|
Because We're Living in a Hametzdic World and I am a Matza Girl
Rabbi Joshua Kulp
Beyond the prohibition of eating hametz, the Torah is strict and does not allow hametz to be found in one’s possession on Pesah, a prohibition known as בל ימצא and even goes so far as to prohibit seeing hametz, a prohibition known as בל יראה. From a simple perspective, it seems that the Torah is advocating an “out of sight, out of mind” mentality. If the hametz is not on my property and I can’t see it then I don’t have to worry about it. We even find an echo of this in a midrash on Exodus 12:19, “No leaven shall be found in your houses for seven days.” Picking up on the word, “In your houses,” the Mekhilta De-Rabbi Yishmael comments: “‘Your houses’: This comes to exclude hametz owned by a Jew found on the property of a non-Jew, even though he could destroy it [he is exempt] because it is not in his property.”
This model is what I call the “possession” model. If one physically possesses hametz, if it is on her property, she transgresses the biblical prohibition. However, this is not the general model of relating to hametz that we find in Hazal. Rather, what we find is a model I call the “ownership” model. A Jew is not allowed to own hametz on Pesah, even if it is not on her property. And hametz on her property, hametz that she sees, is not problematic unless she has quasi-ownership over it. For instance, Sifre Devarim 13:1 states, “‘You shall not see for yourself hametz’--but you can see [hametz] belonging to others.” Tosefta Pesahim 2:6 teaches, “A non-Jew who came to the house of a Jew and had hametz in his hand -- he is not obligated to remove it.” On Bavli Pesahim 5b, the Talmud brings up the possibility that one would hide one’s hametz in a pit or somewhere outside his home, in a place where she won’t see it, but rules that this too is forbidden since the Torah states that hametz should not be found “in your borders.” The problem is not possession but ownership.
The rabbis’ decision to allow a Jew to see hametz owned by a non-Jew was almost certainly necessary given the social conditions in which Jews have almost always existed–living among a sea of non-Jews. For most of Jewish history, it would have been exceedingly difficult for a Jew not to look at hametz owned by a non-Jew. Keeping hametz completely out of sight would have been and still is highly impractical. But there is still a question of how far a Jew must keep away from hametz she does not own on Pesah? This question is asked by the Yerushalmi–can a Jew derive benefit from hametz owned by a non-Jew on Pesah. For instance, can a Jew rent out her donkey to a non-Jew to use to carry hametz on Pesah? Can she rent her boat for a non-Jew to transport the non-Jew’s hametz? Can she rent out space for the non-Jew to store her hametz? There are conflicting amoraic opinions in this passage, but the passage is clear that even according to the lenient opinion, a Jew cannot participate in transporting a non-Jew’s hametz on Pesah. This seems like too high a level of engagement with this temporarily but strictly prohibited substance. It is, I believe, an echo of the “out of sight, out of mind” thinking that is found in earlier sources. If I rent my donkey and the non-Jew uses it to transport her hametz, I don’t see the hametz and besides receiving money for the use of my donkey, I don’t engage with it. This might be permitted. But to pack someone else’s hametz onto my donkey and transport it somewhere–that’s too much.
The medieval period brought with it a host of questions concerning partnerships between non-Jews and Jews. For instance, R. Ya’akov bar Asher, the author of the Tur, cites a question asked to Rashi: If a Jew and a non-Jew are partners in the ownership of an oven, can the Jew tell the non-Jew to take the proceeds earned on Pesah and the Jew will take the proceeds from the week that either precedes or follows? Rashi and eventually the Shulkhan Arukh 450:3 both rule that this is permitted, as long as the stipulation is made prior to Pesah. However, in the very next section, the Shulkhan Arukh notes that if a Jew owns an oven, she cannot take money from a non-Jew for baking her hametz in that oven on Pesah. Doing so would seem to be in breach of the “out of sight, out of mind” model and too direct a form of deriving benefit from hametz on Pesah. But in section 5 of that chapter, the Shulkhan Arukh allows one to rent her oven to a non-Jew to bake matzah, even if the non-Jew will eventually bake hametz. This legal fiction would at least allow the Jew to imagine that her oven is not baking hametz on Pesah, a thought that might keep the Jew awake at night.
An example of a modern dilemma is whether a Jew may work in a non-Jewish bakery during Pesah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Orah Hayim 1:4) was asked this question and ruled stringently. Beyond some of the technical reasons (such as she is actually responsible and liable for the hametz), it seems clear that this is a significant breach of “out of sight and out of mind.” To work in a bakery on Pesah and to look at hametz all day long is simply too much engagement with hametz to be tolerable.
Another issue addressed intensely by the aharonim is smelling hametz owned by a non-Jew. The Be’ur Halakhah Orah Hayim 443:1 has an extensive discussion about this issue. And again, while his comments are technical, I still think it boils down to how much distance a Jew wants to have between herself and hametz on Pesah. Does a Jew feel comfortable walking past a non-Jewish bakery and taking a deep whiff of the freshly baked croissants? Can one walk into the bakery with the express intent of doing so? Is this an infringement of “out of scent, out of mind”?
This issue came to the fore last year when the Israeli government passed a law allowing hospitals to ban hametz from their premises on Pesah. Remarkably, the previous year, one of the ostensible reasons the Israeli government was brought down was the decision of the minister of religious affairs in the Bennet government to instruct hospitals not to search visitors’ bags for hametz.
Of course, the broader issue in these cases is the extent to which Israelis want to see the government enforcing religious rules. But I also believe the sensitivity of this particular issue goes all the way back to the “out of sight, out of mind” attitude that still underlies much of our emotional reaction to hametz. When writing this article I found questions (in Hebrew) on Israeli websites such as, “Am I allowed to look at a picture of hametz on Pesah?” While the rabbi answering quickly said, “Yes–you transgress only when you own the hametz,” the very question is illuminating. Can I stay at someone’s home when they have hametz there? Again, the answer was yes, but the questioner did not feel comfortable with the practice. As often happens in the development of halakhah, there is a trajectory created in the inner circles of Hazal and there is a trajectory created in the inner minds (or in this case, perhaps the tummies) of ordinary Jews and actual practice ends up meeting somewhere in between. There is no prohibition of looking at hametz on Pesah, but you just might not want to do so.
| 
