasons for your stated practice.

Ok, I understand now. So you're saying that you're not here on hashkafah.com to share your views, opinions, and beliefs, correct? You're simply here to make comments about other people's practices? Just want to clarify.

I didn't say that at all. I very often share my views, opinions, and beliefs. What we're talking about, however, is sharing my personal ritual practices and chumrot. That's different, and shouldn't be conflated. Again, to take the example of let's say wearing a hat or women wearing skirts or fasting on BeHaB, I don't think I have been circumspect in sharing my views, opinions, and beliefs. On the other hand, I have been circumspect in revealing my personal ritual practices.

Have you ever taken the time to think about why that is? What would be so bad if you shared what you do personally? Why do you think it is that you are circumspect about revealing what you do personally?

Lots of reasons. It's usually irrelevant. Whatever the reasons are, being "scared" is not among them. But usually it's simply because it's usually irrelevant. For example, in this thread, what I do or don't do is irrelevant to whether you think the certifying rabbis are machti et ha-rabbim.

Now, have you ever taken the time to think about why you are apparently willing to imply that the certifying rabbis are machti et ha-rabbim but are reluctant to come out and say it in so many words?

You don't like showing off? Stating what personally you do is showing off? That's a new one.... As far as implications, do you really think people here can't think for themselves? Are they all going to say "oh, if melech does it, it must be right, so I'm gonna do it too" and then get rid of their rabbi? Do you believe that you have that much influence over the people here?

Also why is it that you so badly want me to say that those rabbis are machti et ha-rabbim and to commit to that when you're so unwilling to commit to anything yourself?

Absolutely not. You got me on that one - I was wrong to word that the way I did. Note, by the way, my edit above - I took that stuff out of my post [before I saw your reply]. The point is that it's usually irrelevant.You practically said it - it's something you volunteered. I'm just asking for clarification. Either say they are machti et ha-rabbim or say they are not machti et ha-rabbim. That shouldn't be a difficult thing to answer since you apparently have thought about it and have an opinion.
Is the reason you are reluctant to answer definitively one way or another because in fact the situation is a tad more nuanced than was suggested?

You continue to ask the same thing repeatedly. I shouldn't have to answer the same question more than once. Do you think that asking over and over and over again is going to change my answer? I've already said in a previous post that I don't know enough of the halachot regarding "machti et ha-rabbim" to give a proper answer on that.

Also please don't tell me what I "volunteered". I don't imply things in my posts. Either I say it or I don't say it. Don't look for deeper meaning in my words, further than what I actually write.

OK, fair enough.
[deleted for violating self imposed board guidelines]

Thank you melech. I honestly appreciate the courtesy you have shown me.

The issue of course is what to do if/when the [certain demographic] Down South come out with their alternative certification because they don't think COR is kosher enough. Unless that's just political posturing to get COR to abandon its policies and instead adopt the enhanced standards of the Down South Rabbinate.

If you think COR policies are strict, take a look at the MK! I was shocked when I found out they don't allow half the vegetables COR allows to be cleaned/washed

I took your suggestion to do even more introspecting. While I am circumspect about discussing my own ritual practices [and hence, as I have said above, even though there have been countless threads on issues such as wearing hats for tefillah for example, I have never once revealed whether I myself do or do not] because they are usually irrelevant, I am also circumspect about discussing many other personal things. For example, I have never once discussed what I do for a living (if anything), nor my age, nor how many children I have or their ages (except for the youngest one). Nor did I ever answer this post's question posed to me http://www.hashkafah.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=830250
I think it's an issue of establishing boundaries.
However, on the other hand, I have been quite open about my views and opinions and biases and agenda on a large host of topics as well as other aspects of my personal life such that it has been easy for some members to identify me.
Basically, I have some quirks and shtick. However, even after this further introspection, I stand by my claim that it is not because I am "scared".

New hechsher intended as alternative to COR
By CAROLYN BLACKMAN, Staff Reporter
Thursday, 09 August 2007
TORONTO - Six food establishments in the Greater Toronto Area are now being supervised by Mehadrin Kosher, a new kashrut supervisory body led by Rabbi Moshe Levy, spiritual leader of Nachal Yisrael, a small synagogue and beit midrash on Bathurst Street south of Wilson Avenue.


http://www.cjnews.com/TOPScnCJN/index.php?...0&Itemid=86

Undermining COR threatens the community
By RABBI MARVIN PACHINO
Wednesday, 12 September 2007
One of the distinct advantages of Jewish life in Toronto is the existence of a single, competent, reliable and almost universally accepted kashrut supervision agency: the Kashruth Council of Canada, which is known by the acronym COR.
http://www.cjnews.com/TOPScnCJN/index.php?...9&Itemid=86

That some of the restaurants formerly certified by the upstart are now certified by COR and seemingly the disputes between those restaurants and COR have been resolved, I wonder if that means 1. the disputes were political to begin with rather than halachic and 2. if having competition spurred COR into relaxing some of its rules now that it's not the only kid on the block with a ball.

You think they could get away with that? And why would they want to?

Do I think who could get away with what? Sorry, I didn't catch your question. Could you rephrase.


And why would they want to?
You mean, why would COR want to relax some of their standards?

Do you think the COR could get away with relaxing their standards? Wouldn't the masses not appreciate that? Wouldn't the Down South Rabbinate not allow it? If it's the main show in town, what they do is dictated by the town. People don't usually like relaxation of standards that haven't been inconveniencing them until then.

Why would they want to relax their standards? You think the competition is scaring them? If the competition has lower standards, they don't have to be scared. If they have the same, you would think that would be a call to tighten their standards, not loosen them.

I have to think about those questions. I have absolutely no inside information and this is all conjecture and speculation on my part from observing COR certifications being withdrawn and then returned, with intervening certifications in the interim.
My spin is that yes, COR is concerned about competition and a schism and wants to nip it in the bud. There are ways of finding compromises even without relaxing halachic standards. For example, an agreement in terms of monthly fees. But even "halachic" standards, if those were just smokescreens to begin with. I think even the Down South Rabbinate would recognize that if you have a half dozen establishments with an alternative certification, this could balloon and perhaps they would be willing to find an accommodation, yes, even if that means relaxing supposedly halachic standards. Even rabbis are very pragmatic when they opt to be. After all, the greater community good of nipping an alternative certification in the bud may trump some of the newer "halachic" standards.

Very interesting... I wouldn't be surprised if there was some truth to both the points you raise, given the ways things seem to work in Toronto.

Do you happen to know which six restaurants are now under COR? Nothing came up when I clicked on the CJN link.

My understanding is that there were six commercial establishments with the alternative certification and I heard two of them are now back under COR, one of which had originally been under COR.Here's an example:A certain pizza store was told it could no longer use brocolli. Open and shut halachah, no? Bugs are in issur d'orayta. But the owner complained because he had inventory. So COR relented and let him use up his stock.So was it really a halachic issue? Or is there room for flexibility even when the issue is one of an apparent issur d'orayta?

For the benefit of us land lubbers, who exactly do you mean by the "Down South Rabbinate"???

Do you believe that there is a greater community good of a solitary certification, or is competition healthy?

I'm torn on that. I think there is a greater community good of a solitary certification but I also think that competition is healthy. I feel badly for establishments that have to put up with the COR monopoly [and I feel badly for consumers who are affected as well by higher prices and lack of choice], especially given that the kosher food industry [ie restaurants] is such an incredibly difficult industry to make a go of in the first place (eg. in Toronto, you can have 3 different owners of a restaurant in one location, one after another, none of whom can make a go of it, until it finally goes treif).

Without knowing what goes on in the COR, I honestly believe that kashrus agencies (and the actual mashgichim) are not raking it in. The higher prices are necessary, and you get what you pay for. If you're going to have a mashgiach sitting there checking the lettuce, your salad is going to cost more. As a consumer, I like one community certification that you know you can trust, instead of a bunch of rabbis who don't know anything about kashrus trying to make an extra buck.

I am not for a moment suggesting that the kashrut agencies are raking it in [and all the more so the actual mashgichim]. But that's not to say there isn't room for flexibility. A mashgiach temidi for example, which is a new requirement for some establishments in Toronto, is obviously more expensive than spot checks.
At the BAYT, for example, which is a large Orthodox synagogue, people making simchas must now pay for a mashgiach at the time of the simchah. Which is lovely, but that's a new requirement. Why wasn't that required 2 years ago? Does halachah change? Did the BAYT turn into a Conservative synagogue? The caterer is under COR. I assume that means he's kosher and reliably so.

As for a bunch of rabbis who don't know anything about kashrut making a buck, that's quite the allegation. Do you have knowledge that the new certifying agency is being run by thieving ignorami?

Okay, I hear what you're saying.


I'm sorry; I was projecting general feelings about kashrus onto your city, when I really know nothing about this new agency. However, what was written previously in this thread about it doesn't shed the greatest light on them.

Umm... do you have a particular claim to make with respect to the kashrut standards at the large traditional Conservative synagogues in Toronto (you know which ones I am referring to), or was this just a generic insult on your part? Please explain.