Parashat Bo: Matza
The Weekly Mitzva
Yeshivat Har Etzion
PARASHAT
BO
Shiur
#15: Matza
By Rav
Binyamin Tabory
The Torah in Parashat Bo (Shemot 12:8) commands eating the korban pesach
(the sacrificial lamb) together with matza and marror. Inasmuch as today we cannot offer
sacrifices – including the korban pesach, there is no longer a biblical
obligation to eat marror, which is to be eaten in conjunction with the korban
pesach. However, our sages
instituted a rabbinic requirement to eat marror independently of the
korban. Regarding matza, however,
Rava maintained that the obligation of matza has an independent status as a
biblical requirement, since the Torah explicitly states, "On (that) night you
should eat matzot" (Shemot 12:8).
The gemara cites a beraita which supports this opinion. The beraita observes that in one place,
the Torah requires eating matza all seven days of the festival (Shemot 12:15),
whereas elsewhere, it obligates eating matza for only six days (Devarim
16:8). The beraita employs an
exegetical principle of Rabbi Yishmael to conclude that once the second verse
excludes the seventh day from the obligation, the entire obligation
dissolves. Seemingly, then, the
consumption of matza on Pesach should be entirely optional. Therefore, the Torah specifically
mentions the obligation to eat matza together with the korban on the first night
of Pesach. And even if there is no
korban, the Torah still reiterated "on (that) night you should eat matzot" to
establish an independent mitzva to eat matza. The Rambam (Sefer Ha-Mitzvot – mitzvat
asei 158), as well as other codifiers, write that there is a biblical
requirement to eat matza on the first night of Pesach – even without a Beit
Ha-mikdash.
The Chizkuni (Shemot 12:18) understands the Torah's seemingly convoluted
presentation of this mitzva to imply that although there is no obligation to eat
matza the entire week of Pesach, one who does eat matza fulfills a mitzva by
doing so. He explains that when it
comes to most mitzvot, one not only merits reward for observing them, but also
deserves punishment if he is negligent and fails to fulfill them. Other mitzvot, however (such as eating
matza the rest of Pesach), do not entail any punishments but do bring reward to
those who opt to fulfill them.
Another possible source for this mitzva to eat matza throughout the
entirety of Pesach is the juxtaposition of the prohibition against eating
chametz and the requirement to eat matza (Devarim 16:3). The gemara (Pesachim 43b) derives from
this textual association that women (who are forbidden from eating chametz) must
eat matza (despite its being a time-bound mitzvat asei, and thus women should be
exempt). According to Rav Shimon,
(Pesachim 28b) these two mitzvot are mutually dependent in terms of the times of
their application, as well. Rav
Shimon maintains that there is no "lav" (a biblical prohibition) to eat chametz
erev Pesach or after Pesach. His
argument is that chametz is only biblically forbidden at the time that matza is
to be eaten. The Penei Yehoshua (ad
loc.) writes that Rashi's interpretation of Rav Shimon shows that there is a
biblical REQUIREMENT to eat matza all Pesach.
We find another indication that the mitzva of eating matza is required
(or at least fulfilled) throughout Pesach in the discussion regarding tefillin
on chol ha-moed. The gemara
(Menachot 36b) explains that since tefillin are called an "ot" (a sign), and
Shabbat and Yom Tov are themselves an "ot," there is no need to put on tefillin
on those days. Tosafot (ad loc.)
raise the issue of whether one must wear tefillin on chol ha-moed, and they
claim that Pesach is an "ot" since chametz is forbidden, and Sukkot is an "ot"
because it obligates us to sit in the sukka. The Rosh, however (Responsa 23:3), cites
the geonim as saying that Pesach is an "ot" due to the 'OBLIGATION' of eating
matza. Indeed, it seems far more
logical that an "ot" should involve a demonstrative act such as eating matza,
rather than passively refraining from eating chametz. Although the Rosh maintains that one
should put on tefillin on chol ha-moed, he does not take issue with the opinion
that the obligation of matza creates an "ot."
It is well known that the Gaon of Vilna maintained that eating matza all
Pesach is an optional mitzva. It is
related (Ma'aseh Rav 175) that he afforded immense value to this mitzva. In fact, he would make a point of eating
se'uda shelishit on the last day of Pesach (although he did not usually eat
se'uda shelishit on Yom Tov), in order to fulfill the mitzva of eating matza in
its waning moments before it expired.
If we indeed assume that there is a mitzva to eat matza all Pesach, we
must ask why there is no berakha attached to it. On Sukkot, for example, there is no
obligation to eat in the sukka throughout the festival; the obligation to eat in
the sukka applies only on the first night.
Thereafter, there is only a prohibition against eating anything
substantial outside the sukka, and technically, one could avoid eating in the
sukka throughout the remainder of Sukkot by living the entire week on
snacks. If, however, one does eat
in the sukka, he fulfills a mitzva and also recites a berakha. Why should we not similarly require a
berakha over the consumption of matza after the first day of
Pesach?
This question, originally posed by the Ba'al Ha-Maor (end of Pesachim),
has become the subject of much discussion, and various answers have been
suggested. The Michtam (Sukka 27a)
and the Meiri (Pesachim 91b) reject the entire thesis and maintain that there is
no mitzva at all to eat matza after the first night of Pesach. By contrast, the Sedei Chemed (Chametz
U'matza 14:10) cites a prevailing custom to recite a berakha, and the Netziv
(Meishiv Davar 77) expresses uncertainty as to whether such a berakha would be
considered a berakha le-vatala (an unnecessary berakha). In any event, this custom of making a
berakha has been resoundingly rejected.
(See Responsa Yechaveh Da'at 1:22).
The Ba'al Ha-Maor himself answered by saying that one need not eat matza
the rest of Pesach, as it is possible to subsist on rice (for those whose custom
permits it) or other foods.
However, since a person cannot refrain from sleeping for an entire week,
one must be in the sukka at some point during the week, and this mitzva
therefore requires a berakha.
It is told that certain people who were known as extremely meticulous in
mitzva observance did not eat matza at all after the first night of Pesach. Apparently, they were concerned about
the intricacies of baking matza and feared that it could become chametz quite
easily.
Rav Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer 13:65) disputed this position very
strongly for a number of reasons.
He thought that there was an inherent contradiction in this
practice. If the adherents of this
custom were truly afraid that the matza was not baked according to halakha, how
could they eat it on the first night of Pesach? Furthermore, Rav Waldenberg argued that
there is a mitzva to eat "pat" (bread or matza) every day of Pesach, especially
Shabbat and Yom Tov. How could they
ignore this obligation? If we
accept the opinion of the Chizkuni and Vilna Gaon, then the followers of this
practice also negate the fulfillment of eating matza all
Pesach.
Rav Waldenberg also cites an opinion that given the Karaitic doctrine
requiring eating matza all Pesach, as the Torah says, "You should eat matza
seven days" (Shemot 12:15), there were those who refrained from eating matza
after the first night to demonstrate their opposition to the Karaitic
position. Nevertheless, Rav
Waldenberg strongly advised eating matza all week.
We have shown that there is some dispute as to whether or not there is a
mitzva to eat matza throughout Pesach.
On the first night of Pesach, however, everyone agrees that there is an
obligation to eat matza. In
general, any mitzva of the Torah requiring eating involves the eating of a
"ke-zayit" (an olive). The mishna
(Pesachim 10:1) says that a waiter who took a moment at the seder to recline and
eat a "ke-zayit" of matza has fulfilled his obligation. The Maharal of Prague (Sefer Gevurot
Hashem 48) inferred from the formulation of this halakha that the waiter
fulfills his requirement only be-di'avad (ex post facto); he satisfied the
minimum requirement of eating while reclining. However, the mitzva involves all the
matza that one eats the first night of Pesach and should therefore all be eaten
while reclining. He says that this
is the position of the Rambam, as well.
The Maharal did not specify to which halakha in the Rambam he refers, and
attempts have been made to deduce this from various halakhot. (See Rav Y.B.
Zolty's Mishnat Ya'avetz, 16 for one possible source.) It seems fairly clear to me, however,
that the Maharal referred to the Rambam in Hilkhot Chametz U'Matza 6:1. There the Rambam writes, "There is a
biblical requirement to eat matza on the night of the fifteenth… Once one has
eaten a ke-zayit, he has fulfilled the mitzva." The Rambam could have said simply, that
there is a mitzva to eat a ke-zayit of matza. By writing instead that there is a
mitzva to eat matza and one need not eat more than a ke-zayit, he implies that
all of one's matza consumption constitutes a fulfillment of the mitzva, though
the minimum requirement is a ke-zayit.
We have thus learned that according to one view there is an obligation to
eat matza all week (Penei Yehoshua's understanding of Rav Shimon), whereas
another opinion maintains that although there is no obligation, one fulfills a
mitzva by eating matza all week (Chizkuni, Vilna Gaon). This latter opinion was disputed by
Me'iri and others. Lastly, we saw
that the Maharal felt that on the first night, although one fulfills the mitzva
by eating a ke-zayit, all matza eaten that night is a fulfillment of the
mitzva.