01 – Ḥadash

01. The Omer Offering and the Prohibition of Ḥadash

Every year, on the day after the first day of Pesaḥ – the 16th of Nisan – there is a mitzva to offer the first of the new grain as a meal offering to God, so that the first of each year’s harvest is dedicated to Him. In addition, one may not eat from the new grain before the Omer offering has been brought, and one may not harvest the new grain before the barley for the Omer offering has been harvested. The Torah states (Vayikra 23:9–14):

The Lord spoke to Moshe, saying: Speak to the children of Israel and say to them: When you come into the land that I am giving you and reap its harvest, you shall bring the Omer, the first of your harvest, to the kohen. He shall wave the Omer before the Lord, that it may be accepted on your behalf; on the day after the “Shabbat” the kohen shall wave it. On the day you wave the Omer, you shall offer an unblemished yearling lamb as an olah to the Lord. Its meal offering shall be two-tenths of an eifa of fine flour mixed with oil, a fire offering to the Lord, a pleasing aroma; and its libation shall be a quarter of a hin of wine. You shall eat neither bread, nor parched grain, nor fresh grain until this very day, until you have brought the offering of your God – an everlasting statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

The Omer offering is brought on the day after the first festival day of Pesaḥ. This is the Sages’ received tradition in interpreting the verse’s phrase, “the day after the Shabbat”: the day after the rest of the first Yom Tov of Pesaḥ. The rest of that day is meant to strengthen our faith through the memory of the Exodus and the mitzva of eating matza on the Seder night. Having deepened that faith, we are then commanded to offer the new grain, so that all our eating throughout the coming year is shaped by that intention. Since the day of the Omer offering is fixed, its harvesting, preparation, and offering override Shabbat even when it falls on Shabbat.

Although wheat is the finest of the five species of grain, the Omer offering is brought from barley. This is the tradition transmitted from Moshe at Sinai, and it also reflects agricultural reality: in Eretz Yisrael, barley ripens before Pesaḥ, while wheat ripens only later. This choice is also significant. Barley is animal feed, and it represents the basic, lower side of human life. Precisely because this side of life emerges first, it too must be connected to holiness. From the night of the Omer harvest, we count seven weeks — forty-nine days — during which we prepare ourselves to receive the Torah on Shavu’ot, when we are commanded to bring the shtei ha-leḥem, the “two loaves,” the first offering brought from that year’s new wheat.

The Omer permits all Israel to eat from the new crop; the shtei ha-leḥem permits meal offerings from the new crop to be brought in the Temple. (Menaḥot 68b; see Peninei Halakha: Mo’adim 13:7).

The mitzva of harvesting the Omer is performed on the night of the 16th of Nisan, and the harvest may be done at any point during the night. Ideally, the barley should be grown near Jerusalem. If the nearby barley had not yet ripened, it could be brought from farther away, provided it was grown in Eretz Yisrael. The Omer was customarily harvested and brought to the Temple courtyard in a dignified ceremony, before a large public gathering, in order to reinforce the Sages’ tradition regarding this mitzva. Once it was brought to the courtyard, the kernels were removed from the ears, lightly roasted, and ground. The resulting flour was then sifted through thirteen sieves.

The next day, after the daily offering and the additional festival offering were brought, one-tenth of an eifa was taken from that flour, mixed with one log of oil, and a handful of frankincense was placed upon it. The kohen waved it before God, took a handful from it, and burned it on the altar. Once this handful was burned, all Israel was permitted to eat from the new grain (Menaḥot 63–68; MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:3–12).

2. The Mitzva Across Time and Place

Until Israel entered the Land, they were not obligated to bring the Omer offering, and there was no restriction on eating from the new grain. On the 10th of Nisan in the year 2489 from Creation, Israel crossed the Jordan and entered Eretz Yisrael. From that point onward, it became forbidden to eat from the new grain before the Omer was brought. This prohibition applies not only in Eretz Yisrael but throughout the world, and it applies both to grain owned by Jews and to grain owned by gentiles, as the verse states: “an everlasting statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings” (Vayikra 23:14; see below, section 5).

The prohibition remained in force even after the destruction of the Temple, as the verse states, “an everlasting statute throughout your generations.” When the Temple stood, the new grain became permitted once the Omer was offered on the 16th of Nisan. After the destruction, however, it becomes permitted only after the 16th of Nisan has fully passed, as the verse also says, “until this very day, until you have brought the offering of your God.” When the Temple is standing, the determining phrase is “until you have brought the offering of your God”; when the Temple is no longer standing, it is “until this very day.” In the Diaspora, where two festival days are observed, one must wait an additional day; the new grain therefore becomes permitted only after the 17th of Nisan has ended (Menaḥot 68b; MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 10:2; SA YD 293:1).

This mitzva is rooted in the fact that grain provides the staple of human nourishment; for that reason, the divine values bound up in it must be given special expression. The Torah therefore commands us to restrain ourselves and not eat from the new grain before offering its first portion to God. In this way, we return our food to its sacred root and prepare ourselves to receive His goodness as we eat. Through this, holiness and divine values illuminate our eating throughout the year. Yet only after Israel entered the Land was its holiness revealed, enabling grain to be connected to its sacred root through the Omer offering.

Even now, when the Temple is destroyed and we cannot offer the Omer, this awareness still elevates the Jewish people and shapes our eating: the first portion of the grain should have been offered to God, and for that reason one may not eat from the new grain until the day of the Omer (see Sefer ha-Ḥinukh §303; Ḥizkuni to Vayikra 23:10; below, 2:2).

3. The Prohibition of Ḥadash

The prohibition of ḥadash applies to the five grain species from which bread is made: wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye, as the verse states (Vayikra 23:14): “You shall eat neither bread, nor parched grain, nor fresh grain until this very day.” Bread is made from flour produced from these five grains, which are capable of becoming ḥametz. If dough made from them is left to stand, it ferments, allowing it to become fine bread, the staple of human nourishment. By contrast, if the dough is kneaded and baked quickly, before it has time to ferment, it becomes “bread of affliction” (leḥem oni) – the matza we are commanded to eat on Pesaḥ (Menaḥot 70a–b).

Ḥadash – grain subject to the prohibition of the new crop – may not be eaten, but one may derive benefit from it. Therefore, one may feed ḥadash to animals (Mishna, Menaḥot 10:8; Pesaḥim 23a). Likewise, one may sell ḥadash to a gentile, provided there is no concern that Jews will come to eat it.

The Torah specifies “bread, parched grain, and fresh grain” to teach that new grain is prohibited in every edible form. “Bread” is the most refined form, since its preparation requires grinding the kernels, kneading the flour with water, and baking the dough. “Parched grain” (kali) refers to kernels roasted over fire, while “fresh grain” (karmel) refers to raw kernels eaten as they are. Cooked dishes made from new grain are included in the prohibition as well, since the prohibition of ḥadash takes effect once the grain has reached the stage of karmel, and cooking does not remove that status. The prohibition also includes all flour products, such as bran, coarse bran, starch, and gluten, as well as oatmeal, which is made from crushed oats. Beverages produced from new grain are included as well, whether made by pressing, cooking, or brewing – such as beer and other grain-based drinks.[1]

Any grain that had taken root by the 16th of Nisan – even if it had not yet emerged above ground – is permitted on the day of the Omer. Grain that had not taken root by the 16th of Nisan is not permitted by the Omer that year and remains forbidden until the Omer of the following year. Grain seeds are presumed to take root in the soil two weeks after they are sown (Dagul Me-Revava; R. Akiva Eiger). Some authorities maintain that grain takes root within only three days of sowing (Terumat Ha-deshen). Since this is a Torah prohibition, the halakha follows the stringent view. However, if it is known with certainty that the grain took root before the 16th of Nisan, it becomes permitted on the day of the Omer even if two full weeks have not passed since sowing (see Yerushalmi, Shevi’it 2:4).

The prohibition of ḥadash applies to all grain, including grain grown in an unperforated pot or in water (Rashash to Pesaḥim 36b; Divrei David, vol. 4, YD 50:2).

Grain kernels that became permitted on the day of the Omer may be sprouted, and the leaves that grow from them may be eaten without waiting for the next Omer. The prohibition of ḥadash applies to the kernels themselves, even before they have reached one-third of their growth; it does not apply to the stalks (Sha’agat Aryeh, Ḥadash §4).


[1]. The Sages state that one who violates this prohibition by eating an olive-bulk of bread, an olive-bulk of parched grain, and an olive-bulk of fresh grain is liable for three sets of lashes (Keritot 5a). Likewise, one who eats a cooked dish made from new grain violates a Torah prohibition and is liable for lashes; since the prohibition already took effect when the grain was in the stage of karmel, grinding and cooking it do not remove the prohibition (Ḥatam Sofer, YD 114; see Har Tzvi, YD 239).

One who drinks a beverage made from new grain violates a Torah prohibition but is not subject to lashes. Only wine and oil are treated as equivalent to the fruit itself; liquids extracted from other produce do not have that status for purposes of lashes (MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 10:22; see Peninei Halakha: Shabbat 12, note 13). Some authorities maintain that a beverage derived from ḥadash is prohibited only rabbinically, since it is not the grain itself but merely liquid extracted from it (Mishkenot Yaakov, YD 68; Penei Yehoshua, Kuntres Aḥaron to Kiddushin). Leḥem Mishneh to Mishna, Terumot 11:2 goes further and maintains that such beverages are permitted. However, the overwhelming majority of authorities maintain that beverages made from ḥadash are prohibited by Torah law (Maharam of Rothenburg; Rosh; Semag; Rokeaḥ; Ḥakham Tzvi §20; Shev Yaakov §61; Sha’agat Aryeh Ha-ḥadashot, Ḥadash §13; Ḥok Yaakov 489:22; AHS YD 293:23–27).

4. The Prohibition Against Harvesting

One may not harvest any of the five species of grain growing in Eretz Yisrael before the barley for the Omer offering has been harvested. The verse states: “You shall bring an Omer, the first of your harvest, to the kohen” (Vayikra 23:10), teaching that the Omer offering must be the first grain harvested. One who harvests earlier violates this positive mitzva. Nevertheless, the grain that was harvested becomes permitted after the Omer is offered (MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:21). Even after the destruction of the Temple, this prohibition remains in effect. The prohibition applies specifically to harvesting with a tool; picking by hand is permitted (Pesaḥim 11a).

The prohibition applies only to grain grown in a place from which the Omer offering may be brought. Therefore, grain grown in beit ha-shelaḥin – manually irrigated fields in valleys – may be harvested before the Omer, since such grain is of inferior quality and unfit for the Omer offering. The Sages, however, decreed that this grain may not be gathered into a heap before the day of the Omer, lest people come to eat it while it is still forbidden as ḥadash. They could have prohibited even its harvest, but because delaying the harvest could damage the crop, they limited the decree to gathering the grain into a heap (Menaḥot 71a; Shita Mekubetzet to Menaḥot 71a; MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:13).

Nowadays, in cases where harvesting is permitted, one may harvest with a combine, even though it separates the kernels from the ears during harvesting and gathers them in a grain bin.[2]

One may likewise harvest new grain growing among young saplings, since such grain is sparse and unfit for the Omer. The Sages also did not prohibit harvesting it, because leaving it in place would damage the young saplings. It is also permitted to harvest new grain for the sake of a mitzva, such as clearing a field to make room for people to sit at a mourners’ meal or for a Torah class. This, too, is because the prohibition applies only to harvesting grain fit for the Omer for personal use, not to harvesting done for the sake of a mitzva.

To prevent people from mistakenly eating this grain, the Sages decreed that it may not be tied into sheaves in the usual way. Rather, it must be left in small, untied bundles called tzevatim. By minimizing the processing, people would remember that the grain is forbidden as ḥadash (Menaḥot 71a, 72a; Rashi to Menaḥot 71a; MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:15–16). [3]

Before the day of the Omer, one may harvest grain that has not yet reached one-third of its growth if it is being cut for animal fodder, since the harvest is directed primarily toward fodder rather than the kernels. “One-third growth” is the stage at which grain is fit for human consumption in pressing circumstances and, if planted, will grow. [4]

Outside Eretz Yisrael, one may harvest grain before the day of the Omer, since the Omer offering may not be brought from grain grown outside the Land. However, authorities disagree over whether the Sages’ decree against gathering the grain into a heap applies there as well.


[2]. Some have suggested that after the destruction of the Temple, the prohibition on harvesting before the Omer ceased to apply (Keren Ora; Rashash). However, the wording of Rambam (MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:13) and Shita Mekubetzet to Menaḥot 84a, citing Rabbeinu Yitzḥak, indicates that the prohibition remains in effect. This is also the view of Sha’agat Aryeh Ha-ḥadashot, Ḥadash §8, and Malbushei Yom Tov, vol. 2, Ḥovat Karka §11.

Grain from beit ha-shelaḥin – manually irrigated fields – and from valley fields may be harvested before the Omer because it is not of choice quality and is therefore unfit for the Omer. According to Maharam Ḥalawa, this leniency applies specifically to beit ha-shelaḥin located in valleys, where the produce is so inferior that it is invalid for the Omer even after the fact. According to Tosafot, Ran, and Rabbeinu Peretz, however, the leniency applies even to grain that would be valid for the Omer after the fact, as the Mishna teaches regarding beit ha-shelaḥin or valleys (Menaḥot 85a).

Even so, the Sages prohibited harvesting even grain whose harvest is permitted by Torah law, lest one come to eat it while it is still ḥadash. When delaying the harvest would cause loss, however, they permitted harvesting it, provided the grain was not gathered into a heap. This unusual handling would remind people not to eat it. Although several Rishonim write that the leniency depends on the potential loss involved (Rabbeinu Gershom; Tosafot; Ran; Shita Mekubetzet), it seems clear that financial loss itself cannot override a Torah prohibition. Rather, they mean that the basic leniency rests on the fact that grain grown in these places is unfit for the Omer. The Sages prohibited harvesting it only as a safeguard, lest one come to eat it, and they did not impose that decree in a case of financial loss. This is explicit in Meiri (Pesaḥim 11a). It also accords with the practice of the people of Jericho, who harvested before the Omer with the approval of the Sages (Menaḥot 71a); the Rishonim explain that this was because the Omer was not brought from there (Rashi; Rivan; R. Yeshaya di Trani; Shita Mekubetzet).

Apparently, “grain of the valleys” refers to grain grown in Jericho and the Jordan Valley. Because rainfall there is sparse, the grain required irrigation, like beit ha-shelaḥin. It was also unfit for the Omer because the region’s warm climate caused it to ripen early; by the time the Omer was offered, it was already past its prime and no longer of choice quality. It may also be that grain grown through manual irrigation is generally of lower quality than grain grown naturally. In any event, the same ruling appears to apply to the Beit She’an Valley, where the hot climate causes barley to ripen well before Pesaḥ; by Pesaḥ, it is no longer fresh or of superior quality and is therefore unfit for the Omer. This also fits the reasoning that manually irrigated grain is of lesser quality, for even though more rain falls there, supplemental manual watering is still needed.

Harvesting with a combine: Today, grain is normally harvested with a combine, which separates the kernels from the ears as it harvests. Therefore, wherever harvesting is permitted, it may be done with a combine as well. There is no need to prohibit this because of the rabbinic decree against gathering grain into a heap, since that decree may be understood to apply specifically to a heap of grain, not to combine harvesting, which is an entirely different process. One could argue the opposite: combine harvesting is more severe, because it brings the grain closer to an edible state. Nevertheless, today people do not normally eat raw grain, so the concern that someone may come to eat it does not apply. In addition, prohibiting the standard method of harvesting with a combine would cause enormous financial loss. It therefore stands to reason that just as the Sages waived their rabbinic prohibition against harvesting in cases of financial loss, they would likewise waive the prohibition against gathering grain into a heap in cases of loss. See R. Shlomo Rosenfeld’s article in Teḥumin 7.

[3]. A practical issue concerns harvesting the edges of grain fields to create firebreaks and prevent fire from spreading. At first glance, the Gemara permits harvesting only for the sake of a mitzva, as Rambam writes (MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:15). Some, however, infer from the Gemara that any harvesting not meant to prepare grain for eating is permitted (Sefat Emet to Menaḥot 71a; AHS, Kodashim 116:8). According to this view, harvesting to create firebreaks would be permitted. By contrast, Be-ohalah Shel Torah 4:34 forbids harvesting for fire prevention, since it may involve a Torah prohibition. He adds that one should not rely on the minority view that the prohibition on harvesting ceased after the destruction of the Temple. He does, however, permit harvesting before the crop has reached one-third of its growth.

In that case, the harvest must be specifically for animal fodder, since the poskim write that the leniency before one-third growth applies only for animal use (Mahari Kurkus; Kesef Mishneh to MT, Laws of Temidin u-Musafin 7:15). This can be understood as follows: the harvest is directed not toward the grain kernels, but toward the ears, which are the animal fodder. Still, it seems that one may follow the rulings of Sefat Emet and AHS, because the Sages’ permission to harvest specifically for a mitzva applies only when the harvested grain will be eaten. When the harvest is not done for eating and the grain itself will not be eaten, the prohibition does not apply in the first place. This resembles melakha she-eina tzerikha le-gufa – labor not performed for its essential purpose, and therefore not the primary form of that labor.

Nevertheless, ideally one should have a gentile do the harvesting. The Gemara states that the Sages were uncertain whether it is forbidden to instruct a gentile to perform a Torah prohibition that is not punishable by court-imposed death, and most authorities rule stringently and forbid it (Bava Metzia 90a; see Peninei Halakha: Shevi’it 5, note 9). In the case of a positive mitzva, however, which carries no lashes, such as harvesting before the Omer, it appears that instructing a gentile is permitted. Indeed, Tosafot Ḥakhmei Anglia (Kiddushin 38b) permit telling a gentile to harvest ḥadash.

[4]. Authorities disagree about what qualifies as one-third growth. The main view is that it is the stage at which the fruit or grain becomes fit for consumption in pressing circumstances, similar to the halakhic stage known as ma’akhal ben Derusai. It is also the point at which the seed becomes viable and can be used for planting, as stated in Tosefta, Terumot, end of ch. 2; Yerushalmi, Ḥalla 1:3; and Yerushalmi, Shevi’it 2:7. Rambam codifies this (MT, Laws of Tithes 2:5; Laws of Terumot 2:10), as does SA YD 331:15. In grain, this stage is reached at the end of the milk stage, when the kernel’s contents begin to change from liquid to a waxy consistency. See Peninei Halakha: Shevi’it 3, note 6.

5. Ḥadash in the Diaspora

Eretz Yisrael is the home of the Jewish people and the place best suited for fulfilling the Torah (Sifrei to Devarim 11:18; Ramban to Vayikra 18:25; below, 13:1). It is also easier to observe the mitzva of ḥadash in Eretz Yisrael, since grain is sown at the beginning of winter and ripens around Pesaḥ. As a result, the Omer permits all types of grain, and one need only refrain from harvesting or eating grain that ripened before Pesaḥ until the day of the Omer. By contrast, in countries where rain falls during the summer as well, sowing is sometimes delayed until after Pesaḥ, so that part of the crop remains forbidden as ḥadash until the Omer of the following year. It was often difficult to determine which grain had taken root before the Omer and was therefore permitted, and which had taken root afterward and remained forbidden until the next Omer. Because this created a pressing difficulty, authorities permitted grain sold in the markets on the basis of a safek sfeika, a double doubt: perhaps the grain was from the previous year; and even if it was from the current year, perhaps it had taken root before the Omer; or perhaps it came from a place where all grain had taken root before the Omer (Ra’avya; Rosh). Others maintain that the prohibition of ḥadash outside Eretz Yisrael is rabbinic, and therefore, in any case of doubt, the halakha follows the lenient view (Or Zaru’a).

When Jews migrated to the cold countries of northern Europe, however, it became far more difficult to avoid violating the prohibition of ḥadash. Since the winters there are severe, grain was sown only toward the end of winter, and often took root only after the day of the Omer. In addition, summer grain was sometimes grown, since in some countries rain falls even in the summer. As a result, there were times when nearly all local grain was ḥadash, yet many ate it without checking whether it would remain forbidden until the following Omer. This was especially problematic with barley and oats, from which beer was made, as it was often clear that they came from the new crop.

In practice, some rabbis urged the public to observe the prohibition despite the difficulty. When the hardship became too great, others refrained from rebuking the community, knowing that their words would not be heeded. They invoked the principle, “Better that they sin inadvertently than deliberately” (Rosh; Rema YD 293:3).

Other authorities, faced with great hardship, sought grounds for leniency. Some maintained that, according to the lenient view in the Mishna, ḥadash does not apply outside Eretz Yisrael at all, and that this view may be relied upon in pressing circumstances (Taz YD 293:4). Others maintained that, according to the lenient view in the Mishna, ḥadash outside Eretz Yisrael is rabbinic and applies only in lands near Eretz Yisrael; therefore, in pressing circumstances, one may permit ḥadash in Europe and other lands far from Eretz Yisrael (AHS YD 293:20, based on Rabbeinu Barukh). Still others maintained that although ḥadash applies throughout the Diaspora, it applies only to grain owned by Jews, not to grain owned by gentiles (Baḥ). The halakhic authorities who issued these rulings were aware that, according to the overwhelming majority of Rishonim, the halakha follows the Tanna’im who maintain that ḥadash outside Eretz Yisrael is prohibited by Torah law even when the grain belongs to a gentile. Nevertheless, because of the great hardship, they relied on minority views and ruled leniently. In those countries, people depended so heavily on beer that it seemed as though “a person’s life truly depends on it” (Taz YD 293:4).[5]


[5]. The Mishna and Gemara in Kiddushin 37a record a dispute about ḥadash outside Eretz Yisrael. The first view – that of R. Yishmael – maintains that the prohibition does not apply there by Torah law. This is also the view of R. Elazar, son of R. Shimon b. Yoḥai. By contrast, R. Eliezer, R. Akiva, and R. Shimon b. Yoḥai maintain that the prohibition of ḥadash applies by Torah law even outside Eretz Yisrael, as the verse states: “an everlasting statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings” (Vayikra 23:14).

Tosafot to Menaḥot 68b explain, based on the statements of the Amoraim there, that all agree ḥadash applies in the Diaspora; the dispute is only whether it applies by Torah law or rabbinically. Sha’agat Aryeh, Ḥadash §1, writes similarly. Some, however, maintain that according to the first view, the prohibition of ḥadash does not apply outside Eretz Yisrael at all (Baḥ; Taz).

In practice, the overwhelming majority of Rishonim rule in accordance with R. Eliezer, maintaining that ḥadash applies by Torah law even outside Eretz Yisrael. First, this is the view of most Tanna’im. Second, this is the ruling of an anonymous Mishna, formulated as a practical halakhic ruling: “Ḥadash is prohibited by Torah law everywhere; orla is a received law; and kilayim is rabbinic” (Mishna, Orla 3:9). The same conclusion emerges from the practice of the later Amoraim – the sages of Rav Ashi’s academy and Ravina – who treated the prohibition of ḥadash in the Diaspora as Torah law (Menaḥot 68b).

This is the ruling of Rif, Rosh, Ramah (R. Meir Ha-Levi Abulafia), Meiri, Mordekhai, and Ritva in their comments to Kiddushin 37a. It is also the ruling of Rabbeinu Yona, Rokeaḥ, Rabbeinu Yeruḥam, Ra’avya, Sefer ha-Ḥinukh, Kol Bo, Semag, Semak, Rambam (MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 10:2), Tur, and SA YD 293:2.

In Europe, however, observing the prohibition proved very difficult, and authorities therefore sought grounds for leniency. A few Rishonim maintain that the prohibition of ḥadash outside Eretz Yisrael is rabbinic (Or Zaru’a; Maharam, Me’il Tzedek). Accordingly, in cases of doubt, one may be lenient in pressing circumstances. According to Rabbeinu Barukh, cited in Responsa Ha-Rosh 2:1, ḥadash in the Diaspora is rabbinic and applies only in lands near Eretz Yisrael; AHS YD 293:19–21 develops this lenient approach.

Taz YD 293:4 maintains that according to the first view recorded in the Mishna in Kiddushin 37a, there is no prohibition of ḥadash in the Diaspora at all. Although the Rishonim ruled in accordance with the stringent majority view among the Tanna’im and Amoraim, Taz maintains that their ruling was not absolute. Therefore, in a time of need, one may rely on the lenient minority view (see Peninei Halakha: Shevi’it Ve-yovel 7, note 2). Some were also lenient when buying grain from a gentile, since according to Riva, cited by R. Avigdor, there is no prohibition of ḥadash on grain owned by a gentile in the Diaspora. According to Baḥ, there is no prohibition of ḥadash on grain owned by a gentile even in Eretz Yisrael. Leḥem Mishneh to Mishna, Terumot 11:2 suggests that beverages produced from grain are not prohibited.

Although most Aḥaronim maintain that the halakha follows the overwhelming majority of Rishonim – that ḥadash in the Diaspora is prohibited by Torah law – and that one should therefore be stringent when possible (MB 489:45), many relied on the lenient minority opinions because of pressing circumstances (AHS).

6. Mixtures and Cases of Doubt

If there is doubt whether grain or grain-containing products are prohibited as ḥadash, they may not be eaten, since one must be stringent in cases of doubt involving Torah prohibitions. This is the practice in Eretz Yisrael: any grain with kosher certification from the Chief Rabbinate is presumed to be free of any concern for ḥadash.

In principle, this should be the practice in the Diaspora as well. Since old grain is now readily available, and the situation is no longer one of pressing need, one should be stringent in cases of doubt concerning ḥadash (see Igrot Moshe, YD 4:46:4). In practice, however, most kashrut agencies in the Diaspora are lenient in such cases, relying on arguments developed in earlier times, when old grain was very difficult to obtain. One who wishes to be lenient outside Eretz Yisrael has authorities upon whom to rely. The more difficult it is to obtain food without concern for ḥadash, the more room there is to rely on the lenient views.

In Eretz Yisrael, however, one should not be lenient, even though most grain is imported. The overwhelming majority of authorities rule stringently, and this has long been the accepted practice in Eretz Yisrael, where cases of doubt can be avoided without difficulty. Therefore, any grain-containing product bearing overseas kashrut certification but lacking Rabbinate approval may not be eaten unless it states explicitly that it was made from old grain or was supervised by a rabbi who is careful about the prohibition of ḥadash, since most Diaspora kashrut agencies are known to be lenient when ḥadash is in doubt.

If ḥadash flour became mixed with other flour, it is not nullified, even if the other flour is a thousand times its quantity. Since ḥadash will become permitted after the day of the Omer, it is a davar she-yesh lo matirin – something that will eventually become permitted – and such an item is not nullified when mixed with its own kind (Nedarim 58a; MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 15:10).

If, however, the mixture containing the ḥadash is ḥametz, it cannot be kept until the Omer, since the ḥametz must be destroyed before Pesaḥ. Therefore, if the mixture contains sixty times as much permitted food as ḥadash, the ḥadash is nullified and the mixture may be eaten (Ḥokhmat Adam 53; Binat Adam 28). The same applies if the mixture is a food that will spoil before the day of the Omer: the ḥadash is nullified in sixty (Ḥok Yaakov 489:24).

If ḥadash flour became mixed into a different kind of food, it is nullified in sixty, and one need not wait until the day of the Omer. Even a davar she-yesh lo matirin does not prohibit a food of a different kind unless it can impart flavor to it. Once there is sixty times as much permitted food, it can no longer impart flavor and is therefore nullified (SA YD 102:1).

Chapter Contents

Peninei Halakha We use cookies to ensure the website functions properly and improve user experience. You can choose which types of cookies to enable.
Cookie Selection