(For the riddles, please see back page)
1) The Yaavatz in his sefer Mishneh Lechem (Maseches Challah 2:3) writes:
“It appears to me that the mitzvah of separating challah is the woman’s mitzvah, as women were specifically commanded with this mitzvah, as women are the ones who prepare food to feed the house. Like we find in Kesubos: “These are the activities a woman must do for her husband, grind, bake etc.” Additionally, Chazal say women were given the mitzvah of challah, as they caused the חלתו של עולם to be ruined, therefore, they are given this mitzvah to help fix up their mistake.”
The Yaavatz continues: “What difference does this make? If someone takes away her mitzvah they must pay her ten gold coins for taking away her mitzvah and her berachah. Certainly, if a random person comes along and steals her mitzvah even with her husband’s permission, he must pay, but even the husband himself on his own dough is also obligated to pay his wife ten coins if he separated challah, as the mitzvah is hers, and the Torah gave it to her. Just like she gets punished if she isn’t careful with it (Shabbos 31b), similarly, she is entitled to reward for it, and if someone does it in her stead they need to pay her. This is what I think, with siyata dishmayah”.
However, the Chida (Machzik Berachah, Orach Chaim 263, ois 3) disagrees, he writes: “I saw in the sefer Mishneh Lechem of the Yaavatz etc. and his words are incorrect. Since a woman is the one normally at home, generally she is the one that separates challah, as the husband isn’t home, and for this reason Chazal gave her the mitzvah. Additionally, it helps atone for her sin when she ruined חלתו של עולם , the same is with Shabbos candles. However, why on earth should the husband who owns everything, have to pay her if he separates challah in her stead.
2) The Mishnah in Shabbos (34a) teaches:
“On erev Shabbos close to nightfall, one should ask his family members if they separated challah”.
The question is, those who have the minhag to bake their own challos on erev Shabbos, why don’t we find that the husband asks the wife just before Shabbos, “did you separate challah”?
The Eishel Avraham (Butchach 260) writes: “I never saw or heard anyone do this minhag (of asking, “did you separate challah”). It appears to me that the reason is because nowadays we call the loaves of bread made in honor of Shabbos “challah”, and since the loaves are called “challah”, one will surely remember to separate challah. Since the name and the essence of the dough: היא מזכרת אבן פינת יקרת מ צות נטילת חלה - speaks out the importance of the mitzvah of challah, there is no longer a concern that one will forget. The poskim which say one should ask, are talking about places when the loaves baked for Shabbos weren’t called “challah”.
The Shu”t Kneses Yechezkel (end of siman 23, cited in Pischei Teshuvah, Yoreh Deah 323:5, and Mishnah Berurah, Orach Chaim 260) writes: In the year 5487 erev Pesach fell on Shabbos, and I gave a drosha the week prior, that this coming Shabbos (erev Pesach) everyone should warn their wives to separate challah. The reason we don’t normally remind the wives, even though it’s a clear halachah, is because we pasken that by challah in Chutz La’aretz, one can eat the challah, leave some behind and separate challah from that, therefore, even if challah wasn’t taken before Shabbos it can be taken after Shabbos. However, when erev Pesach is on Shabbos, if one forgets, he can’t leave any of the bread until after Shabbos, as it’s chometz. Since there is no takonah [way of fixing it retroactively], one should make sure to ask at home before Shabbos. The Noda B’Yehudah also mentioned this point in his drosha.
The Shu”t Minchas Yitzchok (6:46) writes: According to the above, in Eretz Yisroel where it is forbidden to eat bread before taking challah, one should need to ask at home if challah was taken every single erev Shabbos. Those who buy readymade challah from Badatz bakeries have nothing to worry about, but those who make their own challos (which the Rema, Orach Chaim 242 says one should) should be concerned, and surely, they should ask if challah was taken.
R' Shlomah Zalman (Halichos Shlomah, Orach Chaim 260) is quoted as saying: Even in Eretz Yisroel there is no need to ask this question today. The minhag is to separate challah whilst the bread is still dough, and on erev Shabbos just before nightfall it is already baked and in bread form. Since the bread is no longer in dough form, we can assume challah was taken, therefore, there is no need to ask.
Some suggest another reason for why we don’t ask this question today: The main reason women bake their own challos for Shabbos nowadays is so that they can separate challah, and since the mitzvah of challah is the reason they bake the challos it’s very unlikely they will come to forget. Similar to what we find in Pesochim (11a), that if one is searching for chometz, we aren’t worried he will accidentally come to eat it.
Some suggest, another answer based on the Sefas Emes. The Sefas Emes (Shabbos 34a) writes: The reason we ask women on erev Shabbos if they separated challah is because women are lazy, and they will think there is still more time in the day to do the job, and they will lend up doing it bein hashmoshas, however, we aren’t worried they will forget about it altogether. The Achronim speak out (Aruch HaShulchan 437, and Sdei Chemed, Mareches Chometz U’Matzah DeBizmaneinu) that today women aren’t lazy, on the contrary they are more careful the men. According to this, nowadays there is no longer a reason to ask them.
3) The Kol-Bo (siman 31, cited in the Rema, Orach Chaim 301:16) writes:
“Rabbeinu Asher zt”l says: מנהג כל ישראל שלא לצאת בשבת בלתי מנעלים ובלי טלית או גלימה – “The minhag in Klal Yisroel is to not go out on Shabbos without shoes, a tallis, and a cloak.”
The Kol-Bo continues: והטעם כדי שיזכור שהוא יום שבת קדוש לאלקינו ולא יבא לידי חלול שבת ועל זה חטא מקושש על שלא נהג במנהג זה ויצא בלא טליתו ולא היה לו אות .וע״כ נסמכה פרשת מקושש לפרשת ציצית כדכתיב למען תזכרו – “The reason is so that one remembers that it’s the holy day of Shabbos for our G-d, and one won’t come to violate Shabbos. This is what caused the mekoshesh [wood gatherer] to sin, because he didn’t follow the minhag and he went out without his tallis, and he didn’t have a sign, therefore, he stumbled. This is why the parsha of mekoshesh is next to the parsha of tzitzis, like it says, “in order that you remember”.
The Shu”t Rav Peolim (Vol 4, Orach Chaim 13) was asked if one should have special shoes in honor of Shabbos. He writes: הסברא מחייבת דאין הסנדל הזה בכלל הבגדים שחייב האדם להחליף בשבת – “Logic dictates that shoes are not included in the items of clothing that one is obligated to change in honor of Shabbos.”
He cites proof from the Yerushalmi (Shabbos 6:2) which says: לאו אורחיה דבר נשא מיהוי ליה תרין סנדלין חד לחולא וחד לשבתא - “It’s not the way of people to have two pairs of shoes, one for weekday and one for Shabbos”. It’s clear from the Yerushalmi that one doesn’t need special Shabbos shoes, and one can wear his regular weekday pair.
Some point out, the above proof fits according to the Korban Eidah who learns this statement of the Yerushalmi not as a question, but as a statement. However, the Pnei Moshe learns this as a question, and according to the Pnei Moshe the Yerushalmi is asking: “Is it not the way of people to have two pairs of shoes, one for weekday and one for Shabbos?”. According to the Pnei Moshe we seemingly have a proof to the contrary, that one should in fact have two pairs of shoes, one for the week and one for Shabbos.
The Chida (Avodas HaKodesh, ois 139) writes: Praiseworthy is one who has special clothes for Shabbos, going from the sole of his feet until the top of his head, and he doesn’t wear a single item of clothing, that he wears during the week.
The Chasukei Chemed (Succah pg. 415) according to the opinion that one doesn’t need a separate pair of shoes for Shabbos, explains something amazing. In Devorim (29:4) the pasuk says: רגליך מעל בלתה לא ונעלך מעליכם שלמותיכם בלו לא – “The items of clothing on your backs and the shoes on your feet never wore out”. The Rogatchover asks that this pasuk is difficult, as when it mentions clothing it refers to them in the plural (שלמותיכם) and when it mentions about shoes it refers to them in the singular (ונעלך )? Based on the above, the Chasukei Chemed answers: When it came to items of clothing, each person had two sets, one for Shabbos and one for weekday, however, when it came to the shoes, since there is no need to have special Shabbos shoes, everyone had only one pair, therefore, it is written in the singular.
The Kitzur Shlah writes: One should even have a special belt, pair of shoes and hat for Shabbos. The Pele Yoetz also writes that one should have special shoes for Shabbos. The Kaf HaChaim after he quotes the Rav Peolim who says there is no need, writes, however, it’s a middas chasidus [pious act] to change shoes for Shabbos.
Halachah lema’aseh it seems like a bit of a machlokes, if one can afford it, certainly he should be mehadar and have special shoes for Shabbos. If one can’t, he certainly has what to rely on to be lenient, however, one should make sure to clean and polish his shoes so that they are presentable for Shabbos.
4) The Satmar Rebbe, Rav Yoel Teitelbaum, brilliantly explains the Medrash by pointing out that the concept of imprisonment appears to have no place in Judaism.
Although the Torah specifies the appropriate punishment for various transgressions – such as financial restitution, lashes, and the death penalty – no sin is punished with jail time. The concept of incarceration has been implemented by other societies when they are afraid that the defendant may attempt to flee before his trial, or to prevent a convicted felon from committing additional crimes.
In the case of the wood-gatherer, neither of these rationales was applicable, for Tosfos (Bava Basra 119b) writes that his intentions were purely for the sake of Heaven. After the Jewish people heard Hashem’s decree (Bamidbar 14:34-35) that they would be forced to wander in the wilderness for an additional 40 years and would die there without meriting to enter the land of Israel, they concluded incorrectly that they were no longer required to observe the mitzvos.
The wood-gatherer therefore violated Shabbos to have himself put to death to teach them that they were still obligated to keep the Torah’s laws. If so, running away before he could be sentenced would defeat his entire purpose, and he certainly had no incentive to sin again. If there were no legitimate grounds for which to imprison him, why did the people do so?
The first Mishnah in Pesachim discusses the Rabbinical obligation to check for chometz on the night before Pesach. Tosfos (Pesachim 2a) questions the need for this search in light of the Biblical requirement of bitul chometz, when we declare that any chometz in our possession is null and void like the dust of the earth. After we have done so, why is there any further need for bedikas chometz? Tosfos answers that even if a person wholeheartedly disavows himself of any chometz he owns, Chazal were still worried that he may encounter chometz on Yom Tov and be tempted to eat it.
In other words, the Satmar Rebbe explains that we are afraid that even though a person enters Pesach with the best of intentions, as evidenced by his willingness to renounce firmly all chometz in his possession, he may later change his mind. What Biblical source did Chazal find to support an enactment that compels us to second-guess our sincere commitment to adhere to halachah?
The Medrash Pliah suggests that they derived it from the incarceration of the wood-gatherer, for even though his actions were motivated solely for the sake of Heaven, the people were still worried that he might subsequently reconsider and attempt to escape. Just as they were unable to trust his initial desire to make an example of himself to teach the people a lesson, so too the Rabbis did not allow us to rely on our well-intentioned bitul chometz and additionally required us to do bedikas chometz. (R’ Ozer Alport)
