A "Shoalin VeDorshin" evening on the topics of Pesach, Kfar Chabad

00:09 Speaker 1 Thank you very much, Rabbi Bergman. Rabbi Bergman. Shh... That was the fir— Rabbi Bergman! That was the first class. With Hashem’s help, there will be a continuation another time. You’re invited. Now we’ll move on to the Rabbi’s address. In recent generations, as the Alter Rebbe puts it, it has been customary for the rabbi to deliver a sermon on Shabbos Hagadol. For us, it’s Motzaei Shabbos. The story of Jason[?]. And after the Rabbi’s address, everyone here will also have an opportunity to ask him questions. Shh... I’m going to ask my question publicly now, since several people asked me to put it to the Rabbi. In recent years, something new has entered Chabad, something we didn’t know of until a few years ago. In Chabad, people were very stringent on Pesach: they stayed home, and even relatives didn’t eat in one another’s homes. That was how seriously Chabad took the stringencies of the holiday. Someone told me that when he was in Switzerland, people arrived at a hotel, and there was a Vizhnitzer [unclear], and he put it this way: “Well, one thing you wouldn’t find there was a Chabad chossid.” In other words, Chabad was so stringent that a hotel was certainly out of the question. In recent years, though, a new practice has come in, with the recommendation of Chabad rabbis and, as people put it, in keeping with the finest Chabad tradition. People really did ask me about it. Wait, I’ve already brought it up. They asked me whether this means the days of Moshiach are near, when [unclear], and we’re like everyone else: you open Hamodia and see a Chofetz Chaim gathering, and also the Plaza Hotel, where you can celebrate the Seder properly. They asked me, so I’m asking the Rabbi to address whether that’s really the case. Actually, it even worked to my advantage. A year ago, I invited someone to my home, and he told me, “Geit doch nisht”—you don’t go to other people’s homes. So I said

02:53 Speaker 1 to him, “Listen, I hope I’m no worse than the Plaza Hotel. If you can go there, then [unclear] come.” He was persuaded, and he came. So I saw that there’s a good side to this, too. Let’s hear the story of Jason[?]. Rabbi Ashkenazi, please, our teacher and rabbi.

03:20 Speaker 2 Good evening, and have a good week. That is a very serious question. Perhaps we’ll address it later. I just wanted to comment on the subject discussed here, concerning worms. Heaven forbid, I don’t want to be lenient about it. We’re talking here about the lettuce used on Seder night, and may Hashem bless the mitzvah. Of course, it has to be checked and checked and checked as thoroughly as possible. But not to eat lettuce at all? I don’t think it goes that far. Who am I to say that? But I once had— I saw an old, old book. It was once in my house. I don’t know whether someone took it from me, but I also mentioned it to his neighbor. I marked the passage twice. It also has explanations of the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch. Its author was apparently a chossid of the Tzemach Tzedek. Bris Savon[?], Brech Savon[?]—I no longer remember his name. This is what it says, and I’m quoting: In general, there it appears that the concern that a person might come to eat it applies to chametz belonging to a Jew. But of course, the distinction isn’t entirely clear. Chametz belonging to a non-Jew—after all, this is my cupboard. I use it all year, and then I close it up, and so on. No: when the chametz belongs to a non-Jew, they were not concerned that a person might come to eat it. But if the chametz belongs to a Jew and he does exactly the same thing—closes it up—that won’t help. When it belongs to a non-Jew, though, what does the Shulchan Aruch say in section 440? He should put up a partition. For a non-Jew’s chametz, a partition is enough—a partition ten handbreadths high, even [unclear]—and that serves as a reminder so he won’t come to eat it. That reminder is enough. Apparently, because both factors are present—

05:33 Speaker 2 it belongs to a non-Jew, and there is also that reminder—the Sages did not extend their decree that far. What? For me, because of the usual way of using it, how [unclear]? By way of the reminder. [Unclear.] Nevertheless, the Sages said that he might come to eat it, and the fact that it isn’t yours isn’t enough. What? Well? No, that’s not it. From the standpoint of removing chametz, I have to take it out of my possession. No. What? What? Correct, and that doesn’t help. Why? Because it’s yours. [Unclear.] But if it belongs to a non-Jew, they did not make that decree. That is the depth of the Sages’ words: what they were concerned about and what they were not concerned about. In this case, they were not concerned. But what was I trying to say? I still haven’t found an explanation, though surely there is one. It’s such a simple question: why is this so? But there’s a gap here; that’s how it is. That wasn’t what I was getting at. What I wanted... What? You wrote it down. You wrote it down. The first reason why nullification isn’t effective—there, it depends on whether it’s done wholeheartedly. I sell it wholeheartedly, because the price is the price. But now there’s the second reason: he might eat it. So what’s the difference? I don’t know. [Unclear.] Why might he eat it? He might forget that it’s Pesach. Don’t you think he might forget that he sold it? Don’t you think so? So, chametz belonging to a non-Jew. That seems to be the point. That’s the big gap here. Generally, it’s not so common for someone to come to think that something which isn’t his

08:08 Speaker 2 is his. But whose is it? Whose is it? After all, it’s mine. It’s mine. I’m used to this cupboard all year. All year long, I go to it and take bread. Now you’ve gone and closed it up. So what? There are a few practical points that follow from this assumption. First, someone who is actually staying in a hotel. Take this question: a person travels tonight to a hotel owned by a non-Jew. If he goes tonight, rents a room, and there is chametz in the room, it may become his chametz because he has rented the room. The book argues that what is in the room is acquired through the law of acquisition by one’s premises. The Jew who rented the room therefore comes to own the chametz and is obligated to search for it. But if a person goes to that hotel on the afternoon of Erev Pesach and stays there throughout Pesach, it would seem that he has no obligation to search for chametz. Why? Because any chametz there belongs to a non-Jew. There is no obligation to search for a non-Jew’s chametz. But if he actually finds chametz there, he has to cover it with a vessel or—as the Shulchan Aruch says—take a long knife and scrape it away, without touching it. Why? Because once he starts handling the chametz, the concern that he might come to eat it arises again. [Unclear.] It’s the same thing, except that we’ve gone noch a trit vayter—one step further, another level further—and said that the chametz... Suppose there’s chametz in a hotel cupboard or under the bed, right? And I see it on Pesach. So what? It belongs to a non-Jew. I know it isn’t mine. But when it’s in my home, when it’s in my

10:02 Speaker 2 home, it takes on the same status. So what follows from this? If it’s in a hotel and belongs to non-Jews, he really is not obligated to search for the chametz. What? Which non-Jew? Well. All right, that’s fine; it certainly isn’t mine. But now the concern is that I might forget it’s Pesach and take it and eat it. Do you understand? [Unclear.] On the other hand—and I’ve now seen several books discuss this—there is also the case of someone who actually owns chametz. We’ve mentioned this many times. If he has chametz and wants to sell it, then in practice, as was customary in the Rebbe’s household and as has always been customary with us, one may rely on the beis din’s sale. With [unclear], it is a full and final sale, and even from the outset he does not have to dispose of the chametz before Pesach. He can sell it. What’s more, consider another question: someone has a shop and, after Pesach, will need to buy chametz from other places where it may not have been sold properly. Would it be better for him to buy it now and arrange a proper sale? It would seem that [unclear] after Pesach. So perhaps it really is better to buy it before Pesach and sell it in full accordance with halachah, rather than buy it after Pesach from someone whose sale may or may not have been done properly. On the other hand, the sale itself has to be done properly. So what was I trying to say? Some people have chametz and leave it there. You can’t leave chametz in the freezer and then continue using the rest of the freezer with— The same applies if there are such things in the cupboards.

12:08 Speaker 2 That don’t need a refrigerator and can be kept and used in half a cupboard—yes, half a cupboard. It’s not just—today, you know, [unclear], so what does halachah require? It has to be shut in a separate room, as we find and as the Alter Rebbe rules: it has to be shut in a separate room, locked, and the key handed over to the non-Jew. The Rema writes that nowadays that isn’t customary. I haven’t seen people hand over the key, but in any case it has to be closed off in a separate place, a separate corner, or a separate cupboard. Then there’s a clear indication, and [unclear]. There’s another point, too. Some discuss this because in the sale we make, we don’t just sell the chametz; we also rent out the place where the chametz is kept. You can’t rent out just the part of the refrigerator where it’s placed. To rent it out, you also have to rent out the ground beneath the refrigerator. So it’s preferable—meaning, anyone who wants to leave chametz should leave it in a place, if possible a closed room, or at least—huh? What? Right, so make it part of the cupboards and put a sign on it indicating that it’s sold with the chametz. What? What? Well, a kitchen cupboard extends down to the floor. The cupboard under the counter. A hanging cupboard. Some say you can rent out the wall, but halachically it has to be—the thing that’s rented. What? What? Since tonight is the Tzemach Tzedek’s yahrzeit, let’s mention the ruling of the Tzemach—of the Tzemach Tzedek on this subject, because apparently people don’t know that... There’s a disagreement between the Tzemach Tzedek and the Chayei Adam. L’chaim. L’chaim, l’chaim. Is there, uh, liver? There’s a disagreement, there’s—

14:37 Speaker 2 There’s a disagreement between the Tzemach Tzedek and the Chayei Adam. You’ll see that there are batei din in Bnei Brak today that arrange the sale of chametz before sunset on the 13th. Look at Rabbi Datzan’s [?] announcements today: they’re arranging the sale before the 13th—tomorrow toward evening. Why? What? Why? Because the Chayei Adam rules that this room where the chametz is sold—the room sold with the chametz, meaning a storeroom sold with the chametz—when does the sale take effect? Only tomorrow at midday, meaning on Erev Pesach, at the end of the fifth hour. At night—when does the obligation to search take effect? On the night of the 13th—the night of the 14th. Yes. So how can you—on the night of the 14th, you have to search there for chametz. So what do they do? They say that to avoid having to search that place for chametz, they sell the chametz already on the night of the 14th—before the night of the 14th. In other words, when the obligation to search on the 14th begins, the chametz has already been sold. It’s already been sold. Just a moment, just a moment. The chametz has already been sold to a non-Jew, as we said earlier. There’s no obligation to search for chametz belonging to a non-Jew. The Tzemach Tzedek disagrees with the Chayei Adam. He brings proofs and says that since tomorrow, at the time for disposing of chametz, it will no longer belong to the Jew—it will have been sold—there is no obligation to search that room even tonight. That is the Tzemach Tzedek’s ruling. He disagrees with the Chayei Adam, and they are accustomed to do otherwise, but our custom follows the Tzemach Tzedek. So those rooms—just a moment, just a moment, just a moment—in those rooms where chametz is sold, according to the Tzemach Tzedek there is no obligation to search: not on the night of the 13th, not on the night of the 12th, and not during any of the three weeks before Yom Tov. That room

16:49 Speaker 2 will be sold together with the chametz, like a closed room. This led to an opening for people to say: “Since the Tzemach Tzedek rules that a place sold with the chametz doesn’t need to be searched, I’ll sell the whole house and then I won’t have to search for chametz.” But when you look at the Tzemach Tzedek’s responsum, you see that these are two separate things. You can exempt yourself from searching the place you sold with the chametz, because it will be sold to a non-Jew. There is no obligation to search for a non-Jew’s chametz. But when a person has a home, the Sages’ obligation to search his home for chametz takes effect on the night of the 14th. If he tries to exempt himself—if he looks for a way, as the Gemara puts it, to get out of the mitzvah—he is setting aside a mitzvah instituted by the Sages. That’s why we always say: leave one room. If you’re leaving home for all of Pesach, leave one room and search it. Clean it thoroughly and search it for chametz. You can sell the other rooms and rely on the Tzemach Tzedek, but that isn’t a reason to remove from yourself the entire obligation to search for chametz. If someone is leaving home and wants to clean only one room—you’re staying in the house. He’s staying in the house. So what? You can, but if you want to go into the other rooms, you’ll have to search them for chametz yourself. As we mentioned earlier, every year on this subject—what? On the subject of searching for chametz. It’s also worth reminding people, because they always forget at the last minute: anyone who has a car or other vehicle and plans to use it during Pesach needs to search it for chametz. It’s a place where chametz has been brought throughout

19:18 Speaker 2 the entire year. But, as we said, many halachic authorities say it doesn’t have to be searched by candlelight. Since it has a lot of windows, it can also be searched by daylight. The same applies to all the rooms in the house. In practice, there’s something rather strange here. The woman has been working and cleaning the house since seven days before Yom Tov. In practice, she’s the one occupied with searching for chametz: she cleans the house. Yet the Shulchan Aruch cites the Yerushalmi’s words, “Women are lazy,” saying that one cannot rely on women for the search for chametz because “women are lazy.” But in practice, without the women, we would have been left with chametz in the house. So, seemingly, the blessing over disposing of chametz should be said at the beginning, when they start preparing the house for Pesach. In any case, no—we don’t say the blessing then; we say it only on the night of the 14th. But this search with candles is the search by candlelight. Rather, it seems from the beginning of section 433 that there is a combination of the two. If so, what does the woman do, and what does the husband do afterward? She searches, she begins the search, and that really is part of the search for chametz. Then the search on the night of the 14th completes it. But in practice she, too, took part in searching for chametz, especially nowadays. At the end of section 433, and also in subsection 5, it discusses shuls and batei midrash with large windows—a shul full of windows. The Alter Rebbe says there is room to say it has the same status as a portico, which can be searched by daylight

21:25 Speaker 2 and does not require candlelight. In any case, even after the fact, that search is effective. It certainly counts; you don’t have to do it again. Ideally, perhaps it should also have been searched by candlelight, but once it has been searched by sunlight, it doesn’t need to be searched again by candlelight. So for those who ask why we haven’t seen—I don’t know; in any case, I haven’t seen people on the night of the search for chametz searching inside all the cupboards and drawers, everything, by candlelight. Why don’t they do it? Because in practice they rely on the search that was already done. But the Sages instituted a search on the night of the 14th, so certainly those places in holes, cracks, or corners—places the sunlight doesn’t reach—are searched by candlelight. They’re asking whether a person... What? They’re asking here whether a person—huh? Well. There’s a general question discussed here: does the prohibition of bal yera’eh and bal yimatzei—chametz not being seen or found in one’s possession—depend on the person or on the chametz itself? In other words, does it depend on where the chametz is? Say a person is here and has chametz in America, where the time is six or seven hours later. When does he begin to transgress bal yera’eh and bal yimatzei? Does he transgress here already, say, on Monday at six—at eleven, meaning at twelve noon on a Torah level, or at eleven-thirty—for the chametz in America? Or does he transgress with regard to the chametz in America only at seven-thirty in the evening, or six-thirty in the evening? How do we determine this? As it appears, there is also the question of ownership in this matter, in the laws of [unclear], so in practice

23:50 Speaker 2 That goes by the person, not by the... not by the... If a person is here, then everything follows his situation. Hm? Right. Those who traveled abroad, to Europe, to Russia. Right. Right. Right. So, in any case, I prepare two bills of sale: a sale for seven days and a sale for eight days. The purchaser also signs twice, both for the chametz sold for seven days and for the chametz sold for eight days. So when those traveling abroad come to sell their chametz, they should say that they are traveling abroad, and I will include them in the eight-day sale, not the seven-day sale. Some poskim do not require this and say seven days are enough, because he does not intend to buy it back until after Pesach ends abroad. But why? Why get involved in all these complications? Make it eight days from the outset, and there is no problem. And... Hm? What, what? Let me go step by step. Regarding... regarding the burning of chametz: I already mentioned this earlier in the yeshiva, and I think I mention it every year. Even bachurim who do not have any chametz of their own are certainly obligated in “tashbisu”—removing chametz. It is a mitzvah, after all, and according to one opinion in the Shulchan Aruch of the Rema, section 36, they acquire it in the end. So even someone who has no chametz may need to obtain some of his own in order to perform the... the burning of chametz. And regarding... regarding what was asked: If a person actually gets rid of all the chametz in his home, must he also sell chametz? And is it preferable to get rid of it rather than sell it? A person who has gotten rid of all his chametz does not need

26:15 Speaker 2 to sell it. But here is the thing: some opinions say that the sale of chametz is included in “tashbisu.” There are many opinions—in Rashi, the Baal Hamaor, and several other Rishonim—that say selling it is part of “You shall remove leaven from your homes.” If I say that “tashbisu” means burning, then certainly it can only be done by burning. But according to the opinions that “tashbisu” can be fulfilled in any way, if I sold the chametz to a non-Jew, of course at the permitted time, I fulfilled “You shall remove leaven from your homes” through the sale. Therefore... But the sale must, of course, be conducted properly through the rabbi. So this is acceptable even l’chatchila, and that also seems to follow from the Alter Rebbe’s procedure. Regarding... regarding kashering for Pesach, I wanted to mention that many people ask and are uncertain about dentures. So, the best thing is... Hm? With all these things, if they are removable and can be taken out, it is best to take them out and not use those teeth for hot chametz for twenty-four hours. That means from tomorrow morning until Monday morning. Then take them out, pour boiling water over them, and afterward pour cold water over them. That is for removable dentures; if they are fixed, one does not have to break one’s teeth. Although it says [unclear], the intention is not to break the... the... [unclear]. So what is advisable is to... that is, not to use those teeth for hot chametz before Pes... before the start of Yom Tov. In this matter, one can also count the six hours remaining until evening. Hm? Poskim? But there are poskim. But that is also [unclear]. Yes. Right. Right. Just now I drank mashke, and this one is imported. This mashke is chametz. I drank something

28:54 Speaker 2 strong, and if I had—if I had—and I did not swallow it immediately but started swishing it between my teeth, then the chametz mashke would already have been absorbed into those teeth. You do not have to eat something sweet. Absorption of chametz can happen with a strong drink too. It is worth knowing that all imported alcoholic drinks may contain chametz. So people asked me about traveling abroad and buying chametz at duty-free. They want to buy chametz there—meaning mashke—and then pick it up when they return after Yom Tov. That is, they would collect it when they get back. As a rule, the duty-free shops do not sell their chametz. On the one hand, there is room to permit it. Why? Because if, when traveling abroad, a person puts the chametz into a bag there, that is enough. He can lift the bag, and the chametz becomes his, even if it remains there afterward. I have internet. The chametz would then be his, and even if it stays at duty-free, it is his chametz and he has sold it. On the other hand, there is reason to question whether this works so well. Why? Because a Jew remains responsible for the chametz. He is liable to the duty-free shop: if it is stolen or lost, he must pay. It is quite possible, and there is room to say, that chametz for which a Jew is responsible is subject to the prohibitions of bal yeira’eh and bal yimatzei, and it would also be forbidden to benefit from after Pesach. So the solution is not to buy this chametz and sell it, since a Jew remains responsible for it. There is—I do not know where it is now. I heard there is one company that... a shop,

30:46 Speaker 2 he knows; he is familiar with the duty-free shops. There is one shop that does sell its chametz, but the other shops do not. Hm? What, what? Regarding water, regarding water: Boruch Hashem, the issues that came up have been resolved. This year our water will come directly from the wells, and there will be no problem with the National Water Carrier, so one may drink tap water too. But I have not heard of a problem with Mei Eden for those who use mineral water all year. It is simply an unnecessary expense, because one can use water from the... What, what? Regarding... Several people have also approached me, and I want to say something about those who hold communal sedarim. They asked about the wine—how to handle the wine poured for everyone. Their question concerns the seder: they are careful that a non-Jew should not even see the wine. At these communal sedarim, it is impossible to... But in practice, if these are sedarim here in Israel attended only by Jews, even Jews who desecrate Shabbos, then the stringency about a non-Jew seeing it does not apply. The concern is only if he touches it, if he pours the wine. But... Hm? I am not sure that I... Hm? I am not sure, I am not sure that cooked wine helps with this issue of seeing it. The entire concern about seeing the wine is a stringency. It is a stringency beyond... the Tashbatz does not understand its reasoning, and there I do not know. After all, the prohibition concerning wine applies only when a non-Jew touches it, or even moves it; not letting a non-Jew see the wine is a stringency. I am not sure whether that was said about cooked wine too. So in any case, we have

33:11 Speaker 2 no proof that there is a distinction here. You know the Rebbe’s well-known sicha, don’t you? The Rebbe cried so much on the night of the seder after receiving a letter from Russia from a Jew who made Kiddush. He asked everyone—they can tell you this story—that he had asked the Rebbe: he had to work on Shabbos, but he wanted to make Kiddush, and he asked whether he could make Kiddush over wine, since he desecrated Shabbos, and how would he fulfill his obligation? Hm? Hm? Did the Rebbe speak about [unclear]? I do not remember. I only remember that this was the question. Regarding... regarding kitchens, I will repeat this again. We have mentioned kitchens several times already. I am speaking especially about Jews who are meticulous in their observance. Those who have a separate kitchen for Pesach—there is no question that this is proper and commendable. But not everyone has that option. Some use their chametz kitchen, cover the countertop, and put basins into the sink. In that case, what is proper and advisable—and even more meticulous—is not to use hot water on Pesach. Do not use hot water in that sink. Why? Because the sink is chametz. Someone even told me in the name of rabbis who ruled that the sink can be kashered. I do not know, because presumably it is earthenware. Earthenware or glass. According to the Alter Rebbe, glass certainly cannot be kashered for Pesach, even if it was used only with cold food, all the more so if it was used extensively with hot food. So the sinks cannot be kashered. And the moment you put down a plate—even if you do not put it inside the sink, but hold a plate under the faucet and pour hot water, boiling water, over it, while the sink underneath is chametz—then the plate perhaps, according to the basic letter of the law

35:14 Speaker 2 It becomes forbidden, because pouring hot water on Pesach connects the chametz sink to the Pesach vessel. So the advice and the request are not to use hot water. And even those who use... Huh? What? What? Between the sink underneath and the basin. The water runs down, after all. Yes. What do you mean it doesn’t touch? It’s in the air, beneath the—those aren’t the same thing. You just put a basin inside. Yes, the basin stands there; it’s even raised a little above the sink. Hot water gets between the basin and the sink. That’s what happens, certainly. The sink—first let’s settle the question of the sink. Ah, but what? And even those who use only—cold water as well. But it is right and proper not to soak dishes in the sink. If you want to wash a dish, just wash it under the tap, put it aside, put it on the covered counter, but don’t soak dishes in the sink. Why? Because, again, the sink underneath is chametz, and during Pesach even cold water can cause absorption and release. [unclear] So, regarding your question about the sink: sinks are usually porcelain, and that is an earthenware vessel that cannot be kashered. If it’s a stainless-steel sink, then strictly speaking it can be kashered. But it needs hagalah, immersion in boiling water, and for that the water has to be bubbling. I still haven’t managed it. Several times I tried to kasher such a sink; I filled it with water up past the [unclear]. But it’s very hard to cover, and if you don’t cover it, the water will never bubble. Bring something to put in. There, you have it. But what? One moment. But what? There’s the option of libun, heating it—libun kal, a lighter form of heating. Huh? Why not? Why wouldn’t that work? [unclear]

37:34 Speaker 2 [unclear] A hot [unclear] that came out of the oven—you put it on the sink. [unclear] It’s a kli rishon, a vessel heated directly on the fire. [unclear] And it’s quite possible that people often put a hot pot into the sink too; that’s common. So it’s hard to rule on it. I mean, if you want to rely on leniencies, you certainly can. But there are also grounds for leniency. Still, it’s a stretch... What? Hot, even if you use only cold water. Ah, lukewarm isn’t called hot; lukewarm isn’t called hot. According to the most stringent opinion, [unclear] thirty degrees. Sometimes you turn on the hot tap before the cold tap, and then you already have a problem. Besides, there’s something else. If you ever turned on the hot tap—if you turned on the hot tap, not with dishes there, but into that basin, yes? Then the basin has already become hot. It has already absorbed. Do you see? It, it—[unclear]. What? What? Well, in any case, if you’re taking responsibility for it, please. I’ll say just one thing: if it gets hot, if it gets very hot, [unclear]. What? What?

39:23 Speaker 3 To arrange water.

39:30 Speaker 2 Someone from one of those companies was here with me one Erev Pesach and said that his were fine, but the others weren’t. So go figure how... Huh? What? I can’t understand how that could be. Those charcoal filters—charcoal alone, without anything else, purifies? What? There is some here. It has to be [unclear]. Well. There’s a story that the Rebbe once came to the students’ Seder, and there are two versions of what happened. On one occasion the Rebbe wondered why, why they had put it there, and they explained why. Because, what, [unclear]; there is an explanation that it actually makes things worse. So it stayed there in the water all Pesach, that [unclear]. But in fact, afterward too—and I heard that in the Rebbe’s home it was customary to cover the tap with cloth. So apparently it’s not simply a matter of that concern; on the contrary, it has to do with the issue of... Well. I didn’t understand.

41:06 Speaker 4 You have two sinks.

41:08 Speaker 2 Well, yes.

41:13 Speaker 4 Underneath.

41:13 Speaker 2 That’s certainly a problem. So you need to make sure the basin you put in reaches all the way up, so it covers up to the... the... Well, then it really is a problem. Well. Certainly—but that—I don’t think so. I don’t think so. I don’t think so. Regarding wine: some people have difficulty drinking wine but specifically want to be scrupulous and drink wine. They can also drink grape juice, but another solution is to mix the wine with grape juice instead of water. I remember once hearing from Rabbi Glikov[?] that, in his opinion, you could even mix it half and half—half wine and half grape juice—and he saw no problem with that. But if you mix two-thirds wine with one-third grape juice, softening the strength of the wine with the grape juice, then it would seem permissible and also preferable, as a hiddur, to mixing it with water. What? What? I can’t hear. Fine. So it’s dry, without sugar. That’s better. It’s also kosher for use in the Beis Hamikdash. Wine without sugar was used for the libations. On the contrary, wine without sugar was considered a hiddur. Regarding—regarding—kashering, regarding medicines. I also want to mention that it’s generally important to know the rules about medicines people need on Pesach. At any rate, there is no chametz problem with ointments or drops for the eyes or ears. In other words, even if there were an issue, these are applied to the body, not taken by mouth. The same stringency concerning chametz does not apply. What? Certainly. The whole question is about medicines that enter the body.

43:55 Speaker 2 Generally, there is no concern with tablets. With most tablets, there is no concern about chametz; the only concern is kitniyos. If they must be taken, then one takes them [unclear]. But the main chametz concern is usually with vitamins, iron, and medicines for the stomach or abdomen. There is a chametz concern there, so each case must be asked about individually. But there are pregnant women and others who are required to take them. There are various ways to do so. In any event, with other medicines—ordinary capsules or tablets—there is no concern about chametz. Regarding giving children food: I mentioned this here too. In my opinion, children who cannot eat matzah and need baby food—the question is what is better to give them, soaked matzah or kitniyos? Of course, all the foods given to them, cornstarch and so on, Similac and so on. It would seem preferable to give them those foods, even though they contain kitniyos, rather than soaked matzah. For with soaked matzah, according to what the Alter Rebbe wrote in his responsa, there can be a concern about actual chametz, whereas with kitniyos it is only a concern arising from a decree lest one come to... Sorry, that’s enough for me. I want to mention again, too, the separation of challah: everyone who baked matzos in groups, in chaburos, and did not separate challah at the bakery should not forget to separate challah from the matzos they baked. Usually challah is separated from all the matzos at the bakery. A chaburah that did not separate challah should do so. And even if the—say, they have a kilo, a kilo and a quarter: the minimum amount for separating challah throughout the year is 1,250 grams—one and a quarter kilos of flour—without a bracha, and 1,600 or 1,700 grams with a bracha, of flour without any additions.

46:36 Speaker 2 of the water. I just want to make this clear; perhaps some people here aren’t familiar with it. I want to explain the subject a little, because I’ve seen some confusion about it here. Perhaps we should... Wait, we’ll get to that shortly. We’ll get to it. According to halachah, when does a dough become obligated in challah? When it is kneaded into one dough of, say, a kilo and a quarter, without a blessing, or a kilo and three quarters, with a blessing. But that is only when it was one dough. If they made one dough of a kilo and then another dough of a kilo, each dough on its own is exempt from challah. When does it become obligated? If a basket combines them. That is what the Mishnah says: if they are in one basket, the basket combines them to reach the required amount for challah, and they become obligated. So if I then take even half a kilo out of that basket, after it has combined them, I can separate challah with a blessing even from that half kilo. Why? Because the obligation of challah has already taken effect. Once it has taken effect, the dough from which I want to separate challah does not itself have to contain the required amount. Yes? Wait, we’ll get to that, but that is one point. A second point: there is another halachah that when separating challah from matzah, it must be min hamukaf—together in one place. That is a separate issue. If I want to separate challah from several packages of matzos, for example, taking from one for all of them—assuming they are all the same kind, unlike what you asked earlier—it is not enough for those boxes to be closed. I cannot just open one box, separate challah, and intend it for all the matzos. Or, even more clearly, suppose I have two packages in one room and another package in a second room. I cannot separate from this package for all of them. The halachah says that when we separate terumos and maasros or challah, it must be min hamukaf: they must all be together in one place. To perform the mitzvah properly, what do we do? If we want to separate challah for several packages, we don’t have to separate from each individual package. It is enough to open all four or five packages, say, and spread a sheet, a tablecloth, or paper over them. That covering joins them all so that they are min hamukaf. Yes? We’ll see. But from what I saw when the Rebbe opened them, I don’t know whether he opened all the packages, but in any case he would tear the paper a little, so that they would be exposed. He did not rely merely on opening the outer packaging. So, what I mean is this—I’ve seen these two laws confused. One law concerns becoming obligated in challah: the basket joins them. The other law concerns their being min hamukaf. In other words, if I have two doughs or two loaves, each weighing a kilo, lying next to each other, and I cover them with a lid, that still does not make them obligated in challah. It helps for min hamukaf, but not for the obligation of challah. For that obligation, it is not enough to put a basket over them. They must be inside a container, completely inside it, without any part protruding. If there is enough inside the container—inside a basket, for example—if

48:54 Speaker 2 the total amount inside that container reaches the required amount for challah, then even though it consists of several doughs, they must be inside one container. More than that, some opinions say they must even touch one another. If they are doughs, they must touch for the obligation of challah to take effect. A covering alone does not create that obligation. I’ll explain this using the bakery as an example. When we bake doughs, the Shulchan Aruch says not to bake matzah from a dough containing the required amount for challah. Why? Because if the dough is larger, processing it will take too long, and there is a concern that it might become chametz. So for the matzos of Seder night, the doughs should each contain less than the required amount for challah. But then how do the matzos become obligated in challah? If you have seen the bakery, there are deep carts there. The matzos are placed inside those carts, with all the matzos contained within the cart, and together they amount to far more than the required amount. Although they come from many different doughs, they become obligated in challah. If you have seen it, the bakery also has a rack for placing sets of three matzos. There, the basket does not combine them. Each matzah rests separately, so that does not create an obligation of challah. The cart acts as a basket that does create the obligation. So afterward, even if I take only a kilo, a kilo and a half, or half a kilo out of that basket, challah can be separated from it. Even if I took only half a kilo or a kilo, which does not itself reach the required amount, it came from a basket that held the required amount. So I can separate challah, even with a blessing.

50:54 Speaker 2 Now, regarding your question about two kinds: of course, they must all be of the same kind. If they are two different kinds, they do not combine to become obligated in challah. Say I have two cakes, one sweet and the other of a different kind, and each was made from a kilo of dough. Even if they touch, if I am particular about their different flavors and don’t want to serve them together, but want to serve each separately, they do not become obligated. Two different kinds do not combine. What? What was that? [unclear] the Rambam says it must be an olive-sized amount. [unclear] even the slightest amount. Yes? Then they combine; they can combine. So people who have [unclear] and [unclear] and are particular about keeping them separate should separate challah from each kind, not from one kind for all of them, even if they cover them together. Yes? That is a very serious question: if a person forgot to separate challah from his dough on the night of Pesach, there is a lengthy discussion among the poskim about how to separate challah on Yom Tov. This issue arises only in Eretz Yisroel, because outside Eretz Yisroel the halachah says that with challah of the Diaspora, one may go on eating and separate challah afterward. One may separate it later, provided one leaves a little over from which to separate it. But in Eretz Yisroel, even though the obligation of challah is rabbinic today, it is more stringent. Outside Eretz Yisroel, the obligation is only a reminder, so that the laws of challah will not be forgotten. In Eretz Yisroel, although it too is rabbinic, it is more stringent. So there is a suggestion given by the poskim: take a boy between twelve and thirteen years old, or a girl between eleven and twelve. On the one hand, the child is still a minor; on the other, the child is a mufla samuch le’ish—near adulthood, when vows can be valid. Since the child is a minor, the Yom Tov prohibitions do not apply in quite the same way, only rabbinically. The child may perform certain work—even work prohibited by Torah law according to the Rashba, [unclear] for a Jew’s needs, or a rabbinically prohibited act for the child’s own needs, so that the child will also have something to eat. So take a boy of twelve to thirteen or a girl of eleven to twelve and ask the child to separate challah. The child separates it, and according to several poskim the dough has thereby been rectified. Then, since the child is not yet an adult, an adult should separate challah again. At that point it is no longer definitely tevel—produce from which the required separation has not been made—so an adult may separate it. That is not considered so much an act of rectifying it. The whole prohibition against separating challah on Yom Tov is because it is considered rectifying something; once it has already been rectified, one may separate it again. That is one suggestion. Yes? What? Presumably not. It is a dispute; presumably not. Yes, the same applies on Shabbos. Why? It is not merely a matter of preference but a mitzvah, to the point that even... Let’s put it this way: if a person has several doughs, what is preferable? With the mitzvah of mezuzah, we see people honoring others: “You affix a mezuzah and make the blessing; you affix a mezuzah and make the blessing.” That is not so simple. How are they allowed to make the blessing? Because, in practice, if someone has a house with five rooms and needs to affix five mezuzos, then according to what is ruled in the Shulchan

52:51 Speaker 2 Half a kilo, a kilo. Even though a kilo on its own is still less than the amount that requires challah, since it came from a basket that held the requisite amount, you can separate challah from it. You can even separate it with a bracha. Now, regarding your question about two different kinds: of course, it all has to be the same kind. If they are two different kinds, you cannot combine them to make them obligated in challah. In other words, suppose I have two cakes. One is sweet, and the other is a different kind. One was made from a kilo of dough, and the other was made from a kilo. Even if they touched each other, if I am particular about keeping their flavors separate and do not want to serve them together—I want to serve each one on its own—then they are not obligated. Two different kinds do not create an obligation. What? What was that? But the Rambam already says it must be a kezayis. [unclear] even a tiny amount. Huh? Huh? Then they combine. They can combine. So indeed, those who have [unclear] and keep the kinds separate should separate challah from each kind, not from one kind for all of them, even if altogether there is enough. Huh? Wow. That is a very serious question: if someone forgot to separate challah from his dough on the night of Pesach, there is a discussion—a long discussion among the halachic authorities—about what he can do, how to separate challah on Yom Tov. This is only in Eretz Yisroel, because outside Eretz Yisroel the halacha says that with challah of the Diaspora, one may go ahead and eat and separate challah afterward. He can separate it later, provided he leaves a little over from which to separate it. But in Eretz Yisroel, where the obligation to separate challah is rabbinic, it is meant to ensure that the laws of challah are not forgotten. But in Eretz Yisroel, although the obligation is rabbinic, it is more stringent. So there is

55:05 Speaker 2 a solution suggested by the halachic authorities: take a boy between twelve and thirteen, or a girl between eleven and twelve. On the one hand, the child is a minor; on the other, the child is close enough to adulthood that vows are binding. In matters of vows, the vows of a minor approaching adulthood are binding. On the one hand, the child is a minor, so the Yom Tov prohibitions do not apply to the child in quite the same way—only rabbinically. The child may perform a melacha, according to the Rashba even one prohibited by Torah law, on an occasional basis for a Jew, and a rabbinically prohibited act for the child’s own needs, so that the child, too, will have something to eat. So take a minor—a boy between twelve and thirteen or a girl between eleven and twelve—and tell the child to separate challah. The child separates challah, and according to several halachic authorities, the dough is thereby rectified. Then, because the child is not yet an adult, an adult separates challah again. Since the dough is no longer definitely tevel, an adult is permitted to separate from it. It is not really rectifying it anymore. The entire prohibition against separating challah on Yom Tov is because it rectifies something, like making a vessel fit for use. But once it has already been rectified, it is permissible to separate again. That is one solution. Huh? What? Presumably not. It is a matter of dispute. Presumably not. Ah, the same applies on Shabbos. Why? It is not merely a practice but a mitzvah, to the extent that even this involves... Here is the situation: when a person has several batches of dough, the question is what is preferable? We see that with the mitzvah of mezuzah, people honor others: “You affix a mezuzah and make a bracha; you affix a mezuzah and make a bracha.” That is not so straightforward. How is each one allowed to make a bracha? Because, in practice, if someone has a house with five rooms and needs to affix five mezuzahs, then according to the ruling in the Shulchan

57:25 Speaker 2 The Shulchan Aruch, in section 213, says that he cannot honor each person with making a blessing over a different door. Why? Since the house belongs to one person, there is only one obligation, and making separate blessings would mean making unnecessary blessings. The same thing is written there about challah: if someone has several batches of dough, of different kinds, and wants to separate challah from each batch, he should not have several people separate challah and make blessings, since the obligation falls on one person. He compares this to searching for chametz. If someone has several rooms and several people helping him search for chametz, should each one make a blessing over a different room? That doesn’t make sense. He should make the blessing and appoint all of them as his agents to help him. That’s what he says. It’s the same with challah and with mezuzah. But that’s in section 213. In section 458, it also says the opposite. There it says that on Pesach night, the custom is to separate challah from the matzos, and even if he has several women—several... It explicitly mentions women there: if he has several daughters at home, they can all have a share in the mitzvah. He actually says that even though they all belong to one household, nevertheless... Apparently, because separating challah on Pesach night is so cherished, they don’t consider the issue of an unnecessary blessing, and a blessing is made for each one. The questions remain open; they need to remain open. They’re open. May Hashem help us merit to eat of the offerings and the Pesach sacrifices, and may we merit to see the Geulah through Moshiach, immediately, right now.

59:19 Speaker 5 At my mother’s house, I make the blessing for my grandfather, and then I go to my mother’s. Do I make a blessing there too, or can she make the blessing?

59:24 Speaker 2 She can make the blessing. Let her help you a little, and then you...

59:29 Speaker 5 You’ll explain there—

59:30 Speaker 2 It belongs to her brother; let her make the blessing over it. Exactly.

59:39 Speaker 6 The Jewish people are proud, and they stood [unclear] in the service of their G-d. The Jewish people are proud, and they stood [unclear] in the service of their G-d. The Jewish people, the Jewish people. The Jewish people are proud, and they stood [unclear] in the service of their G-d. The Jewish people are proud, and they stood [unclear] in the service of their G-d. The Jewish people, the Jewish people. The Jewish people are proud, and they stood [unclear]