Heart of the Matter

While Pesach is of course full of Mitzvos that are brimming with emotion and meaning, there are many relatively technical parts of the Yom Tov. We know, however, that deep and important messages can be found even in the seemingly mundane Dinim. In fact, sometimes the more practical Mitzvos and Halachos can actually provide us with the most impactful insights into the essence of the Yom Tov.

The Gemrah at the beginning of Pesachim that tells us that the Bedikas Chometz done Or L’Arba Assur is a Din D’Rabanan, but “Min HaTorah B’Bitul B’Alma Saggi”. Contrary to what we may have assumed, the Gemara is telling us that M’Doraysa it is not necessary to search for and destroy Chometz—Bittul itself is sufficient.

Rashi, on the Gemara explains that since the Torah used the word “Tashbisu” and not “Tiva’aru”, we know that Biur is not actually needed, just Hashbasa. Rashi concludes “V’Hashbasa D’Lev Hi Hashbasa”. The way to accomplish Hashbasa is B’Lev.

The Rambam seems to echo the words of Rashi here. In the third Perek of Hilchos Chometz U’Matzah he writes: “Mitzvas Asei Min HaTorah L’Hashbis HaChametz Kodem Zman Issur Achilaso…” There is a Mitzvah D’Oraysa to destroy Chometz prior to the Zman of Issur. In the next Halacha the Rambam continues: “U’Mah Hi Hashbasa Zu HaAmurah B’Torah Sheyivatel HaChametz B’Libo V’Yachshav Oso K’Afar.” Rambam too identifies the Mitzvah of Hashbasa, which is the Ikkur Din D’oraysa, using the term “B’Libo”, just as Rashi did.

There are, of course, many Dinim and Halachos based on this Gemarah and the Rambam, and many pages have been written to clarify them. There does seem to be, however, one underlying question that should be addressed as well.

There are many Mitzvos which we fulfil throughout the year, and they generally fall into one of two categories: Kum V’Asay, intentional action or Shev V’Al Taseh, intentional inaction. Some Mitzvos require us to carry our an action—shaking a Lulav, eating Matzah or blowing Shofar—while other Mitzvos call for inaction, such as fasting on Yom Kippur. The Mitzvah of Tashbisu seems to stand alone: we are told to destroy the Chometz not by a specific action, but by merely considering them to be destroyed. Rather than the Torah telling us to burn the Chometz, or dispose of them in some other way, Rashi is telling us that we accomplish this Mitzvah through Hashbasa B’Lev.

The question that begs an answer is: why? Why is Pesach the only time in which we accomplish a prime aspect of the Yom Tov—the destruction of Chometz—through thought alone? Even the Kol Chamira that we say seems to be a Giluy Milsa, or a text introduced by the Chachamim to ensure that each person is truely Mevatel the Chometz. M’Ikur HaDin, though, just considering the Chometz to be Battul is enough to render them Mushbas, thus fulfilling the Mitzvah of Tashbisu. Why now? Why is a Halacha such as this related to Pesach and what does it teach us about the Yom Tov?

Looking at the words of both Rashi and the Rambam, there is one word that sticks out as being integral to the Mitzvah of Tashbisu: Lev. Both Rishonim describe the process of Hashbasa using this word, and Rashi actually seems to define the term Hashbasa as being related to the Lev. That being the case, it appears that the Lev is at the heart of the matter, leading us again to ask: why? Why is a Mitzvah so integral to the Yom Tov of Pesach done specifically B’Lev?

Interestingly, there is an occurrence of the term “Lev” in the Torah that also seems related to Pesach.

At the beginning of Parshas Vayera, we learn of the visit that the three Malachim paid Avrohom Avinu. The Passuk tells us that when Avrohom noticed the three men passing his tent, he begged them to enter so that he may provide for them, tempting them with a bite to eat: “V’Ekcha Pas Lechem V’Saadu Libchem Achar Tavoru.” Avrohom offered the men bread, which he told them will nourish their heats.

The Medrash Rabba, there, teaches us that this all took place on Pesach and that the Lechem which Avrohom provided the Malachim was actually Matzah.

We cannot assume that the words “V’Saadu Libchem” are incidental, and that Avrohom was merely describing the provisions he would offer his guests, for the Torah does not relate unimportant facts. Rather, we must understand why Avrohom told the Malachim that the bread he was to give them would result in “Saadu Libchem”, and in what way this is related to the day on which this all occurred—Pesach.

As we know, the first time a word is used in the Torah can teach us a great deal about its true meaning. In this case, the initial occurrence of the word Lev is actually quite interesting.

The Passuk in Parshas Noach tells us: “VaYomer Hashem El Libo Lo Osif L’Kallel Od Es Ha’Adama”. After Noach brought his Korbanos, creating a Re’ach Nichoach, HKBH decided that he would no longer punish the earth on account of mankind, “Ki Yetzer Lev HaAdam Ra’ah MiNeurav”.

The Medrash Rabba on this Passuk contrasts the words “Voymer…El Libo” with the term “VaYomer…B’Libo” using an important Klal: “HaReshaim Hem B’Reshus Liban HaTzaddikim Liban B’Reshusam”. When speaking about Tzaddikim, or HKBH L’Havdil, the Torah uses the words “Voymer…El Libo”, indicating that the person is in control of their Lev. In the case of Reshaim such as Esav and Haman, however, the words “VaYomer…B’Libo” are used, because the Lev of a Rasha controls him.

While this Medrash provides an easy way to identify whether a person mentioned in the Passuk is a Tzaddik or Rasha, we certainly must understand its meaning. What is truly meant by the words “HaReshaim Hem B’Reshus Liban HaTzaddikim Liban B’Reshusam”?

In his Sefer Yad HaMelech on Hilchos Teshuva, R’ Elizer Landau of Brode, a grandson of the Noda B’Yehuda, discussed the concept of Bechira which is mentioned by the Rambam there. As part of his novel approach to this Yesod, he explains the words of the Medrash.

Some people, notes the Yad Hamelech, view the concept of Bechirah Chafshis in a negative light. The freedom to choose between right and wrong, good and evil, exists because HKBH allowed us to be Bocher—but this set us up for failure. If we did not have the ability to choose between Tov and Ra’ah, we would be compelled to do the Ratzon HaBorei in every situation. As such, the fact that we sometimes fail is the fault of our Bechira.

He explains that this attitude is rooted in a misunderstanding of Bechira, which he frames in a new way.

When HKBH created mankind he said “Na’aseh Adam B’Tzalmenu K’Dmuseinu”. A person is elevated from animals because, like HKBH he is Moshel. Whereas Hashem is Moshel on the world, using Bechira a person can be Moshel on himself. Because the gift of Bechira came from the words Na’aseh Adam B’Tzalmenu, explains the Yad Hamelech, it is impossible for it to create Ra’ah.

Rather, the gift of Bechira is the ability to be Bocher BaTov, contrary to the machinations of the Yetzer Harah. A persons natural inclination is toward his own Retzonos—be they pure or otherwise. Without the gift of Bechira, we would all be slaves to our inclinations, never being able to rise above the pull of our Taivos, never being able to escape our natural Middos, never being able to be more than we already are. Only because Hashem said “Na’aseh Adam B’Tzalmenu K’Dmuseinu” do we have hope: we can be Moshel over our own selves, being Bocher BaTov even against our Yetzer Harah.

Based on this idea, the Yad Hamelech explains the Medrash in Parshas Noach. “HaReshaim Hem B’Reshus Liban HaTzaddikim Liban B’Reshusam”. A person’s Lev is the seat of his Yetzer Harah, the source of his Taivos and all the tendancies that steer us from the Derech Hashem. When a person is able to be Bocher BaTov against the pull of his Retzonos, he is in the category of HaTzaddikim Liban B’Reshusam, as he controls his Lev. When he cannot be Bocher Batov, a person is said to be B’Reshus Libo, as his Retzonos are in control, and his Bechira rendered useless. The true meaning of the word “Lev” is now understood: the Retzonos of a person that run contrary to his Bechira are called his Lev. With this in mind, perhaps we can understand the Mitzvah of Tashbisu, and in turn the words of Avrohom Avinu.

The Yidden in Mitzyrayim knew the ultimate purpose of the Geulah: Tavdun Es HaElokim Al HaHar HZeh. We would be leaving the Kur HaBarzel, to be followed shortly by Mattan Torah. This was nothing short of daunting—the years of Galus had left us bruised and battered—many were unable to extract themselves from the Toevas Mitzrayim, and even those who could were greatly affected by all they had undergone. Their unease, their lack of confidence in their ability to keep the Torah and Mitzvos was answered by the Mitzvah of Tashbisu.

As we stood on the precipice of Yetzias Mitzrayim, just days before we would be led to freedom, HKBH spoke to Moshe Rabbeinu and gave him the Mitzvos of Pesach, included among them the words “U’Biyom HaRishon Tashbisu Se’or Mibatechem”. The only way Hashbasa B’Lev can work is if a person has control over his Lev: only if we are able to instruct our hearts, in the manner of Tazaddikim, does a construct such as Bitul B’Lev even make sense. The message of this Mitzvah, then, is that we can in fact be Moshel on ourselves, on our Retzonos and Yetzer—we can be among those about whom it is said “Liban B’Reshusam”.

This Mitzvah is quite empowering: as we readied ourselves from Yetzias Mitzrayim we were assured that success was possible. We can control our Lev, using it for the purposes of Kedusha, for Mitzvos. The Mitzvah of Tashbisu is no mere technicality—it is the key to our existence as Avdei Hashem. By understanding the role of the Lev, and our abilities to be Moshel upon it, we can understand our capacity for growth in all areas of Ruchnias.

Perhaps this was the message of Avrohom Avinu as well.

We know how the Kiruv enterprise of Avrohom Avinu was structured: he would lure passerby with the offer of a nourishing meal and an opportunity to rest their tired bodies, and then engage them in discussions of Emunah. Guests were challenged with concepts such as “Yesh Manhig LaBirah” and the repast was followed the request that the visitors thank Hashem, “Hodu V’Shibchu L’Mi SheAmar V’Haya HaOlam”. The Kiruv equation of Avrohom Avinu is timeless, and still in use today: the offer of nourishment and creature comforts in the hopes of bringing people Tachas Kanfei Hashechina.

When the Malachim approached, Avrohom Avinu began the process he knew well. He offered them food, hoping that they would join him. His specific offer of Lechem had its own purpose, however. Chazal, in various Medrashim tell us that there are proofs from Torah, Neviim and Kesuvim that “Pita Saadasa D’Liba”, bread feeds the Lev. The source in Torah to this concept is the words “V’Ekcha Pas Lechem V’Saadu Libchem”. By offering Pas Lechem, Avrohom was engaging in their Lev, their Retzonos.

We know, however, that he actually served them Matazah, as he instructed Sarah Imenu “Lushi V’Asu Ugos”. Matzah is not Pas, it is Lechem Oni—as such it does not fall into the category of “Pita Saadasa D’Liba”. In doing so, Avraham communicated an important message to his guests: you do not have to be slaves to your Lev and your Retzonos, you can be Bocher BaTov. Yes, the Saadasa D’Liba is attractive, but Ugos Matzos do more—they nourish the Neshama. The message of Avrohom Avinu, indeed the story of his life, is encapsulated in this concept: you can choose the other side of the river, stand M’Ever L’Nahar and control your Lev.

Perhaps it is no surprise, then, that the Tur teaches that the Yom Tov of Pesach is tied to Avrohom Avinu—the message of the Yom Tov and of the first of the Avos are intertwined. Avrohom taught us to choose Matzah over Pas, to use our Bechira to control our Retzonos, and this message is repeated each year. The Mitzvah of Tashbisu was given for Pesach Mitzrayim, and resonates L’Doros, as we are reminded anew that we can control our Lev, that we do not have to be slaves to Pharoah or to our Yetzer. We can use our Lev in the service of Hashem as we destroy not only the physical Chometz but the metaphorical Se’or Sheb’Isa, reaching a level of true Cheirus.