Chametz U’Matza #1

מצות עשה מן התורה לאכול מצה בליל חמשה עשר שנאמר בערב תאכלו מצות בכל מקום ובכל זמן.

And achilas matzah is always de'oraisa

בכל מקום ובכל זמן. ולא תליה אכילה זו בקרבן פסח בקרבן הפסח אלא זו מצוה בפני עצמה מצותה כל הלילה.

Meaning that we pasken like the mishnah close to the gemara from the end of Pesachim on kuf-vav that מצה בזמן הזה דאורייתא, maror derabbanan, that unlike maror which is as the Rambam will tell us at the end of the perek. He said the same thing already in Sefer Hamitzvos. Perek Zayin, where's that word about maror? Yeah, I'm sorry the end of Perek Zayin. פרק ז הלכה יב the Rambam's going to say that

אכילת מרור אינה מצוה מן התורה בפני עצמה אלא תלויה היא באכילת הפסח מצות עשה אחת לאכול בקרבן הפסח על מצה ומרורים.

So in contrast to maror which is a detail, an element of mitzvas achilas pesach, matzah is also an independent mitzvah. That's the thrust of the pasuk Ba'erev Tochelu Matzos. Okay and as the Maggid Mishnah quotes this is what Rava says, it's a machlokes Amora'im but this is what Rava says in kuf-vav in Pesachim. אלא זו מצוה בפני עצמה ומצותה כל הלילה. Mitzvasah kol halaila is a machlokes Tanna'im whether that's the case. The machlokes רבי אלעזר בן עזריה and Rebbe Akiva is about the zman of achilas pesach. According to רבי אלעזר בן עזריה, achilas pesach is only until chatzos. According to Rebbe Akiva it's kol halaila. And then even though mitzvas matzah is an independent chiyuv, but its zman is hukash to the zman of achilas pesach. So mi'meila the machlokes רבי אלעזר בן עזריה and Rebbe Akiva by the zman of achilas pesach carries over to achilas matzah. So one question in the Rishonim is how do we pasken in that machlokes רבי אלעזר בן עזריה and Rebbe Akiva? Do we pasken like רבי אלעזר בן עזריה or do we pasken like Rebbe Akiva? Then there's the second question which the Rosh and Rabbeinu Tam discuss. אפילו אם תמצא לומר that we pasken like Rebbe Akiva that the zman of achilas pesach min HaTorah is kol halaila, and therefore we would pasken that the zman of achilas matzah min HaTorah is kol halaila, but just as by achilas pesach there's a syag of chatzos, so too by achilas matzah there's a syag of chatzos. So again the Rosh, Rabbeinu Tam have one of the two says be'feirush that even if you pasken like Rebbe Akiva min HaTorah that the zman of matzah is all night, but there is a syag of chatzos, the first mishnah in Berachos. וכל הנאכלים ליום ולילה חכמים אמרו עד חצות. So the Rambam here when he says u'mitzvasah kol halaila, so the Rambam is taking two positions. A, he's saying we pasken like Rebbe Akiva against רבי אלעזר בן עזריה. B, he's saying and that according to Rebbe Akiva the syag of chatzos doesn't apply to achilas matzah. So the question is why not? The syag of chatzos, so maybe the syag of chatzos is only להרחיק אדם מן העבירה, so if you have הנאכלים ליום ולילה and you eat it too late, then you're going to be over in issur nosar. But that doesn't seem to be the case because the syag applies to keriyas shema. So it seems clear that the syag of chatzos is not only להרחיק אדם מן העבירה to be over a lo sa'aseh by if you'll leave it to the end of the night, so then One minute on the wrong side of one second on the wrong side of amud hashachar is is the difference between a mitzvas asei and an issur noser. But that's not, it's not true that siyag is only for that because the first mishna uv'feiresh says that that the Chachamim say that Krias Shema is only until chatzos because of the siyag. So why would, why wouldn't you have the siyag by achilas matzah? That's the question the Rambam doesn't have it. The Mechaber writes in Shulchan Aruch that a person should be zahier to eat afikoman before chatzos. Again, which is either like רבי אלעזר בן עזריה or like the Rosh, that even if you hold like Rebbi Akiva, but l'maiseh, mitzvas matzah is miderabbanan is you have that deadline of chatzos. And the Rambam doesn't have, doesn't have the siyag by achilas matzah. In Perek Ches of Hilchos Korban Pesach, Halacha Tes-Vav,

קבעוהו בכמה מקומות שאין הפסח נאכל אלא עד חצות כדי להרחיק מן העבירה. ודין תורה שיהא נאכל כל הלילה עד שיעלה עמוד השחר.

In Hilchos Krias Shema, Perek Aleph, Halacha Tes,

איזהו זמן קריאת שמע בלילה מצוותה משעת צאת הכוכבים עד חצי הלילה. ואם עבר ואיחר וקרא עד שלא עלה עמוד השחר יצא ידי חובתו שלא אמרו עד חצות אלא להרחיק מן הפשיעה.

In Pesach lashon is leharchik min ha-averah, and for Krias Shema the lashon is leharchik min ha-peshiyah. It's the same lashon. And in Perek Daled of Hilchos Ma'aseh Korbanos Halacha Beis,

כל שהקרבו מתירו ביום מעלין אותו על המזבח כל הלילה. כיצד? זבחים שנזרק דמיהם ביום, מקטירין אימוריהן בלילה עד שיעלה עמוד השחר. וכן איברי העולות מקטירין אותן בלילה עד שיעלה עמוד השחר. וכדי להרחיק מן הפשיעה אמרו חכמים שאין מקטירין האימורין ואיברי העולה אלא עד חצות הלילה.

And in Perek Gimmel Halacha Ches Ma'aseh Korbanos, that's by hekteir cheilev ve-eivarim, right? Daled Beis was hekteir cheilev ve-eivarim. Yud Ches Perek Gimmel Halacha Ches Ma'aseh Korbanos:

כל אלו הנאכלין ליום ולילה דין תורה שיהו נאכלין עד שיעלה עמוד השחר, וכדי להרחיק מן העבירה אמרו חכמים שאינן נאכלין אלא עד חצות הלילה.

And I don't think I'm not sure if the pshat in the Tosafos is correct. Yeah, okay, and I don't know why the Rambam thinks there's no siyag of chatzos by mitzvos matzah, but he doesn't have it halacha le-ma'aseh. Rambam continues on Perek Yud Gimmel Hilchos Chametz u-Matzah be-sha'as achilas matzah.

אבל בליל חמשה עשר בלבד חובה ומשאכל כזית יצא ידי חובתו.

So the Lashon haRambam here suggests the following: the Rambam could have economized and just said,

מצות עשה מן התורה לאכול כזית מצה בליל חמשה עשר.

Instead, he says initially when he presents the mitzvah, he doesn't mention the shiur. He says מצות עשה מן התורה לאכול מצה. He doesn't mention the shiur. And even when he repeats it, he says,

אבל בליל חמשה עשר בלבד חובה ומשאכל כזית יצא ידי חובתו.

So the very clear impression conveyed by the Rambam is that more than a kezayis the night of the 15th is a mitzvah. That whatever matzah a person eats the night of the 15th is part of the mitzvah. It's not that once he ate the kezayis, so then everything min haTorah, everything else is reshus. Obviously miderabbanan, there's a chiyuv of more than one kezayis. But no, the Rambam is saying even on a de'oraisa level that there is a kiyum in eating matzah. That's what the Rambam says, ומשאכל כזית יצא ידי חובתו. But he doesn't define the mitzvah that way. He separates the shiur from the mitzvah because the mitzvah is taka open-ended in terms of kiyum hamitzvah. So the Rambam has that... How does the Rambam know that? Maybe mitzvah is only to eat a kezayis. How does the Rambam know it? So the Mishnah at the end of Arvei Pesachim says that אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן. So you can't eat dessert achar hakorban pesach. And in the Mishnah, not the way we use the word colloquially, in the Mishnah the word afikoman is not referring to the Pesach; it's referring to what you would have eaten after the Pesach that you can't. So you can't eat dessert or anything else after the Pesach. אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן, right? And then the Gemara says that בזמן הזה אין מפטירין אחר מצה אפיקומן. Bazman hazeh, that what we eat at the end of the meal is not the Korban Pesach but we eat matzah, so you can't eat after, you can't eat after the matzah. Why can't you eat after? What's the... why can't you? פרק ח הלכה ט. Take a look. ches, tes.

ואף על פי שנמשך בסעודה ואכל כל מה שרוצה לאכול ושתה כל מה שרוצה לשתות. ואף על גב דנמשך בסעודה ואכל כל מה שרוצה לאכול ושתה כל מה שרוצה לשתות ובאחרונה אכל מבשר הפסח אפילו כזית ואינו טועם אחריו כלל ובזמן הזה אוכל כזית מצה ואינו טועם אחריה כלל כדי שיפסיק סעודתו בטעם בשר הפסח או המצה בפיו שאכילתן היא המצוה.

That the din of ein maftirin is that the taste that lingers should be from the achilas matzah. And the lashon she'achilasan hi hamitzvah with the hei hayediah, it doesn't sound like we're talking about a mitzvah d'rabanan. Hamitzvah with the hei hayediah. But I don't understand, the mitzvah d'oraisa of matzah you were yotzei by Motzi Matzah. The matzah that you're eating by afikoman at Tzafun is not she'achilasan hi hamitzvah. So what does the Rambam mean that the ta'am for the din of ein maftirin is

כדי שיפסיק סעודתו בטעם בשר הפסח או המצה בפיו שאכילתן היא המצוה?

Oh, so that's what's mishma. You see that the matzah that you eat ba'achrona is also matzah d'oraisa. Agam that it was enough what you ate barishona that you were yotzei, but what you're eating ba'achrona is still hamitzvah. It's still matzah d'oraisa and that's what's reflected in the din of אין מפטירין אחר מצה אפיקומן. The same way it's true of Korban Pesach. Korban Pesach the Rambam also has his famously the shitas Harambam is that they ate Korban Pesach twice, once at the beginning of the meal and again at the end of the meal. They ate it right after Motzi Matzah and then again at the end of the meal. And there too it's all a kiyum of ואכלו את הבשר בלילה הזה. It's not just the first kazayis is a kiyum of ואכלו את הבשר בלילה הזה. So let's look at the leshonos very precise here again in our halachos vav aleph.

מצות עשה מן התורה לאכול מצה בליל חמישה עשר שנאמר בערב תאכלו מצות.

Fast forward to the end of the halacha.

אבל בליל חמישה עשר בלבד חובה ומשאכל כזית יצא ידי חובתו.

So in the beginning of the halacha the Rambam speaks lashon mitzvah. At the end of the halacha he speaks lashon chovah. Nimtzah, heim heim had'varim. In the end of the halacha when he's going to mention the shiur kazayis, so there he says that he speaks in terms of the chiyuv. The chiyuv is kazayis. In the beginning of the halacha when he doesn't mention the shiur, so the Rambam doesn't say the lashon chovah because the mitzvah is even beyond kazayis. The mitzvah is even beyond kazayis. It's only when he's going to chovah, kazayis defines the chovah. But in terms of where there's a kiyum hamitzvah, so that's what's mashma from the sugya of אין מפטירין אחר מצה אפיקומן that there's a kiyum hamitzvah in whatever matzah a person eats

לאכול מצה בליל חמישה עשר. אכילת מצה אלא אם כן אכל מאחד מחמשת המינים שנאמר לא תאכל עליו חמץ שבעת ימים תאכל עליו מצות דברים הבאים לידי חימוץ אדם יוצא בהן ידי חובת מצה אבל שאר דברים כגון אורז ודוחן וקטניות אין יוצא בהן ידי מצה לפי שאין בהן חמץ.

The Lashon of the Rambam is very meduyak. Matzah is very unique in that as a cheftza shel mitzvah, something very unique in that the definition of matzah is what it isn't. What's the definition of matzah? Something which didn't become chametz. The definition of matzah is what it isn't. So the emes is potatoes are matzah and the depressing thought that macarons are matzosa so, but the obvious things are on one level right? But the Rambam says no you're not yotzei because to be yotzei mitzvas matzah it has to be הדבר הבא לידי חימוץ. But again what the word matzah itself means is something which isn't chametz. So apples are, apples are matzah. Apples are matzah. Rambam says

אין אדם יוצא ידי חובת אכילת מצה אלא אם כן,

no, the matzah, the non-chametz, has to be, you learn from the hekesh, it has to be from הדבר הבא לידי חימוץ. It has to mean that it had the possibility of becoming chametz and didn't become chametz. But something which is matzah because it's not nitan to become chametz, an apple cannot become chametz, so then that, it's technically, it's correct to refer to that as matzah, but it's not if you're using matzah in the sense of what you can eat to be yotzei your mitzvah. So in that sense it's not matzah. That's why the Lashon of the Rambam is that you're not yotzei mitzvas matzah unless the matzah was from chameshas haminim because they have the potential to become, to become chametz. Okay, we'll pick up with this tomorrow Bezrat Hashem.