Yosef Eliyahu Henkin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin (1881 - 1973) was a prominent Orthodox rabbi in the United States.
He was born in Belorussia, and studied at the Slutzker Yeshiva under Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer. He received rabbinical ordination (semichah) from Rabbi Meltzer, and he was also ordained by Rabbi Boruch Ber Leibowitz and Rabbi Yechiel Epstein, the Aruch HaShulchan. After serving as rabbi in a number of Russian towns, he emigrated to America in 1922. In 1925 he became the director of Ezras Torah, which provided assistance to scholars. He served in that capacity until his death.
Under his guidance, and following his decisions, Ezras Torah published an annual calendar (luach) listing the synagogue and liturgical customs for each day, specifying the specific practice of that day. Most traditional non-chassidic synagogues in North America followed the decisions of Rabbi Henkin as their baseline.
He had two sons: Louis Henkin, legal academician and writer, and Rabbi Hillel Henkin, educator in Connecticut. His grandson is Rabbi Yehudah Herzl Henkin, an Orthodox rabbi in Israel. Many of Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin's opinions are only known through the responsa of his grandson.
Contents |
[edit] Halachic Positions
Rabbi Henkin considered Reform marriage as a form of common law marriage requiring a Jewish divorce (get).
He was opposed to the practice seen in many yeshivas and synagogues of pausing in the middle of the Rosh Hashanah services for kiddush and refreshments before shofar-blowing. (His stance is defended in his grandson's responsa.)
If a Jewish storekeeper completed a form to sell his chametz to a non-Jew before Passover, yet he kept his store open, selling chametz on Passover and keeping the profits for himself, Rabbi Henkin felt that this proved the "Chametz sale" to be a fraud and therefore invalid. (Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, on the other hand, believed the sale to still be valid.)
Rabbi Henkin felt that in a case where tunafish are being caught, it is halachically permissible to check only a few of each batch and not each individual fish; Rabbi Feinstein, on the other hand, felt that each fish needed to be checked for kosher markings that it was in fact, a tunafish and not some other fish. This is a particularly interesting heiter (permission) since Rav Henkin did not allow for the concept of Cholov Stam; i.e., milk which the government supervises as a form of kosher; making canned tuna (which is boiled in milk to give it more weight) using in the same product both the heiter of Cholov Stam and tunafish, which means that neither Rabbi Henkin nor Rabbi Feinstein would eat the product, as made.
[edit] The New York Eruv
In 1936, Rabbi Henkin declared that Rabbi Yehoshua Seigel's 1905 Manhattan eruv could no longer be relied on because he had only acquired permission for ten years. However, Rabbi Henkin's main argument why the eruv could no longer be relied on was because of the construction of bridges that crossed Manhattan’s waterfront (Luach HaYovel Shel Ezras Torah, p. 62). This letter was later reprinted in Edus L’Yisroel, 1949 (p. 151).
Rabbi Henkin was involved in all the discussions about the Manhattan eruv, and on March 15, 1960, he signed on a Statement of the Vaad L’Maan Tikkun Eruvin B’Manhattan (Divrei Menachem, O.C. vol. 2 p. 10) that stated the need to investigate how to bring to fruition the plan for a Manhattan eruv.
On July 12, 1961, Rabbi Henkin wrote a letter stating that there was a sound basis to establish an eruv in Manhattan.(ibid., pp. 14-15; Hapardes 36th year, vol. 4, and Kisvei Hagriah Henkin, pp. 32-33). Yet, he wrote that until the eruv would receive the written support of most of the rabbanim of Manhattan, the permisison for the eruv would only be for times of great need.
The 1979 letter opposing the Flatbush eruv alleges that Rabbi Henkin signed the 1962 letter against the Manhattan eruv. Yet, his name is not on it, and it is on the 1960 letter in favor. [1] [2]
[edit] Position on Israel
Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin was opposed to the position of the Satmar Rav, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum.
- I was shocked to read in Chomoteinu (Cheshvan 5719) the slanderous notion that we are required to give our lives to frustrate and resist the efforts of the State of Israel in its struggle against those who would rise up against them. This was stated as a psak din based on "Israel is restricted from rebelling against the nations." (Ketubot 111a)...
- Now all the rabbis who were opposed to Zionism and the establishment of a state took up that position until the time that it was officially founded. Once the state was declared, anyone who plays into the hands of the nations of the world even where there is no imminent danger, is clearly an informer and persuer (rodef). All the more when there is danger to destruction of life in so doing... Surely, those who recently emigrated must be very weary of the state's efforts to strip them of their Torah way of life, but to proclaim that anyone who aids the state is a persuer, well such talk is the severest form of persuing (redifa). (Source: "Our Responsibility Towards Eretz Yisrael")
[edit] Bibliography
Rabbi Norman E. Frimer and Dov I. Frimer, "Reform Marriages in Contemporary Halakhic Responsa," Tradition, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Fall 1984), 7 - 39;
