We don't need to get in a stew over the ban on beans at Pesach - The Jewish Chronicle

Most people are extra-scrupulous when it comes to the kashrut of the Pesach products they buy, and the sight of Ashkenazi shoppers peering at labels to determine whether or not a particular foodstuff contains kitniot, legumes, has become a permanent feature of the run-up to Pesach.

Nevertheless, Ashkenazi frustration seems to grow more and more vocal with each passing year at what many perceive as a most mystifying chumrah, extra prohibition, and a divisive and unfair culinary advantage enjoyed by their Sephardi brethren.

In truth, one should not be perplexed at the different approaches of the Ashkenazi and Sephardi authorities. After all, in the area of general jurisprudence, we are well accustomed to variations in matters of law, statute, procedure and sentencing, between one country and the next. In the USA, for example, major differences in legislation occur between one state and the next, even in regard to the imposition of the death penalty. The same applies to the often differing application of halachic principles to our liturgy, customs and ritual practices by the main Sephardi and Ashkenazi halachic authorities over the centuries in different parts of the world.

Sephardim took their halachic guidance from the codifications of law formulated by the Babylonian Geonim (7-11th centuries), Moses Maimonides (12th century), Asher ben Yechiel (13-14th) and Joseph Karo (16th).

Numerous regional variations in law, custom and prayer arose, however, within the Ashkenazi communities of Eastern Europe, and these were assessed and enumerated in the glosses to Karo's Shulchan Aruch provided by the illustrious Polish authority, Rabbi Moses Isserles (16th). He accepted, however, that Karo had faithfully recorded the standard Jewish law, but saw the necessity of providing glosses, highlighting the situations in which Ashkenazi tradition diverged. The prohibition of kitniot was but one example.

Ashkenazi frustration seems to grow with each passing year

The Torah prohibits the eating of grains that are subject to the leavening process, and oral tradition enumerated the five crops of wheat, barley, spelt, rye and oats. The Talmud (Pesachim 35a) specifically excludes rice and millet from the prohibition since contact with water will not lead these to a state of leavening, but rather to that of decomposition (sirchon). A dissenting voice - that of Rabbi Yochanan - is quoted, however, insisting that rice is a species of corn and is, therefore, prohibited, as is millet which, in his view, was indeed subject to a degree of leavening. The Ashkenazi prohibition of kitniot may be seen as a precautionary measure in order to take account of Rabbi Yochanan's minority view.

That sage's expansion of the definition of chametz opened the door to a number of other foodstuffs being included in the prohibition, especially those that had a tendency to swell up, akin to the process of leavening, when boiled or brought into contact with water. These included seeds, corn, legumes (plants of the pea family) and other podded crops. The generic term kitniot (literally "small in size", by contrast with the five main types of grain which form the main biblical prohibition) was applied to them.

The halachic considerations of the precise foods that constitute kitniot, and the methods of preparation that may or may not fall under the prohibition, go beyond a popular article. In a wide-ranging article by Rabbi Yehudah Paris, published in the halachic journal, Techumin (1992-3), he provides the following summary of the situation:

1) The prohibition extends only to kitniot that have been boiled in water, not when eaten fresh or roasted or fried in oil;

2) The prohibition does not extend to oil derived from kitniot;

3) Soya was never included in the original prohibition;

4) The original prohibition did not extend to a situation wherein kitniot forms a very small proportion (less than 1/60th) of the total volume of the mix;

5) One may eat food that was cooked in a pan in which kitniot had been cooked, even earlier on the same day;

6) One may keep kitniot in one's home without apprehension that someone might inadvertently eat it;

7) It may be given to children or sick people.

The ancient talmudic sages, when asked by their students to advise on matters of doubtful practical custom, as opposed to decisive law, would frequently retort: "Go and see what the ordinary folk are doing, and be guided by them." Popular practice was regarded as mirroring a halachic consensus. In Israel, where the Sephardic tradition is predominant, more and more Ashkenazi families appear to be jumping on a permissive bandwagon, especially as regards oils and other derivatives of kitniot.

The principle of consulting one's own rabbi should not, however, be ignored.