<html>
<body>
The latest issue of Hakirah
(<a href="http://www.hakirah.org/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.hakirah.org/</a>) contains an article with the above title by
ARI Z. ZIVOTOFSKY and ARI GREENSPAN which is most interesting. Part
of the article is at
<a href="http://www.hakirah.org/Vol14Zivotofsky.pdf" eudora="autourl">
http://www.hakirah.org/Vol14Zivotofsky.pdf</a><br><br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>Introduction<br><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>A kashrut question that had
engaged the halakhik community from<br>
time to time through the twentieth century has once again arisen<br>
during the last decade. A species of fish known in various places as<br>
kingklip has recently appeared in Israel and generated a turbulent<br>
controversy regarding its permissibility. This article will present
the<br>
history of its status and examine the issues and the arguments
involved<br>
in the debate. We will not arrive at a ruling; that has been<br>
done by many competent
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><i>poskim</i></font>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>. We will discuss the halakhik<br>
questions, the rationales, and the different analyses that have been<br>
employed during the brief 100-year history and thereby illustrate<br>
the halakhik process in an area of Jewish law.<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>What is a kingklip?<br><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>Kingklip
(</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><i>Genypterus
capensis</i></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>,
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><i>Genypterus blacodes,
Genypterus<br>
chilensis </i></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>and others) is
a fish that lives near the ocean floor in the<br>
southern hemisphere at depths of 50–500 meters. It can grow to
between<br>
80 and 200 centimeters, weigh 15–25 kg, and live for up to 30<br>
years. It is a nocturnal, carnivorous feeder that is found in the<br>
waters of the southern hemisphere and considered a seafood delicacy.<br>
Because no Jewish community of any magnitude existed in the<br>
Southern hemisphere prior to the previous 100 years, the fish was<br>
unknown to Jews.<br><br>
<br>
</font>This article then discusses in detail the various halachic
opinions regarding the Kashrus of this fish and how they were arrived
at. (One needs to purchase the journal to read the rest of the
article.)<br><br>
The article concludes with <br><br>
Lessons to be learned<br><br>
The controversy over kingklip kashrut has reached the point that a<br>
South African fish expert, Dr. P.C. Heemstra, emailed me (AZZ [Ari Z.
Zivotofsky]:<br>
October 2005) that he was so dismayed with the rabbinic approach<br>
towards examining kingklip kashrut that, he cynically wrote, "I<br>
find the arguments about kosher/unkosher kingklip exceedingly<br>
tiresome .... I hope kingklip is declared unkosher as it is getting
rare<br>
now, and the fewer people that are eating it the better."<br><br>
The earliest claim that it is permitted is traced back to the
universally<br>
accepted gaon Rav Yitzchak Kossowsky and his son R.<br>
Michel. Since that time no South African kashrut agency or reputable<br>
rav has ever prohibited it, and until today both the Johannesburg<br>
and Cape Town Batei Din treat it as kosher. Kingklip has<br>
macroscopic scales that are not shed upon landing. They are there<br>
for anyone who looks for them to see. While they are thinner and<br>
less rigid than most scales, in structure they are similar to other
cycloid<br>
scales. All major kashrut organizations in their native lands<br>
(South Africa and Australia) have accepted it as kosher. It was
stated<br>
very clearly in an email from Rabbi Yossi Salzer to the OU on Feb<br>
12, 2004, where he wrote: "Cuskeels or not-the Torah says: with<br>
fins and scales it's Kosher. Kingklip has fins & scales. It's
Kosher!"<br><br>
Despite the above, some of the most prominent poskim of our<br>
time have questioned its kosher status or have advised against
eating<br>
it. The reasons for not declaring it kosher have been varied and
creative:<br>
thin scales; covered scales; it is eel-like; its scales are
eel-like;<br>
the scales do not catch the finger; the scales are not protective;
the<br>
fish is a bottom dweller.<br><br>
Refusing to be intimidated, Rav Moshe Kurtstag, an internationally<br>
recognized talmid hakham, issued a responsum on kingklip<br>
and responded to every point raised. He determined that there is no<br>
question that it is a kosher fish. In addition, following the bulk
of<br>
the controversy and fully aware of the supposed position of the
Israeli<br>
rabbinic heavy weights, all of the major figures in South Africa<br>
reiterated that they had previously personally examined the fish and<br>
declared it to be kosher and mehadrin.<br><br>
The standard operating procedure for all of Jewish history has<br>
always been to first go to a local posek. Only in cases of doubt or<br>
conflict did the local rabbinic authorities, not the questioner,
turn<br>
<font size=3>elsewhere. And the recognized world experts would usually
support<br>
the authority of local rabbis. In the case of kingklip the local
poskim<br>
were fully competent and confident in their decision. It is unclear<br>
why there was a need to turn to Israel or the US with this
question.<br><br>
An email from one of the South African rabbis (not to me)<br>
sums up the feeling of the South African rabbis:<br><br>
I'm sorry to say, but the Rabbis were given TOTALLY INCORRECT<br>
information about the fish by some "frum" trouble-<br>
maker in Johannesburg who wants to discredit the local<br>
Beth Din ... Why these Gedolim didn't first check with us who<br>
know the fish, before giving a p'sak, I don't know ...<br><br>
Is kingklip kosher? All of the local rabbis in South Africa and<br>
Australia said an unequivocal "yes." Should the question have
remained<br>
a Southern hemisphere question? Most definitely. It is difficult<br>
to know why the question was brought to Israel. The Beit Din<br>
itself said it was someone looking to discredit them. An individual<br>
South African rabbi said it was a "trouble maker." We have no
way<br>
of knowing or judging, and it is irrelevant - it should have
remained<br>
a local question. <br>
<hr>
In my mind this article raises many fundamental questions about how a
halachic psak is arrived at and reliability of piskei halacha that emerge
from such a procedure.<br><br>
Another article by R. Zivotofsky that also highlights some of the same
issues regarding piskei halacha is Clarifying Why the Muscovy Duck is
Kosher: A Factually Accurate Response which may be read in its entirety
at
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/cc8478g" eudora="autourl">
http://tinyurl.com/cc8478g</a><br><br>
YL<br>
</font></body>
<br>
</html>