42

I want to know what the OU's or any other Orthodox kashrut agency's problem is with Triangle K. I have read about the Ralbag family which founded and runs the Triangle K and they are clearly Orthodox. If so, what is the problem with their hashgacha?

Please provide sources and facts and not mere conjecture or judgment calls.

I don't mean for this question to arouse a political and/or religious debate, I am purely interested in the facts.

msh210
  • 73,729
  • 12
  • 120
  • 359
Mark
  • 1,464
  • 1
  • 9
  • 19
  • 3
    Hello Mark, and welcome to Judaism.SE! Thanks for asking this relevant contemporary question. If you have some documentation or other material indicating that the OU or other agencies indeed have a problem with Triangle K, outlining or linking to it could really strengthen your question. As you suggest, this potentially evocative discussion should be based only on sources and facts, not mere conjecture or judgment calls. – WAF Nov 27 '11 at 15:01
  • 8
    @WAF The Triangle K is not listed on the CRC's directory of acceptable kashrut agencies: http://www.crcweb.org/agency_list.php – SarahBrodsky Nov 27 '11 at 15:05
  • 2
    @SarahBrodsky That is a very useful piece of information which, if included in the question, would make it one on the cRc rather than the OU. If so, the question would be undermined by a line in the first paragraph linked, "The fact that a particular agency does not appear on this list does not imply that the cRc has determined it to be substandard." – WAF Nov 27 '11 at 15:09
  • 4
    @WAF Mark did say "or any other kashrut agency". I disagree that the statement you cited would undermine the question. That seems like a throwaway line to avoid publicly denigrating other organizations. Triangle K is a very common symbol and if the CRC recommended it, it would be on the list. – SarahBrodsky Nov 27 '11 at 15:15
  • 1
    @SarahBrodsky Assuming that there was some motivation to the composition of that line other than its stated purpose quickly moves the discussion into the realm of conjecture and over-complication. In fact, your assumption regarding that line that leads you to a conclusion exactly the opposite of what the line says is a method of analysis that would make answering this question on its own terms incredibly difficult if not impossible. The question assumes a "problem" is held by someone (only OU is named) with Triangle K. I suggest that direct evidence of such a problem would be instructive. – WAF Nov 27 '11 at 15:22
  • 4
    This shul's list of symbols explicitly that Triangle K is not accepted. http://www.asbi.org/kashrut/index.htm Of course, this is a synagogue and not a kashrut agency. – SarahBrodsky Nov 27 '11 at 15:46
  • I'm looking for documentation on the web, but my question is based on a conversation my mother had with one of the leading rabbis in the OU, who happened to be our neighbor. And since I didn't have the conversation I didn't get to find out more. – Mark Nov 27 '11 at 18:23
  • 1
    Triangle K is not considered a reliable hechsher. Always ask your local rabbi as they will be able to guide you based on your level of observance and means. –  Jul 16 '13 at 12:37
  • For the record, many products imported to Israel have Triangle K certification and are endorsed/recognized by ("b'ishur") the Israel Chief Rabbinate. – yosh m Sep 17 '13 at 09:05
  • 1
    You need to speak with the shochem and boidkim that work by there meat, they themselves witness that the meat is barely kosher deorisa (when also using botel brov), and some of them speek about certain shochtim are Michael shabos, on the days the Rav come everything is more kosher – hazoriz Jan 05 '16 at 21:49
  • @hazoriz How many of them have you talked to you that you know that? What about all the non-meat factories (ie the vast majority of products with that symbol)? What's wrong with using batel berov? – Double AA Jan 05 '16 at 21:58
  • @DoubleAA 3 and 1 friend of a fourth, a not shechted animal is botel to 2 shechted ones, on that is traif is botel to 2 that are not traif, – hazoriz Jan 05 '16 at 22:01
  • @hazoriz Why are they all working there if they disagree with what's going on? What is improper about using bittul in those cases? – Double AA Jan 05 '16 at 22:02
  • @DoubleAA they are all embarrassed they worked there, one of them still works there (he needs the money) but he gives an excuse that he needs to do his job good, kosher (he was a shochet) what other do is not his problem, he does not give his hecher on it, maybe you can say it is OK since it is a big peace of meat so it is not roui liiskabaid, but to do it constantly it becomes like a lichatchila which is forbidden dirabonon – hazoriz Jan 05 '16 at 22:06
  • @hazoriz Saying it sounds sorta like a derabanan is not such a damning argument, especially when it might not be asur for anyone else to eat it since it might not be considered mevutal baavuro even if you want to consider it Meizid and not Shogeig. – Double AA Jan 05 '16 at 22:13
  • https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/75901/is-lindemans-fruit-lambic-beer-kosher – Dude Sep 01 '16 at 15:33
  • More sources are cited in https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/1d4mxh/why_is_there_so_much_dislike_for_triangle_k_as_a/ – arp Jul 28 '19 at 17:59

8 Answers8

19

Every Kosher Agency has its own standards that it adheres to. It has its leniencies that it follows, as well as stringencies. If you don't agree with those leniences, then you won't trust that hechsher.

There are many things that must be taken into account. Some examples:

  • the Kashering process between non-kosher and kosher products run on the same line.
  • Transportation.
  • The ingredients used (e.g. gelatin)
  • the frequency of Mashgichim (inspectors') visits
  • Transparency. How easy is it to find out what leniencies the Kosher Agency follows.
  • does your level of kashrut observance match up with the koshering agency

I wasn't able to find the Triangle-K's stance on any of these issues, but here's an interview (archived here) allegedly conducted with Rabbi Ralbag. In it, he specifically mentions two leniencies that many others do not accept:

“Others don’t want to accept it, so very good…we depend on ABC…On cooking for wine, someone will say 190, someone will say 180…what we do, we’ll say openly what we do…but it’s al pi halacha…Rav Moshe has a tshuva that when you take grape juice and you cook it…175…by the crush you cook the grapes…even if it’s all done by a non-jew, it’s kosher…only considered non-kosher after it’s separated…we set up one of our large grape-juice suppliers in that way…Even if it’s fully in non-jewish hands…it’s kosher…we put a mashgiach there, but even if he wouldn’t be there, it’s kosher.”

So, he relies on R' Moshe's leniency with regards to grape juice. He considers mevushal what others would consider non-mevushal, and therefore becomes forbidden to drink when touched by a non-Jew, according to people who do not follow that leniency.

He also says that they follow a leniency about when the grapes can start becoming non-kosher if touched be a non-Jew. When I worked at a winery under the OU's supervision, all the touching was done by the Mashgichim from when the grapes were brought into the processing center, before they even enter the crusher.

What about hard liquor? “We permit hard liquor…even though it’s made in caskets…al pi halacha it’s permitted…stam yaynam…They don’t blend, so far as we found out, they don’t blend any wine…we don’t give a hashgocha on whiskey anyway.”

So it all depends on what leniencies you're willing to accept.

Also, based on the above (assuming you don't accept these leniencies), you might say I'll stay away from Triangle-K products that contain wine/grape juice, but can eat the rest of their products. But there's something to remember, if they consider the grape 100% kosher, that means they aren't careful to kasher the lines in between grape and non-grape products, since there is nothing wrong with the grape products. This could potentially mean that other products on the same line are "contaminated" as well. One might argue that it is all nullified, but maybe not, you have no way of knowing.

Menachem
  • 44,362
  • 6
  • 127
  • 247
  • The Rabbanut hechsher in Israel permits gelatin... – Adam Mosheh Mar 07 '12 at 06:42
  • 1
    @AdamMosheh: Exactly. See here: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/12736/who-determines-the-kosher-status-of-new-foods – Menachem Mar 07 '12 at 13:51
  • 6
    Odd that relying on R Moshe Feinstein would put you on the blacklist. – Double AA Jan 15 '13 at 20:29
  • 1
    @DoubleAA: not everyone accepts all his chumrot (e.g. timers on shabbat) and not everyone accepts all his Kulot (e.g. Chalav HaCompanies) – Menachem Jan 15 '13 at 22:17
  • @Menachem I don't think he would still hold of timers being assur today, and no one is put on the blacklist for using Chalav HaCompanies. – Double AA Jan 16 '13 at 04:22
  • @DoubleAA: with regards to timers, perhaps or perhaps not. Perhaps he would be even more strongly against timers. In this shiur http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/764082/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Kosher_Switch:_Glatt_or_Just_Kosher_Style - Rabbi Lebowitz posits that the reason R' David Feinstein was against the Kosher Switch was because of his father's Psak regarding timers. The point of my answer is that everyone has their own standards of Kashrut, and they have to determine if the kosher certifiers meet that standard. It's not about blacklisting. – Menachem Jan 16 '13 at 04:38
  • Yes, but the problem is, how is anyone supposed to evaluate Triangle K if no one knows what the problems are? Someone who doesn't drink Chalav haCompanies knows which hechshers s/he can or can't use. If the only issue is the temperature of the grape juice, someone should clarify that so educated consumers and their rabbis can make educated decisions if they can eat it or not. By being blacklisted, I mean told not to use it (which effectively is what the major organizations have done) without being told why, leaving cnsumers with no way of discerning whether their rabbi should hold of it or not – Double AA Jan 16 '13 at 04:46
  • 2
    @DoubleAA: I agree. But the Triangle K is also sorely lacking in their transparency. And perhaps that is the problem. How can anyone recommend them, when they ahve no idea what they hold? The OU's Kashrut policies are public record and available on their website. – Menachem Jan 16 '13 at 04:58
  • 4
    What you just wrote (if you can source it with links to the websites (and perhaps those of other major kashrus organizations) or something) is IMO a more valuable answer than what is in your post. – Double AA Jan 16 '13 at 05:00
  • @DoubleAA For example of OU's records of their policy, see "Lo Basi ella L'Orer" - https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=lo+basi+ella&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#hl=en&newwindow=1&client=ubuntu&hs=pw1&tbo=d&channel=fs&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22lo+basi+ella%22&oq=%22lo+basi+ella%22&gs_l=serp.3...484.484.8.1623.1.2.0.0.0.2.910.2165.3-1j6-2.3.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.Y_Sczn-I_7o&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41018144,d.eWU&fp=d564d5c96256546b&biw=1141&bih=498 – Menachem Jan 16 '13 at 05:10
  • In terms of the grape juice leniency, this ends up extending to lots of other juice products, as grape juice is often used to reconstitute a concentrate, especially if it contains cranberries. And, due to an FDA technicality, it does not always end up on the ingredients list. – Y     e     z May 07 '14 at 18:51
  • RE the hard liquor: the Chabad rabbi in my community has paskened that it is permissible to drink whisky which was aged in casks previously used for grape products, even if there is a chance of noten ta'am. – Noach MiFrankfurt Feb 18 '15 at 02:09
  • That second 'leniency' is funny. Ou has a made up law about touching grapes, star k goes according to shulchan aruch, and look what happens. – user6591 Mar 30 '15 at 18:25
  • 1
    @NoachmiFrankfurt That's an old issue http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/36532/759 – Double AA Aug 03 '15 at 02:38
  • Menachem, I second @user6591. Why does it matter if a non-Jew touches grapes? That happens all the time in the produce section at groceries. – Double AA Aug 03 '15 at 02:40
  • @DoubleAA: The question is at what time in the wine making process does it start becoming a problem. – Menachem Aug 03 '15 at 07:20
  • @Menachem Yes, and the answer is clearly not while the grapes are whole. So what's up with the OU? Is it just to make the supervision easier? – Double AA Aug 03 '15 at 14:38
  • @DoubleAA: The point was that when you dump the grapes into the trough, the weight of the grapes crush some of the bottom grapes. To clarify, the grapes were brought in container carts by the workers. They were then handed over to the mashgichim, who hooked the cart up to the mechanism that flipped the cart over and dumped the grapes into the trough. From then nothing was done by the workers. The mashgichim hit the switch to fill the cart, and all switches and checking thereafter. – Menachem Aug 03 '15 at 19:47
  • 1
    I read through it and it seems a bit of a suspect source, considering that it elides too much and appears to leave things that R' Ralbag said out. – Noach MiFrankfurt Aug 03 '15 at 22:42
  • @NoachmiFrankfurt: Anybody on the internet can say anything about anyone. That's why I put "allegedly". – Menachem Aug 04 '15 at 02:59
  • About the use of wine casks... That's not a qulah. Avoiding the use of whisky aged in wine casks is a 20th century chumerah. See Rav Moshe's teshuvah to R' Pinchas Teitz. Someone in Elizabeth NJ (R' Teitz's congragation) came out with whiskey advertising this feature -- no wine casks. Rav Moshe first explains that there is no reason, but he gives all berakhos and tefillos for success for people who want to eliminate even the appearance of issur. But it's clear R Moshe was not only lenient, he knew of no source to be stringent. – Micha Berger Jul 20 '18 at 18:47
  • Also don't forgot that they are now lenient regarding oil, such as chawzeer oil etf, success they say it's not really edible by they use it anyways, also in many cases there's no mawshgeeyawch at all – B''H Bi'ezras -- Boruch Hashem Mar 09 '21 at 15:12
11

The OU has (at least) two specific problems with Triangle-K:

1- While halakhah has no minimum bound (shiur) for how often an establishment must be spot-checked (yotzei venichnas = someone who goes and comes), Triangle-K does so far less often than does the OU.

The OU had multiple incidents where staff made it clear that until the OU took over inspection, the staff never expected a Triangle-K employee to stop by, and didn't particularly worry about someone coming by just as they were doing something wrong.

2- Rabbi Ralbag holds that factory equipment self-kashers by doing a run. So, he allows doing a run of non-kosher product, and rather than stopping everything for a full cleaning and kashering, he would do a run of kosher product -- to be wasted or more likely sold as non-kosher. Then the second batch onward of kosher product would be sold as kosher.

(I have a feeling this is the bit about non-kosher and kosher animal fats mentioned in Yishai's answer.)

I also heard about his allowing pasteurized grape juice, but only through the rumor mill. The above two are from a rabbinic supervisor within the OU.

Micha Berger
  • 9,648
  • 33
  • 41
  • 1
    Possible objection to the OU supplied anecdote on #1, as one might expect them to quote a story that puts them in a better light than a competitor. – Isaac Kotlicky Mar 02 '16 at 13:34
  • If it was an official OU statement and not something I got informally from a rav who happens to work for the OU. I cannot name names, as he would like to continue getting a paycheck. (And to preempt people who might wrongly blame the wrong person: no, it's NOT my rebbe-chaver who was a longtime Avodah email list member.) – Micha Berger Mar 02 '16 at 17:01
  • what about cheese? I know tablet K is meikil vis-a-vis gevinas akum, but haven't heard about the triangle-k. Most commercial cheeses use vegetable or microbial rennet anyhow... – Isaac Kotlicky Mar 02 '16 at 18:23
7

In addition to the Menachem's response above, Triangle K does not require meat products to be glatt kosher, which is a stringency that most American Jews hold by. As far as I know, this is the main reason why people don't go by them. Especially for meat products like Hebrew National hot dogs.

My understanding is that many people have no problem with eating Triangle-K products that are not meat; however, I can imagine that this lower standard of kashrut might cause people think twice before buying any of their products at all.

Daniel
  • 24,888
  • 3
  • 48
  • 148
  • 3
    @Daniel - you say "glatt kosher...is a stringency that most American Jews hold by". On what do you base that? AFAIK, most American Jews do not keep kosher at all. Also, AFAIK, most who do keep kosher don't even know what Glatt means. Of those who know what Glatt means, I seriously doubt if "most" of them are makpid about it. That leaves: "most American Jews who keep Glatt hold by that stringency" - which is a tautology and adds nothing. TriangleK does represent that the meat is Glatt - so what's the complaint? And how does that have any impact on their hechsher on other (non-meat) products? – yosh m Sep 17 '13 at 09:22
  • See this article about Hebrew National at Yeshiva world: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=130775 – yosh m Sep 17 '13 at 09:22
  • Typo in my earlier comment: "...TriangleK does represent..." should be "...TriangleK does not represent..." – yosh m Sep 19 '13 at 21:27
  • 2
    FWIW, Ashkenazim have no need to hold by glatt. I have even seen a psak from R' Hamburger (a Charedi Yekke) that one should prioritise the ethical aspects of koscher v'yauscher over chumrot like glatt. – Noach MiFrankfurt Feb 18 '15 at 02:12
  • Daniel, I thought that most American Orthodox Jews held by glatt because most hashgachot hold by glatt. – Noach MiFrankfurt Aug 03 '15 at 17:18
  • @NoachmiFrankfurt That could be. I'm not sure the reason why most American Orthodox Jews hold by glatt. But they do, and this is a reason why they might not be satisfied with Triangle-K certification for meat products. – Daniel Aug 03 '15 at 17:20
  • Nor am I, however, I recall that not long ago, the local kosher butcher sold non-glatt meat in addition to glatt (they are under KVH, the Zhviller Rebbe's hashgachah). However, it is worth mentioning that the vast majority of animals slaughtered do not exhibit glatt lungs. – Noach MiFrankfurt Aug 03 '15 at 17:28
  • @NoachmiFrankfurt I think you meant the vast majority of animals slaughtered do exhibit glatt lungs? In any case, why is that worth mentioning? The question is about problems people have with Triangle-K. One of those problems is that they certify meat that is not glatt. – Daniel Aug 03 '15 at 17:30
  • A student of Rav Moshe Feinsein told me that Rav Moshe told him that Glatt kosher is one big joke... – mevaqesh Jan 05 '16 at 23:29
  • 1
    R JB Soloveitchik also said that the number of cows leaving glatt slaughterhouses as glatt is unrealistic. Adhesions that cannot be "easily removed" (as glatt defines "easily") are just more common than that. – Micha Berger Mar 02 '16 at 16:53
  • A possible parallel to your comment about accepting Triangle-K for everything but meat: my father would accept Triangle-K except for Pesach. (I cannot easily find documentation.) – arp Jul 28 '19 at 17:57
7

The OU and other certification agency's problems with the Triangle-K are well documented with in-person interviews in Professor Timothy Litton's book Kosher: Private Regulation in the Age of Industrial Food.

Selected excerpts (from page 82 to 84):

Triangle K has much in common with its larger competitors ... There is, however, one crucial difference: there is a widespread consensus that Triangle K certification is unreliable.

...

Critics of Triangle K argue that Ralbag's kashrus standards are below the industry norm. One industry expert, who wished to remain anonymous, explained as follows:

He goes on with an example of using Kosher animal fat and vegetable fat on the same equipment but calling the vegetable fat pareve without Kashering. Ralbag says that his father did that, but he no longer does.

Nevertheless, this example reflects a belief that Ralbag has kashrus standards ... that, while principled, are sufficiently outside of the mainstream that other agencies will not rely on his certification. As another kashrus expert explained, "It's permissible under Jewish law, but it's a standard that many people are not willing to accept."

Critics of Triangle K also accuse Ralbag of lax administrative practices.

He describes the Triangle K not inspecting jointly certified facilities with the OU - they only ever see the OU Rabbi there, and having insufficient administrative capacity to know and track what he is certifying.

Ask613
  • 1,094
  • 6
  • 15
Yishai
  • 31,937
  • 1
  • 62
  • 130
  • 3
    It's hard to call what you quote "well documented". It's just more of the same "lax standards and poor administration" generalities. You have provided one example without even explaining what is wrong with the Triangle K's alleged former position. – Double AA May 07 '14 at 17:07
  • 2
    @DoubleAA, you can see the book for the sources and further details. I wasn't inclined to type up that much text. But for the question of why they don't like them, it is very well documented. He goes directly to the "they", the OU, CRC, etc., and gets and documents their reasons. – Yishai May 07 '14 at 17:16
2

Rabbi Asher Lopatin - when he was still in Chicago before moving to YCT - created a Community Standard of Kashrut for his Orthodox Synagogue.

It can be seen at http://images.shulcloud.com/626/uploads/community-standards-of-kashrut.pdf

In it he states:

The Triangle K was added to the not-acceptable category. I really tried on this one, but I cannot call it reliable.

Ask613
  • 1,094
  • 6
  • 15
  • 2
    This doesn't answer the question. – Double AA Mar 30 '15 at 17:00
  • 1
    @DoubleAA - Perhaps, but in some ways this is the closest that you can get to an answer. By the nature of Kashrut Supervision and what is considered reliable and what is not, all that we have to go by is either published lists of reliable hechshers, and word-of-mouth. I have asked the same question myself about Triangle-K from Rabbis, and what I heard were comments about Rabbi Ralbag himself not eating his own hechsher and how lenient the Hechsher is on several issues. But no major Kashrut organization lists the Hechshers that are not reliable and why. What about Tablet-K? Mexico אא? – Ask613 Mar 31 '15 at 13:35
1

Triangle k is kosher according to the letter of the law. Now in regards to which products you wish to consume depends on your standards of kashrut. Regarding meat however some people will say that the meat is tarfus (non-kosher on a biblical level). This is incorrect. The way they are bodek (inspect) the lungs, as well as the melicha (salting) isn't In the strictest manner as most ultra orthodox slaughter houses would perform. So like I said before according to the letter of the law even on a rabbinic level it would be permitted. The meat just isn't glatt. (Glatt is when they check the animals lungs and they don't find an abnormality) depending on the abnormality it can either render the meat tarfus or kosher. People that eat glatt don't eat meat that has a question of an abnormality found within the lungs. (Note: there is no concept of glatt by poultry)

David Feigen
  • 1,942
  • 12
  • 21
  • 2
    Isn't the letter of the law different for different standards? Isn't that what standards mean? – Double AA Jun 08 '14 at 23:06
  • 1
    The letter of the law means Halacha. The concept of glatt is not halacha. As a matter of a fact you will not find the concept of glatt in the mishna, gemara, or even in the shulchan aruch. – David Feigen Aug 09 '15 at 08:16
  • 1
    That doesn't sound like a fact to me. – Double AA Aug 11 '15 at 15:53
  • 1
    I've asked many rabbis and they all have told me that it's an actual fact. – David Feigen Aug 11 '15 at 15:59
  • 2
    That could be, but then perforce either you or they didn't fully pose/understand the question clearly. – Double AA Aug 11 '15 at 16:02
  • 1
    Bet Yosef smooth lungs is halakhah, as per the ruling followed by Sepharadim. Ashkenazim allow adhesions (sirchos) that can be removed easily (no space to describe how) and without tearing the lung. This is the Rama's ruling. Some East European communities have a custom to worry about the opinion of Beis Yoseif, but with all the leniencies one takes when the practice is custom, not (as the Sepharadim hold) a Torah requirement. So, for most Ashkenazim, glatt in itself is not an advantage. – Micha Berger Jan 05 '16 at 21:30
  • 1
    However, historically speaking, the kashrus of slaughter houses went down the tubes, complete with Mafia involvement and rabbis' lives threatened. (The Ridvaz was locked in the meat freezer, escaped Friday night, and he and his family fled by train from Chicago to NY that night -- threat to life trumping Shabbos.) Hungarians who fled the Nazis got to the US needed their own slaughterhouses in order to keep glatt. In a couple of decades, glatt stopped meaning "smooth" in America and started meaning "less problematic". So that now you can find OU glatt kosher chicken! – Micha Berger Jan 05 '16 at 21:38
  • 1
    R JB Soloveitchik, who was in charge of kashrus for Boston, noted the output of glatt meat from these plants and questioned their honesty -- from what he saw, the percentage deemed glatt was implausibly high. But, those new houses didn't have these more shocking problems. – Micha Berger Jan 05 '16 at 21:38
  • @MichaBerger See this post from the Seforim blog (paragraph beginning "Returning to Ridbaz..."). See also this post (fn. 2, beginning "R. Gedaliah Silverstone..."). :) – Fred Jan 06 '16 at 03:49
  • @Fred, I got the Ridbaz story from R/Dr Aharon Rakeffet (PhD Jewish Hist), who was one of R/Dr Marc Shapiro's rabbeim and the two are still in contact. I'll stick with RARR's version over RDS's unsupported belief "I doubt that the story is true..." – Micha Berger Mar 02 '16 at 16:58
0

See Shu"t Shulchan Levi 24:15 (page 232). Rav Belski zatza"l (formerly the posek for the OU) is discussing the kashrus status of equipment used to manufacture vegetable oil produced with no hechsher, or with a "non-acceptable" hechsher. He writes that there are real concerns about non-kosher oil being mixed in, or at least having the flavor of non-kosher oil being absorbed by the kosher oil, and thus we need to treat the oil as non-kosher.

He writes there that initially he thought to rule more leniently on oil with a "bad" hechsher, since at least someone is taking responsibility for its kashrus.

But then he looked into it and determined that there is no difference, and that frequently the oils with a "bad" hechsher were forbidden even bediavad. He also writes about hearing from a reliable source, about a mashgiach who caught the workers mixing pig lard into the oil. When the mashgiach tried to stop them and called his supervisor, the "Rav HaMachshil" (play on words- the rabbi who causes others to stumble) fired the mashgiach for interfering with the production.

Thus, he rules that oil manufactured under that "bad" hechsher needs to be treated as non-kosher, and all the equipment needs to be kashered before using them. If you look at the teshuva you will see his very strong language about this issue.

In Shulchan Levi he doesn't identify who the "bad" hechsher is. But I saw the original teshuva, which is available as an internal OU Kosher document for mashgichim. The document is K-27. There, he is very clear that the "Rav HaMachshil" is Rabbi Ralbag. Instead of discussing השגחה מפוקפקת, "questionable supervision," he refers to השגחה מרולבגת "Ralbag supervision." Likewise, he also mentions there the questionable oil as שמן מרולבג.

[This teshuva, written in the late 90's, demonstrates that Rav Belski viewed the Triangle K as not being reliable. It is possible that in the past 20+ years things have changed, and the OU's position may have changed as a result. Likewise, it is possible that the OU's position was based on faulty info and really the Triangle K was never as bad as they thought. I am just answering the OP by providing a source which explains the OU's original position.]

Binyomin
  • 2,971
  • 10
  • 21
  • "He goes on with an example of using Kosher animal fat and vegetable fat on the same equipment but calling the vegetable fat pareve without Kashering. Ralbag says that his father did that, but he no longer does." From Yishai's answer. If this criticism is obsolete there is more likely no Toelet to spreading this hearsay (from our perspective) of yours. – Double AA May 13 '21 at 22:01
  • "mixing pig lard into the oil" Almost certainly this is not a realistic presentation of the event. Almost certainly the workers were adding in something the mashgiach thought was not supposed to be added but R' Ralbag knew about and allowed for whatever halachic reason (bittul of some sort) and criticized the mashgiach for not following policy. If R' Belsky held like the mashgiach then you see why he'd word the story like this without it actually being so simple. This is why one sided criticisms are so useless – Double AA May 13 '21 at 22:07
  • @DoubleAA The question is, "what is the OU's problem with Triangle-K." I'm sharing a teshuva, written by one of the main poskim for the OU, who describes that hechsher in very negative terms (OU documents confirm it's about Triangle K). It is clear from this teshuva that he held the hechsher to be no good, and that the rabbi was a "rav hamachshil" in general not just regarding oil. This explains the OU's historic problem with the hechsher. Perhaps things have changed and OU doesn't view it to be problematic anymore; but I directly answered the OP. – Binyomin May 13 '21 at 22:13
  • @DoubleAA I heard from a mashgiach- I admit this is hearsay- who discussed companies using pig lard to grease equipment. He told me that triangle K permitted it, based on Shu"t Rama 53 that shuman chazir doesn't mix with the oil and is natla"f. So I don't find Rav belski's description so farfetched. In any event, whether you agree or not with rav Belski's version of the story, it explains the OU's reticence to the triangleK and thus answers the OP. – Binyomin May 13 '21 at 22:15
  • (the hearsay for us is your story about the "internal documents") I'm not saying it doesn't answer the question; I'm questioning the propriety of posting it unqualified for minimal Toelet. The story you mention in the comments may not be farfetched but it CLEARLY sounds different from the presentation of "the rabbi just ignored mixing in pig". To say R Belsky and R Ralbag disagree if we should rely on or on how to interpret Shu"t Rama 53 is very different from the presentation in this answer which presents R Ralbag as nefariously negligent, arguably straight lashon hara. – Double AA May 13 '21 at 22:40
  • @DoubleAA I looked up the internal OU document and identified the document. I cannot post a link to it (I looked at a mashgiach's hard copy) but you can now track it down yourself to verify my post. And I added an endnote pointing out that the teshuva is 20+ years old, and based on info which may be faulty, and is only being shared to shed light on the OU's position. – Binyomin May 20 '21 at 21:47
-5

1- many use rav moshe on pasteurized wine
2- carrying grapes only by mashgiach is a stringency
3- one can still get non glatt from reliable kosher agencies
4- less checking and less openness is the main problem. If that was fixed then other problems would go away. Also if rabbi lopatin,a rather understanding individual, could not consider it reliable... Fuhgeddaboudit! Finally - look up crc ,you get their site as well as any other kashrut org. Look up triangle k and you get stack exchange! Obviously they are not very open

Dani
  • 1,549
  • 3
  • 26
David Zitter
  • 1
  • 2
  • 1
    There is no need to shout (i.e., write in all caps). Second it is not clear how your points relate to the question, maybe you could phrase this is as self-understanding text. Last, if I Google Triangle K, I get .... their site. – mbloch May 07 '21 at 03:17