<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Sages of Ashkenaz and Kitniyot</title>
	<atom:link href="http://menachemmendel.net/blog/2009/04/12/the-sages-of-ashkenaz-and-kitniyot/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://menachemmendel.net/blog/2009/04/12/the-sages-of-ashkenaz-and-kitniyot/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:24:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Joe in Australia</title>
		<link>http://menachemmendel.net/blog/2009/04/12/the-sages-of-ashkenaz-and-kitniyot/comment-page-1/#comment-1744</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe in Australia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 03:13:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://menachemmendel.net/blog/?p=1413#comment-1744</guid>
		<description>I like the crop-rotation idea because it explains why the minhag arose at that time and spread quickly. I agree that the idea of bean fields planted near wheat fields wasn&#039;t new, but this regular crop rotation changed farming practices. Now every farmer who grew wheat would also grow (and process and store) beans, so the storage houses would inevitably have some wheat kernels among the beans. Now every bean field had recently been used for wheat, and would inevitably have self-sown wheat growing among the bean stalks. The prohibition on kilayim may also have influenced the minhag, since the Torah explicitly warns us of the &quot;taste&quot; of one plant being transferred to another.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the crop-rotation idea because it explains why the minhag arose at that time and spread quickly. I agree that the idea of bean fields planted near wheat fields wasn&#8217;t new, but this regular crop rotation changed farming practices. Now every farmer who grew wheat would also grow (and process and store) beans, so the storage houses would inevitably have some wheat kernels among the beans. Now every bean field had recently been used for wheat, and would inevitably have self-sown wheat growing among the bean stalks. The prohibition on kilayim may also have influenced the minhag, since the Torah explicitly warns us of the &#8220;taste&#8221; of one plant being transferred to another.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Kagan</title>
		<link>http://menachemmendel.net/blog/2009/04/12/the-sages-of-ashkenaz-and-kitniyot/comment-page-1/#comment-1743</link>
		<dc:creator>David Kagan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://menachemmendel.net/blog/?p=1413#comment-1743</guid>
		<description>Hello:

I do not believe the three field rotation was significant enough to generate a fear of Kitniot.  The Mishna and Talmudim all discuss multiple crop rotations (even if only two) and more importantly fields of beans adjacent to grain fields (even the &quot;spotted&quot; fields within fields) and no one worried about Passover and Kitniyot.  

I would suggest the fear that generated the Issur of Kitniot was the encounter with oats.  Oats are a northern European grain (unknown in the middle East).  When the first settlers migrated to Ashkenaz, they would have encountered a new &quot;grain&quot; that looks and smells like one of the &quot;Five Grains&quot; but was not part of the original five.  If I am not sure of the definition of &quot;grain&quot; regarding the Issur of Chametz, it is an easy matter to be strict and forbid Kitniot.

This does not change your central thesis.  The reason I prefer the oats hypothesis is that it is more significantly different than just the handling of crops or the location of the mill, which is not that different between Ashkenaz and Sephardic locales.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello:</p>
<p>I do not believe the three field rotation was significant enough to generate a fear of Kitniot.  The Mishna and Talmudim all discuss multiple crop rotations (even if only two) and more importantly fields of beans adjacent to grain fields (even the &#8220;spotted&#8221; fields within fields) and no one worried about Passover and Kitniyot.  </p>
<p>I would suggest the fear that generated the Issur of Kitniot was the encounter with oats.  Oats are a northern European grain (unknown in the middle East).  When the first settlers migrated to Ashkenaz, they would have encountered a new &#8220;grain&#8221; that looks and smells like one of the &#8220;Five Grains&#8221; but was not part of the original five.  If I am not sure of the definition of &#8220;grain&#8221; regarding the Issur of Chametz, it is an easy matter to be strict and forbid Kitniot.</p>
<p>This does not change your central thesis.  The reason I prefer the oats hypothesis is that it is more significantly different than just the handling of crops or the location of the mill, which is not that different between Ashkenaz and Sephardic locales.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
