Laws of Chametz and Matzah, Chapter 5 (Auto Translated)

Rambam, Laws of Chametz and Matzah, Chapter 5 – What is Chametz

Introduction to the Chapter

Speaker 1: Good evening. Good evening. We are learning the Rambam, Laws of Chametz and Matzah, the fifth chapter. Baruch Hashem, the Rav is back from resting with renewed strength, and we are going to learn the holy Torah.

Before we learn, we must express our gratitude, out of the obligation of hakaras hatov (recognizing the good), to our esteemed friend, the president of the well-known foundation that spreads Torah and wisdom in Israel, our friend the pious philanthropist Rabbi Yoel Eli Wetzberger, who is the sponsor of this shiur, and also all the other Jews who support our shiur. And yes, let us move forward.

Overview of the Chapter

We are going to learn in this chapter about chametz: what makes chametz, and how one must be careful when baking matzos that it should not become chametz. And at the end of the chapter we will learn about vessels: how one purifies vessels, hag’alah, libun, how one purifies the vessels so that one can use them on Pesach. Yes? Yes. Okay.

Now, the Rambam says as follows. I thought that it’s not exactly so, perhaps it’s the next chapter, but the Rambam calls it Laws of Chametz and Matzah. That is, here we have the prohibition of eating chametz, which we learned more or less in the first four chapters. Perhaps in this chapter as well is what is chametz and how it becomes chametz.

But there is, the chapter also appears to be an introduction to the topic of shemiras hamatzos (guarding the matzos), when one goes to make matzah, and the next chapter will already stand, in chapter 6, the positive commandment to eat matzah. But there are Laws of Chametz, the prohibition of chametz, and the mitzvah of matzah, which are very strongly connected, because matzah is not…

The Connection Between Chametz and Matzah

Very strongly connected. Very good, because if it were more practical, and the women would have great pleasure if it were so, that for eight days one doesn’t touch anything that has to do with wheat, one only eats eggs with potatoes. But in practice, matzah is chametz that has not become chametz’dik. It’s the same type of material from which chametz is made.

Therefore, the chapter is the boundary, because first he says what is chametz, the things that are chametz are what one makes matzah from, and afterwards he says how one makes it in such a way that it should actually be matzah.

Halacha 1 – Only the Five Species of Grain

The Two Main Ingredients of Matzah and Chametz

Now. The Rambam says as follows: “There is no prohibition of chametz on Pesach…” I’ve gotten a bit of a headache, so I can help afterwards. So basically, first we need to know, matzah or chametz, both are made from two main ingredients. That is, flour, let’s say wheat, and water. So we need to know which of our dry things becomes chametz, and which wet thing becomes chametz. These are the first two halachos that we will learn about this.

Which Types of Grain Can Become Chametz

The Rambam says as follows: “There is no prohibition of chametz on Pesach except for the five species of grain only.” There are other things from which one can make flour. I don’t know if they have the name “kemach” (flour), but things that are similar, from which one can make mixed with water and it becomes like a cookie or something. But in practice, these things are not chametz. Chazal say, only things that are from the five species of grain, which are called pas (bread). I mean, we also learned this halacha, for example, in the Laws of Birchas Hamazon, these things are called pas, the five species of grain. Only these things can become chametz.

Detailing the Five Species

“And they are” – he now explains which are the five things. He divides them, there are two categories. They are indeed five, but they are not five separate species, rather there are really two species, chittah (wheat) and se’orah (barley). For example, for halacha this is relevant, because terumas ma’aser can only be separated min bemino (from the same species). So in other topics it states which of the five species of grain are under the category of chittah, and which are under the category of se’orah.

And he says them here: “And they are the two types of wheat which are chittah and kusemes.” If I remember correctly, kusemes is called today, many people who have a hard time with spelt. “And the three types of barley which are se’orah and shiboles shu’al and shifon.” Shifon is oats. It’s commonly said that shiboles shu’al is oats, and shifon I don’t know. I don’t remember.

These are the five species from which when one makes flour it becomes chametz.

Discussion: Wheat Itself vs. Flour

“But” – but there are other… Why must one specifically make flour? Soon we will see that the wheat itself can… because in the wheat lies what can become… can make the next step. The wheat itself can be.

No, I’ll say it, the shell of the wheat is not the inside of the white piece, which when ground well is flour, but even before that it’s not ground so well into flour. I mean to say, wheat is flour that has not yet been exposed, that is still surrounded by a shell. Flour is when it’s already ground, it’s a second step. A wheat itself, one sees, one must know if there is moisture on it. But something is inside a wheat, it’s a wheat itself.

No, one sees a kernel. A kernel one must still grind extra, it may be white, but it’s not flour, it’s a fruit, it’s the wheat. Okay, we’ll see about this later. Actually, there’s a distinction in this between wheat and barley, I think. Whether when it’s a whole entity it can already become chametz.

Kitniyos Are Not Chametz

The Rambam says, but there are other things that are very similar, people put them in the same category as the five species of grain. They saw that regarding the blessing there is also a dispute about them, that you should say that one can indeed make a mezonos. And actually even in practice, every year before Pesach I have people calling me up, “Can you help me?” And he lists the things that lie in the drawer where all the sorts of oats lie. He lists barley and beans, they are two different types of worlds. Barley is from the five species of grain, and kitniyos, rice is however kitniyos.

“Such as rice and millet,” two types of rice. I mean that rice we know as rice, I don’t know exactly what it’s called in today’s… What does the… say? He doesn’t say no. “Beans and lentils,” other types of beans. Beans are beans, and lentils I think are… What are they called? Lentils have a name, right? Ah, lentils? Lentils, yes. Lentils, lentils, lentils, yes. “And similar things,” these things, “do not have the law of chametz.” This doesn’t have the law of chametz.

Halacha 1 (Continued) – Sirchon vs. Chametz

Kitniyos Can Become Sirchon, Not Chametz

Even if you have indeed managed to let it be flour, to grind these types of kitniyos, and make from it a flour, like rice flour, flour from rice, “and similar things in hot water,” there is about how to make, so chametz is the type of flour once it becomes fermented, it becomes puffed up. There is also about rice and millet to make, to produce such a type of flour. For example, one does it with hot water and covers it with cloths “until it swells” until it becomes puffed up, it becomes fermented. And it looks similar “like dough that has become chametz,” it looks like a… five-species-of-grain dough. You would think that you have indeed managed to make chametz from the five species of grain?

But Chazal say, no, “this is permitted to eat because this is not chametz but sirchon.” This is not called chametz, this is not called flour that has become chametz, rather it’s flour that has become rotten. This exists, when flour, when one mixes it with other things, it can become chametz, or it can become something that Chazal call sirchon. Even if people manage to indeed make something into good food, but it doesn’t have the law of chametz. I don’t know if the distinction is in reality, as if it’s a different chemical reaction that happens in the flour. It could be so. I mean, a great expert.

What Does “Sirchon” Mean

What we mean to say when it says sirchon, doesn’t mean to say that it must stink. No, sirchon doesn’t mean stinking, but it means not chametz. Chametz is a certain process, whatever that is, is called chametz, and sirchon is something another process which is called sirchon, it’s something just puffed up.

Because we’ll see later the same thing is also regarding when it’s made with water it’s called chametz, and when it’s made with mei peiros (fruit juice) it’s not called chametz, it’s called sirchon. One must know what sirchon means, because it hasn’t gone through the fermentation that means chametz. A different process.

Discussion: Is Sirchon Also a Type of Fermentation?

Because that’s the point of the… because every chametz you could call sirchon. It’s something that has rotted. It’s also something fermented, as you said, you want to ferment. Like chametz and yeast, for example. Regular chametz one doesn’t say ferment, one says chametz. In short, so, it’s all chemical processes. One of them is chametz, and one of them is not.

Right, if you let something lie for a long time, either it will become a good fermentation, and it will become, I don’t know, it will become wine or chametz. It will lie long, and the same thing can become brandy. Brandy is also a type of fruit that has fermented, it has become rotten in a good way. Or it becomes spoiled, and the halacha says here which is which. I say, it’s not a gezeiras hakasuv (Divine decree), I just don’t know exactly what we’re talking about, about that I say that… Yes.

Yes, it could be not only you know. There are many investigations in today’s commentators. We try to understand which exact process is the definition of chametz and which is not. But it could be that Chazal didn’t have the same sort of science that we have, even today. It’s not something that’s studied too much, it’s only relevant for the bakers. I mean that it’s not deep science. But one talks about this a lot, and there are disputes and investigations about it.

But it’s certain that when… So I think, I don’t mean what is certain. I think certainly that when Chazal say it truly, they mean something a different process. One can see the distinction. It doesn’t have the good taste, I don’t know? Chametz enhances the taste, but this is something just puffed up, something else is missing.

Practical Application: Rice Cakes and Other Modern Products

No, what I mean what will be a practical difference is, let’s say that today one has better machines and one can indeed make, I don’t know, a rice cake that looks very good, but it’s still something a different type of thing than chametz. A different type of chemical process has happened in it.

Novel Idea: Artificial Yeast May Not Be Chametz From the Torah

It could be the opposite, I think that… No one should rely on this for halacha, but I think that if one makes chametz, bread, challah with artificial yeast, I don’t know what it’s called, the not-real se’or (sourdough starter), I think that it’s not chametz from the Torah. I think that the only real chametz is the sourdough. If someone wants to be meticulous about burning sereifas chametz (burning of chametz), he should specifically burn sourdough, because that’s the chametz that Chazal spoke about. Today’s thing, one makes with chemicals, who knows, perhaps it’s actually sirchon, but not chametz.

One must know, if however the chemical process happens in the dough, the same as… If you have a different process, you see that it tastes different. Some distinction exists, right? It tastes different.

Yes, but doesn’t sourdough taste different than normal challah? It tastes different, certainly it doesn’t taste. It doesn’t have other ingredients, it has fewer ingredients. If you make plain challah, plain with flour and water, it has no taste. The sourdough gives a taste, because the chametz in it, it’s a good chametz, one makes it well, it has a taste.

So, I mean, what I mean to bring out is this, if it were a mitzvah to have chametz, certainly no Chassidic Jew would eat today’s.

Mei Peiros Do Not Cause Leavening — Versions of the Rambam and Dispute of the Rishonim

Digression: The Custom of Prohibiting Kitniyos on Pesach

Speaker 1:

Just as one doesn’t eat machine matzah.

Speaker 2:

Hey, is it the same?

Speaker 1:

Yes, but in practice, that’s not what was meant. The same thing, chametz means that. Okay, I don’t know if one can sign on to this, but it’s not to be lenient, but I say that we want to see the chametz, to say that there is a distinction. That means needs.

Speaker 2:

Hey, does it look similar?

Speaker 1:

Yes, but it’s not, it’s something else. Very good.

Rabbeinu Manoach’s Reasons for Prohibiting Kitniyos

Speaker 1:

By the way, we spoke here about kitniyos. We all have, we follow the prohibition of kitniyos. The prohibition with kitniyos is not because we are concerned that it indeed becomes chametz, because Chazal said that it doesn’t become chametz, it doesn’t become chametz.

There is here an interesting Rabbeinu Manoach, he says as follows, he brings that in Sefer HaMinhagos, one of the Rishonim, says that one doesn’t eat kitniyos on Pesach. He says, the reason is, says Rabbeinu Manoach himself, because Yom Tov has what makes “vesomachta bechagecha” (and you shall rejoice in your festival), and no one rejoices with food of kitniyos. It’s interesting, we enjoy our cholent very much, but one sees many times in the Gemara that kitniyos was much cheaper, it’s hard on the stomach, it’s not a thing that’s good to eat on Yom Tov, because on Yom Tov you don’t go around with a stomach full of kitniyos.

Later he says, that even if someone only had a prohibition with kitniyos, he may begin. He brings a halacha like someone who only had a prohibition and he becomes aware that it was in error, there’s a Gemara in… there’s a Gemara in… I don’t think in the sugya of ragi, like when one becomes aware that it was in error it becomes permitted.

But what he says is that it could be that the reason is because it falls in… One reason why it could be prohibited is because wheat can fall in among kitniyos.

At the end he says an interesting thing, that there are types of plants that when they grow well become like wheat, and when they don’t grow well are called kitniyos. And here is the concern, you see the last piece that he says, that it changes, and in good weather it becomes into one of the five species of grain? Interesting, I didn’t know about this. And in bad weather it becomes into kitniyos, therefore you don’t know, perhaps this year it’s not true kitniyos, rather it’s from the five species of grain.

By the way, in practice, at the end he indeed has a reason why one should be afraid of kitniyos. Obviously, our custom is… the Ashkenazic custom. Our Ashkenazic custom doesn’t have to do with kitniyos.

Practical Application Regarding Potato Starch and Pesach Cookies

Speaker 1:

Again, I want to say this not about questioning whether one can make from it whether it indeed becomes chametz. It’s certain that it doesn’t become chametz, but the point is because one is afraid that a wheat kernel falls in, or perhaps the concern of Rabbeinu Manoach.

Presumably one doesn’t conduct oneself, that is, one used to make bread from beans or from rice, one makes… about rice one can indeed make.

Speaker 2:

No, I’ll say it, because according to our custom it’s even more stringent, because we make with potato starch or with I don’t know other things.

Speaker 1:

What do you call things that you use white?

Speaker 2:

Potato starch, yes. But there is more, there is almond flour today one holds other things that look exactly like chametz.

Speaker 1:

In any case, it looks… One sees the finished product, it looks like a cookie.

Speaker 2:

It should never look like it should look like flour, I mean like dough.

Speaker 1:

Like flour it certainly looks.

Speaker 2:

One puts more something a cake.

Speaker 1:

Don’t you see dough? Do you see dough? You don’t make the cookies. Perhaps ask those who make it. Is dough laid out?

Speaker 2:

Okay.

Speaker 1:

I don’t know if it puffs up, I don’t know. Perhaps not. I don’t know if it puffs up. But… It becomes such a thick dough. Also when we make cake, one doesn’t let it on like wheat everything. Something a different process. I don’t know exactly. Perhaps indeed a cake is not chametz? I don’t know. I don’t know if the point. Anyway, it looks like bread. I mean the point is as it stands, at least.

The Shulchan Aruch HaRav’s Reason and the Rambam’s Position

Speaker 1:

But he says this, it indeed states, he brings for example that the Shulchan Aruch HaRav said this is the reason, that one used to indeed make, it looks something kitniyos, bread, or cookies, or something, I don’t know what, it looks similar, one will be mistaken. If that is the reason, certainly all the Pesach cookies and all these things should be prohibited all the more so.

To this the Rambam says very clearly that it’s not a problem, because he says this is his language, his language is this “because even if one kneads flour and covers it with his garment until it swells almost like dough,” the Rambam says that one may indeed. The Rambam says the essential law. If someone comes and says, “Look, my children get confused, I make a decree,” it’s not a contradiction with this. And if you don’t have a custom about this, all these things that we use should indeed be prohibited.

Speaker 2:

I hear, I hear.

Chapter 5: What is Chametz – Continuation of Law 2 and Mei Peiros, and Law 3 Cooking Grain

Continuation of Law 2 – Mei Peiros Do Not Cause Leavening

The Rambam’s Amendment in Peirush HaMishnayos

Speaker 1: We meant to say that it’s in a museum, you can see it on the internet. And in the Peirush HaMishnayos the Rambam actually changed the same thing, and it says “mutar le’ochlo” (permitted to eat it), and you can actually see the Rambam’s own pen how he crosses out, so he brings, you can look it up whoever wants to search for the picture, and he writes on the side that one is not chayav kares.

So indeed, we see clearly that the Rambam made the change, not only in Mishneh Torah but also in Peirush HaMishnah, but what “ein chayav kares” means, whether it means that therefore one is chayav, it’s assur like derabbanan, like chametz nuksheh, that’s not one hundred percent clear in the Rambam. It’s, I hold it a bit open.

Two Approaches in “Mei Peiros Do Not Cause Leavening But Cause Rotting”

Speaker 1: I saw that there are two approaches that interpret “ein mei peiros machmitzin ela masrichin.” Simply we would say that it’s the same as we learned by rice, that this means it didn’t become chametz at all.

Rabbeinu Manoach brings an approach that… we will later learn that if you soak the flour with hot water, the heat of the water doesn’t let it become chametz afterward. He says the same thing, mei peiros is very powerful, it has the same concept as hot, and this makes it so it can’t become chametz afterward.

It doesn’t seem so, because later we see that if it has a little water it does become chametz. But it would be interesting, if one of our listeners understands chemistry, someone should see whether what they say that rice and millet don’t cause leavening, and mei peiros don’t cause leavening, whether in chemistry one can see what they mean by this, whether it’s a different kind of fermentation? Or yes.

Speaker 2: No, I mean like Rabbeinu Manoach, the… well, more a prevention.

Speaker 1: Yes, the acid, something a… but then it seemingly wouldn’t be the thing that even if it has a drop of water, would a drop change it.

Speaker 2: Perhaps because it’s a gezeirah already, perhaps this is already not really…

Speaker 1: Okay, let’s learn further.

What Does Mei Peiros Mean

Speaker 1: And mei peiros, what does mei peiros mean? Says the Rambam, it’s not true that it only means squeezed fruits, rather the definition of it is broader. Like wine and milk and honey and oil, or apple juice or pomegranate juice, and all similar things from other wines and oils and liquids. Any oil, wine or liquids is called mei peiros and it doesn’t cause leavening.

Discussion: Why Milk and Honey Are Called Mei Peiros

Speaker 1: Also the Rishonim here ask immediately, like for example milk they say why? Because what does the cow eat? The cow eats fruits and grass, things that are called like…

And the same thing, I saw interesting, the Hagahos Maimoniyos brings… no, I’ll tell you regarding honey. He says, honey doesn’t only mean date honey, because that’s certainly mei peiros, but even bee honey. He says like this, as Rav Yosef translates – I don’t know who this translator Rav Yosef is – as Rav Yosef translates on the verse “asher tis’enah hadevorah,” so Rav Yosef’s translation says that just as the bees run around and they extract from all fruits and from all flowers the juice, and they give it out, and bee honey is also pure fruit just as it is.

Speaker 2: So, what’s the definition? What does it mean that it’s not water we call it mei peiros?

Speaker 1: No, I say other liquids. You can write other liquids. If you think about it, wine is made from fruit, oils are also made. All oils are made from fruit.

Speaker 2: Okay, but it wasn’t called mei peiros in other contexts.

Speaker 1: Okay, could be. No, we need to think if someone will come up with some other kind of fruit, I don’t know, rice drink, or someone makes today some new kind of drink from some other things, perhaps it won’t be in the category, because it could be that the reason why it’s called mei peiros is because they originate from fruits. The milk makes, the cow makes its milk from grass and from…

Speaker 2: I mean that the definition is forced. Milk is milk. That’s what it meant.

Speaker 1: You’re right, it could be a question. That could then be a question. We need to know what’s the reasoning why, it has some chemical, or we need to know if it has some new thing.

Eggs – Dispute Between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam

Speaker 1: One thing that the Rambam doesn’t list here is eggs. Eggs are not in the category of wine and oil and liquids. There’s a great dispute among the Rishonim. Rashi was stringent about eggs, and his grandson Rabbeinu Tam was noheg leniency with eggs.

Because today for example, when they sell matzah ashirah, so that one can easily have lechem mishneh on Shabbos Erev Pesach, they usually make it with eggs, that’s the easy way how to make it. It depends on the dispute between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam.

Speaker 2: That’s matzah. If it’s matzah, there’s no problem at all. The question is whether one can be yotzei with that matzah ashirah.

Speaker 1: It’s matzah ashirah, yes. There’s even matzah ashirah. According to if mei beitzim is not mei peiros, then this isn’t matzah at all. It’s just a new food, yes. Bread.

Speaker 2: I mean that it’s a permitted thing, it’s not matzah.

Provided That No Water At All Is Mixed In

Speaker 1: Says the Rambam, the law that mei peiros doesn’t cause leavening is only when it’s pure mei peiros, as he already emphasized right at the beginning. Provided that no water at all is mixed in. Not any, he says shem mayim. Anything that’s called water.

Speaker 2: Yes, shem mayim. Any water.

Speaker 1: Interesting, both times he says this word shem mayim ba’olam. Something he had here something that bothered him. It means any any any water. Any any water. And if any water is mixed in, if any water is mixed in, these cause leavening then it does cause leavening, because the act itself the mei peiros alone wouldn’t.

With the little water, it means like this, even if it’s only a drop of water that the water itself couldn’t cause any leavening, it’s only a drop. But then it makes that also the mei peiros can cause leavening. That’s how I mean to learn at the end.

Speaker 2: Oof.

Discussion: Water in Wine and the Chemical Question

Speaker 1: For example, on such a thing becomes a question, I mean a tremendous one, that wine also usually has some water. Yes, they wash off the grapes, or a little water falls into the wine. Should you also say that every wine we need to be afraid about the drop of water in it?

They say no, that once it’s been nullified in the wine, it has the status of wine. It could be the Rambam’s language shem mayim, perhaps the Rambam yes, makes us worry about such a thing, that any mei peiros, if there’s in it even just a little water, that fell in, perhaps that’s but very difficult.

Speaker 2: We spoke about this a minute ago.

Speaker 1: It’s very difficult to understand. There are even those who say even more, Rabbeinu Manoach brings and others that perhaps if you add water to mei peiros it becomes even worse, it becomes even more quick to leaven. It’s very difficult to understand. We need to know the reality of what they’re talking about. It could also be that they made such a broad rule, so much mei peiros can be every thing is a bit different.

It’s hard for me to understand, because actually, what are grapes? What is apple juice? It’s water from apples. It goes through a process, it comes from the water.

Speaker 2: Yes, you say that milk is mei peiros because the cow is called milk, the cow also drinks water.

Speaker 1: Yes, you know? In some way you can say that the wheat also has water, and the water also has the earth wheat.

Speaker 2: True, true. And the person also has water, yes.

Speaker 1: True, everything has water. That’s water. Ultimately mayim, yes, the whole world was mayim bamayim. So everything said, everything comes from water. Everything has water in Gemara Chagigah. What does it mean the beginning world was water, it just became snow, it just became ice?

Speaker 2: Yes, so what do we want to say here? So how can it be chemically it’s not possible to find a liquid that doesn’t have in it any water?

Speaker 1: Rather what, we have to say the previous thing, that the chemical of the sharpness, on whatever there is in the mei peiros, prevents from becoming chametz. Just like how will he understand what prevents if you put in a little water.

But seemingly, the thing, if you put it in hot water, it helps that it should be prevented even later. I don’t believe that Rabbeinu ben Nachman said that if he put mei peiros, one can afterward add water. Let’s see, the next law we will learn about scalding, chalatah. Just as you pour on with hot water, it can’t become chametz afterward even if you pour in cold water.

Speaker 2: Yes, but I say Rabbeinu Manoach puts together the two laws. He says that the sharpness of the mei peiros makes it so it shouldn’t be able to become chametz afterward. He adds by way of… I don’t know if he means that even later it won’t be able to become chametz, it will ruin?

Speaker 1: Perhaps he doesn’t mean it halachically.

Speaker 2: Yes, perhaps he brings out the idea that it interferes a bit with the process before the becoming chametz.

Speaker 1: So what you said that then it becomes stronger is the question on the word harei eilu machmitzin. Simply one can learn harei eilu machmitzin two ways. Harei eilu machmitzin, if you left it for eighteen minutes. Like all other laws of chametz. But other opinions say it causes leavening more, that it becomes immediately, it becomes right away chametz, because the water with mei peiros causes more leavening. We should know.

Speaker 2: Okay, let’s learn section 3. Well, says the Rambam further. Sorry.

Speaker 1: Yes, what happens when… okay, let’s learn.

Law 3 – We Don’t Cook Wheat or Flour in Water

We Don’t Cook Wheat in Water

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Cooking Grain, Fruit Juice, and Scalding

Speaker 1: One may not cook wheat in water, such as rifot. There is a type of food called rifot. I’ve seen that nowadays it’s called “bulgur,” and it’s a Middle Eastern dish similar to couscous, where there’s cut-up wheat that’s cooked with spices and eaten. It’s a popular food. One may not do this, because there’s no difference from making dough, and also when one cooks it, it can become…

Speaker 2: Ah, one needs to know if this is chametz.

Speaker 1: The Rebbe says that it’s complete chametz. Interesting. One needs to see later that it fits with the law of chalitah (scalding), yes? Chalitah is another thing, but here one sees a novelty, that not only when one takes wheat, flour, and grinds it, not grinds it, kneads it and everything, does it become chametz. Rather, one can even cook wheat directly in water, it’s also already chametz. This we’ll see later in several ways, and this is not with water, on wheat, whole wheat it’s called chametz.

Speaker 2: Perhaps this is a… perhaps this is a… perhaps this is a… and not flour.

Speaker 1: Or, there are two types. Or flour means making such… making dumplings, making… I don’t know, a porridge, a groats. Even if it hasn’t become… what I mean to say all these things, is even if it hasn’t become from risen wheat, from risen dough. Such as levivot… levivot means, yes, you say. You take something else. You take something else. You take such sorts of things. We’ll say that if one has cooked with this, this is complete chametz.

And this is when they split in the cooked dish

Speaker 1: But the Rambam says, and this is, the law that it becomes complete chametz. Ah, here he says yes, this is complete chametz means that it’s Biblical chametz. He says, and this is when they split in the cooked dish, that the wheat kernels, I mean the splitting refers simply to the wheat kernels, the flour doesn’t become split. The wheat kernels,

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Cooking Grain, Fruit Juice, and Chalitah

Law 3: Cooking Wheat and Flour

Speaker 1: Levivot means, yes, what you say, you take such sorts of things, and when, if one has cooked with this, this is complete chametz. But the Rambam says, and this is, the law that it becomes complete chametz, ah, here he says yes, this is complete chametz means that it’s Biblical chametz.

He says, and this is when they split in the cooked dish, that the wheat kernels, I mean the splitting refers simply to the wheat kernels, the flour doesn’t become split. The wheat kernels, if you can make sure that the wheat kernels remain completely closed until the end, water hasn’t entered deep inside the wheat kernel. But if it has become split, I mean as usually happens, the wheat kernel opens a bit, it gets a hole, and there water enters, and it makes it wet inside the wheat kernel, that’s when it becomes complete chametz.

Discussion: Why is split chametz complete?

Speaker 1: I mean seemingly when he says when it’s not split, it will perhaps not be complete chametz, but it will be at least Rabbinically forbidden. Also I have simply difficulty… I’m saying that even split is hard to understand why that’s called chametz. It becomes risen, yes, literally. Chametz is by any amount, it could be such a small drop inside the wheat kernel has become a bit fermented.

Speaker 2: No, one can’t come to that because chametz is by any amount.

Speaker 1: Seemingly yes. Yes, I understand that it’s any amount, it’s not going any large piece of chametz, but still it’s something…

Law 3: One may not fry dough in oil on a pan

Speaker 1: Okay. Let’s continue, another thing that one may not do. One may not fry dough in oil on a pan. That one may not fry dough that one has made, one may not fry it with oil on a pan, one may not fry dough.

We’re talking here if one lets it become chametz, if one lets it more than the measure, or the word here is about the fruit juice it goes… become chametz even faster. One can learn it this way, that one has made dough, even if it’s still within the eighteen minutes, but if one is going to fry it with oil, the fruit juice from it, the oil is fruit juice, it will hasten the…

Speaker 2: That’s only according to the opinion that says so.

Discussion: Dispute between Rabbeinu Manoach and Maggid Mishneh

Speaker 1: But… not clear. Perhaps he means like you said earlier, you said “one may not cook wheat.” What’s the question? It’s less than eighteen minutes, and without water perhaps. We’re talking about a way that… again, when it was wheat kernels, one may fry in oil on a pan, because the oil is fruit juice. Yes? And just as one may make with any fruit juice one should be allowed.

Speaker 2: Bread what may one?

Speaker 1: No, I’m saying, here he says dough one may not. Wheat kernels themselves one would be allowed, yes? Wheat kernels in oil on a pan one should be allowed, yes? Because the wheat kernels are only in contact with fruit juice, not with any water. That means with the oil one should be allowed. But dough that already has water, that one may not, because the frying is indeed now in fruit juice, but it already has water in it.

Law 3: But one may cook bread and roasted flour

Speaker 1: But after what… but bread and flour that already… but one may cook bread and roasted flour. Bread that one has already baked is no longer leavening afterward, one may now cook it in water. Because once it’s been baked, it won’t become chametz again. And the same thing roasted flour, flour that one has roasted has already finished, it’s already been finished, it’s no longer now a flour that can become chametz, one may now cook with water. And it’s talking about the… yes.

Dispute of Rambam’s Commentators: Rabbeinu Manoach and Maggid Mishneh

Speaker 1: So here, on this I also saw there are two opinions. The thing that one may not fry dough in oil on a pan, I see that there’s a dispute between two commentators on the Rambam, Rabbeinu Manoach and the Maggid Mishneh, and they both continue according to their approach.

Rabbeinu Manoach said that the reason why fruit juice doesn’t leaven is because it holds back, because it has fruit juice it holds it back from leavening. So he says that… that the thing that “one may not fry dough in oil” is if one leaves it long, if the dough already has water, and before one puts it on the oil it can already become chametz, then one may not. But if immediately when one makes the dough one puts it already on the hot oil, it should be permitted.

But the Maggid Mishneh doesn’t learn this way, he learns that there’s something of a law that fruit juice doesn’t leaven, and if it has any water it does leaven. So there is the case, the dough is simply flour with water. Oil is indeed fruit juice, but here it’s a mixture of fruit juice with water, so it does leaven.

The Stringency of Gebrochts

Hagahot Maimoniyot: Fear of flour that isn’t well baked

Speaker 1: But bread and roasted flour not. Here there’s a well-known thing that’s called by us gebrochts. Gebrochts is simply bread or roasted flour. So the Rambam says that once it’s already been cooked or baked it’s no longer leavening.

But the Hagahot Maimoniyot brings Rishonim who said that one should be concerned that perhaps there is in the bread some drop of flour that hasn’t yet baked well and that can become chametz. So that’s where our stringency of gebrochts comes from, that perhaps there remained on the matzah some drop of flour that hasn’t become well baked, and now when you mix it together it can become chametz.

I mean the stringency of gebrochts has to do with this law here on top. A Hagahot Maimoniyot? Or let’s see, where did I see this law? I know that gebrochts is about this, but it’s much a later stringency. It was innovated the… how did I see? Chassidim thought up this stringency. Can you in a later one will see the chalitah in the next piece, and one doesn’t do it. I didn’t see it perhaps there? Not, no, not in… it says in the… I saw it in the Rambam’s commentator. I saw that one of the Rambam’s commentators is concerned about this thing. I don’t know if it’s Rabbeinu Manoach, let’s see. I don’t remember right now, but that’s what they’re concerned that perhaps there’s a bit of flour in it.

Discussion: Difficulties with the stringency of gebrochts

Speaker 2: Ah yes, that’s true. The concern is very hard to understand, because I’ve never found flour in any matzah, and even when there was flour, it’s roasted flour, and roasted flour also doesn’t become chametz. It was very hard to believe that it looks exactly like roasted flour.

Speaker 1: But perhaps the word is a concern of some flour that hasn’t become well roasted. It could be that in the times of the students of the Maggid, students of the Mezeritch Maggid, not the Maggid. It’s not earlier. It’s certainly not earlier. The stringency is certainly not earlier, because we know from the… could be it’s something of a similar thing.

It’s very hard to understand. They write, the Shulchan Aruch HaRav writes that one sees… not the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, his responsa. One sees that there is flour. How can you say that there’s no flour? That’s not flour. That’s simply… how is it called? It’s dust. It’s matzah. But one doesn’t see any flour on the matzah. I’ve never seen flour on the matzah. And even when there was, it’s hard to believe that it was in the oven that’s thousands of degrees there. It should remain something not complete. Yes.

Story with the Kotzker Rebbe

Speaker 1: So, there was a story that the holy Kotzker Rebbe asked his son-in-law, the Avraham Ezerman. He will clarify whether there’s such a reason to be stringent about gebrochts. He came back and he said that he doesn’t see any reason to be stringent. The Rebbe said that he should first be stringent, it seems that it’s according to Kabbalah.

So, I with the Kotzker Rebbe hold that gebrochts is not a stringency that makes sense. Fine, what will we do? Okay, very good.

Law 3: Chalitah — Throwing flour into boiling water

Speaker 1: Further… yes, you’re right that it connects with this law. One also sees, say, the thing of being stringent, one sees the next law was also to see, one found some stringencies. The Rambam is a pleasant thing at the end. Something is called chalitah.

The Rambam says thus: “And if one boiled the water a lot, and afterward threw into it the flour”, one threw in flour. There is this language, not that he threw hot water into the flour, but he threw flour into hot water, then yes, “this is permitted”. And not like earlier he said, “one may not cook,” one may not cook flour in water. But if the water is very hot and afterward one put in the flour, one may yes.

“Because it cooks immediately before it can leaven”. Ah, the “immediately” means to say before the flour, before it became dough, before it became anything, one put it into hot water, and then it gets cooked before it has the chance to become chametz. One may yes. One may make such a sort of dumpling for example, even not necessarily a hard matzah, cook in this way if it’s already very hot when one puts it in. Very hot, because then it gets cooked, and the cooking stops it from being able to afterward go through the process of fermentation, of becoming chametz, of becoming dough.

Custom of Babylonia and Spain: To forbid chalitah

Speaker 1: The Rambam says, this is from the basic law. But “and they already practiced in Shinar and in Spain and in all the West” – one conducts oneself however in Babylonia and in Spain, the two places where the Rambam had… Babylonia he didn’t live, but Babylonia was the Geonim. He knew what he knew from where all of Israel conducts itself. “And in all the West”, and all countries west of the Land of Israel, “to forbid this thing”, to forbid the thing of chalitah.

Speaker 2: Morocco, yes.

Speaker 1: “To forbid this thing”, to forbid the thing of cooking flour in water. Why? “A decree lest one not boil the water very well”. When one makes it when one knows for sure that it gets cooked before it can become chametz, then there’s no problem. But we are concerned that perhaps the water won’t be so hot, and it will take a bit until it gets cooked, and in that time it can yes become chametz.

Discussion: The measure of eighteen minutes

Speaker 2: I want to understand, if it’s less than eighteen minutes, I don’t have a problem.

Speaker 1: We’re not talking when it’s less than eighteen minutes. One minute, have you already encountered in the Rambam the topic of eighteen minutes?

Speaker 2: Exactly.

Speaker 1: Later we’re not going to talk. Yes, it does say a measure of the time to walk a mil, he says in this chapter. Until now we haven’t seen it yet.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Cooking Grain in Fruit Juice, Karmel, and Mixing Barley and Wheat

Discussion: Problem of leavening in hot water

Speaker 1: But we are concerned that perhaps the water won’t be so hot, and it will take a bit until it gets cooked, and in that time it can yes become chametz.

I want to understand, if it’s less than eighteen minutes, I don’t have a problem. We’re not talking when it’s less than eighteen minutes.

Speaker 2: One minute, have you already encountered in the Rambam the topic of eighteen minutes?

Speaker 1: Exactly. Later we’re not going to see.

Speaker 2: Yes, it does say the measure of the time to walk a mil later in this chapter.

Speaker 1: Until now we haven’t seen it yet. So, we don’t know yet.

One minute, I want to understand, the word here is… there’s no going eighteen minutes. So what’s the problem with… it becomes chametz immediately. How did he say that it doesn’t become chametz immediately? You have before a new thing that it takes eighteen minutes?

But I want to understand, that’s the way how one makes matzah. One takes water with flour. Hot water with flour will be worse than regular water with flour. I mean that it will indeed later it will say about this hot…

Speaker 2: Okay, one doesn’t make matzah by cooking. One makes matzah by baking.

Speaker 1: By baking? That’s the word? That one may only bake and one may not cook matzah?

Speaker 2: I mean it’s more, because later we’ll see also what temperature the water should be, and such laws. So later it will be. What it says here is… one doesn’t make matzah. It’s not going to come out any matzah from this. It’s going to be some kind of cooked thing.

Speaker 1: But the form is appropriate.

Speaker 2: Okay, I’m not talking here as matzah a measure, but as chametz… it’s not matzah, it’s something else.

Speaker 1: Okay, later we’ll see…

Speaker 2: Here, the things that can become a bit chametz, put in a wheat kernel in water, and one doesn’t make. It doesn’t say that one needs eighteen minutes or anything.

Speaker 1: Okay, later it will say more.

Speaker 2: Okay. Later it will say the order of making matzah. There it will say how long and what kind of water one should use, and so on. Here we’re talking as chametz. Later one will talk as matzah. There’s no rule that it only becomes chametz and one leaves it eighteen minutes. The rule doesn’t say. Until now they haven’t mentioned such a rule.

Law 4: Cooking grain and flour in fruit juice

Speaker 2: The Rambam says further, what we just talked about cooking, that essentially one would be allowed and one forbids it, this we’re talking about cooking in water. But in fruit juice it’s permitted to cook grain, one may take the whole kernels, wheat, or flour, and cook it in fruit juice, because as we discussed, fruit juice doesn’t leaven.

And so, dough that was kneaded with fruit juice. Even when one has already made dough. First he talks about throwing raw flour or grain into the fruit juice and cooking, or when one has already made dough from it. But if the dough is only made with fruit juice, and afterward in its cooking in fruit juice one cooked with fruit juice, or roasted to fry in oil, another kind of way of cooking with fruit juice, by frying on a pan with oil, frying, where oil is also fruit juice, this is permitted, because fruit juice doesn’t leaven. This is fruit juice cooked with fruit juice.

Fruit juice cooked in water one won’t be allowed, as we learned earlier. Fruit juice cooked in fruit juice or fried in fruit juice one may.

Right, here one sees further, according to all versions it says permitted, true? According to the Ra’avad’s approach here should also be forbidden perhaps.

Law 5: Karmel and new pots

Speaker 2: Ah, the next one will be very relevant to the topic that we talked about regarding gebrochts.

Karmel that is singed in fire, if one roasts fresh wheat, wheat that is still moist, and one roasts it so it will become dried, and afterward grinds it, afterward one makes… otherwise, regular flour is raw flour, simply ground wheat. Here we’re talking about flour that one roasted when it was still wheat, and afterward one made from it a flour.

So seemingly, we learned that once it’s become hot enough, it’s been cooked or baked, it can no longer afterward become chametz, because it’s already been baked, it’s already lost the power to become chametz.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Guarding the Matzot from the Time of Harvest

Law 5 (continued)

But here there is indeed a stringency, that one may not cook flour except in water. One may not take flour that is already truly cooked flour, it’s already roasted flour, which has already been roasted before grinding, but one may not cook it in water. Why? Lest it was not roasted well in fire, because we fear that perhaps it wasn’t roasted well enough, and it will become chametz when you cook it. When one goes to cook it, then it will become chametz. On this one must be stringent.

Speaker 1: Yes.

Speaker 2: I’m saying, it’s not exactly the matter of roasting, because here we’re talking about a specific thing, karmel. But here we see the matter that there is a concern of lest it was not roasted, perhaps it wasn’t roasted so well.

Speaker 1: Yes, but this is a proof for this, because karmel is the whole order that appears in the Torah by… what’s it called? By… well, by chadash. Karmel is the order when… also by the Omer it appears, no? “And parched grain you shall not eat until this very day.”

Speaker 2: I don’t remember, not necessarily, okay.

Speaker 1: The karmel is the order, at the beginning of the season the grain is still very fresh, not yet good, good bread isn’t made from it, one takes the more fresh, like moist thing. If one specifically wants to use it, it’s not impossible, it’s possible, either then one roasts the karmel, or one eats it just like that, or perhaps one can afterwards make from it even a kind of porridge, even a meal and make from it such bread. But the normal way is, it’s not yet truly ready, it’s not yet truly ready, it won’t become leavened. And it’s also seemingly, one doesn’t roast it one hundred percent. It’s such a light, one does such a quick roasting process. So it’s not… in truth essentially it’s not… leavening wasn’t, here he makes a stringency. It has nothing to do with the stringency that some Chassidic Jew made that the matzot shouldn’t be baked.

Speaker 2: It’s very funny, because you do bake matzot. Baked.

Speaker 1: No, also baked isn’t some science that we don’t know what it is. Look at the matzah, if it’s baked it’s baked. It’s not a hidden thing. Karmel also isn’t, but karmel is initially not so much. But you don’t know exactly what it is, yes.

Speaker 2: I don’t know, but I imagine it’s something.

Speaker 1: Yes, I mean seemingly in a practical way if you think that one can only make flour when it’s already completely become sufficiently cooked in the field. As mentioned it’s very fresh, you can’t yet make from it flour, it will be such a wet mush. One roasts it in the oven so that it should, instead of in the sun, one gives it a roast in the oven so it should become dried out, and one can make from it flour. Would you have thought that this is enough? It’s already like flour that is roasted? He says, no, it doesn’t go through the normal process of roasting, it’s a roasting of karmel, and there there is the concern that it wasn’t roasted well enough.

Sealing New Pots

Speaker 2: Further, and similarly when one seals new pots. There is a type of process that was done, new pots, I mean it’s a bit similar to the dough in the cracks of kneading troughs that we learned earlier. New pots one would put in them flour or dough, so that it should… that it seals the pot. I mean it covers all the little holes, like there are small holes, like we spoke about a new pot that seals the pot.

Says the Rambam, and similarly when one seals new pots, for example one wants to have a new pot for Pesach, one may not take raw flour or raw dough and do it. One may only cook matzah even if they returned and ground it. What you can do is, you can take baked matzot, you can grind it, freshly grind it, and then use it there in the roasting so it should do whatever the flour does to the pot.

But roasted flour, but one may not use roasted flour. Roasted flour is the flour that was roasted, or the karmel. Why? Lest it was not roasted well and it will come to leavening. We fear that it wasn’t roasted well, it will become chametz, and your pot will now become chametz.

Roasted flour means the flour of roasted karmel, and the law is essentially the same law. In the Gemara it only appears in the second case, but the Rambam learned that if so then surely by kal vachomer one may not use it initially, because even for sealing the pot the Gemara forbade it. But it’s essentially the same case, it’s one case the law. As the Maggid Mishneh says.

Laws 6-7: Soaking Barley and Wheat in Water

Speaker 2: Now we’re going to see a new law which discusses soaking, that there were those who soaked the kernels before they separated them, before they made flour from them.

Barley

Says the Rambam: One may not soak barley in water on Pesach. One may not soak or wet the barley with water on Pesach. One wants to afterwards properly take the flour and properly make it in a Pesach manner. But one may not beforehand soak the barley, soak the barley. I don’t mean soak, I mean even for a short time. This means putting in water. Why? Because they are soft, the shell of the barley is weak, they leaven quickly, the water comes quickly into the flour, into the wheat, and makes it chametz.

What is the law after the fact if one did it? And if one soaked, if one did do it? If it’s soft… it depends. See, one takes a look, if it’s truly so soft, if the barley is so soft, how can one see it? He gives a sign: such that if one places it on the opening of the oven, if one places this on top of an oven, they split open immediately, it’s clearly seen that the barley splits open, it’s clear that the water has done enough that the barley has become very soft and water has gone deep inside, then these are forbidden, one may no longer use the barley because the barley has become leavened.

But if it did not reach this softness, but if the water didn’t have such a strong effect, and even when one placed the barley on the hot top of the oven it didn’t puff up, it’s clear that the barley remained completely sealed and the water didn’t do so much to it, these are permitted, then after the fact yes it’s permitted. This is barley.

Wheat

What happens with wheat? Wheat yes, it’s permitted to soak it in water in order to remove its bran. Now he tells us the reason why one does it: so that one should be able to easily remove the shell from the wheat. And one grinds it immediately in the manner that one grinds for fine flour. This one may do, one may make it wet before grinding, because wheat has a harder shell, the wheat doesn’t become wet so quickly from inside, one may do so.

Limitation: Short Time

Speaker 2: But I mean, by both things we’re not talking about when it lies for a long time. We’re talking here presumably when it lies for a short time before one goes to actually separate and grind it. That’s how it seems, because later we see that water that has soaked with… that wheat that has soaked in water is forbidden. So here we’re talking presumably when it’s a short time, when it’s still… we haven’t yet learned the term measure of leavening, but a short time.

Law 7 (continued): The Custom of All Israel

Speaker 2: Says the Rambam, but also on this law, and already all Israel has practiced, in Shinar, and in the Land of the Deer

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Guarding the Matzot from the Time of Harvest

Law 5 (continued) — The Custom of All Israel Not to Soak Wheat in Water

We’re talking here presumably when it lies for a short time before one goes to actually separate and grind it. That’s how it seems to us, because later we see that wheat that has soaked in water is forbidden. So here we’re talking presumably when it’s a short time. We haven’t yet learned the term measure of leavening, but it’s a short time.

Says the Rambam, but also on this law, and already all Israel has practiced, in Shinar, and in the Land of the Deer, and in Spain, and in the cities of the West — interesting, he calls Eretz Yisrael “Land of the Deer,” it’s an aggadic expression. I don’t know if it’s called that today. We understand, because it’s a land that spreads out, and one takes territories, but as the Gemara then says so. Deer simply to translate means from the language of desire, yes? From the language of… deer that run around? No, it means that… I remember, an expression from the verse, Land of the Deer, it means a place that… as the Rambam says one desires and covets and loves, yes? It appears in the introduction. It means a land, a land of desire, as there is a way of saying land of desire, a land that one desires.

In Babylonia, in Eretz Yisrael, and in Spain, in the… in the cities of the West. Near Spain. Now people know what the news is. Near Spain is Morocco. Cities of the West. Not to soak wheat in water — one conducts oneself not to soak wheat in water, that one shouldn’t wet wheat in water. Why? Earlier it didn’t say cities of the West, it said all the West. This is cities of the West, so there’s a difference.

Not to soak wheat in water, why? A decree lest they delay and become leavened. As I said, when it’s a short process of soaking, one may. But we fear that it will remain longer and it will become chametz completely. So one was stringent on this. Done.

Law 6 — A Dish in Which Barley or Wheat Was Found

Further, the Rambam says such a law. Until now we learned the basic process of the Sages. What is understood? Let’s learn further.

A dish that was cooked, and barley or wheat was found in it — one cooked a dish, when one finds inside whole barley or wheat. Then the question is whether the barley or wheat leavened the entire food.

So, if they split open, the entire dish is forbidden because chametz has mixed into it. If it opened, it’s clear that the dish became exposed to the inside of the wheat, that means to the flour that is inside the wheat, and it was cooked, cooked means with water, then the wheat became chametz, then the entire dish is forbidden, because chametz has mixed into it, and chametz forbids in any amount.

I saw in the commentators on the Rambam discussing, also the pot from it has become. I would have wanted to say that the entire dish, including the pot, because if it forbids in any amount means in any amount within any amount also, the absorptions. There are Rishonim who say that no, only the dish itself, not so far does the any amount go.

But if they did not split open — the kernel of wheat remained completely sealed, then so, regarding the dish one is stringent. I mean, excuse me, the wheat itself one may not eat, one is stringent, one designates it and burns it. One must indeed get rid of the wheat, one must burn it, this we will already see. But the remaining dish one may eat. Ah, he says, it’s not truly chametz.

For the grain that was soaked or cooked and did not split open — the grain that became either soaked or cooked and it didn’t become split open — this law goes back to both laws of soaked and cooked, because by soaked also the sign was if it became split open. If it didn’t become split open, it’s not complete chametz of the Torah, but only rabbinic.

The Source: “And You Shall Guard the Matzot”

From where did the Sages take the law that one should be stringent? He says, the reason why the Sages were more stringent than the basic law is because it says “and you shall guard the matzot.” “And you shall guard” means that one should make fences and safeguards, not only be stringent on the prohibition itself, but guarding. That is to say, be careful with matzah and guard it from every side of chametz. When you make matzah you should be very careful from every type of way that one need only be concerned that it can become leavened.

So, an exception of rabbinic law one must burn it. But here we see interestingly that something that is only rabbinic chametz one must also burn. Why not? I don’t know if we had chametz nuksheh for example that it said one must burn it. Okay.

Discussion: Where Does the Introduction of “And You Shall Guard the Matzot” Fit?

Most versions once had in this piece that this is an introduction for the next piece. There’s certainly a connection, it says therefore the Sages were stringent. But in our version that we have here from Rav Rabinowitz it says differently, we learned that this is also like the reason, why? Because we’re going to see, the entire guarding of the matzot has to do with wheat that split open. And wheat that split open itself is only rabbinic, or before they split open. Not if they split open is biblical, it seems only not split open. But it seems that one learned that “and you shall guard the matzot” has two types. It can be a guarding, that means guard that it shouldn’t be chametz. It can also be like a safeguard, “and you shall keep my charge,” guard it one more step, like a fence for the chametz.

Study Partner A: Right, but you can say it another way, that “and you shall guard the matzot” can be regarding when one makes matzot, that it’s a stringency and one should eat good kosher matzot. But here it says that “and you shall guard the matzot” is the word from it so it shouldn’t become chametz. So the same, when one makes a food, a dish, one cooks soup, one must also be careful to have “and you shall guard the matzot,” because the entire reason for the prohibition is so it shouldn’t come to chametz. So one must be concerned by every thing.

Study Partner B: Yes, yes, certainly, because “and you shall guard the matzot” doesn’t mean guard the matzot, it means guard from chametz. That’s how it seems. Indeed, I understand what you’re saying. It’s a stringency, the prohibition of chametz not on the mitzvah of matzah. But there it’s most relevant, because when baking matzot is when one plays around with chametz. Yes.

Law 7 — Guarding the Grain from the Time of Harvest

Says the Rambam further, after the introduction, as you say, one goes to learn laws of guarding the matzot. One goes to learn about guarding… guarding from chametz in matzot.

Says the Rambam, “Therefore the Sages said, a person must be careful with the grain that he eats from it on Pesach” — the grain, the wheat or the five species of grain that one will make from it matzot on Pesach, one must guard, one must watch over, “so that water should not come upon it after it was harvested” — water should not come after it was cut, “so that there should not be in it any chametz” — there should not be any concern of chametz. “Any” means like “some,” as we saw earlier, a trace of chametz, even not truly chametz.

Although, as long as it’s not split open, it’s not a problem, why must one guard it so strongly? But one must guard it, as he now said, it’s a stringency.

Grain That Sank in a River or Upon Which Water Fell

About this he says so, “Grain that sank in a river” — in ancient times, everything was brought in ships, I mean today also, we see that everything one takes from the supermarket, before that it was on a ship. So such a ship sank with grain, one rescued the grain, but it was already wet, or in another way “upon which water fell”.

Then the guarding of “and you shall guard the matzot” says so far, that “just as it’s forbidden to eat it” — not only that it’s forbidden because of the prohibition of eating chametz, but it’s also forbidden as a concern. There is a concern of chametz, there is a concern in “it shall not be seen and it shall not be found,” “it’s forbidden to keep it”. But what then? What must one do?

“Rather” — the person arrived a bit before Pesach with such a shipment of wheat, “one sells it to a Jew” — one should sell it to a Jew, “and informs him” — he should inform the Jew, you should know that the wheat is not good wheat that one can use for matzah. So that he will return and sell it to a Jew — one should inform, “You’re buying it, but eat it before Pesach.”

And one should not sell it, initially it’s better one should not sell it to a non-Jew. What will it help you to sell it to a non-Jew? But a non-Jew will go sell it to a Jew and not inform the Jew. He won’t sell it to the Jew and inform.

And if one sells to non-Jews before Pesach, one sells a little to each and every one — if one sells it to non-Jews, one should not sell the whole thing to one non-Jew, because then the non-Jew will get rid of it and sell it to a Jew. It will take a long time to sell to the non-Jew on a smaller scale, so that they will eat before Pesach. Why? Because there is a concern lest the non-Jew return and sell it to a Jew.

Discussion: Two Levels of Guarding

So, it seems, and he brings here, the matter is not so simple, because it seems there are two levels. There is the “and you shall guard the matzot” that he says, that rabbinically, perhaps not biblically, a trace of wheat that became wet, even if it didn’t become split open, right? If it became split open it’s perhaps chametz biblically, but it didn’t become split open, the Sages say that one must guard from using the wheat on Pesach. This is one thing.

Then there is another thing that it says here that one must actually guard. That means, one must stand there, as the Rambam, “one must be careful.” It doesn’t say here exactly that, it says “one must be careful,” but one sees in the other commentators, afterwards, the Rambam himself later brings that there is a distinction of guarded matzah. It’s interesting, but guarding means… here it says, here it says guarding at the time of harvest, right? But the Rama doesn’t make it clear something. In the Rav and other commentators one sees that there is such a thing that only for the matzah of the mitzvah one must have guarding.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Caution Against Leavening — Water, Guarding the Matzot, and Laws of Baking Matzah

Here comes in a whole… the Gemara says like this, that eisah shel goy, dough of a non-Jew, one may eat, yochel, one may eat eisah shel goy. Meaning to say, not when the non-Jew has let it become chametz, but a non-Jew has now just kneaded fresh dough. That is, you’re passing by a non-Jewish bakery, and you see that he has just finished making dough. You can take it from him, because the dough hasn’t yet become chametz, it’s fresh dough, and bake it and eat it because it hasn’t become leavened. But “u’vilvad she’yochal k’zayit matzah ba’achronah,” so it says in the Gemara. We learn from this from the Rishonim that regarding the k’zayit matzah, on that there is “u’shmartem et ha’matzot” only on the k’zayit.

But the Rambam here doesn’t say so, the Rambam says that on all of them there is a concern that it should be actual chametz. And apparently from here it will appear that here comes our stringency of guarding from the time of harvesting, that if it fell down, it became wet, even if the wheat became wet, there is this stringency, the rabbinic prohibition, that one must be afraid that it will become chametz.

Right, but the Rambam himself does bring later the law of matzah shemurah. If someone has only matzah shemurah, he will eat the last k’zayit from it. So it’s not that the Rambam doesn’t hold of the law that one doesn’t need to. It could be that this is only lechatchilah. It’s what it says here that one must guard from the time of harvesting. It sounds like it’s about a concern of chametz, but it sounds like perhaps it’s only lechatchilah. “Tzarich lizaher,” he doesn’t say.

Chavruta A: Bedieved, that’s what I’m saying, there are two levels. Bedieved, if one knows… the Rambam here puts in… if one doesn’t know, one must be afraid. He says, “shatva’ah banahar, shenafal aleha mayim.”

Chavruta B: No, there are two things. So it comes out, it’s not clear. It comes out that there are two different levels. One must be careful. But if one wasn’t careful, it’s not… it’s okay, except for the matzah shemurah, for the matzot mitzvah it’s not okay. But if one does know, then it’s also included in “u’shmartem et ha’matzot,” that if one knows that it fell in the water, one shouldn’t eat it at all.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Caution Against Leavening — Water, Guarding the Matzot, and Laws of Baking Matzah

Grain Upon Which a Leak Fell — Drop After Drop

And here come out the great stringencies of being concerned when one should cut at the right time. This is an even greater level of stringencies, that even when it’s still attached to the ground, if it’s already completely ripened, one is also afraid that it can become chametz from rain that falls on it after that time. But this is already stringencies upon stringencies. Even that, meaning from the basic law it’s only for matzot mitzvah. That is, the custom has always been to eat matzot that are not just shemurah. Guarding from the time of harvesting.

Okay. Further, says the Rambam, “dagan shenafal alav delef”. Here we spoke about when a large quantity of water fell on it, “tava banahar”. But what happens “dagan shenafal alav delef”? Rain dripped on it. The Rambam, “kol zman shehu tored tipah achar tipah afilu kol hayom kulo, hoil vehu holech tipah achar tipah eino ba lidei chimutz”. I think it’s similar to the law that one learns later, that “kol zman shemit’asek bo”, each time it drips on it something presses it back down or whatever, “eino ba lidei chimutz”. “Aval kesheposeik”, but when it stops raining, then we will need to be afraid, “im nishtaha k’shiur”, if the wheat lies wet in water for the proper amount, later he will say what the shiur is, then “harei zeh ye’aser”, because it had enough time when it’s wet and it’s not the thing that it’s “doleif alav”, “tored alav”, then “harei zeh ye’aser”. Which is apparently also miderabbanan, with the law of “u’shmartem et ha’matzot”? He doesn’t say that it’s “harei zeh chametz”.

Okay. One goes to learn more rules of caution, that one does the deed. Apparently everything is still part of the topic of “u’shmartem et ha’matzot”, yes?

Yes.

The commentators ask, for example, that if one doesn’t know, there it’s like the great… whether one can rely that one looks at it, it looks like nice wheat. That’s the question whether the Rambam here would forbid such a case. He certainly doesn’t forbid, he begins with the… that one should… this agrees that one should.

Discussion: The Mechanism of Drop After Drop

But this is interesting to me, that because it drips one after the other it can’t become chametz. What is this from the Rambam? Is it like I explained it that it’s like being occupied with it all day, is that the word?

It’s like one doesn’t let the… it doesn’t give rest for it to begin fermenting.

That’s bad. It wouldn’t be.

Yes.

Caution in Baking Matzah

Okay, now we’re going to go more directly to baking matzot, how one can be careful that the matzah shouldn’t become chametz.

Law 11: One Doesn’t Knead Large Dough

Says the Rambam like this, we made a good heading, caution in baking matzah. Says the Rambam like this, ein lashin bePesach isah gedolah. On Pesach one doesn’t knead a large dough. Why? On Pesach, right when one is in Pesach. Why? Shema tachmietz. Because when you make a large dough, you can’t… so quickly be finished and bake all the dough, so one is afraid shema tachmietz. Ela, what is indeed the shiur? Shiur chalah bilvad. Shiur chalah, which the Rambam goes later, at the end of this law he goes to say how much is the shiur chalah. We can know it’s somewhere like five, six pounds. The shiur chalah is a smaller shiur, and this one can still control. It doesn’t take so long until it comes to the oven, and this one can perhaps be occupied with the whole time. It’s not a problem. This is one law in the measurements of matzot.

Law 11 (Continued): One Doesn’t Knead with Hot Water — Water That Rested

Another law, ve’ein lashin with warm water, lo bachama velo bachami chamah. And so far, lo mayim shenish’avu bayom, because water that was drawn, that was drawn out that day, is warm. Unlike hot water we learned earlier, doesn’t let chametz form. But warm water does even more, makes the dough quickly quickly become chametz. Ela bemayim shelanu, only with water that rested overnight, which the Sages say that at night the water becomes a bit cooled. The water is the perfect temperature to make with this, to use the water for matzot. Ve’im avar al hahalakha velash be’echad mikol elu, he did indeed use water that is warm, harei hapat asurah, then this is not kosher for matzot, forbidden even bedieved.

Forbidden goes up on both, whether one made an isah gedolah, or one used chamin. On this thing there is a dispute among the poskim. There is the Rosh and other Rishonim who learn that the law of mayim shelanu is only lechatchilah, but the Rambam says that the law of mayim shelanu is me’akev, if it is warmer than mayim shelanu.

Which is known, the Gemara says that there was on this a dispute between the Sages of Israel and the Sages of the nations where the sun goes at night. And I don’t remember exactly, do you remember, but the mayim shelanu has to do with that the sun goes under the world at night, and it controls the temperature of the water. In short, for this mayim shelanu is the right temperature, it’s not too cold and not too warm. But here the word is not warm, water is not warm.

Law 12: One Shouldn’t Sit Under the Sun and Knead

Okay, now we’re going to learn more laws that the Rambam says that the dough shouldn’t become too warm. Says the Rambam, lo teshev ishah tachat hashemesh vetalush, she shouldn’t sit under the sun and knead dough. The same thing, velo tachat harakia beyom av, and not on a cloudy day under the open sky, afilu bemakom she’ein hashemesh zorachat bo, because the warmth makes it able to come more quickly to chametz. And another law, velo taniach et ha’isah vetit’asek bedavar acher. As long as until one bakes it, one must be occupied with the dough. She may not leave the dough and be busy with something else.

Law 12 (Continued): She Needs Two Vessels of Water

Okay, says the Rambam further another law, ve’im haytah lashah ve’ofah, if the same woman does both things, she kneads, and afterwards she takes the dough that she kneaded and she puts it in the oven, her hands become hot. Each time she puts her hands in the oven her hands become hot. And as we learned, heat hastens leavening, for the same reason why one may not use warm water. So because of this, “tzrichah shnei kelim shel mayim”, she needs two vessels of water, “echad shemekatzefet bo ve’echad shemetzanenet bo yadah”. When she makes the dough, the whole time there must be enough wet that one should be able to make from it a dough, but they don’t want her to also with the same water cool her hands after each time she puts it in. You see that one didn’t use utensils in those times, one used the hands and put in the oven against the bread that lies in the oven. So if she goes to dip the hands in the same water, the water will become warm, and as we learned, one may not use warm water to bake matzot.

Law 12 (Continued): Bedieved — The Bread is Permitted

“Ve’im avrah velasha tachat hashemesh”, if she was indeed transgressing the prohibition and she did indeed knead under the sun, or she didn’t cool her hands, or she made a dough more than shiur chalah, “hapat muteret”. Oh, I didn’t learn well earlier. As I said earlier “harei hapat asurah” means on the chamin, warm water. But on the first law, ein lashin, isah gedolah, is indeed only lechatchilah. But bedieved, on all these laws, from all these laws that we just learned, bedieved is only the warm water. All other laws are lechatchilah, because the water becomes a bit warm or so on, but bedieved is indeed permitted.

Discussion: Distinction Between Mayim Shelanu and Other Stringencies

One must know why… what is the problem? “Mayim shelo nish’avu bo bayom” is more warm than water that she dipped her warm hands in?

I mean to say, can one measure with a temperature?

Yes. Okay, certainly. If one can’t, then it’s indeed permitted. We’re talking about the law, we’re talking about the case.

What’s hard to understand? You can understand that the… how is it called? “Tachat hashemesh” is a bit warmer, it’s not the same thing as hot water.

I want to know, the “tachat harakia beyom ha’aviv” is also about warm or about there’s humidity? What is there the matter? It’s warm?

Beyom ha’aviv? No, the sun doesn’t bake.

No, no, no. Because when the sun bakes, you can go see, you can go in the shade, you’ll know that there it’s less warm. When it doesn’t bake at all, a person doesn’t grasp where it’s warmer, so everywhere can be hot. It could be about the person doesn’t know. I don’t know if it becomes warmer because of this, but it can be as hot as on the other day under the sun, do you understand?

So.

Stringencies in Later Poskim

On this law come in the later poskim more various stringencies that we have strongly introduced in the matzah bakeries. One doesn’t bake under the open sky, meaning if one wants to make a matzah bakery in the backyard, one must make a… this is the law here, not under the sun, one is afraid that there will be sun.

No, for example, I tell you, the Rema says, for example, not even may one carry it through. For example, a person has such a bakery in his backyard, and even the place where one kneads, is indeed under a roof, but one must run to the oven.

But what it says talush, does it mean specifically kneading or another part?

I don’t know. Do you understand what I’m saying? Not sure that it’s not so far. Meaning, if one says that the sun is a problem, then…

Yes.

Law 12 (End): Shiur Chalah

Further, says the Rambam further. The Rambam said that one shouldn’t make a large shiur, only shiur chalah. Says the Rambam now, how much is the shiur chalah? Kemo be’erech shalosh ve’arba’im vachumesh beitzah, three and forty with a fifth of an egg. Says the Rambam, which egg? Guf habeitzah habeinonit? Lo kumshkala. Like the size. He says that the word is size, not weight. Interesting language guf, that is the size. And the Rabbeinu Manoach says here two interesting things.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Shiur Chalah, Signs of Leavening, and Caution in Baking Matzot

Shiur Chalah – Gematria and Signs

Not that before this Chazal introduced that this is the shiur chalah, rather one learns it out from verses. This is an ashirut hasafah. But it comes out such an interesting hashgachah pratit, yes, a wondrous thing, that “chalah” is in gematria the shiur chalah. Not with a fifth, but where is the fifth? Okay, the fifth is the kollel with the kollel. Okay.

And the second thing he says, “keguf habeitzah habeinonit lo kemishkalah”, he says, so he gives you good advice how one should do this. There is in the Gemara on a similar case, that take a vessel that is full of water, and throw in forty-three eggs. The water that runs out, that is the shiur. Very good.

Law: Signs of Leavening and Caution with Dough

Says the Rambam further. I’m now going to learn… more laws? No, it’s more like when it becomes a concern that it has indeed become chametz. From where do we know that it has become chametz? What is the shiur of chametz? He already mentioned shiur earlier, but now he says what the shiur is. Apparently he already said the word shiur when it becomes leavened. How did he say it? “Im nishtaha k’shiur”. “Dagan shenaflu alav mayim aval shepaseku im nishtaha k’shiur”. Here he says what the shiur is. Okay.

Occupation with Dough Prevents Leavening

Says the Rambam like this: “Kol zman she’adam oseik babatzek afilu kol hayom kulo eino ba lidei chimutz”. As long as one kneads, it doesn’t become chametz. It’s understood here, one kneads with it, one is occupied with it, one pats, one kneads, it can’t become. It’s simply a simple thing, it doesn’t get puffed up. Like anyone who has once seen his mother bake, mainly when it gets puffed up is when one puts it to the side and lets it ferment. But as long as one pats on it, it doesn’t come to leavening.

The Sign of Sound – When Dough Becomes Chametz

Aval im higbiah yado vehinichoh, but if he removed his hand and let the dough leaven, veshaha habatzek, the dough rested, how long? Ad shehigi’a lehashmi’a kol bizman she’adam makeh beyado alav. How does one know the shiur? Like this, a dough that is puffed up, if you knock on it a sound will be heard, it has such a plop. Then it’s a sign kevar hechemitz, that it has already become chametz, veyisaref miyad, one must already burn it.

Ve’im ein kolo nishma, but if you knock on what one doesn’t hear any sound, it doesn’t have the pride – chametz one always says is pride, it’s already puffed up, it already has a sound, it already has an ego, a personality – then even when one doesn’t want… ay, ein kolo nishma, if one doesn’t have the shiur, if one doesn’t have the sign of kolo nishma, what is the shiur? Im shaha, if the time that one let it wait is kedei hiluch adam mil, the shiur of how long it takes for a person to walk a mil – I think in our law one assumes it’s eighteen minutes, one must check in the laws of eruvin techumin and other places what is the shiur mil and how long it takes – then one knows that one must be concerned kevar hechemitz, even if it doesn’t have the shiur, the sign, then veyisaref miyad, one must burn it.

The Sign of Pale Face

Vechen, there is another sign, im hichsifu panav, if the dough became pale, ke’adam she’amdu se’arotav, such a kind of paleness like a person whose hair stood up, a strong paleness, harei zeh asur le’ochlo, this is also a sign of chametz, but not chametz from the Torah, ve’ein chayavin alav karet, this is a shiur miderabbanan, and this one would also be concerned that it’s chametz.

Law: Two Doughs – The Sign is Not the Cause

Further, another law, says the Rambam like this: Hayu shtei isot shehigbiah hayad mehen be’et achat venishtehu, he has two pieces of dough, and one of them he let lie without being occupied. Both he let, and one of them already has the shiur that he knocks and it has the sound, and the second doesn’t have any sound. So even the one that doesn’t have the sound, but you have the sign that they are both the same time, and he made both the same dough. So sheteihan yisarefu vera’uyin chametz gamur.

Discussion: The Nature of Signs

He means to say that the sign is not the cause, it’s not that this is the prohibition because it doesn’t make a sound, we know that it’s chametz, rather the sound is such a sign. This one doesn’t have the sign, but in practice we know that it’s chametz because it’s the same time.

Speaker 2: I understand, but it could be that there is such a thing that it became leavened which one can’t see with the sign. Perhaps there are other signs that one could see, but I know, it’s not magic, one can’t see that it became chametz. It’s certain that chametz is a thing that one can see. It can sometimes be that it shouldn’t make the sound, but it’s still chametz.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Laws of Earthenware Vessels and Caution Against Leavening

Speaker 1: I know. That’s what I’m saying, but it’s not a reason. Certainly, the sound is not chametz. It’s not chametz. Chametz is chametz, not sound. But something happened in the dough, perhaps it’s a little less. It’s not clear. Also, it could be that it’s more of a doubt. I don’t know if it’s…

Speaker 2: Yes, already. Yes. The same thing is nishteha. Nishteha means to say that if you see that you have chametz. If someone has a clear sign and he made nishteha, and he knows clearly that it’s not chametz, if it would be, I don’t know, there isn’t such a sign, there’s only a sign for yes chametz. If there would be such a thing, a sign for not chametz, seemingly it would also have to be. Nishteha is even not, nishteha is also only a sign. It actually takes time, but that’s enough that one must be concerned. That’s how it seems to me.

Law: Prohibition of Pictures on Matzot

The Rambam says another law, a stringency on Pesach. The Rambam says, it used to be the custom, they used to make beautiful ones, even today on sourdough, here they make such a design. The Rambam says, one should not make a design. Ein osin tzrikin hametzuyarin, one doesn’t make… It’s a small form, small molds. But it means to say braided. Okay, no, I mean it’s year means one cuts out something and makes designs on it.

Why? It’s called she’isha shoha aleihen. When one wants to make a picture, one makes it nice, and it takes time. And in that time one also doesn’t, one doesn’t knead it then, one isn’t occupied with it, one just leaves it, one just makes a picture from the outside. And one is concerned, you know, it’s yes, what isn’t? In that time one does nothing, one is just drawing, it becomes chametz.

Bakers May, Homeowners May Not

Therefore the Rambam explains, hanachtomin, professionals, professional bakers, may do it, lefi shehen beki’in bimlachtam, they do it very quickly, they know how to do it quickly, umemaharin la’asoto. But ba’alei batim, those who will imitate the professionals, it will take them a very long time, they may not.

The Rambam says, even if they formed them with a mold, even if one found a way that it shouldn’t take time, because one has such a frame that makes the picture, one still may not, lest another come to do it without a mold, there will be competition, every homeowner will want to make as beautiful as the neighbor, and she won’t know that the other has a trick, a way out for this, it will take longer, and it will delay and become leavened. Therefore, it was decreed that one should not add any designs to the matzah.

Connection to Our Custom

Interesting, it could be about this that our custom is that the matzot are, each one looks approximately different, and not like the machine matzot where each one looks exactly the same. And it has to do with this that it should take as quickly as possible, one shouldn’t occupy oneself with the visual, with the beautiful appearance of it. Okay.

Discussion: The Gemara and Rabbeinu Manoach

On this it says in the Gemara, they should tell him, kol hasrikin matirin, usrikei beitzim, yes? Usrikei beitzim hen mutarin, it doesn’t go like that. Yes. He doesn’t make any pictures on the matzot in practice. And already, the Gemara would perhaps have permitted, even because it’s a nachtom, if it’s a bakery perhaps it’s a nachtom.

In Rabbeinu Manoach’s times he did know of matzot that one makes a style on them. He says that the Gemara speaks of when one makes tzurot chaya ve’ofot vedagim, and that was the style. But he makes just something, a quick design, I don’t know what one makes on it, some scratch, he means more.

Discussion: The Holes in Matzot

Speaker 2: We also make, we make the holes. We make the wheels? That’s the opposite, that it doesn’t let it make.

Speaker 1: It’s made, yes. That means the occupation should be with this.

Speaker 2: That’s what he says, no, very good, I mean from this Rabbeinu Manoach does. Ve’achshav hatzerichah mona’at teficha. He says, nevertheless one must do it in a quicker way. On the contrary, he speaks of something similar, I don’t know exactly what we do, but something similar, that one used to press something in so that it shouldn’t puff up. And actually whoever makes the holes, one must make sure that one does it quickly. Today there is the big three that has many wheels.

Law: Caution with Water from Kneading

Already, the Rambam says further, water, more matters of caution from chametz. He says, mayim sherochotzin bo yedeihem, the person who kneads, he keeps washing his hands. Normally it’s actually important to wash the hands, he didn’t say it, but seemingly one must wash the hands from kneading one dough to the next.

Speaker 2: Yes, normally it’s difficult, because it’s a wet kneading.

Speaker 1: I’m saying, on your hands remains chametz which remains a shiur.

Speaker 2: Yes, if one doesn’t wash it off, there are on it small pieces.

Speaker 1: Chametz is forbidden in any amount. Or one washes off the bowl after kneading, one washes off the pot. And likewise, or mayim shemishtamshin bish’at lisha. During kneading one uses, as was said earlier, the woman keeps dipping her hands, so that it makes a bit wet so that one can easily be occupied with the dough. So there’s a problem that now there are many small tiny pieces of flour or small tiny pieces of dough in the water.

Now, as long as it’s only small pieces, they don’t stick together, it doesn’t become from it a dough. But if one will pour it out on a place where it will lie together, and we will make from several pieces one piece, and they will come together and become a wicked dough. Now, yishpechenu, pour, bemakom midron, one should pour it out on a sloped place, so that it will pour, and so it will further become spread out, so that it won’t gather in one place and become leavened.

Law: Sorin et Hamursan – Soaking Bran for Animals

Another similar law. Ein sorin et hamursan, the way one used to give food to chickens, one takes wheat kernels. Mursan is the bran from the wheat. One may not take the bran from wheat and soak it with water and place it before the chickens, lest it become leavened, perhaps there is stuck on it a bit of the flour, and it will become chametz.

But if one does it with hot water, choltin lahem hamursan berotchin umanihin lifneihem. There isn’t here the concern that one had in soaking the mursan. Already most of the world has customarily not to have… yes, shelo lachlit. Also for the same reason, a decree lest one not heat the water well.

But what may one do? He says, it’s permitted to knead for chickens mursan or flour. One may knead a dough from mursan or flour for the chickens, because that is occupation.

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Feeding Animals, Mursan on the Body, Flour in Charoset, Kneading Matzah with Fruit Juice, and Introduction to Laws of Vessels

Law 18: Feeding Mursan to Chickens (Continued)

The Rambam says: Already most of the people have customarily not to feed — but if one does it with hot water, one scalds for them the mursan in boiling water and places it before them, there isn’t here the concern that one had in soaking it in the land of Israel.

The Rambam says, already most of the people have customarily not to feed, also for the same reason that we spoke about, lest the person not heat it well.

But what may one do? He says, it’s permitted to knead for chickens mursan or flour, one may knead for them a dough from mursan or flour, if one gives it to them to eat immediately, because it won’t remain a shiur of chametz, or one places it before them and stands over them, he stands there and watches that it shouldn’t remain long enough, until it doesn’t delay before them the time of walking a mil.

The Rambam says another law, and as long as they are pecking, as long as the chickens are playing with it, they have two options: either they eat the whole thing immediately, or he stands there and watches that they don’t stop working. And then, if they are pecking with their hard mouth, which they knock on it, that’s like being occupied with it. That, or a person was stirring it with his hand, or the person stands and mixes it while the chickens are eating, it doesn’t become leavened, as we learned, that as long as one is occupied with it, it doesn’t become chametz. And when they stop eating, when the chickens finish eating, he should rinse the vessel with water, he should wash out the vessel in water, and as we learned, and pour it out in a sloped place. That means, yes, because it can remain…

Law 19: Mursan on the Body for Cosmetics

Now we will learn, women used to use wheat bran for cosmetics. Before going to the bathhouse they placed mursan, they took the bran from wheat and placed it on their face or on their flesh.

The Rambam says, a woman should not soak the mursan that she goes with it to the bathhouse, they may not soak it for the same reason that it will become chametz. But they may take dry wheat or dry flour, they may rub it on their face, but she rubs it on her flesh dry.

Yes, one sees here how far, how different it is from today’s stringencies. Why? Yes, try out a recipe. Take flour and smear it on your face on Pesach. Eh, get out of here. Already, it’s not.

Okay, the Rambam says further. I see here yes but many stringencies, according to the customs that were then there were many stringencies. The Rambam says further, one also uses wheat sometimes as a band-aid, and a person should not chew wheat and place it on his wound, for the same reason, because they become leavened. Yes, perhaps it makes it feel a bit better, I don’t know, could be.

Discussion: The Shulchan Aruch’s Stringency

It actually says in the Shulchan Aruch that one should not place the mursan on the body, even dry, understand? Because who knows, perhaps it will become a bit wet. Okay.

Law 19 (Continued): Flour in Charoset and Mustard

Further, one doesn’t place the flour into the charoset. One may not put flour into the charoset. And if one placed it, if one did put flour into the charoset, it should be burned immediately. Why? Charoset is made from a mixture of fruit juice with wine with things, because it hastens to become leavened there is a mixture of flour with fruit juice.

Discussion: Why Does Charoset Hasten to Become Leavened?

Wait a minute, but it’s only fruit juice, is one afraid that the charoset also has water? It seems that charoset has something that is sharp, something that makes… I don’t know exactly what charoset has, some sharpness. On the contrary, sharp helps. We don’t know what charoset is, perhaps we’ll learn it in a later chapter. But it seems that it’s something that makes chametz quickly. Okay, it’s something that makes chametz quickly. I don’t know, there are things that we haven’t learned properly. Okay.

He doesn’t say what is charoset? He says, here the mustard? There is something, it’s not the water from the charoset that is the problem. There is one of the ingredients that the Rambam puts into the charoset, he says that one puts in the mustard, mustard seeds, and that is something that makes it quickly become chametz. So he brings.

Or Rabbeinu Manoach actually adds, one speaks when there is in it some water, or when one is concerned that there is in it water. If it’s only pure charoset from fruit juice, there won’t be any problem. Perhaps one used to put water there? Yes.

Law of Flour in Mustard

But mustard also, initially one doesn’t place the flour into the mustard. But when one placed it, he should eat it up before it has a shiur of becoming chametz. That means, mustard seems to become chametz very quickly, then it should be burned immediately. But in mustard it’s only initially one shouldn’t, but after the fact, if there wasn’t time for chametz, one may.

Law 20: Kneading Matzah with Spices and Fruit Juice

Further he says, it’s permitted to place the spices and the sesame and the nigella and to knead them into the dough. If one wants to make matzah with good flavors, matzah with spices, one may put in spices, sesame, and nigella into the dough. And likewise it’s permitted to knead it with water and oil or honey and milk. It’s interesting, because that’s simply water with fruit juice. One may. That means, as long as one goes with the laws of one is occupied with it the whole time, one doesn’t let it delay. Or to smear on them, or to smear from above, wine and oil and honey.

Discussion: What Does “Lekatef” Mean?

The word “mehar” isn’t here. It’s somewhat unclear. Yes, he says that according to the version that we have it yes, it’s correct. He says that when one says that fruit juice with water becomes chametz, one doesn’t mean that it becomes chametz faster than a normal matzah. It becomes chametz a matzah now. Or lekatef bahen means or to mix in oil, or to smear from above.

Law of Lechem Oni on the First Day

Further, but all these things are for matzot that one eats over the remaining days of Yom Tov, when then there isn’t a law of lechem oni. But on the first day, the first day, or by us the first two days of Yom Tov, that means the kezeitim that one eats, it’s forbidden to knead or smear except with water alone, one may only knead or smear with water alone, not because of chametz, it doesn’t become chametz, but so that it should be lechem oni. Lechem oni means poor bread, which is poor, it doesn’t have any extra things, it’s not rich with fruit juice. But he says, and on the first only.

Discussion: What Does “On the First Day” Mean?

Interesting, why doesn’t he say “on the first night”? It’s the Seder, it doesn’t mean the meal of the day. And on the first only is it that needs to be a remembrance of lechem oni. Perhaps the Rambam held that lechem oni must be the whole first day, not only at night.

What’s going on here? The holy Ra’avad says, what does the Ra’avad say? Rabbeinu Manoach actually says so, that the whole first day, not only at night. But what does the Ra’avad say first?

No, the Ra’avad says that one may not make all these things the whole year either, no? Why? I don’t know, because what it says in the Gemara that one may is only for the diligent, but for everyone like other vegetables we don’t have. It’s similar to what was said that one may not make any pictures. Anything that you play around extra, one is afraid that you won’t be occupied, you won’t be busy putting other things into the recipe. As long as you know only the flour with water, you keep being occupied with it. But just like the prohibition earlier from making pictures, there is the prohibition from putting in other things, because you’re making a proper recipe.

It says in the Gemara the language of the first day, that’s the fact. And Rashi assumed that it means the first night. So says the Maggid Mishneh, and seemingly the Rambam means. Yes. But you say that others want to go a whole day literally? Why? What difference does the whole day make?

He says, he says that nowadays, he says, nowadays when on the second night one still has an obligation, as long as one hasn’t yet finished, the whole obligation… That’s the Ra’avad, that’s Rabbeinu Manoach’s answer to this, that the Rambam means to say in exile, nowadays, where the Rambam lives. That since one hasn’t yet finished the obligation of matzah until the second Seder, the whole first day when one hasn’t finished the obligation… It means the second day one will already be able to, because the second day is the same law, and the law is that it’s the same as the first day. But even the first day one may actually only not at the shiur, at the kezayit, right. Yes, it’s an interesting language. But Rabbeinu Manoach tries to answer with the explanation, that as long as one hasn’t finished… one shouldn’t be busy with any other mitzvah, one should only have lechem oni. Okay.

Introduction to Laws of Vessels

Further? Just what then should one do? I don’t know, you’ll come to the schedule. Okay, first one learns. A Jew learns, one doesn’t have actions. I’ll give myself a minute just then.

One is in the middle of learning that one must be very careful from all kinds of chametz, especially when one makes the matzah. Can one now learn about the vessels that one used. That means this is actually used. He begins with which vessels one may bake matzah on. One may not bake matzah on the same vessels when one baked chametz. And afterwards he goes in from this to general which vessels one may use on Pesach. And here there are the laws of hag’alah.

Discussion: Is This “Laws of Baking Matzot”?

He doesn’t speak about baking matzah. One isn’t standing not when matzah means to use on Pesach. Later he says, she’ofin alav, and bake on it, the next piece forward. Yes, but matzah doesn’t mean to say the matzah from which one will eat. It means it in a clear manner. Yes, but matzah doesn’t mean specifically the matzah. It doesn’t mean that one may not make on this the soup of Pesach either. Exactly, the same thing when one bakes bread, it would be a sort of technology that one would use for the matzah also, but it’s not laws of baking matzot.

Yes, but here he came in. I’m saying, it comes in simply, because one speaks of all the ways that one must guard from a bit of chametz. Yes, but it also comes in laws of baking matzot. Yes. The question is, is this laws of baking matzot? Not laws of baking matzot. It shouldn’t go long to hag’alah. It doesn’t say about baking matzot. It says here about… Not just not about matzah doesn’t mean about baking matzah, and baking on it matzah doesn’t mean baking. Baking on it matzah means baking on it something that isn’t chametz. So it’s not…

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Laws of Earthenware Vessels and Caution Against Leavening

Laws of Chametz and Matzah: Kashering Vessels for Pesach

Law 21 – Earthenware Vessels Used with Chametz in Cold

Speaker 1:

Yes, but here is how it comes in. Okay.

If it comes in, as I say, it comes in simply because we’re talking about all the ways that one must be careful about a bit of chametz. Yes, but it also comes in the laws of baking matzah. Yes. Okay. The question is, this is laws of baking matzah, not laws of baking matzah. The laws of baking matzah will come much later. It doesn’t say here about baking matzah. It says here about… just not about matzah doesn’t mean not about baking matzah, and on the eve of Pesach matzah doesn’t mean baking. On the eve of Pesach matzah means on the eve, something that is not chametz. Take for example. It’s not something, a precaution in the baking of the matzos, it’s a precaution for Pesach.

All the laws of baking matzos are precautions against chametz.

Yes, okay, you understand the distinction.

The Rambam’s Language

Anyway, the Rambam says this: All earthenware vessels that were used with chametz in cold, later the Rambam will say that generally this is the law of earthenware vessels. But he begins now with earthenware vessels that were not used for hot. Earthenware vessels that were used for hot, the Rambam will say later that one should not use them on Pesach at all. But here he says, when earthenware vessels that were only used in cold, only cold, he says, earthenware vessels that were only used in cold, were only used with cold things, it is permitted to use them with matzah in cold, one may also use them with matzah in cold.

Inference from the Commentators on the Rambam

That means he’s saying that if one of them had been hot, it wouldn’t be acceptable. Either the chametz was hot, or afterward, even if one used cold chametz, but afterward put in hot matzah, that also wouldn’t be acceptable. So it says in the commentators on the Rambam. So says the Rambam. There’s no reason at all why it should be a problem if it wasn’t significant. It’s obvious that putting in hot matzah. The commentators on the Rambam say so. The Rambam says very clearly, he throws in the word “in cold.” Because putting in hot, he wouldn’t even want to put in hot matzah, because there’s a concern that perhaps sometimes by mistake there’s chametz there in hot, so one shouldn’t put hot matzah there. But if it’s only the chametz was cold. And cold which is not absorbed, then one may also afterward use cold matzah which is not absorbed.

Discussion: Is This the Practical Law?

Yes, I don’t know if this is the law, it could be plain, because such types of vessels. That is, the vessels where one puts in the bread after it’s baked, not when it’s still hot, the closet, I mean I don’t know a closet, right? Or it’s a place where one only puts in cold things. You’re not going to put any hot thing there.

Anyway, it’s not relevant the question of what one puts. The Rambam would have had to say, it’s very strange to make such laws from inferences. If he wanted to say “and it’s forbidden to use with hot,” he would have had to write it. He speaks very briefly, one must make inferences, because this isn’t laws of kashering, he doesn’t bring out all kinds of situations. He brings everything one needs to know. If one wants to look for stringencies that aren’t stated, so he says that too.

I see he already brings from below many Jews who tell me that I’m saying something, there’s someone else who tells me. I don’t believe that one needs… It’s true that it’s brief, it’s brief, it’s brief. But the Rambam expresses the word, I have matzah in cold. He says the word explicitly, because this is normal, one doesn’t need to come to… normally he doesn’t yet need to add the word “in cold,” you could have understood it from being normal like that. He put in the word “in cold” for a reason. And so learns Rabbeinu Manoach, and it’s not a bad interpretation.

Distinction on This Inference

A bad interpretation. I’m arguing with him, can you? Yes, I’m arguing with him. It’s a bad interpretation. If the Rambam wants to make a new type of prohibition that makes no sense, and one must search under the earth for reasons why there would be such a prohibition, it’s not stated anywhere, that one may not put in a place that was never absorbed with any chametz, a warm matzah, why, for some crazy stringency, because the Rambam must write such a stringency. He doesn’t say it. I don’t believe, the Rambam however what he wants to say, he says clearly, he never says things that one must say within some inference within an inference and figure out the Torah. He is my teacher. As you say other students of the Rambam, like the Meiri and Rabbeinu Manoach understood differently.

Law 21 (Continued) – Beit Se’or and Earthenware Vessels for Charoses

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says, these are the vessels where one put in, fermented chametz, proper chametz. But except for vessels in which one places the se’or, the vessels in which one places the se’or, the starter that one uses for baking. Or the charoses where one puts in other sharp things, this one may not use even if one only used cold se’or in it. Sharp chametz is kosher, because the liquids are sharp, the sharpness indeed causes it to be absorbed.

What is Charoses?

What does it mean, the charoses is some kind of chametz thing. One puts it in the flour, ah, on Pesach one also uses charoses. It must be that there’s Pesach charoses, there’s chametz charoses. Charoses isn’t something that one only knows from Pesach. It’s some normal thing, charoses, there’s something sharp in it. Things.

Discussion: Wet Things or Also Dry?

Therefore, here you won’t use… There are commentators who consider whether this is only when the thing is wet. It’s also a dry thing. When someone puts in, I don’t know, he puts in a cookie, how should the vessel be absorbed from a dry thing? A wet thing one can still hear.

Speaker 2:

No, but I’m talking about a sharp thing, let’s say. But a sharp thing that is completely…

Speaker 1:

Well, certainly, we’re talking about se’or and charoses. Se’or was, se’or and charoses are both such a wet, liquid thing, not a dry thing. It’s not stated. One doesn’t need to explain. One doesn’t need to make it more explained. One doesn’t need to make things more explained for people, everyone, that aren’t stated. It says about se’or and charoses. If you’ll still bring se’or and charoses, it’s about… If you want to make new rules that I don’t know what salt, the salt isn’t chametz. What else is there that is chametz that is cold? I don’t know what the question is.

Vessels in Which Chametz is Mixed

And likewise vessels in which chametz is mixed, the same thing, not the vessel where one only puts se’or, but the vessel where one also puts se’or in it. That is, the mixing bowl where one kneads the dough of chametz, and one leaves it there to become chametz, is also, since one always puts se’or in it and it lies there, it becomes chametz there, just as in the beit se’or it also has the same law that also the chametz, the certain sharpness of the se’or, indeed causes it to be absorbed even in cold, even cold liquids.

Discussion: What Does “Absorption” Mean?

The word “absorbed” also doesn’t appear in the Rambam, so let’s stop saying it. Something about being absorbed isn’t stated. It says that one doesn’t use it. You can think for yourself why. Because being absorbed is something that people start to think is magic, it goes into the walls, things. It’s very simple, bring me the plate where one puts in se’or, I’ll show you that it’s very sticky. It’s very hard to clean well. The same thing, the pots that one may not add the word absorbed, one must say sticky. Sticky, and if it’s not sticky, what is it? All these things that are stated aren’t sticky.

Speaker 2:

If one cleans it, may one use it?

Speaker 1:

Certainly one may. Certainly one may. What’s the question? Nothing is stated about being absorbed. The word absorbed isn’t stated here, Rambam.

Speaker 2:

No. No. No. Even after cleaning. Tested and proven.

Return to the Foundation: Absorption Means Stickiness

Speaker 1:

Okay, everyone else who understood and learned the Rambam until you, I understood that we’re not talking about the topics in the Gemara, that this is a continuation of all the topics. In the Gemara it never says a magic thing, it’s called absorption. Absorption simply means sticky. I have an issue that today we don’t see any absorptions, and one must believe a discussion by itself. But here we’re indeed talking about absorption. The Rambam states the word absorption. The Rambam doesn’t give any explanation. Don’t say about the word.

I’ll tell you the reason, a Jew brings me a piece of Rambam. You bring me a piece of Rambam? That which is indeed a prohibition of chametz, one may not use it, the Rambam doesn’t need to say anything. We already know that there’s a prohibition of chametz, and we already know that one must indeed, one must indeed, because this is indeed something that people don’t grasp. It’s a bit dirty, and there are things that are very sticky, one must be careful. Every thing you can ask the question, you know the rules, we’re not learning rules, we’re learning details. It does make sense.

Speaker 2:

You don’t have a book? You have a beit se’or in your house? You have a vessel in which se’or is placed?

Speaker 1:

Very good, I also don’t have. So if you’ll have, you would know… It’s yes. Stickiness doesn’t make it more, but it was sharp, it’s not true, there’s no magic sharpness, it doesn’t go into vessels, it’s not nonsense with noodles.

Speaker 2:

Why don’t we say pieces? It’s not just it’s pieces, it’s not stated in the Rambam.

Speaker 1:

A fact is stated, a beit se’or. Now I’ll say, a beit se’or is something where the se’or lies there, it lies there the whole week. It’s not something that one takes out and does once. Se’or lies there, constantly, for weeks and months a piece of se’or lies there, and it becomes very stuck together with the vessel, and it’s very hard to clean. If someone has a patent that he can clean it perfectly, certainly it’s permitted, not magic, but usually not. About this the Gemara speaks, if someone has found a way how he can clean the earthenware vessel punctiliously one hundred percent, I’m not talking, he can indeed, generally it’s that one can’t, one doesn’t go. So that’s different, that’s a Pesach one. But one doesn’t need to laugh at what’s not stated in the Rambam, nothing is stated about absorption, it’s not stated in all things. I don’t see why it’s hard to understand.

The Reality of Beit Se’or

Someone tells me another story: the beit se’or always has se’or in it. I believe him. It’s not stated here, it’s not stated here. It’s a fact. Look in the beit se’or, I’ll take you to the bakery, because you’re only putting things that aren’t stated. You’ll see that there’s always se’or there. There’s no doubt about it. If someone has found a type of bench, he has a dentist, can clean it. The part, I don’t believe him. He can’t, even today one doesn’t clean the vessels. You’ll see, you’ll go to a bakery, you’ll see that there’s always se’or there. That’s the rule.

Someone cries, it’s indeed cold, it’s already so dried out, give it a wipe off. No, it’s not enough. It’s so complicated.

The Distinction Between Hot and Cold

The Rambam indeed makes a distinction. He says indeed specifically cold, because when it would have been hot, one doesn’t go… even if you see from things, it’s even more sticky. What is this understanding? Have you ever encountered a vessel where one puts hot things, you don’t know the difference between hot things and cold things without the magic thing called absorptions? Everyone knows the difference. I’ll show you, the knife with which one cuts the challah becomes less dirty than the knife with which one cuts the fish, warm fish. You’ll see, go into your kitchen you’ll see, one doesn’t need to come to any things. Okay?

Say, afterward make a rule. Why is it with some type of sharp thing that isn’t that? Eh, it’s not, it doesn’t speak about that. But one doesn’t need to make any rules that aren’t stated. What should I do?

Speaker 2:

No, it’s good. I have another bit of satisfaction.

Law 22 – Earthenware Oven

Speaker 1:

Earthenware oven. Yes? Well well. No, no, no. Afterward there’s something like this, it’s called an earthenware oven. It’s some kind of pot, or a… I don’t know if it’s actually a pot, it’s like a stone tanur basically. So on this one bakes challos all year, on this one doesn’t bake matzah on Pesach. Why? Further, there one bakes it, usually, there’s chametz. But you see clearly, if you’ll say I’m an apostate, it’s not magic, it’s an earthenware vessel, it’s stated only in the Torah, earthenware vessel is absorbed, it’s hot, there one bakes it. No, if there is indeed a remedy, and for this there is a remedy, and for the se’or no one will do the remedy, it’s not relevant.

But “an earthenware oven on which one bakes chametz challos all year – one doesn’t bake matzah on it on Pesach.” What one bakes there, if there is indeed a certain remedy: “Fill it with coals and heat up the place that was used with chametz.” He filled it well with… what are coals called? Coals. The oven is a vessel where one puts coals inside the vessel, and one bakes on the outside of the vessel, like one makes pita, one makes it on the wall of the vessel. So since when one used it with chametz it was with strong heat, so the way how one may use it is how one burns it out with coals. Then “it is permitted to bake matzah on it.” If one must fill it. “The place where one bakes matzah on it.” This is the way how one uses the oven by filling with coals.

Yes, but this isn’t a normal thing. One must fill it again to clean it. Very good, the oven, so he brings, the oven is… That is, actually every earthenware vessel one could do such a remedy, usually the Sages say that you won’t do it, because it will crack. An oven however, earthenware vessel is a type of earthenware vessel that one uses on a great level of heat. A regular earthenware vessel is already based on it cracking. About this it will later state that earthenware vessels usually one doesn’t kasher.

Innovation: Earthenware Vessel Isn’t a Magic Law

Ah, good. I just want to bring out from this law, that even the law of earthenware vessel isn’t a magic law. It’s a fact that it’s dirty, and people won’t clean it. You’ll indeed fill it with heat. The Sages say, ah, I don’t trust you, because it will indeed crack. It will crack before it becomes clean, so there’s no way. But if someone has indeed perhaps a way, certainly he may.

And the proof is that even the earthenware oven where one uses matzah in a primary vessel, it’s chametz, yes? There’s no doubt that it indeed becomes chametz. If there’s a remedy, one may indeed. I’ll give a sign.

Speaker 2:

Okay.

Speaker 1:

It could be that the first section, yes, second section, two sections, like section 32, because we asked that one should have said more laws of earthenware vessels, but it doesn’t look like the Rebbe wrote specifically earthenware vessels here from above, perhaps it’s a mistake. One should write more like baking, here one bakes the bread, one must know the whole section.

There are vessels that one uses only cold, there are vessels where one puts the se’or, there’s the vessel, the oven, where one bakes in it actually. Usually it turns out that this is made of earthenware, but it’s not actually earthenware. You can perhaps say differently.

You can say, first he speaks about things that one uses with the matzah, because today we’re accustomed that one changes the whole kitchen. But then the thought was, what does one change? One changes from chametz to matzah. Well, he begins, he goes, he expands a bit more to vessels that one perhaps once used for chametz, or that one cooks chametz in them, another type of chametz.

He brings here that in the Shulchan Aruch it states that we don’t use even in cold. That means, anyway things that one uses with chametz… even the ladle one covers, like the custom, one doesn’t leave even a table. But according to the law, what it states here is that one may use in cold.

Law 23: Metal Vessels – Kashering in a Primary Vessel

Speaker 2:

Okay.

Speaker 1:

So now one can learn about the vessels that one cooks in them, you can say, metal vessels begin. Perhaps, okay, one can cook earthenware vessels also, but that will be afterward.

“Metal Vessels and Stone Vessels”

“Metal Vessels and Stone Vessels” – regarding stones there is a dispute among other Rishonim, but the Rambam says that stones are like metals, not like earthenware – “that were used with chametz in boiling in a keli rishon (primary vessel),” that one cooked with the pot. Yes, keli rishon doesn’t mean that one poured into it hot soup, but rather that one cooked soup in it, “such as pots and cauldrons.” Yes, pots are, yes, pots or cauldrons, some other type.

One must clean them, perform hagalah, with the same level of heat that was used when it became chametz. That is, how did it become chametz’dik? When one cooked with the chametz. So the way one cleans it, one must also clean it with hot water that is on the fire. It doesn’t mean one pours hot water on it, but rather the item itself is placed into the pot where hot water is boiling.

“One places them into a large vessel and fills water over them and boils them within it.” One heats it up in the pot. One doesn’t pour hot water on it, but rather one heats it up in the pot. Now, after one is mevashel betokho, after one boils it up with hot water, “afterwards one rinses them,” afterwards one washes it off, cold water or whatever, and one washes it off as you said that hagalah sometimes wasn’t simply that the water was as clean after doing hagalah as before. So it would be lying in dirty water that has bits of chametz. One must also wash it off from that, “and uses them with matzah,” afterwards one can use it with matzah, it has become clean. Yes.

Digression: Hagalah is a Leniency, Not a Stringency

So in short, by the way, I’ll forgive you that you’re right that I’m coming here after such a whole politics about what is the calf and all these things. But it seems to us that all these things are tremendous leniencies, not stringencies, it’s even a clean thing. I mean that even today going into a kitchen, except for someone who is very small, or he only buys such fancy pots, stainless steel, or such things that aren’t called beli’ah. And the point is not beli’ah, it’s easy to clean.

But normally, a vessel that one bakes in is dense, it’s never even my pot, go buy and take a pot, the not fancy pot that I have, I have a simple pan, I make eggs with it and such things. It’s always dirty. However much one washes it off, I’m almost certain that one can even taste the egg that was made yesterday usually. Except that one spends a lot of time cleaning it with a whole process, normally one doesn’t clean it that way.

Comes the halachah, it says a great leniency, did you cook chametz in it yesterday? Cook in it today! Clean boiling water, and clean it the same way, and that’s it, it’s enough. And it’s true that kashering has been made easier to do.

I have many times people call me asking a question, I know that a dairy spoon fell into a meat pot. And I tell him, you know it’s faster to kasher than to even make a phone call. What is kashering? It’s take your percolator, pour hot water on it, that’s it. Boil it up in hot water. Kashering is here to help us so you shouldn’t have any questions, that even when it’s not one hundred percent that you need to kasher it, kasher it anyway.

But once people have started to look at it like one must go to a professional kasherer and one must carry it to the place where one kashers, yes.

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

It has become so complicated, people think it’s a very difficult halachah. Of course there are stringencies, one shouldn’t wait twenty-four hours, such sorts of things that are stringencies, that actually makes people… there is the professional kashering is more for… practical, yes, practical, true. Now, large things and so forth. But here one will see that there are also solutions for that. But anyway, that’s the… yes, that’s the halachah.

Halachah Regarding Knives

And so, it’s interesting, what one calls today for example Pesach’dik, the Rambam says, mishtamesh bematzah. One doesn’t mean to say matzah, one means to say with Pesach’dike food. I’m speaking here about a vessel. Matzah doesn’t mean, one means to say matzah kneidlach, yes.

“And so the knives,” knives. Knives that one uses on hot, apparently. Not clear, I’ll see it. Let me see. “Mevashel” one must make hot “the blade,” either the point, the sharpness. Yes, “blade” otherwise… well, what does it say here? Blade means… it says a verse “ve’et hanetzev.” That’s the verse by… what’s his name? The first judge, Ehud ben Gera? It says “vayavo gam hanetzev achar halahav.” The netzev is the place where one holds. The handle? One holds netzavim, yes, one stands. The thing on which it stands.

The chiddush is that a person shouldn’t think that usually only the sharp side of the knife touches the heat, but it’s a knife. Sometimes he puts down the whole knife on the hot meat, not chametz, but for example on the hot chametz’dike soup. Therefore, because one doesn’t say any of it is your thing. One must kasher, one must be mevashel in keli rishon. And afterwards one means mishtamesh by matzos.

Apparently one is speaking here that one needs keli rishon means to say, because many times one uses the knife still in the pot for example. If it’s actually a knife that one uses only on the table and it never came to such high heats, it will be enough, one pours on it from a hot kettle. As he brings so from Rabbeinu ben Noach, that many times one cuts the meat in the pot or the chametz.

Discussion: Rov Tashmisho vs. Mi’ut Tashmisho

For example, regarding this come Rishonim and ask, that if it happens sometimes that one uses the knife like a spit, to roast on it one will need an even higher level of heat, one will need libun. But what one sees here yes is, this is yes also a great question about something that most times one doesn’t use very hot, but sometimes sometimes, let’s say such a knife, most times one uses only to cut, but sometimes sometimes one will give a use the knife in the pot.

Whether one goes after rov tashmisho, this is a well-known dispute in the later ones, in Shulchan Aruch in the Rishonim, whether one goes after rov tashmisho, whether one goes after what sometimes sometimes. Here one can perhaps think that one doesn’t go specifically after the rov tashmisho. A knife, because sometimes sometimes there can be such a kind of absorption. I don’t know, perhaps that’s only the handle. The Rambam doesn’t say, the Rambam doesn’t say.

Halachah 24: Keli Sheni – Bowls and Cups

“Metal vessels and stone vessels and wooden vessels.” That is, previously we learned about earthenware vessels, now what is there metal vessels? Sorry, until now we learned about metal vessels that one uses in keli rishon, that one cooks in them. Here he speaks about vessels that one uses at the table, one uses already in keli sheni, “such as bowls and cups,” that into them one pours from the pot into them, in keli sheni.

So this one doesn’t need to place into the pot and cook the pot, because when it received the chametz it wasn’t so hot, it needs only a weaker level of heat. “One places into a large vessel.” One doesn’t need to cook the pot, but rather “one pours boiling water over them,” one can pour boiling water on it. “And leaves them within it until it overflows.” But this he says yes, it’s not enough to give a pour. It must lie a bit.

So it looks here, because what one can see, this is the realistic things. That it should give an opportunity that the dirt should come out from the… What one calls hagalah, one calls today washing dishes.

I have a great chiddush, not a chiddush, not a chiddush, it’s simple. Usually one washes with hot water. I mean that it’s already hot. Usually in a normal house, I mean that it’s a keli rishon there in the boiler there is a keli rishon. I don’t know if it boils up actually boiling, but… but as hot approximately as the food that one puts on is. One puts with that soap. If one uses very soap, it’s apparently a davar hapogem. I just want to say, no, we are somewhat funny.

Laws of Hagalah – Practical Application in Daily Life

The Three Levels of Kashering Vessels – A Practical Observation

Speaker 1:

I have a great chiddush, not a chiddush, it’s simple. Usually one washes with hot water. I mean that it’s really already hot. Usually in a normal house, I mean that it’s a keli rishon there in the boiler there is a keli rishon. I don’t know if it boils up actually boiling, but as hot approximately as the food that one puts on is. One soaks with that soap. But if one uses soap it’s apparently a davar hapogem.

I want to say, no, we have somewhat funny added, for some reason, for this I say I wanted that it’s a revelation, it’s a law. I mean that my wife, or the cleaning lady, when she washes dishes, she is also mekayem. No, she is mekayem all the rules. Things that one uses cold, that for cold is enough. When must one turn on the hot water? The vessels that one uses. When does one do something a greater thing? Today one doesn’t do hagalos, but one does other solutions, one puts something a stronger, a steel wool, I know, something another thing.

The pot you can see, everyone knows motzaei Shabbos to clean the cholent pot is a greater job than cleaning the plates, and the cup is an even smaller job. True, very simple. So the three levels that one sees here, not a decree of the scripture or in the book of rules, it’s very a practical thing that everyone conducts themselves so at home already when he washes his dishes. Right I say?

Speaker 2:

Yes, umanicha metocha ad sheyiflot.

Speaker 1:

But this is yes, chiddushim, people give a pour on, but the thought of hagalos is that it gives an opportunity. Because today one has washed, it’s not believed. Ve’achar kach shotef, because one washes it off from the water that was full, is mishtamesh bematzav.

Beli’ah – What Does It Mean Practically

Speaker 1:

But it’s the opposite, from this ad sheyiflot you see that the hagalah that stands in Rambam is when it’s still dirty. As this, places in, as I wanted to tell, many times when one washes dishes, one places it into the sink, one pours out into the hot water, one waits a bit because it’s stuck.

Before this I say that beli’ah means sticky, not in the inside, literally somewhere in the chemistry of the vessels. Many times, we spoke about this in Shabbos even, many times one places in specifically a bit in water, it should soak, it should come off.

But I mean, this itself, when we have a shiny pot, one can very clearly see what is the pot and what is the dirt. But when someone has such, more such, let’s say, a wooden vessel, a cutting board, think of such a rough clumsy pot, you can hardly… think of such a rough black pot that one uses for years long, one uses the same pot in a restaurant. You can’t see exactly to scrape until to come to the bottom away. It can even be that there are there such pieces that it goes in, one holds in pops and made a few pieces.

There is a part of the rabbis who become mixed up, that apparently one doesn’t see such a clear absorption. I mean that it’s there inside because they look already after what one has cleaned. Before one has cleaned one sees very well. Very well.

Halachah 25: Earthenware Vessels – Vessels That One Cannot Kasher

Speaker 1:

Now, now we’re going to learn about earthenware vessels. Earthenware vessels. Earthenware vessels… is so, previously we learned about earthenware vessels that one bakes on them, that one can bake them off with a strong level of heat. This is that which is a special kind of oven that can withstand a strong level of heat. But earthenware vessels, as it says in the Gemara, has a problem that it can become broken, therefore the person will be careful and not use it on the same level of heat.

Says the Rambam, all earthenware vessels used with chametz in hot, whether keli rishon, such as let’s say he has a pot of earthenware, or a keli sheni like a plate. There’s no difference what the earthenware is. Whether that it’s covered with a layer of glass, covered… not like glass, or a word, something something such…

I mean, lead means it. Ofer is lead?

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

Okay. Over I remember, I mean that it means lead. It also holds here such… one must know what today there is.

Speaker 2:

Yes, by today it’s actually glass.

Digression: Lead in Vessels

Speaker 1:

Once, today one doesn’t use lead, one holds that lead is very dangerous to eat with lead. But in the time of Chazal, very many vessels were covered with lead. Lead that one uses for a pencil, yes, that thing. And today one holds it terribly dangerous something if one eats it and so forth. But it used to be, I read that the Romans, I mean, in the time of Chazal, almost very many vessels were covered with lead. Does that make it?

But lead is a soft thing. It’s not like today when it doesn’t matter to me what’s there inside. It’s glass, it’s glass, even inside there is something another thing. But here one speaks that it’s smeared on it a layer of lead, and it’s not strong enough, it can still… absorb or what’s it called, whatever it’s called today, porcelain, the vessels, it’s not like earthenware mashichim behaver, it’s something else. One must ask the rabbis what the halachah from it is, but it’s not the same.

Continuation of Halachah 25

Speaker 1:

He says, earthenware vessels, no difference whether it’s surrounded with a layer of lead or it’s earthenware vessels as it is, earthenware vessels, one doesn’t use it with matzah at all, one shouldn’t kasher it, but rather one puts it away after Pesach and cooks in it, one shouldn’t use it on Pesach. He also doesn’t say one transgresses on it bal yera’eh or something about the absorptions, he just says one should put it away.

Speaker 2:

No, it just looks clear that it’s not any… it’s only because if one cooked in it will go in a taste into the food. But it remains he stood earlier, the except that in the cracks of the earthenware, if there is a shiur, then there is a problem, that here usually there isn’t any shiur, it’s only there are small absorptions.

Halachah 26: How to Boil a Large Vessel That Has No Vessel Larger Than It

Speaker 1:

The last halachah is a practical halachah. The Rambam said that for example a pot one should place into a large pot. But what happens here? A large pot, that he doesn’t have a larger pot than it, there is a patent for this. “A keli rishon that one wants to boil it,” who gives instruction for this rabbi?

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

“And didn’t find another vessel larger than it in order to boil it within it,” this is the largest vessel, he doesn’t have with what to kasher this. He has a solution. He says a solution like this: “I saw making for it a rim of clay on its rim from outside. And he takes around on top with clay, and fills it with water until the water exceeds over its rim, and boils the water within it.”

We want that the water should surround not only inside of the pot, but also outside of the pot, because the absorptions go everywhere. But it should run around on the outside. But it doesn’t need to… no, it’s not running. If I understand, the explanation is that one must clean inside in the pot, as the… everywhere that it can stick, the top with on top the smaller. But the other side one doesn’t need to, because it’s already smaller than inside.

Basically he needs a way how one should be able to fill the pot should be full with heat. Not with heat, with the hot water. So he puts something a sticky, the does something such a playdough sort of thing. When he cooks it, he fills it up like until there, and afterwards already. “And the water over its rim,” until the water runs everywhere its rim, “and boils the water within it, and the water,” and that’s enough. “And afterwards rinses it,” well, wash it off and one doesn’t stay by the water.

Discussion: Why Does One Need the Clay?

Speaker 1:

That is, I need to understand a bit why one needs to have the clay. One can just so fill until it’s over, flows over. Something you need to stop there, it says, for something a second, at least. Why can’t one just overflow? What’s missing the clay?

I actually don’t know, I would do the solution only that fill up the pot, and you know still that it should run around a bit on the top, throw in something a thing into the pot that it should run out. That would also perhaps help.

The Rama said him a practical solution. No, no, that one needs anyway to do. One must somehow that it should spray out. Okay, he says that mevashel the water, that will make that it should run around, yes? When the… he brings actually that he doesn’t understand clearly why then they need to do that.

I thought that perhaps one wants that it should lie a bit further there, and the clay holds it that it shouldn’t immediately run down. But it’s yes there until something a leniency. The video is influential that it’s a leniency. In order essentially one would be better, but that if one doesn’t have, it’s enough so.

Conclusion of Chapter 5: Laws of Hagalah

Speaker 1:

Alright, that’s it. And “chochach shoteh” (foolish palate), from using for mitzvos, back then they could use it for mitzvos. That’s it. All the laws of hagalah, and there are about five halachos. Six halachos, five. Very good. Six halachos, one can call them all laws of hagalah.

Discussion: Again About the Spout

Speaker 2:

I don’t understand the practicality of the spout. I didn’t understand it so well. It seems to me that he does this, but why does it help… what does it accomplish? Perhaps… perhaps the end of the spout is higher? As if he makes the oven a bit higher? Not on the side like… perhaps it’s like… do you understand? He makes it as if higher?

Speaker 1:

I don’t know. Perhaps this way the hot water will stay a bit, so it shouldn’t go down right away, but should still have something to go over. It seems to me that the explanation means that he makes the… like… yes, he has a pot, and he puts here a spout like this. So when it runs out, it doesn’t run out, it stays there. It reaches… yes, he fills up to here. Not up to here. Fills up to here, understand? He put here such a piece of spout. So the spout makes it weaker, he doesn’t make it better.

Speaker 2:

It makes it better. So it shouldn’t run around so well. It’s not talking about the other side. His problem isn’t the other side. The problem is only this.

Speaker 1:

No, here, but only the spout.

Speaker 2:

Yes, that’s how it looks. So, he does it like this. Now it goes like this. The other advice is indeed… afterwards there’s another advice that others bring that one can make it overflow. Here we’re not talking about overflowing, here we’re simply talking about making the spout higher, as if. It seems that there was such a practice in the kitchen when one needed a larger spout. They used, there was some kind of spout there. Today I don’t know what there is, but there was some kind of solution, and they had something made a bit higher. Perhaps that’s the explanation.

Speaker 1:

Excellent. Okay, that’s it for Chapter 5 of the Laws of Chametz and Matzah.

Speaker 2:

Continue.

General Conclusion: Hagalah is a Leniency, Not a Stringency

Speaker 1:

Yes. So in short, by the way, I’ll forgive you that you’re right that I come here after such a whole politics about what is hagalah and all these things. But it seems to me that all these things are tremendous leniencies, not stringencies, it’s even a pure thing.

I mean that even today going into a kitchen, except for someone who is very particular, or he only buys such fancy pots, stainless steel, or such things that aren’t called absorbent. And the point is not absorbent, it’s easy to clean. But normally, a pot that one bakes in is that, it’s never ever. Restaurants, let’s say, it’s black, a big pot. Even my pot, go buy and take a pot, the not fancy pot that I have, I have a simple pan, I make with it the eggs with such things. It’s always dirty. How much does one wash it? I’m almost certain that one can even taste the egg that was made yesterday usually. Except if one spends a lot of time cleaning it with a whole process, normally one doesn’t clean it so.

The halachah comes and says a great leniency, did you cook chametz in this yesterday? Cook in it today! Pure water, as if clean it the same way, and that’s it, it’s enough. It’s true that kashering is made to make it easier.

I’ve had many times people call me asking a question, I know that a dairy spoon fell into a meat pot. And I told him, you know that it’s faster to kasher than to even make a phone call. What is kashering? Take your percolator, pour it with hot water, that’s it. From a keli rishon one needs it… yes, we’re talking, it’s a keli rishon. Boil it for you in hot water. Kashering is here to help us so you shouldn’t have any questions. That even when it’s not one hundred percent that you need to kasher it, kasher it anyway.

But once people started looking at it like one needs to go to a professional kasherer, and one needs to carry it to the Islamic new thing probably. Yes. Yes, it became so complicated. People think that it’s very difficult halachos. Of course there are stringencies, one shouldn’t wait twenty-four hours, such sorts of things that are stringencies, that does make it indeed… people shouldn’t be difficult. Think that professional kashering is more for… practically, yes, practically, true. Already, large things and so on. But here one has seen that there are solutions also for this. But anyway, that’s the… yes, that’s the halachah.

Halachah 23-24: Metal Vessels – Knives, Bowls and Cups

Speaker 1:

And likewise… it’s interesting, what we call today for example Pesachdik, the Rambam says, “mishtamesh b’matzah”. We don’t mean to say matzah, we mean to say with Pesach food. We’re talking here about a vessel. Matzah doesn’t mean, we mean to say matzah kneidlach, yes.

And likewise the Rambam says, “hasakinim”, knives. Knives that one uses on hot, apparently. Not clear, I’ll say it. Let’s see. “Martiach” one needs to make hot, whether the point, the sharpness, yes, “halav acheret”… well, what does it say here? No, “lahav” it says here. But lahav means… there’s a verse “v’es hanetzev”, that’s the verse by… what is it called? The first judge, the first judge, the first judge.

Innovation: One Must Kasher the Entire Knife

The innovation is that a person shouldn’t think that usually only the sharp side of the knife touches the heat, but it’s a knife. Sometimes he puts down the whole knife on the hot meat that he… not chametz, but for example on the hot chametz soup. Apparently, they didn’t write when it’s a hot soup. One needs to kasher, one needs to be martiach in a keli rishon. “V’achar kach mishtamesh bah b’matzos”.

Apparently we’re talking here, that’s what keli rishon means to say, because many times one uses the knife still in the pot, for example. If it’s indeed a knife that one uses only on the table and it never came to such a level of heat, it will be enough to pour on it from a hot pot.

As he brings from Rabbeinu Yonah, that many times one cuts the meat in the pot or the chametz, for example. In honor of this, Rishonim come and ask that if it happens sometimes that one uses the knife like a spit, to roast on it, one will need an even higher level of heat, one will need libun.

Question: Majority of Use or Minority of Use

But what we see here yes is, this is yes also a great question about something that most times one doesn’t use very hot, but sometimes occasionally, let’s say such a knife, most times one uses only to cut, but sometimes occasionally one will give a use to the knife in the pot. Whether we go after majority of use, that’s a well-known dispute in the later Shulchan Aruch in the commentaries, whether we go after majority of use or whether we go after what happens occasionally.

Here one can perhaps think that we don’t go specifically after the majority of use, but because occasionally there can be such a kind of absorption, I don’t know, perhaps that’s just the halachah. The Rambam doesn’t say, the Rambam doesn’t say.

Halachah 24: Keli Sheni – Bowls and Cups

“Klei matachos v’avanim u’klei etz”. That means, until now one learned about earthenware vessels. What is here metal vessels? Sorry, until now one learned about metal vessels that one uses in a keli rishon, that one cooks in them. Here he speaks of vessels that one uses at the table, one uses already in a keli sheni, “k’gon kearos v’chosos”, in which one pours from the pot into them, in a keli sheni. So this one doesn’t need to put into the pot and cook in the pot, because when it received the chametz it wasn’t so hot, it needs only a weaker level of heat, “notan l’soch gedolah”. One doesn’t need to cook the pot, but “noten aleihen mayim rosechin”, one can pour boiling water on it.

“U’maniach b’sochah ad sheyiflot”, but this he does say yes, it’s not enough to give a pour, it needs to lie a bit.

Innovation: Hagalah = Washing Dishes

It looks like here, because this one can see, it’s realistic things, that it should give an opportunity that the dirt should come out from the… you know that you once washed dishes? By the way, what you call hagalah, today we call washing dishes. I have a great innovation, not an innovation, it’s simple. Usually one washes with hot water. How hot this is, that’s a question, but there are people who wash with keli sheni hot. I mean, usually in a normal house, I mean that it’s a keli rishon there in the boiler, there it’s a keli rishon. I don’t know if it actually boils to boiling, but… but it’s about as hot as the food that one puts on it is. One puts with the sponges. Therefore, if one uses soap it’s apparently a davar hapo’el.

I just want to say, no, we have it for some reason, therefore I say we’ve learned into it that one can make oneself angry. We’re accustomed that it’s a hagalah, it’s a law. I mean that my wife, or the cleaning lady, when she washes dishes, she’s also fulfilling. No, she’s fulfilling all these rules. Things that one uses cold, what for cold is enough. When does one need to turn on the hot water? The vessels that one uses… when does one do something greater? Today one doesn’t do libun, but one does other solutions, one puts something stronger, a steel wool, I know, something else. The pot you can see, everyone knows motzaei Shabbos to clean the cholent pot is a bigger job than cleaning the plate, and the cup is an even smaller job. True, very simple.

So the three levels that we see here, not according to whether it’s silver or some rules, it’s very a practical thing that everyone conducts themselves this way at home already when he washes his dishes. Makes sense, right? Yes, “u’maniach b’sochah ad sheyiflot”.

Innovation: Hagalah is for Cleaning

But this is yes, innovations, people give a pour, but the idea of hagalah is… because today there was an opportunity. After one has already washed, it’s already hagalah after cleaning. Yes, yes, yes. “V’achar kach shotef”, because one washes it off from the… because it lies with the water that was dirty, “u’mishtamesh b’matzah”.

But it’s the opposite, from this “ad sheyiflot” you see that the hagalah that stands in the Rambam is when it’s still dirty. And like this, he puts it in, like I wanted to tell, many times when one washes dishes, one puts it in the sink, one pours out from the hot water, one waits a bit because it’s stuck.

Innovation: Absorption Means Sticky, Not Chemical Absorption

Therefore I say that absorption means sticky, not on the inside, literally somewhere in the chemistry of the vessel. This, many times, we talked about this even after Shabbos, many times one puts in specifically a bit in water, it should soak, it should come out. But I mean, this itself, when we have a shiny pot, one can very clearly see what is the pot and what is the dirt. But when someone has such, more such, let’s say, a wooden vessel, an old-fashioned, think of such a rough black pot that one uses for years long, one uses the same pot in a restaurant. You can’t see exactly to scrape off, you’ve come to the bare metal. It can even be that there are such pieces that it goes in, that holds in the pot, it’s made a few pieces. I don’t want to distinguish between the original and the stuck on. True, but today’s rabbis who get confused, that apparently one doesn’t see absorption of absorptions. I mean that it used to be because they look already after what one has cleaned. Before one cleaned one sees very well. Very good.

Alright. Now we’re going to learn about earthenware vessels. Earthenware vessels. Earthenware vessels are like this: earlier we learned about earthenware vessels that one bakes on them, that one can bake them off with a strong level of heat. That’s the one that a special kind of oven can withstand a strong level of heat. But earthenware vessels, as it says in the Gemara, have a problem that they can be broken, therefore the person will be careful and not use them on the same level of heat.

Halachah 25: Earthenware Vessels – One Cannot Kasher Them

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says, “Kol klei cheres she’nishtamesh bo chametz b’chamin, bein keli rishon, k’gon” – let’s say he has a pot of earthenware – “bein keli sheni” – like a plate, there’s no difference what the earthenware is – “bein she’ein meshichin u’vein b’avar she’osin oso k’ein zechuchis” – whether when it’s covered with a layer of glass, covered… not like glass, or avar, something like that… I mean led means it. Avar is lead? Yes, okay. I remember that it means lead. Today there are also such… one needs to know what today there is. Yes, but today it’s like glass.

Avar = Lead

Once, today one doesn’t use lead, one holds that lead is very dangerous to eat with lead. But in the time of Chazal, very many vessels were covered with lead. Lead that one uses for a pencil, yes, that thing. And today one holds it terribly dangerous something if one eats it and so on. But the question is, I read that the Romans already, I mean, in the time of Chazal almost very many vessels were covered with lead. That makes it a bit more tasty to use.

But this isn’t like today when it doesn’t concern me what there is inside. It’s glass, it’s glass, even inside there’s something else. But here we’re talking that it’s smeared on it a layer of lead, and it’s not strong enough. The china or what it’s called, whatever it’s called today, porcelain, the vessels, it’s not earthenware vessels coated with lead, it’s something else. One needs to ask the rabbis what the halachah of it is, but it’s not the same.

He says, the earthenware vessels, no difference whether it’s surrounded with a layer of lead or it’s like earthenware as bare earthenware, “ein mishtamshin bahen b’matzah b’chlal” – one shouldn’t kasher them – “ela maniach l’achar haPesach u’mishtamesh bahen” – one shouldn’t use them on Pesach.

The Rambam Doesn’t Say That One Transgresses Bal Yera’eh

He doesn’t say that one transgresses bal yera’eh or something about the absorptions, he just says one should put them away. No, it just seems clear that it’s not any… it’s only because if one used it in this, a taste will go into the food. But absorption is because it stood quietly before, the piece that’s within the earthenware, if there’s a measure, then there’s a problem. But here usually there isn’t any measure, there are only small absorptions.

Halachah 26: How to Boil a Large Vessel That Has No Larger Than It

Speaker 1:

The last halachah is a practical halachah. The Rambam said that for example a pot one should put into a large pot. But what happens with a large pot that he doesn’t have a larger pot than it? There’s a patent for this.

“Keli rishon she’ratzah l’harticho, v’lo matza keli echad gadol mimenu k’dei l’harticho b’socho” – this is the largest vessel, he doesn’t have with what to kasher it. He says a solution like this: “Ra’isi makif lo safah shel tit al sfaso mibachutz”. He takes around the top with clay, “u’mla’hu mayim ad sheyigberu hamayim al sfaso, u’martiach hamayim b’socho”.

We want that the water should surround not only inside the pot, but also outside the pot, because the absorptions go everywhere. But it should run around on the outside. But it doesn’t need to… no, it’s not running. If I understand, the explanation is that one needs to clean the inside of the pot, like the… everywhere that it can touch, the top with the sticky. But the other side one doesn’t need, because it’s already clean from inside. Basically he needs a way how one should be able to fill the pot should be full with clay… not with clay, with the hot water. So he puts something sticky, the clay is something like a play-dough sort of thing.

Conclusion of Laws of Hagalah – Law of Clay Rim

Halachah 26: How to Perform Hagalah on a Large Vessel That Has No Larger Than It

Speaker 1:

V’achar kach shotef oso, well, wash it off, u’mishtamshin.

I need to understand a bit why one needs to have the clay. One can just fill it up until it’s over, flows over. Something needs to stop there, it seems, for some second, at least. Why can’t one just let it overflow? What does the clay accomplish?

I don’t know, if I do the solution for example, that I fill the pot, and you know still that it should run around a bit on the top, throw in something into the pot so it should run out. Okay, and that would also perhaps help.

The rabbi should give a practical solution.

Speaker 2:

No, no, but this needs to be done anyway. It has to somehow spurt out.

Speaker 1:

Okay, so he says marte’ach hamayim (heating the water), that will make it flow around.

Speaker 2:

Yes, when the… interesting.

Discussion: Why Do We Need the Lip of Clay?

Speaker 1:

He actually brings that he doesn’t understand clearly why they need the clay then. I thought that perhaps one wants it to lie a bit further away there, and the clay holds it so it shouldn’t immediately flow down.

But there is indeed something like a leniency (kula). The Radvaz influences that there should be a leniency. Because essentially it would be better to actually have the hag’ala, but if one doesn’t have it, this is sufficient.

So, up to here. V’achar kach shotef oto u’mishtamesh bo l’mitzvos (and afterwards he rinses it and uses it for mitzvos), then he can use it for mitzvos.

Summary of the Laws of Hag’ala in the Rambam

Speaker 1:

Up to here all the laws of hag’ala in the Rambam, approximately five laws.

Speaker 2:

Six laws, five.

Speaker 1:

Very good. Six laws, one can call them the laws of hag’ala.

Continued Discussion: The Meaning of the Lip of Clay

Speaker 1:

I really don’t know the practicality of the clay. I didn’t understand it so well. It seems to me that he does this, but why does it help? What does it accomplish?

Perhaps, perhaps the lip of clay is higher? As if he makes the top just a bit higher? Not on the side, like, perhaps it’s like, do you understand what I’m saying? He makes it as if higher.

Speaker 2:

I don’t know.

Speaker 1:

Perhaps this way the hot water will hold a bit, so it shouldn’t immediately go down, but it should still have what to go over.

It seems to me that “lip of clay” means that he makes the, like, I don’t know, he has a pot, and he puts clay here like this. So when it flows out, it doesn’t flow out, it stays there. It reaches technically.

Speaker 2:

Yes, he fills until here, not until here. He fills until here, understand? He put here such a piece of clay.

Speaker 1:

So the clay makes it weaker, he doesn’t make it better.

Speaker 2:

He makes it better. He makes it so it shouldn’t flow around so well.

Speaker 1:

It’s not talking about the other side. His problem isn’t the other side, his problem is only the spout.

Speaker 2:

No, here, but the lip.

Speaker 1:

Yes, so it seems. So he does it like this, now it goes like this.

The other advice is indeed, afterwards there is another advice that others bring that one can make it overflow. Here we’re not talking about overflowing, here we’re simply talking about making the top higher, as if.

It seems that it was such a practice in the kitchen when one needed a larger pot, one used, there was some clay there. Today I don’t know what there is, but there was some advice, one had something that made it a bit higher. Perhaps that’s the explanation.

Speaker 2:

Wonderful.

Conclusion

Speaker 1:

Okay, up to here Chapter 5 of the Laws of Chametz and Matzah.