Showing posts with label pesach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pesach. Show all posts

Monday, November 26, 2007

Thirty Days Before

The Gemora (Kesuvos 86a) cites a braisa: When does one receive forty lashes for violating a Biblical law? That is only in regard to a negative commandment; however, with respect to a positive commandment, for example – if we tell someone, “Make a sukkah” and he refuses, or we tell him, “Make a lulav,” and he refuses, we beat him until his soul departs.

The question is asked: At what time are we referring to? If this is occurring before Sukkos, why do we beat him; he could say that he has plenty of time to prepare for the mitzvah? If it is already Sukkos, what benefit will there be from the beating; he cannot construct a sukkah now anyway?

Rav Nosson Gishtetner explains that the Gemora is referring to thirty days before Sukkos. From that time and on, there is an obligation for one to build a sukkah; and if he refuses, we can beat him until his soul departs.

The Chidushei HaRim writes that this is true regarding all mitzvos. Thirty days prior to the time a mitzvah is supposed to be performed, one has an obligation to begin involving himself with the mitzvah; it is incumbent upon him to properly prepare himself from that time on in order to fulfill the mitzvah. To such an extent that one is obligated to worry about the poor people in his city thirty days prior to Pesach and to investigate and see if they have sufficient enough funds for all the mitzvos on Pesach.

Read more!

Monday, August 27, 2007

JUSTIFYING A CUSTOM REGARDING GEBROCHTS

Shoel U’meishiv (I: 1:130) issues a novel ruling based on our Gemora.

The Gemora cites the opinion of Rabbi Chananya ben Akavya, who maintains that when a decree was impelled because of a certain incident, it is limited to the same situation as the original incident.

The Shoel U’meishiv says: The obligation of eating matzah on Pesach, which is lechem oni, poor man’s bread (water and flour) is only on the first night of Pesach and not any other nights or days, including the second night. Eating lechem oni is because the Jewish people baked the dough before it had a chance to rise on the way out of Egypt. Since the mitzvah is based upon that incident and that occurred on the night of the fifteenth of Nissan, that is the only night that we have this obligation.

We know when the night of the fifteenth is, and we are not uncertain regarding the days of the new month. The Chachamim instituted that we must observe two days of Yom Tov since that it what they did in the times of the Beis Hamikdosh. Accordingly, we must fulfill all mitzvos on the second night, as well.

However, that is only regarding mitzvos that if we wouldn’t fulfill, it would be degrading for the Yom Tov. We are required to eat matzah and marror since otherwise, it would be apparent that we are not recognizing this night as a Yom Tov; however, matzah which is not lechem oni would not degrade the Yom Tov at all and therefore it would not be necessary. He cites a Beis Yosef as proof to this.

I heard that this could be the justification for the custom of not eating gebrochts only on the first night of Pesach. If the reason for not eating gebrochts on Pesach is because there is a concern that it might result in chametz, there is no distinction between the first night and all the other nights; but if the reason is based on lechem oni, there can be logic to say that it is only applicable on the first night.

Read more!

Friday, July 13, 2007

CIRCUMCISION QUESTIONS - Yevamos 71 - Daf Yomi

*** The Gemora states: The words in the verse teach us that a circumcised Arab and a circumcised Gibeonite are included in the prohibition against eating from the Pesach offering.

The Gemora asks: But aren’t these people considered circumcised? We learned in a Mishna: If one takes a vow that he will not derive any pleasure from areilim (uncircumcised people), he is permitted to derive pleasure from uncircumcised Jews, but he is prohibited from deriving pleasure from a circumcised idolater. If one takes a vow that he will not derive any pleasure from mulim (circumcised people), he is permitted to derive pleasure from circumcised idolaters, but he is prohibited from deriving pleasure from an uncircumcised Jew. (It is evident that a circumcised idolater is regarded as uncircumcised.)

What is the comparison between the two cases? Perhaps it can be said that regarding vows, the halacha is that we interpret his words based on the vernacular, and an idolater is described as being uncircumcised even though they in fact are circumcised.

*** Rabbi Eliezer maintains that a convert who circumcised, but did not immerse himself yet in a mikvah is considered a full-fledged Jew; and he maintains that a child who born circumcised does not need covenantal blood to flow from him.

The Rama rules that if one circumcises a child at night, he is required to cause covenantal blood to flow from him. He also rules that if one circumcises a child before he is eight days old, he is not required to cause covenantal blood to flow from him.

What is the difference between the two cases?

*** Rava explained the braisa (the father was not considered negligent for not circumcising his son at the time of the slaughtering of the korban Pesach, but he is negligent for not circumcising him at the time of the eating) to be referring to a case where the father and mother of the child were released from prison after their korban was slaughtered. (An agent slaughtered the korban for them, but the circumcision of their child is incumbent on them to perform.)

Rashi explains that the mitzvah of circumcision rests on the father and the mother.

Doesn’t the Gemora in Kiddushin state that a woman is exempt from circumcising her son based on a verse in the Torah?

Why can’t the father appoint an agent to circumcise his son for him?

Read more!

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

IS THE TORAH WRITTEN FOR IDOLATERS? - Yevamos 70 - Daf Yomi

The Gemora concludes that the words “toshav v’sachir” mentioned in respect to the Pesach offering are extra. What does “toshav v’sachir” mean when it is written here? It cannot be referring to the two types of Jewish servants (a Jewish servant who is acquired for an acquisition of years, and a Jewish servant who is acquired as an everlasting acquisition) because for what reason should they be exempt from eating the Pesach offering? We have previously established that they cannot eat terumah because their master, the Kohen, has not acquired them as a “monetary acquisition.” They are obviously included in the obligation of bringing and eating a Pesach offering.

It is evident that the words are extra for the purpose of teaching us the gezeirah shavah (to teach us that n uncircumcised person is forbidden to eat terumah), and it cannot be refuted.

Tosfos asks: How can the Torah make a false statement (a toshev and sachir may not eat the Korban Pesach) just for the purpose of teaching a gezeirah shavah?

Tosfos answers: The Torah is referring to non-Jewish workers. Although it is unnecessary (because there is another verse excluding non-Jews from the korban Pesach), at least it is halachically correct. Tosfos concludes that there actually is a Mechilta that expounds the verse in this manner.

The Rambam in Hilchos Korban Pesach (9:7) rules: One is prohibited to give an idolater to eat from the Pesach offering. One who does provide the idolater with meat from the Pesach has violated a negative precept in the Torah.

The Kesef Mishna asks: The Torah does not forbid a Jew from giving the idolater from the Pesach offering; the Torah states: A toshav and a sachir may not eat of it.

He answers: It is obvious that the Torah is not referring to the idolater himself because an idolater is not concerned for that which is written in the Torah. We are compelled to understand the verse to be referring to the Jew. He is forbidden from giving meat from the Pesach to an idolater. Tosfos HaRosh comments similarly on our Gemora.

Rabbi Chaim Braun cites a dissenting opinion: The Yereim in mitzvah 410 states: The Holy One, blessed is He commanded an idolater against partaking in the Pesach offering that his master has slaughtered.

Minchas Chinuch in mitzvah 14 asks on the Rambam from the Gemora Pesachim (3b) which states the following: A gentile would always go up to Jerusalem and eat the Pesach offering. The gentile once told Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira that although it is written in the Torah that strangers or an uncircumcised male cannot eat from the Pesach offering, he had eaten from the best meat of the Pesach offering. Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira told the gentile to ask for the fat tail of the animal. When the gentile asked for the fat tail, he was told that the fat tail is burned on the mizbeach and was not eaten. When the gentile informed them that Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira had instructed him to make this request, they investigated and discovered that he was a gentile and they had him killed. They sent the following message to Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira: “Peace upon you, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira, for you are in Netzivin but your net is spread in Jerusalem.” The Minchas Chinuch asks: Why did they kill him; the prohibition is not written for the gentile; it is written for the Jew. What did the gentile do wrong that he was deserving to be killed?

Read more!

Friday, May 04, 2007

Daf Yomi - Chagigah 26 - LINGERING TASTE

The Gemora states: The Kohanim would lift the Table and show the festival pilgrims the showbread. They would tell them: “See how beloved you are before the Omnipresent; the bread is just as hot and fresh now (at the time of removal from the Table) as it was when it was arranged.” Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: There was a great miracle that transpired with the showbread. The showbread was placed on the Table on Shabbos, and it was subsequently removed the following Shabbos. For the bread to remain fresh in such a state was an open miracle.

There were many miracles that transpired in the Beis HaMikdosh; why was this the miracle chosen to show the pilgrims?

The Sfas Emes answers: The pilgrims attained extremely high levels of spirituality when they visited the Beis HaMikdosh during the festival. They felt the Shechina in close proximity. They observed the Kohanim performing the sacrificial offerings and were uplifted.

We wanted to ensure that the heights that they reached during the festival would not be lost and it was for this reason that the miracle regarding the showbread was displayed to them. The bread was placed on the Table the Shabbos before, but it can still remain hot and fresh the following week.

This also explains why we answer the wise son by the seder night; one is forbidden to eat anything after the eating of the afikoman. The discussions of emunah and bitachon, thanking HaShem for redeeming us and becoming the Chosen Nation brings us to spiritual heights that we never achieved before. We tell the wise son, don’t let this slip away. The taste of the matzah should linger in your mouth all throughout the night, demonstrating that it is our wish that the levels of sanctity and purity that have been reached should not be cast away.

Read more!

Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Daf Yomi - Chagigah 23 - JUSTIFYING A CUSTOM REGARDING GEBROCHTS

Shoel U’meishiv (I: 1:130) issues a novel ruling based on our Gemora.

The Mishna had stated: One may carry terumah while he is carrying a midras (objects that became tamei when a zav, zavah or niddah place their weight on them – they are classified as an av hatumah and have the ability to contaminate people or utensils), but one may not carry kodesh while carrying a midras.

The Gemora asks: What is the reasoning for this prohibition?

Rav Yehudah says in the name of Shmuel: There was once an incident where a person was transporting a barrel of consecrated wine from one place to another and a strap from his sandal (which was tamei through midras) broke off, and he took it and placed it on the top of the barrel and it fell into the airspace of the barrel, and rendered the barrel and the consecrated wine tamei. It was at that time that they said: One may carry terumah while he is carrying a midras, but one may not carry kodesh while carrying a midras.

The Gemora asks: If so, they should have decreed regarding terumah, as well?

The Gemora answers: This Mishna is following the opinion of Rabbi Chananya ben Akavya, who maintains that when a decree was impelled because of a certain incident, it is limited to the same situation as the original incident, and since it occurred by kodesh, the decree was issued only in regards to kodesh and not to terumah.

The Shoel U’meishiv says: The obligation of eating matzah on Pesach, which is lechem oni, poor man’s bread (water and flour) is only on the first night of Pesach and not any other nights or days, including the second night. Eating lechem oni is because the Jewish people baked the dough before it had a chance to rise on the way out of Egypt. Since the mitzvah is based upon that incident and that occurred on the night of the fifteenth of Nissan, that is the only night that we have this obligation.

We know when the night of the fifteenth is, and we are not uncertain regarding the days of the new month. The Chachamim instituted that we must observe two days of Yom Tov since that it what they did in the times of the Beis Hamikdosh. Accordingly, we must fulfill all mitzvos on the second night, as well.

However, that is only regarding mitzvos that if we wouldn’t fulfill, it would be degrading for the Yom Tov. We are required to eat matzah and marror since otherwise, it would be apparent that we are not recognizing this night as a Yom Tov; however, matzah which is not lechem oni would not degrade the Yom Tov at all and therefore it would not be necessary. He cites a Beis Yosef as proof to this.

I heard that this could be the justification for the custom of not eating gebrochts only on the first night of Pesach. If the reason for not eating gebrochts on Pesach is because there is a concern that it might result in chametz, there is no distinction between the first night and all the other nights; but if the reason is based on lechem oni, there can be logic to say that it is only applicable on the first night.

Read more!

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Daf Yomi - Chagigah 17 - RABBINIC MITZVAH OF SEFIRAS HAOMER

Tosfos states that after the counting of the omer, one should say the following tefillah: Is should be the will of Hashem that the Beis Hamikdosh should be rebuilt. This is recited because the mitzvah nowadays is rabbinic and serves to commemorate the biblical mitzvah in the times when the Beis Hamikdosh was in existence.

Tosfos asks: What is the difference between the mitzva of sefiras haomer and the mitzvos of sounding the shofar and taking a lulav which is also only rabbinic nowadays and this additional tefillah is not recited?

He answers: The mitzvah of sefiras haomer is merely a reminder of the Beis Hamikdosh and the other mitzvos involve an action. The distinction is extremely ambiguous and the commentators struggle to explain the difference.

The Gemora in Menochos (66a) says: Ameimar would count days and not weeks. He said: The mitzvah of counting the omer is only to commemorate the Beis Hamikdosh.

The Brisker Rov explains: The rabbinic mitzvah of sefiras haomer is different that other rabbinic mitzvos. A regular rabbinic mitzvah, such as eating marror on Pesach, is the identical mitzvah nowadays as was in the times of the Beis Hamikdosh. The only difference is that then it was biblical and now it is only rabbinic. Sefiras haomer is different. The purpose of the mitzvah mitzva of counting the omer nowadays was not for the counting, but rather it was established to commemorate the Beis Hamikdosh. The mitzvah nowadays is not the same mitzvah as it was then. This is why Ameimar maintains that in the times of the Beis Hamikdosh, they counted days and weeks and nowadays, we only count the days.

According to this, he explains the Ba’al Hamaor at the end of Pesachim. The Ba’al Hamaor says that we do not recite a shehechiyonu on sefiras haomer like we do by other mitzvos because it is only a mitzvah of remembering the Beis Hamikdosh. Shehechiyonu is recited at a time of joy and it would not be appropriate to recite it when we are recalling the tragedy of the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh and the present exile. By other rabbinical mitzvos, a shehechiyonu is recited because the purpose of the mitzvah was for the sake of the mitzvah and not to remind us of the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh.

This is the explanation of Tosfos. The special tefillah of requesting the building of the Beis Hamikdosh is exclusively reserved for the mitzvah of sefiras haomer, which was only instituted to commemorate the Beis Hamikdosh.

Read more!

Thursday, April 05, 2007

SEIZE THE MOMENT

We recite in the Haggadah: The wicked one, what does he say? "What is this service to you?!" He says 'to you', but not to him! By thus excluding himself from the community he has denied that which is fundamental. You, therefore, must blunt his teeth and say to him: "'It is because of this that G-d did for me when I left Egypt';'for me' — but not for him! If he had been there, he would not have been redeemed!"

The commentators ask: How are we so certain that he would not have been redeemed? Weren't there evil people in Egypt that were redeemed; the most famous being Dasan and Aviram?

We mention in the Haggadah: Had the Holy One Blessed Be He not have taken our ancestors out of Egypt, we and our sons and our grandchildren would still be subjugated to Pharaoh in Egypt. The commentaries question as to how we can make such an assertion. Surely the Jewish people would have left Egypt sometime in the future? Perhaps they may have been released? Or eventually the Egyptian empire would collapse or be overthrown?

The Shulchan Aruch writes that one should put his best and most ornate vessels on the table for the Seder. The Maharil had expensive ornamental vessels that he had accepted as collateral from the non-Jews to whom he lent money. He kept these vessels in storage for most of the year. For the Seder night, though, he would set them up in the dining area so as to make the Seder table appear extremely nice.

Most commentators explain the Maharil only to mean that the table was set with these utensils; they could not use them since that would be regarded as stealing.

The Chasam Sofer, however, offers a novel approach. When it came time for the Jews to depart from Egypt, they were commanded to ask their Egyptian neighbors for utensils of silver and gold, in fulfillment of Hashem's promise to Avraham Avinu many years earlier - that his descendants would leave Egypt with great wealth. the Chasam Sofer cites the words of Chazal that the Egyptians offered them more than they asked for. Why was this? It is well known that eating with utensils from a non-Jew that were not properly immersed in a ritual bath can result in grave danger and causes impurity to the one who eats from food cooked with these utensils. The Jews could not immerse the utensils that they borrowed from the Egyptians because they did not belong to them. The angel appointed on the Egyptians knew this and intended that the Jews should use these utensils and become spiritually impure. The abundance of sanctity that Hashem poured on the Jews on the night they departed from Egypt nullified the impurities contained in those utensils and they were able to use them without endangering themselves.

This level of sanctity returns every year on the night of the Seder. The intense desires displayed in the telling over of the exodus from Egypt accomplishes that no impurity can effect us and it is therefore permitted to set up the Seder table with the utensils from the non-Jews and even use them without any fear regarding the impurities contained in those utensils.

Yaakov said to his father, "I am Esav, your first-born; I have done as you have told me." Rashi explains: Yaakov did not lie; rather, he said I am who I am, Esav is your first-born. The Chasam Sofer states that even that explanation is inconsistent with what Yaakov Avinu stood for. He was the pillar of truth; how could he utter words that would appear to be an outright lie? He answers: It was only because of the influence he received from wearing the garments of Esav. One who dresses like a non-Jew talks like one,as well. It was only because that this occurred on the night of Pesach, the sanctity of that night protected Yaakov, and he was able to express himself in a manner that could be interpreted as the truth and because of that, he was able to receive the Blessings from his father Yitzchak.

(One should be extremely careful in regards to the clothing that he or she wears. Clothes that are considered 'goyishe' clothes should not be worn. Besides the fact that the halacha mandates that they are forbidden to wear, one will become effected by those clothes; he will begin to speak like a goy, think like a goy and eventually act like one too. Clothes that are against halacha can be regarded as clothes of a non-Jew.)

It is written [14:3]: Pharoah will say to the Children of Israel: they are wandering in the land and the desert closed in on them. Rashi explains that it means that he will say it about them because he could not possibly say it to them since they already left. Yonasan ben Uziel interprets this passage literally, explaining that Pharoah will tell Dasan and Aviram, who had remained in Egypt, that their fellow Israelites are lost. Dasan and Aviram did not leave together with the rest of the Jewish people. They stayed behind according to this interpretation.

Dasan and Aviram are a testimony to what would happen if the Jewish people would not have left at that precise moment. When Dasan and Aviram left soon afterwards, they witnessed the splitting of the sea, the drowning of the Egyptians, the giving of the Torah and many other miracles in the Wilderness. How could they not believe in Hashem and in Moshe, His servant? How could they have remained in such a wicked state? The answer is because once they sunk to the fiftieth level of impurity, there was no climbing out of that. Witnessing all the miracles could not have any effect on them. They were not capable of becoming inspired through the receiving of the Torah.

The Jewish people who did leave Egypt at that time merited the special sanctity of that night. Hashem instilled in them an abundance of sanctity in order to overcome their lack of spirituality and this enabled them to become inspired when witnessing the splitting of the sea and eventually prepared them for the ultimate prize, the receiving of the Torah.

This is what the Haggadah is informing us and this is what we tell the wicked son. If he would have been in Egypt, he would not have been redeemed together with the rest of the Jewish people. That would result in his sinking to the fiftieth level of tumah, a state which one cannot climb out of.

The lesson to us is a simple one: Seize the moment! Become inspired before it is too late.

Read more!

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Daf Yomi - Rosh Hashana 28 - Eating Matzah Without Reclining

The Gemora state that if the Persians forced someone to eat matzah, he has fulfilled his obligation of eating Matzah on Pesach.

Rav Shach asks that the person should not be considered as if he discharged his obligation since he ate the matzah without reclining and the halacha is that one who eats matzah without leaning has not fulfilled his mitzvah. He continues that even if he did recline it should not be regarded as leaning because reclining under duress being forced to eat) is the exact opposite of freedom and the sole purpose of the obligation to recline is in order to indicate freedom.

Rav Elyashiv shlita, in his Haggadah shel Pesach answers that a person that has the ability to recline and doesn’t has not fulfilled his obligation of eating matzah while leaning since he is lacking in the mitzvah of showing freedom; however someone who cannot recline is not regarded as being deficient in the mitzvah of leaning. A student by his Rebbe or a kohen in the Temple Courtyard fulfills the mitzvah of eating matzah even though they can not recline.

Reb Dovid Solovetchik shilta answers that the case is speaking about where the person did recline and the action of leaning is sufficient for one to fulfill the mitzvah even though the person is not feeling freedom.

Read more!

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Daf Yomi - Beitza 2 - Common Link

The Mishna cites various disputes between Bais Shammai and Bais Hillel.

Regarding an egg that was laid on Yom Tov, Bais Shammai rules that one can eat it on Yom Tov, whereas Bais Hillel maintains that it is forbidden to eat it on Yom Tov. Bais Shammai maintains that one is in violation of seeing chametz on Pesach when he sees chametz the size of a large date and Bais Hillel maintains that one will be liable even if he sees chametz that is the size of an olive. Bais Shammai maintains that if one slaughtered a deer or a bird on Yom Tov, he is allowed to dig with a shovel in order to obtain dirt which is necessary to fulfill the mitzvah of covering the blood of a slaughtered bird or wild animal. Bais Hillel, however, maintains that one should only slaughter on Yom Tov if he has prepared dirt prior to Yom Tov. Rashi and Tosfos both point out that these three disputes regarding Yom Tov have a common theme and that is that Bais Shammai rules leniently and Bais Hillel rules stringently.

The Shita Mikubetzes writes that this Tanna was referring specifically to the festival of Pesach and for this reason he cites a dispute regarding chametz on Pesach.

The Chasam Sofer explains that the discussion in the Gemara regarding the measurement of chametz, besides pertaining to the prohibition of seeing chametz on Pesach, is also relevant to the halachos pertaining to Yom Tov. If one would find chametz on the seventh day of Pesach that is less than the size of a large date, according to Bais Shammai he would not be required to destroy it on Yom Tov because it is less than the required amount of chametz that one would need to see in order to violate the prohibition of seeing chametz on Pesach. According to Bais Hillel, however, he would be obligated to destroy the chametz on Yom Tov.

Read more!