אם ירצה ה׳
This Torah class is brought to you by TorahAnytime.com.
This shiur was made available by the generosity of the Nishmas, Zechor Berach, Ben Shmiel and Feige, Batya, and Yeshaya families. The shiur is dedicated l'iluy nishmasam.
Rav Miller ztl:
Sometimes the beginning of a masechta (Talmudic tractate) is designed to "separate the men from the boys"—to challenge and weed out those who are not fully committed. You have to persist through the difficult opening sugyot (discussions) to reach the foundational principles. So hold out.
Gemarah / Mishna
The Basic Definition of Chametz First, you must know that chametz refers only to the fermentation of five specific grains: wheat, barley, spelt, rye, and oats. It becomes chametz specifically through the action of water causing fermentation. Chametz carries the severe prohibition of karet (excision). Furthermore, it has the unique issur of bal yera'eh u'bal yimatze—you cannot have it in your possession or even seen on your property on Pesach. It is also assur b'hana'ah (forbidden to derive any benefit from it).
The Source and Reason for Bedikat Chametz (The Search) This perek begins with the laws of Bedikat Chametz, which takes place on the eve of the 14th of Nisan. The Mishnah states it must be done "Or l'Arba'ah Asar"—by the light of the 14th, using the light of a ner (lamp). There is a discussion about the meaning of "Or"—does it refer to the daylight of the 14th or the nightfall that begins the 14th? The conclusion follows the view that it means the night of the 14th.
Bedikat Chametz is a rabbinic enactment. Why is it necessary? After all, one can simply perform bitul chametz (nullification), declaring any unknown chametz ownerless. If it's not yours, you aren't transgressing bal yera'eh. So why search?
Answer: The Chachamim required a physical search and removal because a person might come to eat it accidentally. Since chametz is permitted all year round and people are accustomed to it, they might forget it's Pesach, see a piece, and eat it, thereby violating the Torah prohibition of eating chametz. This reason distinguishes chametz from other forbidden foods (like pork), which are always forbidden; one is always conscious of them and unlikely to accidentally eat them.
Two Explanations in the Gemara 1. Practical Concern: "Shemma yicholeh"—lest he come to eat it. 2. Imitating Torah Stringency: Since the Torah is exceptionally strict with chametz (with the added prohibition of possession), the Rabbis were also strict, decreeing a search and removal even where the Torah prohibition of possession might not apply (e.g., if the chametz was nullified).
This second reason explains why the rabbinic decree applies even to types of chametz where the Torah prohibition of bal yera'eh might not technically apply, such as: * Chametz nuksheh: Hardened, inedible chametz. * Chametz that is ta'aroves: Chametz mixed into other substances.
Once the Rabbis decreed, they included all chametz.
The Discussion on the Word "Or" (Light) The Gemara delves into a detailed analysis of the word "Or" in the Mishnah. Does it mean "light of day" or "night"? This leads to a broader linguistic and conceptual discussion: * The word "Or" can be a noun meaning "light," or a verb meaning "to become light." * A verse describes the future joy of the righteous in the World to Come as "Or zarua la'tzadik" (light is sown for the righteous). This is interpreted as the illuminating joy of profound understanding dawning upon them. * This segues into an aggadic lesson about travel: One should enter a strange town only by day (to see where one is going) and depart on a journey only by day (for safety).
Determining the Start of Night The discussion references the debate about when night officially begins for halachic purposes: Is it at tzeis hakochavim (the appearance of stars), or earlier, when the eastern sky loses its reddish glow (k'dai sheyit'anev hagevul)? The Gemara notes that the term "stars" itself may be ambiguous—it could refer to the first visible stars or the full emergence of starlight. This complexity is why we are stringent today in observing the later time.
Stars and Praise A verse states, "Halleluhu kol kochvei Or"—Praise Him, all you stars of light. A question arises: Why specify "stars of light"? Don't all stars have light? Two explanations are offered: 1. Rashi's View: All stars give light. The verse emphasizes "light" to teach us the importance and benefit of stellar light. This has practical implications; for example, one who takes a vow not to benefit from "light" must avoid starlight as well. 2. An Alternative View: Some celestial bodies may not emit visible light. The verse specifies "stars of light" to highlight those whose light we can perceive and from which we derive inspiration to praise the Creator. The praise is ultimately our recognition of Hashem's greatness as seen through His creation.
Sugya Arc: Bedikas Chametz - Core Mandate and Derivation
Talmudic Terms Explained:
- Bedikas Chametz: Rabbinic ordinance to search for leaven (chametz) before Pesach, using a candle (ner) to illuminate hidden areas.
- Bitul Chametz: Mental nullification, declaring chametz ownerless, which de-rabbanan equates to non-possession but insufficient alone.
- Bal Yera'eh U'Bal Yimatzei: Biblical prohibitions against chametz being seen or found in one's domain during Pesach, carrying kareis (excision) penalty.
- Biur Chametz: Physical destruction or removal of chametz, complementing bedika.
- Chametz Nukshe: Hardened or inedible chametz (e.g., initial sour dough, se'or), unfit even for dogs but still requiring biur.
- Ta'aruvos Chametz: Chametz mixed into non-chametz substances, not overtly visible but prohibited.
- Sevara: Underlying logical rationale, here distinguishing chametz's year-round permissibility from perpetual issurim.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 1:
Kashya: If bitul chametz renders it ownerless (like dust), exempting from bal yera'eh u'bal yimatzei, why mandate bedikas chametz?
Terutz: Chachamim require bedika and biur lest one encounter and eat it habitually during Pesach.
Sevara: Chametz is mutar all year (unlike treif or orlah), so habit (lo bedili inshi minay) risks forgetful consumption; bitul suffices for ownership but not this gezeirah (decree) against akilah (eating).
Kashya→Terutz Arc 2:
Kashya: Why bedika only for chametz, not other issurim like basar b'chalav or nevelah kept in home?
Terutz: Other issurim are perpetual (assur all year), so awareness prevents eating; chametz's temporary issur invites oversight.
Sevara: Torah's unique chumra of bal yera'eh u'bal yimatzei on chametz mirrors rabbinic stringency—gezeirah applies universally to prevent akilah, aligning takkanah with d'oraisa framework.
| Din (Law) | Tzad (Side) | Rayah (Proof) | Chal (Challenge) | Pivot (Turning Point) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biur for Chametz Nukshe/Ta'aruvos | R. Natan: No bal yera'eh (inedible/mixed) | Mishna: Burn se'or on Pesach (chametz nukshe) | If no issur possession, why biur? Could use post-Pesach | Universal gezeirah: Once chumra for standard chametz (due to bal yera'eh), extends to all forms sans exception, even mutar post-Pesach (contra chametz gamur). |
| Bedika Exemption in Non-Chametz Areas | Mishna: No bedika where chametz never enters | "Two rows in the cellar" (yayin martef) as minimal check | Why check cellar if rare entry? | Possibility (chashash) suffices; shamash might deposit bread temporarily—bedika targets feasible risk, not certainty. |
Kashya→Terutz Arc 3:
Kashya: Why two cellar rows (shuros b'martef)—Beis Shammai: Outer + upper; Beis Hillel: Two outermost?
Terutz: Cellar permits occasional chametz (e.g., servant's bread on kegs); check exposed surfaces where deposit likely.
Sevara: Bedika balances chashash (remote risk) with practicality—full search excessive if no routine entry; limits to "face" (pnei kol ha'yayin) prevent undue burden while safeguarding issur.
Sugya Arc: "Or La'Arba Asar" - Temporal Debate and Agadic Extensions
Talmudic Terms Explained:
- Or La'Arba Asar: "Light of the 14th" (Nisan eve), timing bedika; debated as evening (layla) or dawn (noge'ah).
- Amar Lei: "He said to him"—dialogic retort in shakla v'tarya.
- Tzei'es HaKochavim: Star emergence marking nightfall, varying by star type (large/medium/small).
- Amud HaShachar: Dawn's first light, starting yom (day).
- Sevara: Here, linguistic logic parsing "or" as noun (night) vs. verb (illumination process), yielding hashkafic insights on safety/journey.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 4:
Kashya: If "or" means dawn (light), bedika by day; but pesukim (e.g., "va'yehi or") link or to morning—contradicts R. Yehuda's layla?
Terutz: "Or" as noun = night; as verb (e.g., "va'yehi or") = illumination advent (process, not state).
Sevara: Noun-verb distinction preserves dual meanings—pesukim use verbal "or" for dawn's arrival, allowing nominal "or" as evening for bedika timing; resolves without forcing contradiction.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 5:
Kashya: Pesukim prove "or" = light (e.g., "k'or ha'boker zarach shemesh")—how sustain layla pshat?
Terutz: Verbal "or" = lightening process (advent); nominal = night, as in summoning light/darkness duties (Bereishis).
Sevara: Creation narrative summons processes—"kore" not naming but appointing (e.g., light process rules yom)—aligns day from amud hashachar to tzei'es, night from darkening onset, without equating initial darkness to full layla.
| Din (Law) | Tzad (Side) | Rayah (Proof) | Chal (Challenge) | Pivot (Turning Point) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nightfall Timing | R. Meir: Post-sunset when east darkens | "Mi'lashekas ha'chamah ad tzei'es" (work span = yom) | Contradicts tzei'es as day-end if darkening = night | Star gradation: Large stars post-sunset (short bein ha'shemashos); medium post-reddening—reconciles via unspecified "koachavim" type. |
| Bedika "Or" as Layla | R. Yehuda: Evening of 14th | "Kol kochvei or" (stars of light/night) | If "or" = light, all stars emit—why specify? | Verbal pivot: "Or" = emitting process; all stars praise (via visibility/inspiration), but light-givers emphasized for human appreciation (e.g., neder against or includes starlight). |
Kashya→Terutz Arc 6:
Kashya: If tzei'es ha'kochavim ends yom, why tannaitic dispute on layla start (e.g., post-reddening vs. 2/3 mil)?
Terutz: Varies by star visibility—large post-sunset, medium later; no fixed minutes, but chumra takes latest (all stars).
Sevara: Observational (not timed) benchmark—tannaim knew specifics; modern 72 minutes ensures coverage, but core is empirical signs, allowing flexibility without contradiction.
Kashya: If "kol kochvei or" mandates praise only for light-emitting stars, why extend to non-luminous hosts (dark stars)—does visibility alone suffice for inspiration, or must all creation praise regardless?
Tosafot on Pesachim 2a, s.v. “Or Le’arba’ah-asar Bodkin et ha’Chametz”
Tosafot addresses the fundamental question: Why did the Sages institute the requirement to search for chametz on the night of the 14th of Nisan? The discussion centers on whether this rabbinic enactment is due to the Torah’s prohibition against owning chametz on Pesach (“bal yera’eh u’val yimatzei”), or whether there is a different, deeper rationale.
Summary of Tosafot’s Conclusions 1. Bedikat chametz is a rabbinic enactment primarily intended to prevent accidental consumption of chametz, which carries karet. 2. Bitul alone is sufficient for the Torah prohibition of “bal yera’eh,” but the Sages added the requirement of a physical search and removal as a safeguard. 3. The stringency applies specifically to chametz because it is only temporarily forbidden, and people are not accustomed to avoiding it. 4. The decree extends to all types of chametz, including inedible or mixed chametz, as evidenced by the requirement to burn even si’ur.
1. Rashi’s Explanation
Rashi explains that we check for chametz to avoid transgressing the Torah prohibitions of “bal yera’eh” and “bal yimatzei” (Shemot 12:19; 13:7). According to this, bedikah is a safeguard to ensure that no chametz remains in our possession when Pesach begins.
2. Rabbeinu Yitzchak’s (Ri) Question
Ri challenges Rashi’s explanation: - The Gemara later (6b) states: “The one who checks must also nullify.” This shows that bedikah alone is insufficient; bitul (declaring chametz ownerless) is required. - From a Torah perspective, bitul alone is sufficient to avoid “bal yera’eh.” Once chametz is nullified, it is considered ownerless and no longer in one’s possession. - If so, why did the Sages mandate a physical search? According to Rashi, it seems redundant.
3. Ri’s Alternative Explanation
Ri argues that bedikah is a rabbinic stringency enacted for a different reason: - Even though bitul is sufficient for the Torah prohibition, the Sages required checking and destroying chametz to prevent one from accidentally eating it during Pesach. - Eating chametz on Pesach carries the severe penalty of karet (excision), so the Sages erected a “fence” to avoid this danger.
Proof from the Gemara:
Later (10b), Rava discusses a case of a loaf of bread stuck in the rafters. The Gemara asks: Must it be removed? The concern is, “Sometimes it might fall, and one may come to eat it.” This shows that the underlying concern is accidental consumption, not merely ownership.
4. Why Specifically for Chametz?
Ri explains why such a stringency was not enacted for other forbidden items (e.g., non-kosher food, orlah, kilayim): - Chametz is unique: It is permitted all year and only forbidden on Pesach. People are not accustomed to separating from it (לא בדילי מיניה), so they might forget and eat it accidentally. - Other prohibitions (e.g., meat and milk, orlah) are forbidden year-round; people are constantly vigilant, so no extra decree is needed. - Nazir’s wine: Although temporarily forbidden to the nazir, it is permitted to others, so there is no need to destroy it.
Manuscript Variant: Some texts add that chametz is especially severe because it carries karet, and people are not used to avoiding it.
5. Alternative Explanation: Imitating Torah Stringency
Tosafot offers another rationale: - Because the Torah was exceptionally stringent with chametz (adding “bal yera’eh” and “bal yimatzei”), the Sages mirrored that stringency by requiring bedikah and biur, even when bitul has been performed—all to prevent accidental eating.
6. Rashba’s Insight: Extending the Decree to All Chametz
The Rashba (Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet) adds a crucial point: - Even according to the second rationale, the rabbinic decree applies to all types of chametz, including: 1. Chametz nukseh – hardened, inedible chametz. 2. Ta’arovet chametz – chametz mixed into other substances. - Even though “bal yera’eh” may not apply to these forms (since they are not fit for eating or are nullified in mixture), the Sages still required their removal.
Proof from Rabbeinu Tam (Pesachim 42a): - The Mishnah states: “Si’ur (soured dough) must be burned.” Si’ur is considered chametz nukseh. - Some opinions hold that even chametz mixed into other foods must be burned. - If it were permitted to retain these forms, why burn them? One could simply keep them until after Pesach, when they become permitted (according to Rabbi Yehudah, only full chametz is forbidden after Pesach; chametz nukseh and mixtures are permitted, as derived from the three verses regarding before, during, and after Pesach). Since the Sages require burning, it is clear that the decree encompasses all chametz, regardless of form.
Tosafot on Pesachim 2a, s.v. "VA'HA DE'KAYMA LAN AD TZEIS HA'KOCHAVIM YEMAMA HU" (Timing of Yom (Day))
Talmudic Terms Explained:
- Tzeis ha'Kochavim: Star emergence, signaling nightfall/end of yom; debated by star size (gadolim/large visible by day, ketanim/small only at deep night, beinonim/medium as halachic benchmark).
- Bein ha'Shemashos: Twilight interval post-sunset (sheki'ah) until full night, duration varies (e.g., redness of mizrach/east or fractions of mil); ambiguous zone for Shabbos/Yom Tov.
- Amud ha'Shachar: Dawn's first light rays, marking yom's start per Megillah.
- Mil: Temporal unit (~18-24 minutes walking distance), used for twilight spans.
- Pnei Mizrach Ma'adimin: Eastern horizon reddening, a visual sign for bein hashemashos end per R. Yehuda.
- Sevara: Logical underpinning, here harmonizing pesukim and tannaitic views via observational uncertainty.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 1:
Kashya: How does Gemara assume yom endures ad tzeis ha'kochavim, implying no earlier nightfall?
Terutz: Ri posits Gemara's peshita (obvious premise) from Megillah 20b's maskana—pesukim in Nechemiah equate work span (amud hashachar to tzeis) with "yom" explicitly.
Sevara: Pesukim's linkage proves yom's full arc (dawn to stars), as "layla mishmar v'yom mela'chah" distinguishes night guard from day labor, extending yom boundary.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 2:
Kashya: But Shabbos 34a (Bameh Madlikin) implies night earlier—R. Yehuda ends bein hashemashos at mizrach non-reddening, or alternate view at 2/3 mil pre-tzeis?
Terutz: No contradiction; Shabbos views don't pinpoint tzeis precisely, as we're inexpert (ein anu beki'in) on stars—neither gadolim (day-visible) nor ketanim (deep-night), but beinonim.
Sevara: Observational ambiguity allows Shabbos's shorter twilight to align with Megillah's extended yom—tzeis benchmark varies, so "pre-tzeis" durations fit without forcing early night.
| Din (Law) | Tzad (Side) | Rayah (Proof) | Chal (Challenge) | Pivot (Turning Point) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yom Ends at Tzeis | Gemara's Peshita (Ri) | Megillah 20b: Nechemiah pesukim—"me'alos hashachar ad tzeis" as yom, "layla mishmar v'yom mela'chah" | Shabbos 34a: R. Yehuda's redness end or 2/3 mil seems pre-tzeis nightfall | Inexpertise on stars (ein beki'in)—beinonim undefined, so twilight spans reconcile as subsets within yom's arc to actual tzeis. |
| Bein ha'Shemashos Duration | R. Yehuda: Post-sheki'ah to non-ma'adimin | Visual sign (pnei mizrach) | Alternate: 2/3 mil "long before" tzeis per appearance | Star gradation (gadolim/ketanim/beinonim)—halachic tzeis flexible, not contradicting Megillah's proof. |
Rashi's 2nd Pshat Explained "Kol Kochvei Or" - Linguistic Pivot and Stellar Praise
Talmudic Terms Explained:
- Kol Kochvei Or: "All stars of light" (Tehillim 148:3), parsed to debate "or" as noun (night/evening) vs. verb (illumination/emission process).
- Kore: Verb "calls/summons," here not naming but appointing duties (e.g., light's process rules yom/day).
- Tzavah: "Hosts" (Tehillim 148:2), celestial bodies praising Hashem via existence/inspiration.
- Neder: Vow prohibiting benefit (hano'ah), e.g., from "or" (light), extending to starlight per Rashi.
- Sevara: Core logic—pasuk's redundancy implies deeper import; stellar light's utility elevates praise obligation.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 1:
Kashya: If "or" as noun means night, pasuk reads "stars of night" (all stars praise); but verbal "or" (emission) limits to "stars that emit light"—why exclude non-luminous tzavah from praise?
Terutz: Rashi: Gemara masKINs no non-luminous stars exist—all emit light; "or" (emission) isn't limiting but emphatic, teaching light's value (not superfluous).
Sevara: Redundancy signals chiddush—stellar light impacts olam (world), e.g., neder barring "or" forbids nighttime outings (starlight = hano'ah), urging appreciation beyond visibility.
| Din (Law) | Tzad (Side) | Rayah (Proof) | Chal (Challenge) | Pivot (Turning Point) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Stars Emit Or | Rashi: No dark kochavim | Tehillim: "Kol tzva'o" (all hosts praise) implies universality—can't limit to emitters if non-emitters exist | Modern astronomy: Dark bodies (non-luminous) contradict | Gemara's maskana assumes emission universal; "or" teaches practical hano'ah (neder example), not ontological exclusion—reconciles via emphasis on light's role. |
Hermeneutics Corner
Additional explanations of the technical Talmudic hermeuntical methods used.
"Or" Interpretation - Linguistic Drash via Pesukim
Talmudic Terms Explained:
- Drash: Derivation or interpretation from pesukim (verses), using logical or traditional methods to extract meaning beyond pshat (literal).
- Pasuk: Biblical verse used as rayah (proof) in shakla v'tarya (back-and-forth debate).
- Noun vs. Verb: Grammatical pivot distinguishing word forms (e.g., "or" as static night vs. dynamic illumination process).
- Sevara: Core logic—pesukim's context dictates interpretation; redundancy or structure signals deeper chiddush (novelty), avoiding contradiction.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 1:
Kashya: How does Gemara (Pesachim 2a) derive "or" as night (layla) despite pesukim equating it to light (e.g., Bereishis 1:5 "va'yikra Elokim la'or yom")?
Terutz: Rav Miller ztl explains Gemara's noun-verb drash—nominal "or" = night (e.g., Tehillim 148:3 "kol kochvei or" as stars of night); verbal "or" = illumination advent (e.g., Bereishis "va'yehi or" as process, not name).
Sevara: Grammatical form shifts meaning explicitly; "kore" (calls) = appoints duties (light rules yom), resolving via pesukim's structure without implied middot—Rav Miller locates at shiur's "or" debate, heightening beginner's grasp of wordplay as entry to drash.
Yom Timing - Proof from Combined Pesukim
Talmudic Terms Explained:
- Maskana: Conclusion of debate, synthesizing pesukim for halachic boundary (e.g., yom from amud hashachar to tzeis).
- Peshita: Obvious premise assumed in Gemara, derived from explicit pasuk linkage.
- Sevara: Pesukim's juxtaposition implies unified span; no contradiction if visual signs (e.g., stars) vary observably.
Kashya→Terutz Arc 2:
Kashya: Why assume yom ends at tzeis ha'kochavim (Pesachim 2a), when Shabbos 34a implies earlier night via redness or mil fractions?
Terutz: Tosfos (DH "Va'ha de'Kayma Lan") derives from Megillah 20b's combined pesukim (Nechemia 4:15-16)—"me'alos hashachar ad tzeis" as work = "yom mela'chah," proving full arc; refutes via ein beki'in (inexpertise) on stars.
Sevara: Explicit pasuk pairing (work span + day/night distinction) forms rayah without middot; Tosfos locates at Megillah citation, aiding beginner by showing pesukim chain as simple proof-building block.
| Din (Law) | Tzad (Side) | Rayah (Proof) | Chal (Challenge) | Pivot (Turning Point) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| "Or" as Noun (Night) | Gemara/Rav Miller: Verbal allows light | Tehillim "kol kochvei or" (stars praise via emission) | Limits praise to emitters, contradicting "kol tzva'o" (all hosts) | Rashi (Pesachim 2a, end of "or" sugya): Universal emission assumed—drash teaches hano'ah value (e.g., neder), pivoting to emphasis on light's role for beginner's ethical insight. |
| Tzeis as Yom-End | Tosfos: Peshita from Megillah | Nechemia pesukim linkage (dawn-to-stars = yom) | Shabbos views seem pre-tzeis night | Ein beki'in on beinonim stars—observational drash reconciles, located in Tosfos' refutation for beginner's variance tolerance. |
אם ירצה ה׳ kindly partner with the Toras Avigdor organization to spread Rav Avigdor HaCohen Miller ztl's Torah to all Yidden on Earth.
For Gemarah sponsoring specifically 347-541-8051 or email info@kolavigdor.com