גריי מאטר א, הלכות חגים, מנהג הקטניותGray Matter I, Laws of Holidays, The Minhag of Kitniyot

א׳

1Part I: General Overview

ב׳

2Over the past millennium, the custom developed in Ashkenazic communities to refrain from eating kitniyot, certain legumes, on Pesach. We will base our discussion in part on an essay by Rav Yehudah Pris of Yeshivat Birkat Moshe (Maaleh Adumim) in Techumin (13:163-180).

ג׳

3Gemara and Rishonim

ד׳

4The Torah forbids us to eat chametz (leaven) on Pesach. Something becomes chametz when flour and water mix together long enough for the dough to rise. The Mishnah (Pesachim 35a) rules that chametz can be produced only from certain grains: wheat, barley, rye, spelt, and oats.¹Some question exists regarding the identification of the Gemara's "shibolet shu'al" as oats. Rav Yosef Efrati (Mesorah 13:66-71) notes Professor Yehudah Felix's claim that shibolet shu'al could not possibly be oats, and Rav Efrati vigorously disputes this claim. He cites Rav Yosef Shalom Eliashiv as supporting the view that shibolet shu'al is undoubtedly oats (the view accepted by almost all Rishonim). Ezra Frazer reports that Rav Aharon Lichtenstein does not flatly reject Professor Felix's claims, but he believes that one should continue to treat oats as shibolet shu'al, absent absolute proof that shibolet shu'al is something else. Rav Hershel Schachter has told this author that in case of great need one may use oat matzah at the Pesach seder. In general, Rav Schachter wrote this author that one should try to eat other mezonot foods together with oat products to avoid any doubt regarding the berachot before and after oats.

ה׳

5Millet and rice are not included in this list, explains the Mishnah, because they spoil and do not ferment. However, Rabi Yochanan Ben Nuri includes rice in the list of grains that can potentially become chametz. The Gemara (Pesachim 114b) states that Rabi Yochanan Ben Nuri is a lone authority concerning this topic. The Rishonim therefore rule in accordance with the majority view, which contends that rice cannot become chametz. The Rambam, for example, writes (Hilchot Chametz U'matzah 5:1):

ו׳

6There is no prohibition regarding chametz except with respect to the five categories of grain. There are two types of wheat... and three types of barley... but kitniyot such as rice... and the like are not included in the prohibition of chametz. Even if one were to knead rice flour... with hot water and cover it with a cloth until it rises like fermented dough, it may still be eaten on Pesach, for it is not chametz; instead it is sirachon (decay).²See Techumin (1:97), where Dr. B.P. Munk discusses the chemical difference between chimutz and sirachon.

ז׳

7The Rif omits the opinion of Rabi Yochanan Ben Nuri, indicating his acceptance of the majority view as the actual Halachah. Similarly, the Rosh (Pesachim 2:12), Baal Hamaor (Pesachim 26b in Rif's pages), and Ritva (Pesachim 35a s.v. Hanei) all rule in accordance with the majority view.

ח׳

8The Beginning of the Ashkenazic Custom

ט׳

9Although most Rishonim reject Rabi Yochanan Ben Nuri's ruling, some Rishonim are nonetheless stringent regarding the consumption of rice and similar foods. The primary authority who espouses this stringency is the Smak, who writes (mitzvah 222 note 12):

י׳

10Regarding kitniyot, such as rice and beans, our rabbis have the practice not to eat them on Pesach. I believe that I have heard that one should not cook them on Pesach, besides in boiling water from the moment they are placed in the pot [this is what the Gemara calls chalitah -H.J.]. Many great rabbis are lenient concerning this issue, but it appears very difficult to permit something when the common practice to be strict dates back to the early ages. It is reasonable to say that this stringency did not emerge as a concern for [kitniyot being actual] chametz, because they would not err on matters familiar even to the youngest of students, and the Gemara explicitly states that only the five species of grain have the potential to become chametz... Rather, the reason is an edict to prevent violation of Torah law, since kitniyot are cooked in a manner similar to the way that grains are cooked. Had we permitted kitniyot, one could have easily become confused [with chametz], because they are cooked similarly... In addition, in many locales, kitniyot are made into bread, and people who are not well versed in Torah laws might become confused. This is not at all similar to vegetables, which are clearly distinguishable from the five grains. It is a proper minhag (custom) to refrain from eating all kitniyot, including mustard seed, because of their similarity to grain. Although the Talmud (Pesachim 114b) specifically permits rice, this rule applied only in Talmudic times, when all were well versed in Halachah. However, today we should certainly follow the decree that we mentioned... and even to put kitniyot in boiling hot water should be forbidden, because one might become confused and permit placing them in cold water.

י״א

11The Beit Yosef (Orach Chaim 453) cites a different concern (which appears later in the Smak) - that kitniyot are mixed with grains that have the ability to become chametz. The Ritva (Pesachim 35a s.v. Tana) alludes to this concern:

י״ב

12One must carefully inspect [kitniyot, such as rice,] because spelt is constantly mixed with rice... Many pious individuals avoid eating these species on Pesach if they were cooked, due to concerns regarding these mixtures.

י״ג

13Tur, Shulchan Aruch, Acharonim

י״ד

14The Tur (Orach Chaim 453) cites the Smak's stringency, but he comments that it is excessive. The Beit Yosef adds that only Ashkenazic Jews abide by this stringency. Accordingly, he rules in his Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 453:1) that one may cook and consume kitniyot, as they cannot become chametz. The Rama, (Darchei Moshe 453:2) however, writes that Ashkenazic Jews have adopted the strict practice of not eating kitniyot on Pesach. Similarly, in his gloss to the Shulchan Aruch, he rules that Ashkenazic Jewry must not deviate from this custom. The Vilna Gaon notes that a source for this stringency appears the Gemara (Pesachim 40b), which records that Rava forbade servants who were not halachically scrupulous to make bread from legumes on Pesach (see Tosafot s.v. Rava and the Rosh 2:28).

ט״ו

15Interestingly, some Ashkenazic authorities expressed serious reservations about the minhag of kitniyot, and a few even strongly criticized it.³See Rav Yaakov Emden (Mor Uktzi'ah 453), in the name of his famed father, the Chacham Tzvi, and Encyclopedia Talmudit (16:104 note 691). Nevertheless, the Aruch Hashulchan (O.C. 453:4-5), writing at the dawn of the twentieth century, presents what has become the normative practice of Ashkenazic Jewry:⁴The Chatam Sofer (Teshuvot, Orach Chaim 122) also uses sharp words against Ashkenazic Jews who are lax in observing the minhag of kitniyot.

ט״ז

16Our forebears practiced for many years the avoidance of eating rice, etc. This prohibition has been accepted as a protection of our observance of Torah law; it is thus forbidden for us to abandon this practice. Those who question this practice and are lenient concerning it are demonstrating that they have neither fear of God nor fear of sin. They also display a flawed comprehension of the proper ways of Torah observance…

י״ז

17Although there are some countries which have not followed this stringency, all of Germany, France, Russia, and Poland have accepted upon themselves and their descendants this wonderful stringency, which has a good reason, and one who deviates from it should be bitten by a snake.

י״ח

18Kitniyot in Case of Illness and Famine

י״ט

19The practice to avoid eating kitniyot on Pesach is merely a custom, and not a rabbinical enactment, so there is some flexibility regarding it. For example, the Mishnah Berurah (453:7) writes that a seriously ill individual may eat kitniyot, even if his life is not in danger. He notes that the Chatam Sofer (Teshuvot, Orach Chaim 122) states that one should place the kitniyot in boiling water, since boiling prevents fermentation. The reasoning behind this leniency is that we assume our ancestors did not accept the stringency of kitniyot to apply in a case of illness. Rav Yehuda Amital told this author that it was permissible for this author's family to boil and serve kasha⁵Kasha is made from buckwheat, which has the status of kitniyot. In situations where kasha must be fed to a sick person on Pesach, it is essential to verify that none of the five grains that produce true chametz have been mixed into the kasha. to his father z"l on Pesach when he was suffering from an advanced stage of lung cancer, and kasha was one of the few food items that he was able to eat.

כ׳

20Similarly, the Aruch Hashulchan (O.C. 453:5) writes:

כ״א

21It was explicitly stipulated that in the event of famine or severe economic conditions, the local sages, led by the chief rabbi, are permitted to temporarily suspend the minhag of avoiding kitniyot on Pesach. However, today, when potatoes are so readily available, there is no such need to be lenient.

כ״ב

22A number of individuals on very strict diets have asked if they may eat kitniyot on Pesach. It may be possible to permit such individuals to consume boiled food items that are only questionably kitniyot, such as quinoa, soy, peanuts, and string beans, even if their custom is to refrain from these foods. Those for whom this is a relevant concern must seek competent rabbinical guidance.

כ״ג

23Part II: Ashkenazim Eating with Sephardim

כ״ד

24In this chapter, we focus on the issue of whether an Ashkenazic Jew may eat non-kitniyot products at a Sephardic Jew's home on Pesach.

כ״ה

25Rav Ovadia Yosef's Responsum

כ״ו

26Rav Ovadia Yosef (Teshuvot Yechaveh Da'at 5:32) rules that an Ashkenazic Jew may eat non-kitniyot food at a Sephardic Jew's home on Pesach. He does not require special utensils that have not been used for kitniyot for the Ashkenazic guest. He bases his opinion on a similar ruling of the Rama (Orach Chaim 453:1): "It is obvious that if kitniyot fell into food during Pesach, they do not render the food forbidden b'dieved (post facto)."

כ״ז

27Accordingly, Rav Ovadia argues the following:

כ״ח

28It is clear that the food particles of kitniyot absorbed into pots in Sephardic homes that are released into non-kitniyot food do not forbid the food to Ashkenazim. Even if the utensils have been used within the past twenty-four hours (and are thus emitting a good taste), it is still permissible for Ashkenazim to eat from them, because there is surely more permissible food than there are kitniyot that emerge from the walls of the pot.

כ״ט

29Precedents for Rav Ovadia's Ruling

ל׳

30Rav Ovadia cites several interesting precedents for his ruling. The first is a responsum of the Rama (132:15) regarding those who are strict about the issue of chadash (the prohibition against eating grain sown after Pesach, before the following year's sixteenth of Nissan) in the Diaspora. Just as most observant Diaspora Jews today are lenient in this area, most observant Jews in pre-war Europe were lenient (see Mishnah Berurah 489:45). The Rama writes that those who adopt the strict position regarding chadash may nonetheless eat food that absorbed flavor from the utensils of those who are lenient about chadash. He reasons that, in his community, even those who are strict only treat chadash as a doubtful rabbinical prohibition (as opposed to the many authorities who consider chadash to be an absolute biblical prohibition even in the Diaspora). The Rama thus claims that the light nature of chadash facilitates eating food that may have absorbed its flavor from pots. The flavor of the chadash is nullified (bateil berov) by the non-chadash food.

ל״א

31Rav Ovadia equates kitniyot to the Rama's case of chadash. Kitniyot are also an unusually light prohibition, so one may be lenient regarding the flavor in pots that cooked kitniyot.

ל״ב

32A second precedent cited by Rav Ovadia is a ruling of the Radbaz (Teshuvot 4:496). His responsum discusses whether those who did not rely on a particular shochet may eat food cooked by those who did rely on him. The Radbaz rules leniently because he claims that the shochet in question was probably acceptable. Even those who do not rely on him for their actual meat could at least eat food cooked in utensils that absorbed the flavor of his meat. Again, writes Rav Ovadia, we see that certain prohibitions are treated unusually lightly, so their flavor is permitted. Kitniyot, a mere custom of Ashkenazic Jewry, should also be treated this way.¹The Radbaz also mentions other factors in his lenient ruling, which run counter to normative practice today. Nevertheless, Rav Ovadia claims that kitniyot are a lighter prohibition than the meat which the Radbaz addresses, so the flavor of kitniyot is permitted even without the additional factors utilized by the Radbaz.

ל״ג

33Rav Ovadia's third precedent is an important ruling of the Rama in his gloss to the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 64:9). The Rama addresses a type of fat whose permissibility depended upon varying customs among Ashkenazic communities of his time. He permits members of the communities that abide by the strict view to eat food cooked in utensils of people in the lenient communities. The Rama reasons that the lenient communities were following a legitimate ruling of their halachic authorities. Even one who was strict about the actual fat did not need be strict about its flavor, because there is a valid opinion that permits the flavor.²This leniency is quite surprising, as those who prohibit the fat in question treat it as a biblical prohibition. Accordingly, even if they think that the biblical prohibition is somewhat debatable (in deference to the lenient view), they should not go so far as to permit the fat's flavor. (Flavor is ordinarily prohibited on a biblical level as long as one can detect it in the food; see Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 98:2; Shach, Y.D. 98:7; and Biur Hagra, Y.D. 98:10.) Rav Ovadia cites several authorities who address this problem. They explain that not only is the fat's prohibition doubtful (safeik), as there are those who permit it, but there is also another doubt involved (safeik s'feika). Flavor must enhance another food in order to prohibit it, and it is always doubtful if the flavor emerging from the utensils impacts positively or negatively on the food absorbing it. See Tosafot (Avodah Zarah 38b s.v. Iy), Rosh (Avodah Zarah 2:35), Teshuvot Harashba (497), and Sefer Issur V'heter (33:10). All of these Rishonim assert that it is always a safeik whether the flavor emerging from a pot imparts a good taste. Between these two doubts, the Rama believes that one may eat food that was cooked in the same pot that was used to cook the questionable fat. Similar doubt about the flavor’s impact might also explain the other lenient precedents that Rav Ovadia cites. Otherwise, it remains unclear why flavor is nullified so easily.

ל״ד

34From all of the above precedents, Rav Ovadia concludes that there are certain light prohibitions where flavor is nullified when mixed with permissible food, and he asserts that kitniyot are one such prohibition.

ל״ה

35Other Authorities

ל״ו

36As was noted at the beginning of the chapter, the Rama (O.C. 453:1) writes that there need not be a 60:1 ratio of non-kitniyot to kitniyot in order to nullify any kitniyot that might have fallen into a pot of food. Rather, as long as a majority of non-kitniyot exists, one has not violated the minhag of not eating kitniyot. Later authorities appear to accept this view, including the Eliah Rabbah (453:4), Shulchan Aruch Harav (O.C. 453:5), Chok Yaakov (453:5), Chayei Adam (127:1), and Mishnah Berurah (453:9). The Chok Yaakov explains that, although it appears from the Terumat Hadeshen that a 60:1 ratio is necessary to nullify the kitniyot, the Halachah follows the Rama, who states that only a majority of the food must not be kitniyot. The reason for this Halachah is that refraining from kitniyot is merely a custom, so it is not treated with the same severity as biblical and rabbinical laws.

ל״ז

37The flavor of food is no stricter than the food itself. Accordingly, if the aforementioned authorities rule that the non-kitniyot majority nullifies a minority of actual kitniyot food, undoubtedly they agree that the non-kitniyot food cooked in the pot nullifies the flavor of kitniyot that emerges from the pot.³In this case, it might suffice to ascertain that the food's volume is greater than that of the absorbed flavor, while the thickness of the walls containing the flavor might not matter (see the Radbaz's responsum cited above). Indeed, the Zera Emet (vol. 3, O.C. 48) rules that the minhag to refrain from kitniyot does not include refraining from their flavor. Rav Ovadia thus notes that all of these Ashkenazic authorities agree with his ruling and permit an Ashkenazic Jew to eat food cooked in a Sephardic Jew's dishes on Pesach.

ל״ח

38Limitations

ל״ט

39When discussing pots in which kitniyot were cooked, the distinction between lechatchilah (ab initio, before the occurrence) and b'dieved (post facto, after the occurrence) must be stressed. The above-cited lenient rulings only permit a b'dieved situation, when food was already cooked in a pot that previously cooked kitniyot. However, Rav Ovadia Yosef (Teshuvot Yechaveh Daat 1:9) and Rav Yehoshua Neuwirth (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchatah 40:80) rule that an Ashkenazic Jew who must cook kitniyot on Pesach (such as for a sick person) may not lechatchilah cook non-kitniyot food for healthy Ashkenazic Jews in the same pot. Similarly, Rav Efraim Greenblatt told this author that an Ashkenazic Jew who wishes to visit a Sephardic home on Pesach should arrange for food that was not cooked in a pot that previously cooked kitniyot.

מ׳

40Beyond the custom of kitniyot, some Ashkenazic Jews altogether avoid eating at other people's homes during Pesach. Their concern is that different people observe divergent practices and customs regarding Pesach, so the guests might not be permitted to eat from the food cooked in the utensils of their hosts. Rav Elazar Meyer Teitz told this author that Rav Michel Feinstein told him that he heard a story about this practice involving Rav Chaim Soloveitchik and the Chafetz Chaim. Rav Chaim visited the Chafetz Chaim on Pesach, and the Chafetz Chaim, who was known for his warm hospitality, did not even offer his guest a cup of tea, due to this practice. Apparently, this stringency was very common in many European circles.

מ״א

41Conclusion

מ״ב

42If an Ashkenazic Jew finds himself in a Sephardic Jew's home on Pesach, he may eat food that was already cooked in pots that previously cooked kitniyot. However, an Ashkenazic Jew may not cook food for himself on dishes that were used to cook kitniyot. If an Ashkenazic Jew plans in advance to visit a Sephardic Jew on Pesach, Rav Ovadia Yosef indicates that he permits the Sephardic Jew to cook in his own pots for the visitor, while Rav Efraim Greenblatt requires the host and visitors to make alternative arrangements. In addition, some Ashkenazic Jews have the custom of not eating anything outside their own homes on Pesach.

מ״ג

43Part III: Scope of the Practice

מ״ד

44To conclude our discussion of the Ashkenazic practice of not eating kitniyot on Pesach, we will focus on the scope of this prohibition, as well as addressing which items are included in it.

מ״ה

45Owning and Benefiting from Kitniyot

מ״ו

46The laws condemning chametz are far stricter than nearly all other Torah prohibitions (see Tosafot, Pesachim 2a s.v. Or). The Torah forbids owning chametz, and the Halachah follows the majority view in the Talmud, forbidding any benefit from chametz. In this area, we treat kitniyot far more leniently. The Rama (Orach Chaim 453:1) and Mishnah Berurah (453:12) rule that the Ashkenazic minhag to avoid kitniyot precludes neither owning nor benefiting from them.¹See Encyclopedia Talmudit (16:105 notes 703 and 705) for those who rule strictly against the Rama. Consequently, one may keep kitniyot in one's home, a particularly relevant concern for families with sick individuals, young children, and pets. A rabbi should be consulted for guidance in determining that a product is merely kitniyot and not actual chametz.

מ״ז

47Oils and Syrups of Kitniyot - Rav Kook and the Badatz

מ״ח

48In the year 5669 (1909), a great controversy erupted between Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook and the Jerusalem Badatz regarding the permissibility of sesame seed oil on Pesach. Rav Kook published a short work (summarized in Yesodei Yeshurun 6:424 and Hamo'adim Bahalachah, p.259) outlining why he permitted this item for Pesach consumption. Although sesame seeds are kitniyot, he notes that their form has changed into oil. No oil can ever become chametz even if it contacts water, so the minhag to avoid kitniyot does not include sesame seed oil. Similarly, the concern of confusing kitniyot with grain does not apply once the sesame seeds are no longer in grain form. Furthermore, Rav Kook addresses sesame seeds that were watched to ensure that they would not be exposed to water. The machine producing the oil needed to be completely dry in order to function, further ensuring that there was no concern for chametz. Finally, the sesame seeds in question were cooked during their processing, and once something is cooked, it can no longer become chametz. Thus, the sesame seed oil in question was so far removed from concern of chametz that, according to Rav Kook, the minhag of kitniyot did not apply to it.

מ״ט

49The Jerusalem Badatz strongly rejected Rav Kook's lenient ruling. They argued that the Rama (Orach Chaim 453:1) clearly includes oils derived from kitniyot in the custom of avoiding kitniyot, as noted by the Chayei Adam (Nishmat Adam 33).

נ׳

50Rav Kook responded that the Rama only intends to prohibit oil from kitniyot that were not carefully inspected for other grains or oil from kitniyot that were not already cooked or boiled. Several of his contemporaries accepted Rav Kook's understanding of the Rama and his subsequent ruling, including the Maharsham (Teshuvot 1:183), the Marcheshet (Chapter 3), and Rav Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor (Teshuvot Be'er Yitzchak, Orach Chaim 11).

נ״א

51Despite the cogency of Rav Kook's arguments and the many great authorities that support it, common practice is to prohibit oil made from kitniyot. For example, Coca-Cola changes its formula from corn syrup to sugar for its kosher-for-Pesach colas. In spite of our stringency, some authorities do permit oil of products whose kitniyot status is questionable, such as peanut oil (Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank's Mikra'ei Kodesh p.205-206 and Teshuvot Chelkat Yaakov 1:97).

נ״ב

52Today many food products contain kitniyot that have been manufactured and metamorphosed into a new product, such as ascorbic acid (made from corn syrup). Rav Hershel Schachter (B'ikvei Hatzon 27:9) permits transformed kitniyot for Pesach use, whereas the Star-K (Kashrus Kurrents, Passover 1998) does not permit them in Pesach foods.

נ״ג

53Items Defined as Kitniyot

נ״ד

54Much has been written about which items to include in the minhag of kitniyot. Four issues are generally explored regarding this issue. Is the item defined as kitniyot (legumes, such as beans and lentils), or is it at least similar to kitniyot (see Rambam, Hilchot Kilayim 1:8-9)? Can the item be ground into flour in the same manner as grain? Was the item historically included in the custom of kitniyot? Does the item grow near fields of grain (see Mishnah Berurah 453:13)?

נ״ה

55Historically, the Semak (thirteenth century) mentions rice, beans, lentils, chickpeas, sesame, and mustard. The Chok Yaakov (453:1) and Aruch Hashulchan (O.C. 453:3) include corn in this category, most likely because it is ground into flour. While these foods have undoubtedly been included in the minhag of kitniyot, there are other foods whose status as kitniyot is more controversial.

נ״ו

56Potatoes

נ״ז

57Although it appears surprising, there are authorities who include potatoes in the minhag of kitniyot, as they are ground into flour and can be confused with grain flour. The Chayei Adam includes potatoes in the category of kitniyot, although he notes that in 5531 (1771) rabbis permitted their use on Pesach due to famine (see Nishmat Adam 20).

נ״ח

58Obviously, this ruling is not accepted today (see Aruch Hashulchan, O.C. 453:5). Rav Moshe Feinstein (Teshuvot Igrot Moshe, O.C. 3:63) explains why we do not regard potatoes as kitniyot despite the fact that they are ground into flour. Noting that kitniyot were prohibited as a custom and not through rabbinical legislation, Rav Moshe asserts that we only define something as kitniyot if there is a custom to regard it as kitniyot. The early Ashkenazic rabbis did not forbid anything that can be ground into flour;²Contrast this statement to Chayei Adam 127:1. rather, they forbade eating certain products. Thus, although there is logical reason to include potatoes in the category of kitniyot, they were not historically included. Perhaps, Rav Moshe suggests, the great need for them kept them from being prohibited; perhaps the list of kitniyot was kept short because the reasons for prohibiting any kitniyot are weak. Whatever the reason, Rav Moshe rules that only things customarily avoided may not be eaten on Pesach.

נ״ט

59Peanuts

ס׳

60Both Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank (Mikraei Kodesh 2:105) and Rav David Tzvi Hoffman (Teshuvot Melameid Leho'il 1:88) note that the practice in Jerusalem is to regard peanuts as kitniyot. However, Rav Moshe reaches the same conclusion regarding peanuts that he reached regarding potatoes:

ס״א

61Peanuts were not regarded as kitniyot in many places. Thus, in a place where there does not exist a minhag to forbid peanuts, they should not be forbidden, for regarding these matters one should not be excessively strict, as the Chok Yaakov writes [453:9]. Peanuts indeed are forbidden for those whose minhag is to avoid them, although even they may be lenient in cases of doubt. One may give kashrut certification to peanut oil that has no chametz, and those who do not follow the strict minhag may partake of it.

ס״ב

62Rav Moshe recorded in this responsum (written in 1966) the accepted practice of kashrut organizations of that time. However, today it seems that the practice among the major kashrut organizations has changed, and they now treat peanuts, and even peanut oil, as kitniyot. The general practice to be very strict about kashrut on Pesach seems to have taken hold with kitniyot, despite the rulings of such eminent authorities as Rav Kook and Rav Moshe.

ס״ג

63Soybeans

ס״ד

64Although the generally accepted practice today is to regard soybeans as kitniyot, Rav Yehudah Pris cites Rav Dov Lior as permitting soybeans for Pesach consumption (Techumin 13:176-178). Rav Pris explains that Rav Moshe's reasoning regarding peanuts applies equally to soybeans, as they were not known to the earlier generations that adopted the minhag of prohibiting kitniyot. Quinoa may have the same status as peanuts and soybeans in this regard. ³See Kashrus Kurrents of the Star-K Kosher Certification (Passover 1998) for a discussion of caraway, cumin, fennel, fenugreek, and coriander. Kashrus Kurrents addresses quinoa in the Passover 1997 issue.

ס״ה

65Conclusion

ס״ו

66The general practice today is to permit eating potatoes on Pesach. On the other hand, it is accepted to prohibit syrups and oils produced from kitniyot, as well as soybeans and peanuts. Nonetheless, a Rav may consider permitting caraway, cumin, fennel, fenugreek, coriander, soybeans, peanuts, or quinoa for people with restricted diets. He may be similarly lenient regarding syrups and oils produced from kitniyot for such individuals.⁴Of course, care must be taken to ensure that no actual chametz is mixed in. Competent halachic guidance must be sought in such situations. All kitniyot are permitted for a seriously ill individual (even if the illness is not life-threatening) or a young child who must eat kitniyot (Chayei Adam 127:6). This often arises today, as many pills contain cornstarch binders.