Avodah Mailing List

Volume 07 : Number 010

Friday, March 30 2001

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 23:01:39 -0600
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Re: Voss Iz Der Chilluk #5: MC vol. 2 p. 65

At 11:10 AM 3/27/01 -0500, Micha Berger wrote:
>Is this really "tz'vei dinim" (TzD)? I'm not arguing that the two dinim
>ever co-exist. I think of a TzD as a case where in the norm two sevaros
>coincide, so that a single halachah is a kiyum of 2 dinim, but in the
>case in question, only one does.

I would say this is Brisker:

There are two dinim in bittul: Bittul Shavyus vs. Bittul Chashivus.


ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:02:17 +0300
From: "D. and E-H. Bannett" <dbnet@barak-online.net>
Re: LEDs and LCDs on Shabbat

> Do you mean a toldah = melachah deoraisa, or did you mean a gzeirah
> d'rabbanan?  I always thought that LCDs were at most assur m'drabbanan.

Not what I mean, I was only quoting an authoritative source. And, yes,
he says mid'rabbanan.

Of course, my tricky little side point, really the main point of the
posting, was the Ur = Ohr equivalence and the smiles of a talmid chakham..


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:47:38 -0800
From: Eric Simon <erics@radix.net>

Since R'Broyde's article on cloning a few years back, has there been any
other serious halachic discussion of the issue.  I ask this in light of the
recent Masorti decision that cloning is not permitted, which, frankly,
surprised me.

To my everlasting chagrin, Rabbi Yitzchok Breitowitz gave a lecture on
specifically this topic on March 18, but I was out of town and missed it
(and have not heard anything about what he might have said).

I do recall hearing one rabbi (I forget who) simply shrugging his shoulders
saying, essentially, only HaShem can give a neshama to a baby, I don't see
what the extra halachic problem is on the human side of this.


-- Eric

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 09:46:27 -0500
From: "Wolpoe, Richard" <Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com>
Kadesh urChatz - 14 steps or 15 steps?

Kadesh urChatz - 14 steps or 15 steps?
(c) 2001 Richard Wolpoe

At the beginning of the Seder, we chant Kadesh uRchatz. Many Haggadot have
this arranged as 14 steps and others have 15 steps. The key difference is:
Motzi-Matzah? Are they two separate steps or one compound yet single step?

Arguing the merits of Motzi-Matzah as either a single compound step or as
two distinct steps has some value. However, I will ignore the intrinsic
aspect of Motzi-Matzah and come up with a completely extrinsic reasoning.

How is the number 14 significant vs. the number 15?

The number 14 has its merits. 14 is the Gematria of Yad - Hand - it
could correspond to mighty Hand. However I can think of no connection to
"steps." Can you?

How about the number 15?

Well, the Temple of Old in Jerusalem had 15 steps. For each step we have
a special Psalm hence ther are 15 Shir Hamaalot- song of ascents or steps

The same term - Ma'alot - are used in the preface to the song
Dayenu. "Cama Ma'alot Tovot Aaleinu!" This indicates that each step
from Ilu hotzianuis mentioned. There are actually 14 verses in Dayeinu,
however there are 15 separate steps enumerated in the summary that
follows. The last step an allusion to the Temple i.e. the Bet Habechira.

It is clear to me that the number 15 is magical this night - and indeed
in general - as a significant number of steps in ascending.

This leads me to believe that the number must be 15, not because I am
convinced that Motzi and Matzah are definitely two separate steps, but
rather that it is highly suggested by the entire structure of the Seder
that steps would match some magical number. In this case that magical
number is most likely to be 15.

True, 14 can be made into a special number. The echod mi yuodei'a ends
at 13, and therefore perhaps making 14 a special number would add to it
a bit of symmetry or completion. However, it is far more likely that
the concepts of steps requires 15. This theme recurs too often and is
to entwined and enmeshed within the haggadah itself to ignore.

While the eating of Motzi and Matza does take place concurrently,
the separate, individual brachot suggest TWO separate steps - albeit
accomplished simultaneously.

There are 15 steps to the Seder, Motzi and Matzah are therefore separate.

Shalom and Regards
Rich Wolpoe 

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 20:39:59 +0300
From: "Amihai & Tamara Bannett" <atban@inter.net.il>

Reb. Gila Atwood asked:
> Re: ma-im she lanu- just reading over kitzur shulchan aruch- would
> someone enlighten me about this intriguing business of suspending a
> piece of metal in the water if that night will be the equinox? Is this
> still done anywhere? If this has already been discussed, please escuse me.

From Shearim Laluach HaIvri, an excellent book by Racahamim Sar Shalom:
(P. 144) It says that "It is costomary to announce the time of the Tekufah
[There are 4 tekufot a year AZB], so that people will be aware and not
drink water, a half an hour before and after the tekufah. This is still
kept by many of Bnei Adot HaMizrach."

In case you're intersted Tkufat Nissan this year WAS on March 25 at 6 PM.


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 13:18:18 -0600
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Voss Iz Der Chilluk #6: MC vol. 1 p. 60 - An Oldie but Goodie

OK, Rabbosai, this is, as noted, an Oldie but Goodie. Let's get the
creative juices flowing and come up with some new and innovative

Inyana d'yoma (almost):

The Divrei Yechezkel 45:4 asks why the Ramban categorizes Sefiras ha'Omer
as a Mtizvas Aseh *she'ein* ha'zman grama - how is different than any
Mitzvas Aseh she'ha'zman grama - it is, after all, linked to a time.

Voss Iz Der Chilluk?

What derech/derachim have you employed.

Note: For our purposes, the Haskolishe answer of ta'us ha'defus will
not be accepted!

ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:40:41 -0500
From: gil.student@citicorp.com
Re: Voss Iz Der Chilluk #6: MC vol. 1 p. 60 - An Oldie but

RYGB wrote:
> The Divrei Yechezkel 45:4 asks why the Ramban categorizes Sefiras ha'Omer as a
> Mtizvas Aseh *she'ein* ha'zman grama - how is different than any Mitzvas Aseh 
> she'ha'zman grama - it is, after all, linked to a time.
I'm not sure how to categorize these answers.

1. I think it was the Sha'agas Aryeh who answered that it is the korban
ha'omer that starts the sefirah so it is not dependent on TIME but on
the ACTION of hakravas hakorban.

2. I think the Seridei Eish answers the exact opposite. Sefirah is
not a mitzvah that is DEPENDENT on time but rather the mitzvah IS time
(i.e. to count time).

Gil Student

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:50:12 +0200
From: Menachem Burack <Mburack@emiltd.com>
Burial in Chevron

One of the rabbonim who paskened to delay the burial of the baby in
Chevron presented two precedents.

The first from tanach he compared it to the case of Pilegesh B'givah.
The second is a teshuva of RMF zt"l about delaying the burial of an
aborted fetus for the purpose of bringing it to an antiabortion rally.

Does anyone know where to find this teshuva by RMF? 
What do you think of the parallels?

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:23:16 -0500
From: gil.student@citicorp.com
Re: Erev Pesach she' chal b'Shabbos Eitza

Carl Sherer wrote:
> Is there any inyan of eating Shalesh Seudos on (non-Shabbos days of)
> Yom Tov?

Al pi halachah, no. See Tosafos on Beitzah 2b that there is a machlokes
midrashim about this. But I believe everyone holds that there is no
chiyuv. Al pi nistar or chassidus, I don't know but I can cynically note
that there always seems to be an "inyan" when it comes to eating.

Gil Student

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:32:36 -0500
From: gil.student@citicorp.com
RE: Shower in Lieu of Tevilas Ezra?

Akiva Miller wrote:
> Obviously, Rav Tzuriel would have been talking about modern showers, 
> but I'm curious if anyone ever heard anything like what I wrote above.
I heard from R. Feivel Cohen that modern showers are good for 9 kav.  At the 
time, there was a contractor there discussing the rate of water that flows from 
different types of shower heads and RFC did not have a problem with them.

Gil Student

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 20:42:41 -0500
From: Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
re: Matzah mehl Rolls on Erev Pesach

Based on all the shakla v'tarya going on, it seems that we are missing a
very basic point, namely, What will cause matza to lose its taam so that
it may be eaten on Erev Pesach?

There has been a presumption among some that the rules ought to be
similar to the rules which define when a piece of bread changes from
being Hamotzi to being Mezonos. But we are becoming aware that this is
not necessarily the case. Raaya #1 is the MB paskening against matza meal
cake, even though he elsewhere says that it is mezonos. Raaya #2 is this
business about flash-boiling an entire matzah and then quickly
drying/rebaking it, in which case it is still hamotzi, yet okay on Erev

R' Chaim Markowitz wrote <<< l'chorah putting lots of honey in something
should remove the taam matzah also but this doesn't seem to be how we
paskan >>>, and I suspect that this was RYGB's initial feeling as well,
with which he began this thread.

I would like to offer a theory on why Taam Matza follows different rules
than Hamotzi/Mezonos. I will point out that I have absolutely no proof
for this, but I think it fits with what we've said so far.

The difference between Hamotzi and Mezonos lies in the way that food is
eaten: Is it something used as the basis of a meal, or is it snack food?
This is why flavorings will turn it into mezonos, but boiling will not,
*unless* it loses its toar lechem in the process.

But the essence of matza lies in its identity. I am reminded of another
significant Pesach halacha, that of denatured alcohol. Alcohol which has
things mixed into it, even to the point where a dog would not eat it, is
NOT considered nifsal me'achilas kelev, because the alcohol is still
there. It just has other things mixed into it. The same would apply to
bread crumbs: Mixing objectionable flavors into the crumbs does not make
it nifsal me'achilas kelev, you've got to burn it to ash, or let it go
stale - *that's* when the chometz itself becomes nifsal.

Maybe that's why the MB says not to eat matza meal cake on Erev Pesach.
Because the matza is still there. Flavors have been *added* to it, but
the matza itself is still there. Maror must be tasted, but the presence
of other flavors is not m'akev on achilas matza.

Just thinking...

Akiva Miller

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 13:23:02 +0300
From: "S. Goldstein" <goldstin@netvision.net.il>
facts of life

Bread can be used as bait for fishing by rolling into a small ball.  It
stays on the hook.

Siddur Halachic Compilation Derech HaChaim was written by the Nesivos, R'
Yaakov miLissa, not by Rav Yaakov Emden.

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 03:27:38 +0200
From: "Mrs. Gila Atwood" <gatwood@netvision.net.il>
Re: Avodah V7 #9

> Thinking about why, and of the regalim in these terms, the following
> question hit me: if we didn't earn the ge'ulah, then why isn't Succos
> also a celebration of the gemilas chessed we got before earning it? What
> did we do between Pesach and Marah to warrant ananei hakavod?

Were they not in the merit of Aharon HaCohen?

> And if the two mitzvos of Marah plus whatever additional hilchos Shabbos
> we got with the mun were enough to earn Shavu'os, why wasn't the korban
> Pesach an act of IdT sufficient for ge'ulah?

A gevaldig IdT! That and Mila- "bedamaich, chayi". This tells us that
welive by merit of that blood, that we were redeemed BECAUSE of the IdT,
the*mesirus nefesh* of being mekayem those mitzvos. At that time could
we saythat the average member of clal Israel, (not counting the Levi)
would beconsidered an Am Ha'aretz, or not even that? However, the inherent
ahavasHashem and Yiras Hashem were aroused by Moshe Rabenu. What do we
say aboutthe 80% that didn't make it, that they weren't mekayem these
mitzvos orthere were other reasons? The Tanya also talks of the typical
Am HaAretzwith relatively unsophisticated understanding still being
willing to bemoser nefesh, even to the point of martyrdom, and this is
a chizuk to avoidavera.

However, after this more is required of us. We still have to gain
understanding- hence sefira and the opportunity for an incomparably
higherlevel of geula, a revelation of divinity that we could not have
perceived inMitzrayim and could barely endure at Har Sinai.

Pesach is also linked directly to the FIRST mitzvah, chidush hachodesh
which, as well as initiating the whole IdT process on a national level,
also hints at the nature of Israel, waxing and waning like the moon.
It makes sense then that we set the time for Pesach.

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 23:36:21 -0600
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Micha's Question

Micha asked:
: >Then why do we set the date for Pesach, as we do for Succos? One would
: >think that Shabbos, which is primarily IdE, is of course a schedule
: >set by HKBH, and that yamim tovim depend on beis din's kiddush hachodesh
: >just because it sets dates for IdT. In which case, how does Pesach
: >jibe?

The answer, I believe, is to be found in Pesachim 5a, where it says that 
the pasuk in Shemos 12:18 "Ba'rishon b'arba'asar..." means "On the first 
day of Pesach, the fourteenth.

The first day of Pesach proper is called Shabbos ("Me'Mochoras ha'Shabbos") 
- but that is not the first day of Pesach! The fourteenth is the first day 
of Pesach. The fifteenth is described as "Me'Mochoras ha'Pesach" (Bamidbar 
33:3). Indeed, Noch Chatzos on Erev Pesach has gedorim of Chol ha'Mo'ed Pesach.

Why is this? Of course, because the Avodah of the afternoon of 
the  fourteenth is the "token" IdT that Hashem gave us to prepare for the 
IdE (the geder of "me she'otach b'erev Shabbos yochal b'Shabbos").

As part of our IdT we set the date for Pesach - the fourteenh, yes, but not 
for the Shabbos of Pesach - that follows me'meilah.

ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 02:08:11 -0500
From: "Noah S. Rothstein" <noahrothstein@mindspring.com>
Fate of Children Who Were Niftar, R"L

From: "Carl and Adina Sherer" <sherer@actcom.co.il>
> Hashem yerachem on that poor child's neshama, which AIUI is in
> limbo until the guf is brought to kvura....

But since a child cannot committ aveiros, wouldn't the neshama go straight
to Gan Eden without any detour and further yissurim whatsoever?

Also, we know that the guf a tsadik does not decompose. Wouldn't this
also be true for a young child who never had the chance to sin?

- Noach

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 04:33:36 -0500
From: "Noah S. Rothstein" <noahrothstein@mindspring.com>
Vort on Attitude to Gashmius vs. Ruchniess

I recall hearing a beautiful vort from R' Leibel Katz b'sheim the Baal
Shem Tov HaKadosh on the verse in Aleinu: "B'shomyaim mima'al, v'al
ho'oretz mitachas":

"B'shomayim mima'al"- That in matters of ruchniess one should never be
satisified with one's self and should always look above to those who
are on a higher madreiga and try to emulate them but

"V'Al HoOretz Mitochos': That in matters of gashmius, one should always
be satisfied w/ what one has and look to those who below one and have
less and appreciate how much more one has.

- Noach

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:49:34 -0000
From: "Seth Mandel" <sethm37@hotmail.com>
A correction Re G-d and HaShem

For the first time in my life, I feel like the Noda Biy'huda must
have felt when he wrote his famous t'shuva saying that sturgeon are
kosher, only to have the printer remove it from the book because "it is
impossible, the m'habber must have made a mistake, and I won't embarrass
him by printing such nonsense." IIRC, it took the Noda Biy'huda two more
tries before it actually got published.

[Oops. R' Seth Mandel's posts often contain non-ASCII characters. In order
to reduce them to the least common denominator readable by all email
systems, I run them through a script I originally through together for
preformatting divrei Torah for Toras Aish and for personal printing.
Therefore the script happens to change "God" to "G-d", hyphenate a
transliterated sheim havayah, etc... I now separated the tool I use for
moderation to not be so heavy handed. -mi]

I had written a post to Avodah explaining why it is muttar to spell
out the name of God, may He be praised, rather than the common style to
write G-d. But when it was posted, someone had changed all the times I
wrote God to G-d! The whole thing didn't make sense any more, so I am
posting it again:

<I quoted the Rambam that said that the name of God in any other language
(including Arabic, which was a hiddush, because in Arabic it's almost the
same as Hebrew) is just a kinnuy, and has no halokhos of shem haShem. Just
as you are allowed to write Horahamon in Hebrew without a chupchik (with
a nod to another poster, "shtrichel"), so you are allowed to write God
or the Lord in English without a dash. This is not just the CQ guessing
things from the Rambam here; every rov I know who has learned through the
sugya came to the same conclusion, and I have heard several (and those
who want to know what RYBS said about this can ask me offline). People
write G-d because of harhoqo y'sero; they feel uncomfortable about writing
God because of their training that when they refer to Him in Hebrew it
is not allowed to write it out, unless it is a kinnuy. That's fine, but
I like to distinguish between the muttar and the osur, and so I write
God. Again, my own personal preference; people who prefer harhoqo y'sera
are welcome to. And some may even have a psaq to that effect; although
I myself would challenge the Rov who made the psaq on what his basis was.

Hashem is also personal preference. I listened to many g'dolim, and that
was not a term they used; they used HQB'H or RBS'O or der Eibershter;
the term haShem was only used as a replacement for shem adnus or yod ke
vov ke when quoting a posuq or something from davening. I don't know where
the idea started of using haShem to refer to God on a normal basis. Among
European Jews that I knew it was found in the phrase "mirtze-ashem," but
not in other speech (again, they used Got or der Eibershter in Yiddish,
or the above variants in Hebrew). This is just my limited observations;
I would welcome testimony from the list members about European Jews or
old-time G'dolim about how they referred to God in their speech. But
from my observation, it is a fairly recent phenomenon to use haShem as
the standard term to refer to God, so, again as my own preference to
imitate how the g'dolim from Europe acted, I do not use it commonly.>

I am sure this time it will be posted as is. I say again: I know of no
source that has a reasonable raayo why it should be written G-d, and
I know of several sources that show that there is no reason for it to
be. I mentioned the Rambam, who says so b'ferush. And I have no quarrel
with those who wish to write G-d as harhoqo, but halokho it ain't.

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 20:45:14 -0500
From: Moshe Shulman <mshulman@ix.netcom.com>
Re: Shower in Lieu of Tevilas Ezra?

At 12:05 PM 3/28/01 -0600, you wrote:
>From: "Noah S. Rothstein" <noahrothstein@mindspring.com>
>I seem to recall that some hold that taking a shower is sufficient to
>fulfill tevilas Ezra. Anyone have any more info on this?

I seem to recall that Reb Moshe also held such a view.

moshe shulman mshulman@NOSPAMix.netcom.com    718-436-7705
CHASSIDUS.NET - Yoshav Rosh       http://www.chassidus.net

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 03:12:25 +0200
From: "Carl and Adina Sherer" <sherer@actcom.co.il>
Re: Tekufah

On 29 Mar 01, at 20:39, Amihai & Tamara Bannett wrote:
> In case you're intersted Tkufat Nissan this year WAS on March 25 at 6 PM.

That's Tkufas Shmuel. Tkufas Rav Ada was Tuesday at 10:21:06 
A.M. See the Tashbetz 1:108 and Chazon Ish OH 138:4.

-- Carl

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.


Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 00:37:12 -0500
From: Isaac A Zlochower <zlochoia@bellatlantic.net>
bein hashemoshot

I believe that Micah has exaggerated the effect of atmospheric
conditions and altitude on the accuracy of the Naval Observatory tables of
sunrise/set and twilight times. If these tables are of little or no use as
he seems to suggest, then why bother generating them, and why are all the
calendrical times for shabbat based on such tables? When the experts who
generate these tables speak of more than several minute inaccuracies at
high lattitudes, they are unlikely to be referring to 45 deg. lattitude
(that's above Bangor and the populated part of Maine), but rather 60
or more deg. As far as the effect of altitude is concerned, a simple
trigonometric calculation of the the declination of the horizon from the
vantage point of Denver (mile high = 1.6 km) relative to the horizon at
0 km. shows that the angular difference is 1.25 deg. or 5.0 minutes of
"solar" travel (convince yourself that the rate is 4 minutes/deg.). The
atmospheric refraction would typically add a minute or so to that value
(At sea level the average correction for such refraction is 0.59 deg. or
2.4 minutes; at the altitude of Denver the atmosphere is thinner and
the correction is less.) I have no idea where a 24 minute correction
for Denver originated (or 20 minutes for Maine).

My primary interest in asking for observations, however, was not to check
the accuracy of the tables, but to relate the various shiurim given for
bein hashemoshot to sky conditions. The appearance of the sky is the
more fundamental criterion, while the various estimates ranging from
1/2 mil (Rabbi Nechemiah) to 2/3 mil (Rav Yosef) to 3/4 mil (Rabbah)
to 4 mil (R' Tam's understanding of Rabbi Yehudah) for bein hashemoshot
are approximations that may be useful if a clear sky is unavailable.
It required the subject to estimate how much time it would take to walk
those particular distances at an average sustainable pace. The current
expression in terms of minutes is misleading since we have accurate
means of measuring time and the sages did not.

My proposal may, however, be somewhat premature. The primary interest
is in observations at the lattitude of Israel near the equinoxes, and
I would not wish to encourage anyone there to gaze intently at the sky
at dusk (except in prayer) in an open, unlit area - rather than being
alert to their surroundings. So, please be careful.

Yitzchok Zlochower

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:31:52 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
RSRH, Symbols, Kabbalah

On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 05:38:21AM -0600, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:
: >The problem is that Avraham isn't standing betachtis hahar. His mountain
: >climbing through 10 nisyonos to the akeidah -- at the top of the mountain.
: It is, of course, a little fruitless to argue symbolism. Remember that 
: RAYHK's ta'anah on RSRH was on his deployment of symbolism.

WADR to RAYHK, I'd like to take a moment to suggest the gap between RSRH
and other shittos in kabbalah is not as large as it looks.

And yes, I am following Dayan Grunfeld's assertion in the introduction to
Horeb that Hirsch's symbols are a derech in understanding diverei kabbalah.

In Nefesh haChaim, the connection between olam hazeh and olamos ha'elyonim
is us (e.g. 1:6, 1:21). [This is a point that I've raised repeatedly, it
also underlies my "mitzvos as spiritual fitness" model and the whole "ta'am
and taste" thread.] The ability to be mashpi'ah anything beyond the
physical is explained entirely in terms of the event's haspa'ah on people,
their neshamos, and thereby impacting events in shamayim.

As I once suggested here, perhaps Ya'akov saw himself in the dream -- he
was the "sulam mutzav artzah, virosho magi'ah hashamaymah".

This would suggest that an object's or event's metaphysical value is
its symbolic content, IOW, it inheres in how that object speaks to us.
So, one can speak directly of an action's impact on olamos, or one
can speak of the step before -- how people are impacted by the action,
what the action is supposed to say to us, the symbol. Hainu hach.

This is a blurring of the line between map and field, IOW, between the
symbol doing the describing and the thing being described.

However, "histakeil bi'Oraisa ubarei alma" -- the map doesn't represent
the field, the field was created to embody the map. The two are supposed
to go hand in hand.

In many cases, including a number of those under discussion, HKBH Himself
refers to them on the symbol level. "Beini uvein binei Yisrael, os hi
li'olam..." And the Yisrael who does realize that os, and gives it kiyum
bilibo, has thereby created a channel between earth and heaven in which
IdE and IdS (formerly IdT) can occur. More so, one can view that kayamus
itself as the event, not just its vehicle.

Another example in which the symbol level is the more blatant is the one
at hand. The connection between Avraham's avodas Hashem and his realization
that Moriah is a mountain is how he percieved Moriah. His avodah did, in
a "histakeil bi'oraisa" sense, cause the altitude difference between
Har Habayis and Silwan. However, it is simpler to look at the step before
-- why was Avraham Avinu's avodah like a mountain, and how does that
mountain resemble it. IOW, symbology -- comparing the map (in this
case, the mountain) to the field (Avraham's derech in avodah).


Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 14:27:43 -0000
From: "Leon Manel" <leonmanel@hotmail.com>
New shiur from RYBS

This shiur also appears in Noros Harav in a diffferent format.

Shiur HaRav Soloveichik ZT"L on Erev Pesach Shechal B'Shabbos

(Shiur date: 3/19/74. Note that this Shiur has 3 sections: Erev Pesach
Shechal Bshabbos, a discussion on egg matzo and drush)

The Mishna (Pesachim 49a) quotes a 3 way Machlokes Ta'naim regarding
how to deal with Chametz (leavened items) when Erev Pesach coincides
with Shabbos. Rabbi Meir says 'Mva'arin Es Hakol Lifnay Hashabos', we
eradicate all Chametz on Friday, Erev Shabbos. The Rabbis say the final
Bi'ur, eradication, takes place `B'Zmano', in its appropriate time,
on Shabbos. Rabbi Elazar Ben Tzadok distinguishes between Chulin, food
permissible to all, and Terumah, which is restricted to Kohanim. Bi'ur
for the former may take place on Shabbos, while Bi'ur for the latter
must take place on Friday.

Bi'ur Chametz is a fulfillment of the Mitzvas Tashbisu. The Mitzvas
Bi'ur commences on the night of Erev Pesach. We perform Bdikas Chametz
(a "search and destroy mission" on Chametz), and recite a blessing of Al
Bi'ur Chametz (not Al Bdikas Chametz). The culmination of this activity
is the final destruction of the Chametz (actual Bi'ur) during the day
of Erev Pesach. The Torah obligation is to complete the Bi'ur by the
sixth hour (noon, based on a 12 hour day of 60 minutes, Shaos Z'maiyos,
starting from 6 AM). The Rabbis added an extra restriction to complete the
Bi'ur by the end of the fourth hour (continuing with the above example,
10 AM). When the Mishna says that we must be M'vaer before Shabbos,
the Rabbis were telling us that the Rabbinic obligation of Tashbisu
begins Erev Shabbos. (Note that this is strictly a Rabbinic issue, as
from the Torah requirement, Friday is still the thirteenth of Nissan,
and there is no Torah restriction on Chametz on the thirteenth.)

Our custom of Bi'ur Chametz by the end of the fourth hour on Friday
the thirteenth, is not mentioned in the Mishna. The discussion there
simply says that according to Rabbi Meir it must be eradicated before
Shabbos. Bdikas Chametz is done on the night of the thirteenth. But
the final Bi'ur can take place anytime prior to Shabbos. Again this is
a strictly Rabbinic issue of Tashbisu, since the fourteenth is Shabbos,
and Bi'ur is forbidden on Shabbos, there can be no fulfillment of Tashbisu
in such a year. So according to Rabbi Meir the Mitzvas Tashbisu migrates
from the fourteenth to the thirteenth of Nissan.

The Chachamim say that Tashbisu does not migrate. Bdikah can migrate to
the night of the thirteenth, because there is a restriction of searching
with a candle on Shabbos, but the rest remains in its right time. [There
is a Machlokes between Chachamim and Rabbi Yehuda (Mishna Psachim 21a)
as to how to fulfill the act of Tashbisu. According the Chachamim,
Hashbasaso B'chal Davar, the Chametz may be eradicated by any means
possible. According to Rabbi Yehuda it must be consumed through burning.
Some explain that even Rabbi Yehuda's requirement to consume the Chametz
through fire is relaxed in cases where it is impossible to fulfill. For
example if he could not find wood for a fire, he can eradicate it through
other means. The fullest Kiyum Hamitzvah according to Rabbi Yehuda is via
burning. However when he can't burn it for whatever reason, there is still
a Mitzvah to eradicate it B'chal Davar, through any means possible. So
when Erev Pesach is Shabbos, and it is impossible to burn the Chametz,
he can accomplish Bi'ur (even possibly according to Rabbi Yehuda) on
Shabbos through other forms of Bi'ur.] According to the Chachamim the
Mitzvas Tashbisu on Shabbos Erev Pesach ends the same time as on Erev
Pesach of a regular year. One accomplishes Bi'ur through alternate means
that are permissible on Shabbos, for example by crumbling it and casting
it to the wind to disperse.

The Machlokes between Rabbi Meir and the Chachamim is when does the
Mitzvas Tashbisu apply when Erev Pesach is Shabbos. Rabbi Meir says it
applies 24 hours earlier than normal and the Chachamim say the Mitzvas
Tashbisu remains in its appropriate time, on Shabbos. According to the
Chachamim, if one eradicates the Chametz on the thirteenth, he has not
fulfilled the Mitzvas Tashbisu.

Rashi explains that according to Rabbi Meir one sets aside what he
needs to consume on Shabbos and is M'vaer everything else that he is
destined to be M'vaer on Friday. Rashi is based on the earlier Gemara
(13a): "We learned in a Braysa, if the fourteenth [of Nissan] falls on
a Shabbos, we eradicate everything before Shabbos, and we burn Terumah
that is definitely unclean (Tomay), possibly unclean and pure (Tahor)
and we set aside from the clean food for 2 meals in order that we may
eat it till the fourth hour. This is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer the
son of Yehuda of Bartuta, in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua".

Here we find something that is contrary to the normal concept of Bi'ur
Chametz. Bi'ur Chametz is the fulfillment of the Mitzvas Tashbisu. The
very moment that Bi'ur applies, the Chametz becomes prohibited because
of the obligation of Tashbisu. Chametz after Chatzos according to the
Rambam (Chametz U'Matzo 1:8) is forbidden by a direct prohibition (Lav)
of Lo Tochlu Alav Chametz. According to Rabbi Yehuda, this prohibition
applies during the time of Shechitas HaPesach. But the majority of
Rishonim disagree with the Rambam. So from where do they derive the
prohibition of Chametz on Erev Pesach? Tosfos (Pesachim 28b) says that
Tashbisu on Erev Pesach is not just Bi'ur Chametz, but it also prohibits
one from eating Chametz after 6 hours. How can there be Bi'ur Chametz if
it is still permissible to eat it? In all cases where we require Bi'ur,
Srayfa, the item has a definite prohibition, for example Klaay Hakerem,
Chametz on Pesach etc. Nowhere else does the Torah require Bi'ur on
something that has not yet attained prohibited status. Yet the Gemara on
(Psachim 13a) says that we must eradicate everything on the thirteenth
based on a Rabbinic application of Tashbisu that applies to Bi'ur
but not to the Issur Achila. Mitzvas Bi'ur on Erev Pesach is based on
Tashbisu. Also, if I leave the Chametz past 6 hours I violate the Issur
A'say of Tashbisu. Tashbisu is both a Kiyum A'say of Tashbisu of Chametz
and also an Issur A'say. I can fulfill a Mitzvas Tashbisu Byadayim. And
if I leave it past 6 hours on the thirteenth, I violate an Issur A'say
of Bi'ur according to Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar Ish Bartuta. So
there is a fascinating Halacha here that Mitzvas Tashbisu is split,
it applies to the Kiyum A'say but not the Issur A'say, as evidenced by
the fact that according to both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar Ish Bartuta
we retain 2 meals worth of Chametz till the next day. B'achila it only
becomes prohibited on Shabbos but the Mitzvas Bi'ur Bgufo Shel Chayfetz,
the Mitzvas Tashbisu applies a day earlier.

Why does Rabbi Meir disagree with the Chachamim? The Baal Hamaor says
that Rabbi Meir agrees with Rabbi Yehuda, that since he can't do the
Bi'ur on Shabbos he does it a day earlier. (The Rav noted the following
difficulty according to the Baal Hamaor, that even (according to some)
if Rabbi Yehuda agrees that if it's impossible to accomplish Bi'ur via
burning, he may do it through any other possible means, on Shabbos. So
if Rabbi Meir's opinion is that it must be done on Friday, he would
disagree with Rabbi Yehuda. Be that as it may, the Rav continued to
explain the Baal Hamaor.)

The Rambam holds like Rabbi Meir, that we eradicate all Chametz before
Shabbos and he also holds that Hashbasaso Bchal Davar, not like Rabbi
Yehuda. According to the Rambam there is a specific Halacha, unrelated
to Rabbi Yehuda, that Bi'ur Chametz in any form is prohibited on
Shabbos. Such a Halacha is found in Rashi in Baytza, that in general
Terumah Tmaya does not require specifically Srayfa, but he can feed
it to his dog as Hashbasaso Bchal Davar. The Gemara in Shabbos says
that one may be M'vaer Terumah Tmaya in such a way based on She'Lachem
(Shabbos 25a). Why can't he do so on Yom Tov? Rashi explains that there
is a prohibition against any type of Bi'ur on Shabbos, not only via
fire. Tosfos quotes an opinion of Rashi (Baytza 27b, D'H V'Al HaChalah
Shenitmays). Since the Torah forbade burning Terumah Tmaya on Yom Tov,
it also forbade giving it to the dog of a Kohen, because this would
constitute an act of Bi'ur, and the Torah elevated such Bi'ur to make it
similar to Srayfa which is forbidden on Yom Tov (and, the Rav added, if
it is forbidden on Yom Tov, it is definitely forbidden on Shabbos!). This
Rashi is difficult to understand, but we see that in his opinion anything
that requires Bi'ur, Klaay Hakerem, Chametz on Pesach, etc., the Bi'ur
can't be done on Yom Tov or Shabbos even if there is no work involved
(as there is no effort involved in feeding it to the dog) and fire is
not used to destroy it. The Rambam would appear to agree with this as
he holds like Rabbi Meir, that the Bi'ur must take place before Shabbos.

The Baal HaMaor (15b in the Rif pages) explains that Rabbi Meir based his
opinion regarding Chametz on Erev Pesach that coincides with Shabbos on
his agreement with Rabbi Yehuda's opinion that Bi'ur Chametz requires
Srayfa. And since sometimes Erev Pesach falls on Shabbos and Srayfas
Chametz is not Docheh Shabbos, and if some Chametz remains he will be
unable to burn it, therefore they declared the sixth hour of Friday the
thirteenth to be the same as the sixth hour of Erev Pesach in a typical
year. Hence they declared that one must be M'vaer everything before
Shabbos, Terumah or Chulin, as it is possible for him, to eat Matzo on
Shabbos for his meals. The Baal HaMaor disagrees with the Rambam as to
whether Rabbi Meir requires strictly Srayfa. According to the Baal HaMaor,
since Rabbi Meir requires Srayfa, they had to take the thirteenth and
treat it like Erev Pesach of a typical year, where Chametz becomes Assur
after the fourth hour and full Isur applies after 6 hours. Once Chazal
had to accelerate the Mitzvas Tashbisu when Erev Pesach is Shabbos, they
did it completely in all regards. According to Baal HaMaor, Mechira to
a non-Jew must be completed Friday during the fifth hour. According to
Baal HaMaor they back ported the Issur Chamtez 24 hours. According to
the Baal HaMaor, Rabbi Elazar Ish Bartuta disagrees with Rabbi Meir and
agrees with Rabbi Elazar Ben Tzadok.

According to the Baal HaMaor one can eat Matzo instead for Seudas Shabbos
at night without any issue at all. And during the day, he can eat Matzo
until the time that Chametz becomes Assur Bachila (the Baal HaMaor
says till the sixth hour, but the Rav explained that he was referring
to the time of Issur Doraysa but the Baal HaMaor would be Choshesh
for the Mitzvas D'Rabanan to move up the Issur to the fourth hour). In
this way he gets around the problem of the Yerushalmi (Perek 10), that
anyone who eats Matzo on Erev Pesach is akin to Bo Al Arusaso in his
future father in laws house. He proves this from the very comparison
of Matzo to Arusa. The Baal HaMaor says that Matzo becomes Arusa only
when Chametz becomes Assur. The Baal HaMaor explains the opinion of the
Chachamim who say B'Zmano, as they hold that because of the importance
of Hashbasas Se'or, one can crumble and disperse it to the wind as this
does not violate the Issur Bi'ur on Shabbos.

According to the Baal HaMaor, the basic Machlokes between Rabbi Meir
and the Chachamim is whether Bi'ur Chametz is permitted on Shabbos. But
the Baal HaMaor describes a second Machlokes between Rabbi Meir and the
Chachamim: what is Bi'ur Chametz? Does Bi'ur Chametz requires Srayfa or
is it B'Kol Davar? The Rambam also deals with this secondary Machlokes
described by the Baal HaMaor in a different way. According to Rabbi Meir,
who the Rambam paskens like, Bi'ur Chametz is prohibited on Shabbos, no
matter what form of Bi'ur Chametz is used. This is in agreement with the
opinion of Rashi noted earlier. Another difference between Baal HaMaor
and Rambam is according to the Rambam one sets aside 2 meals worth of
Chametz and eats it on Shabbos while the Baal HaMaor says that he eats
Matzo on Shabbos. The Mitzvas Tashbisu is done in half according to
Rambam, the Bi'ur is done on Friday but Tashbisu does not result in any
Issurim. According to Baal HaMaor, Tashbisu is completely done on Friday.

(Someone raised the following question during the Shiur: according to
the Baal HaMaor, Matzo is permitted as long as Chametz is not forbidden,
until the sixth (or fourth) hour on Shabbos. Yet the Baal HaMaor says
that the complete Mitzvas Tashbisu was accelerated by 24 hours, which
presumably includes an Issur Chametz as well. So how may one eat Matzo on
Shabbos, once the prohibition of Chametz based on Tashbisu applies? The
Rav answered that Chametz becoming Assur results in Matzo becoming Assur
(as an Arusah) on Erev Pesach. For example if Chametz became Assur on
Purim Matzo would not become Assur, only on Erev Pesach. In other words,
only on the real Erev Pesach does this linkage occur. So this Issur of
eating Matzo that is connected with the prohibition of Chametz applies
only on the real Erev Pesach, even if circumstances (i.e. the calendar)
requires that the Issur Tashbisu be accelerated one day because of Erev
Pesach coinciding with Shabbos.)

[The Rav commented that all the pamphlets concerning Erev Pesach that
coincides with Shabbos ignored the fundamental Machlokes Rishonim of
when the Mitzvas Tashbisu applies in such a year. Instead they focused
on when to eat the cake at the Taanis Bchorim! They missed the elephant
and focused on the mosquitoes!)

The Ramban in the Milchamos disagrees. He says that Matzo is Assur
all day, not just from the sixth hour on, and he bring proofs from the
Yerushalmi. He explains the concept of Arusah as deriving from the fact
that Bdikas Chametz was already done the night before (on a typical year),
therefore Matzo becomes an Arusah immediately in the morning of Erev
Pesach. (The Rambam also disagrees with the Baal HaMaor and prohibits
eating of Matzo on Erev Pesach all day.)

What is the connection between Bdika and the beginning of the
prohibition of Matzo as an Arusah? The Mattir by Arusah is Nisuin
as well as Kidushin. Kidushin is an Oser, it forbids her to all other
men. Heter L'baala depends not only on Kidushin, but on Nisuin also. (From
some statements of the Rambam it would appear that this is a D'oraysa,
however there are some contradictory statement in the Rambam that require
resolution, but the bottom line is...) that the Issur to the rest of
the world does not grant a Heter for the Baal, he requires Chupa as well.

The Yerushalmi teaches us that Matzo requires Heter, just like Nisuin is
a Mattir. The Mattir is the Mitzvah of Ba'erev Tochlu Matzos. If someone
ate Matzo on the night of Pesach and had intention not to fulfill the
Mitzvah of Matzo he violates the concept of Arusa. It is a Kal Vchomer
that if he inappropriately eats Matzo before Pesach he violates the
concept of Arusa, then how much more so should he be considered to have
violated the concept of Arusa on Pesach night itself, if he eats Matzo
inappropriately! If he eats Matzo Kmitzvasah, then he has a Mattir. With
inappropriate intent, not only does he not fulfill the Mitzvah of Baerev
Tochlu Matzos but he also "violates" the concept that Matzo requires a
Heter and he ate without such a Heter.

How can one eat Matzo during the year? The answer is that when Chametz
is permitted, Matzo is not Matzo, There is no special identity to Matzo
when there is no special prohibition for Chametz. The moment that Chametz
becomes prohibited, Matzo becomes an Arusa. But there is no Nisuin yet,
it becomes a Nesuah with the Kiyum Hamitzva (at night). According to the
Baal HaMaor, there is no difference between eating Matzo on Erev Pesach
before the time that Chametz becomes Assur and eating Matzo on Chanukah:
in neither case is the Matzo considered an Arusah, as long as there is
no Issur Chametz in effect.

The Ramban disagrees. Even though Chametz is not yet prohibited on
Erev Pesach, however there already is a difference between Chametz and
Matzo which derives from the fact that we already did Bdikas Chametz the
night of Erev Pesach (on a typical year). We have already created the
distinction between Matzo and Chametz. After all, the Mitzvas Bdika is to
search for Chametz. Matzo does not become Assur until Erev Pesach. The
night of the Bdika is not called Erev Pesach, Erev Pesach begins in
the morning at sunrise. So at that time Matzo becomes Assur because
there is a concept of Chamtez created the night before through Bdika.
Even though Chametz may still be eaten, since the Kiyum Bi'ur on the
Mitzvas Tashbisu has begun, the special characteristic of Matzo begins
as well. Where the Baal HaMaor requires a full-fledged Issur Chametz to
turn Matzo into an Arusah, the Ramban only requires the Kiyum Bi'ur of
Tashbisu, and the associated Chalos Shem Chametz.

The Rav quoted the Maaseh Rav of the Vilna Gaon, that there is a further
connection between Arusa and Matzo. Just like an Arusa requires the 7
blessings of Nisuin to permit her to her husband, on the night of Pesach
we recite 7 blessings to permit us to eat the Matzo. Because of the
classification of Matzo as Arusa, the Gaon would not uncover the Matzos at
the various points in the Haggadah where many have the tradition to do so,
because in addition to Chupa, Kalah without Bracha (the 7 blessing) is
forbidden to her husband as if she were a Nidah. The seven blessings are:
1) Boreh Pri Hagefen; 2) Kiddush; 3) Shehechyanu; 4) Boray Pri Adamah;
5) Asher Gealanu; 6) Hamotzi Lechem; 7) Al Achilas Matzo. Based on the
Rav's explanation of Arusa, we have a better understanding of this custom
of the Gaon!

The Gemara says (13a) that the Halacha is like Rabbi Eliezer Ish
Bartuta. The Machlokes among the Rishonim is with whom does he agree:
Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok? The Rambam paskens like Rabbi
Meir. The Rif paskens like Rabbi Elazar Bar Tzadok. Rambam holds that
Rabbi Eliezer Ish Bartuta aggrees with Rabbi Meir, and together they are
an opinion of at least two, hence he paskens according to them and against
the Chachamim. The Rambam felt that when Rabbi Eliezer Ish Bartuta said
M'vaarin Hakol Lifnay Hashabos, he was referring to Chulin, just like
Rabbi Meir. The Rif and the Raavad and Rosh held that Rabbi Eliezer Ish
Bartuta agrees with Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok and Chulin is B'zmano on
Shabbos and Terumah is before Shabbos. Since together they form an opinion
of at least two, these Rishonim pasken according to them and against the
Chachamim. The Rif, and those that agree with him, pasken that when Erev
Pesach is Shabbos one must fulfill the Mitzvas Bi'ur on Shabbos.

Rambam (Hilchos Chametz U'Matzo 3:3) "If the fourteenth falls on Shabbos,
we search for the Chametz on the night of Erev Shabbos that is the night
of the thirteenth and we set aside from the Chametz enough to eat until
the fourth hour on the day of Shabbos. He places it in a secure area and
the rest [of the Chametz] he is M'vaer before Shabbos. If some of the
Chametz [that he set aside for Shabbos] remains on the day of Shabbos
after 4 hours, he is M'vatel [nullifies] it and he covers it with a
vessel until after the first days of Yom Tov and then he is M'vaer it".

The Rambam agrees with Rashi that according to Rabbi Eliezer Ish
Bartuta and Rabbi Meir, there is a Mitzvas Tashbisu, yet this Mitzvas
Tashbisu does not create a prohibition against eating Chametz and he
fulfills the other part of Tashbisu, the Kiyum Hamitzvah of Bi'ur, on
Erev Shabbos. This is our custom, as in this regard we pasken like the
Rambam. (see Maggid Mishna.)

We take it as a given that according to Rabbi Meir Bi'ur is prohibited
on Shabbos. But it is possible that to say that Rabbi Meir holds that
it is preferable to do so before Shabbos. One might say that when Rabbi
Meir says that M'vaarin Hakol Lifnay Hashabos means that the Mitzvas
Tashbisu begins on Friday, before Shabbos. However Rabbi Meir does not
say that one MUST be M'vaer before Shabbos, rather one MAY be M'vaer
before Shabbos. If he does not, then he must be M'vaer on Shabbos.
(According to the Baal HaMaor, one could not use this reasoning, as
he holds that Rabbi Meir agrees with Rabbi Yehuda that Bi'ur Chametz
requires burning, which must be done before Shabbos.)

Does the Rambam agree with this possible interpretation of Rabbi Meir,
that M'vaarin Lifnay Hashabos might mean that one could do it on Shabbos
as well? The Rav explained that the Rambam removes all doubt regarding
this when he says if some Chametz remained after 4 hours on Shabbos, he
must cover it and dispose of it after the first day of Yom Tov. Since the
Rambam normally permits Bi'ur of any kind and does not limit it to burning
(like the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda) and yet he prohibits Bi'ur of any kind
on Shabbos, we see that the Rambam's opinion is that according to Rabbi
Meir there is an Issur Bi'ur, of any kind, on Shabbos. Therefore one must
be M'vaer everything before Shabbos, except what he sets aside for eating
on Shabbos itself. Since any sort of Bi'ur is prohibited on Shabbos,
he has no choice but to cover up whatever is left till after the first
day of Yom Tov. (Rambam is the only Rishon who paskens like Rabbi Meir.)

The Rambam agrees with Rashi that Bitul protects against Bal Yayraeh
and Bal Yimatzeh. But also, in Bitul there is a Kiyum Hamitzvah of
Tashbisu. The Rambam says (2:2) "And what is the Hashbosah required by
the Torah? It is that he must be M'vatel it in his heart and think of it
as dirt and impress upon himself that he has no Chametz whatsoever in
his possession...". (Unkelos says that Bi'ur is Bitul.) Such Hashbosah
(of Bitul) can be done on Shabbos as well. But the Mitzvah of Tashbisu of
Bi'ur Bguf Hachafetz, destroying the actual Chametz itself, can't be done
on Shabbos. The advice given to crumble any remaining Chametz on Shabbos
and flush it down the toilet according to the Rambam is forbidden. Any
Chametz that remains, according to the Rambam, must receive Bitul,
then take the Chametz and place it in the garbage. Leaving the Chametz
in the garbage is not a problem, because Bal Yayaraeh and Bal Yimatzeh
is not defined by the location of the Chametz, but by the ownership of
the Chametz, in Dinay Mamonus. Once I renounce ownership of the Chametz
it can remain in my garbage can. Those of the opinion that one may flush
it away do not pasken like Rabbi Meir.

The Rif, Ramban and Rosh disagree and say that Rabbi Eliezer Ish Bartuta
agrees with Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok. If Bi'ur is permitted on Shabbos
why does he disagree with the Chachamim regarding Terumah, why not be
M'vaer Terumah on Shabbos as well? If Bi'ur is prohibited on Shabbos,
then why does he permit Bi'ur of Chulin on Shabbos? Terumah has a more
limited number of potential consumers, only Kohanim. Chulin on the other
hand can be given to all one's friends and neighbors, therefore they
allowed him to keep it till Shabbos. But since there are fewer potential
eaters of Terumah, he must be M'vaer before Shabbos. Rashi says that
it is impossible to hold on to it, Lhashoso E' Efshar (49a). If he will
leave the Terumah he will have nothing to do with it, in other words he
will not even be able to be M'vaer it on Shabbos. Therefore he must be
M'vaer before Shabbos. Rashi (49a) holds that according to Rabbi Eliezer
Bar Tzadok, Bi'ur is prohibited on Shabbos.

The Rav explained Rashi that since the limited audience for Terumah
virtually guarantees that there will be some left over into Pesach,
in order that the Kohen should not be stuck with the Chametz well into
Pesach, we tell him to be M'vaer before Shabbos. From Rashi it appears
that there is an Issur Bi'ur on Shabbos. If there was no Issur Bi'ur
on Shabbos, what risk would there be to allow him to wait till Shabbos
with Terumah also? From Rashi it appears that he would be compelled to
hold on to it because he can't do Bi'ur. Chulin however he can hold
onto because he can always find sufficient people to consume it. The
probabilities are better that he will dispose of it by inviting many
guests to a party. According to Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok, with Terumah
there is no choice: anything that would remain after the fourth hour
on Shabbos would have to be kept until after Yom Tov Rishon. But with
Chulin, he can rely on the greater probability of more people; perhaps
there will be nothing left to be M'vaer. But since he can't do Bi'ur on
Shabbos in either case, if Chulin remains he will have to hold on to it
till after Yom Tov Rishon and burn it then.

Rabbi Meir felt that it is impossible to consume all the Chametz before
Pesach, whether it is Chulin or Terumah. Since Bi'ur on Shabbos is
prohibited, the Mitzvas Hashbosah was moved up by a day. Rabbi Eliezer
Bar Tzadok agrees with Rabbi Meir in the case of Terumah. But in the
case of Chulin, he permits him to wait because there is a better chance
that it will be totally consumed, he has a way to help ensure that there
will be nothing left because guest may come to partake of his Chametz.
But if some Chametz remains, he must wait till after Yom Tov Rishon to
dispose of it, because Bi'ur on Shabbos is prohibited. Therefore according
to the Rambam, according to both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok,
Bi'ur on Shabbos is prohibited, and that is the way he paskens.

We can also learn another Pshat in Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok; that he
holds Bi'ur on Shabbos is permitted, that he agrees with the Chachamim as
far as Bi'ur is concerned. Even if there are no guests we can still be
M'vaer the Chulin on Shabbos, by flushing or through other means. Rashi
holds that by Terumah Tmayah he can feed it to his animal. (Note: see
Rashi Psachim 13a, D'H Thoros Lo Yisrfu, which seems to contradict the
earlier explanation of Rashi's opinion that Bi'ur of any sort, even one
that requires minimal exertion, is prohibited on Shabbos.) The Rambam
disagrees and says that Terumah Tmayah requires actual burning. Since on
Shabbos it is prohibited to burn Terumah Tmayah, they required that all
Terumah be burned before Shabbos. But in reality Bi'ur would be permitted
on Shabbos for regular Chametz, since it does not require actual burning,
but Hashbosah Bchal Davar (only Rashi holds that he can dispose of
Terumah Tmayah in ways other than burning). To fulfill both Kiyumim
of Hashbosas Chametz and Terumah Tmayah they said to be M'vaer before
Shabbos. Therefore all Terumos are to be consumed before Shabbos as Lo
P'lug. Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok holds that Bi'ur is permitted on Shabbos
for Chulin, therefore he can flush it on Shabbos. According to the Rambam,
who paskens like Rabbi Meir, it is definitely prohibited. But according
to the Rishonim who pasken according to Rabbi Eliezer Bar Tzadok, one
can do Bi'ur in this manner on Shabbos.

The Rav said that he did not destroy the remaining Chametz on Shabbos. He
would place it in the garbage. However he cautioned that the Kol
Chamira must be said with great care and Kavana. It should be recited
with both texts Livtal Vleheve Hefker Kafra D'ara (text of the Ree)
and also Livtal Vleheve Kafra D'ara (according to Rashi because if it
is Hefker there is no Tashbisu, because he has to show that Ayno Rotzeh
Bkiyumo, hence it can't be Hefker before he pronounces the Bitul). Every
year Bitul is done after the Bdikah for the Chametz that I did not find,
D'lo Chazitay. It is repeated in the morning at the Srayfa as a Minhag,
but this Minhag is not mentioned in the Gemara. But when Erev Pesach is
Shabbos, the whole protection is received from the Bitul recited on the
morning of Erev Pesach, Shabbos, and it must be a serious declaration. The
Bitul pronouncement must include Chametz that I have seen and that I
have to keep till after Yom Tov (Dchazitay)[because I am prohibited from
disposing of it] as well as Chametz that I have not seen (U'Dlo Chazitay).

Regarding the use of egg matzos: the Rav said that since Rabbi Eliezer
Ish Bartuta says that we leave over 2 meals worth of Chametz for Shabbos,
it is appropriate for us to do this and not use egg matzos. We don't
agree with the Baal HaMaor, therefore we do not use Matzos (of any kind)
on Erev Pesach. The Mitzvas Tashbisu creates a Kiyum of Bi'ur on the
thirteenth but not an Issur Achila, a prohibition against eating the
Chametz until it's rightful Zman Issur, prohibited time. This was the
Minhag of the Rav and his parents and Gedolei Yisrael.

If one holds like the Baal HaMaor that the Issur Chametz begins Friday
after 4 hours, he would have to eat Matzo from Friday on. The problem with
Egg Matzo is as follows. The Gemara says that Matzo that was kneaded with
fruit juice is not called Matzo. Rashi and the Raavad said that one is not
punished with Kares, however the Issur of Chametz Nuksha still applies,
even though it's not Chametz Gamur. (Raavad 5:2 Chametz U'Matzo) The
Rambam considers Matzo kneaded with fruit juices as perfectly acceptable
Matzo, as long as there is no water introduced to the batter. All Rishonim
except for Rashi and the Raavad agree. Rabbeinu Tam is quoted to have
eaten egg matzos on Erev Pesach (Tosfos Pesachim 35b, D'H U'May Payros)
because in his opinion, fruit juice is not even a leavening agent, so
egg matzos are permitted on Pesach as well as Erev Pesach. According to
Rashi and the Raavad one may not eat egg matzos on Pesach because it is
Chametz Nuksha. What about Erev Pesach? The Rama says one should not eat
egg matzos even Erev Pesach, unless there are mitigating health reasons.
For example if one is Mitztaer, uncomfortable eating regular Matzo, he may
eat egg matzos. So in the core Halacha, the Rama paskens against Rashi,
that egg matzos really are permissible (if egg matzos would be Assur
M'Ikar D'Dina, if egg matzos were really prohibited, them the elderly and
ill would not be allowed to eat them either). The Noda B'Yehuda permits
egg matzos on Erev Pesach because on Erev Pesach Chametz Gamur alone
is prohibited, not Chametz Nuksha. This depends on the Machlokes Rashi
and Rabbeinu Tam if Chametz Nuksha is included in Bal Yayraeh and Bal
Yimatzeh and if the Mitzvas Tashbisu applies to it. According to Rashi
there is a Mitzvas Tashbisu on Chametz Nuksha, therefore there is an
Issur Achila. According Rabbeinu Tam, Mitzvas Tashbisu does not apply
to Chametz Nuksha, therefore there is no Issur Achila. Many Achronim
permit egg matzos on Erev Pesach. Minhag Yisrael is not to eat egg matzos.

There is an anomaly, according to the Rambam, regarding egg matzo
that it is permissible to use on Pesach but not Erev Pesach. The Rambam
excludes Matzo that was kneaded with the 4 liquids of wine, oil, milk and
honey. Matzo baked with all other fruit juices are perfectly acceptable
for fulfilling the Mitzvah of Achilas Matzo on Pesach. Therefore what we
call egg matzos, would be acceptable for Matzo Shel Mitzvah on Pesach
night and therefore forbidden on Erev Pesach. The Rav emphasized that
when one reads in the modern Pesach books and literature that egg matzo
is permitted on Erev Pesach, that is according to the other Rishonim,
not the Rambam.

According to the Gaon if one eats egg matzos, one must eat a lot in order
to be Koveah Seuda. Other Achronim (with the exception of the Gaon)
require a smaller amount, based on the requirements of Eruv Techumin,
between 3-4 eggs. (The Rav said that the students of Yeshiva Rambam
experimented and discovered that 3-4 eggs are equal in volume to 2.5
matzos.) If people eat a significant amount of cake they are required to
wash and make a Bracha of Hamotzi, not Borei Minay Mzonos. However once
there is Kvias Seuda as defined by the amount eaten, once must wash and
say Bircas Hamazon. Kvias Seuda is equivalent to between 3-4 eggs, or a
few pieces of cake. Those that want to eat egg matzos on Erev Pesach for
Lechem Mishna must eat a shiur. One who eats a sufficient amount of any
form of Pas Haba B'kisnin that creates Kvias Seuda turns the Pas into
Lechem and requires washing, Hamotzi and Bircas Hamazon. Sponge cake
is excluded, it is not considered Lechem, however pies are considered
Lechem if one eats a sufficient amount. Anything that is Blilaso Avah,
if it is kneaded into a thick texture it is considered Pas and if a
sufficient amount is eaten then one must treat it like bread.

Regarding the Halacha that Bi'Ur Chametz on Shabbos is forbidden, the Rav
noted an Agadadic/Kabbalistic reason that the Bi'ur should not be done on
Shabbos. It is a given that there is evil on this world. The Torah says in
Breishis that Hashem created light and Hashem saw that the light was good,
which implies that the darkness is bad, essentially the creation of good
and evil. At the time of creation, Hashem chose not to eradicate darkness
from the world. Chazal say that Hashem hid the original light created
at Maasei Breishis till the days of Moshiach, when complete and total
light, without darkness, will reign. The Gemara (Makos 13a, Sukka 53a,
Yerushalmi Sanhedrin Perek 10) says that when David dug the foundations
for the Beis Hamikdash, he dug deep enough to find a piece of pottery,
Atzitz, that was there according to some from the time of creation and
according to others from the time of Maamad Har Sinai. David wanted to
take it. The Atzitz warned David not to remove it, because it has been
there all these years preventing the abyss beneath it from rising up and
flooding the world. David took it anyway and when the waters threatened
to engulf the world, Achitofel advised him to write the name of Hashem on
a stone and throw it into the abyss, and the stone settled in the opening
and the world was saved. We see from here that Hashem left behind within
His creation certain abysses into which man may fall. Man's wickedness
can break open the protective coverings from these dangerous places and
the resulting evil can consume the entire world.

Hashem created good and evil, He separated between good and evil but
did not eradicate evil from the world, even though it says that Hashem
saw all that He did and it was very good, Tov M'od. When the torah tells
us that Hashem rested on the seventh day it is referring to Mizmor Shir
Lyom Hashabos, to Yom Shekulo Shabbos Umenucha Lchayei Haolam Habo. The
Rav said in the name of his father, that when the Levites would sing
the daily Hymn on Shabbos they would say L'Yom Shekulo Shabbos Umenucha
Lchayei Haolam Habo. The true Shabbos is to come in the eschatological
age, when evil will be eradicated and U'macha Hashem Dimah M'Al Kal Panim.

How will evil disappear? Judaism suggests two approaches. The first is a
war against evil, to simply eradicate and destroy it. This is symbolized
by Milchama L'Hashem B'Amalek M'Dor Dor, there is an ongoing battle
against the evil forces in the world and in nature, as represented by
Amalek. When the Torah commands us to heal the sick, V'Rapo Y'Rapeh,
it is telling us that illness is a bad thing and man should try his
utmost to eradicate it from the world. According to Kabbalah, Amalek
represents the generations of Tohu V'Vohu, of dark evil in the world. We
find many times that we are commanded to eradicate the evil from among
us, U'Bearta Hara M'Kirbecha, the Torah was very strict with murderers
an sinners. The Torah warns us against becoming pacifists when dealing
with those that commit grave sins (e.g. murderers) and commands us not
to look the other way. On the other hand the Torah tells us that the
evil can be overwhelmed by good and transformed into good through the
power of Teshuva, repentance. No matter how deeply entrenched in sin a
Jew may be, he has the possibility of doing Teshuva to correct the evil
within him and elevate himself back to a state of complete good.

There are people that have become so infected by evil that it is no longer
possible to separate them from the evil. The Rambam and the Ramban say
that it is possible for man to sink to such a level that he loses his
free will, Bchira Chofshis, to change his ways and return to Hashem. At
that point he personifies evil, his personality and the evil within it
are indistinguishable. He becomes an Amalek. If he has not yet reached
that stage, the evil can be elevated and Teshuva is possible.

Shabbos and Pesach represent these two approaches to the eradication of
evil. Pesach is Hashbosas Hara, an active campaign to eradicate evil. The
Rambam in the well known first letter (of the Igeres HaRambam) says that
each man has his own internal Paroh that he needs to eradicate. Every man
can remove his internal Paroh. The removal from the standpoint of Pesach
manifests in a physical immolation of the evil within. It requires great
efforts. Shabbos, on the other hand, represents Teshuva. Chazal say that
when Adam realized the great power of Teshuva, after Kayin told him that
he was forgiven, he immediately said Mizmor Shir Lyom Hashabbos. What is
the connection between Kayin's judgment and Adam's reaction of saying the
psalm? It is that Shabbos represents the idea that in the eschatological
age there will be no need to eradicate evil. It will transform into
good through Teshuva, without a battle. Therefore when Shabbos is Erev
Pesach, there is no Bi'ur Chametz, no physical eradication of Chametz,
evil, but rather an absorption and transformation of evil into good,
as symbolized by Shabbos and Teshuva.
Copyright 2001, Josh Rapps and Israel Rivkin, Edison, NJ. Permission
to reprint this Shiur, with this  notice, is granted.

Go to top.


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]

< Previous Next >