web analytics
May 28, 2015 / 10 Sivan, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

The Mitzvah Of Destroying Chametz


Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

This column is dedicated to the refuah sheleimah of Shlomo Eliezer ben Chaya Sarah Elka.

There is a mitzvah to remove and destroy the chametz from one’s possession before Pesach. This is derived from the pasuk in Parshas Bo, “tashbisu se’or mibateichem(Shemos 12:15). There are also two lavim associated with owning chametz on Pesach: bal yiraeh and bal yimatzei.

The Minchas Chinuch discusses the following question regarding the mitzvah of tashbisu (to remove and destroy the chametz from one’s possession): is the mitzvah accomplished only by actively owning chametz and destroying it, or can one fulfill the mitzvah by not owning any chametz to begin with? In other words, does one have to actively destroy the chametz or may one fulfill the mitzvah by not ever owning chametz and not lifting a finger (sheiv v’al ta’aseh) to destroy it?

We find that there are mitzvos that one can fulfill without actively performing an action. On Shabbos there is a mitzvah of shabbason, which is a mitzvas assei that one must rest and, by definition, not perform any melachos. If one performs a melachah on Shabbos, aside from the lo sa’assei he has transgressed the assei of shabbason. If one does not perform any melachos on Shabbos, he has fulfilled the assei of shabbason. Perhaps the assei of tashbisu is the same, and if one did not own any chametz before Pesach he will have fulfilled the mitzvah of tashbisu.

The other option is that the mitzvah of tashbisu is similar to that of tzitzis, whereby if one does not have a four-cornered garment with tzitzis on it he has not fulfilled the mitzvah. If one does not own a four-cornered garment with tzitzis he has not transgressed the mitzvah of tzitzis; however, he also has not fulfilled it.

There are several differences between these two options. If there is a requirement to actively destroy the chametz before Pesach, obviously one only fulfills the mitzvah if he has chametz, finds it, and destroys it. This is why we hide bread before bedikas chametz: to ensure that we will have bread to destroy the next day. If there is no need to actively destroy the chametz and one can fulfill the mitzvah if he simply does not own chametz, one would not have to ensure that he has chametz to burn the next day.

Here’s another difference: someone else grabs one’s chametz and destroys it before the owner had a chance to do so. Generally, when one steals a mitzvah from another person he must pay him ten zehuvim. If the mitzvah is to actively destroy the chametz, the person who grabbed and burned the chametz would be required to pay the owner ten zehuvim. If the mitzvah is fulfilled by merely not owning chametz without actively destroying it, the person would not have to pay the owner ten zehuvim since the owner fulfilled the mitzvah – as if he had burned it himself.

The Minchas Chinuch mentions that another difference between these two options is in a scenario whereby one has chametz on Pesach. The mitzvah applies even on Pesach, and one must destroy his chametz on Pesach as well. There is a machlokes about how one must fulfill the mitzvah of tashbisu if one has chametz. The rabbanan say that it can be performed by any means of destruction, even by eating. Rabbi Yehuda says that it must be done by burning the chametz. According to the rabbanan, it would constitute a means of destruction if one ate his chametz on Pesach. However, if the mitzvah is only fulfilled by actively destroying the chametz, this action will be considered a mitzvah haba b’aveirah since eating chametz on Pesach is forbidden. According to the Minchas Chinuch, when one performs a mitzvah haba b’aveirah he has not fulfilled the mitzvah. But if the mitzvah is fulfilled by simply not owning chametz, then eating it on Pesach would not constitute a mitzvah haba b’aveirah and one will have fulfilled the mitzvah of tashbisu.

The Minchas Chinuch says that it is indicative from the Chinuch that he is of the opinion that the mitzvah is fulfilled simply by not owning chametz. This is because the Chinuch says that someone who is traveling before Pesach is obligated in the mitzvah of tashbisu. The Minchas Chinuch says that if the mitzvah required an active destruction, one who would be traveling before Pesach would not be obligated in it.

Another indication that the Chinuch is of the opinion that the mitzvah of tashbisu does not require active destruction is from the fact that he says that women are obligated in the mitzvah. If the mitzvah required an active destruction, women would be exempt since it is a mitzvas assei she’hazman gramma (time-sensitive mitzvah). However, if it is not an active requirement, women would be obligated even though it is a mitzvas assei she’hazman gramma.

One final difference is whether one is required to have kavanah while destroying his chametz. If the mitzvah requires an active destruction, one would be required to have kavanah when destroying it. If the mitzvah is fulfilled by simply not owning chametz, one would not need to have kavanah when destroying his chamtetz.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “The Mitzvah Of Destroying Chametz”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
J-Street
J Street: The Jewish Enemy Within
Latest Judaism Stories
Leff-052215

There is a great debate as to whether this story actually took place or is simply a metaphor, a prophetic vision shown to Hoshea by Hashem.

Staum-052215

Every person is presented with moments when he/she must make difficult decisions about how to proceed.

Torat-Hakehillah-logo-NEW

One does not necessarily share the opinions of one’s brother. One may disapprove of his actions, values, and/or beliefs. However, with brothers there is a bond of love and caring that transcends all differences.

Torah

This Shavuot let’s give G-d a gift too: Let’s make this year different by doing just 1 more mitzvah

Question: Should we wash our hands in the bathroom with soap and water, or by pouring water from a vessel with handles three times, alternating hands? I have heard it said that a vessel is used only in the morning upon awakening. What are the rules pertaining to young children? What is the protocol if […]

God and the divine origin of His Torah are facts even though we do not fully comprehend them.

So if we basically live the same life, why should he get eternal reward and not me?”

The question is: What about pidyon haben? Can one give the five sela’im required for pidyon haben to a kohen’s daughter?

In Parshas Pinchas the Torah introduces the Mussaf for Shavuos by describing it as Yom HaBikurim when we bring the new offering.

Rachel was thrown by the sight and began to caringly think whom this person might be.

The desert, with its unearthly silence & emptiness, is the condition in which the Word can be heard

The census focused on the individual, proving each is created as irreplaceable, unique images of God

Jewish survival in a dysfunctional world requires women assuming the role Hashem gave them at Sinai

The Honor Of Reading The Kesubah
‘Witnesses Sign Only After Reading…’
(Kesubos 109a)

Why does the Torah use two different words for “to count,” and what does each indicate?

From Bemidbar on and in Nevi’im, the nation is viewed primarily by its component parts, the tribes

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The question is: What about pidyon haben? Can one give the five sela’im required for pidyon haben to a kohen’s daughter?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The mitzvah that parents must give their son a bris milah is a mitzvah that they must perform for someone else – namely their son.

The Bach writes that he mentioned his insights to many of the leading gedolim and no one disproved him.

The Bais Halevi answers that we must properly define what is considered to be “in the middle of a mitzvah.”

In this case one could reason that by applying halach achar harov we could permit the forbidden bird as well.

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

Why is it necessary to invite people to eat from the korban Pesach?

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/the-mitzvah-of-destroying-chametz/2013/03/25/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: