Posts page - Page 19 of 42 - Peninei Halakha

09. Soaps, Cosmetics, and Disposable Kelim

Poskim disagree about whether body ointments that contain ḥametz may be used on Pesaḥ. While soaps and creams are not made from ḥametz, they sometimes contain grain alcohol or other ḥametz derivatives, leading to queries about their status on Pesaḥ.

Some say that applying an ointment is equivalent, by rabbinic enactment, to drinking. Therefore, even if the ḥametz in these products is not fit for a dog’s consumption, it retains the status of ḥametz because it is suitable for anointing, and thus it is forbidden to use them on Pesaḥ. Accordingly, one must use soaps, shampoo, and creams that are kosher for Pesaḥ.

Others maintain that the Sages only equated the application of ointment to drinking with regard to Yom Kippur and anointing with oil consecrated as teruma (priestly gifts). All other Torah prohibitions relate to eating alone, not anointing. Although it is forbidden to derive benefit from ḥametz, the ḥametz in these products was rendered unfit for a dog’s consumption even before Pesaḥ began and thus lost the status of ḥametz. It is therefore permissible to derive benefit from them and apply them to the body during Pesaḥ.

Since this dispute relates to rabbinic law, the halakha accords with the lenient opinion, and meticulously observant individuals act stringently. We must distinguish between four gradations of products containing ḥametz, of which the middle two are subject to dispute:

Toothpastes must be certified kosher for Pesaḥ because they are flavored and thus like any other food product.
Creams that are absorbed into the skin, flavorless lipstick, and perfumes that contain alcohol need not be certified kosher for Pesaḥ, in keeping with the lenient opinion, since they are not fit for consumption and generally do not contain ḥametz Nonetheless, many choose to be stringent and buy creams and perfumes that are certified kosher for Pesaḥ.
Soaps and shampoos warrant even more room for leniency because they are designed to clean, not to be absorbed into the skin. Nevertheless, some are stringent.
Detergents, shoe polish, and the like do not require any kosher certification. Even dishwashing detergents need no certification because their taste is foul. Even if these substances were mixed with ḥametz, its taste was befouled before Pesaḥ and it is no longer considered ḥametz.^[11]

Occasionally uncertainties and concerns arise when ḥametz is found in various products, like paper cups, tin foil, baking sheets, and paper tablecloths. However, there is no need to be concerned, as they have no discernible taste. Unfortunately, these doubts arise for reasons of economics and marketing, not because of any halakhic reasons.

[11]. The Rishonim disagree about the equation of anointing with drinking: some apply it only to Yom Kippur and teruma oil, while others hold that it applies to other prohibitions, though only on the rabbinic level. The question arises with regard to soap made of lard, and many Aḥaronim tend toward stringency if the item is for enjoyment and leniently if it is needed for health reasons (see Yeḥaveh Da’at 4:53). They incline toward leniency if the lard’s taste has been befouled (AHS YD 117:29). Regarding Pesaḥ, there is a more stringent aspect, namely, that one is forbidden to derive any benefit from ḥametz, but there is also a more lenient aspect, namely, that the ḥametz lost its status when it became inedible before Pesaḥ, making it less strict than something that had been forbidden from the outset. In practice, Responsa Sho’el U-meishiv 3:2:146 states that one may keep soap that contains ḥametz over Pesaḥ since its taste has been befouled. It does not address whether or not the soap may be used on Pesaḥ. Responsa Divrei Malkiel 4:24:43 states that one may not use cosmetics that contain wheat-derived alcohol, since the alcohol helps spread their scent and is thus significant. The alcohol is not batel since it can be isolated from the rest of the mixture. Responsa Ḥazon Naḥum §56 states that the law follows the current situation, namely, that the taste of the ḥametz has been befouled, and the mixture is thus permissible. Ḥazon Ish, Demai 15:1 suggests that only something edible may not be used as an ointment. Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:62 rules leniently in the case of an ointment that contains ḥametz that is used for health purposes. Bedikat Ḥametz U-vi’uro 2:43 summarizes the topic and rules stringently unless it is uncertain whether a product contains ḥametz, in which case one may be lenient. It seems to me that even those who rule stringently should distinguish between fat-based soap and contemporary soaps: fat-based soaps are absorbed in the skin and may be considered ointments, whereas contemporary soaps merely clean and remove dirt from the body, but are not absorbed into it. I have thus distinguished between ointments and creams, which are absorbed into the body, and soaps and shampoos, which are not (though hair conditioner may be more akin to an ointment). As a matter of practice, I heard from R. Nachum Rabinovitch that he rules leniently regarding all products unfit for a dog’s consumption, as did his mentor, R. Pinchas Hirschprung. This is the opinion of R. Dov Lior as well.

In reality, the vast majority of cosmetic products produced in Israel do not contain wheat-derived alcohol. Even most products from abroad do not contain wheat-derived alcohol, since it is more expensive than potato-derived alcohol. However, a few products in fact contain wheat-derived alcohol, and according to the stringent views one should not use them on Pesaḥ. Still, when one has a product and is not sure whether it contains wheat-derived alcohol, even if he is normally stringent he may be lenient, based on a combination of several uncertainties and doubts.

Another issue arises regarding the use of products that contain wheat germ oil, which is a source of vitamin E, since it is unclear whether liquids exuded by wheat are considered ḥametz. According to Rav Kook (Oraḥ Mishpat, p. 129), even if these liquids are forbidden, they were already batel be-shishim before Pesaḥ and are not ḥozer ve-ne’or on Pesaḥ. Moreover, many authorities maintain that even if this liquid was considered ḥametz, since it is not fit for consumption it loses its status as ḥametz. Another issue arises regarding lotions, although it is not certain that wheat starch-based lotions are considered ḥametz, and moreover they are inedible. Therefore, in practice, one may be lenient and use any cosmetic product not fit for consumption.

01. The Origins of the Ashkenazic Custom

The ḥametz prohibited by the Torah is produced from one of the five types of grain: wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye. Other species such as rice and millet, even if they rise, do not undergo the same fermentation process as the five cereal grains, and they may be eaten on Pesaḥ. Although one Tanna, R. Yoḥanan b. Nuri, maintains that rice is also a cereal grain and forbidden by the Torah in its leavened state, the rest of the Sages maintain that even if rice rises, it may be eaten on Pesaḥ (Pesaḥim 35a). This was the practice of the great Tanna’im and Amora’im. In fact, Rava ate rice at the Seder (ibid. 114b).

During the era of the Rishonim, over 800 years ago, the Jews of the Rhineland would refrain from eating kitniyot^[1] on Pesaḥ. Initially, only some communities observed this stringency, but within a several generations the custom had spread to all Ashkenazic communities.

Three principal reasons for this custom have been offered: A) Since kitniyot are cooked in the same manner as grains, in a pot, there is concern that if people cook rice on Pesaḥ they will end up mistakenly cooking forbidden types of grain. B) Since kitniyot, like cereal grains, are often made into flour, if the unlearned masses see pious Jews cooking and baking foods with kitniyot flour without concern for it becoming ḥametz, they are liable to do the same with grain flour as well. The rabbis of the Talmud were not concerned about this because, in their day, Jewish tradition was clear and established. However, the tribulations of the exile and the scattering of Jewish communities gave rise to a fear that some Jews would be cut off from tradition and come to forget what is forbidden and what is permitted. Eating kitniyot on Pesaḥ would cause them to err and eat forbidden cereal grains without taking care that they do not become ḥametz. C) Grain and kitniyot kernels are similar in appearance and are kept in the same storehouses for long periods. It is therefore eminently possible that wheat or barley kernels would find their way into kitniyot, and when the kitniyot are cooked the grain will become ḥametz. This concern persists today, because the same storehouses are used for grain and kitniyot, and they are not usually cleaned out when switching from one species to another. Thus, in fact, when checking different types of kitniyot one can find kernels of grain. This is due to the fact that in order to replenish the fields and soil, crop rotation was instituted: the same field would be planted with grain one year and legumes (which help replenish the soil) the next year. However, plants of the previous crop inevitably remain in the field. Therefore, if a fenugreek crop was grown after a wheat crop, some wheat will sprout among the fenugreek, and some kernels of wheat will be found in the harvested crop of legumes. The same applies to all other species. Experience shows that sometimes the quantity of grain kernels is more than one sixtieth of the entire kitniyot crop. This problem applies to those species of kitniyot that physically resemble cereal grain.

[1]. [Editor’s note: we have refrained from translating the term “kitniyot” since there is no precise equivalent in English, and an imprecise translation would be misleading. In earlier contexts (such as the laws of kilayim, which prohibit cultivating dissimilar species in close proximity), kitniyot referred specifically to members of the legume family, and indeed, legumes specifically were introduced into European crop-rotation systems in the medieval era. As currently used, the category of kitniyot includes species that are not legumes, and not every member of the legume family is considered kitniyot.]

02. The Sephardic Custom

During the era of the Rishonim, all Sephardic communities ate kitniyot and rice during Pesaḥ, though they were careful to pick out forbidden grains. Indeed, R. Yosef Karo writes (Beit Yosef §453) that nobody worries about “such things except for Ashkenazim.” This is the custom of most contemporary Sephardic communities.

However, some leading Sephardic Aḥaronim have written that many pious Jews refrain from eating rice during Pesaḥ because of a case in which some wheat was discovered in rice even after it had been checked several times (Pri Ḥadash, Ḥida). The Jews of Izmir have a custom not to eat rice on Pesaḥ (Lev Ḥayim 2:94), and many Jews of Morocco refrain from eating rice and other types of dry kitniyot on Pesaḥ. In Baghdad, many laypeople did not eat rice on Pesaḥ. For those who eat rice on Pesaḥ, the ruling was that they must first check it two or three times (Ben Ish Ḥai, Year One, Tzav 41). Each person should continue his ancestral custom. Where there is doubt or difficulty in doing so, it is best to consult a rabbinic authority.

Certain spices such as cumin, turmeric, and fenugreek often have grains mixed in and should not be eaten without a prior meticulous inspection.

Nowadays rice is stored in the same packing-houses as flours and semolina. Therefore, those who eat rice on Pesaḥ must buy packages that are certified kosher for Pesaḥ or check the rice thoroughly three times (see Ama Devar 1:62) .

03. Spouses from Different Communities

The following question arises frequently nowadays: What should a married couple do if one spouse comes from a family that refrains from kitniyot and the other from a family that eats kitniyot? A similar matter was addressed by one of the great Rishonim, R. Shimon b. Tzemaḥ Duran (Tashbetz 3:179), who writes that they obviously cannot eat together at the same table while food permissible to one is forbidden to the other. Therefore, the wife must adopt her husband’s customs, for “a man’s wife is like his own body.” We learn that when a Yisraelit marries a kohen, she attains the status of a kohenet, and she may eat teruma. Conversely, a kohenet who marries a Yisrael becomes a Yisraelit, for whom teruma is forbidden. We likewise learn from the laws of kehuna that if the husband dies, and she has no child from him, she reverts to her family custom, but if she has a child from him, she keeps his custom. If she remarries, she adopts her husband’s practices. (When it comes to determining Jewishness, the mother is determinant; if she is Jewish, so is her child, regardless of the father’s status.)

Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe OḤ 1:158) adds that the wife’s status is similar to that of one who moves to a place where the accepted custom is different from his own. If he intends to settle there, he relinquishes his previous custom and accepts the custom of his new home (based on SA YD 214:2, OḤ 468:4, and MB 14 ad loc.). When a woman marries, it is as if she moves permanently into her husband’s house, and she must therefore adopt his customs. Accordingly, if an Ashkenazic woman marries a Sephardic man, she may eat kitniyot during Pesaḥ and need not perform hatarat nedarim (annulment of vows).^[2]

[2]. Igrot Moshe OḤ 1:158 proves that this is a Torah law from the fact that the Torah exempts a married woman from the obligation to honor her parents, since this mitzva would require her to actively clothe and feed her parents if necessary, and her obligations to her household take priority (SA YD 240:17; obviously if there is no clash between the two obligations, the great mitzva of honoring her parents is incumbent upon her). Thus, according to the Torah, a woman’s place is in her husband’s home.

Igrot Moshe also asserts that she need not perform hatarat nedarim. MB 468:14 implies the same in stating that one who moves from one locale to another must behave according to the custom of the new place. It is implied that since this is the halakha, there is no need for hatarat nedarim. This is also the opinion of Kaf Ha-ḥayim 468:43. Additionally, in extenuating circumstances even Ashkenazic communities did not accept the custom of refraining from kitniyot and can therefore be lenient in situations of famine or sickness (MB 453:7). Similarly, two different customs in one household would certainly cause tension. However, Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 16:13 states that she must perform hatarat nedarim, and Ḥazon Ovadia (p. 56 and n. 10) states that it is better to perform hatarat nedarim. Nevertheless, in practice, she need not perform hatarat nedarim, and this is the common practice.

May Ashkenazim perform hatarat nedarim and eat kitniyot? Mahari Ben Lev §38 states one who refrained from eating kitniyot because he thought they are ḥametz may perform hatarat nedarim, but one who knew, or whose ancestors knew, that kitniyot is merely a stringent custom may not perform hatarat nedarim. Accordingly, Ashkenazim may not perform hatarat nedarim and eat kitniyot. According to Pri Ḥadash §468, one need not perform hatarat nedarim to annul a custom that originated in a mistake, and if they knew that it is just a stringent custom, it is possible to perform hatarat nedarim. (However, we need to examine whether he would apply this reasoning to a custom accepted by an entire community; perhaps even according to Pri Ḥadash hatarat nedarim would not be effective in such a case.) Ḥatam Sofer OḤ §122 upholds the opinion of Mahari Ben Lev. This is in fact the customary practice: we do not find Ashkenazim performing hatarat nedarim to eat kitniyot.

04. Prohibited Species

The familiar foods included in this custom are: rice, alfalfa, peas, millet, sorghum, chickpeas, fenugreek seeds, sunflower seeds, mustard, buckwheat (kusemet, not to be confused with kusmin – spelt – which is a forbidden cereal grain), cumin, vetch, black-eyed peas, soy, mung beans, lentils, fava beans, lupin beans, poppy seeds, flaxseed, pulse, caraway, hemp seeds, common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris), sesame seeds, lupine seeds, corn, clover seed, and tamarind fruit. Products made from kitniyot – corn flakes, corn flour, and rice cakes, for example – are also included in the custom. Saffron was originally called “karkom” in Hebrew and is permitted, and turmeric, the Modern Hebrew karkom, is also permitted, but if there is concern that wheat was mixed into the saffron, it is forbidden. Mustard and flaxseed are not kitniyot, but the custom is to forbid them because they grow in pods like kitniyot.

Dill and coriander are not kitniyot, but one must examine them well because they often contain wheat.

There are differing customs regarding peanuts. In Jerusalem and many other places people refrain from eating them (Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:60), but in Greater Lithuania they were customarily eaten. One who does not know whether his family was stringent in this regard may eat them (Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63).

Potato flour is permitted on Pesaḥ. There is no contention that based on the customary prohibition of kitniyot anything from which flour can be made should be forbidden. Rather, the custom only includes what the great Ashkenazic Rishonim forbade. Since potatoes had not yet arrived in Europe then, they are not included in the prohibition (ibid.).

Regarding quinoa, some are strict due to its similarity to some types of kitniyot. Some are lenient since the customary prohibition does not apply to quinoa, which entered our diets only recently. Moreover, its seeds are much smaller than those of cereal grains, making them easy to distinguish. In practice, the primary view is the lenient one, as long as one thoroughly inspects the quinoa.

05. Rules Governing This Custom

People who adhere to the custom of not eating kitniyot may keep them in the house during Pesaḥ and derive benefit from them, for example, by feeding them to animals (Rema 453:1).

One who does not eat kitniyot on Pesaḥ may cook them for somebody who does, but it is recommended that he use some sort of reminder that he is not cooking for himself. It is likewise permissible for a storeowner to sell kitniyot during Pesaḥ; however, if there might be wheat kernels among the kitniyot that make up more than one sixtieth of the mixture, the storeowner may not sell the kitniyot, because this could cause customers to transgress the ḥametz prohibition. It would be better to sell such kitniyot along with the ḥametz.

If kitniyot fall into a cooked food, they should be removed, and whatever cannot be removed is batel in the majority of the dish. If, however, such a large amount of kitniyot falls in that they become the majority, the dish is considered a kitniyot dish and its consumption is forbidden (Rema 453:1; MB 8-9 ad loc.).

It is permissible for one who does not eat kitniyot on Pesaḥ to eat from and cook with clean kelim in which kitniyot were previously cooked.^[3]

[3]. Kitniyot in a mixture are batel in a simple majority (batel be-rov). Although the implication of Terumat Ha-deshen is that it is only batel be-shishim, the Aḥaronim rule that it is batel be-rov; so state SAH 453:5; Ḥayei Adam 127:1; Ḥavot Ya’ir §6; and Eliya Rabba §4. All of this only applies ex post facto, when the kitniyot were found to be mixed in. However, it is forbidden to mix kitniyot with permissible food le-khatḥila (Kaf Ha-ḥayim 453:25). If one who does not eat kitniyot visits one who does eat kitniyot and there is nothing else for the guest to eat, he may, if absolutely necessary, eat the non-kitniyot food from a mixture containing kitniyot. For example, he may eat potatoes and zucchini from a dish containing kitniyot, even though the food he is eating absorbed some flavor from the kitniyot. If the mixture is so complete that the components cannot be separated, he may eat from it, as the kitniyot are batel be-rov. However, if they knew that they would be hosting him, he should not eat from a dish in which the taste of kitniyot is discernible, as it would be considered a dish into which kitniyot were mixed le-khatḥila. Only if they intended to make him the dish without kitniyot, in which the kitniyot got mixed in accidentally, is it permissible for him to eat.

Those who abstain from kitniyot may still eat food cooked in a pot in which kitniyot had been cooked and that has been cleaned well, since kitniyot are not considered entirely forbidden.

Some maintain that the prohibition of kitniyot begins at the onset of Pesaḥ (Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 16:10 n. 42), and under pressing circumstances one may rely on this view. In practice, however, the mainstream opinion is that the custom of kitniyot corresponds to the prohibition of ḥametz. Thus, kitniyot are forbidden from the time that ḥametz is prohibited (Ḥok Yaakov 471:2; Responsa Maharsham 1:183; Shevet Ha-Levi 3:31).

When the seventh day of Pesaḥ is a Friday, it is permissible (for those who are not keeping an eighth day) to eat kitniyot on Shabbat, though the common practice is not to prepare them on Pesaḥ. Nevertheless, it is permissible to accept kitniyot from someone whose custom is to eat kitniyot on Pesaḥ, and if someone wishes to prepare kitniyot, it is not forbidden.

06. Kitniyot That Never Touched Water and Kitniyot Oils

We are not stricter with kitniyot than we are with the five cereal grains, so whatever is acceptable regarding these grains is kosher for kitniyot, too. Thus, kitniyot that have not come into contact with water, or that have come into contact with water but were not left for more than 18 minutes before being cooked (like matza), may be eaten. Some poskim are stringent in this respect, but most are lenient.^[4]

The poskim disagree about oils and whiskeys made from kitniyot. The lenient view is that the kitniyot prohibition does not apply to oil extracted from them, while according to the stringent view, kitniyot oil has the same status as kitniyot that may not be eaten according to custom. There is a middle position that asserts that if the kitniyot had been rinsed in water (for example, as part of the malting process) they become forbidden, and the oil extracted from them is prohibited. However, if they are ground and made into oil without having been moistened, they are permitted.^[5]

Soybean, cottonseed, and canola (rapeseed) oils are not included in the prohibition. Many are stringent about soybean and canola oils, but whoever wishes to be lenient may be so. The widespread custom regarding cottonseed oil is to be lenient.^[6]

Lecithin extracted from rapeseed and added to chocolate is not included in the kitniyot prohibition, though some are stringent.^[7]

Chocolate and candy that contain kitniyot that are batel be-rov, even if they are labeled “Kosher for Pesaḥ only for those who eat kitniyot,” may technically be eaten even by those who do not eat kitniyot, because the kitniyot in these products are added before Pesaḥ and are batel be-rov. In addition, these products generally contain kitniyot oils, which, according to several leading poskim, are not included in the custom to prohibit kitniyot. In practice, however, since many people are stringent in this respect, kosher certification agencies label them as kosher for Pesaḥ only for those who eat kitniyot.^[8]

[4]. Most authorities are not stricter about kitniyot than about the cereal grains (SAH 453:5; Ḥayei Adam 127:1; Responsa Maharsham 1:183; Be’er Yitzḥak §11; Responsa Marḥeshet §3; and Rav Kook’s Oraḥ Mishpat §111). Some, however, are more stringent, including Sho’el U-meishiv 1:1:175 and Ma’amar Mordechai §32. Their rationale is that no one would understand these distinctions since kitniyot do not become ḥametz. Additionally, they were concerned that making the kitniyot exactly like the cereal grains would mislead people to think they could use kitniyot to fulfill the mitzva of matza. The halakha follows the lenient view, as they are a majority, and also because, in general, halakha follows the lenient view in disputes about custom.

The Rishonim also debate whether or not scalding works for kitniyot, since scalding any of the five cereal grains technically eliminates the possibility of its leavening, though the Ge’onim agree that no one knows how to scald grains properly (SA 454:3). However, according to Or Zaru’a 2:256, since the prohibition of kitniyot is a custom, it is permissible to eat scalded kitniyot, while Mordechai and Rabbeinu Peretz’s glosses to Smak §222 are stringent.

[5]. Terumat Ha-deshen §113 explains that oil extracted from kitniyot is prohibited because the kitniyot are first malted. This is also the opinion of Rema 453:1. The implication of Terumat Ha-deshen is that if the kitniyot were not malted, their oil would be permitted. R. Yitzḥak Elḥanan Spektor in Responsa Be’er Yitzḥak §11 rules even more leniently, explaining that if the kitniyot were checked to ensure that no grain seeds were mixed in, the oil extracted from them is permitted, since the act of checking proves that the person is familiar with the prohibition. Similarly, Responsa Emek Halakha §134 permits whiskey distilled from kitniyot, as the prohibition applies to kitniyot themselves, not the liquid extracted from them.

Conversely, other Aḥaronim maintain that oil extracted from kitniyot is prohibited even when the kitniyot are not malted (Nishmat Adam §33 and Avnei Nezer OḤ §373). However, Terumat Ha-deshen and Rema imply that such oil is permissible. This raises an apparent difficulty, since the oil will eventually be mixed with water, a process that would be forbidden to apply to grain. Thus, according to these authorities, the custom is to prohibit kitniyot in their seed and flour state, but not in their oil state. One need not be concerned that grain kernels got mixed in with the kitniyot, which would turn to ḥametz when the extracted oil is mixed with water, since any oil extracted from the grain is batel be-shishim and is not ḥozer ve-ne’or on Pesaḥ (SA 447:4). Additionally, it appears that even liquid that is exuded by grain does not become ḥametz, as explained in Oraḥ Mishpat §§111-112 and Responsa Marḥeshet §3. Tzemaḥ Tzedek permits this for poor people, provided that the kitniyot did not come into contact with water while in seed form.

Rav Kook has a well-known ruling (Oraḥ Mishpat 108-114) in which he broadly permitted sesame oil since not only are the seeds not malted, but the oil is also fried, which would prevent cereal grain from becoming ḥametz and is certainly enough to alleviate the problem of kitniyot. This idea is echoed by Avnei Nezer OḤ §533 with regard to rapeseed oil (this responsum appeared in 5458, 11 years before Rav Kook’s responsum). The Ḥasidic-Ashkenazic rabbinical court in Jerusalem vociferously opposed Rav Kook without any regard for the honor of Torah or of all of the poskim who had previously ruled even more leniently than Rav Kook on this matter. Rav Kook responded to them sharply, with erudition, and with strong proofs. As part of his response, he wrote (p. 123): “In truth, the path of my righteous and ingenious mentors, may their merit protect us and all of Israel, whom I merited to serve, was not to incline toward stringency when it was possible to be lenient, especially regarding issues without a strong basis in the words of the talmudic Sages. It is sufficient that we do not budge, God forbid, from the customs we accepted at the guidance of our rabbis, the poskim. But as for the details that can be argued one way or the other, certainly one who inclines toward a lenient ruling in an effort to be wise and benevolent is praiseworthy, as long as his words are based on the profundity of halakha and sound reasoning…” Furthermore, one who adds prohibitions to a prohibition that is not rooted in the law may violate a prohibition implied by a positive commandment (“lav ha-ba mi-khlal aseh”) according to Rashi’s comments in the first chapter of Beitza. As Rav Kook wrote (p. 126): “That which the Talmud often states, that we do not make decrees on top of other decrees, is derived from the following verse: ‘You shall safeguard My observances’ [‘u-shmartem et mishmarti’ – Vayikra 18:30]: make safeguards, i.e., enact decrees, for My observances, that is, for the Torah. But do not make safeguards for safeguards; do not make decrees upon decrees.” Against the claim that we must be increasingly stringent nowadays, Rav Kook writes: “I know the character of our contemporaries well: it is precisely when they see that everything that can be permitted based on the profundity of halakha is permitted, they will understand that when we do not permit it is based on the truth of Torah law. Consequently, many people will adhere to the Torah and heed the words of the Sages, God willing. On the other hand, when they discover that there are things that can be permitted according to the letter of the law, but the rabbis were not sensitive to the travails and hardships of the Jewish people and leave these matters in their prohibited state, it will cause a terrible desecration of God’s name, Heaven forbid. Ultimately, there will be an increase of outbursts saying about core elements of the Torah that if the rabbis want to permit it, they can; thus, the law will be perverted” (p. 126).

Based on this, technically, even if the sesame would be moistened, the oil that comes from it would be kosher for Pesaḥ, for halakha follows the lenient view with respect to laws that are based on custom. However, this contradicts the principle of equating kitniyot with grain, and it is proper to follow this principle. Therefore, I wrote in the main text that we follow the middle view, which is the prevailing halakhic view.

[6]. Soybean oil is produced without moistening the soybeans, so according to Rav Kook and most poskim it is not forbidden. Even if the soybeans would be moistened beforehand, the principle is that we follow the lenient view with respect to laws that are based on custom. Furthermore, it is questionable whether soybeans were even included in the prohibition of kitniyot, since they did not arrive in Europe until about 100 years ago. Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63 states that only what has customarily been accepted as prohibited is included in the custom. This is also the opinion of R. Dov Lior, the rabbi and head of the rabbinical court in Kiryat Arba.

Regarding cottonseed oil, Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:60 is lenient, citing a ruling attributed to R. Ḥayim Soloveitchik of Brisk. Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato (16:4) rules leniently in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein. However, Minḥat Ḥinukh 3:138 is stringent.

Peanut Oil: We learned in section 4 above that in Greater Lithuania the custom was to eat peanuts, as per Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63, since only items that are known not to have been eaten because of kitniyot are prohibited. Peanuts, which were discovered later on, were not included in the original prohibition. On the other hand, Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:60 and Ḥelkat Yaakov §97 prohibit peanuts but permit peanut oil. This is also the opinion of Melamed Le-ho’il OḤ §88. Seridei Esh 2:37 also echoes this idea, and quotes that Avnei Nezer OḤ §383 prohibited peanut oil. Practically, if one is unaware of a family custom to be stringent, he may be lenient, since this is an unclear custom.

[7]. The Badatz is strict about lecithin derived from rapeseed. However, according to halakha, the prohibition of kitniyot does not apply, as there are many uncertainties that mitigate toward leniency. Firstly, rapeseed is not a legume (the technical meaning of kitniyot), but a member of the Brassicaceae family of crucifers, whose fruit grips the stalk and whose seeds grow in pods, much like the mustard plant. Oil is extracted from these seeds. According to Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63, we do not forbid anything that was not explicitly prohibited by custom. Additionally, it is debatable whether the status of kitniyot can be applied to the seeds of a plant when it is clear that the plant itself is not kitniyot. However, according to Avnei Nezer OḤ §373, rapeseed oil is considered kitniyot, just like mustard (although even according to Avnei Nezer, if one boiled the seeds they would be permissible, as explained in §533). Moreover, we already saw that there are opinions that permit oil produced from any type of kitniyot. According to Maharsham 1:183, rapeseed oil is kosher for Pesaḥ since the oil is extracted without malting the seeds, and we have seen that most poskim are lenient in these situations, akin to the case of sesame oil. Finally, the oil is batel be-rov before Pesaḥ. According to Be’er Yitzḥak, any oil that was added to a mixture before Pesaḥ is batel. Ultimately, when there are so many uncertainties regarding a custom, we rule leniently. This is the ruling of R. Mordechai Eliyahu, as cited in Responsa Ama Devar 1:62.

[8]. According to Rema 453:1 and MB 9 ad loc., even if kitniyot were mixed in on Pesaḥ, they are batel be-rov, although clearly one may not do so le-khatḥila. In this case, the mixing took place before Pesaḥ, and not for the purpose of nullifying the prohibited ingredients in the majority of permissible ingredients, since they may be eaten according to Sephardic custom. Therefore, since they were batel be-rov before Pesaḥ, the mixture may be eaten on Pesaḥ. Additionally, R. Yitzḥak Elḥanan Spektor writes in Be’er Yitzḥak §11 (quoted in n. 4 above) that the prohibition of kitniyot does not apply to kitniyot oil that was checked before Pesaḥ. This is the opinion of R. Lior and R. Rabinovitch.

Lior also rules that string beans and fava beans in their pods are kosher for Pesaḥ, since in this state they are considered vegetables and not kitniyot. They were never included in the original prohibition since all of the concerns that were mentioned as the reason for the custom of kitniyot never applied to them. In practice, many people avoid eating them, but one who wishes to be lenient may do so.

07. Extenuating Circumstances, the Sick, and Babies

Even in Ashkenaz it was clear that the custom to refrain from kitniyot is not as severe as eating ḥametz. Therefore, under pressing circumstances like drought or famine, leading halakhic authorities permitted eating kitniyot. In actuality, rabbis have often disagreed whether the need was pressing enough to permit eating kitniyot. Some rabbis were inclined to be lenient, others to be stringent, and still others to permit kitniyot to the poor alone, requiring the wealthy to buy other types of foods. On such matters, one must follow the ruling of the accepted local rabbinic authorities.

Some Aḥaronim write that when applying these leniencies to kitniyot, it is better first to permit kitniyot that do not resemble cereal grain, and only permit rice, millet, and buckwheat when there is no choice (Nishmat Adam). Additionally, several Aḥaronim state that when applying these leniencies, one should first scald the kitniyot in boiling water, since scalding prevents even cereal grains from becoming ḥametz. Even though in practice we do not permit scalding cereal grains on Pesaḥ (see above, 2:7), when it is necessary to be lenient with kitniyot, it is best to take precautions to the degree possible (Ḥatam Sofer OḤ §122; MB 453:7).^[9]

One who is ill and needs to eat kitniyot may do so, even if he is not dangerously ill. For example, someone suffering from constipation may swallow flaxseed with water as a laxative. One may likewise feed kitniyot dishes to children who need it (Ḥayei Adam 127:6), though it is proper to set aside special kelim for this. Anytime one acts leniently, the kitniyot should be thoroughly inspected to ensure that they contain no cereal grains.

[9]. Ḥayei Adam (127:1) permits eating kitniyot in truly extenuating circumstances, like if one has nothing else to eat. See also Nishmat Adam §20 and Mor U-ketzi’a (which asserts that ideally the custom of kitniyot should be abolished altogether). Ha-mo’adim Be-halakha’s chapter on kitniyot states that Teshuva Me-ahava, Ma’amar Mordechai, and Mahariz Enzil maintain that one may not eat kitniyot even in an extreme situation. Conversely, Maharim Padua of Brisk (§48) permits kitniyot in extenuating circumstances. Divrei Malkiel 1:28 and Sho’el U-meishiv 2:4:158 rule leniently for poor people only. Ḥatam Sofer OḤ §122 does not oppose the lenient authorities but notes that they should require scalding the kitniyot before eating. Nishmat Adam §20 states that one should first permit kitniyot that do not resemble cereal grain, and only as a last option permit those that resemble grain. MB states that one may certainly be lenient in extenuating circumstances and cites Ḥatam Sofer and Ḥayei Adam that scalding is required before eating. AHS 453:5 states: “They explicitly accepted that if there would be famine and the poor would be starving for food, all of the local sages, led by the chief rabbi, would permit kitniyot on that Pesaḥ.”

01. Kashering Kelim

The Torah commands that if a Jew wishes to use a non-Jew’s kelim (vessels, cookware, cutlery, dishes, etc.) that had been used for non-kosher, they must render them kosher – or “kasher” them – by the same means they were used with forbidden food, as it is written: “any article that enters fire, you shall pass through fire…and anything that does not enter fire, you shall pass through water” (Bamidbar 31:23). The Sages derive from here that kelim must be kashered in the manner that they are used. If they are used with fire, then they are kashered via libun, in fire. If they are used with boiling water, then they are kashered through hagala in boiling water. If they were only used cold, then they are kashered by rinsing them in cold water (Avoda Zara 74b; 76b). Thus, there are three types of kashering: libun, hagala, and rinsing.

The Sages explained that when one cooks a non-kosher food in a pot, its taste is absorbed in the walls, and if one later cooks a kosher food in the same pot, the non-kosher taste will be released from the walls of the pot and enter the kosher food, rendering it forbidden. To remove the taste absorbed in the walls, the pot must be kashered in the same way that it absorbed the taste. This is the well-known principle: “as it absorbs, so it releases” (“ke-bole’o kakh polto”; Pesaḥim 30b). It is necessary to clarify that whenever the Sages spoke of taste absorbed into the kli, they also referred to taste that got stuck to the walls of the kli due to the strength of the cooking or the fire. It was only about two hundred years ago that a method for manufacturing soap, which can clean kelim thoroughly, was discovered. Prior to that, even when they tried to clean kelim using substances like lye and ash, whose effects are similar to that of soap, fatty residue of foods almost always remained stuck to the walls. In addition, since the walls were generally rougher, more taste adhered to them than nowadays. Thus, the directive of this mitzva, to kasher kelim in the manner by which they absorbed taste, refers to taste that adhered to and was absorbed into the walls of the kelim (as explained in detail in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32, n. 1).

Kashering kelim for Pesaḥ is just like kashering kelim after they were used for non-kosher food. To make them kosher for Pesaḥ, they must be kashered with the same methods by which they were used. Ḥametz utensils that one does not wish to make kosher for Pesaḥ must be cleaned normally and put away in a closed place so that nobody inadvertently uses them during Pesaḥ (SA 451:1; see also above 6:4, where we learned that such kelim should not be sold).

02. “As It Absorbs, So It Releases” (“Ke-bole’o Kakh Polto”): Between Hagala and Heavy Libun

Let us further explain the principle of “as it absorbs, so it releases” (“ke-bole’o kakh polto”; Pesaḥim 30b). If a kli was used for food that is not hot, since the residual food adheres loosely to the kli, it can be removed easily, by rinsing it in cold water. This is called hadaḥa (rinsing).

If the kli was used with hot liquids, for instance, a pot in which a ḥametz dish was cooked or a ladle or spoon inserted into a pot in which ḥametz was cooked, the taste of the food adheres to and is absorbed by the kli, and only boiling water can cause its release. This is hagala.

If a kli was used directly on a fire – as in the case of roasting spits or baking trays – since there is no liquid to soften the adhesion of the food to the walls, the taste becomes absorbed strongly into the kli, and boiling water is not powerful enough to cause the release of the taste from the walls of the kli. They must be kashered using the method by which they absorbed the taste – through fire, namely, libun.

We must add that absorption through fire takes place only when the food is directly on the fire, for example, in the case of a knife used to cut a pastry that is on the fire. However, if the pastry was removed from the fire and then cut with the knife, even though the pastry is dry, since it is no longer on the fire, the knife’s absorption is deemed weaker, and it can be kashered by means of hagala (Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh 58:27; Erekh Ha-shulḥan 94:13).

Before kashering with hagala, it is necessary to clean the kelim, since the boiling water is not powerful enough to remove all the food residue stuck to the walls of the kli. With respect to libun, however, there is a dispute among the Rishonim: Some say that one must clean the kelim before libun as well, because fire, too, is not powerful enough to remove all the food residue stuck to the walls of the kli. Others say that fire is powerful enough to destroy anything stuck to the kli, so it is not necessary to clean kelim that will be kashered by libun. This is the accepted halakhic ruling.^[1]

[1]. According to Rashba (Torat Ha-bayit Ha-katzar 4:4), it is necessary to clean roasting spits thoroughly before libun, because libun does not incinerate all of the flavor adhering to the kli. This is also the view of Rabbeinu Yeruḥam, Orḥot Ḥayim, and Pri Ḥadash. Tur states that it is not necessary to clean roasting spits before libun, because the fire incinerates all residual food and flavor adhering to and absorbed within the kli. This is also the view of Me’iri, Hagahot Maimoniyot, and Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh, and many Aḥaronim accept this view in practice, including: Taz 451:7; Knesset Ha-gedola; MB ad loc. 24.

03. Kashering Kelim that Absorbed Ḥametz Before the Onset of the Prohibition

We have learned that if a kli absorbs a forbidden food by means of fire, it must be kashered by fire. This principle applies only when non-kosher food has been absorbed. For example, if one roasts non-kosher meat on a spit, the spit must be kashered through libun, because the non-kosher food was absorbed by means of fire. However, if at the time of absorption the meat was kosher, and only later became non-kosher, the kli may be kashered through hagala. Thus, if the meat of a korban was roasted on a spit, after a day passes, the meat of the korban becomes notar and may not be eaten, and the flavor absorbed by the spit is also notar. Therefore, the spit may not be used until it has been kashered. However, since the meat was permitted to eat at the moment its flavor was absorbed in the spit, it is not necessary to perform libun, and it is sufficient to perform hagala in boiling water. This is because hagala releases almost all of the flavor, and whatever is not released is considered weak flavor. When forbidden food was absorbed, even this weak flavor must be removed, but when the initial absorption was of something permitted, it is sufficient to remove the main part of the flavor by means of hagala (Avoda Zara 86a; Ramban and Ritva ad loc.).

The leading Rishonim disagree about ḥametz: Some say that the absorption of ḥametz throughout the year is considered the absorption of permissible matter (heteira bala), since ḥametz may be eaten all year round. Consequently, there is no need to kasher anything for Pesaḥ via libun, as even kelim used in fire, like roasting spits and baking pans, can be kashered by means of hagala. Others say that ḥametz is considered a forbidden food (issura bala); even though it may be eaten le-khatḥila all year round, it is always considered forbidden vis-à-vis Pesaḥ, as even something that became ḥametz before Pesaḥ is called ḥametz and is forbidden to eat on Pesaḥ. Therefore, roasting spits and baking trays must be kashered by means of libun. This is the accepted halakhic ruling (SA 551:4). However, where there are other reasons to be lenient, the lenient position is relied upon (MB 451:28).^[2]

[2]. Those who adopt the lenient view that the absorption of ḥametz throughout the year is considered the absorption of permissible matter are: Rambam, Raavad, Rabbeinu Tam, Rid, Raavan, Raavyah, Itur, Sefer Ha-teruma, Or Zaru’a, Roke’aḥ, Yere’im, Shibolei Ha-leket, Smag, Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh, Tashbetz, and others. Those who adopt the stringent view are: Ramban, Rashba, Rosh, Ran, Ritva, Nimukei Yosef, Me’iri, Rabbeinu Yeruḥam, and Maharil, and it is inferred from Rif as well.

04. Defining the Difference between Absorption through Liquid and Absorption through Fire: The Status of a Frying Pan

As we learned (section 2), the difference between pots used for cooking, which are kashered by means of hagala in boiling water, and baking trays and roasting spits, which are used for baking and roasting and are kashered by means of libun, is that the absorption through cooking is mild, whereas absorption through fire is intense. This is because the objective of cooking is to mix together the liquids in the dish, so it becomes softer and more flavorful. Since cooking is liquid-based, its absorption is milder. In contrast, the objective of baking and roasting is to minimize the liquid in the food, thus hardening it. Therefore, its absorption is more intense.

Even if a dish cooked in a pot was burned, the pot is kashered by means of hagala, since the initial absorption was through liquid, and, moreover, we follow the main purpose of the kli, which is made for cooking, not baking (Rosh).

Accordingly, a skillet or frying pan is kashered by means of hagala, because the purpose of the oil placed in the frying pan is to make the food more liquid. This is the difference between baking and frying: baking dries out the pastry, whereas frying makes it more liquid. This is the view of most Rishonim (Rosh, Raavyah, Mordechai, and Sha’arei Dura).

But some say that since people often fry with small amounts of oil, the oil is often used up, and the absorption is dry, via fire. Moreover, sometimes there are parts of the frying pan that were not coated in oil even initially, and there the absorption is by means of fire. Therefore, a frying pan or skillet has the same status as a baking tray, and it is kashered by means of libun (Rashba, Rabbeinu Yoel).

In practice, one may kasher a skillet or frying pan for Pesaḥ by means of hagala. Le-khatḥila it is best to kasher it with light libun, which is how it is used all year. This is also the easiest way to kasher it, as it entails heating up the empty skillet until it reaches the temperature of light libun (as described in the next section; regarding Teflon skillets, see section 9 below).^[3]

[3]. According to Rashba (Torat Ha-bayit 4:4), Rabbeinu Yoel, and Maharam Ḥalawa, kashering of a skillet in which food was fried with only a bit of oil is by means of libun. According to Raavyah, Rosh (Pesaḥim 2:7), Rabbeinu Yeruḥam, Agur, Shibolei Ha-leket in the name of Ge’onim, Mordechai, Hagahot Maimoniyot, and others, it is by means of hagala. (According to Rabbeinu Tam, Or Zaru’a, Ra’ah, and Ohel Mo’ed, only a kli that is completely surrounded on all sides by the heat of a fire – like a roasting spit or baking tray inside an oven – requires libun. Accordingly, even if one did not place oil in the base of the skillet, it is kashered by means of hagala.)

The Rishonim do not distinguish between Pesaḥ and other prohibitions, but SA (YD 121:4; 451:11) is stringent with regard to other prohibitions, requiring libun, but lenient with respect to Pesaḥ, ruling that hagala is sufficient. The Aḥaronim explain that with regard to Pesaḥ R. Karo combines the opinion that hagala is sufficient with the view that ḥametz before Pesaḥ is considered a permitted food (above, section 3), and thus rules leniently that one may kasher a frying pan for Pesaḥ via hagala (Gra, Ḥok Ya’akov, Ḥida, Ma’amar Mordechai, Nahar Shalom, Erekh Ha-shulḥan, and many others). Against them, Pri Ḥadash (YD 121:8) states that since, in practice, we rule that ḥametz absorbed before Pesaḥ is considered a prohibited food, kashering a skillet for Pesaḥ requires heavy libun. This is also the view of Pri To’ar.

According to Rema (451:11), technically one may kasher a skillet for Pesaḥ by means of hagala, but it is proper to be stringent and kasher it by means of light libun. This is the practice le-khatḥila. (Regarding light libun, see the next section.)

Some say that when there is no sizzling, bubbling oil in the skillet, the skillet has the status of a baking tray (Pri Ḥadash 451:11, SAH 36). It seems from the Rishonim that even if the skillet was coated with a bit of oil, since the oil is supposed to be absorbed into the food as part of the frying process, unlike baking, which is supposed to dry out the food, it is kashered by means of hagala (Rosh and others; so states AHS 451:13. Kaf Ha-ḥayim 451:70 gives a different parameter – that if there was enough liquid present in the skillet to coat something that touched something that was in the skillet [“tofei’aḥ al menat le-hatfi’aḥ”], the skillet can be kashered by hagala).

Regarding a pot used to prepare jachnun, kugel, or kubana, or a frying pan used to prepare malawach, I initially thought that if no sizzling oil is placed in them, they are kashered by means of libun. In practice, however, it seems to me that the result is determinative: If the food remains moist, as in the case of kugel, it is considered “cooked,” and the kli is kashered by means of hagala. If the result is more pastry-like, as in the case of typical kubana and malawach, the kli is kashered by means of libun. If the result is something in between, as in the case of soft kubana and jachnun, one may kasher them by means of hagala, as we can factor in the opinion that ḥametz before Pesaḥ is considered a permitted food, as explained in section 3 above. (See Peninei Halakha: Berakhot 6:11, n. 10.)

05. Libun

The Sages said that libun is the insertion of a kli into fire until “they shed their outer layer” (Avoda Zara 76a) or until the kli gives off sparks (y. Avoda Zara 5:15). Since iron generally does not peel or spark when placed in fire, it seems that the Sages’ intent was that libun should cause the food adhering to the kli to peel off from it or that the food will give off sparks.

Many maintain that libun requires heat that can incinerate and destroy any food that can adhere to the kli, until it is shed in the form of sparks – even though the fire on which ḥametz was roasted or baked never reached such an intense heat (Pri Megadim). This is a temperature of 350-400^oC.

Some rule leniently, maintaining that the principle of ke-bole’o kakh polto applies to the temperature of the fire at the time of absorption. The temperature at the time of absorption is the temperature at which kashering can take place. Thus, for example, if a kli absorbed flavor at a temperature of 200^oC, it can be kashered at 200^oC. In their view, a baking tray that absorbed a forbidden taste in an oven can be kashered in that oven at the same temperature. In practice, halakha follows the stringent view, but in times of need, it is possible to be lenient. Therefore, if a kli is needed, or if following the stringent view might ruin the kli, one may rely on the lenient view.

There is also light libun (libun kal), which entails heating a kli by fire to the point that a piece of straw placed on the opposite side of the kli would become singed from the heat, or a fine thread stretched out over the wall of the kli would become singed and snap from the heat. Light libun is not effective where regular libun is required, but it is more effective than hagala at extracting the flavor absorbed in the kli, and it also incinerates some of the flavor absorbed in and stuck to the kli. When it is uncertain if libun is necessary, one may suffice with light libun. Light libun can be performed by putting a kli in an oven and heating it at the highest temperature for about half an hour.^[4]

[4]. Regarding libun, Avoda Zara 86a states: “until they shed their outer layer.” This is cited in She’iltot, Behag, Rif, Rambam, and others. Yerushalmi Avoda Zara 5:15 states: “libun requires that it gives off sparks.” This is cited by Rosh, Tur, and SA 451:4. This is not a dispute, however. Rather, these are two different indicators of libun. So states Pri Megadim 442, Mishbetzot Zahav 1.At first glance, it seems that the metal of the kli itself must spark and shed a layer, but metals generally do not spark or shed layers due to fire, and according to experts, they did not do so in the past, either. Therefore, it seems that the meaning is that the foods that remained stuck to the kelim would burn, char, and shed layers or burst and release sparks. This is similar to the explanation of R. Pfeiffer (Darakh Kokhav, p. 310), and many works cite his explanation (Ma’adnei Asher, Issur Ve-hetter 159; Hora’ah Berura, YD 121:59; Divrei David, vol. 1, YD 10). Even though nowadays, when we have soap, foods do not remain stuck to kelim, the requirement of kashering remains as it was (Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:7-8).

As I wrote above, there is a dispute among Aḥaronim with regard to libun. Many maintain that it requires a fixed temperature that would produce sparks if there is food stuck to the kli. These include: Pri Megadim 441, Eshel Avraham 30; Responsa Maharam Schick, OḤ 213; R. Frank’s Mikra’ei Kodesh: Pesaḥ 1:80:7; Igrot Moshe, YD 1:60. Some adopt the lenient view that libun requires the same temperature at which the kli absorbed the forbidden food. These include: Responsa Arugat Ha-bosem, OḤ 119; Minḥat Yitzḥak 3:66; Tiferet Tzvi 1:30; and Nitei Gavriel (Pesaḥ 1:75, n. 3) in the name of R. Aharon Kotler and R. Y. B. of Brisk. The accepted ruling is the stringent one, as this is the view cited in contemporary works of halakha. However, since according to many the absorption of ḥametz throughout the year is considered the absorption of permissible matter (heteira bala), in which case even hagala would be effective, in times of need one may rule in accordance with the lenient view of libun, namely, that it requires the same temperature at which the kli absorbed the ḥametz. This is certainly the case more than 24 hours after the absorption, as then the flavor is spoiled, and in cases of uncertainty we follow the lenient view. In addition, since nowadays metal kelim are cleaned thoroughly with soap, there is no concern that the forbidden food will impart flavor, and the kashering requirement is based on the kli’s use with forbidden foods (Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:7-8). In cases of other forbidden foods, where the rationale of heteira bala (i.e., ḥametz absorbed throughout the year is considered permissible matter, so even kelim used in fire can be kashered by means of hagala) does not apply, one may only be lenient in the case of a significant loss (ibid. 33:6).

Rabbeinu Avigdor, one of the Rishonim (cited in Hagahot Maimoniyot on MT, Laws of Forbidden Foods 17:5), has an even more lenient view: Libun consists of burning a fire under the kli to the point that if one places a piece of straw on it, it will be singed. This is what the Sages meant by “until it gives off sparks.” In practice, the consensus is not to adopt his leniency, and this form of libun is called “light libun,” which is more effective than hagala. When there is uncertainty about whether a kli requires libun, many rule that it may be kashered with light libun (Terumat Ha-deshen §130; Rema 451:4). Another advantage of light libun is that it is effective for crevices that are hard to clean and that hagala does not kasher (MB 451:33). Nowadays, these kelim can be cleaned with soap, which renders everything stuck in the crevices unfit for a dog’s consumption.

The poskim further write that there is an even lighter form of libun, namely, heating the kli to the temperature of “yad soledet bo,” i.e., at which the hand reflexively recoils (Levush; Taz 451:8; SAH 10). This seems to refer to anything above 70^oC. Pri Megadim (451, Eshel Avraham 30) states that this form of libun is effective for food absorbed into a kli rishon after it had been removed from the fire.

06. The Principles of Hagala

As we have learned, kelim used for cooking must be kashered by means of hagala. However, there are different temperature levels in cooking, and the operative principle is: ke-bole’o kakh polto.

A kli rishon on the flame: The highest level of intensity of cooking, and as it is used for ḥametz, so it is kashered: in boiling water, in a kli rishon on a flame. Even if the water in the kli rishon on the fire was not boiling when it was used for ḥametz, it must boil during kashering, because it is impossible to estimate the temperature at which the kli absorbed ḥametz, so to dispel uncertainty, it must undergo hagala in boiling water.

A kli rishon removed from the flame: A kli that was heated over a flame and then removed, or if the flame beneath it was then extinguished, still can cook a bit. Therefore, kelim that became forbidden in this manner can be kashered in a kli rishon that is no longer on a flame if the water in it remains very hot.

Liquid poured (“irui”) from a kli rishon: This has the capacity to cook the surface layer (“kedei klipa”) of a food item. Kelim that became forbidden through irui can be kashered by pouring boiling water over them from a kli rishon.

A kli sheni: If a dish that was cooked on a fire was poured into another kli, the second kli is called a kli sheni. The poskim disagree about whether it is necessary to kasher kelim that were placed in a kli sheni. In practice, the ruling is that they must be kashered by means of hagala in a kli sheni (SA 451:5).

Some are even stringent regarding a kli shlishi and beyond (i.e., kelim at least twice removed from the kli in which the food was cooked), maintaining that as long as the food remains at the temperature of yad soledet bo, a kli into which it was inserted must be kashered. Even though most poskim are lenient and maintain that it is sufficient to rinse them, due to the gravity of the ḥametz prohibition, le-khatḥila the custom is to kasher them by means of hagala (SAH 451:34).

A kli that is used at a temperature that never reaches yad soledet bo, that is, it remains under 45^oC, even a kli rishon, does not require hagala, and it is sufficient to rinse it.

Le-khatḥila, many have the custom to kasher all kelim used with hot ḥametz foods in a kli rishon on the fire, even if they were used only for irui or as a kli sheni, as we are concerned that they were once used as a kli rishon, but that this was forgotten. (See Rema 451:6; Kaf Ha-ḥayim 451:107.) However, when the level of forbidden use is certain, it is not necessary to kasher the kli using a higher level of hagala.

07. What Determines the Type of Hagala: Main Use or Most Intense Absorption?

Often, the same kli is used at different levels of severity. How is such a kli kashered? Some are stringent, maintaining that every kli must be kashered based upon its most intense usage, so if it was once used in fire, even though it is normally used in boiling water, it must be kashered by means of libun. Likewise, a kli that was once used with boiling water but is normally used with cold water must undergo hagala, for otherwise the kli will be kashered based on majority usage, not based on most intense usage (She’iltot, Raavyah, Mordechai, Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh).

In contrast, many authorities are lenient and maintain that the requirement to kasher depends on how that kli is used. Therefore, if it is normally used in boiling water, but occasionally used on a flame, it is kashered by means of hagala. If it is normally used with cold water but occasionally used with boiling water, it is kashered by means of rinsing (Rabbeinu Tam, Ramban, Rashba, Ran, SA 451:6). At first glance, this is problematic: How can kashering a kli based on its majority usage eliminate the flavor it absorbed during its more intense usage? The answer is that after 24 hours, flavors absorbed into and stuck to kelim become foul, and they consequently can no longer render forbidden foods that come into contact with them (as will be explained in the next section). Therefore, the requirement of kashering is based on the kli’s majority use (Rashba, Rama Mi-Fano).

In practice, the custom le-khatḥila is to be stringent and to kasher every kli according to its most intense usage. Under extenuating circumstances, we are lenient and kasher it according to its primary use. When there is concern that kashering it based on its most intense use will ruin the kli, for example, in the case of a kli that is used in fire in a minority of its usages, and which is likely to be damaged by libun, one may kasher it le-khatḥila by means of hagala, in accordance with its primary use.^[5]

[5]. The rationale of those who adopt the stringent view is obvious: Since the kli once absorbed through more intense usage, it must be kashered accordingly. This is the view of She’iltot, Raavyah, Mordechai, Hagahot Maimoniyot, Terumat Ha-deshen, Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh, and Maharil. On the other hand, the Talmud implies that we follow the kli’s majority usage, so cups that are usually used for cold are kashered by means of rinsing (Avoda Zara 75b), even though they are occasionally used for hot. Knives that are usually used with boiling water are kashered by means of hagala (Pesaḥim 30b) even though they are occasionally used to slice meat that is on the fire. This is the view of Rabbeinu Tam, Ramban, Rashba, Ra’ah, and Ran. Likewise, many infer that this is the view of Rif and Rambam, as cited in Beit Yosef 451:6. This dispute pertains to kashering kelim that absorbed prohibited foods as well.

In practice, SA 451:6, 25, rules in accordance with the lenient view. According to Rema the custom is to be stringent and kasher the kelim according to their more intense usage, but we are lenient be-di’avad. According to SAH 451:27-28, such kelim should not be used on Pesaḥ. Only be-di’avad, if they were used after being kashered according to majority usage, the food is kosher. However, it seems from SHT ad loc. 144 that one may kasher a kli according to majority usage when it is difficult to kasher it according to its more intense use. Additionally, if kashering it according to its more intense use might damage the kli, according to Beit Meir ad loc. 11 (cited in SHT 51) one may kasher it according to its majority use.

Many Sephardic poskim wrote that we follow the majority usage (SA 451:6; Rama Mi-Fano; Gan Ha-melekh; Pe’ulat Tzadik; Zivḥei Tzedek, R. Yosef Messas, Yabi’a Omer 10, YD 58; Or Le-Tziyon 3:10:10-11). However, several Sephardic poskim wrote that le-khatḥila the practice is to be stringent according to the most intense usage (Knesset Ha-gedola; Shulḥan Gavo’ah; Kaf Ha-ḥayim 451:100; R. Ḥayim David Ha-Levi’s Mekor Ḥayim 186:6). SA 451:20 also states that the custom is to kasher tables by means of irui, in accordance with the more intense usage. Since we find some Sephardic poskim who ruled that one should be stringent le-khatḥila, and many Ashkenazic poskim ruled that one may be lenient when necessary, in order to minimize the differences, I wrote that we follow the stringent view le-khatḥila and that we are lenient when necessary. Therefore, forks that are sometimes used in fire should be kashered by means of hagala, since they can be damaged by libun. There is an additional reason to be lenient and require only hagala – the fork that was used in the fire is batel in the majority of forks that were not.

Several Aḥaronim wrote that we determine majority and minority usage based only on use with ḥametz that requires kashering; a kli that is primarily used for cold food that is not ḥametz but was once used for ḥametz in boiling water must undergo hagala. However, if most of the ḥametz usage was cold, as in the case of a table or countertop, even though it was occasionally used with hot ḥametz, it can be kashered with cold water, in accordance with its majority usage. So state Pri Megadim YD 91, Siftei Da’at 3; Beit Efrayim ḤM 17; Ḥazon Ish OḤ 119:15; Shevet Ha-Levi 6:116:3 (and in R. B. Frankel’s notes to §91, he is lenient and maintains that majority use is determined by all usage, including permitted use).

08. Foods Cooked in Kelim That Were Not Kashered

If one mistakenly cooked on Pesaḥ in a ḥametz pot that was not kashered, if 24 hours have not elapsed since ḥametz was last cooked in the kli, the dish is forbidden on Pesaḥ and must be destroyed. If 24 hours have passed, the dish is kosher be-di’avad, as there is a rule that anything that imparts foul taste does not render a food forbidden, and after 24 hours, the flavor absorbed in and stuck to the kli has become foul. Consequently, the taste of the foul ḥametz does not render the dish forbidden (SA 447:10, YD 103:5).

If the one who cooked in a ḥametz pot on Pesaḥ knew that it had not been kashered but transgressed and cooked in it on Pesaḥ, then even if 24 hours have passed since ḥametz was cooked in it, since he transgressed and cooked in a ḥametz pot that was not kashered, the Sages penalize him and render the cooked food forbidden to him and to anyone for whom he cooked. However, others, for whom he did not intend to cook, may eat from it, since in fact there is no ḥametz flavor that renders it forbidden.

Others are stringent, maintaining that even if one accidentally cooked on Pesaḥ in a ḥametz pot, even if 24 hours have passed since ḥametz was cooked in it, the dish is forbidden, because ḥametz on Pesaḥ is treated more stringently than other prohibitions, and just as even the tiniest quantity of ḥametz renders a mixture forbidden, so too, even its befouled taste renders a mixture forbidden (Rema; above, 7:5, n. 5).^[6]

[6]. As explained in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 34:2, it is impossible to calculate with precision how much flavor was absorbed in or stuck to the walls or how much flavor they release, as some kelim, like earthenware, absorb a lot; others, like wooden kelim, absorb less; and there are still others, like metal kelim, in which the flavor only adheres to the walls. Some flavors are absorbed or adhere more strongly, and others less so. Some foods have a very strong flavor, and others have a weak flavor. Since there is a constant uncertainty that can never be resolved, the halakhic ruling is that in order to avoid uncertainty, one must consider the entire wall of the kli as though it is filled with the flavor of the dish, and during cooking, it is all released into the dish. Since the contents of almost all of our pots and kelim are not sixty times the volume of the wall, with all its thickness, if kosher food was cooked in them within 24 hours of cooking non-kosher food, the kosher food is rendered forbidden by the non-kosher flavor that it absorbed.

This is the status of earthen and wooden kelim even today, and this is also the status of glass and metal kelim that were not cleaned with soap, as generally accepted. However, as explained in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:4-8, unlike earthen and wooden kelim, metal and glass kelim do not absorb flavor into their very substance. Consequently, if they were cleaned with soap, as generally accepted today, they do not impart flavor. Therefore, be-di’avad, if one accidentally cooked in a clean ḥametz pot, even within 24 hours, the dish is kosher. Nevertheless, there is still an obligation to kasher it (ibid. 7), so if one took a pot that was used to cook ḥametz within the past 24 hours and purposefully cooks Pesaḥ food in it, even though no flavor that would render it forbidden was imparted into the dish, due to the Sages’ penalty, the dish is forbidden to the cook and to anyone on whose behalf he cooked the dish (Rashba, Ritva, Radbaz, Knesset Ha-gedola, Pri Megadim, and others, as explained in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:3, n. 3, toward the end).

09. Cleaning and Preparing Kelim for Hagala

A kli must be cleaned before undergoing hagala, for although boiling water extracts the flavor absorbed in and stuck to the kli, it does not clean the kli of residual food stuck to it. If one kashers a kli via hagala without first cleaning it, he must clean it and then redo the hagala (SA 451:3).

If the kli has cracks and crevices from which it is hard to remove food residue, it must be cleaned with a lot of soap, until it is certain that the residual food on it is not fit for a dog to eat, and then hagala may be performed. Likewise, if a pot has handles, one must clean around the handles with a lot of soap so that the food residue that may have been left there is completely befouled.^[7]

Handles of kelim must also be kashered because when metal vessels are heated during cooking, the heat spreads to the handles, and if they reach the temperature of yad soledet bo, the entire kli, including its handles, is considered as a kli in which a forbidden food was cooked, and the entire kli must be kashered. Its handles can be kashered through irui from a kli rishon, because their use and absorption are not as intense as a kli rishon over fire (Rema 451:12). The handles of wooden kelim also must be kashered, even though they do not get so hot, because sometimes the cooking food drips or sprays onto the handles, and its flavor becomes absorbed in and stuck to the handles. Therefore, both the kli and its handles must undergo hagala (SA 451:12; MB ad loc. 68).

Kelim that are likely to be damaged by the kashering process may not be kashered. This is why earthen kelim cannot be kashered; since earthenware absorbs a lot of flavor, hagala cannot cause the release of all the flavor it absorbed. Libun could kasher an earthenware kli, as libun incinerates all the flavor that the kli absorbed, but since libun is likely to make an earthenware kli shatter, there is concern that libun will not be performed properly. Therefore, the established halakha is that there is no way to kasher an earthenware kli. The only way to kasher an earthenware vessel is to return it to the kiln, where it is impossible to protect it from the full force of the kiln’s fire. Then, if the kli survives, it is as though it has been made anew (SA 451:1; MB ad loc. 13, 14).

Likewise, baking trays, Teflon skillets, and Wonder Pots (an Israeli invention used for baking cakes on stovetops), since they absorb taste through fire, cannot be kashered, as the prevailing custom accords with the stringent view (in section 5) that requires a temperature of 350-400^oC to kasher them, and at such a temperature, they will likely become warped to the extent that most people would prefer to simply throw them out. However, as we learned (ibid.), in times of need one may rely on the lenient view that kelim used in fire can be kashered at the temperature they were used to bake or roast, and at such a temperature, they will not be ruined.^[8]

[7]. SA 451:3 states that the solution for crevices is to perform libun at the place of the crevices to incinerate the food residue there. The poskim wrote that a wooden knife case, since it will burn up during libun, cannot be kashered (Rema, Taz, MA, MB, etc.). It stands to reason that they did not mention the solution of rinsing it in soap because it did not exist, so libun was the only solution for food residue in crevices.

[8]. The accepted ruling is that baking trays must be kashered by means of heavy libun, and since this is likely to ruin them, they should not be kashered for Pesaḥ (Or Le-Tziyon 3:10:2; Be-ohalah Shel Torah 1:18; Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 8:40; Hagalat Kelim 5:6; 13:315). The same applies to Wonder Pots and Teflon skillets. However, in times of need, one may be lenient and kasher them at the temperature at which they absorbed flavor, as we learned in section 5 that in times of need one may rely on the lenient view that kashering temperature hinges on the temperature at which the absorption by fire took place. We also learned in section 3 that one may factor in the view that ḥametz is considered “heteira bala” and can be kashered by means of hagala. This leniency is reinforced by the opinion of Shulḥan Gavo’ah 451:31 and Responsa Tiferet Adam, OḤ 16, that when one coats a baking tray with oil, the tray has the status of a pot that absorbed through liquid and is kashered by means of hagala. Ḥazon Ovadia: Pesaḥ, p. 134, states that one who wishes to rely on this view may do so. It seems that they mean to say that because of this oil, the pastry does not stick to the kli, and it can therefore be removed easily from the tray. Therefore, its absorption is not considered to be by means of fire. There is room to say that in a case that one is careful to place a baking sheet between the pastry and the tray, according to this view, there is no absorption through fire, and so it can be kashered by means of hagala. In the case of baking sheets, perhaps other poskim would concur with this view.

10. Waiting Twenty-Four Hours before Hagala

It is customary not to perform hagala on a kli until 24 hours have elapsed since the last time it was used with forbidden food (i.e., until it is no longer “ben yomo”), because for 24 hours the taste that is absorbed into and stuck to the kli remains flavorful, and if the boiling water used for hagala is not sixty times larger than the volume of the walls of the kli, the hagala water may absorb the forbidden taste and cause it to be reabsorbed in the walls and re-stuck to the sides, rendering the hagala ineffective. But after 24 hours, the taste absorbed into and stuck to the kli becomes foul, and then the kli can be kashered even if the water is not sixty times its volume, because the kli releases a foul taste into the water, and such a taste will not render the kli forbidden, even if it is reabsorbed. For a kli is only rendered forbidden if the flavor it absorbs initially is good, in which case it remains forbidden even once the absorbed flavor has become foul. However, if at the time of its absorption and adhesion to the kli the taste was foul, the kli is not forbidden.

Another reason for this 24-hour delay is our concern that meat and dairy kelim will undergo hagala in the same water, release good meat and milk flavor into the hagala water, and if the hagala water is not sixty times the volume of either the meat or the dairy, the flavors will not be batel be-shishim. Rather, these flavors will mingle and then render all of the hagala water, as well as any kelim that undergo hagala in it, forbidden, as they will have absorbed the flavor of basar be-ḥalav (the forbidden mixture of milk and meat). However, once 24 hours have elapsed, the flavors of milk and of meat that are released by the kelim is foul and will not render the hagala water and the kelim that underwent hagala in it forbidden, since noten ta’am li-fgam is permitted (SA 452:2; MB ad loc.).

The common practice at public hagala stations is not to rely on the presumption that everyone waited 24 hours before performing hagala. In order to avoid problems, liquid soap is added to the hagala water, thereby immediately rendering any taste released by the kelim foul, so even if it is reabsorbed into the kelim, since it is foul, it does not render kelim forbidden.

Technically, it is possible to perform hagala on metal and glass kelim that were cleaned with soap without waiting 24 hours, since they do not release flavor. However, le-khathila the custom is to wait 24 hours or add liquid soap in the case of glass and metal kelim, like in the case of wooden kelim.^[9]

[9]. According to Rashi, Sefer Ha-eshkol, Yere’im, Ramban, and others, during the entire time that the kelim are in the boiling hot hagala water, the kelim release flavor and do not absorb from the hagala water. Consequently, there are no grounds for all the concerns mentioned above. However, Tosafot, Or Zaru’a, Rosh, Rashba, Smak, and others are concerned about everything mentioned above, and this is the custom, as written in SA and Rema 453:1-2 and in MB 1 ad loc. Thus, one who wishes to perform hagala must ensure that one of two conditions is met: 1) The kelim have not been used for 24 hours, so flavors they release are foul (or liquid soap, which befouls all flavors, has been mixed into the hagala water). 2) The hagala water is sixty times the volume of the kli’s walls, so that any taste released into the water is batel be-shishim.

According to Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh, if one kli after another is inserted into the hagala water, the flavor that is released by them is batel, one by one, and we do not combine all the kelim together. However, according to Rashba, the kelim are ḥozer ve-ne’or, so if the hagala water is not sixty times the volume of the walls of all the kelim inserted into the hagala water, all of the aforementioned concerns apply. This is the accepted custom (MB ad loc. 13). The custom, le-khatḥila, is also to kasher only kelim that have not been used for 24 hours, lest the hagala water have less than sixty times the volume of the walls of the kelim (MB ad loc. 20).

All of these principles also applied to metal kelim that were not cleaned with soap, as was the standard practice until modern times. Nowadays, however, when we clean these kelim with soap, and there is no longer any concern that a layer of residual food remains on them, there is no concern that they will release flavor into the hagala water. Only in the case of wooden and earthen kelim is there concern that they will release flavor (Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:4-8). Nevertheless, the accepted ruling is to wait 24 hours, in accordance with time-honored custom, or to put soap in the hagala water, as is necessary for wooden and earthen kelim and for glass and metal kelim that were not cleaned properly.

Some maintain that hagala can only be performed in water, as other liquids do not adequately cause the release of flavor (Ramban, Ritva, Me’iri). Others maintain that hagala can be performed in other liquids as well (Rashba). Rema 452:5 rules that hagala should le-khatḥila be done in water, and be-di’avad, it can be done in other liquids. Based on this, several Aḥaronim wrote that le-khatḥila ash should not be mixed into the hagala water (MB, Pri Ḥadash, Ḥok Yaakov). Nevertheless, the accepted ruling nowadays is to mix liquid soap into the hagala water. Apparently there is no concern as the liquid soap does not alter the consistency of the water (so states Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 7:76).

Regarding whether one may perform hagala on Pesaḥ: As we learned above (7:5), according to the majority of Rishonim and SA, who maintain that even on Pesaḥ something that imparts foul flavor does not render the mixture forbidden, it is permissible to perform hagala as long as the kelim have not been used for 24 hours, for then the flavor absorbed in and adhering to the kli is foul. According to Rema, who is concerned about the view that something that imparts foul flavor renders a mixture forbidden on Pesaḥ, one may not perform hagala on Pesaḥ. Only libun, which incinerates the taste in and on the kli, may be done to kasher kelim on Pesaḥ. However, one may perform hagala on clean metal and glass kelim on Pesaḥ, since they do not release ḥametz flavor into the hagala water. (See Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:6-7.)

11. Hagala in Practice

For the purposes of hagala, any kitchen pot can be used, as long as it is clean. The hagala water must actually be boiling.

The entire kli is left submerged in the water for about three seconds. Le-khatḥila, the custom is to rinse the kelim in cold water immediately after hagala, but this is not an absolute requirement (SA 452:7; MB 34). Therefore, when it is difficult to rinse the kelim in cold water, there is no obligation to make an extra effort to do so.^[10]

Sometimes the immersion of kelim cools the water to the point that it stops boiling. In this case, the kelim should be left in the water until it returns to a boil. If one inserts two kelim simultaneously into boiling water, one must shake the kelim to ensure that the boiling water circulates between them (based on SA 452:3-4).

If a kli cannot be immersed in its entirety into the water, it may be immersed one half at a time (SA 451:11).

Many have the custom le-khatḥila to perform hagala in boiling water even on kelim that were used for irui or as kli sheni (above, section 6).

In brief, this is the procedure of hagala: First, one cleans the kli and boils water in a large, clean pot. Any kli that requires hagala is then inserted into the boiling water for about three seconds. The kli is now kosher. The custom is to add liquid soap to the hagala water or to wait 24 hours from last use with ḥametz or forbidden foods before performing hagala; for kelim that are not clean, it is obligatory to do so. Le-khatḥila, the kli is rinsed in cold water after hagala.^[11]

[10]. All concur that hagala water is intended to cause the release of flavor absorbed in kelim. Many Rishonim wrote that the kli should be left in the hagala water until it releases everything it absorbed into the water (Rif; Rambam, MT, Laws of Ḥametz and Matza 5:23; Raavad, Ramban, Rashba, Ran, and others). Raavyah and Tur (452:1) stated that the custom is to insert and remove the kelim immediately. Aḥaronim explain that this is so that they do not reabsorb what they released (MB 452:4). Pri Ḥadash 452:6 explains that the custom is simply to insert and remove the kli immediately, against most Rishonim, and Jewish custom is itself considered Torah. In contrast, Taz and Eliya Rabba state that even according to Tur and the prevailing custom, one must leave it in the water a bit. SAH 452:4 explains that this means “leaving it a very little while.” It seems that this means about three seconds.

The Rishonim also wrote that one should rinse the kli with cold water after hagala, to remove from the kelim what they released and so that the heat of the water does not cause the taste released during hagala to be reabsorbed or get re-stuck (Rambam, Raavyah, Rashba, and many others; Me’iri states that instead of rinsing in cold water, one may dry the kli to wipe off anything that was released and then stuck loosely to the surface of the kli). However, the Rishonim wrote that rinsing in cold water is not essential for the hagala to be effective, as it is not mentioned in the Talmud. Aḥaronim explained that this is because the custom is to perform hagala on kelim that have not been used for 24 hours. (See MB 452:34.)

[11]. Although the custom of Ashkenazic communities and some Sephardic communities is to avoid using hagala to switch kelim from meat to dairy and vice versa, when kashering kelim for Pesaḥ one may switch them from meat to dairy even le-khatḥila (Ḥatam Sofer, YD 110; see Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 33:9, n. 11).

12. Kashering Pots by Means of Hagala

Hagala of a pot must be performed in a large kli into which the entire pot can fit. It is not sufficient to boil water inside the pot, because it is likely that during the course of the year some dishes sprayed out or boiled over the sides of the pot, in which case the flavor of ḥametz was absorbed into and adhered to the pot’s upper lip – and the lip is not kashered by boiling water inside the pot.

If there is no large kli in which hagala can be performed, one should fill the pot that one wishes to kasher with water and bring it to a boil, and at the same time, boil water in a small kli. When the water in the pot boils, insert the small kli into the boiling water in the pot, which will cause a lot of water to spill over every side of the pot, thus kashering its lip. (See Avoda Zara 76a, and see SA 452:6.)

When it is possible to remove the handles of the pots, some are scrupulous to remove them and clean them. Alternatively, one may clean around them with plenty of soap, until it is clear that any flavor that may have been in the crevices has been befouled. Then one performs hagala (above, section 10). Pots that have a metal fold along the rim do not require any special treatment.^[12]

[12]. Some have the custom of going over the edges and lid of the pot with a blowtorch in order to incinerate the residue that may be found under the folds of metal along the rim and lid of the pot. However, this is unnecessary, as whatever residue may have been trapped there is extremely foul with age and constant rinsing with soap, as we discovered upon examination. We also found that whatever accumulates around the handles is exceedingly foul, so there is no need to remove the handles, since rinsing with soap certainly befouls any flavor completely.

Regarding hagala of a large pot that is kashered by boiling water in it: It can be suggested that one should cause the water to overflow by pouring boiling water into it from an electric kettle. However, the solution I suggested, using a small kli with boiling water, is preferable, because when pouring the water, it cools down slightly, whereas the entirety of the small kli is boiling hot and is itself a kli rishon, and so does not cool down.

Kashering a pot by causing it to overflow onto its outer walls is effective for a kli that absorbed ḥametz through overflow, but a kli that is regularly inserted into another kli and absorbed ḥametz flavor there – as in the case of a ladle – absorbed in a kli rishon, and hagala by the overflow method is not effective. Instead, it must be kashered through complete immersion in boiling water (MB 452:31).

13. Absorption through Pickling (“Kvisha”) and Its Kashering

Kelim into which cold ḥametz has been placed are kashered by rinsing them. For example, beer mugs are kashered for Pesaḥ by rinsing them, even though beer is ḥametz, because as long as the ḥametz in a kli has not reached the temperature of yad soledet, its residue adheres only loosely to the kli, and it can be removed by rinsing. Certainly, then, plates and bowls into which ḥametz cakes were placed are kashered by cleaning them, because in addition to the fact that the pastries are not hot, they are also dry, and without moisture, flavor does not adhere to a kli. However, one must remove crumbs that may remain on the kelim.

But if the beer was left in a mug for 24 hours, according to many, this constitutes kvisha (“pickling,” or the absorption of taste through prolonged soaking) occurs, and the Sages said: “kavush ki-mevushal” (pickling is akin to cooking). That is, pickling imparts flavor into foods just as cooking does, and according to many, it even imparts flavor into kelim (Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 35:9). Therefore, it is forbidden on Pesaḥ to use kelim in which beer was left for 24 hours.

Kelim that have absorbed taste via kvisha can be kashered through hagala in boiling water, for if hagala is effective on kelim used for cooking, it certainly works on kelim used for pickling. Moreover, since kvisha is a milder form of absorption, one may kasher such kelim by soaking them in water for three 24-hour periods – that is, by soaking the kli in water for 24 hours, replacing the water, soaking it for another 24 hours, replacing the water again, and soaking it for another 24 hours. Of course, it is generally faster and easier to kasher these kelim by means of hagala in boiling water, but kelim that are liable to be damaged by boiling water may be kashered in this manner.

An alcoholic beverage like whiskey, according to some poskim, has the effect of kvisha and imparts the flavor of the whiskey into the kli within 18 minutes. Thus, if one wishes to use this kli on Pesaḥ, he must first kasher it by means of hagala or by soaking it in water for three 24-hour periods.^[13]

[13]. The Talmud (Ḥullin 111b) states: “Shmuel said: Pickled [food] (kavush) is like cooked [food] (mevushal).” Some explain this to mean that pickling food in a sharp or briny liquid causes the absorption of flavor, much as cooking does, but merely soaking in water or another liquid that is neither sharp nor briny does not cause absorption like cooking (Rashi, Rashba, and many others infer that this is Rambam’s view). But according to most poskim, soaking in any liquid is considered like cooking (Rabbeinu Tam, Tosafot, Raavad, Or Zaru’a, Rosh, Mahari Weil, Ritva, SA YD 105:1). Some say that in order to be considered like cooking, the pickling must last for three days (Raavyah, Maharam Rothenburg, Yere’im), but according to most poskim, it must last only 24 hours (Rosh, Mahari Weil, Sha’arei Dura, SA YD 105:1, and others). With regard to sharp liquids, some say that even pickling in a sharp liquid only causes absorption after 24 hours (Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh, Shakh, Taz), and some say that it begins causing absorption in the amount of time it would take to bring it to a boil (“shi’ur hartaḥa”; SA YD 105:1, MA, Binat Adam, and others). The Aḥaronim are uncertain how long the “shi’ur hartaḥa” is: 10, 18, or 24 minutes.

There is a dispute among the poskim regarding the degree to which kelim absorb taste via kvisha. Some maintain that kelim absorb taste from kvisha just as from cooking (Issur Ve-hetter Ha-arokh, Shakh, and Pri Megadim). Others maintain that kvisha causes kelim to absorb flavor only in their outermost layer (Taz). Still others maintain that only wooden and earthenware kelim absorb flavor through kvisha, but not metal kelim (Kereti U-feleti, Erekh Ha-shulḥan). Above I adopted the stringent view, because this is the accepted ruling, and so it is proper to accept it in practice le-khatḥila. As a matter of technical law, however, the halakha follows the lenient view with respect to glass and metal kelim.

Even though an earthenware kli that absorbed ḥametz during the cooking process cannot be kashered through hagala, if such a kli absorbed flavor through kvisha, it can be kashered by means of hagala or by soaking it for three days, as explained in SA 451:21.

01. Countertops and Sinks

The kitchen sink and countertops are generally used with cold foods, but sometimes hot liquids spill onto them from a kli rishon, and in such cases their usage is at the level of irui mi-kli rishon. And sometimes burning hot quiches and pastries or pots from which sauce is overflowing are placed on them. In these cases, their usage is at the level of “kli rishon removed from the flame,” which is kashered by pouring boiling water over a white-hot stone.

If it were not difficult, it would be proper, le-khatḥila, to kasher them by pouring boiling water over a white-hot stone, but since this is difficult to accomplish, one may kasher them le-khatḥila by pouring boiling water over them, in accordance with most of their more intense usage. Before pouring the hot water over them, one must clean them well with soap and water, paying attention that no food residue remains in cracks. One must then dry the sink and countertop before pouring, so that the boiling water touches them directly and is not cooled by any cold water on their surface. For this reason, one first pours the boiling water on the bottom of the sink, then on its walls, and then on the countertop, starting with the areas closest to the sink and moving further away.

In home kitchens, the custom is to kasher the sink and countertops using water that was heated up in an electric kettle (“kumkum”). Since the kettle is not large enough to heat up enough water all at once, the kashering is done in stages; in each stage, water boiled in the kettle is poured over one area. If the poured water trickles over to an area that has not yet been kashered, one must squeegee it away before pouring more boiling water from the kettle over it.

Instead of pouring hot water, one may also cover the countertops with oilcloth or foil and either place a plastic insert in the sink or line it with thick foil. Those who are stringent clean and pour hot water over the countertops and sink and also cover the countertop with oilcloth or thick foil and either place a plastic insert in the sink or line it with thick foil.^[1]

[1]. Le-khatḥila, the method of kashering required is determined by the most intense usage, and in times of necessity, by the majority of usage (above, 10:7). In the case of sinks and countertops, kashering based on majority use is by cleaning and rinsing with cold water, but since it is possible to perform a higher level of kashering, this is the custom. Therefore, countertops have the same status that tables had in the past (below, n. 8), i.e., even though most usage was with cold, since sometimes people would place burning hot quiches on them, the custom became to kasher them by pouring boiling water on them. Some were even more stringent and poured the boiling water over a white-hot stone. If dough is kneaded on the countertop, then its most intense usage has the status of a surface on which dough was kneaded: some say it is kashered by means of hagala, and some say it is kashered by means of light libun (below, n. 10). Kashering countertops based on the more intense usage requires pouring boiling water over a white-hot stone, as by means of the stone the poured water becomes hotter and kashers at the level of hagala in a kli rishon (SA 451:16). In practice, kashering with a white-hot stone or white-hot iron can cause damage, so these surfaces should be kashered by pouring boiling water, which kashers at the level corresponding to most of the more intense usage. Those who are stringent also cover the countertop with a fixed cover like oilcloth or with aluminum foil. Those who wish to suffice with a fixed countertop cover may do so, but those who are stringent are concerned that the cover will move. Those who are stringent are also concerned that aggregate stone countertops have the status of earthenware, but this concern is baseless, as it is known that countertops do not absorb flavor like earthenware or even wood. Therefore, pouring boiling water over them is effective even le-khatḥila.

Sinks have the same status as countertops. However, if the sinks are made of porcelain, some are concerned that it has the same status as earthenware, in which case hagala is not effective. Therefore, they require the placement of a plastic insert or lining the sink with thick foil to serve as a barrier between the sink and the kelim placed therein (Ḥut Shani, Pesaḥ 10:17; Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 8:1, which adds that a stainless-steel sink is kashered by pouring boiling water over a white-hot stone). However, porcelain sinks are made very well, and their coating is as impenetrable as glass. Therefore, they can be kashered (see below, n. 11) le-khatḥila by means of pouring boiling water, and, when necessary, by rinsing. (Ḥazon Ovadia, Pesaḥ, p. 151 rules that one may kasher by pouring boiling water; Or Le-Tziyon 3:10:11 states that one may kasher by rinsing or cleaning with cold water, but the custom is to pour boiling water.)

One may kasher sinks and countertops with a steam cleaner, as long as it is high-quality, and it is as effective as pouring boiling water on them. However, burning alcohol on sinks and countertops is not as effective as pouring boiling water, as is evident from the fact that it does not heat up the countertops like pouring boiling water does.

02. Gas, Electric, Ceramic, and Induction Stovetops

Throughout the year, people usually use the same stovetop grates for both meat and milk, because even if some meat or dairy liquid spills onto them, the flame incinerates and befouls it (Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 25:9).

Technically, for Pesaḥ as well, regular cleaning suffices. However, due to the seriousness of the ḥametz prohibition, people customarily perform light libun on such grates to kasher them for Pesaḥ (Rema 451:4; MB ad loc. 34). Alternatively, one may wrap thick aluminum foil around the bars on which the pots sit, creating a barrier between the Pesaḥ pots and the grates that came into contact with ḥametz. In addition, it is customary to turn on all the flames and let them burn for about 15 minutes.

For the areas of the grates that do not come into contact with the pots, the enamel cook top beneath the grates, and the burner caps, it is sufficient to clean them well.^[2]

Electric ranges: Clean thoroughly and run on the highest setting for about 15 minutes.

Ceramic burners: The surface on which the pots are placed is like smooth, impervious glass. This surface is heated up electrically, and it, in turn, heats up the pots on it. Based on the principle of ke-bole’o kakh polto, they are kashered by cleaning and then heating them up on the highest setting for about 15 minutes.

Induction cooktops: The surface on which the pots are placed is like smooth, impervious glass. However, unlike ceramic burners, in which the heat source is within the ceramic surface, in induction cooktops the heat source is in the pot, which heats up by means of a magnetic field. From the pot, the heat spreads to the food cooking within it and to the surface on which it is standing. Ḥametz is liable to be absorbed into the cooktop via food that overflowed from the pot, some of which can get stuck to the base of the pot and continue to heat up along with it. Such cooktops are therefore kashered by cleaning them and pouring boiling water over them. Kashering them from the food that overflowed and got stuck to the bottom of the pot is based on the principle of ke-bole’o kakh polto: wet the bottom of the pot when they are empty, and heat them up on the cooktop for about 15 minutes. (Below, in section 14, the obligation to kasher glassware is discussed.)

[2]. Due to the stringency of the ḥametz prohibition, light libun is required (MB 451:34; Kaf Ha-ḥayim 451:74). Some maintain that hagala is sufficient (Ḥazon Ovadia, Pesaḥ, p. 137). Covering the grates with aluminum foil is as effective as light libun since it completely separates the grate from the pots, so even if some liquid spills, it would not connect the grate and the pot. If food was cooked on Pesaḥ on grates that were not cleaned, the foods are kosher.

03. Baking Ovens and Trays

The oven itself and the racks on which trays are placed are kashered by cleaning them and running the oven on its hottest setting for half an hour.

Baking trays are not kashered because they absorbed through fire, and kashering them requires libun at a temperature of 400^oC, which will likely cause them serious damage (above, 10:5 and 9). One should therefore buy special baking trays for Pesaḥ, while the ḥametz trays should be cleaned and put away like all other ḥametz utensils. Instead of special Pesaḥ trays, one may use disposable trays.^[3]

[3]. With regard to the oven walls, the entire concern is for steam that may have been absorbed into them and will be released by the walls, thus rendering Pesaḥ food forbidden. Therefore, it is certain that the oven can be kashered by heating it to a high temperature. Even if a ḥametz dish once spilled and was absorbed into the oven itself, since there is no direct contact between the oven itself and the Pesaḥ foods, and the only concern is for steam that it might release, heating the oven to its highest temperature is sufficient. (This is also the view of R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halikhot Shlomo 3:2; however, Ḥazon Ovadia, p. 132, and Ḥut Shani 10:2 state that one must also wait 24 hours, as is customary before hagala. Nevertheless, in practice, this is not necessary since it is being kashered by means of libun, as explained in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 25:11). Even though heating the oven itself to its highest temperature kashers it, it is customary to clean it as well. Ovens that self-clean at more than 400^oC need not be cleaned before kashering even according to custom.

Baking trays in which ḥametz is baked cannot be kashered because custom follows the stringent view (above, 10:5) that requires a temperature or 350-400^oC to kasher them by means of libun, which will damage them. However, one who wants to rely on the lenient view, that even libun only requires heating up to the temperature at which the baking took place, may kasher the baking trays in the oven, as explained above (10:5).

04. A Warming Tray (“Plata”) and Barbecue Grills

A warming tray (“plata”) is forbidden on Pesaḥ because of baked goods that are placed on it and because of cooked foods that sometimes spill on it. Since it absorbed through fire, it must be kashered through libun. However, libun will damage it, and as we learned, when necessary, kelim that absorbed through fire can be kashered by heating them up to the temperature at which the absorption took place (above, 10:5 and 10:3). Therefore, one may kasher a plata by cleaning and heating it up for an hour. Those who are stringent also cover it with aluminum foil to create a barrier between the plata from the Pesaḥ pots.

A grill: The body of the grill and the racks are kashered the same way they are used, which is at the intensity of heavy libun. If it is a gas grill, it is kashered at the highest temperature setting; if it is a charcoal grill, it is kashered by putting in the largest amount of charcoal that one regularly uses.

05. Microwave Ovens and Dishwashers

There are three steps to kashering a microwave oven: 1) cleaning it thoroughly of any residual food resulting from spillage or steaming; 2) heating a bowl of water for about ten minutes at the highest setting – to kasher it from ḥametz steam and vapor using the principle of ke-bole’o kakh polto; 3) since there is concern ḥametz may have spilled onto the plate that sits on the microwave’s turntable, one must clean the plate and perform hagala on it with boiling water, or, alternatively, place something as a barrier between it and the food that will be heated in the microwave on Pesaḥ.^[4]

Dishwashers: The filter, where residual food often gets stuck, must be cleaned thoroughly. Then the dishwasher should be run, with its racks, at its hottest setting, so that any absorbed ḥametz is released, ke-bole’o kakh polto.^[5]

[4]. The year-round status of a microwave is explained in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 25:11, n. 12. Regarding the plate, some say that according to Sephardic custom, the glass plate does not absorb, so cleaning it is sufficient (Yalkut Yosef), whereas according to Ashkenazic custom and Ben Ish Ḥai, the plate is considered meat, dairy, or ḥametz, depending in which food touched it. Based on what we explain below (section 14) and in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut (32:5), one should be stringent, as stated above, since this level of intensity is similar to that of a kli rishon.

[5]. Some are stringent and consider dishwashers to have the status of a kli rishon on a flame. This means that to kasher a dishwasher one must put a white-hot piece of metal in it in order to bring the water to a boil. However, those who follow the lenient approach have authorities on whom to rely. Others are stringent about this because they have a custom, le-khatḥila, to kasher everything in a kli rishon on the fire. So state Igrot Moshe, OḤ 3:58, and Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 8:32. However, in practice, a dishwasher should not be considered a kli rishon, because only where the water is heated up is considered a kli rishon. However, from there the water is injected into the hollow center of the dishwasher, and when the water arrives there it has the status of something poured from a kli rishon – and ke-bole’o kakh polto. Regarding what Rema writes, that there is a custom to kasher everything in a kli rishon, this is only le-khatḥila, and even then, it is only due to the concern that the kli may have been used in a more intense fashion. In the case of a dishwasher, there is no such concern; this is the accepted ruling (Hagalat Kelim 13:225-227; Or Le-Tziyon 3:10:11 states that technically it is permissible to kasher just by cleaning). See Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 25:8, n. 10.

06. The Dining Table

Tables of the past were made of thick, solid wood. People would put burning hot pastries and boiling pots on them, so ḥametz dishes would occasionally spill on them. Therefore, the custom became to kasher tables by pouring boiling water over them (SA 451:20), and some were more stringent, pouring boiling water onto a white-hot stone on the table (Mahari Weil). However, today’s tables are more delicate and fragile, and would be damaged, warped, or defaced by boiling water. Since the tables are so delicate, people do not place boiling pots or burning hot pastries directly on them.

Therefore, one must clean the table well, as this kashers the table in according to its majority usage. But since sometimes hot ḥametz liquids can splash onto the table, and sometimes people place hot pastries on it, it is proper to take care not to eat at the table without a tablecloth serving as a barrier between the table and the food.

Some are scrupulous to affix nylon or contact paper, out of concern that the tablecloth placed on the table will move around, but affixing them creates a permanent barrier, over which one places the tablecloth. If it is a table on which one occasionally kneads dough, a permanent barrier must be placed or affixed to it.^[6]

For a table on which no one places hot ḥametz foods and no one kneads dough, it is sufficient to clean it well, and there is no need to cover it.

One may kasher a tablecloth on which ḥametz was eaten by laundering it in a washing machine. If a tablecloth cannot be washed, one should clean it and keep it in a locked cabinet with the ḥametz dishes.

[6]. SA 451:20 states that the custom is to pour boiling water on the tables, since ḥametz soup would sometimes spill onto the table (even though most of its use is with cold, and technically cleaning it is sufficient). According to Responsa Mahari Weil §193, since sometimes hot quiches are placed on the table, it absorbs taste at the level of kli rishon, so one would need to kasher it with a white-hot stone. Several Aḥaronim wrote that le-khatḥila one should act accordingly (Eliyah Rabba, Pri Megadim, MB 451:114). However, people do not place boiling pots or burning hot pastries directly on contemporary tables, which are comparatively fragile and delicate. At most, we place pots on a trivet, and occasionally ḥametz food spills from them onto the table, or we place hot – but not burning hot – pastries on the table, so pouring boiling water kashers it effectively even from its more intense usage. Yet even pouring boiling water can ruin the table. Therefore, it is proper to place a barrier on it. If it is a table on which one occasionally kneads dough, a permanent barrier must be affixed to it. This all follows the accepted view (above, 10:7) that le-khatḥila we are concerned about most intense usage. But be-di’avad, when necessary, even if it was used for dough, as long as its surface is smooth and there is no concern that ḥametz got stuck in its crevices, one may suffice with cleaning and rinsing, in accordance with most of its usage. Or Le-Tziyon 3:10:10 accepts this le-khatḥila.

07. The Refrigerator and Kitchen Cabinets

Because the refrigerator and kitchen cabinets are used with cold food, the only concern is that some ḥametz crumbs might remain there. Therefore, cleaning them is what kashers them. Hard to reach places where ḥametz crumbs may remain must be cleaned with soapy water to befoul crumbs that may be there and render them unfit for a dog’s consumption.

When kitchen cupboards are made of natural wood, it is hard to clean their cracks and crevices from ḥametz. If one does not wish to wet them with soapy water, he should clean them as well as he can and cover them with paper or cloth (MB 451:115).

08. Cutlery, Pots, and Skillets

We detailed the laws relating to hagala of kelim in chapter 10. The operative principle is that the intensity of use dictates the intensity of absorption, but the custom, le-khatḥila, is to kasher everything by means of hagala in a kli rishon (10:6). Therefore, the custom is to kasher cutlery in a kli rishon on the flame even though they absorb principally from a kli sheni. Even if one sometimes uses a fork with something on the fire, since it would be damaged by libun, it may be kashered through hagala, in accordance with the majority of its usage (10:6-7).

Before kashering, one must clean the kelim (10:9). We have already learned how to do hagala in practice (10:11) and how to kasher a large pot that cannot fit into another kli (10:12).

Regarding a skillet, le-khatḥila it is kashered by means of light libun, but one who wishes to kasher it by means of hagala may do so (10:4). A skillet that is normally used without oil – to fry malawach, for example – must be kashered by means of heavy libun (4, n. 3). Non-stick or Teflon skillets cannot be kashered since they are intended for frying without using oil. This means that they must be kashered by means of heavy libun, but since this procedure would ruin them, they cannot be kashered.^[7]

[7]. In times of need, such skillets can be kashered by means of light libun, in accordance with those who maintain that ke-bole’o kakh polto applies to the temperature of libun as well, combined with the opinion that the absorption of ḥametz throughout the year is considered the absorption of permissible matter (heteira bala; above, 10:5). Under extenuating circumstances, one may kasher them by means of hagala, in accordance with those who maintain that ḥametz is considered heteira bala (above, 10:3).

09. Kelim and Machines Used for Kneading and Mixing

Kelim used for kneading – the surface on which the kneading takes place, the rolling pins, and the parts of mixing and kneading machines that come into direct contact with dough – must be kashered by means of hagala. Even though the dough is cold, since the acidity of the ḥametz in the dough can intensify the absorption of the taste of ḥametz, they must be kashered via hagala (Ri, Raavyah, Rosh, SA 451:17). Some are more stringent, maintaining that hagala is ineffective for such kelim (Rashi, Rabbeinu Tam), because it is hard to clean off the dough that was absorbed in crevices. However, they can be kashered by means of light libun. If they have no crevices, they can by kashered via hagala (Rema 451:16-17; MB 94).^[8]

Mixers have holes whose purpose is to ventilate the motor, so that it does not overheat. Flour and pieces of dough splatter into these holes, and there is concern that, when used with Pesaḥ foods, pieces of ḥametz will fall into the food. Since it is hard to clean, it is better not to kasher it, but when there is great need for a mixer, one must open the motor compartment and clean it thoroughly.

[8]. The Talmud (Pesaḥim 30b) explains that kelim used with ḥametz cold are kashered by means of hadaḥa (rinsing), but kelim that were used with dough, whose acidity is harsh, cannot be used on Pesaḥ. According to most Rishonim, the meaning is that hadaḥa is not sufficient to kasher kelim used with ḥametz, but hagala is (Arukh, Ri, Raavyah, Rabbeinu Yeruḥam, and Tur. Others said that the Talmud refers to earthenware kelim, for which hagala, too, is ineffective; so say Rif, Ritz Gi’at, and Rambam as interpreted by Magid Mishneh. It stands to reason that these Rishonim would agree that kelim used for kneading ḥametz that are made of other materials can be kashered by means of hagala). Some are stringent, maintaining that even hagala is ineffective for these kelim (Rashi, Rabbeinu Tam, Rabbeinu Shimshon of Sens). Therefore, Rema wrote (451:16-17) that they are kashered by means of light libun. Many explained that hagala is ineffective for bowls used for dough because they have crevices that cannot be cleaned properly (Smak, Baḥ, Gra). Some are more stringent, maintaining that hagala is ineffective because the acidity of the ḥametz is absorbed intensely in the kli, so this would apply even to kneading kelim that have no crevices (MA). In practice, according to most Aḥaronim, if the kelim have no crevices, even those who adopt the stricter interpretation of the Talmud would agree that the kelim can be kashered by means of hagala (MB 451:94).

10. Various Other Kelim

Silver goblets: The custom, le-khatḥila, is to perform hagala on silver goblets used for kiddush wine, because ḥametz crumbs sometimes fall into the goblet and soak in the wine for 24 hours, and sometimes they soak in whiskey for 18 minutes (above, 10:13). Since this is a remote concern, if necessary, one may suffice with just rinsing them, in accordance with their majority usage.

The custom is to perform hagala on electric urns (such as those used on Shabbat) and kettles, because ḥametz crumbs may have fallen into them. Hagala is done by filling the device with as much water as possible, bringing the water to a boil in the same manner that the water is boiled all year round, and then letting some water out through the tap or spout through which the water is dispensed. Before hagala, it is best to clean out the stone deposits that accumulated inside. When the lid of an urn is made of metal and one regularly places challah loaves on it to warm them before a Shabbat meal, hagala in boiling water must be performed on the lid.^[9]

Thermos: After cleaning it properly, hagala in boiling water is performed. It is also possible to kasher it by pouring boiling water into it and on its opening.

Pop-up toasters and sandwich makers require heavy libun, and since this is liable to damage then, they should not be kashered. (Although we explained above, 10:5, that in times of need we are lenient and allow libun at the same temperature as the usage, since these appliances are difficult to clean, there is no room for leniency.)

A blender that is used to grate, chop, and dice foods – if it was used with cold foods, it is kashered by means of rinsing. If there are grooves in which food particles may remain, the appliance should be cleaned with soap until it is clear that any residual food is unfit for a dog’s consumption. If the appliance was used with hot foods, and one was not careful about using it with ḥametz all year round, all of the parts that touched hot foods should be kashered by means of hagala.^[10]

False teeth: These should be cleaned thoroughly before the onset of the ḥametz prohibition. They need not undergo hagala, because people do not normally put boiling foods or liquids in their mouths; just as they are used for both meat and dairy when cleaned in between, so can they be used on Pesaḥ.

[9]. This matter is unclear. Since there is no liquid present and the challah reached the temperature of yad soledet, perhaps it should be considered to have absorbed the taste of challah as though by means of direct fire, meaning that the lid would need libun, and regular libun will damage the lid. The custom is to be lenient because we factor in the view that ḥametz throughout the year has the status of “heteira” and thus hagala is effective where normally libun would be (as explained above, 10:3).

[10]. If a blender was used with cold, sharp foods (that are so sharp that they cannot be eaten by themselves), and one was not careful about using it with ḥametz all year round, it must be kashered le-khatḥila by means of hagala, as we are concerned that the combination of the strong abrasive action with the sharpness of the food caused the flavor of ḥametz to be absorbed into the appliance (SA, YD 96:1; Kaf Ha-ḥayim 1). If the kelim are made of metal or glass, or were not used with hot foods, then even if they were used with sharp foods, they can be kashered by rinsing them. (We explained in Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:12, n. 15, that the special status of sharp foods is the subject of disagreement among Rishonim and Aḥaronim; since our glass and metal kelim do not absorb or release flavor, we follow the lenient view and consider sharp foods as we treat all other foods.)

A coffee machine: One cleans it and heats up water to the highest temperature in the normal manner.

11. Earthenware and Porcelain Kelim

If an earthenware kli absorbs ḥametz hot, even if it was in a kli sheni, hagala is not effective. It is also impossible to kasher it by means of libun (above, 10:9). If used cold, however, one may kasher it by means of hadaḥa, that is, by cleaning and rinsing it. If a ḥametz beverage sat in it for 24 hours, one may kasher it by means of hagala or by soaking it three times, each time for 24 hours (SA 451:21; above, 10:13). Clay and ceramic kelim are considered earthenware.

The poskim are divided about the status of porcelain (china). Porcelain is made as an earthenware kli, but it is coated with glass by brushing it with or immersing it in the substance from which glass is made. In practice: le-khatḥila, porcelain kelim should not be kashered, but in times of need, as long as there are no cracks, they can be kashered by means of hagala.^[11]

[11]. The poskim are divided about the status of porcelain. Radbaz (Responsa Radbaz 3:401) wrote that it is proper to be stringent and consider it earthenware, as it is hard to know whether the coating is impervious. He even conducted an experiment: he cooked in a porcelain kli and found that its weight increased a bit, implying that it absorbed matter. Many showed concern for his view, including: Pri Ḥadash 451:26; Maḥzik Berakha 451:10; MB 451:163; Ben Ish Ḥai, Tzav 14; R. Ḥayim Palachi in Mo’ed Le-kol Ḥai 4:3; and Kol Mevasser 1:80. Against them, many practiced leniency and considered it to be like glass. Several poskim ruled accordingly, including Shiyarei Knesset Ha-gedola OḤ 451; Hagahot Beit Yosef 30 (though he was personally stringent, he did not agree to this stringency for others); and She’elat Ya’avetz 1:67. Rav Goren ruled accordingly for the IDF with regard to porcelain plates that have no cracks and that are generally used with a kli sheni (Meshiv Milḥama 2:150).

It seems that the primary reasoning of those who adopt the stringent view is concern that the glass coating is imperfect. It emerges from Pri Ḥadash and Ḥida (Maḥazik Berakha) that if the porcelain is real, there are grounds for leniency, but it is often counterfeited. Indeed, in the past, many would coat the earthenware with a glasslike substance with a paintbrush, and sometimes the coating was imperfect and had cracks. However, when the earthenware is immersed in liquid glass, the coating is uniform, smooth, and strong. Therefore, although le-khatḥila one should show concern for the stringent view, when necessary, one may be lenient, since nowadays the manufacture of porcelain is high quality, i.e., the glass coating is strong and the kli does not absorb. However, when the kli has cracks, its status reverts to being like earthenware.

Today there are high-quality plates made (by Arcopal and others) from sand. Their texture is hard like glass, and, as can be seen when they break, the interior material is hard and impervious, like glass. Although their surfaces are made rough for aesthetic reasons, they have the status of glassware and are kashered by means of hagala, as will be explained in the next section.

12. Glassware

A dispute arose in the time of the Rishonim regarding glass kelim. Some say that since glass is smooth and hard, and even if it held hot foods, the taste of those foods is not absorbed into it and does not adhere to it. Therefore, even if glass kelim were used with prohibited foods or ḥametz throughout the year, it is sufficient to clean them thoroughly to enable their use for kosher food or on Pesaḥ (Raavyah, Rosh, Rashba, Ran, SA 451:26).

Others disagree, saying that since glassware is made of sand, like earthenware, even if glass kelim do not actually absorb, they have the status of earthenware, which cannot be kashered. Therefore, if one used them with hot ḥametz foods, there is no way to kasher them for Pesaḥ (Rabbeinu Yeḥiel, Smag, Rabbeinu Peretz, Terumat Ha-deshen, and Rema).

Still other Rishonim adopt a middle position. In their view, glass kelim have the same status as metal kelim. If they were used with boiling hot ḥametz food, they must be kashered by means of hagala in boiling hot water (Rambam, Or Zaru’a, and Shibolei Ha-leket).

Many Sephardim follow the lenient opinion and kasher glassware by rinsing it only, and many Ashkenazim have the custom not to kasher glassware. In practice, however, it seems that the middle position, according to which glassware has the same status as metal kelim and can be kashered by means of hagala, is primary. Those whose family custom is to be lenient may maintain their custom, and those whose family custom is to be stringent should maintain their custom.^[12]

[12]. In Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 32:5, n. 3, this issue is addressed extensively. The following is a summary: Most Sephardic rabbis rule leniently that glassware may be kashered by rinsing, in accordance with SA 451:26, Pri Ḥadash, Shetilei Zeitim, and Sha’ar Ha-mifkad. Many contemporary poskim ruled likewise, as cited by Alei Hadas, Netivei Am, Shemesh U-magen, and R. Ovadia Yosef. Some are stringent and require hagala, including: Rav Pe’alim, R. Ḥayim David Ha-Levi, R. Mordechai Eliyahu, R. David Shloush, and R. Kapaḥ. It seems that in the past, glass was not strong and durable enough to be used in a kli rishon on a flame, so the Rishonim and Shulḥan Arukh, who permit glassware with rinsing and without hagala, were referring to kelim whose most intense use was at the level of irui or kli sheni. There are also differences of opinion among Ashkenazic poskim. Rema 451:26 rules stringently that glass kelim cannot be kashered for Pesaḥ by means of hagala, but be-di’avad, if they were cleaned, hot food placed in these kelim is not forbidden (Darkhei Moshe 451:19; Taz 451:30). According to MA 451:49, one may be lenient, be-di’avad, only after kashering by means of hagala. Ḥok Yaakov 451:68, SAH 451:73, Mekor Ḥayim 451:46, and Maharsham concur. Some rule that hagala should be performed three times on glassware, because according to Itur, hagala three times is effective after 24 hours even for earthenware kelim (Tzitz Eliezer 9:26, quoting R. Tzvi Pesaḥ Frank). Many have written that we rule stringently and do not kasher glassware only when it comes to ḥametz, but one may kasher kelim from other prohibitions by means of hagala. This is the view of Maharam Brisk, Seridei Esh, Beit Avi, and Minḥat Yitzḥak. According to She’elat Ya’avetz 1:67, technically one may kasher glass kelim by rinsing them, but due to the severity of the ḥametz prohibition, the custom developed to avoid using them. Beit Leḥem Yehuda, Ḥamudei Daniel, and Yad Yehuda state similarly. Since there are differences of opinion among both Sephardic and Ashkenazic poskim, I wrote in favor of the middle position for all communities.

13. Kelim of Enamel, Plastic, and Other Materials

Enamel kelim are made of metal and coated with a thin layer of enamel for aesthetic reasons. The inside of the pot is usually painted white, while the outside is decorated with different colors. Enamel is made of sand like glassware, but it is manufactured differently. In practice, one may perform hagala on enamel kelim like all other metal kelim.^[13]

The same applies to all types of metals, leather, wood, and bone. Only earthenware cannot be kashered, because, due to the unique composition of earthenware, it absorbs a lot and does not release all that it absorbs.

Plastic kelim that have absorbed the taste of boiling hot food are kashered via hagala with boiling water, like all other kelim. However, sometimes plastic kelim get scratched, making it hard to clean them well. Therefore, the accepted recommendation is to replace plastic baby bottles and pacifiers before Pesaḥ, as it is hard to clean them to the point that their original shine is restored. Nevertheless, in times of need, they can be kashered by means of a good cleaning and hagala or pouring boiling water from a kli rishon.^[14]

[13]. At first, poskim were uncertain about enamel because its craftsmen kept enamel’s composition secret. Then, when it became known that enamel is sand-based, uncertainly arose again as to whether such kelim have the status of earthenware. Responsa Ḥatam Sofer (YD 113) states that enamel is kashered via light libun. R. Shlomo Kluger rules stringently that one may not kasher enamel even via libun, since it might get damaged in the process (Tuv Ta’am Va-da’at 1:183). AHS YD 121:27 states that it can be kashered by performing hagala three times, relying on the view of Itur that triple hagala is effective even for earthenware kelim once 24 hours have passed since their use with prohibited food. The accepted ruling is that they can be kashered by means of hagala, since they are primarily metal and the enamel coating is like glass. This is the view of Aderet, and so state R. Mordechai Eliyahu’s Hilkhot Ḥagim 5:39 and Ḥazon Ovadia, Pesaḥ, p. 157.

[14]. Igrot Moshe (OḤ 1:92) states that one should not perform hagala on kelim made of plastic or other synthetic materials not mentioned by the Rishonim, since such materials might be like earthenware, which does not release what it has absorbed. This is also the view of R. Yaakov Shaul Elyashar and Lehorot Natan 6:69. Nonetheless, most poskim agree that plastic kelim can be kashered by means of hagala. These include: Responsa Ḥelkat Yaakov 2:163; Seridei Esh 2:160; R. Levi Yitzḥak Halperin; R. Mordechai Eliyahu, Hilkhot Ḥagim 5:86; Ḥazon Ovadia, Pesaḥ, p. 151; and Or Le-Tziyon 3:10:13.

15. Enamel Utensils

Enamel utensils are made of metal and coated with a thin layer of enamel for aesthetic reasons. The inside of the pot is usually colored white, while the outside is decorated with different colors. Enamel is made of sand like glassware, but it is processed differently. Great uncertainty arose regarding such utensils. At first, poskim were uncertain because the craftsmen kept enamel’s composition secret. Then, when it became known that enamel is made of sand, uncertainly arose again as to whether such utensils have the status of earthenware.

In practice, the poskim rule that one may perform hagala on enamel utensils like all other metal utensils, and some recommend performing hagala three times. Yet regarding Pesaĥ, some instruct not to perform hagala on enamel utensils in light of the severity of the ĥametz prohibition.^[13]

[13]. Responsa Ĥatam Sofer YD 113 states that enamel is koshered via light libun. R. Shlomo Kluger rules stringently that one may not kosher enamel even via libun, since it might get damaged in the process (Tuv Ta’am Va-da’at, first edition §183). Ktav Sofer YD 78 permits koshering enamel via triple hagala. SHT 451:191 quotes Ĥatam Sofer and then states that many great authorities were more stringent in this matter when it came to Pesaĥ. This is also the view of Maharsham 1:53. Aderet rules that one may kosher such utensils via hagala, but out of respect for Ĥatam Sofer states that one should use triple hagala (which according to Itur works even for earthenware vessels once twenty-four hours have elapsed since they were last used). This is also the opinion of AHS YD 121:27. R. Mordechai Eliyahu states that one may kosher these utensils for Pesaĥ via hagala, and preferably triple hagala.

16. Plastic Utensils

Plastic utensils that have absorbed the taste of boiling hot food are koshered via hagala with boiling water, like all other utensils. This is true of all types of metal, such as silver, copper, iron, aluminum, etc., as well as utensils of leather, wood, and bone. It is earthenware alone that the poskim say cannot be koshered, because, due to its unique composition, it is very absorbent, but does not release all that it absorbs. And some poskim say that glassware has the same status as earthenware.

However, Igrot Moshe (OĤ 1:92) states that one should not perform hagala on utensils made of plastic or other synthetic materials not mentioned by the Rishonim, since such materials might be like earthenware, which does not release what it has absorbed. Nonetheless, the overwhelming majority of Aĥaronim agree that hagala is effective on plastic utensils, and this is the halakha. Utensils made of hard plastic are koshered through hagala in a kli rishon on the flame, whereas plastic utensils that are liable to be damaged in a kli rishon on the burner can be koshered at the same level they absorbed the ĥametz.^[14]

[14]. Those who ruled leniently are: Responsa Ĥelkat Yaakov 2:163, Seridei Esh 2:160, Tzitz Eliezer 4:6, and many others. This is also what Hagalat Kelim states in 13:91. Sidur Pesaĥ Ke-hilkhato 9:25 assigns greater weight to the stringent opinions, and states that triple hagala seemingly works according to everyone (based on the opinion of Itur that triple hagala is effective even on earthenware vessels once twenty-four hours have elapsed since their last use, although it seems that one needs to change the water between each stage of hagala; see Sidur Pesaĥ Ke-hilkhato 9:25 n. 10). It seems proper to wait twenty-four hours, ensuring that any absorbed taste is foul, in which case hagala is only rabbinically required, and one may be lenient in a case of uncertainty about a rabbinic law.

01. The Mitzva of Eating Matza

It is a Torah commandment to eat matza on the night of the 15th of the month of Nisan, as it says, “In the evening, you shall eat matzot” (Shemot 12:18). Even though the Torah also says, “you shall eat matzot for seven days” (ibid. 12:15), the Sages inferred, based on the rules for interpreting the Torah, that the Torah does not mean to command us to eat matzot all seven days. Rather, the intent is that matza is the staple food that we eat on Pesaḥ in lieu of bread. However, one who wants to live off of fruits, vegetables, meat, and dairy products may do so.

The simple meaning of this is that one who eats matzot all seven days of Pesaḥ does not thereby fulfill a mitzva. This is what the Sages meant when they said (Pesaḥim 120a) that eating matza during the seven days is “optional” (“reshut”). Yet many leading halakhic authorities have written that although eating matza is obligatory only at the Seder, and indeed that is why the Sages instituted the special blessing over the eating of matza at the Seder only, nevertheless one who eats matza on the other days of Pesaḥ still fulfills a mitzva, even if it is not obligatory. In this view, the Sages referred to eating matza on the remaining days of Pesaḥ as a “reshut” only by way of contrast with the obligation to eat matza on the night of the 15th. According to this view, the verse “you shall eat matzot for seven days” retains its simple meaning. This is how Ibn Ezra and Ḥizkuni explained the verse, this is implied by a statement by Rosh, and this was the practice of the Vilna Gaon. However, even they maintained that the mitzva consists of eating a kezayit (olive’s bulk) of matza at each meal, and that eating more does not add to the mitzva.^[1]

[1]. Pesaḥim 120a explains this based on one of the rules for interpreting the Torah, namely, that any item singled out from a class of items did not leave the class to teach a new idea only about itself, but to apply the new teaching to the entire class. In this case, the “class” is “you shall eat matza for seven days.” However, the Torah says later on, “for six days you shall eat matza, and the seventh day will be a festival for the Lord, your God” (Devarim 16:8). Clearly, the “seventh day” was excluded from the general class in that there is no mitzva to eat matza on that day. This in turn teaches about the entire class – all seven days – that there is no mitzva to eat matza. Only on the night of the 15th, the Seder night, is there such a mitzva, for we were commanded especially: “In the evening you shall eat matzot.”

Most Rishonim and Aḥaronim do not mention any mitzva associated with eating matza during the seven days of Pesaḥ, implying that there is in fact no such mitzva. However, many Rishonim and Aḥaronim do actually mention such a mitzva, including: Ibn Ezra on Shemot 23:15, Ḥizkuni on Shemot 12:15, and Responsa Rosh 3:23 citing the Ge’onim that one does not wear tefillin on Ḥol Ha-mo’ed Pesaḥ, since there is already a “sign” on Pesaḥ, namely, eating matza. So states MB 475:45 in the name of Gra (Ma’aseh Rav §185).

02. Shemura Matza

There is a mitzva to safeguard the matzot from becoming ḥametz, as the Torah states, “And you shall observe (u-shemartem) the matzot” (Shemot 12:17). This refers specifically to the matzot eaten on the Seder night in fulfillment of the mitzva, for the very next verse states, “in the evening you shall eat matzot.” The other matzot one eats on Pesaḥ are like any other food: they may be eaten as long as there is no concern that they contain ḥametz. However, we have been commanded to safeguard especially carefully the matza used for the mitzva on Seder night. This matza is called “shemura”.

Le-khatḥilah, the safeguarding of the matzot begins with the harvesting of the grain to be used for the matzot. Common practice is to harvest the wheat while it is still a bit moist, for if it were to dry out completely and then get drenched by rain, it would become ḥametz. Likewise, the wheat kernels must be stored where there is no concern that they will come into contact with water.

One may also fulfill the mitzva of eating shemura matza with matzot that were guarded from the time the wheat was milled into flour. As long as the wheat kernels showed no signs of becoming ḥametz and nothing has happened that would undermine the presumption that they are not ḥametz, one need not be concerned that they had become wet and became ḥametz. However, this is not the best kind of shemura matza, since it was guarded only from the time of milling.

Under extenuating circumstances, when no flour that has been guarded from the time of milling is available, one may use regular, store-bought flour and fulfill the mitzva by guarding the dough from the time of kneading (SA 453:4). Even where it is customary to rinse grains of wheat lightly before milling them, it is still permissible in extenuating circumstances to buy regular flour in the market, since a brief rinse is presumed not to be enough to cause the grains to become ḥametz. However, where it is customary to briefly soak the grains in water, one may not buy flour for matza in the market, since it is presumed to be ḥametz (MB 451:24). Therefore, in practice, one should not buy flour that is not certified kosher for Pesaḥ since the wheat is often soaked in water and may have become ḥametz.^[2]

In practice, today’s custom is to be scrupulous about shemura matza; matzot that have been guarded from the time of harvest are used to fulfill the mitzva of eating matza on the Seder night. The enhanced practice has taken root so thoroughly that people have come to call matza that has been guarded only from the time of milling “non-shemura matza,” even though it is considered shemura halakhically, and one may use it to fulfill the mitzva of eating matza.

[2]. According to Rif, Rambam, and other Rishonim, the wheat needs to be guarded from the time it is harvested; according to Rosh, from the time of milling, since the mitzva only begins when the wheat touches water, and wheat was usually milled by watermills. The implication of Rosh’s opinion is that as long as one mills the wheat without using water, the mitzva of guarding the wheat begins at the time of kneading (MA 453:7). However, several Rishonim wrote that the wheat must be guarded from the time of milling and did not mention the rationale of the watermill; among them are Rashi, Shibolei Ha-leket, and Smak.

Geonic responsa, cited by many Rishonim, state that if no wheat was guarded from the time of milling, be-di’avad one may purchase flour from the market. If the matza was guarded from the time of milling, one recites the berakha of “al akhilat matza” over it (BHL 453:4), because Ran and many other Rishonim explain that according to Rif and those who agree with him, guarding the matza from the time of harvest is merely the best way to fulfill the mitzva (“mitzva min ha-muvḥar”). According to Kaf Ha-ḥayim 482:1, under extenuating circumstances, one may even recite the berakha over matza that was only supervised from the time of kneading. It seems that most poskim concur that be-di’avad, guarding from the time of kneading suffices.

Tur and Beit Yosef state that according to Rif, Rabbeinu Yeruḥam, Ran, and Magid Mishneh, the need to guard the matza pertains only to the matza used to fulfill the mitzva on the first night of Pesaḥ. All other matza eaten on Pesaḥ need not be guarded (MB 453:21). (Although some maintain that one must be stringent and use shemura matza for the entire holiday, either because there is greater concern about matza, which is made of flour and water, or because they maintain that there is a mitzva to eat shemura matza all Pesaḥ; see below, section 5.) According to Baḥ and those who agree with him, the mitzva to guard the matza is rabbinic, and the rabbis merely supported their enactment using a verse from the Torah. However, according to most poskim, this mitzva is from the Torah. So states BHL 460:1 s.v. “ein”, citing Rashba, Pri Ḥadash, and other Rishonim and Aḥaronim.

03. Must the Safeguarding Be with the Intent to Fulfill a Mitzva?

Safeguarding the matzot to be used for fulfilling the mitzva of eating matza on the Seder night has two meanings: being extra vigilant to prevent it from becoming ḥametz and intending that the making of this matza is for the sake of the mitzva of eating matza (“le-shem matzat mitzva”). It is therefore necessary that the matza be kneaded and baked by Jews who are halakhic adults, who can be relied upon to focus their actions for the sake of matzat mitzva, not gentiles, minors, or the mentally unfit, since they cannot be relied upon to have the proper intent (She’iltot, Rashba).

Some dispute this second meaning. In their view, the mitzva of guarding the matza requires extra vigilance to prevent the matzat mitzva from becoming ḥametz but not that the matzot are baked with special intent. Thus, gentiles and minors are fit to knead and bake matzat mitzva, as long as an adult Jew supervises their work, ensuring that they work quickly and that the dough does not become ḥametz. His supervision should be for the sake of matzat mitzva (Ra’ah).

In practice, at the time of kneading one should take care to fulfill both meanings of “safeguarding.” Thus, one must insist that Jews knead and bake the matzat mitzva, taking care that the dough does not become ḥametz and intending that the matza be for the sake of the mitzva. However, at the time of harvesting and milling, the first meaning is sufficient. Thus, the wheat may be harvested and milled by gentiles as long as a Jew stands nearby and supervises their work, ensuring that it does not become ḥametz (SA 460:1; MB and SHT 4 ad loc.).^[3]

Le-khatḥila, one should say out loud, when starting to work on matzot, that all the work is being done for the sake of producing matzat mitzva; be-di’avad, it is sufficient that he thought it (BHL 460:1, based on Pri Megadim). He should also have in mind that it is for the matzat mitzva that one eats on Seder night, but if he had in mind that it is for matza for Pesaḥ, he has fulfilled the obligation (SAH 453:14).

[3]. According to most poskim, there are two meanings of “safeguarding”: ensuring that it does not become ḥametz and intent to make the matza as matzat mitzva. According to Ra’ah, there is only one purpose: ensuring that it does not become ḥametz for the sake of the matzat mitzva. According to R. Hai Gaon and others, it is indeed necessary to intend to use the wheat for the mitzva, but if a Jew supervises a gentile or child and instructs him to knead the dough specifically le-shem matzat mitzva, we may rely on this for proper intent. SA 460:1 follows the view of most poskim that safeguarding entails intent to make matzat mitzva as well, so one may not use matza that was kneaded or baked by a gentile (MB 460:3, SHT ad loc.).

According to Baḥ and Eliya Rabba, those who believe that the guarding must begin at the time of the harvest (see the previous section) also require a Jew to harvest and mill the wheat le-shem matzat mitzva. Some are meticulous about this in practice. (According to those who maintain that turning on a machine does not constitute proper intent – see the next section – the harvesting and milling must be done by hand, not with agricultural machinery; very few people insist on this.)

Taz explains that the harvesting and milling need not be done with intention for the sake of matzat mitzva; therefore, one may have a gentile harvest and mill the wheat, provided that a Jew supervises and ensures that the wheat does not become ḥametz. The need to have Intentions during specific actions begins at the time of kneading, so it is necessary to ensure that a Jew performs the kneading and baking (according to most poskim). Consequently, SA 460:1 rules that gentiles are unfit to perform the kneading or baking of the matza. BHL 460:1 s.v. “ein” states that the universal custom is to be lenient in accordance with Taz, that gentiles harvest and mill the wheat under the supervision of a Jew. So states Ḥok Yaakov and SAH 453:16. Matza that is made this way is called “shemura mi-she’at ketzira” – supervised from the time of the harvest.

04. The Fitness of Handmade and Machine-Made Matza for the Mitzva

A great dispute has raged among poskim ever since the invention of matza-baking machines. The dispute centers on two principal questions: 1) Is there indeed no concern that machine-made matzot may become ḥametz? 2) Can one use them to fulfill the mitzva of eating matza on the Seder night?

Concerning the question of ḥametz, it is agreed that everything depends on the nature of the machine and on its supervision. As long as there are kashrut supervisors who ensure that there is no risk of ḥametz, the matzot are kosher for Pesaḥ. Thus even the most pious and God-fearing Jews eat machine-made matzot on Pesaḥ.

The second question, however, is still debated. Some say that the mitzva of guarding the matza requires that the entire process of kneading and baking be done with explicit intent that they are le-shem matzat mitzva, and since a machine cannot have intentions, one would not fulfill the mitzva of eating matza on the Seder night with machine-made matza.

Most poskim maintain that one can fulfill the mitzva by eating machine-made matzot, for several reasons. Firstly, as we learned, some maintain that the mitzva of guarding the matza only requires one to ensure that it does not become ḥametz, and it is irrelevant whether this is done while making the matza by hand or by supervising the activity of a machine (based on Ra’ah). Furthermore, a human being operates the machine, and if he operates it with the intent of making matzat mitzva, then automatically all of the machine’s operations are considered to have been done for the sake of the mitzva.

In practice, one may use machine-made matza to fulfill the mitzva of eating matza on the Seder night. Many are scrupulous to fulfill the mitzva with handmade matzot that were baked under good supervision, but it is not necessary to eat handmade matzot throughout the Seder meal. Rather, scrupulous fulfillment entails eating handmade matza for those kezayit quantities that constitute the mitzva (see below 16:22-25).^[4]

[4]. Originally, the machines were operated with more human input, which caused concerns of ḥametz and of breaking from tradition. After the machines were enhanced and improved, these concerns abated, but the concern that operating the machine does not constitute intent remained and was even magnified. Among those who prohibit machine matza are: R. Shlomo Kluger, R. Ḥayim Halberstam (the Sanzer Rebbe, author of Divrei Ḥayim), R. Yitzḥak Meir Alter (the Gerrer Rebbe, author of Ḥidushei Ha-Rim), R. Avraham Bornstein of Sochatchov (author of Avnei Nezer), and most of the great Ḥasidic leaders. Even today, most Ḥasidic poskim tend to dismiss machine-made matza. Among those who permit are: the authors of Sho’el U-meishiv, Tiferet Yisrael, Ktav Sofer, and Arukh Le-ner. Some poskim even prefer machine matza to handmade matza, since there is less of a chance of the machine matza becoming ḥametz. This is the opinion of R. Meir Simḥa of Dvinsk (author of Or Same’aḥ) and R. Shmuel Salant, the head of the Jerusalem rabbinical court, who personally ate machine matza, as did the Lithuanian community in old Jerusalem. The main reason for preferring machine matza is that the most important dimension of guarding the matza is to ensure that it does not become ḥametz, and based on what they saw, machine matza was less likely to become ḥametz. R. Tzvi Pesaḥ Frank, cited in Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:3, states that since gentiles and children are intelligent, a supervising Jew cannot supply proper intent on their behalf while they knead. A machine, on the other hand, has no intelligence, so the intent of the Jew operating the machine is effective. Thus, my teacher R. Tzvi Yehuda Kook would eat machine-made matza at the Seder. R. Min-Hahar and R. Messas also preferred machine-made matza. R. Shaul Yisraeli stated that there is no preference for handmade matza over machine-made matza. According to R. Mordechai Eliyahu, even though one may recite the berakha over machine-made matza, handmade matza is preferable. (Responsa Oneg Yom Tov OḤ 42 explains that even though the mitzva to guard the matza is from the Torah, if for some reason one does not have matza that was guarded for the sake of the mitzva, he still has a Torah obligation to eat matza on the Seder night, presumably with a berakha, even though he has not fulfilled the mitzva of guarding the matza.)

I wrote that using handmade matza constitutes a more scrupulous form of observance based on my father’s explanation. Many things have changed in recent decades. Machines are more automated than ever, so there are more grounds for concern that no specific action was done for the sake of the mitzva. Perhaps in the past, when more human input was necessary to operate the machinery, this problem was less of a concern, but today the machines operate at the touch of a button. Moreover, when all of the matza was handmade, there was a concern that the pressure to supply matza to the entire nation meant that matza bakers would not be sufficiently meticulous in their efforts to keep the matza from becoming ḥametz. The machines were a great solution to that issue. Nowadays, on the other hand, most handmade matza factories are extraordinarily scrupulous, to the point that the situation may have been reversed, and there is less concern about handmade matza becoming ḥametz than there is about machine-made matza. Even though there is a consensus that the intent of the machine operator or the kashrut supervisor is sufficient, having the proper intent throughout the process (as is the case with handmade matza) enhances the mitzva. This is especially true if one bakes his own matza, since it is always better for one to fulfill a mitzva on his own rather than through an agent (this is indeed my father’s custom – to bake his own matzot mitzva).

Chapter Contents

Menu

languages

Books list