After Pesach Chametz

Chametz שעבר עליו הפסח is prohibited due to a קנס.  The halacha (448:3) is that it is prohibited to everyone even to benefit from the chametz. However, there are Rishonim that hold it is only prohibited for the one who keeps the chametz and those that hold it is not prohibited בהנאה (see beginning of shiur of Rav Asher Weiss.)  

The Pri Migadim (434:9) says that chametz owned by kids would not be prohibited after Pesach since the קנס on chametz שעבר עליו הפסח would not be imposed on kids. In the פתיחה כוללת he is unsure about this halacha.

All of these issues may hinge on the geder of the קנס of the Chachamim.  Did the Chachamim place  an issur on the cheftzah of chametz that was kept over Pesach as an extension of the issur of chametz and if so it is across the board and carries all the stringencies of chametz on Pesach.  Or it is an issur on the gavra for violating the issur and if so it can have it may only apply to the one who kept the chametz and may only carry an issur achilah or may not apply to kids.  (We can sharpen the chakirah more and even if it is an issur cheftzah, is it an extension of the issur chametz with all of its laws or is it an new issur and may not carry an issur hanah (like the Briskor Rav's difference between the issur chametz Erev Pesach in the fifth hour or the sixth hour.)

Thoughts On Karpas

We eat karpas as a strange thing to eat a vegetable before the meal in order encourage children to why we are doing karpas.  The Bach (673) gives three explanations as to what is the answer to the question of we are doing karpas at the seder.  1.  It is the way of בני חורין to eat vegetables before a meal in order to whet the appetite.  2. The answers is that we eat a snack since its going to be a while until the meal.  3. He cites the Maharal (Gevuros 50) that it is not the karpas itself that is strange for it is normal to eat a vegetable at the beginning of the meal, rather it will make the eating of maror strange for we already ate a vegetable for karpas.  This approach is already mentioned in the Rishonim, and Rabbenu Dovid says this is supported from the ma neshtana which we say שתי פעמים, the strangeness is the eating of two vegetables, not the karpas itself.  (However, it does create another difficulty since the ma neshtana is recited before the maror, why would there be a question?)  According to this approach, the answer is we are eating maror since it is a mitzvah.  

These two approaches should come into play in the discussion the Tur has in siman 483 if one doesn't have wine and has to say the kiddush on matzah, when is karpas eaten.  The Tur says in that case karpas should be eaten before kiddush for if it is eaten afterward, there will be nothing strange for the vegetable is bein eaten after the bread.  However, according to the Maharal, the point is just to make the second eating of the vegetable as the maror a funny event and that can still take place even if the karpas is eaten after the matzah.  The Maharal's approach in fact is the simple read of the Gemarah (114b) that since even if one can be yotzei maror with the karpas we eat again as a היכר for the kids.  In other words, it is the second eating that is strange.  See Chazon Eish who tries to align the other approach with the Gemarah. 

The opinion of the Rambam (Matzah 8:2) and Rav Amram Gaon is that karpas should be dipped in charoses.  Tosfos disagrees for we use charoses for maror only to remove the poison in the maror (115a,) which does not apply for the karpas.  So why do the Rambam and Rav Amram hold one must use charoses?  

The Bach (ibid) suggests that there is some degree of poison that exists in all vegetables.  

The Ritva on the Haggadah says יש להם לאכול מן הירקות המרים, ונהגו לאכול כרפס, ויש לנו לטבלו בחרוסת, ... והטיבול הזה הוא זכר לוימררו את חייהם בעבודה קשה בחומר ובלבנים.  According to the Ritva the karpas is a bitter vegetable to remember the slavery in Egypt.  In light of this it may very well be that is why the Ritva says to dip it is charoses which is also meant to serve as a remembrance to the slavery (see Rishimos Shiurim of Rav Kamlenson siman 75.)  It comes out the Ritva holds karpas is connected to being slaves in Egypt while the Bach in one approach holds we eat karpas as a means of demonstrating freedom so they view karpas from opposite sides.  

The Rambam is of the opinion that everything eaten as a mitzvah through the seder, matzah, korech, maror, karpas, is dipped in charoses.  Why does he hold that way?  The Rambam (7:11) says הַחֲרֹסֶת מִצְוָה מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים זֵכֶר לַטִּיט שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹבְדִין בּוֹ בְּמִצְרַיִם. ... וּמְבִיאִין אוֹתָהּ עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן בְּלֵילֵי הַפֶּסַח.  Here the Rambam says it is a mitzvah for the charoses to be present on the table durnig the Haggadah.  As the Alter Rebbe puts it (473:20)  וְתִקְּנוּ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לְפָנָיו חֲרֹסֶת בִּשְׁעַת אֲמִירַת הַהַגָּדָה, שֶׁהַחֲרֹסֶת הוּא זֵכֶר לַטִּיט שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּעְבְּדוּ בּוֹ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בְּמִצְרַיִםק וְזֵכֶר לַתַּפּוּחַ כְּמוֹ שֶׁ[יִּ]תְבָּאֵר, לְכָךְ צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁמְּסַפֵּר שִׁעְבּוּד מִצְרַיִם.  In other words, there is a halacha that the table should be adorned with charoses as a remembrance to the shibud and then there is another halacha of dipping in the charoses which the Rambam delineates in Chapter 8.  In light of this it is understandable that the Rambam holds the halacha of dipping things in charoses is not a halacha in the item being sipped but it is a halacha in charoses as a way of enhancing the remembrance of the shibud that all dippings of the night should be done in charoses (ibid siman 79,80.)  

According to to Tosfos (114a,) the Rosh and Tur that hold we don't dip in charoses why do they require a dipping at all?  The Migdal Oz (8:8) says שאין אכילה חשובה בלא טיבול.  In other words, to define it as a eating that will be acknowledged dipping is required.  

The Ritva (presumable lishitaso that it is a bitter vegetable,) asks how can one say a ha'adamah on the vegetable if it is not fit for consumption and vegetables which are not edible are shehakol?  He answers that כי בלילה הזה מצותו קובעתו ועושה אותו כאילו מידי דחזי, כיון שאנו חייבים לאוכלו, since we have to eat it, on this night it is deemed fit.  In the Haggadah Naftali Sheva Ratzon (which is one of the commentaries on the Haggadah on Sefaria) says a derush idea, "This is an allusion to a Midrash: when the Israelite women gave birth in the fields and the Egyptian soldiers would come to kill the children, the ground would swallow up the infants. The Egyptians would then bring oxen to plow up the ground in order to find them. After they left, they broke through the ground and sprouted up like weeds, as it says “I caused thee to multiply as the plants of the field.” (Ezekiel 16:7) In order to remember this great miracle, we eat greens and recite the blessing boray peri ha’adamah even though it is not necessary to recite this blessing under these circumstances."    

The Rambam (8:2) is of the opinion that one must eat a cazais of karpas.  That would presumably be because every time we find an act of eating it entails eating a cazais.  Many Rishonim disagree with the Rambam and do not require a cazais because one is not obligated to eat karpas for the sake of eating it but merely as a means of inspiring questions.  This issue may have its roots as to the nature of the point of karpas.  According to the approach that the karpas eating itself is to arouse questions then its whole purpose is defined as a question starter and it would not require a cazais.  However, the Maharal notes according to his approach that the eating of karpas is to to encourage questions about the maror, it is logical that it will only make the eating of maror strange if an act of actual eating, meaning a cazais took place beforehand.  In line of this thought, if the Rambam holds like the Maharal, it is possible to suggest another reason for why he requires the karpas to be dipped in charoses and that is to drive home the home the point that the marror is a second vegetable eating parallel to that of the karpas which will inspire questions (ibid siman 76.)   

The Ritva says proof that there is no act of eating required but it is merely necessary to taste a little bit because we do not say a birchas hamitzvah before eating karpas.  It is noteworthy that even though we say on the karpas the regular beracha of ha'adamah, the Tur (484) is of the opinion that even one who is not eating the karpas currently may say the beracha for others .  The Taz explains that even though the karpas is not technically a mitzvah, once there is a takkanah to do it, its beracha is like a birchas hamitzvah where one can say it for others.  In other words, it is not a mitzvah but it is a chiuv.  The Ritva also must hold this way for he says it is not a mitzvah but as cited before he says מצותו קובעתו which must mean it is a Rabbinic obligation in order to inspire questions.  The Baal Ha'Etur (cited in the Tur) that holds one can't say the beracha unless partaking in the karpas, in other words, it is a regular birchas hanehin would seem to view the karpas as not a geder of a takkanah but as a minhag.  The Rambam that holds one must eat a cazais may hold due even though the point is to arouse questions (even if we don't say he holds like the Maharal,) once it is an obligation, it requires a cazais like any other act of eating.  

The Klal And The Individual

There are two types of korbanos.  There are korbanos of the tzibbur such as the korban tammid where one korban is offered for the entity of Klal Yisrael.  There is another type of korban which is a korban yachid where a private indivdual has an obligation or offers to bring a korban of his one.  The Rambam splits these two categories into the different books, the book of Korbanot which deals with the individual korbanot and the book of Avodah which coves the communal obligations.  The korban pesach is an interesting korban in that it is a korban yachid offered by every individual but at the same time it is qualified as a korban tzibbur (the Yerushalmi says that is why it overrides Shabbos, see also Yoma (51a) פסח נמי אתי בכנופיא.)  (See about this in this book pg. 192-196 (in the pg. numbers on top,) article קורבן הפסח and sicha of the Rebbe volume 18 Behaloscha sicha 2.)  Or in another words as the Rebbe clarifies in a footnote based upon the Rogatchover's breakdown (מפענח צפונות פרק ד,) normally a tzibbur is a sum that is greater than the sum of its parts but in the korban pesach the tzibbur is the combination of all the individuals lumped together.  

The Rebbe goes on to explain the "טעם פנימי" for why this duality is present in the korban pesach.  Pesach is the time of the birth of Klal Yisrale and therefore the korban pesach carries two elements of Klal Yisrael.  On the one hand it is the body of Klal Yisrael, the tzibbur that is of vital importance but at the same time every individual also is important in his/ her own right.  These two perspectives are alluded to by Hillel in Avos אם אין אני לי מי לי, everyone has their own mission and is important in their own right but at the same time, וכשאני לעצמי מה אני, one has to be acting as part of the klal, one's actions as a yachid has to have a place as part of the general klal.  This dichotomy or paradox of acknowledging both the individual and the tzibbur is fraught with tension but is the goal.   

This paradox is also highlighted by the parshios of Vayakhel and Pekuday.  The name Vayakhel means a gathering yet the parsha details every individual vessel used in the Mishkan and the name Pekuday means every individual but the parsha is all about all the pieces coming together?  The Rebbe explains (volume 21 ) that the the parsha of Vayakhel highlights that even though there are individual vessels, they were not made purely with intent for their own function but also to function as part of the general Mishkan.  Conversely, Pekuday demonstrates that after there is an entire Mishkan structure, one should not just view all the individual parts as losing their own self worth in the totality of the building, but that the totality enhances the importance of the individual.  This is also hinted to by the fact that Vakayhel Pekuday are often combine but also are sometimes separate parshios.  There is a klal and individuals and both are of importance.     

Want It

The Chofetz Chaim in Toras Habayis (Ch.7) asks why is it that we aren't able to reach the heights in learning Torah that the previous generations could?  He explains that ones ability to learn Torah depends on how much one wants it.  Since in the past learning Torah was much more important to people, they were able to learn more.  In the footnote he uses this idea to explain the possuk is the parsha, ויקרא משה אל־בצלאל ואל־אהליאב ואל כל־איש חכם־לב אשר נתן ה' חכמה בלבו כל אשר נשאו לבו לקרבה אל־המלאכה לעשת אתה, who obtained the chochma how to do the melacha?  Those that desired to do it, כל אשר נשאו לבו, those to whom it was important, got the ability to accomplish.  This is the peshat in the Gemarah Berachot (50a) that the possuk הרחב פיך ואמלאהו refers to Divrei Torah for when it comes to accomplishing in ruchniout, in learning Torah, if one asks, if one truly desires to accomplish, there will be a way.  In the parsha sheet מתוקים מדבש he adds to this idea the Gra on the Siddur explains the words of Hallel מאשפות ירים אביון the Gemarah says אביון תאב לכל דבר, the way to be raised, to obtain greater levels, is by desiring to grow. 

The beginning of the possuk of הרחב פיך ואמלאהו says אנכי ה אלקיך המעלך מארץ מצרים.  What is the connection between Hashem taking us out of Egypt and asking to obtain divrei Torah?  The Maharsha says since Hashem took us out of Egypt, he can give us the ability to obtain Torah.  Why do we need to derive this from the fact that Hashem took us out of Egypt?  Rav Uri Zohar explains the limud is that one might think yes, one can ask to have the ability to acquire Torah but it has to be logical.  One can't expect to beseech Hashem to become a gadol baTorah if they barely know aleph beis.  The possuk is teaching us that is not the case, I was מעלה, I elevated Klal Yisrael from the depths of tumah so that in just 7 weeks they were able to accept the Torah, so too, a person can ask for the capabilities to excel in Torah beyond his dreams.  A person that wants to excel in Torah is given the capability to do so, one though must still put in the effort to do the work, כל אשר נשאו לבו לקרבה אל־המלאכה, there is a נשאו לבו but it has to lead to a לקרבה אל המלאכה.

Weighted Down

Rashi says three interpretations in word קרך in parshas Zachor.  One peshat is מקרה, another is קרי וטומאה and the third is קור.  What is the connection between the fact the Amalek caused tumah and cooled off the greatness of Klal Yisrael?  The very fact that there is a coolness is a tumah.  When there is a lack of fire, of inspiration, it automatically leads to sin. 

Rabbenu Bechai asks why did Moshe break the luchos after the agel why did he not  give them back?  He explains that the "neshama" of the luchos, the letters flew up to the heavens by themselves and all that was left in Moshe's hands was the physical stones of the luchos.  Once the life force of the luchos left, they were no longer a "חי נושא את עצמו" and they naturally became a dead weight that was to hard to carry and slipped from his hands.  The Bechai concludes this is a principle found by all things when the life force, the fire, is removed, then it or a person becomes heavier. In other words, a lack of fire, a coolness, leads to heaviness which equates with death.  

The taharah of Parah comes to cleanse one's self from the sins brought about by Amalek.  The power of Amelek is he coolness, the dead weight, the breaking of the luchos.  The tikkun says the Sfas Emes (Parah 5634) is the fire necessary for the learning of Torah.  The fire, the energy, gives a person new life.  וע"י ההבל מהתורה שבלב כל איש ישראל שצריך עי"ז ההתלהבות לשרוף כח היצה"ר שבו כמ"ש בית יעקב אש כו' עשו לקש וע"י השריפה ניתן הטהרה.  One who becomes tumah through a dead body, one who becomes defiled by sin and becomes weighed down by sin, needs the taharah of the חוקת התורה, to give him new life. 

The Mikdash is called בית חיינו.  In a sicha, Rav Yaakov Shapira notes that we find the term בית חייהם associated both with Torah and tefillah.  Both of these aspects are present in the Mikdash.  As cited here from Rav Yaakov Katz, the essence of the Mishkan is to remind a person that the learning of Torah is a means of connection to Hashem.  As the Ramban says the Mishkan is a portable Matan Torah.  It is through the Mishkan that one can be come inspired to learn Torah as Tosfos Bava Bathra (21a) says.  The Mishkan is the antidote to the the sense of deadness brought about by sin and gives a person a new chiyus.  Hence it is called בית חיינו.

Beyond Daas

Why did Klal Yisrael receive crowns for saying נעשה ונשמע but had to remove them after the agel?  At the time of the giving of the Torah there was a chance to correct the sin of Adam.  However, Klal Yisrael sinned with the agel which was the same root as that of Adam.  The Beis Halevi explains the sin of the agel was the use of human understanding.  Klal Yisrael believed Moshe Rabbenu was dead and they needed a replacement for him.  Although, logically this was a sensible argument it was incorrect since Hashem said it is prohibited to make an idol.  This was the root of the sin of the eitz haddas as well.  The holy books write all source of noble intentions that Adam had when he ate from the eitz haddas but since it was prohibited, it was prohibited.  When man acts based upon his understanding against G-d's wishes it brings downfall.  The greatness of נעשה ונשמע is that Klal Yisrael was willing to suspend their own daas and just follow what Hashem commands.  This is hinted to by the crown which goes above the head.  That was given to Klal Yisrael on account of their willingness to surrender their daas to a higher authority.  When they fell due to the use of their own daas, then they lost their crowns.  The Arizal teaches on Shabos the crowns are returned.  On Shabbos a Jew gets to experience a pre-agel sense of  following Hashem.

Haman made a gallows 50 amos high.  The Maharal says that Haman was trying to access the power of the שער נ and thereby defeat Mordechai (see more about 50 here.)  This is hinted to in the name Haman which is המ, the gematria of אדם and ן, the שער נ he tried to access.  However, ultimately this led to his downfall.  What is the capability of overpowering the שער נ accessed by Haman?  50 is the max level of daas that a person can obtain.  In as much as there are levels of daas of kedusha, there are in tumah.  Haman was trying to draw his power from the extreme powers that mankind can reach.  However, Klal Yisrael is not limited by the limit of man knowledge but their connection to Hashem goes beyond that.    Chapter 51 in Tehillim is about the teshuva of Dovid Hamelech.  The avodah of teshuva brings a person higher than one can obtain with their own daas.  Teshuva is not something that logically makes sense, one can't go back in time to correct the past but it comes from a place greater than daas.  That is the avodah of עד דלא ידע to connect to Hashem beyond one's daas.  

Purim Points

 A few points on Purim.

1. The Gemarah (4b) gives two reasons why Megillah can not be read on Shabbos.  Rav Yosef says since the poor people wait for the day the Megillah is read to be able to collect money which they won't be able to do on Shabbos.  Rabbah says we are worried someone will carry a Megillah in a public domain to read it and therefore it should not be read on Shabbos.  The Turay Even (5a) points out hat the reason of Rabbah which is a גזירה may have been a later decree but the reason of Rav Yosef which is not a גזירה must have been around from the time of the original takkanah to read Megillah otherwise a later Beis Din would not have the power to change which day the Megillah should be read.  In other words, according to Rav Yosef in a year like this year when the 14 of Adar is Friday and those that read on the 15th read on Friday as well, according to Rav Yosef it is the correct day for them to be reading for the takkanah was for them to read on the 14th if the 15th is Shabbos but according to Rabbah it is a push forward of when they should have read.  The question is discussed in poskim if someone for some reason could not read on the 14th or a katan that becomes bar mtizvah on the 15th should they read on the 15th?  According to Rav Yosef it would seem no, for the halacha is to read on the 14th but according to Rabbah maybe yes, for the גזירה is only on the tzibbur but if there is a particular case where one has to read maybe they should just like the Ran writes Chazal did not make a gezerah not to do milah on Shabbos because it is only for a specific person?  See about this is (Tzits Hakodesh siman 55, Cheshek sholom Megiilah 5a.  (Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank (Teshuvot volume 2 siman 127) seems to understand the opposite, that according to Rabbah the takkanah was uprooted from the 15th,I didn't understand what he was saying.) 

2. The Tur (siman 692) cites the Baal Haetur holds that one may talk between the end of the Megillah and the beracha of הרב את ריבנו.  The Beis Yosef explains that is since it is not a beracha on them mitzvah, it is just a separate beracha of thanks for the miracle there is no issue of interruption.  The Tur disagrees.  The Shaar Hatzion (692:12) is unsure if one does talk, if the Tur holds even bidieved that one can no longer say the beracha or he only argues לכתחילה.  In other words ,does the Tur hold it is a birchas hamitzvah and one cant interrupt or does he hold even though it is a birchas hashevach for the miracle it still should be connected to the Megillah and one should not interrupt.  See more about the geder of the beracha in Ratz Katzvi. 

3. The Smag lists the mitzvah of mikrah Megillah but does not list the other mitzvot of the day.  (As noted last year, this is also the case in the Rambam.)  The Mizrachi in his commentary asks why?  He answers that the yesod of all the mitzvot is the same, פרסומי ניסא and therefore, the Smag lists only the mitzvah which is the best pirsum which is Megillah.  I assume he means that since the yesod of all them itzvot is the same, it is the same theme, that it counted as one mitzvah.  The Pri Migadim (cited in Beur Halacha 694) has a doubt if ne can fulfill the mitzvah of מתנות לאביונים with a מתנה על מנת להחזיר.  What is the doubt?  Rav Zvi Reyzman suggests his debate is if the nature of them mitzvah is the mitzvah of charity to be done on Purim or a mitzvah to make people happy on Purim (which there are sources for both approaches.)  If the mitzvah is charity a מתנה על מנת להחזיר doesn't suffice but if the mitzvah is merely to increase happiness then maybe it suffices.  It is hard for me to hear that a מתנה על מנת להחזיר increases one's simcha.  However, in light of the Mizrachi, maybe he holds it suffices for a מתנה על מנת להחזיר has a שם מתנה and will effect פירסום הנס.   

4. The Rambam (Megillah Ch. 2 Law 16-17) says כיצד חובת סעודה זו שיאכל בשר ויתקן סעודה נאה כפי אשר תמצא ידו ושותה יין עד שישתכר וירדם בשכרות, וכן חייב אדם לשלוח שתי מנות של בשר או שני מיני תבשיל או שני מיני אוכלין לחברו ... מוטב לאדם להרבות במתנות אביונים מלהרבות בסעודתו ובשילוח מנות לרעיו, שאין שם שמחה גדולה ומפוארה אלא לשמח לב עניים ויתומים ואלמנות וגרים, שהמשמח לב האומללים האלו דומה לשכינה.  From the fact that the Rambam compares all of these three mitzvot, mishteh, mishloach manos, matanos lievyonim and emphasizes the importance of matanos lievyonim due to its simcha, it would seem that the Rambam holds the nature of all of these mitzvot is to increase simcha on Purim.  This is indeed how Rav Solevetchik (Harraray Kedem 232) and The Reebe (Likutay Sichos volume 16) both understand the Rambam.  The Rebbe asks how does the Rambam know that this is the nature of all of these mitzvot?  He explains since the possuk says  לעשות אותם ימי משתה ושמחה ומשלוח מנות איש לרעהו ומתנות לאביונים it means the establishment of the day is a day of joy and the laws that follow, mishteh, mishloach manos, matanos lievyonim are ways of expressing this joy.  Rav Asher Weiss goes a step further and says as opposed to a a yom tov where the mitzvah of simcha is limited to the activities one typically does to enhance a yom tov, on Purim any activity that increases one's happiness would be a fulfillment of experiencing the happiness of the day.  Or, in other words, as expressed here, the mitzvah's are to turn the day into a happy day.  This would be not like the aforementioned Mizrachi. 

5. The Manos Helevi writes the point of the mitzvah of mishloach manos is to increase friendship between people.  The Bach says this idea in order to explain the opinion of Rashi (Megillah 7b) that one can fulfill mishloach manos by eating the Purim seudah at someone else's house even without sending anything because there was an act of bonding together.  In other words, this reason of the Manos Helevi is no just a reason for the mitzvah but defines the geder of the fulfillment.  Rav Refael Shmulevitz asks why is there a specific focus on increasing friendship on Purim?  He explains that on Purim there was a new act of the acceptance of the Torah.  When it comes to Matan Torah there was a prerequisite of כאיש אחד בלב אחד as the Or Hachaim says (Yisro 19:2.)  Why is this so?  Rav Chayim Shmulevitz explains since the Torah was given to the totality of Klal Yisrael as an entity not to a cluster of individuals and hence unity is a necessity to join Klal Yisrael together.  So too, for קיימו מה שקבלו כבר, there is a need for friendship and togetherness.        

6. The Gemarah Megillah (12b) says תנא כולן על שמו נקראו בן יאיר בן שהאיר עיניהם של ישראל בתפלתו בן שמעי בן ששמע אל תפלתו בן קיש שהקיש על שערי רחמים ונפתחו לו.  The Shem MiShmuel (5671) asks the order should be the opposite for first hi prayed and only after that was he answered and lightened the eyes of Yisrael?  The Baal Shem Tov explains the double הסתר אסתר פני refers to the fact that the greatest concealment is when one doesn't feel that they are in a state of הסתר.  The Shem MiShmuel says a similar idea.  The first step to cause the salvation was to see the light, to recognize the lowly state that one is in.  It is only after Mordechai showed Klal Yisrael what they were lacking, he shined a light on their darkness, that they were then able to open their hearts to pray.