Is sesame-seed oil [שמן שומשמין] considered kitniyos? This was the topic of much heated discussion among the poskim. Rav Kook ztz"l was firmly of the opinion that it is not and wrote teshuvos to that effect*. How shocked I was to read in a recently published book by a well known academic in the Modern Orthodox community where he asserted that the Rav changed his psak ["retreated"] because of pressure from the stringent faction.
"A final noteworthy incident took place in Palestine in 1909. In his rabbinical post in Jaffa, Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Kook permitted his community to use sesame-seed oil on Passover. Un- questionably Orthodox, Kook knew well that traditional Jews considered sesame oil a form of kitniyot and therefore re- frained from using it during Passover. A member of the Jaffa community who had opened a factory that produced sesame oil asked Kook to authorize his product for Passover use. The businessman explained that his oil was manufactured by machines that obviated the concerns linked to kitniyot. This was sufficient for Kook to offer a lenient ruling. But his decision was adamantly opposed by the leading rabbinic court in Jerusalem. One of the Jerusalem rabbis’ primary concerns was that Kook’s position appeared in accord with the well-known viewpoint of European reformers and therefore was unacceptable from an Orthodox point of view. Ultimately Kook retreated in the face of the strong stand of the Hungarian-trained Jerusalem court, a decision that would do much to solidify the strict stance maintained by Orthodox Jews in Israel in subsequent decades."
I searched in vain for a source that the Rav retracted. I went from sefer to sefer that discuss the controversy and found nothing. The author wrote a footnote where he quoted a sefer written by Rabbi Professor Neriyah Gutel. I don't have the sefer but I emailed Rabbi Gutel to ask if there is any truth to this author's assertion about Rav Kook recanting.
Here is his response - short and to the point!
ב"ה,
שלו' וברכה,
הבל הבלים. חד וחלק. שיטה ידועה ...
בברכה, נרי'
Interesting that this transpired just after I wrote this post.
As an aside - this author has a habit of calling Gedolei Torah by their last names only - "Kook", Feinstein", "Soloveitchik" "Teitelbaum". This is a gross display of disrespect. It does not make one less of an academic if he adds at least an "R'" before their names.
* Shut Oracĥ Mishpat 108-114 in which he broadly permitted sesame oil since not only are the seeds not malted, but the oil is also fried, which would prevent cereal grain from becoming ĥametz and is certainly enough to alleviate the problem of kitniyot. This idea is echoed by Avnei Nezer OĤ §533 with regard to rapeseed oil (this responsum appeared in 5458, 11 years before Rav Kook’s responsum). The Hasidic-Ashkenazic rabbinical court in Jerusalem vociferously opposed Rav Kook without any regard for the honor of Torah or of all of the poskim who had previously ruled even more leniently than Rav Kook on this matter. Rav Kook responded to them sharply, with erudition, and with strong proofs. As part of his response, he wrote (p. 123): “In truth, the path of my righteous and ingenious mentors, may their merit protect us and all of Israel, whom I merited to serve, was not to incline toward stringency when it was possible to be lenient, especially regarding issues without a strong basis in the words of the talmudic Sages. It is sufficient that we do not budge, God forbid, from the customs we accepted at the guidance of our rabbis, the poskim. But as for the details that can be argued one way or the other, certainly one who inclines toward a lenient ruling in an effort to be wise and benevolent is praiseworthy, as long as his words are based on the profundity of halakha and sound reasoning…” Furthermore, one who adds prohibitions to a prohibition that is not rooted in the law may violate a prohibition implied by a positive commandment (“lav ha-ba mi-khlal aseh”) according to Rashi’s comments in the first chapter of Beitza. As Rav Kook wrote (p. 126): “That which the Talmud often states, that we do not make decrees on top of other decrees, is derived from the following verse: ‘You shall safeguard my observances’ [‘u-shmartem et mishmarti’ – Vayikra 18:30]: make safeguards, i.e., enact decrees, for my observances, that is, for the Torah. But do not make safeguards for safeguards; do not make decrees upon decrees.” Against the claim that we must be increasingly stringent nowadays, Rav Kook writes: “I know the character of our contemporaries well: it is precisely when they see that everything that can be permitted based on the profundity of halacha is permitted, they will understand that when we do not permit it is based on the truth of Torah law. Consequently, many people will adhere to the Torah and heed the words of the Sages, God willing. On the other hand, when they discover that there are things that can be permitted according to the letter of the law, but the rabbis were not sensitive to the travails and hardships of the Jewish people and leave these matters in their prohibited state, it will cause a terrible desecration of God’s name, Heaven forbid. Ultimately, there will be an increase of outbursts saying about core elements of the Torah that if the rabbis want to permit it, they can; thus, the law will be perverted” (p. 126).
