Neither Fish Nor Fowl

Before Pesach, I usually take my car into a car wash to be cleaned. However, I don’t fall for those Passover specials. They charge you about $20 extra to clean your car. Why? It’s for Passover. Admittedly, a minivan that has been used for trips, car pools, and snack runs needs extra cleaning attention. I remember a woman in front of me at the car wash looking with dismay at the ticket that the attendant handed her for her minivan wash. Her stub was stamped “Extra Dirty.” I hope her kids can still get shidduchim.

However, to simply charge extra for Passover is unconscionable. Dov Hikind’s office last year launched an investigation into these so-called Passover car wash specials. Another complaint we hear around Pesach time is price fixing of food items. As Abie Rotenberg’s song goes, “Why do the same things we buy all year round, at Pesach time are triple the price?” Moreover, people complain about the cost of items manufactured specially for Passover. Granted, there are additional costs involved in a Passover production, but are the high final prices justified? There was a well-known federal investigation in the ’90’s regarding price fixing by Jewish manufacturers. Hopefully, those concerns are now just something from the past. Additionally, I have read that our local food stores pledged not to raise their prices simply because it’s Passover.

A number of years ago, I read a columnist who declared that the Vaad HaKashrus should get involved if there was indeed price gouging. I’m not sure I agree. However, there is plenty of precedent for such a move.

The mishnah in Kerisus (8a) relates an interesting incident. There was a time when birds used for korbanos became exceedingly expensive. Each pair of birds was sold for a gold dinar. A gold dinar at that time represented about a month’s salary for the average person. Women who had recently given birth could hardly afford to purchase them for the korbanos they were required to bring.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel cried fowl and declared, “I swear by Hashem, Who rested His Divine Presence in the Beis HaMikdash, I will not go to sleep tonight until the price drops dramatically.” He went to beis din and declared that any woman who hitherto would have brought five sets of korbanos was now free as a bird to bring just one; she may bring the others if she so chooses. (This is a rather simplistic interpretation; see the Gemara for all the technical details.)

After Rabban Shimon’s declaration, the price of the birds swooned dramatically—to a hundredth of the original price. According to Rashi in Kerisus, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted an emergency, limited-time measure to bring down the price of the birds. He felt that b’nos Yisrael were being taken advantage of financially and were not getting proper tweetment. Perhaps some would chicken out of buying their korbanos. After the temporary measure, however, they were able to wing it. We can certainly conclude that the rabbis did at times see fit to intervene and lower the bill; they didn’t duck the issue.

However, was that measure only for the birds, or can it be applied to fish as well? Mullet over for a second, then read the rest. The question was posed to the Tzemach Tzedek. It seems that hundreds of years ago, the gentiles of that place knew that the Jews had the halibut of buying fish for Shabbos, and they cod raise the prices without suffering a dropoff in sales. When the prices increased dramatically, the Jews realized that something was fishy. Some were in favor of instituting a temporary ban on the purchase of fish for Shabbos to cause the price to sink.

Others, however, referred to the Gemara in Beitzah (16a) that the money one spends on Shabbos and yom tov is not deducted from one’s yearly allotment. So, they reasoned, what difference does it make if the fish is expensive? Since they are buying it for Shabbos, their money will be returned to them in one way or another through Divine intervention, and they will remain afloat. They argued further, How can you ban herring from a kiddush? A Jew without herring is like a fish out of water! When both sides presented their arguments, it was time to fish or cut bait.

The Tzemach Tzedek ruled that a boycott was in order. Just as Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel curtailed the offering of korbanos, we may temporarily curtail the mitzvah of oneg Shabbos. This would be true even if eating fish on Shabbos is a mitzvah d’Oraysa, as some argue (see the Shulchan Aruch HaRav). However, for halachah l’ma’aseh we hold that eating fish is just one manifestation of the mitzvah of oneg Shabbos. One can fulfill the biblical mitzvah of oneg Shabbos with other dishes as well. There are plenty of fish in the sea. So a boycott is certainly in order to bring the price of fish down.

As to the argument that the money spent on Shabbos will be returned: The Tzemach Tzedek said that it is fine for people who have the money to lay out, but not for a poor person who does not have the money to spend now and will not be able to buy the fish, even though there is a guarantee that the money will be returned to him later. Since these poor people were floundering, a temporary ban on buying fish for Shabbos was proper.

The Aruch L’ner points out two apparent flaws in the Tzemach Tzedek’s conclusion from our mishnah. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel never forbade women from bringing all their korbanos. He just made it optional. Further, even if he had forbidden women from bringing all their korbanos, they would have been able to offer them after the price went down. Every woman affected by the temporary measure conceivably could have brought all the optional bird sacrifices when it became affordable. However, if a ban on fish was initiated, it wouldn’t just make the purchase of fish optional, it would outlaw it altogether. Further, after the boycott would be rescinded, only current Shabbos meals could be enjoyed with fish. Those Shabbos meals that passed without gefilte fish could never be “rectified.” Therefore, the Aruch L’ner says that no support can be adduced for the ban from our mishnah.

Still, the Mishnah Berurah (242:2) codifies the ruling of the Tzemach Tzedek as practical halachah. You may indeed institute a boycott against fishermen who are as crooked as a barrel of fishhooks.

One interesting point that can be made from the above story is that the Tzemach Tzedek agreed that one should continue buying fancy food for Shabbos even if it is above one’s means. That money will be returned to him somehow that year. I heard the following caveat from R’ Reuven Feinstein, shlita: One cannot simply go on a spree and purchase the most expensive items and expect the money to be returned. However, a food that is indeed within one’s means and suddenly becomes expensive may continue to be purchased without suffering any net loss in his income that year. This fits with the above story. Apparently the fish started out as affordable but was subject to the whims and manipulations of the gentile merchants.

Just one note: There is no way to tell how the Shabbos expenditures will be repaid to each individual. Perhaps the individual might be saved from losing his wallet. Perhaps there was a decree that he should sell six cars one week and now will sell seven. But one way or the other, Hashem will pay him back for the money he spends to honor Shabbos.