Pesachim 42 – Unwanted substances

The following must be removed (from the world) on Passover. Babylonian sour dip, because it had sour milk and moldy breadcrumbs – ingredients about which people tend to forget; beer from Media – because it had some barley added to it, while most beer brands at the time were made from dates; and wine vinegar from Edom – because it, too, had barley.

Rav Nachman explained: originally, wine from Judea would not sour, due to the merit of its being used in the Temple, and to convert it to vinegar, one had to add barley. The standard vinegar of that time was the one made from Judean wine. However, now it is the wine of Edom (Roman empire and its successors) that does not sour, so they have to add barley to it, and it is called “Idumean vinegar.”

Art: Man Holding a Pipe and a Glass of Beer by David The Younger Teniers

Pesachim 41 – Mustard

One should not put the flour into a condiment made with vinegar, nor into mustard, which also contains vinegar. Still, if he did put flour in them – he needs to eat it right away. That is because vinegar slows down leavening, so if he eats it before it leavens, he is safe.

However, Rabbi Meir says that it must be burned immediately. Some say this is because Rabbi Meir considers vinegar as helping to leaven, not slowing it down. Others, however, say that Rabbi Meir agrees about vinegar slowing down leavening, but he is afraid that if you allow eating the mixture, then people may be negligent and not eat it soon enough.

As a preface to laws of cooking the Passover lamb in a subsequent chapter,  the Talmud gives a few rules here. One should not cook it in water or in any other liquid, but only roast it on fire. However, once it is roasted, he can baste it or eat it with relishes.

Water used by a baker to wish her hands contains flour. Such water should be poured out onto a sloping surface, for otherwise, this water itself may leaven.

Art: In the Vinegar Factory in Hamburg by Gotthardt Kuehl

Pesachim 40 – What not to do on Passover

Some innocuous acts may nevertheless lead to leavening, and they are therefore prohibited on Passover. One should not soak bran for chicken, and of course, one should not soak the actual grain. Some say that the bran itself leavens, while others – that the problem is with the small portions of the grains adhering to the bran.

A woman should not soak bran to use it as a cleaning agent when going to the baths. She may, however, rub it on the dry skin. Similarly, one should not chew grains of wheat and place them on his wound for a cure – because this creates chametz.

If so, how is one to behave? Here are the rules that tell us when leavening can no longer occur: If one baked, cooked, or scalded grain in hot water, then this is completely safe on Passover.

Can one add flour to a pot that's cooking already? Some say that one must then immediately add vinegar, which stops the leavening process, but some completely allow this. (Today, a moot question; many later customs made it much more strict.)

Art: Flat Landscape with Harvested Grain Field by Paul Baum

Pesachim 39 – Bitter herbs

Together with the Passover lamb at the Seder, one must eat bitter herbs. Now that there is no Temple and no Passover offering, strictly speaking, bitter herbs are not required, but the Sages instituted that they should be eaten nevertheless so that this mitzvah will not be forgotten.

What kind of bitter herbs should one eat? Any lettuce will do, but people usually use romaine lettuce. Although it is not really bitter, it would become so if let to grow and become old, and that is enough. Although any bitter herb will do, the Talmud enumerates a few specific ones whose names contain hints. For example, “chazeret,” or lettuce is “chasa” in Aramaic because God “chas” – pitied us. Horseradish can also be used, but extreme bitterness is not required, as shown by lettuce. The quality of lettuce being sweet at first and bitter later reminds us how Egyptians treated the Jews: with soft talk first, but harsh actions later.

How do we know that more than one type of herb is valid? – Because it is similar to matzah, which also can be made of different types of grain. The bitter vegetable must not be boiled or pickled because this takes away the bitterness.

Art: The Bitter Draught by Adriaen Brouwer

Pesachim 38 – Should you own your matzah?

When one separates “challah,” the kohen’s portion of the dough, it has to be his dough because the Torah said, “When you will eat your bread.” Rav Assi said that the same is true for matzah at the Seder – one has to own it. Rav Pappa objected: “Does it ever say, ‘your own’ about matzah?” Rava told him that actually, it does. The same word, “bread,” is used to describe matzah, “bread of affliction,” and challah, the priest's portion, which makes their laws the same. This has a practical ramification: one cannot fulfill the mitzvah of eating matzah at the Seder with stolen matzah.

The offering of the Nazirite included unleavened bread. Can one use this bread for his Seder? The answer is that if he prepared it for himself, then he cannot eat it at the Seder, but if he prepared it to sell to others, then he can use it himself. This seems paradoxical. However, it is logical.

The Torah said, “Watch your matzah,” that is, guard it for the sake of the Seder. If he prepared the matzah for himself, he watched it for a Nazirite, not for the Seder – thus, he cannot eat it. But if he prepared it for others, he had a thought in the back of his mind that if he cannot find buyers, he will use it for the Seder. Therefore, he watched with the intention of possibly using it for Seder, and now he can indeed eat it.

Art: An earthenware tankard, a bread roll, a pewter dish of hazelnuts by (after) Jacob Fopsen Van Es

Pesachim 37 – Cookies baked by Baitus

The Sages taught, “One cannot bake ‘thick bread’ on Passover – so says Beit Shammai, but Beit Hillel allows it.” What could this mean? If it means bread one hand-breadth thick like they used to bake in the Temple, without giving it a chance to leaven – then how can Beit Hillel allow it? Obviously, priests in the Temple could be trusted to use dry wood, hot metal ovens, etc., but not the general populace. Rather, this particular rule is just talking about abundant bread, and Beit Shammai forbids it simply because it is too much work for a holiday. If so, it should apply to all holidays! – You are right, it is, just that our teacher was teaching it on Passover, so he used the Passover name.

In general, matzah should be baked quickly so that the dough does not get a chance to rise and become chametz. What about special cookie-formed dough for the matzah? A baker named Baitus sought permission to bake such matzot since he was doing it very fast. However, the Sages asked him, “What will the people say? That all cookie-matzot are forbidden, but that of Baitus are allowed?” Certainly, a non-professional baker cannot do it fast enough, and for her, it is forbidden.

Some reverse this logic: a home-based baker does quick, simple cookie-matzot, and for her, it is allowed. However, a baker is going for fancy ones; it takes him more time and is therefore forbidden.

Art: The Pancake Baker by (after) Gabriel Metsu

Pesachim 36 – Flour used for joyful occasions

Every two out of three years, one separates the second tithe from his grain, then takes it to Jerusalem, to celebrate and to eat the tithe there. Furthermore, this tithe cannot be given to a bereaved, but rather it is reserved for joyful occasions. Can one make matzah out of it? – No, because matzah is called “the bread of affliction” – these are the words of Rabbi Yosi HaGlili. However, Rabbi Akiva disagrees: the Torah has mentioned the word “matzah” many times, to indicate that even the second tithe flour can be used. But matzah is called “bread of affliction!?” – fine, just don’t make it with wine, oil, or honey. Still, “bread of affliction,” “lechem oni” does hint at bereavement? – No, it does not, rather it means “bread of answer” – since over matzah we answer many questions.

Fruit and grain that ripens first is called “first fruit” and is brought to Jerusalem and is eaten there by the priests. Can the priests make matzah out of that? – No, since the Torah said, “You will eat matzah in all your dwellings,” that is, matzah must be fit to be eaten everywhere, and the first fruit flour is fit to be eaten only in Jerusalem.

Art: Fruit Still Life with roses and Honeycomb by Robert Spear Dunning

Pesachim 35 – What to make matzah from?

One can make matzah only from wheat, barley, spelt, rye, and oats. Why just these? – Because the Torah said, “With the Passover offering, you don’t eat any leaven… for seven days you will eat matzah.” Thus, only things that can become leaven can serve for matzah for the Passover Seder. What is excluded? For example, rice.

Can you revert this rule and say that only things that can be made into Seder matzah are prohibited as hametz? Not quite, and here is why. Rav Pappa and Rav Huna were sitting in front of Rav Idi, who was dozing off. They said between themselves, “Why does Resh Lakish say that if one makes a dough with fruit juice and it leavens, one still has not violated Passover? – It must be because this matzah is too rich, and one needs to remember affliction and eat matzah of poverty. But, on the other hand, if one dissolves flour in water and it leavens, he is liable, even though it is not fit as matzah for the Seder!?” At this, Rav Idi woke up and said, “Kids! Resh Lakish's reason is different: dough made with fruit juice does not leaven!”

One fulfills his obligation to eat matzah even if it was made from flour that has not been fully tithed or has minor defects in the tithing procedure, but not major ones.

Art: St. Peter Sleeping by Giuseppe Antonio Petrini

Pesachim 34 – Planting the priest’s portion

Abaye and Chananiah, son of Avin, were learning about priest’s portion (terumah) in the academy of Rabbah – who was quite a personality, see here. Rava met them and asked what new have they learned. They replied, “And what problem do you have?” Rava told them that he could not understand the following ruling: If a priest’s portion of grain became impure and one planted it, then this grain cannot make other food impure, but it itself is still forbidden to be eaten. The earth should purify it! 

They told him, “You know for whom it is forbidden? – For all others, but not for the priests, and in fact, it is pure.” Rava rejected the answer since it would not be teaching anything new. They tried another time: “It became impure because the priests did not watch it!” – but that answer was not satisfactory either.

When Ravin went to Israel and related this question to Rav Yirmiyah, the latter said, “Stupid Babylonians! They live in the low dark land, and because of that, their teachings are murky.” (When they don’t know a reason, they just invent it!) The real reason was conclusively proven by Resh Lakish to be this: in truth, this portion of the grain is pure, but the Sages, out of their love for holy things, decreed additional impurity on the planted grain and removed the power of the earth to purify it. Basically, however, it is pure, and thus it cannot transmit impurity further.

Art: Proverb 'everything has a reason' by Pieter The Younger Brueghel

Pesachim 33 – Squeezing pure juice out of impure grapes

Rabbi Yochanan made a puzzling statement: “If grapes became impure, one could squeeze the juice out of them in the amount of less than an egg’s volume, and that juice will be so pure that one can use it for libations in the Temple.” How could that be?

The answer is that Rabbi Yochanan considers grape juice as a separate liquid that happens to be contained in grape skin. As such, the skin protects the juice rather than contaminate it. When he squeezes the juice out, given that the amount of grapes is less than an egg’s volume, it cannot transmit impurity further.

Still, Rav Chisda was amazed and asked, “The impurity of the grapes, where did it go?” That is because, according to him, the grape juice permeates the grape and becomes one with it, so an impure grape skin makes the juice impure right away, and this impurity cannot disappear.

Art: Hanging Grapes by George Henry Hall

Pesachim 32 – Eating priest’s chametz

If a wall fell on one’s chametz and buried it, he is not required to dig after it to destroy it. However, he still needs to renounce it in his heart – lest it becomes uncovered during Passover and he will want it. How deep does it have to be buried? – So that a dog cannot dig it out. And how deep is that? – Three handbreadths.

If one eats the priest’s portion (terumah) on Passover, and it was chametz, then if he did it by mistake, he needs to repay the amount he ate plus one fifth, whereas if he did it on purpose, he needs to repay nothing at all.

This seems counterintuitive! However, let’s look deeper. If he eats terumah (2% of the crop, Kohen’s portion) by mistake, the Torah says that he needs to return the grain itself. The grain becomes terumah again, and he even adds one-fifth to be forgiven for his error.

By contrast, if he eats it knowingly, he is treated like a regular thief, who repays only what he has stolen, in cash or other goods. Since chametz on Passover is worth nothing, it turns out that he stole zero value and has to repay zero.

Art: Peasants eating in a farmyard by Antonio Diziani

Pesachim 31 – Loan Secured by Whiskey

Imagine that a Jew borrowed money from a non-Jew and left some chametz (think whiskey or vodka) in the non-Jew’s house as collateral. If after Passover the Jew defaults on the loan, the non-Jew keeps the chametz as a repayment. We can say that the chametz was already in non-Jewish hand on Passover retroactively, and now it is permitted for use.

By contrast, imagine a non-Jew who borrowed money and left his chametz in the Jew's house. Now, if after Passover the non-Jew defaults on his loan, the chametz becomes Jewish retroactively and is therefore forbidden for use, as chametz owned by a Jew on Passover.

In general, Abaye says that when one defaults on a loan, the lender acquires the collateral retroactively, from the first minute of the loan. Why? Since he did not repay, it is now clear that the collateral belonged to the lender all along. If he did something with it earlier, such as selling it, it now transpires that he had the right to do so.

Rava will say that since the borrower could have paid the money any time, the collateral always remained his. If the lender sold it before the loan was due, he did so illegally. It seems, though, that the rule we started with presents a problem to Rava! There, the lender did acquire chametz retroactively!? – Rava will answer that there it was different: whiskey was left with the lender who did not need to take any action to acquire it.

Art: The Irish Whiskey Still by Sir David Wilkie

Pesachim 30 – Chametz mix

If chametz is mixed with some permitted food, it is still prohibited to be eaten on Passover – so says Rav. Of course, if you can feel its taste, it is the same as chametz itself, but Rav refers even to minute amounts. Why doesn't the regular law of nullification of small amounts apply? This is a special decree: since normally people are accustomed to eating chametz, and since eating it leads to being cut off from one’s spiritual source, then it is better to distance people from even small admixtures of chametz.

However, Shmuel does not see a reason for this additional decree, and according to him, a small admixture of chametz that is not noticeable is, in fact, allowed on Passover. Even Shmuel does not allow nullification if the mixtures are of the same kind, for example, bread mixed with matzah. Finally, Rabbi Yochanan is even more lenient: he allows nullification of even bread with matzah.

Correspondingly, they will differ for chametz after Passover: some will consider the mixture with its own kind forever forbidden if owned by a Jew on Passover, while others will allow mixtures after the time of the prohibition has passed.

Rava, who lived after them, stated the decisive law: chametz mixture is forbidden on Passover and permitted afterward.

Art: An elderly couple eating and drinking in a tavern by (after) David Ryckaert III

Pesachim 29 – Eating chametz of the Temple

On the previous page, we had a rule about chametz after Passover – that if it had belonged to a Jew on Passover, then it was now prohibited – but we could not find a source for it. Now the Talmud says that it could have many sources. It could be the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah, who, although strict, interprets the law of “not seeing chametz in your dwelling” as telling us that your chametz cannot be seen, but non-Jewish chametz and chametz of the Temple can be seen. It could also be the opinion of Rabbi Shimon: even though the chametz after Passover is not prohibited, it could be that the Sages added a penalty and prohibited it nevertheless.

Now that we know that the Temple’s chametz is not “yours” and is less stringent, what if one does eat it after all? Does he have to bring a special sacrifice for using Temple’s property? Some say that yes: since after Passover, it is not prohibited and can be redeemed, he has used the Temple value and has to pay. However, others say that one does not bring this sacrifice: since by eating chametz, he anyway forfeits his soul, he is spared the monetary punishment.

Art: A peasant couple eating in an interior by (after) Egbert Van Heemskerck

Pesachim 28 – Some say, chametz is allowed

Rabbi Yehudah says that the only way to destroy chametz is by burning it in a fire. The Sages disagree and say to him, “You sound stringent here, but this will lead to a great leniency later on: if one does not have firewood, what is he to do?” Rabbi Yehudah tries to prove his point of view to the Sages by comparing chametz to various offerings that must be burned. Still, he is ultimately disproved by contradictions with his earlier statements. The Talmud then applies to him a proverb, “The arrow maker was killed by his own arrow.”

The next rule about chametz is that if a non-Jew owned it during Passover, then after Passover, it is permitted for use. Still, if it was a Jew who owned it on Passover, then this chametz is forever forbidden for use because of the phrase, “no leaven must be seen in your territories.”

This rule is strange according to whichever view you take. Rabbi Yose allows the use of chametz on Passover itself! Rabbi Shimon forbids it only during Passover, but not after. And Rabbi Yehudah, who is the strictest, should forbid any chametz that existed on Passover, regardless of who owned it. Thus, we are left with no authority that forbids only the chametz owned on Passover by a Jew.

Art: Forbidden Fruit by James Jebusa Shannon