The Nazi project to reshape society to fit Nazi ideas about race and national unity excluded many people from the Nazis' so-called "national community" ("Volksgemeinschaft"). Even before the introduction of the Nuremberg Race Laws on September 15, 1935, Jews living in Nazi Germany became the target of regulations designed to reduce their social and economic standing.¹ Anti-Jewish legislation affected the quality of everyday life—shopping, finding housing, and doing business became more complicated. Individual acts of discrimination toward Jews by shopkeepers, landlords, and public officials created new challenges. Daily life became so difficult that many German Jews struggled to understand which acts should be considered relatively minor disappointments and which should be considered to be genuine threats.²

Less than three months after Adolf Hitler was appointed German chancellor, a law issued on April 21, 1933 forbade the slaughter of livestock without first stunning the animals by an electric shock. Though Jewish ritual slaughter was not referenced in the law, it was the unofficial target of the legislation. Jewish ritual slaughter had long served as a symbol of supposed "Jewish cruelty" in antisemitic circles. Several German states had already outlawed the practice in the years before the Nazi rise to power.³

As the law took effect, German Jews confronted shortages of kosher meat and escalating prices. The question of how to respond to this new reality worried religious Jews in particular. Orthodox rabbis were committed to upholding Halacha—Jewish law rooted in the Talmud⁴—and they feared that approving the consumption of non-kosher meat would set a dangerous precedent throughout Europe and would undermine efforts to retain other kosher practices. Some argued that when Jewish traditions were under assault, religious laws should be observed even more strictly.

On the other hand, liberal rabbis frequently ruled that meat from an animal that was slaughtered after being stunned could still be considered kosher. These leaders feared that strict adherence to Jewish law would place undue stress upon their congregations, especially for poorer Jews who could not afford expensive imports of kosher meats from neighboring countries.⁵ They also remained mindful that failure to overcome the crisis would cast the leaders as indifferent to public suffering and incapable of responding to new challenges. In turn, some Orthodox leaders worried that the lack of a unified position on this issue would spark further conflicts among the already divided Jewish religious communities.

The Orthodox German Jewish weekly Der Israelit (The Israelite) waded into this controversy in the summer of 1934, more than a year after the ban. In the featured editorial, the paper takes a conservative position against the so-called "new-kosher" trend sweeping the country's butcher shops and restaurants. In a serious and angry tone, the author criticizes the "cynicism" and "speculative dealings" involved in the sale and consumption of so-called "new-kosher” products. Rooted in scriptural terms, this denunciation of "new-kosher" speaks to deep disagreements over the ban and the best ways to address the challenges of the "contemporary Jewish situation."

To learn more about policies targeting Jews during the first several years of Nazi rule, see the Experiencing History collection, Exclusion of Jews in Nazi Germany.

To learn more about the daily challenges faced by German Jews under Nazi rule, see Marion A. Kaplan, Between Dignity and Despair: Jewish Life in Nazi Germany (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998).

German occupation authorities also instituted such bans in conquered territories. For the case of the Warsaw ghetto, see Barbara Engelking and Jacek Leociak, The Warsaw Ghetto: A Guide to the Perished City (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009), 641.

A religious text describing Jewish ceremonial and civil law.

In defiance of the ban, German Jewish butchers also continued to perform kosher slaughter in secret. See Kaplan, Between Dignity and Despair, 33.

The central religious text of Judaism, usually referring to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible and rabbinic commentary.

Religious text describing Jewish ceremonial and civil law.

In Jewish law, one who resolves legal matters.

A term referring to questions about Jewish law and practice sent to rabbis, to which they composed answers advising the writers.

Hebrew: "Every day should be perceived as a new beginning."

Jewish ritual slaughter.

Hebrew: Literally "prey and carcass," a term denoting non-kosher meat.

Non-kosher.

Hebrew: "One who sins and causes others to sin."

Hebrew: "Belief or faith."

"New-Kosher"!

Out of the contemporary Jewish situation, which is at once tragic as well as comic, a new Jewish word was born: "New-kosher". But what does it actually mean? Neither the Torah¹ nor the Talmud,² nor the Decisors,³ nor Responsa⁴ mention it. In scripture, when the term "new" is used in combination with a law, it’s in the sense that Torah teachings and Torah law will always be "new" to us as b'chol yom yihiyu be'einecha ke'chadashim.⁵

But a Jewish restaurant near a resort in the Black Forest advertised their cuisine as follows: "The meat fare is new-kosher." Every day new reports are coming in about "new-kosher" changes in public businesses, Jewish institutions, and private houses in rural areas.

For our readers who are unfamiliar with the meaning of "new-kosher" and will most likely not find a description in any Jewish encyclopedia, the following definition is offered: "New-kosher" refers to meat of animals which were stunned and then killed, with or without a shechita⁶ (as it is irrelevant at this point). In other words, it is meat that is not "new-kosher", but in both old and new terms strictly terefah, and no rabbinic power can alter it from being nevelah u’trefah.⁷ It seems almost cynical when Jewish restaurants use the non-existent term "new-kosher" as advertising to entice ritually observant people.

In America, recently also in France, legal measures have been taken to prohibit such a dishonest and unscrupulous deception. Law-abiding Jewry will have to find means to put an end to these speculative dealings, which come at the expense of the Jewish conscience.

But as long as we are without legal recourse, this warning should be emphasized: Everything sold as "new-kosher" is nothing but strictly terefah⁸ and should be treated the same as meat, which comes as nevelah u’trefah from a non-Jewish butcher shop.

Those who are letting their consciousness be lulled into believing these words are deceiving themselves, and whoever is profiting by spreading these new words is a chote u’machti et harabim⁹ destined to pile guilt upon his soul, which according to the doctrine of "Father Proverbs" is almost unredeemable.

On such an occasion, it is worth noting the admonition of the Hamburg Restaurant Association in the Townhall section of our latest issue. Beware of using older publications from the association without previous inquiries with Jewish restaurants, as their conditions may have changed entirely. Also due to the recent incidents, it could be possible that the business has come into new hands and is no longer worthy of public trust.

In case of uncertainty, it is advised to contact the relevant authority in Hamburg to avoid the risk of consuming something "new-kosher" against one's knowledge and will—that is to say, consuming something strictly terefah. Personal errors and the liability of others are not valid excuses, because in the matter of emunah¹⁰ everyone is responsible for himself.

All 18 Items in the Jewish Religious Life and the Holocaust Collection

Archival Information for This Item