Food for Thought

KOF-K Pesach Articles INSIDE:

Apple of your Charoses Page 3

* Tooth or Consequences Page 10

* The Four Cups of Wine Page 16

* Kitniyos Page 20

Vaad Halacha

KOF-K

Rav Ahron Felder, shlita Rav Shlomo Gissinger, shlita Rav Shmuel Meir Katz, shlita

Kosher Supervision Vaad L’Mishmeres Kashrus

KAsHrus & HAlAcHA sHiur liBrAry

President

Free Downloads

Rabbi H. Zecharia Senter

Supervision Coordinator Rabbi Yehuda Rosenbaum

Executive Administrator

on a wide variety of topics

Rabbi Daniel Senter

Coordinator of Halachic Research Rabbi Ari Senter

Kashrus Administrators: Rabbi Michoel Brukman

> Bedikas Tolaim > Bishul Akum > Bitul > Kashering > Microwaves > Parshas Hashavua > Tevilas Keilim > and many other topics

Far East Division

Rabbi Noam Goldberg Rabbi Pinchus Juravel Flavor and Chemical Division

Rabbi Moshe Dovid Lebovits Rabbi Mordechai Levin Rabbi Etan Mayo Rabbi Avrohom Ossey

For articles and audio shiurim visit us at

Rabbi Moshe Reich

Rabbi Yosef Szachtel

Food Service Coordinator

Shiurim and articles by members of the Kof-K Bais Din and Rabbinic Staff

www.kof-k.org

For tapes and cDs call our office 201-837-0500 ext. 135

Rabbi Yosef Abecasis

Regional Administrators: Rabbi Yeshaya Eichenblatt Rabbi Etzion Genauer Rabbi Sholom Gurewicz KOF-K Kosher Supervision 201 The Plaza, Teaneck, NJ 07666 (201) 837-0500, Fax (201) 837-0126

KOF-K Food For Thought Editors Rabbi M. D. Lebovits Mrs. D. Reichel Mrs. Y. Zidele

Graphic design by:

Kof-K Connection Technical Support: (201) 837-0500 x2 www.kof-k.org

SRULY PERL • 845.694.7186

dynagrafik 845-352-1266

topics include

Shiur given at the KOF-K by

Rabbi Ari Senter

Coordinator of Halachic Research

Grated apples, walnuts and cinnamon – or is it dates, almonds and ginger? The recipe may vary, but any way you slice it, charoses is an integral part of the Seder table and even earns its honorary spot on the Seder plate.

But this delicacy, which we dip the marror into, reluctantly shaking off the excess, is not mentioned even once in the Chumash. The posuk1 commands us, “One should eat it (the Korban Pesach) along with matzohs and marror” – but not a hint about charoses! What is the status of charoses in halacha and what is its unique function at the Seder table?

Mitzvah or Not? The Mishna in Pesachim2 describing the order of the Seder states: “They bring before him matzah, chazeres and charoses3… even though charoses is not a mitzvah.” As we see, in the opinion of Tanna Kama, there is no mitzvah to have charoses. The Mishna immediately follows, however, with the conflicting opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Tzadok, who states unequivocally, “Mitzvah!” – Charoses is a mitzvah.4 If, as Tanna Kama maintains, there is no mitzvah to eat charoses, the obvious question arises – why then are we told to bring charoses to the Seder table? The Mishna certainly is not giving its culinary recommendations for the evening’s menu!

The Gemara5 offers a number of answers to this question. Rav Ami says that the reason we eat charoses is “Mi’shum kafa” – because of the “kafa.”6 And what is kafa? Rashi7 and Tosafos8 have differing interpretations for this word. Rashi – and Rashbam9 as

1. Shemos 12:8.

2. 114a.

3. Some opine that the word charoses comes from the word cheres (Birchei Yosef O.C. 473:11). Others have different sources for this (Refer to Rashi Meseches Pesachim 30b “bais”. Also refer to Machzor Vitri 50, Rokeach 283, Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 473:17, Taamei Haminhagim 516, Lekutei Maharich 3:page:530, Vagayid Moshe 4:1).

4. Refer to Meseches Pesachim 116a.

5. Meseches Pesachim 116a.

6. The poskim discuss why we are only concerned for “kafa” on the night of Pesach and not during the entire year when eating marror (Refer to Rosh Meseches Pesachim 10:25, Shibuley Haleket 218, Vayagid Moshe 25:15, Mikroei Kodesh Pesach 2:50:2, Halichos Shlomo Moadim 9:footnote 318, Halacha Shel Pesach 2:11:5:footnote 260 in great depth. See Haseder Ha’aruch 1:91:4 in depth on this.

7. Meseches Pesachim 115b “tzorech”, Rashbam “tzorech”.

8. Meseches Pesachim 115b “kafa”.

9. Meseches Pesachim ibid “tzorech”.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

3

well – say that kafa refers to the marror’s bitter, almost poisonous seraf – resin. If eaten unaccompanied, the marror can make the eater ill. The purpose of the charoses – according to Rashi – is a very practical one: to take the edge off the marror’s sting, for health reasons.10

Debugging Purposes Tosafos11 takes a different approach. He maintains that the kafa is a kind of worm which is somehow countered by the charoses.12 We will note that the language of the Gemara at first implies that the marror has to be completely submerged in the charoses. Afterwards, the Gemara13 states that total immersion is not necessary, because the pungent smell of the charoses alone is strong enough to serve as an antidote for the kafa – neutralizing the sharpness, according to Rashi, or killing the worm, according to Tosafos.

That explanation is fine for Rashi’s poison, but how does it help us in dealing with the worm? In halacha, a dead worm is just as prohibited for consumption as a live worm! So, if the worm is present, and the charoses finishes it off but leaves it in place, what have we accomplished?

This question precisely is asked by Tosafos,14 who points out the seemingly circular logic involved: If there is a worm in the marror, and the charoses kills it, how can we eat the infested marror? We have to check the marror to permit eating! But if we are going to check it anyway, why do we need charoses?

Tosafos resolves this question by suggesting that the problem of this worm exists only in a minority of the vegetables used for marror.15 In matters of halacha, the Torah says that we follow the majority – i.e., we can rely on the fact that most marror is not infested by the kafa, and eat the item without checking. However, in matters of sakana – risk of physical endangerment – the Torah does not allow us to rely on a simple majority; the threshold of acceptable risk is much higher. Therefore, the charoses must be used to kill the kafa – to protect against the potential danger.

10. Refer to Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 8:6, Tur 475, Shulchan Aruch 475:1, Levush 471:2, 475:2, Be’er Heitiv 475:5, Taamei Haminhagim 515, Mishnah Berurah 473:19, 475:13, Aruch Hashulchan 475:6.

11. Meseches Pesachim 115b “kafa”.

12. Taz 475:4, Shulchan Aruch Harav 475:11.

13. Meseches Pesachim 115b.

14. Meseches Pesachim 115b “kafa”.

15. As an aside, it is interesting to point out that Tosafos (Meseches Pesachim 115b “kafa”) speaks in black and white terms of “majority” or “minority” regarding the need to check marror for infestation. Practically, halacha deals in different terms altogether, disregarding a simple “minority” as a valid criterion to permit consumption without checking, and focusing on whether the infestation is mi’ut hamatzui (See Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 84:8, Gr’a 22.

Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D 1:35, Bedikas Hamozon K’halacha page 153) commonly found in the minority of such products – or miut she’eyno matzui – found only rarely in the minority of these products.

However, even modern day pos’kim do not rely on this criterion across the board. The question was asked whether a new suit that was bought at the last minute for an upcoming Bar Mitzvah occasion needed to be checked for sha’atnez before use. Since the overwhelming majority of suits of this make do not contain sha’atnez, one would assume, following the rule of majority, or even the stricter rule of mi’ut ha’matzui, that the suit would not need to be checked at all.

Surprisingly, Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:72) addresses this issue in a teshuvah he wrote regarding the need to check suits from a generally clean line for sha’atnez. He rules that even though mi’dina, according to the strict requirement of halacha, checking is unnecessary, one nevertheless should submit the suit for checking mi’min’hag – since that is the custom. Even though this seems to defy the principal that we are not concerned abut a mi’ut she’eyno matzui, Rav Moshe, the gadol hador, was authorized to issue a decision that “This is how it should be done.”

In addition to “simple minority,” mi’ut ha’matzui, and mi’ut she’eyno matzui, there is one more category which we call mi’ut she’eyno matzui k’lall – a situation where the problematic situation (infestation, sha’atnez, etc.) is statistically almost non-existent – a notch below “negligible”. The example given for this category concerns a person who appears by all medical yardsticks to be dead. Requiring those present to wait until the body decomposes before disposing of it, to preclude the possibility that the deceased may actually be in a very deep swoon – is considered acknowledging a chance that is statistically almost non-existent. In halacha, we are not required to take such a scant likelihood into consideration even in situations involving a potential health risk.

In answer to our fellow who is stuck before the bar mitzvah, however, the response would be as follows: If the sha’atnez checkers agree that for such a suit, the likelihood of finding sha’atnez is minimal – say, no more than 1 out of 30 – then ideally, the suit should be checked, in keeping with the min’hag.

However, when time pressures do not allow it, the suit can be worn as is (and checked afterwards), since according to strict halacha, checking is not required at all.

4

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

Seeking the Reason for the Mitzvah So far we have addressed the first opinion cited in the Gemara – that charoses is not a mitzvah, but rather is purely a practical means to deal either with the sharpness of the marror, or with its possible infestation.

Now, let us examine the opposing opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Tzadok – that charoses is indeed a mitzvah. This seems to have been the prevalent opinion, as evidenced by the spice merchants in Yerushalayim at the time of the Bais Hamikdash, who would traditionally tout their wares with the words: “Come buy spice (for the charoses) for the mitzvah!”

Assuming that charoses is a mitzvah, what are the foundations of the mitzvah? What does charoses represent?

Here too, the Gemara16 cites differing opinions. Rav Levi avers that charoses, which counts apple as one of its major ingredients, is zecher la’tapu’ach – a reminder of the “tapu’ach” referred to in the Midrash. In contrast, Rav Yochanan maintains that the charoses is zecher la’tit 17– in memory of the mortar with which the enslaved Jews toiled in Mitzrayim, and which the charoses resembles in its color and consistency.18

Apple Applications According to the Rashbam,19 the tapu’ach is a reference to the Midrash in Gemara Sota20 on the posuk in Shir Hashirim21 “ I aroused you beneath the tapu’ach tree” – The women in Mitzrayim used to leave their homes and give birth to their children painlessly in the fields, beneath the tapu’ach trees, out of sight of their oppressors.

The word tapu’ach is most commonly translated as “apple.” Indeed, apples are the most common and basic ingredient used for charoses in Ashkenazic communities. But if we look at the comment of Tosafos on the Gemara in Shabbos,22 which cites the posuk from Shir Hashirim23 a shadow of doubt is cast on this traditional translation. The posuk states,24 “Like the tapu’ach among the trees of the forest,” upon which the Gemara25 comments that the Jewish people are compared to the tapu’ach tree: Just as the fruits of the tapu’ach tree predate its leaves, so did the Jewish people turn around the normal order of things and say “Na’aseh – we shall do” before “Nish’ma – we shall hear.”

That would be just fine, says Tosafos,26 except for the fact that apples don’t grow that way! Apples develop just as do all other fruit – first the leaves, and then the apples. The Tosafos concludes from here that the tapu’ach mentioned in Shir Ha’shirim refers not to the apple but rather to the esrog tree, which does display these unusual qualities. In fact, in the posuk in Shir Hashirim27 “The fragrance of your breath is like tapuchim,” Unkelus translates tapuchim as esrogim!

According to Tosafos’ commentary,28 therefore, the fruit used in charoses should most logically be some sort of citrus fruit akin to esrog. In fact, many Sefardic communities customarily use citrus fruits in their charoses. Some have even opined that the only reason this was not done in Ashkenazic communities is because of the unavailability of such fruits in the cold European climate.

16. Meseches Pesachim 116a. See Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 7:11.

17. Yerushalmi Meseches Pesachim 10:3, Tur O.C. 473, Aruch Hashulchan 473:17. Refer to Shemos Rabbah 1. Some opine to place a minute amount of cement or bricks in the charoses to remember hat the Jews went through in Mitzrayim (Birchei Yosef 473:12, also see Shibuley Haleket 218, Shulchan Aruch Harav 473:33, Darchei Chaim V’sholom 591:page 203, Aruch Hashulchan 473:17, Minhag Yisroel Torah 3:page 306:24, on other items added to the charoses).

18. There is a discussion in the poskim if the charoses should be eaten or just to dip the marror into the charoses (Refer to Haseder Ha’aruch 1:91:2).

19. Meseches Pesachim 116a “zecher”.

20. 11b.

21. 8:5.

22. 88a “piryav”.

23. 2:3.

24. Shir Hashirim 2:3.

25. Meseches Shabbos 88a.

26. Meseches Taanis 29b “shel”, see Tosafos Meseches Shabbos ibid.

27. 2:3.

28. Meseches Shabbos ibid.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G HT

|

KOF-K

|

5

Blood, Sweat29 and – Mortar As we mentioned above, the second opinion quoted in the Gemara30 is that the charoses recalls the tit – the mortar – in its consistency. Tosafos,31 in his commentary, quotes an additional source – the Talmud Yerushalmi,32 which suggests that the charoses serves as a reminder of the Jewish blood spilled in Mitzrayim. The wine in the charoses lends it the appropriately reddish tint.

How can we accommodate both of these opinions? If the charoses mixture is thick, it will not resemble liquid blood. If the mixture is diluted, it no longer recalls the mortar. The solution is to prepare the charoses at the thickness of tit,33 and then, shortly before using it for dipping the marror, to add wine or wine vinegar34 so that the mixture becomes more liquid and flowing, like blood.

Fruitful Metaphors The Tosafos35 goes on to quote the Teshuvos Hage’onim, who points out that the fruits used in charoses are chosen because of their distinction in serving as a metaphor for the Jewish people:36 Apple – “I aroused you beneath the apple tree.”37 Pomegranate – “Your temples are like a slice of pomegranate.”38 Figs – “The fig tree has formed its first figs.”39 Dates – “I shall climb the date palm.”40 Walnuts – “I went down to the garden of nuts.”41 Almond (shaked) – because Hashem shakad – rushed – the Redemption.42

Halachic Applications The Shulchan Aruch43 gives instructions for charoses preparation and serving that reflect the opinions we cited above: “First grate the ingredients to form a mortar-like mixture, and then, before serving, add wine or wine vinegar to liquefy the blend to some extent.” The Shulchan Aruch also enumerates the various fruits to which the Jewish people were compared as candidates for inclusion in charoses.

If we were told to add only a drop of wine to the charoses to lend it the hue of blood, that would not be a 44 problem. However, the Mishnah Berurah implies that enough wine must be added and mixed in to create a practically free flowing liquid. Mixing liquid into a solid mixture to create a new, inseparable entity constitutes an act of lash – kneading, one of

29. Refer to Tur 473, Bach, Drisha 2.

30. Meseches Pesachim 116a.

31. Meseches Pesachim 116 “tzorech”.

32. Meseches Pesachim 10:3, Korbon Eidah on Yerushalmi ibid. Refer to Tur 473, Chok Yaakov 473:26, Aruch Hashulchan 473:12. See Vayagid Moshe 4:7.

There is a discussion in the poskim when to mix the wine while making the charoses or while before eating it (Refer to Chag Hamatzos page 368:footnote 8. Also see Pri Temarim 26-27:pages 49-50).

33. Aruch Hashulchan 473:17.

34. Rama 473:5, Mishnah Berurah 48.

35. Meseches Pesachim ibid. See Kaf Ha’chaim 473:99.

36. Refer to Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 7:11 for other items used in charoses. In addition see Tur 473, Ohr Zeruah 2:256, Leket Yosher page 83, Rokeach 284, Rama 473:5, Aruch Hashulchan 473:17, Kaf Hachaim 473:99, Minhag Yisroel Torah 3:pages 306-307, Vayagid Moshe 4:3 in great depth.

37. Shir Hashirim 8:5. Refer to Shar Ha’tzyion 475:13. See Shibuley Haleket 218.

38. Shir Hashirim 4:3,6:7, Rokeach 284, Rama 473:5.

39. Shir Hashirim 2:13, Tosafos Meseches Pesachim 116a “zecher”, Tur 473, Rama 473:5.

40. Shir Hashirim 7:6, Tosafos and Rama ibid. Some leave this out (Refer to Pri Chadash 473:5). For more on this see Vayagid Moshe 4:3.

41. Shir Hashirim 6:11, Tur 473, Tosafos ibid, Chai Adom 130:4.

42. Tosafos, Rama and Chai Adom ibid, Pri Chadash 473:5, Aruch Hashulchan 473:17. See Leket Yosher page 73.

43. O.C. 473:5.

44. 473:48.

6

|

KOF-K

|

P E S ACH

5 77 1

the 39 forbidden acts on Shabbos.45 The Mishnah Berurah46 points out that doing so can be a problem when Seder night falls out on Shabbos. Therefore, when Pesach begins on leil Shabbos, the wine should preferably be added before the onset of Shabbos.

Does adding the wine so far in advance of the Seder diminish our fulfillment of the imperative to start off with a mixture that resembles mortar and then turn it into a combination that recalls blood? That depends on whether we maintain that this dual zecher must be applied at the time the charoses is eaten, or whether it is sufficient to have the zecher present at the time the charoses is prepared.

Times Have Changed The Shulchan Aruch Harav47 addresses the issue of kafa found in the Gemara, and asserts that whether we define the kafa as an insect/worm or as a poison, neither one nor the other exists anymore in our day. Charoses today purely serves the mitzvah purpose. This change necessarily alters the nature of how we use the charoses.

Although the Gemara talks about fully submerging the marror in charoses to kill the kafa, today, when the sakana – danger – is no longer applicable and we are using the charoses for the mitzvah alone, it is sufficient to be tovel be’miktzas – to dip the marror lightly in the charoses, as a remembrance of the tit. 48 If the charoses is a mitzvah, why then do we not make a beracha on it as we do for matzah and marror? The Shulchan Aruch Harav49 maintains that the charoses is still tofel – subordinate – to the marror,50 and therefore is not accorded a separate beracha.51

Separating the Good from the… Good Not only does the Shulchan Aruch Harav52 maintain that the marror need not be totally submerged in the charoses, since the poison it was meant to counter no longer exists. He also stresses that the marror should not be left in the charoses for too long, since we do not want to excessively neutralize the bitterness of the marror. Rather, the marror should be dipped briefly in the charoses and then the excess shaken off.53 How much of the charoses needs to be knocked off?54 It is clear from the following teshuva of the Tzitz Eliezer55 that not all of the charoses must be removed.56 The Tzitz Eliezer addressed the question of why shaking off the charoses from the marror should not be considered a violation of borer – one of the 39 acts prohibited on Shabbos,57 and to a certain extent, on Yom Tov.58 Borer is defined as separating the pesoles – the bad or undesirable – from the ochel – the good, or desirable.

45. Meseches Shabbos 156a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 321:14.

46. 473:48.

47. 475:11. Refer to Pri Chadash 475:1. See Shar Ha’tzyion 475:13.

48. Pri Chadash 475:1, Shulchan Aruch Harav 475:11, Mishnah Berurah 475:13, see Shar Hatzyion 13. Refer to Vayagid Moshe 25:16. Others argue with this premise (Shulchan Aruch 475:1, Siddur Yaavetz 2:page 84 (new), Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 119:7, Aruch Hashulchan 475:6, Ohr Letzyion 3:15:19). Refer to Mishmeres Shalom 35:2 who discusses how is it possible to dip the marror into charoses and shake off the charoses, if the custom is to use ground marror.

49. 475:11.

50. Kol Bo 50, Tur 475, Levush 475:1, Radvaz 3:544, Chazon Ovadia 1:39, 2:page 169 in footnote, Yalkut Yosef 13:page 403:4. See Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 7:11 who does not say a beracha is recited. For more on the reasons why no beracha is recited on charoses see Pri Chadash 475:3, Haminhag Hilchos Pesach 80. Refer to Chasam Sofer O.C. 47.

51. Tur 475, Pri Chadash 473:5, Chok Yaakov 473:25, Radvaz 3:544. See Pnei Hashulchan O.C. 212:1:8:page 348.

52. 475:11.

53. Shulchan Aruch 475:1, Chai Adom 130:10. See Levush 1.

54. Although one removes some of the charoses, according to some poskim one should make sure to use a kezayis of charoses (Refer to Haseder Ha’aruch 1:91:8).

55. 17:1. Refer to Levush 473:2.

56. See Levush 471:12, and Vayagid Moshe 25:18.

57. Meseches Shabbos 74a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 319.

58. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 510:4.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

7

The Tzitz Eliezer offered three reasons why shaking off the charoses is not a borer problem: Firstly, the charoses is not considered undesirable. The person would gladly eat it in its entirety, and is separating it only for halachic reasons. Secondly, since he would otherwise have eaten the charoses, no particular part of the charoses can be singled out as pesoles – the part he doesn’t want. Finally – and what is most relevant to our question – the charoses is not entirely washed or rubbed away; after the marror is shaken, there are noticeable remnants of the charoses that remain.59 For all these reasons, we do not need to be concerned for a violation of borer in this case.

Dynamics and Nature of the Mitzvah Assuming that the charoses is a mitzvah, let us take a closer look at the precise nature of this mitzvah – what it entails and what it does not entail.

The Rambam60 clearly rules that charoses is a mitzvah mi’divrei sof’rim, but, as we shall see, he qualifies that to some extent. The Rambam writes that the charoses is a reminder of the mortar that the Jews worked with in Mitzrayim. He enumerates the list of typical Sefardi components of the charoses – dates, figs and raisins (apples are conspicuous by their absence). The Rambam then goes on to say that the charoses should be “brought to the table” on the night of Pesach. He mentions nothing about there being a mitzvah to eat the charoses!61 The same impression comes across in the Rambam’s Perush Hamishnayos,62 where the Rambam asks – if the charoses is a mitzvah, why don’t we make a beracha on it as we do on marror? The Rambam quotes a minority opinion of Rabbenu Tzadok, who says that since the charoses is a mitzvah, we should make a beracha on it. The Rambam categorically dismisses this opinion and asserts that this is not the halacha. The implication is that while the Rambam agrees that charoses is a mitzvah and a required element at our Seder table, he does not maintain that eating it is an integral part of fulfilling the mitzvah! A beracha is also not recited on the zeroa – the shank bone on the Seder plate – clearly, because it functions as a remembrance of a Korban while there is no mitzvah to eat it.

Jumping the Gun Every child who is old enough to recite the “Mah Nishtanah” can tell you that we dip twice in the course of the Seder, and that the first dipping is of karpas in salt water.

Rashi learns,63 however, that karpas too was dipped in charoses, and though the Rashbam disagrees,64 there are other Rishonim that concur with Rashi.65 The Ohr Zarua,66 on the other hand, articulates the basis of our modern day practice to use salt water. The original reason for dipping in charoses, he explains, was to deal with the kafa issue, and that was never present in karpas. Besides, the Yerushalmi clearly states that the karpas was dipped in salt. The charoses, representing the mortar, did not come into play until later, in conjunction with the

59. Refer to Biur Halacha 319 “metoch”.

60. Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 7:11. Refer to Magid Mishnah Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 7:11.

61. For a discussion on this concept see Moadim V’zemanim 3:258. Also see B’ikvei Hatzon page 78:6.

62. Meseches Pesachim 10:3.

63. Meseches Pesachim 114a “mitavel”.

64. Meseches Pesachim 114a “mitavel”.

65. Refer to Vayagid Moshe 17:15.

66. Hilchos Pesachim 2:256.

8

|

KOF-K

|

P E S ACH

5 77 1

maror, which symbolized the bitterness of the bondage.

The Ohr Zarua,67 in an especially vehement statement, asserts that if a person eats charoses before its time “ke’ilu bo al arusoso b’veis chamav” – it is “as if he had relations with his fiancée in his future father-in-law’s home”, a sharp metaphor used by the Yerushalmi to describe someone who eats matzah on Erev Pesach, before the time of the mitzvah Seder night.

In a similar vein, the Rem”a mentions a min’hag not to eat charoses on Erev Pesach,68 so as to enable the person to eat the charoses at night be’te’avon – with an appetite.

The Rem”a summarily rejects this min’hag and asserts that one need not be concerned for it in the least.

The Vilna Gaon69 challenges this rejection and asks – if Rabbi Eliezer ben Tzadok deems charoses a mitzvah, why shouldn’t it carry the same caveat as matzah and be prohibited on Erev Pesach?

The Rem”a was not necessarily denying the fact that charoses is a mitzvah. He may simply have maintained that the custom prohibiting consumption of a mitzvah food on Erev Pesach is limited to foods with positive connotations – like matzah or the meat of korbon Pesach, and does not apply to foods with negative associations, like marror which recalls the bitterness of exile and charoses which reminds us of the enslavement with mortar.

This Pesach, may we be zocheh that all reminders of our past travails be deemed irrelevant as we usher in the final geulah!

67. Ibid.

68.

471:2, Levush 471:2. The Mishnah Berurah 15 maintains this custom has no reason. See Elya Rabbah 471:9.

"Oh, no! Pesach is coming!"

Sound familiar?

If so - your head needs a “spring cleaning” - not your house!

Go to our Website www.kof-k.org for a synopsis of what needs to be cleaned for Pesach and what does not... by

Rabbi Shlomo Gissinger, shlit’a, Chaver Bais Din Vaad L’Mishmeres Kashrus KOF-K Kosher Supervision Rav of K’hal Zichron Ya’akov in Lakewood, NJ.

69. 471.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

9

Shiur given at the KOF-K by

Rabbi Ari Senter

Coordinator of Halachic Research

Pesach is on the horizon, and with a mixture of excitement and trepidation, we look forward to the moment when the kitchen is spotless and the scads of special Pesach utensils can come out of hiding – pots, dishes, everything from soup ladle to nutcracker.

A hundred years ago, many Pesach utensils were items in year round use, meticulously scrubbed and scraped and then kashered for yomtov. Today, kashering utensils for Pesach is hardly relevant for the majority of Jewish homes. But, believe it or not, almost every one of us has a set of utensils used on a daily basis the year round, as well as for the week of Pesach – our teeth!

Is It a Question Altogether?

The remarkable set of teeth provided by our Creator serves us faithfully as a natural chopper, food processor, blender – all rolled into one. Though we dutifully brush and floss our teeth with resolute thoroughness on Erev Pesach after eating our last bit of chametz, all pos’kim agree that natural teeth do not need to be kashered in order to render them suitable for use on Pesach.1 The material of which they are fashioned is not considered halachically absorbent, and therefore, a determined cleaning does the trick.

But how many of us can boast of a pristinely natural set of teeth? Metallic fillings, white fillings,2 tooth implants, braces, biteplates,3 and eventually, a set of false teeth adorn our mouths, in addition to or in place of our natural, G-d given choppers.

What is the status of these items in regard to Pesach? Is the cleaning accorded our natural teeth sufficient for them as well, or do they require actual kashering? Some pos’kim do not even consider this a question. However, a good number of pos’kim address the

1. Refer to Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 447:40, Amudei Ohr 54:page 39, Hagalas Keilim page 430:footnote 397.

2. Refer to Darchei Teshuva Y.D. 89:11.

3. See Sharei Yemi Pesach page 77:7.

1 0

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

issue with great seriousness.4 (In the discussion that follows, all comments refer to tooth replacements or corrective accessories, not natural teeth.)

An Opening Assumption When Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt”l was still fairly young, he wrote a long, detailed discussion of this subject,5 in the context of a she’eilah he directed to the Chazon Ish.6 The question was not a rhetorical one, but rather extremely practical. In fact, Rav Shlomo Zalman pleaded in the letter that the Chazon Ish “not turn him away empty-handed,” since if he remained in doubt, his only option would be to eschew hot food the entire Pesach!

Rav Shlomo Zalman began the discussion with his initial assumption – that teeth should be kashered before Pesach through hag’alah – by washing them with very hot water, as hot as the hottest food/drink that the person is likely to have ingested in the course of the year. This follows the principle of “k’vol’o kach pol’to 7– the prohibited material (in this case, the chametz) can be removed from a vessel (in this case, the teeth) the same way that it entered.

But surely, during the year, a person has eaten chunks of hot, solid food. A chunk – known in halacha as a davar gush is considered by some pos’kim, most notably the Maharshal,8 to retain the stringent status of a kli rishon – the primary vessel in which the item was cooked. In that case, hag’alah would not be sufficient – and since most of us are not fire-eaters, the stronger method of libun would not be a viable option. Rav Shlomo Zalman rejects this concern, relying on the many pos’kim who disagree with the Maharshal’s view.9 Therefore, even in the case of a davar gush, he maintains that washing with very hot water would suffice.

Matzah on Erev Pesach?!

Putting Rav Shlomo Zalman’s she’eilah aside for the moment, in more recent halachic literature, we can see that he was not the only one who considered this a very significant question. Rav Moshe Sternbuch,10 for example, was adamant that fillings and false teeth needed to be properly kashered before Pesach, to such an extent that he even advocated allowing the consumption of matzah on erev Pesach for that purpose, as we shall explain: When Erev Pesach falls out on Shabbos, we are faced with the classic dilemma of how to fulfill our Shabbos seudah requirement.

The Talmud Yerushalmi11 clearly states that matzah should not be eaten on Erev Pesach, so as to build up anticipation for the taste of the matzah that will be eaten that night for the mitzvah.12 On the other hand, after a certain point on Erev Pesach, we are not allowed to eat chametz either.

The standard solution is to arise early enough to have time for two meals with a chametz “Motzi” before the hour when chametz is no longer permitted.13 That resolves the “Motzi” question, but we are left with the kashering issue! Since fillings and false teeth cannot be properly kashered on Shabbos, Rav Sternbuch actually opts to permit eating matzah that was not baked le’sheim mitzvah on Erev Pesach (and therefore could not be used at the Seder) with the Erev Pesach Shabbos meals. This, he asserts, is preferable to entering Pesach without having properly kashered the contents of the mouth after eating chametz!

Though other modern day poskim do not agree with his conclusion – such as the Minchas Yitzchak,14 who recoils at the thought of allowing matzah to be eaten on Erev Pesach, and recommends instead restricting oneself to cold chametz – the fact that Rav Sternbuch entertains such a solution points to the seriousness of the question!

4. For a detailed discussion on this topic see Yesodo Yeshurun 6:pages 164-166, Tzohar 11:pages 209-214, Masei Choshev 5:15 in depth, B’shvili Ha’parsha pages 475-477, see Tzitz Eliezer 9:25, 20:13:2, Mishnah Halachos 3:56, 4:68.

5. Minchas Shlomo 2-3:50, see 2-3:60.

6. The Chazzon Ish zt”l was lenient regarding the requirement to kasher false teeth for Pesach (Massei Ish 5:page 18).

7. On this concept refer to Bais Yosef 451, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 451:13, 452:5, Rama Y.D. 70:6, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 72:2, Shulchan Aruch 121:6, Levush 68:9, Taz Y.D. 24:4, 68:2, 69:11, 70:16, 75:6, Chai Adom 125:2, Mishnah Berurah 451:27, 35, and many more poskim.

8. Meseches Chullin 7:44, 8:71. Refer to Divrei Shalom 1:60 on this.

9. For a list of poskim who disagree with the Maharshal see Otzer Divrei Haposkim page 403.

10. Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 8:37.

11. Meseches Pesachim 10:1.

12. Meseches Pesachim 99b, Mishnah Berurah 471:11, Aruch Hashulchan 1.

13. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 444:1.

14. 8:37.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G HT

|

KOF-K

|

11

How Hot is Hot? Getting back to Rav Shlomo Zalman’s discussion, having given his initial assumption that kashering is necessary, he goes on to analyze all the factors supporting or weakening this assumption.

The first reason to preclude a need for kashering is the argument that people usually do not put food/drink that is at the heat of yad soledes bo into their mouths; nobody relishes the idea of a burnt tongue.15 If the chametz ingested was never so hot, it does not require expulsion through kashering.

However, as we know, there is a broad range among pos’kim as to the precise definition of the heat level known as yad soledes bo.16 The halachic description is “the heat which would scald the (sensitive) belly of a baby.” This has been set at temperatures ranging from 120-160 degrees.17 Rav Shlomo Zalman counters that people definitely drink tea, coffee and soup that is hotter at least than the lower end of this range. So, the argument of “people not ingesting things that are yad soledes bo” does not stand.18 But Rav Shlomo Zalman then points out that the Maharsham cites two reasons why kashering teeth would not be necessary, and the first of these addresses this very point: According to the Maharsham, whatever can be put into the mouth is automatically not considered “yad soledes bo” for purposes of consumption. The Ben Ish Chai19 clearly states that in these matters, we do not judge the heat by dipping a finger in the food/liquid and seeing how long we can keep the finger inside.

“Rather, “he says, “take this as your guiding principle: If the item is fit to eat or drink, it is not yad soledes bo! If you cannot eat or drink it at its present heat – it is yad soledes bo!” This approach is echoed by the Minchas Shai20 and the Dar’chei Teshuva.21

How Long is Long Enough?

The second argument brought by the Maharsham22 to preclude the need for kashering is the brief amount of time that the food remains on the teeth. He asserts that bli’ah – absorption of flavor – requires a minimum period of contact. This statement is based on the opinion of the Chamudei Daniel,23 who proves his point from a halacha cited in the Gemara.24 The Gemara states that if a prohibited substance falls into a pot, then if the pot is shaken and the substance blended in immediately, there is not enough time for bli’ah of the issur to take place, and the food is permitted. The Radvaz25 applies this concept to our situation and says explicitly: The brief time that food spends in our mouths is not sufficient to allow the taste to be absorbed. The Aruch Ha’shulchan26 as well cites the Chamudei Daniel and rules in certain circumstances on the basis of his principle.

Therefore, even if Rav Shlomo Zalman maintains that the average person does ingest items that are yad soledes bo, we may still argue that the taste of the item cannot be absorbed by the teeth in so short a time.

Furthermore, in addition to the time element, the Darchei Teshuva27 maintains that the material of which false teeth are made is similar to natural tooth enamel and is not bole’iah to begin with. However, as Rav Shlomo Zalman points out, this argument of the Darchei Teshuva does not really help us, since it most likely would not apply to today’s metal fillings and orthodontic wiring, as metals are definitely known to absorb flavor.

15. Refer to Siddur Pesach K’hilchoso page 170.

16. Refer to Meseches Shabbos 40b, Rambam Hilchos Shabbos 22:4, Issur V’heter 34, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 105:7, Shulchan Aruch 318:14, Machtzis Hashekel O.C. 318:37, Yabea Omer O.C. 3:24:5. See Divrei Yisroel 1:60.

17. Refer to Shoneh B’Shonah 5741:pages 206-211.

18. Refer to Tzohar 11:page 211.

19. Parshas Bo 2:5.

20. Quoted in Darchei Teshuva Y.D. 105:51.

21. 105:51. See Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 89:22.

22. 1:197.

23. Hilchos Taruvos 1, and 34. Refer to Pri Chadash Y.D. 98:9 who argue with the Chamudei Daniel.

24. Refer to Meseches Chullin 108a.

25. 1:223. See Ravaz O.C. 10.

26. Y.D. 105:43.

27. Y.D. 89:11. Refer to Darchei Teshuva ibid where he says to have a separate set of teeth for Pesach.

1 2

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

Are the Teeth Considered Kli Sheini?

Next, Rav Shlomo Zalman suggests a new, different angle: Since we generally do not drink our soup from the pot or our coffee directly from the urn, perhaps we can say that the teeth are at worst a kli sheini – a secondary vessel, which is regarded less stringently for kashering purposes. To this, he offers two responses. First of all, as a rule, we are mach’mir for k’li sheini for Pesach use and customarily kasher even secondary vessels, as the Bach says, because of the stringent status of chametz on Pesach, which is prohibited for consumption even in negligible amounts.

Secondly, while kli sheini does not actually cook a foodstuff, according to some opinions, it does cook ke’dei kelipah – the thin outer layer of the food.28 Therefore, says the Shulchan Aruch,29 it is proper to be mach’mir le’chat’chila and kasher a kli sheini for Pesach. B’di’eved, however, hadacha be’alma – a thorough rinsing – may suffice.

If we assume that the kli sheini cooks ke’dei kelipah, a process that happens almost instantly, that would obviate falling back on the time-related argument of the Chamudei Daniel cited earlier. Even if the teeth would not absorb a full measure of taste in the brief time the chametz tarries in the mouth, they might be affected ke’dei kelipah – and for Pesach, that would be enough to require kashering.

All this is true in the case of liquids or finely cut solid food. However, in the case of a chunk of solid food, there is the added factor that according to the Maharshal, a davar gush has the din of a kli rishon.30 The Chasam Sofer31 as well emphasizes that in the case of a davar gush, the status of the vessel is irrelevant; the davar gush is considered a kli rishon irregardless.

True, as Rav Shlomo Zalman stated earlier, we do not necessarily pasken like the Maharshal. Certainly, in a case of hefsed merubeh – a major loss – we follow the opinion of the Pri Megadim32 who is lenient. But in the absence of that qualification, why shouldn’t we be mach’mir for the Maharshal’s opinion in such a stringent question?

A Cool Suggestion – and a Sharp Rebuttal Rav Shlomo Zalman suggests one logical solution (which the Minchas Yitzchak proposed for the Shabbos Erev Pesach question): Simply abstain from hot chametz for the 24 hours prior to Pesach.33 That would certainly eliminate the need for kashering, by rendering the teeth a vessel “she’eino ben yomo.”

But wait, he objects, is it really so simple? What if a person eats cold chametz on Erev Pesach, but enjoys it together with a davar charif, a sharp item such as an onion? Rav Shlomo Zalman maintains that teeth, our divinely installed cutting implements, have the din of “duchta de’sakina” – a knife’s pressure.34 Just as using a dairy knife to cut a cold piece of meaty onion would cause a basar ve’chalav problem, so biting into cold chametz and onion would render o u r teeth “chametz’dik” even in the absence of heat – and consequently obligate their kashering. The same problem would ensue if we ate cold chametz on Erev Pesach morning, and then bit into an onion with our Pesach meal a few hours later. The sharpness of the onion draws out the latent taste in the vessel – in this case, the chametz flavor in the teeth – even when no heat is applied.

Rendered Inedible Rav Shlomo Zalman puts aside all the above arguments and says: “Mutar! No need to kasher!” The basis for his definitive statement can be found in the Gemara35 that discusses the waiting time between meat and milk. The Gemara there makes a point that meat trapped between the teeth is still called basar. However, if that meat remains in the mouth for hours, the salivary juices and chemical reactions taking place in the oral cavity will render that “meat” disgusting and repulsive. This is true even for an actual bit of meat caught in the teeth, all the more so for mere flavor left by the meat.

28. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 105:2.

29. Ibid. Rama 68:11, see Shulchan Aruch 451:5.

30. Brought in the Shach Y.D. 84:30, Y.D. 105:8, Taz 94:14, 105:4, Aruch Hashulchan 105:20. Refer to Magen Avraham O.C. 447:9.

31. Y.D. 95. See Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 94:7.

32. Eishel Avraham O.C. 451:38.

33. Refer to Darchei Chaim V’Sholom 565, Divrei Shalom 1:111, opinion of Harav Moshe Feinstein zt’’l quoted in Hakashrus Hamatbeiach page 66, Shearim Metzuyanim, B’halacha 116:3 24, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 2:211:7.

34. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 96:1, Shach 6.

35. Meseches Chullin 105a.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

13

Granted, under ordinary circumstances, there is a halachic given that for 24 hours, a flavor will enhance, and only after that point, will it mar its surroundings. However, in the mouth, this process is greatly accelerated; within a matter of hours, whatever was in the mouth is already malodorous and patently inedible, and is considered in the state of a ben yomo. Therefore, while we are mach’mir not to eat dairy products right after actual meat, there is no need to be mach’mir for ta’am ha’balua – for flavor that was absorbed – and the same can be said regarding chametz consumed before Pesach.

The Bottom Line While in his first teshuva, after presenting these many sides, Rav Shlomo Zalman leaves the conclusion a sofek – a matter of doubt, in a later teshuva on the same topic, he says clearly and unequivocally that these sevaras – and especially this last one, about the mouth juices quickly rendering any food pagum – eliminate any need for kashering. Consequently, he rules that me’ikar ha’din, one does not need to kasher teeth related items at all. Nevertheless, he recommends being mach’mir to rinse the mouth with hot water, as hot as whatever one is used to drinking, or alternately, for removable accessories, to soak in salt water.36 Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank37 too was not mach’mir regarding such items.38 The Steipler Rav39 was mach’mir for himself,40 but he too agreed that me’ikar ha’din, there is no problem, and was matir for others to use these items on Pesach without kashering.

When Does “Majority Rule”?

The Sefardic pos’kim have little concern for this whole issue. The reason is that the Sefardim follow the rulings of the “Mechaber” – i.e., the author of the Shulchan Aruch – who states that in all cases, we only consider rov tash’misho of a vessel – its primary use.41 This rule is derived from the Mishna in Avodah Zarah42 which discusses how the various types of utensils are dealt with, depending on their use. The Mishna does not address the possibility that this particular k’li was perhaps used for a different purpose than the norm.

Consequently, according to the Mechaber, in our issue as well, we may rely on the fact that most of the things we eat are not extremely hot. Since “rov tash’misho” of the mouth is for such food, teeth, fillings, etc. do not have to be kashered.

The Rem”a,43 on the other hand, disagrees and asserts that we have to be concerned for mi’ut tashmisho – for minority use, as well. The question is: Does the Rem”a disagree with the Mechaber’s view on principle, or is he mach’mir for a secondary reason?

The Taz44 claims that the latter is true. He maintains that the Rem”a actually agrees that me’ikar ha’din, we need only address rov tash’misho. However, in his concern that someone might make a mistake, he ruled that we should take precautions even regarding mi’ut tash’misho. If the Taz is correct in his analysis, that means that even the Rem”a would agree that basic halacha just requires rinsing the mouth that is mainly used for cold food. Beyond that, we are dealing with chumros, which makes it easier for us to be lenient in special circumstances.

However, if we postulate that the Rem”a disagrees in principle with the Mechaber’s view, we have a problem. Indeed, the Mishna Berura45 quotes the Rashba, who states that the Rem”a Mi’pano supported the argument of rov tash’misho only when we are not dealing with an item that is ben yomo. In other words, if a vessel was used within 24 hours for mi’ut tash’misho, we must remain genuinely concerned for the ta’am of issur, and therefore, the vessel would need libun. Only when the vessel is eino ben yomo – has not been used for the issur within 24 hours, can we rely on the principle of rov tash’misho.

Since the Rem”a rules like the Rashba, that ta’am pagum is assur, this means that if we cooked with a chametz kli ben yomo on Pesach – or in our case, false teeth or fillings that had been used for hot chametz within the last 24 hours, the food would be

36. See Nishmas Avraham 454:page 614.

37. His opinion is quoted in the Tzitz Eliezer 9:25:5.

38. Refer to the opinion of Harav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l as expressed in B’mechitzas Rabbeinu page 138. See Mishneh Halachos 3:56, Hilchos Chag B’Chag Peach pages 140-142. The custom of one of the Lubavitcher Rebbes was to have separate teeth for meat, dairy and Pesach (Otzer Minhagei Chabad page 65:22).

39. Orchos Rabbeinu 2:page 73:57. See Shalmei Moed page 333, Halichos Shlomo Moadim 3:6.

40. This is the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita as well (Ashrei Haish Moadim page 349:24).

41. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 451:6.

42. 75b.

43. O.C. 451:6.

44. O.C. 451:11.

45. O.C. 451:46.

1 4

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

prohibited and the argument of rov tashmisho won’t help. This is because the Rem”a prohibits disregarding mi’ut tashmisho not as a chumra, but rather mi’dina.

When is Pagum No Longer Pagum?

The basis of Rashba’s discussion above revolves around the question of when we are concerned for the ta’am of the issur and at what point this ta’am becomes pagum and permitted. This brings us back to the question of food which is pagum – unfit for use.

There are actually two types of “pagum”. The first is the one referred to by the Rashba when he says that “Ta’am pagum mutar” – the residual flavor of a pagum item is permissible because it is so slight as to become nullified. The flavor exists and is a positive one, but it is lost in its surroundings. This kind of pagum is permitted year round – i.e, when a drop of milk falls into a pot of cholent. However, it is not permitted on Pesach because of the principle that on Pesach, chametz is “asur be’mashehu.”46 However, there is another type of “pagum” – an item that has disintegrated and lost its original form, becoming what we call nif’sal – disqualified from any conceivable use. A pagum item is permissible not because of the rules of bitul but because the item itself is no longer prohibited. Furthermore, once something is nif’sal, it is no longer affected by a davar charif. An onion can spark a strong ta’am of an item that is in the first category of “pagum”; but it cannot magically bring to life something that is nif’sal and disgusting.

This brings us back to the conclusion of Rav Shlomo Zalman, that anything which spends time in the human mouth quickly becomes pagum and nif’sal. That being the case, it would not be relevant whether or not it was used for “mi’ut tashmisho” – i.e., hot chametz food – in the last 24 hours. Even if it had, within a short time of its stay in the deteriorating environment of the oral cavity, no trace of edible flavor remains.

“Pasken the She’eilah!”

“Why not be mach’mir?” one might ask. After all is said and done, Pesach is the time for chum’ros,47 and nobody wants to be guilty of even a tiny particle of chametz on Pesach.

But what are the chumros that can be offered? Kashering items that halachically do not need kashering may not sound so daunting. But putting a set of dentures or a night brace through a full hag’alah process may cost a pretty penny, if the dental item is irreparably warped – and many can attest to such results from bitter experience.

Well, then, a week is not so long. Perhaps it would be best to simply abstain from hot food all Pesach, and sidestep the problem that way. But sim’chas yomtov is also a halachic requirement.48 The Minchas Yitzchak states that diminishing sim’chas yomtov by avoiding hot food is unquestionably a case of hef’sed merubeh, and would not be justifiable for the sake of a chumrah.

The Shevet Halevi49 is one of the many pos’kim50 who allow the use of dental items on Pesach without kashering. Addressing the well-meaning person who sent him the question, he makes a basic and important point: “Some people just want to pile on chum’ros regardless of the facts. I have no eitzah for these people, just as I have no eitzah for those who insist on piling on kulos­ – leniencies. Rather, “Yikov ha’din es ha’har!” – “Let halacha take its course!” Do not just “slouch” into leniency or stringency. Learn the sugya, pasken the she’eilah, and carry out the pesak with full confidence!

46. Meseches Pesachim 30a, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 15:9, see Shulchan Aruch 447:4, Chai Adom 121:13, Mishnah Berurah 447:15, 96.

47. Refer to Shar Ha’tzyion 444:52, Minhag Yisroel Torah 2:page 203, Divrei Shalom 3:111.

48. Rambam Hilchos Yom Tov 6:17-18, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 529:2, Mishnah Berurah 15. See Sharei Teshuvah 4.

49. 4:74. Refer to Shevet Halevi 1:148. See M’Bais Levi 5:page 15, 16:page 17, 18:page 13.

50. Refer to Yabea Omer O.C. 3:24, Yechaveh Da’as 1:8, Asei Lecha Rav 6:44, 9:page 172, Ohr Letzyion 3:10:15, Divrei Shalom 1:60. See Kashrus B’Pesach page 177:72.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G HT

|

KOF-K

|

15

Based on Teshuva Ch. 12 Sefer Sheilas Ahron

Rav Ahron Felder shlita Chaver Bais Din Vaad L’Mishmeres Kashrus KOF-K Kosher Supervision

Refer to sefer for full Hebrew text and sources

The Four Cups of Wine – an Equal Obligation for Men and Women

On the Seder night, some women valiantly try to down four cups of wine, others suffice with four cups of grape juice, and yet others imbibe a mixture of the two. But while the contents of the cup is a matter of question, one thing is certain – that women are obligated in drinking the daled kosos – the four cups on Seder night.

The question is – why? As a general rule, women are exempt from all mitzvos aseh she’hazeman gerama – time-related positive mitzvos – because of their other womanly obligations. Why then should they be obligated in this patently time-defined mitzvah?

“They Too Were in That Miracle” The Gemara in Maseches Pesachim1 states that women are required to drink the four cups “because they too were in that miracle.” Rashi and Rashbam interpret the phrase as meaning that “the miracle was brought about through them.”

The Otzar Mefarshei Hatalmud asks: Why didn’t these two Rishonim opt for the more obvious interpretation – that the women too were saved from bondage by the same miracle? One reason he suggests is that, according to the simple meaning of the pesukim, the onus of slavery was imposed only on the men folk. True, Chazal2 state that among the agonies of the Egyptian slavery was the assignment of men’s work to women and vice versa, which would imply that the women were subjected to enslavement.

However, the Sefas Emes3 writes that this particular torment was not done as a matter of course, but rather only at random.

On the other hand, the Perush Rabbenu Manoach4 and the Tosafos maintain that the women were enslaved along with the men. Furthermore, the women were unquestionably an equal part of the terror experienced at Yam Suf, when Pharaoh pursued

1. Pesachim 8b.

2. Sotah 11b.

3. Megillah 4a.

4. Hilchos Chametz U’Matzah 7, 7.

1 6

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

the entire Jewish nation. So, we are still left with the enigma of why Rashi explained the phrase as he did, eschewing the obvious interpretation.

To complicate matters yet further, in Maseches Megillah,5 in the discussion of women’s obligation in the Megillah reading, the exact same language is used – “because they too were in that miracle” – and there, Rashi opts for the obvious interpretation – that they too were miraculously rescued from Haman’s evil decree. What led Rashi to adopt a different view in Maseches Megillah?

Understanding Rashi A number of solutions are suggested for this enigma. The Yad Aharon6 says that Rashi was in doubt about how to explain the words of Chazal, and therefore, he retained both explanations, using one here and one there. The Matas Elokim maintains that there is no question altogether, since, he asserts, Rashi often changes his approach in different places in Gemara.

In addition, says the Matas Elokim, Rashi probably took note of the fact that the Gemara in Megillah uses the vague language of “they too were in that same miracle,” rather than writing outright that “they too were included in Haman’s decree.” That would seem to imply that Chazal intended to allude to both reasons – that the women too were threatened by this decree, and also that a woman – Esther – had a major part in this miracle. The Matas Elokim proves his point by noting that the Yerushalmi quoted by Tosafos in Pesachim is worded, “they too were in the same sofek” – in the same doubtful and precarious situation – rather than “in the same nes.” Apparently, Rashi acknowledged both views, following the Yerushalmi’s version of Chazal in his commentary on Megillah, while following the Bavli’s version in Pesachim.

Naturally, this whole discussion does not relate to the claim mentioned above that Rashi in Pesachim understands that women were not included in the bondage altogether. If that is the case, the only interpretation of “they too were in that miracle” would be that the women were instrumental in bringing the miracle about. This would also explain why, after stating in his commentary in Pesachim, “In the merit of righteous women they were redeemed from Egypt,” Rashi follows by pointing out that the miracles of Purim and Chanukah were also brought about by women.

Whose Opinion is it Anyway?

If we take a closer look at the words of the Tosafos in Pesachim and Megilla, we may illuminate a different angle in our understanding of Rashi. In the beginning of the commentary in both places,7 Tosafos quotes the Rashbam as saying that the miracle was brought about primarily through the women.

The Matas Elokim asks: Why did Tosafos choose to mention the Rashbam as his source rather than Rashi, when Rashi explained the words in the selfsame manner? The Otzar Mefarshei Hatalmud has an interesting answer to this question. Since, as we mentioned above, Rashi in Pesachim gives a different interpretation than he writes in Megillah for the same words, we must conclude that Rashi’s commentary in Pesachim is not his own opinion, but rather a quote of the Ri Halevi’s view, as brought in the Rashbam. Tosafos was aware of this, and therefore chose to challenge the Rashbam, who explicitly states that he is quoting the Ri Halevi, rather than dealing with Rashi, who was not explicit in this regard.

This innovative insight gives us another solid explanation of why Rashi’s commentary in Megillah differs from his commentary on the very same words in Pesachim. According to the above understanding, Rashi’s words in Pesachim are not his own opinion altogether, but rather a quote from the Ri Halevi. Moreover, I may add, if we continue this train of logic, we must say that Rashi’s words in Pesachim (which are merely a quote of the Ri Halevi) do not prove that Rashi himself held that women were not included in the bondage of Egypt!

Primary or Secondary?

After quoting Rashbam’s words, Tosafos challenges his (or rather, Ri Halevi’s) explanation that the miracle was primarily brought about through women, by pointing out that the wording of the Gemara is “af hem” – even they were in the same miracle. That would seem to indicate that the women’s role in the redemption was not primary, as the Rashbam implied, but only secondary.

Indeed, the author of the Kapos Temarim8 maintains that the Rashbam himself intended to say that the Jews left Egypt in the

5. Megillah 4a.

6. Orach Chayim Siman 589.

7. In the section beginning, “hayu be’oso ha’nes” – “were in the same miracle.”

8. Sukkah 38a.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

17

merit of the men and also of the women – i.e., that the merit of the women was secondary to that of the men, and that is why the wording is: “Af hen” – “They too…”9 Or, alternately, says the Kapos Temarim, we can say that the word “Af” implies that besides the reason that they were included in the decree of bondage, there is an additional reason to obligate women – because the miracle was brought about through them. (The latter explanation assumes the view that the women indeed were enslaved along with the men.)

Two is Better than One? So far we have referred to two places in Gemara that cite the reasoning of “because they too were in that miracle” – in Pesachim, where the topic is women’s obligation in daled kosos, and Megillah, where the subject is their obligation in the Megillah reading. But the Gemara quotes these same words in another place, in Maseches Shabbos,10 in discussing who is obligated in kindling the Chanukah lights.

Here, Rashi does not choose one interpretation over another, as he did in the other two spots. Instead, he cites both explanations! The Kapos Temarim explains his change of policy by saying that Rashi used this opportunity to make it clear that he does not question either interpretation (as Yad Aharon claimed above); he believes that both of them are true. The same view is echoed by the author of Dina De’chayei11 In contrast, the Ma’aseh Roke’ach on the Rambam12 maintains that the two explanations in Shabbos are actually one – the same one Rashi wrote in Pesachim. Rashi intended to say that since it was decreed that the young women at the time had to be given over to the Greek ruler to be defiled before their marriage, therefore a woman had the opportunity to easily assassinate him and thus be instrumental in bringing the redemption.

I would suggest an additional dimension: When Rashi wrote in Pesachim that the miracles came about through women, this was not his personal view, but rather the commentary of the Ri Halevi, as suggested above. Therefore, we can infer that the single interpretation Rashi brings in Megillah – that the women too were as endangered by Haman’s decree as the men – is what Rashi considers the primary explanation. However, the fact that he cites both reasons in Shabbos indicates that Rashi grants that there is an auxiliary reason to obligate women in these mitzvos, the reason he quoted from the Ri Halevi in Pesachim.

Why Here and Not There?

But why did Rashi choose to bring both reasons in Maseches Shabbos, in the discussion of Chanukah lighting, and not in Maseches Megillah, where the topic is the Megillah reading? Surely this was not by chance.

A possible reason for this is that Rashi wanted to emphasize that women are obligated in the Chanukah lighting at the same level of men’s obligation, and can even expedite a man’s obligation by lighting on his behalf. Therefore, Rashi added the extra reason here, to stress that women and men are absolutely equal in this mitzvah.13 Regarding the mitzvos of Purim and the Megillah reading, it was unnecessary to emphasize this point, since Rashi wrote explicitly in Maseches Erchin14 that a woman can expedite a man’s obligation in these mitzvos. Therefore, in Megillah, Rashi suffices with writing what he considers the primary reason for their obligation and no more.15

9.

See Maseches Sotah, where the Gemara states that the Jews were redeemed in the merit of the Avos – the forefathers.

10. Shabbos 23a.

11. In his commentary on the Sma”g on Hilchos Megillah.

12. Chametz U’Matzah, Ch. 3-4.

13. Cited by many Rishonim. See Berur Halacha on Maseches Pesachim for further clarification.

14. Erchin 3a.

15. See Tosafos ibid, where he brings the words of the Baha”g, who differs with Rashi. See also the comment of the Berur Halacha.

1 8

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

We should point out that the Aruch Hashulchan16 cites the opinion of the Bahag as stating that women are not obligated to kindle the Chanukah lights; their obligation is only to see them, just as in the Megillah reading, they are obligated to hear the Megillah and not to read it. This would naturally affect their ability to expedite a man’s obligation in these mitzvos.

Women’s Obligation in Other Mitzvos We find other time related mitzvos that obligate women – such as eating three meals on Shabbos. One reason for this obligation is that man and women are equal in all Shabbos obligations.17 In addition, women were also included in the miracle of the mon – the mannah in the wilderness. Consequently, the obligation of eating three meals on Shabbos which we derive from the posuk about the mon is equally applicable to women.18 In his work Yesodei Yeshurun,19 my father zt”l discusses whether the obligation of eating three meals on Shabbos is de’oraysa – Torah ordained – or de’rabbonon – Rabbinically ordained. This question may affect women’s obligation in the mitzvah, as we will see.

In his book of chiddushim20, the Chasam Sofer asks an interesting question: If the fact that “they were in that same miracle” obligates women in mitzvos de’oraysa, why aren’t they obligated to put on tefillin.

After all, the posuk seems to hinge the mitzvah on Yetzias Mitzrayim – the exodus from Egypt?21 The same question can be applied to the mitzvah of tzitzis.22 The Chasam Sofer responds that the major purpose of the mitzvah of tefillin is to show our love for Hashem, as we say in kri’as shema. Similarly, the main purpose of tzitzis is to remind us of all the mitzvos.

However, since recalling Yetzias Mitzrayim, when Hashem did so much kindness for us, arouses our love for Him, we also mention Yetzias Mitzrayim in connection to these mitzvos. However, this is not adequate reason to obligate women in them.

A Clear Publicizing of – or a Subtle Remembrance?

The Harerei Kedem23 offers a different response to the Chasam Sofer’s question. He explains that there is a difference between a mitzvah that publicizes a miracle through the act of doing it and a mitzvah that is based on a remembrance of the miracle, but does not effectively publicize the miracle by the act of doing it. Women are obligated only in mitzvos of the former type, but not of the latter.

Therefore, women are not obligated to put on tefillin, even though “they too were in that miracle” of the Exodus, because while remembrance of Yetzias Mitzrayim lies at the base of the mitzvah, the act of putting on tefillin does not actually publicize the miracle, as does, for example, Chanukah lighting or Megillah reading. The same can be said in regard to tzitzis.

He goes on to give us a clear sign of which mitzvos publicize the miracle by the act of doing them – if Chazal instituted a beracha of “Al Ha'nisim” on the mitzvah. This beracha was instituted for three mitzvos only, precisely the three mitzvos we have been addressing: Chanukah candle lighting, Megillah reading, and the mitzvah of daled kosos – upon which we recite the corresponding beracha of “Asher Ge’alanu” in place of “Al Ha'nisim.”

16. Orach Chayim Siman 689, 5.

17. See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim, Siman 271, 1.

18. See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim, Siman 291, 3.

19. Yesodei Yeshurun Part 3, p. 249.

20. Chiddushei HaChasam Sofer, Maseches Shabbos ibid.

21. Shemos 13, 9.

22. Bamidbar 15, 43.

23. Gram- Hagoan Rav Moshe Soloveitchik zt”l, vol 2 Siman 163.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G HT

|

KOF-K

|

19

HALACHICALLY SPEAKING Authored by Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Recorder of KOF-K Policy Piskei Horav Yisroel Belsky Shlita Reviewed by Horav Yisroel Belsky Shlita

The young man sits down nervously at the table lavishly set with delicate Pesach china, smiling politely. It is his first visit to his future in-laws fine, Sefardic home, and he is anxious to impress them and please his kallah. Suddenly, he sees a platter of steaming rice being placed squarely in the middle of the table, right alongside the matzohs. With great effort, the chasan, of Hungarian extraction, restrains a shriek of horror, as he desperately wonders –

what do I do now?

We are all familiar with the custom of kitniyos on Pesach. In the following pages, we will take a closer look at this custom – to whom it applies, what it includes, and how halacha regards derivatives or extracts from kitniyos?

Origin of the Custom The custom to refrain from eating kitniyos – legumes and other related items – emerged well after the time of the Gemorah,1 at about the time of the Maharil (approximately 1427)2 and has become the strongly accepted custom3 among Ashkenazik circles.4 Kitniyos5 include rice,6 buckwheat,7 millet, beans,8

1. In fact the Gemorah (Pesachim 114b) mentions that Rabbah ate rice in front of Rav Huna.

2. Some say it was in the year 1300 that the custom started (See Yesodo Yeshurin 6:page 397).

3. Chai Adom 127:1, Aruch Ha’shulchan 4, Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 401-406 in great depth who lists the opinions on this matter.

4. Mordechai Meseches Pesachim 2:588, Darchei Moshe 453:2, Rama O.C. 453:1, 464:1, Levush 453:1, Elya Rabbah 3, Prisha 3, Gr’a 453, Shulchan Aruch Harav 3, Chai Adom 127:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 117:4, Aruch Ha’shulchan 4, Da’as Torah page 119, Shemiras Shabbos K’hilchoso 40:80, Yechaveh Da’as 1:9, 5:32, Bais Avi 2:11, 4:54, see Kaf Ha’chaim 11. On mustard, see Taz 453:1, Minhag Yisroel Torah 2:page 409). The Shulchan Aruch Harav 5 says the custom is only if the kitniyos fell into water.

5. Refer to Rambam Hilchos Kelayim 1:8 who lists which grains are called kitniyos. (See Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 297:3, see Tzohar 2:page 190). Some say kitniyos which do not come in contact with water are permitted (See Shulchan Aruch Harav 453:5). However, this is not the accepted custom (See Chai Adom 127:1, Tzohar 2:pages 194-195).

6. Elya Rabbah 2, Chok Yaakov 453:3, Chai Adom 127:1, see Minhag Yisroel Torah 2: page 205. Refer to Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 406-408. Those who are lenient hold the reason is because one can only be yotzei his obligation of matzah with something which becomes chometz (Magen Avraham 1). One should be more stringent with rice than other kitniyos (Chok Yaakov 453:5).

7. Mishnah Berurah 3.

8. Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 5:1, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:3.

2 0

|

KOF-K

|

P E S ACH

5 77 1

lentils,9 peas, and mustard.10 Although refraining from eating kitniyos is not a Torah obligation but rather a chumra – a stringency,11 an Ashkenazi Jew should not be lenient12 with regard to eating kitniyos.13 In fact, the Aruch Ha’shulchan14 states, “being lenient in this is testimony that he has no fear of Hashem or fear of sin, and he is not an expert in the ways of Torah.” He adds that “this custom is followed by all of Germany, France, Russia, Poland, and all of their descendants, and a snake should bite the one who deviates from it.”15 The stringency of refraining from kitniyos on Pesach was never assumed by the Sefardi communities. Therefore, the custom among the Sefardim is that kitniyos may be eaten.16 Although some poskim say that even Sefardim should not eat rice,17 the minhag of most Sefardim is to eat rice on Pesach.18

Reasons for the Custom A number of rationales have been suggested for the custom of refraining from eating kitniyos: Some say it is because kitniyos grows in fields adjacent to where chometz grains are grown, and some chometz may inadvertently become mixed into the kitniyos.19 Another reason cited is that kitniyos is often ground into a powder which resembles flour. An unlearned person may confuse the powder with wheat flour and consequently come to use regular wheat flour on Yom Tov.20 Even though this reason would ostensibly apply only to ground kitniyos, according to the stringent opinion, even if the kitniyos are whole, they may not be eaten because of a lo plug – the rule that no exception should be made in any case.21 Rabbeinu M’noach suggests an additional reason – that when one eats kitniyos one does not have true simchas Yom Tov.22

Which Additional Items are Included Aside from the items listed above, kitniyos includes: Bean sprouts, black eye peas, canola oil (see below), caraway, chickpeas23 corn,24 corn syrup (see below), cumin,25 dextrose, emulsifiers, fennel,26 fenugreek,27 flax seeds, green beans,28 guar gum, lecithin,29

9. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 297:7, see Minhag Yisroel Torah 2:page 212.

10. Rama 466:1, See Taz 453:1, Mekroeh Kodesh Pesach 2:60:3:page 207, Minhag Yisroel Torah 2: page 409.

11. Chok Yaakov 453:5, 9, Shulchan Aruch Harav 5, Mishnah Berurah 453:6.

12. The last day of Pesach if one does not have anything else to eat then one can be lenient (Mishnah Berurah 453:7, see Shulchan Aruch Harav 3 who says even on the last day of Pesach).

13. Refer to Sharei Teshuva 453:1.

14. 453:4, see Chasam Sofer O.C. 1:122.

15. 453:5. See Tov Ayin 9:6.

16. Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 5:1, Tur 453, Shulchan Aruch 453:1, Shulchan Aruch Hamekutzar 3:83:4. The Bais Yosef 453 says refraining from eating kitniyos is an extra chumra. Refer to Mordechai Pesachim (2:588), Tur 453, Besamim Rosh 348, Yesodo Yeshurin 6:page 399. The Da’as Torah page 119 says that it is forbidden to listen to those who are lenient. The Chacham Tzvi was not happy with the custom of kitniyos (M’eor U’ketziah 453, see Sheilas Yaavetz 2:147, Tov Ayin 9:6).

17. Pri Chadash 1, Birchei Yosef 453:1, Tov Ayin 9:6, Lev Chaim 2:94, Kaf Ha’chaim 8, 10, Piskei Teshuvos 453:footnote 6. Refer to Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 408-409.

18. Rav Poalim 3:30, Yechaveh Da’as 1:9, 5:32, see Rivash 420. If a Sefardi does not eat kitniyos on Pesach and then wants to change his custom he needs to be matir neder (Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 12).

19. Refer to Tur 453, Kol Bo 48, Levush 1, Gr’a, Ohr Yisroel 35:page 198-205 in depth, Minhag Avoseinu B’yudeinu 2:pages 421-424.

20. Bach, Bais Yosef, Prisha 3, Chok Yaakov 453:5, Shulchan Aruch Harav 453:3, Mishnah Berurah 453:6, Aruch Ha’shulchan 4, see Chai Adom 127:1, Biur Halacha “v’yeish.” Refer to Tzohar 2: page 189.

21. Mishnah Berurah 453:6.

22. Ohr Yisroel 35: page 206, see Kaf Ha’chaim Palagi 2:36 who says this reason and adds that according to this reason kitniyos should not be eaten on any Yom Tov. 23. The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 page 37.

24. Chok Yaakov 453:1, Mishnah Berurah 453:4, Aruch Ha’shulchan 3. Corn flour is also included in kitniyos (Shemiras Shabbos K’hilchoso 40:80, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:3, Hakotton V’hilchosuv 22:11, Halacha Shel Pesach page 102: footnote 40).

25. Shulchan Aruch Harav 453:4.

26. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

27. OU document P-77, Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43. See Sappirim Issue 5:pages 3-4 who is lenient based on the opinion of Rav Schwartz Shlita.

28. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

29. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

21

lentils, licorice, lucerne, lupine, millet,30 mustard,31 popcorn, poppy seeds,32 saffron, sesame seeds, snow peas, soy oil, soy beans, soy, starch, stabilizers, string beans, sunflower seeds, 33 and tofu.34 Quinoa (“keen-wa”) is a sesame sized kernel from the beet family and does not resemble any of the grains which are chometz or kitniyos. It is a dispute regarding the usage of quinoa for Pesach and one should consult their own Rav.35 However, coffee,36 tea,37 garlic,38 and radishes,39 are not included in the category of kitniyos.

Spices are also not included in the chumra of kitniyos.40 Nonetheless, one should check them and other permitted foods to make sure that no chometz grains were mixed in.41

Are Potatoes Kitniyos?

Many of those who rely on potatoes in one form or another as the mainstay of every Pesach meal may be surprised to know that some poskim included potatoes in the minhag to refrain from eating kitniyos on Pesach, since they too, can be ground into flour which can be confused with grain flour.42 However, to the good fortune of the Ashkenazic housewife, this opinion is not accepted today.43 Horav Moshe Feinstein zt”l44 explains why this opinion was rejected: He says that we only define something as kitniyos if there is an established custom to regard it as such. Since the custom of kitniyos dates back to the times of the Maharil, and potatoes did not reach the shores of Europe until the 16th century, they were never included in the chumra.45 The fact that there is a great need for potatoes on Pesach was also a factor keeping the consensus of poskim from including potatoes in the prohibition.

How about Peanuts?

According to the lenient opinion, peanuts and peanut oil are permitted on Pesach and are not included in kitniyos46 for the same reason mentioned above regarding potatoes – because any food which was not around at the time the chumra was instituted is not forbidden.47

30. Rambam Hilchos Chometz U’matzah 5:1, Chai Adom 127:1, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:3.

31. Rama 464:1.

32. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

33. Refer to Mishnah Berurah 453:11, see Da’as Torah page 118.

34. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

35. Refer to OU document P-95.

36. Refer to Pri Megadim M.Z. 1, Sharei Teshuva 453:1, Minhag Yisroel Torah 2: pages 213-214. See Tov Ayin 9:6.

37. Sharei Teshuva 453:1.

38. Refer to Chai Adom 127:1, Da’as Torah page 119, Minhag Yisroel Torah 2:page 214. Many have the custom not to eat garlic on Pesach (Refer to Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 464:1, see Magen Avraham 447:20.) However, the custom of many is to be lenient (Chai Adom 127:7, Betzel Hachuchma 4:113).

The same is true for radishes (Chai Adom ibid).

39. Chai Adom 127:7, Kaf Ha’chaim 20, Natei Gavriel Pesach 2:39:7. Refer to Minhag Yisroel Torah 2: page 213.

40. Rama 453:1.

41. Refer to Taz 462:3, Chok Yaakov 9, Be’er Heitiv 4, Shulchan Aruch Harav 6, Mishnah Berurah 453:13, Divrei Yatziv O.C. 195, Kol Mevaser O.C. 1:80.

42. Refer to Chai Adom Pesach question 20 in Nishmas Adom, Kaf Ha’chaim 21, see Aruch Ha’shulchan 453:3, Piskei Teshuvos 453:footnote 33. Horav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l was stringent in his own home regarding potato starch (Shalmei Moed pages 411-412).

43. Pri Megadim M.Z. 453:1, Sheilas Yaavetz 2:147, Aruch Ha’shulchan 452:18, 453:5, Divrei Malkiel 2:112, Chelkes Yaakov O.C. 207:2, Igros Moshe O.C. 3:63, Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 410-411, Minhag Yisroel Torah pages 310-371, Natei Gavriel Pesach 2:39:11:footnote 16. The Chofetz Chaim zt”l had the custom to eat potatoes on Pesach (Dugmas M’darchei Avi page 22:8, Hanhugos of the Chofetz Chaim page 185).

44. Igros Moshe O.C. 3:63.

45. Refer to Chok Yaakov 453:9, Ohr Yisroel 39: page 135.

46. Halichos Shlomo Moadim 4: footnote 28, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:4, Yesodo Yeshurin 6:page 421 quoting the opinion of Horav Shamshon Refoel Hirsch zt”l, see Sridei Eish 1:50:page 134, Mekreoh Kodesh 2:60:2, Chelkas Yaakov O.C. 207:2. Refer to Halacha Shel Pesach page 102: footnotes 42 and 46 who is stringent. The V’Yan Yosef O.C. 286 is stringent. The opinion of Horav Chaim Soloveitchik zt”l was to be lenient (Mekroeh Kodesh ibid).

47. Igros Moshe ibid. See Rivevos Ephraim 7:257, see Melamed L’hoyel 87-88. Some say today the custom is not to eat peanuts on Pesach (Halacha Shel Pesach page 102:22, see Gray Matter 1:page 254).

2 2

|

KOF-K

|

P E S ACH

5 77 1

Consequently, Horav Moshe Feinstein zt”l rules that one who has the custom to refrain from eating peanuts should adhere to his custom. However, one who does not have such a custom does not have to refrain from eating peanuts.

Are Kitniyos Oils Included in the Prohibition?

Many types of oil are derived from legumes - most commonly, soybean (vegetable oil) and corn oil.48. The poskim differ regarding the status of oil made from kitniyos for use in food: Does this oil have the same status as the grain itself, meaning that an Ashkenazi would not be able to use it on Pesach, or is it considered not in the category of kitniyos and therefore permitted?

The opinion of Horav Kook zt”l and others49 was to be lenient regarding such oils.50 However, the custom is to be stringent and not to use soybean or corn oil on Pesach.51 Some opinions say that rapeseed oil, more commonly known as canola oil, belonging to the mustard and cabbage family, should not be used on Pesach. The reason is that this oil was around at the time when the stringency of kitniyos was instituted.52 In contrast, oil derived from tree products, such as olives,53 palm, coconut, and walnuts54 are not subject to the chumra of kitniyos.55 Cottonseed oil is extracted from the seeds of the cotton plant after the lint has been removed. The Minchas Yitzchok56 is unsure whether to permit its usage for Pesach. Horav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt”l says that the custom is to refrain from using this oil on Pesach,57 while the Tzehlmer Rav zt”l was lenient.58 The custom in Eretz Yisroel is to be stringent and avoid using cottonseed oil, while in America, cottonseed oil is permitted, following the custom of Horav Moshe Feinstein zt”l, Horav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l, and all the Rabbonim who came from Europe.59

Other Kitniyos Derivatives In addition to oils, other examples of kitniyos derivatives are cornstarch and corn syrup (including high fructose corn syrup).60 Corn starch is derived from the starchy part of the corn, while corn syrup is made by adding enzymes to turn the corn starch into a syrup mixture of glucose, dextrose, and maltose.

Most halachic authorities agree that corn syrup has the same status as corn and is subject to the halachos of kitniyos.

As a rule, most major Kashrus organizations do not certify products for Pesach made from kitniyos derivatives.61

Paper Towels In recent years, companies have begun to market paper products, especially paper toweling, with certification of kashrus for Pesach, primarily because of the starch present in these products.

In practice, one may place food directly on any paper towels, without being concerned about its kitniyos starch content. Kitniyos are not chometz, and are not subject to the issur be’mashehu – the prohibition of consuming a miniscule amount. Therefore, there

48. Halacha Shel Pesach page 102: footnote 47.

49. Refer to Be’er Yitzchok 11, Maharsham 1:183, see Maharshag 2:43, Bais Shearim O.C. 215.

50. Yesodo Yeshurin 6: page 424, Gray Matter 1:page 251, Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 6:page 73.

51. Yesodo Yeshurin 6: pages 424-425, see Halachos Ketanos 1:103, Melamed L’hoyel O.C. 87, Rivevos Ephraim 7:257. Refer to Gray Matter 1:page 251.

52. Refer to Avnei Nezer 373, 533, Maharsham 1:183.

53. Minhag Yisroel Torah 2:page 215.

54. Refer to Halacha Shel Pesach page 102: footnote 46.

55. Refer to article in Hamodia April 6, 2005 by Rabbi Dovid Cohen Shlita.

56. 3:138:2, 4:114:3. See Cheshav Ha’efod 2:18, Minhag Yisroel Torah 2: page 215.

57. Halichos Shlomo Moadim 4:17: footnote 28. This is also the opinion of Horav Elyashiv Shlita (Orchos Rabbeinu 4: page 166:49).

58. The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 page 377. See Divrei Yatziv O.C. 196 who seems to be lenient.

59. Horav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Zichron Yehuda O.C. 139, Yesodo Yeshurin 6: pages 422-423, Mekoreh Kodesh (Pesach) 2:60, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:4.

60. Refer to oukosher.org. Some regular sodas make a special production and use sugar instead of corn syrup which was the old way of making the specific soda.

61. See The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 page 39.

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

23

is no issur, minhag or chumra to prevent a drop of kitniyos from falling into food.62 Indeed, the Shulchan Aruch63 permits the use of a lamp filled with oil from kitniyos on the dining table even though it is certain that some of the oil will be splattered onto food.

In the case of paper towels, there is no certainty at all of any leaching onto the food.64

Kitniyos She’nishtana A halachic distinction is made between a product that is derived from kitniyos and a product that has been so transformed – nishtana – from its original base of kitniyos as to have assumed a new identity.

The classic example of a product she’nishtana is “musk” – a byproduct of blood that is obtained from a gland in the stomach of a deer.65 According to the Mishnah Berurah66 and others,67 musk is considered a new entity since its form changed completely from the original blood and is therefore permissible for consumption.

The custom of many is to permit the use of kitniyos she’nishtana68 which means that the kitniyos has undergone a significant change in taste.69 Corn syrup which is changed into sorbitol70 or dextrose71 is not considered to have undergone a change (nishtana) and therefore is subject to the halachos of kitniyos. However, if the corn syrup is turned into ascorbic acid, it is considered changed into a new entity and is not subject to the halachos of kitniyos.72 Citric acid is another product originating from kitniyos, but certified for Pesach use because it has been transformed completely (see below).73 Kitniyos she’nishtana plays an important role in Pesach kashrus certification of soda since most diet sodas are made with aspartame – a sweet enzyme that grows on a derivative of kitniyos.74 Sodium erythorbate is kitniyos she’nishtana which is used in Pesachdika frankfurters, while a different kitniyos she’nishtana goes into frozen gefilte fish.75 Other kitniyos she’nishtana ingredients are malto dextrin, NutraSweet,76 polysorbates, sodium citrate and xanthan gum.77 Enzymes fermented from kitniyos are also considered kitniyos she’nishtana.78

Deriving Benefit from Kitniyos on Pesach As mentioned above, even according to the stringent opinion, kitniyos is not chometz. Therefore, one is allowed to have benefit from kitniyos, which is not allowed by chometz.79 Based on this, one is

62. See Be’er Heitiv 453:1 who seems to say otherwise. However, the Shulchan Aruch Harav 5 says not to be concerned with this, and the Darchei Moshe 2 says the custom is not like the opinion brought in the Be’er Heitiv.

63. 453:1, see Darchei Moshe 2.

64. Horav Yisroel Belsky Shlita. The kitniyos starch is so firmly bonded to the paper towel that an iodine test won’t reveal its presence (Horav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). (See The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 pages 424-425).

65. Refer to Meseches Berochos 43a, Rosh 6:35.

66. Mishnah Berurah O.C. 216:7, see Magen Avraham 3. See OU document P-86 who says that fermentations are not considered kitniyos sh’nishtana 67. Rabbeinu Yona Meseches Berochos ibid, Taz O.C. 216:2, Gr’a 4, see Chok Yaakov 467:16, Chasam Sofer Y.D. 117, Chazzon Ish Y.D. 12, Kashrus 1:pages 359-364 in depth.

68. Horav Yisroel Belsky Shlita. OU document P-69. This is the opinion of the OU. This is the opinion of Horav Schachter Shlita (OU) as recorded in Gray Matter 1: page 252.

69. Refer to Kashrus 1: pages 363-364.

70. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

71. Refer to Behind the Union Symbol 2005 page 13.

72. OU document P-51, see Mesora 1: pages 54-55.

73. The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 page 355.

74. Refer to The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 page 41.

75. The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 page 346.

76. Star-K Passover Book 2008 page 43.

77. Refer to oukosher.org “A change for the Better,” OU document H-35.

78. Personal letter from Rabbi Eli Gersten from the OU. 79. Rama 453:1, Mishnah Berurah 12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 7, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:7. For this reason, cosmetic or perfumes which only have kitniyos 2 4

|

KOF-K

|

P E S ACH

5 77 1

permitted to feed his animal a kitniyos product.80 One may also keep kitniyos in his house during Pesach if it has a hechsher (for Pesach use)81 without selling it to a non-Jew 82 As a precaution, one should write clearly on the product that it is kitniyos.83

Special Situations One is permitted to feed kitniyos to children,84 as long as there is a need for it; there is no maximum age.85 This includes baby formula that contains kitniyos.

Similarly, one who is sick r”l (even if he is not in danger) may eat kitniyos on Pesach.86 Based on this, one who is sick would be able to take a pill which has kitniyos.87 According to some poskim, when one is in a very pressing situation, one can eat kitniyos,88 but others argue against this view.

Some say it is proper to keep separate dishes for kitniyos food and wash the dishes in a separate sink.89 Others hold there is no reason for this to be done and that the same utensils may be used.90

East Meets West One who depends on his father for support must follow his father’s custom in regard to kitniyos.91 A woman from a Sefardi background, who ate kitniyos all her life, may not continue to do so if she marries an Ashkenazi. However, if the husband agrees, she may follow her old custom.92 If an Ashkenazi woman gets married to a Sefardi then she may eat kitniyos,93 and there is no need to be matir neder beforehand.94

may be used on Pesach (Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 420-421).

80. Halichos Chaim 1: page 111:340, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:7.

81. Opinion of Horav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Halacha Shel Pesach page 100: footnote 35.

82. Darchei Moshe 2, Rama 453:1, Elya Rabbah 5, Shulchan Aruch Harav 5, Chai Adom 127:1, Mishnah Berurah 12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 453:7, see Chok Yaakov 8. One is allowed to sell it on Chol Hamoed (Aruch Ha’shulchan ibid, Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 12).

83. If there is no hechsher on it for Pesach, some say one should sell it with the chometz, since the product may contain some chometz (Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 12).

84. Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:6, Yechaveh Da’as 1:9, Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 12. Refer to Hakotton V’hilchosuv 22: footnote 21 for why this is permitted. Some say one should try to avoid giving them rice, millet and buckwheat if possible since they are most similar to wheat grains (Piskei Teshuvos 453:footnote 36). Some add when eating kitniyos one should first boil them in water to avoid coming to chometz (Chasam Sofer O.C. 1:122, Mishnah Berurah 453:7).

85. Shevet Ha’kehusi 6:198.

86. Chai Adom 127:6, Mishnah Berurah 453:7, Divrei Yatziv O.C. 195.

87. Refer to Mishnah Berurah 453:7, Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 6:pages 70-71. In addition one may cook kitniyos for a sick person (Chai Adom 127:1, Shemiras Shabbos K’hilchoso 40:80). One should try to use separate utensils for this (Shemiras Shabbos K’hilchoso ibid).

88. Refer to Maharam Brisk 48, Shol U’meishiv 2:3:128, Heichel Yitzchok O.C. 52, Kol Mevaser 1:80, Otzros Yerushalayim 242:pages 660-661, Shoneh B’Shoneh 5785:pages 149-154 in great depth, see Da’as Torah page 119 who brings those who argue. Yesodo Yeshurin 6: pages 401-406 in great depth who lists the opinions on this matter. Refer to Tzemach Tzedek O.C. 56, Tzohar 2: page 193.

89. Refer to Yechaveh Da’as 1:9, Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 12, see Piskei Teshuvos 453: page 144. As far as kashering from kitniyos see OU document P-76.

90. Zera Emes 3:48. See Yechaveh Da’as 5:32. The Oz Nidberu 8:20:4 adds that one should even lend Sefardim one’s utensils on Pesach.

91. Hakotton V’hilchosuv 22:12.

92. Refer to Halichos Shlomo Moadim 1:5:7, Bunim Chavivim pages 100-101.

93. Yabea Omer O.C. 5:37, Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:13, Hamesivta 1987:page 163. Refer to Yismach Lev 1:page 258 who quotes the opinion of Horav Elyashiv who argues.

94. Halichos Shlomo Moadim page 91, Modanei Shlomo page 17, Halichos Beisa 18:11-12, see Shalmei Moed page 413. Refer to Kaf Ha’chaim Palagi 2:23 who says a man can force his wife to do like his custom. Refer to Igros Moshe O.C. 1:158, Minchas Yitzchok 4:84. However, if the woman did like her husband and now she wants to go back and do like her fathers custom then she needs to be matir neder (Modanei Shlomo ibid, Halichos Beisa ibid).

F O OD

F OR

T HO U G H T

|

KOF-K

|

25

If an Ashkenazi Jew finds himself in a Sefardi’s home on Pesach, according to some opinions, he may eat food not containing kitniyos that was cooked in pots previously used to cook kitniyos.95 Others say that one can be lenient only if the pot is eino benyomo – was not used for cooking kitniyos in the past 24 hours.96

Miscellaneous Halachos Regarding Kitniyos From when? – According to some poskim, the custom is that those who refrain from eating kitniyos do so from Erev Pesach at the time when chometz is forbidden.97 Bitul - Kitniyos is butel b’rov – nullified if it was mixed into a majority of permissible food.98 Muktzah - Kitniyos is not considered muktzah on Shabbos or Yom Tov for an Ashkenazi person, since one is able to give it to a Sefardi99 or to a child who is need of it.100

95. Yechaveh Da’as 5:32, Oz Nedberu 8:20:4, The Laws of Pesach: A Digest 2006 pages 38-39, Bonim Chavivim pages 415-419 in depth. There is no lo sisgodidu when two people are practicing two different customs on Pesach in the same house (Moed Lechol Chaim 2:15). Horav Ephraim Greenblatt Shlita says an Ashkenazi who eats by a Sefardi on Pesach should make sure that separate utensils are used (as quoted in Gray Matter 1:page 249).

96. Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 12.

97. Chok Yaakov 471:2, Shevet Ha’Levi 3:31 (end), Opinion of Horav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Sidur Pesach K’hilchoso 16:footnote 42*, Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 6:page 72, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 444:2 and Da’as Torah page 119 who seem to argue. On the last day of Yom Tov kitniyos is not eaten either (Mishnah Berurah 453:7).

98. Refer to Rama 453:1, Pri Chadash 1, Elya Rabbah 4, Chok Yaakov 6, Shulchan Aruch Harav 5, Chai Adom 127:1, Mishnah Berurah 9, Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 414-415, Oz Nedberu 8:20:4. See Halachos of Pesach page 104 who brings those who argue.

99. Shalmei Moed page 8:23:footnote 73 quoting the opinions of Horav Elyashiv Shlita and Horav Zilber Shlita, see Rivevos Ephraim 4:page 241:52, Nachlas Yisroel page 248. See Hagadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 13 where he quotes that it is muktzah, see Minchas Shlomo 2:pages 55-56. Refer to Rav Poalim 3:30 who does not permit an Ashkenazi to cook rice for a Sefardi on Pesach, see Yesodo Yeshurin 6:pages 411-412.

100. Haggadah of Horav Elyashiv Shlita page 13.

We are pleased to announce that once again KOF-K has joined with Rabbi Moshe Soloveitchik, Shlita, in the kosher certification of

Streit’s Kosher products.

Aron Streit's has been making fine kosher foods for Passover since 1925. Streit’s matzo is the oldest family owned Matzo bakery in the United States. They have provided generations of Kosher Consumers with the highest quality matzo and kosher products.

The KOF-K is honored to certify the Streit’s kosher products.

2 6

|

KOF-K

|

P E S AC H

5 77 1

Sefer Milei D’igros

Introduction by Rabbi Yisroel Poleyeff Shlit"a KOF-K is proud to present the printing of Milei D’igros, a 30 year correspondence between rebbi and talmid- Harav Moshe Ahron Poleyeff Z”L and Harav Mordechai Gifter Z”L. The exchange of letters between great talmidei chachamim and scholars is not an uncommon occurrence. History records many such exchanges between gedolim of the past such as R. Yaakov Emden and R. Yonosson Eibshutz.

The exchange reflects, among other things, a two part relationship between the writers.

For one, it’s intent was an exchange of thoughts and ideas in a particular field of knowledge and a testing of the views of one of the writers against the vast knowledge and analytical ability of the other. Thus, in the field of Torah scholarship, the writer may want to test one of his chiddushim, his novella, against the erudition of the other.

Additionally, the exchange of a large number of letters in the Torah field, usually between a student and his rebbi muvhak, also demonstrated the great longstanding love and affection and respect that the student had for his rebbi.

Young Mordechai Gifter came to Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan in the mid thirties and soon found himself in the shiur of Horav Hagaon R. Moshe Aharon Poleyeff. No one could have known at that time that a bond of love and friendship would develop between them that would last a life time. During his years in Rav Poleyeff’s shiur, he absorbed the Torah brilliance of his rebbi and soon recognized that there was no one like Rav Poleyeff who became his rebbi muvhak. A

tie developed between them that would never be broken.

The letters began soon after the young man left to learn in Telz in Europe. Letters would regularly arrive at the Poleyeff household from Rav Gifter containing kushyos and terutzim and his own thoughts and analyses on various subjects in shas.

Many of Rav Gifter’s comments were on the divrei halacha published by Rav Poleyeff and later combined into a 3-volume set called “Orach Meishorim”.

Each letter was carefully reviewed by his rebbi who then answered each and every one of them. These letters, all written by hand, began in the thirties and lasted into the fifties.

All told, they exchanged more than 100 letters, a vast number probably not matched by any other collection of letters in history.

This large number reflected Rav Gifter’s unquenchable thirst for his rebbi’s Torah as well as his love and affection for the gadol hador who had a profound influence on him as his teacher in the years of his youth.

Kol hamelamed es ben chavero Torah maaleh olov hakasuv keilu yelado. Rav Gifter was more than just a student of Rav Poleyeff.

He was like his son.

The publication of this collection of letters between two great gedolim of the not too distant past provides us with a glimpse into their lives in addition to a look into the Torah thinking of these two giants. It will also serve as a proper and lasting memorial to two great men who shaped the lives of hundreds if not thousands of young men. This invaluable volume deserves an honored place in the library of every Torah Jew.

For more information please call: KOF-K Kosher Supervision 201-837-0500 ext 5 F O OD

F OR

T HO U G HT

|

KOF-K

|

27

N O W

A V A I L A B L E

‫ספר‬

‫מילי דאגרות‬ The 30 year correspondence between rebbi and talmid:

Horav Moshe Ahron Poleyeff ‫ז״ל‬ and

Horav Mordechai Gifter ‫ז״ל‬ Containing ‫ דברי הלכה‬and historically significant comments and observations on Jewish life of that era.

design|vividesign|845.694.7186

ALSO AVAILABLE

‫חידושי תורה מאת‬ ‫הגאון הרב משה אהרן פאלייעוו ז״ל‬

‫ספר אורח מישרים החדש‬ ‫ סוכה‬,‫ ביצה‬,‫ בבא מציעא‬,‫ בבא קמא‬,‫פסחים‬

For more information please call: KOF-K Kosher Supervision 201-837-0500 ext 5 2 8

|

KOF-K

|

P E S ACH

5 77 1