from halichot shlomo volume on Pesach p89 (pe-tet)
BTW the sefer contains 3 sections ; main, dvar halacha and orchot halacha.
I am assuming that all 3 are from RSZA or notes of students.
I will do my best in the translation but have added some of the notes in
Hebrew
RSZA says the minhag is not to use cottonseed oil on Pesach (mimetic - who
determines this minhag?)
He brings that the CA prohibited potatos !! but that this psak was never
accepted. because they can't be confused with wheat. He adda that PERHAPS
there is a reason to prohibit potato flour (serach kitniyot - based on
chiddishin of RSZA to Pesachim).
Certainly, cakes made from matza flour should certainly be prohibited (ie
even according to those that eat gebrochs) (yesh ladun behem - Pesachim 40b
- Rashi that when people are "mezalzel one should be machmir)
In the notes that this was what RSZA said in shiurim and when asked a
question responded that one should follow the family minhag. Nevetheless he
remarked several times that cakes with matzah flour that look like chametz
cakes that he didn't understand the heter when we go to lengths to avoid
things that might be confused with chametz
from halichot shlomo volume on Pesach p89 (pe-tet)
...
He brings that the CA prohibited potatos !! but that this psak
was never accepted. because they can't be confused with wheat.
He adds that PERHAPS there is a reason to prohibit potato flour
(serach kitniyot - based on chiddishin of RSZA to Pesachim).
Certainly, cakes made from matza flour should certainly be
prohibited (ie even according to those that eat gebrochs) ...
To me, it seems contradictory to allow gebroks yet forbid matza meal
cake. Yet it certainly seems that this is how RSZA held. I think I'm
going to have to retract most of my recent posts. Or add least append
a big "tzorech iyun" to them.
: from halichot shlomo volume on Pesach p89 (pe-tet)
...
: RSZA says the minhag is not to use cottonseed oil on Pesach (mimetic - who
: determines this minhag?)
Well, if it's mimetic, you just watch what people do. And if so, RSZA's
statement is descriptive, not descriptive. As in: Lemaaseh, people are
nohagim not to use cottonseed oil on Pesach.
: He brings that the CA prohibited potatos !! but that this psak was never
: accepted. because they can't be confused with wheat...
But the CA himself says it's a minhag she'ein hataibur yachol laaemod
bo. He gives it as a hava amina and rejects it for a different reason
than the one given.
...
: Certainly, cakes made from matza flour should certainly be prohibited (ie
: even according to those that eat gebrochs) (yesh ladun behem - Pesachim 40b
: - Rashi that when people are "mezalzel one should be machmir)
Who is being mezalzel on chameitz? If he saying that because some people
are questioning qitniyos, we should strengthen qitniyos, then what does
that have to do with foods not already under that umbrella?
And even among those who question the minhag's sanity, is there really
a major zilzul going on among Ashkenazim doing less and less to avoid
qitniyios? On the contrary, as your translation opens, avoiding shemen
qitniyos has spread well beyond the communities that originally had that
minhag, to the extent that it's being applied to foods that in the past
weren't on the list of qitniyos! The questioning is a counter-reaction
to the growth of the minhag. Who is being mezalzel?
: In the notes that this was what RSZA said in shiurim and when asked a
: question responded that one should follow the family minhag...
Ascerting mimeticism over his own textualism. Sevara aside, minhag
is whatever is the accepted practice.
again, no he doesn't. We just went through this last week. He never proposed it, even as a hava amina, and never gives a reason against it. He merely reports, as a matter of fact and completely without comment for or against it, that he heard that in Germany they forbid potatoes because over there they make flour from them.
: >: He brings that the CA prohibited potatos !! but that this psak was never
: >: accepted. because they can't be confused with wheat...
: >But the CA himself says it's a minhag she'ein hataibur yachol laaemod
: >bo. He gives it as a hava amina and rejects it for a different reason
: >than the one given.
:
: again, no he doesn't. We just went through this last week...
And given the relatice abilities of RSZA and you to read the
Chayei Adam, you're obviously mistaken.
: never proposed it, even as a hava amina...
He reports the existence of such a minhag, and recommends against
its adoption. Close enough.
You're setting yourself up as a baal pelugta of RSZA by splitting
hairs to crration a distinction without a difference? Really?
![https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png"](https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png"){kind=link}