Nissan 5764 • April 2004U.S.A. $3.50/Foreign $4.50 • VOL XXXVII/NO. 4

Nissan 5764 • April 2004U.S.A. $3.50/Foreign $4.50 • VOL XXXVII/NO. 4

CLICK HERE FOR TABLE OF

CONTENTS

OBSERVEROBSERVERJewishJewishTHE

6 Passion, Prejudice, and Political Incorrectness,

Rabbi Yonoson Rosenblum

10 Never Too Bad, Never Too Late – the Lesson of Yetzias

Mitzrayim, Rabbi Fyvel Shuster

16 Reframing Your Life, Rabbi Yehoshua Binyamin and

Mrs. Sheina Elka Falk

20 Hand or Machine:Two Roads to Fulfilling the Mitzva of

Matza, Ari Y. Greenspan and Ari Z. Zivotofsky

34 Tefilla:Worthy of Our Effort… as Ever, Ovadya Hertzberg

SECOND LOOKS

39 Mass Aliya in 2004? Don’t Bet on It!, Mordechai Plaut

INSIGHTS AND INSPIRATION

44 The Time has Come, a poem by Michelle Borinstein

THE JEWISH OBSERVER (ISSN) 0021-6615 is published monthly except Julyand August by the Agudath Israel ofAmerica, 42 Broadway, New York,NY10004. Periodicals postage paid inNew York, NY. Subscription $24.00 peryear; two years, $44.00; three years,$60.00. Outside of the United States(US funds drawn on a US bank only)$12.00 surcharge per year. Singlecopy $3.50; foreign $4.50. POSTMASTER: Send address changesto: The Jewish Observer, 42 Broadway,NY, NY 10004. Tel: 212-797-9000, Fax:646-254-1600. Printed in the U.S.A.

RABBI NISSON WOLPIN, EDITOR

EDITORIAL BOARD

RABBI JOSEPH ELIAS Chairman

RABBI ABBA BRUDNYJOSEPH FRIEDENSONRABBI YISROEL MEIR KIRZNERRABBI NOSSON SCHERMANPROF. AARON TWERSKI

DR. ERNST L. BODENHEIMER Z”LRABBI MOSHE SHERER Z”LFounders

MANAGEMENT BOARDAVI FISHOF, NAFTOLI HIRSCHISAAC KIRZNER, RABBI SHLOMO LESINNACHUM STEIN

RABBI YOSEF C. GOLDINGManaging Editor

Published byAgudath Israel of America

THE JEWISH OBSERVER does notassume responsibility for theKashrus of any product,publication, or service advertisedin its pages

© Copyright 2004

April 2004VOLUME XXXVII/NO. 4

U.S.TRADE DISTRIBUTORFeldheim Publishers200 Airport Executive ParkNanuet, NY 10954

BRITISH REPRESENTATIVEM.T. BibelmanGrosvenor WorksMount Pleasant HillLondon E5 9NE, ENGLAND

FRENCH REPRESENTATIVERabbi Bamberger21 Boulevard Paixhans57000 MetzFRANCE

SWISS REPRESENTATIVEMr. S. FeldingerLeimanstrasse 364051 Basel, SWITZERLAND

ISRAELI REPRESENTATIVEIntnl. Media PlacementPOB 7195 / 97 Jaffa RoadJerusalem 94340, ISRAEL

BELGIAN REPRESENTATIVEMr. E. ApterLange Kievitstr. 292018 AntwerpBELGIUM

SOUTH AFRICAN REPRESENTATIVEMr. V. TabackPO Box 51552,Raedene, Johannesburg2124 SOUTH AFRICA

Nissan 5764 • April 2004U.S.A.$3.50/Foreign $4.50 • VOL XXXVII/NO. 4

20

Statement of Policy

The Jewish Observer has devoted agreat deal of space to the perils of theInternet and to the need for everyoneto be extremely vigilant in its use. Wehave echoed the pleas of our gedolimthat it should not be in use, unless itis an unavoidable necessity, and thenonly with all suitable safeguards.While its dangers must be recognized

and controlled to every possibledegree, our gedolim recognize thatmany people and businesses require itsuse, and therefore it has not beenbanned. This is why we accept adver-tisements listing website addresses, butin no way does this imply that thegedolim or The Jewish Observer con-done casual use of the Internet.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE JEWISH OBSERVER. CLICK HERE.

This is the full Table of Contents of the print edition of the Jewish Observer. The web edition contains only a selection of articles (indicated in color). Click on the title to go to thebeginning of that article.Navigate using your browser’s menuand other options.

Yonoson Rosenblum

I. AS THE CRITICS SEE IT

After nearly a year of pre-releasepublicity, Mel Gibson’s ThePassion finally opened February

25 in more than 3,000 theaters acrossAmerica. Based on initial reviews, themovie more than fulfills the worst fearsof the Jewish community.

Gibson pulled out every Technicolorspecial effect at his disposal to make hissubject’s suffering as shocking as possi-ble. Reviewers were struck by the relent-less, graphic brutality of the film. Ascourging scene that takes no more thanone sentence in any Gospel account, forinstance, takes ten minutes in the film.The New Republic’s Leon Wieseltieraccused Gibson of being “intoxicated byblood,” and of having created a filmwhich in its bloodthirstiness is “startlingand quickly sickening.”

Those calling throughout for that

blood are the Jews. Pontius Pilate, theRoman prelate who ordered the cruci-fixion, is portrayed as a reluctant exe-cutioner. He remonstrates with theHigh Priest for the savagery with whichthe Jewish authorities treat the victim,and only orders his crucifixion to calmthe Jewish mob demanding it. At onepoint, even the Roman soldiers cannotbring themselves to inflict further agony.Only the Jews go on demanding more.

The physiognomy of the Jewishcharacters is taken from the stock anti-Semitic stereotypes. A number ofreviewers remarked on the cut from aclose-up of one hook-nosed Jew to thatof another hook-nosed Jew to open thenext scene. “Sundry Jews lean into thecamera and hiss or keen through rottedteeth,” writes David Edelstein in Slate.

It is far too early to tell what the effectof The Passion will be on attitudestowards Jews.1 Apart from one Denverpastor who posted a notice outside his

church accusing Jews of deicide, therewere no reports of anti-Semitic incidentstraceable to viewing The Passion. It maywell be, however, that the greatest dan-ger to Jews from The Passion lies not inthe United States, where taboos againstthe open expression of anti-Semitism aremore firmly in place than anywhere elsein the world, but from audiences in LatinAmerica and Eastern Europe, where suchtaboos were never firmly planted. If thelast year has proven anything, it is thedegree to which anti-Semitic attitudescontinue to lurk just beneath the surfaceof even the most civilized societies.

II. HOW SHOULD THE JEWISHCOMMUNITY HAVE RESPONDED?

Clearly the concerns about the filmexpressed by Jewish defenseorganizations over the last year

were well founded. Long before the filmopened, the warning lights were alreadyflashing.“Passion plays” have a long his-tory of stirring up anti-Semitic violence.Hitler, yemach shemo, recommended thatall Germans attend the traditional pas-

6 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

Rabbi Rosenblum, who lives in Jerusalem, is acontributing editor to The Jewish Observer. Heis also director of the Israeli division of Am Echad,the Agudath Israel-inspired educational outreacheffort and media resource.

1 Mark Steyn, generally one of the most astutecommentators around, has gone on record thatthere is not the slightest chance of one Jew beingkilled as a consequence of The Passion.

Passion, Prejudice,

and Political Incorrectness

sion play at Oberammergau to under-stand his hatred of Jews.

Then there was the matter ofGibson’s membership in a renegade secto f C a t h o l i c “ t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s .”Traditionalists reject the legitimacy ofVatican II, which absolved the Jewish peo-ple as a whole from the charge of “dei-cide.” Gibson’s father, Hutton Gibson,dismisses Vatican II as a conspiracy of“Freemasons and Jews.” (For goodmeasure, the elder Gibson is also aHolocaust-denier.2) Mel Gibson proud-ly affirms that his father’s faith is his own:“The man never lied to me in his life,”he told one interviewer.

Of additional concern was Gibson’sadmission that he had drawn inspirationfor his script from the ecstatic religiousvisions of a German nun Sister AnneCatherine Emmerich (d. 1824).Emmerich’s visions add many luriddetails found nowhere in the Gospels,and all of which served to increase themeasure of Jewish culpability in the cru-cifixion.

Faced with these red flags, the Jewishcommunity had a number of possiblecourses of action. None of the commu-nity’s goals, however, were achievable byJews acting alone; indeed the prominentrole of Jewish organizations was poten-tially counter-productive.

Efforts were made to seek alterationsin the script. As soon as the first reportsabout Gibson’s film started to hit thepress, Eugene Fisher, associate directorof the Secretariat for Ecumenical andInterreligious Affairs for the United StatesConference of Catholic Bishops(USCCB) convened, together withEugene Korn of the Anti-DefamationLeague, an ad hoc group of “NewTestament” scholars – four Catholics andtwo Jews – to review a copy of the screen-play they had been provided.3

The scholars were shocked by thescript they received, and each sat downindependently to write their own com-ments before combining them in a sin-gle document. Six pages of their final18-page report detail those places inwhich the script, in the words of Prof.Pauline Fredriksen,“not only misreads,but actually contravenes material given

in the Gospels.” Another section detailsGibson’s historical errors. For instance,in order to give the film a tone of his-torical veracity all the dialogue is in eitherAramaic or Latin. The only problem isthat in conversing with one another, aJewish priest and a Roman official, wouldhave spoken Greek, which was the lin-gua franca of the time, not Latin.

Of far greater importance is the schol-ars’ challenge to the portrait of PontiusPilate as a reluctant executioner.Crucifixion was the exclusive provinceof the Roman authorities, and if it tookplace it could have only been to satisfya Roman agenda and to serve as a warn-ing to others whose activities theRomans considered seditious. The his-torical Pontius Pilate was an exception-ally brutal ruler, even by Romanstandards, who routinely crucified self-proclaimed messiahs. At one point, hewas recalled to Rome to explain his bru-tality after the massacre of 4,000 followersof a Samaritan “prophet” in a single day.

The efforts of the scholars made noimpression on Gibson. In a New Yorkerinterview, he dismissed their criticismsas of a piece with the reforms of tradi-tional Catholic practice instituted byVatican II — reforms which the “tradi-tionalists” reject.

All that was left, then, was to hope thatthe film would be a box office bust. Hereit appears that the strategy adopted bysome Jewish defense groups backfired.When the frontal attack on Gibson underthe banner of the Anti-DefamationLeague began, Hollywood insiders were

still predicting that The Passion wouldbe one of the biggest bombs in history.The controversy stirred by the attacks onGibson aroused huge interest in the film,and enabled him to brilliantly market thefilm to conservative church groups as thefilm “the secular elites (or “the Jews”)don’t want you to see.” It now appearsheaded to being one of the largest gross-ing films in history. 4

Vocal Jewish opposition to the filmlikely aroused more anti-Semitism thanit prevented. As Melanie Phillips hasobserved, the more Jews complainabout anti-Semitism, the more peopledislike Jews. A group of demonstratorsunder the banner of Amcha managed toinfuriate both Christians and Jews bytrotting out their tired gimmick of pick-eting in concentration camp garb.Christians who experienced the movieas a profound religious experience wereenraged to find themselves compared toNazis, and Jews were similarly offend-ed by the trivialization of the Holocaustfor the purposes of street theater.

Jewish opponents of the film faced aneven more fundamental problem.Though the film is replete with materi-al found nowhere in the Gospels, the basicstory outline is sufficiently familiar to mostChristian viewers for them to assume thatthe film is based on the Gospels. Thatbeing the case, it was inevitable thatChristians would perceive attacks on themovie as attacks on the Gospels them-selves. Given the relative numbers of Jewsand Christians in the world, that was alosing strategy from the start.

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 7

2 Nor have Mel Gibson’s responses on the issueof Holocaust denial been terribly reassuring.Interviewed for Readers Digest by Peggy Noonan,an early booster of The Passion, Gibson was givena golden opportunity to give the lie to Holocaustdenial. The best he could muster was: “Atrocitieshappened. War is horrible. The Second World Warkilled tens of millions of people. Some of themwere Jews in concentration camps. Many peo-ple lost their lives.”

Even a leading Holocaust denier like DavidIrving admits “atrocities happened.” What hedenies is that there existed a systematic, plannedeffort to exterminate all of Europe’s Jews, whichresulted in the murder of 6,000,000 Jews.Gibson does not come remotely close to affirm-ing the latter. “Lots of people died” deliberatelydeemphasizes the uniqueness of the extermina-

tion campaign against Jews, and would applyequally well to the deaths of a few hundred peo-ple as to that of millions.3 Pauline Fredriksen, Aurelio Professor ofScripture at Boston University, has provided adetailed account of the work of this group in theJuly 28, 2003 issue of The New Republic, entitled“The Gospel According to Gibson.” The descrip-tion of the working of the scholars group is basedon her account.4 It is possible that the prognosticators werewrong from the beginning that there would bea shallow market for a religious film in whichall the dialogue is in two ancient languages.Gibson’s marketing strategy of pre-releaseshowings to select church groups might havealways proved successful, at least in the funda-mentalist community.

III. THE SHTADLANUS APPROACH

The frontal attack on The Passionwith Jewish groups leading thecharge was bound to be counter-

productive. But that does not mean thatthe Jewish community was helpless inthe face of the threat posed by the movieor without potential allies.

The Catholic Church presented themost natural ally. Since the early 1960s,the Church has been working with Jewishgroups to reverse the deadly effects ofmillennia of Church teaching on Jewishguilt. In America, the Church has alsoworked closely with Agudath Israel ofAmerica and other Orthodox groups onissues concerning parochial schoolsand public morality for decades.

The Church certainly had its own rea-sons for not being enthusiastic about thecinematic presentation of the theologyof a schismatic group. Since the 1965papal encyclical Nostra Aetate, theChurch has been committed to remov-ing the stain of millennia of anti-Semitic violence inspired by Churchteachings.

The U.S. Conference of CatholicBishops long ago issued instructions forthe teaching of the passion narrativespecifically designed to counter themost anti-Semitic elements in theGospels. Those instructions suggestdropping crowd scenes of chantingJewish mobs, caution against picking ele-ments from the four different (and oftenconflicting) Gospel accounts, and ques-tion the Gospel portrayal of Pilate as apassive participant. In a strong statementtimed to coincide with the release of ThePassion, New York’s Cardinal EdwardEgan reiterated the Church’s rejection ofthe charge of deicide against Jews. Inshort, the Catholic Church was far bet-ter suited than Jewish groups to mute theimpact of The Passion on Catholics.

Catholics, however, are neither themost numerous nor necessarily themost devout group among AmericanChristians. Working with fundamentalistProtestants – i.e., those to whom Gibsonpitched his movie in private showings– presents different challenges thanworking with the Catholic Church.

Protestants are divided into dozens of dif-ferent denominations, and lack thecentralized, hierarchical structure of theCatholic Church. Nor do conservativeProtestant groups have a long history ofalliances with Jewish groups.

Yet here too there were grounds towork together with evangelicals and otherconservative Protestants. For one thing,fundamentalist Protestants view Jews asthe Chosen People. (In that, they differfrom the Catholic Church, which stylesitself the “New Israel.”) Fundamentalistsare much more drawn to what they call“the Old Testament” than Catholics, andmost are ardent supporters of Israel.5

They tend to have a great deal ofrespect for Orthodox Jews, whom theyidentify with the Jews of the Bible. Inrecent years, a number of close rela-tionships have been forged between Jews,mostly Orthodox, and leading figures

from the so-called religious Right, likeGary Bauer and Ralph Reed.

After a few false starts, the SimonWiesenthal Center found an approachto deal with the evangelical communi-ty. It issued An Appeal to People of Faiththat focuses exclusively on actionsrather than beliefs. Christians are notasked to boycott The Passion nor is thefilm itself criticized. The Appeal explic-itly eschews any request that Christianscensor their sacred texts. While detail-ing the long history of Jews killed in thename of Christianity, the Appealassumes the goodwill of those itaddresses and asks Christians of good willto do for Jews what Jews cannot do forthemselves – i.e., work to ensure that ThePassion not become an instrument to re-ignite ancient Jew hatred.

In response, Ted Haggard, presidentof the 47-million member NationalAssociation of Evangelicals, pledged, ata joint press conference with RabbiMarvin Hier of the Simon WiesenthalCenter, that he and his fellow pastorswould “speak out against hatred ofJews… and declare loud and clear thatwe will not allow bigotry to drive a wedgebetween us.”

IV. THE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS TRAP

For Orthodox Jews in particular,there is one final concern thatmakes open criticism of The

Passion a sticky wicket: the danger thatturning the film into a cause celebremight reinforce generally hostile attitudesto religion in the liberal enclaves in whichmost unaffiliated Jews live their lives.

8 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

We must nevermake the

mistake of confusingthe right and abilityto make noise withthe wisdom of doingso.

5 That support for Israel is but one more reasonthat responsible Jewish leaders should have showngreat care in not alienating evangelicals. Israel todayhas one ally committed to its physical security, andthat ally is the United States. The arms upon whichIsrael depends to retain its military superiority areproduced in America, and without the Americanveto in the U.N. Security Council, Israel would finditself under unrelenting pressure from the U.N. andother international bodies.

The reasons for the close ties between Israel andthe United States are many. But cold political cal-culation on the part of American politicians issurely one of them. Once Jewish money and theconcentration of Jews in states with large hauls

of electoral votes ensured a hearing for Israel inWashington D.C. A declining Jewish populationand wide divisions within the Jewish communi-ty over the correct American policy to Israel, how-ever, have resulted in diminished Jewish politicalinfluence.

Today the ardent support of tens of millions ofChristian evangelicals for Israel plays a far moreimportant role in the calculations of political can-didates, particularly Republican candidates, thandoes the so-called Jewish vote. Evangelicalsdwarf the Jewish community in terms of size, andthey are more likely than most American Jews toview Jews as the rightful inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael,with a title deed from G-d.

To the extent that non-religious Jewsimbibe the elite view of people of faithas either dangerous fanatics, hyp-ocrites, or simple-minded – e.g.,Islamic suicide bombers or abusive cler-gy – they will be less inclined to lenda serious ear to their own religious her-itage. By imputing anti-Semitic inten-tions to Gibson (even where there wereplentiful grounds for suspicion), oppo-nents of the film risked reinforcing theimpression of religion as primarily aspur for inhumane action.

Critics of the film also ran the riskof falling into the familiar modern habitof subjecting religion to the stricturesof political correctness. Gibson couldhardly be expected, for instance, to turnthe pilgrims to Jerusalem into a multi-ethnic lot in order to avoid givingoffense to Jews.

Orthodox Jews certainly have nointerest in encouraging the view thatreligion must be brought up to date. Weare frequently reminded of the degreeto which our own beliefs and practicesrun afoul of the prevailing liberalorthodoxies on a whole slew of issues.Even the belief that a Jew possesses asoul that is qualitatively different fromnon-Jews has subjected us recently tocomparisons to Nazi race theorists.

Mention of these potential pitfallsdoes not mean that they are unavoid-able. There were ways to criticize ThePassion without giving comfort to thepolitical correctness brigades. CharlesK r a u t h a m m e r a n d G e r t r u d eHimmelfarb, two Jews who will neverbe accused of any tendency towardspolitical correctness, both wrote criti-cally of The Passion. While insisting onthe generally positive influence of reli-gion and its rightful place in the pub-lic square, Himmelfarb pointed out thatpreservation of the peaceful coexistenceof all faiths often depends on the mem-bers of society refraining from theexpression of “passions and emotionsappropriate to the home or church” inthe public sphere. She charged Gibsonwith violating that understanding of civilsociety, and pointedly asked how hewould have reacted to an equallygraphic film about the Spanish auto-da-

fe of 1481, in which Jews were burnedat the stake under the gleeful eye of rich-ly robed churchmen, or a film about ofthe slaughter of Jewish men, women andchildren by Crusaders bearing the signof Christianity and celebrating theirmurderous deeds in prayers of thanks-giving.

Alas few critics displayed Himmel-farb’s intellectual subtlety and abili-ty to avoid the trap of furtherdelegitimizing religion in the eyes ofthe unaffiliated.

Many of those who defendedthe confrontational approachto The Passion celebrated

the fact that, in America, Jews no longerhave to remain silent and that we havethe right and power to make our voic-es heard. No more does shtilaheit haveto be our watchword. American free-doms are indeed a cause for celebra-tion. But we must never make themistake of confusing the right and abil-ity to make noise with the wisdom ofdoing so. ■

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 9

THE VORT

• The Vort celebration is to bediscontinued. The L’chaim (held at the time that the engagement isannounced) should also not turn into aVort.

THE WEDDING

• Only 400 invited guests may be seated at the chassuna seuda.

• The kabbolas panim smorgasbordshould be limited to basic cakes, fruit plat-ters, a modest buffet, and the caterer’sstandard chicken or meat hot dishes.

• The menu for the seuda is limited to 3courses followed by a regular dessert.

• No Viennese table and no bar.

THE MUSIC• A band may consist of a maximum of5 musicians (one of the musicians may actas a vocalist) or four musicians and oneadditional vocalist.

• A one-man band is recommended.

FLOWERS & CHUPA DECOR

• The total cost of these items for theentire wedding should not exceed $1,800.

FOR THE FULL VERSION OF THE SIMCHA GUIDELINESAND THE ACCOMPANYING KOL KOREH,

please email info@simchaguidelines.com or call 212-612-2300

Simcha GuidelinesSimcha Guidelines

Rabbi Shmuel BirnbaumRosh Hayeshiva, Mirer Yeshiva

Rabbi Elya SveiRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva Gedola of Philadelphia

Rabbi Shmuel KaminetzkyRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva Gedola of Philadelphia

Rabbi Yaakov PerlowNovominsker Rebbe

Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak FeigelstockRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva of Long Beach

Rabbi Moshe WolfsonMashgiach, Yeshiva Torah Vodaas

Rabbi Aron Moshe SchechterRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva Chaim Berlin

Rabbi Yosef RosenblumRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva Shaarei Yosher

Rabbi Eli Simcha SchustalRosh Hayeshiva, Bais Binyomin, Stamford

Rabbi Yisroel RokowskyRabbi Yisroel Simcha SchorrRoshei HaYeshiva, Yeshiva Ohr Somayach

Rabbi Aryeh Malkiel KotlerRosh Hayeshiva, Beth Medrash Govoha, Lakewood

Rabbi Yisroel Tzvi NeumanRosh Hayeshiva, Beth Medrash Govoha, Lakewood

Rabbi Dovid Tzvi SchustalRosh Hayeshiva, Beth Medrash Govoha, Lakewood

Rabbi Yeruchem OlshinRosh Hayeshiva, Beth Medrash Govoha, Lakewood

Rabbi Mattisyahu SalamonMashgiach, Beth Medrash Govoha, Lakewood

Rabbi Elya Ber WachtfogelRosh HaYeshiva, Yeshiva Gedolah of

South Fallsburg

Rabbi Chaim Boruch WolpinRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva Karlin Stolin

Rabbi Zecharia GelleyRav, Khal Adas Jeshurun

Rabbi Lipa MarguliesRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva & Mesifta Torah Temimah

Rabbi Dovid KviatChairman, Conference of Synagogue Rabbonimof Agudath Israel

Rabbi Shlomo MandelRosh Hayeshiva, Yeshiva of Brooklyn

Rabbi Ephraim WachsmanRosh Hayeshiva, Mesivta Meor Yitzchok

We the rabbinical signatories — barring familial obligations — and unusual andextraordinary circumstances — will not participate in or attend a wedding celebration thatdisregards these guidelines. (Rabbinical Listing in formation)

Rabbi Fyvel Shuster

Heartrending letters of teenagers’Internet experiences were fea-tured in the February/Shevat

issue of The Jewish Observer. Whileemphasizing the need for prevention,nearly every letter expressed the despairof those who had fallen, and their senseof inability to function as ovdei Hashem– productive Torah Jews. Not only dothese letters mandate that we do ourutmost to prevent such tragedies, ourefforts must be accompanied by guid-ance toward the pathways of rehabilita-tion provided by the Torah.

In Nesivos Shalom, the SlonimerRebbe l”xz examines the necessity of con-stantly remembering Yetzias Mitzrayim,the Exodus from Egypt. Obviously, noJew with a rudimentary education canforget the historical events of YetziasMitzrayim. What we must constantlyremember is that Am Yisroel, at the timeof Yetzias Mitzrayim, had fallen to theforty ninth degree of tuma – spiritualdefilement. Despite this, Hashem refers

to them as “B’ni vechori Yisroel – My son,My first-born, Israel.” The unshakabletruth of “Banim attem LashemElokeichem – You are children to the L-rd your G-d” remained constant, evenat that level of tuma. The Torah instructsus to make a point of remembering –every day – that Hashem took us out ofMitzrayim in such a lowly state, drew usclose to Him, and gave us the Torah.

Rabbi Moshe of Kobrin illustrated thepower of remembering YetziasMitzrayim to help baalei aveira recoverand continue in their service to Hashem.

In Parshas Shoftim, the Torahdescribes the fear that can grip a sol-dier facing a powerful enemy: “Whenyou will go out to war against yourenemy, and you will see horses andchariots, a nation greater than you, donot fear them, Hashem your G-d is withyou, [He who] has brought you up fromthe land of Mitzrayim” (Devarim20,1).

While the p’shat – the plain mean-ing – describes the bitachon (trust)needed to defeat the physical enemy,Rabbi Moshe Kobriner, in the footstepsof commentators before him, explainsthe pasuk in the context of the battle

with the yeitzer hara (evil impulse).When a Jew attempts to do battle

with his ancient enemy, the yeitzer hara,the yeitzer points out to the Jew the“host of allied powers that accompa-ny him” and tells him that this “am rav– great multitude” comes “mim’cha –from you,” as the result of that Jew’saveiros. How, then, can one dare to chal-lenge powers of tuma, which he him-self has generated? The Torah instructsus not to fear them, for Hashem raisedus up from Mitzrayim, even though wehad sunk to the depths of tuma. He willdo the same for us, in our struggles.The yeitzer hara values and utilizes the

demoralization brought about by theaveira even more than the direct dam-age of the aveira itself. The previousTolner Rebbe of Yerushalayim, RabbiYochanan Twerski l”xz, used to relate thefollowing lesson taught by RabbiYechezkel of Kuzmir:

“The yeitzer hara [, taught RabbiYechezkel,] works like a clever thief. Thethief goes to the marketplace and looksfor an opportunity to steal. To his dis-may, the only significant quantity of cashcan be found in the cash registers of theshopkeepers, who never leave the store.

10 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

Rabbi Shuster is a maggid shiur in Machon Lev,Jerusalem. A frequent contributor to thesepages, his article,“’Succos Mamash’ – Building OurHome, By Leaving it,” appeared in the Oct. ’03issue of JO.

The thief finds a young boy and offershim a dime to go into a shop and stealone of the candies arranged on thecounter by the cash register. When theboys steals the candy and runs, the shop-keeper pursues him, and the thiefcomes in and empties the entire till.

“So, too, the goal of the yeitzer harais not the specific aveira, but the despairand confusion that result from the trans-gression. In that state, we are vulnera-ble and the yeitzer can empty us of ourJudaism.”

THE DANGER OF DESPAIR

The despair that results from“Internet aveiros” can cause somuch damage because of the feel-

ing that a point of no return has beenpassed; or that so much damage has beendone, more can’t possibly make thingsany worse.

The Tolner Rebbe a”jyls ofYerushalayim points out the fallacy of thisoutlook from an interesting halacha:

The Mishna Berura (Orach Chaim199:(2)) explains that a rasha whotransgresses publicly cannot be count-ed to form a zimun for Birkas Hamazon(to help form a quorum to say a com-munal Grace After Meals). In the BiurHalacha, the Chofetz Chaim goes on toexplain that, nonetheless, the rashahimself is obligated in the laws ofzimun. He provides two practical appli-cations of this halacha. If three suchresha’im ate together, they are requiredto bentsch mezuman. If the rasha eatstogether with three faithfully observantJews, he is forbidden to bentch by him-self, but must wait to join their zimun.

The Chofetz Chaim senses ouramazement at this halacha. If we are talk-ing about a rasha, who violates Shabbos,or eats on Yom Kippur publicly, it seemsout of place to discuss applications of hisobligation in zimun. In a state such ashis, can it make any difference if he par-ticipates in a zimun or not? The ChofetzChaim explains that Chazal have alreadyreferred to this question with the alle-gorical question: “Should one who ategarlic and smells unpleasant eat more ofthe same?” He quotes a response of the

Rambam, who wrote that even Yeravamben Nevat, who was guilty of idolatry,will be held accountable for lesseraveiros, even a rabbinical prohibition suchas cooking on Yom Tov for the Shabbosthat follows without an eiruv tavshillin.

In our mind, this seems as ridiculousas warning a criminal who robbed a bankto return a library book before itbecomes overdue. The Torah, however,transmits a different message. Regardlessof which aveira you have transgressed orare transgressing, any subsequent aveira,no matter how small, changes theworld. While this message is frightening,it contains a powerful message ofencouragement.You have never gone farenough to sever your ties from the Torahand Hakadosh Baruch Hu. If your aveiramakes a difference, you are still con-nected.

Rabbi Mordedchai Gerlitz brings abeautiful story in his collection BesodAvodecha, which illustrates this concept:

Reb Fischel lived in the town of Apta.Though a competent tailor, he neverachieved success in his trade and hadfew customers. So he utilized his free timeto help out around the house and in thebeis midrash of the “Oheiv Yisroel” –Rabbi Avrohom Yehoshua Heschel l”xz

of Apta. One day, the local poritz(wealthy land owner) sold his sur-rounding properties to another poritz.Customarily, a new poritz would hosta party for the aristocracy of the area.The poritz sent his servant into townto find a tailor who would come to hismanor and prepare a suit for him towear at the party.

The servant visited the tailors of Apta,but all of them were too busy with back

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 11

Specializing in Children and Adolescents917-930-5793

FRUM PSYCHOTHERAPISTELI SCHOSTAK, C.S.W.

New Office in Philadelphia, PA Limited Evening Hours Brooklyn, New York

Backpacking, Canoeing, Biking, Daily ShiurimWhen on farm, stay in authentic log cabin in woodsWarm, Leibedig Shabbosim together with farm crew

FARM/VOCATIONAL

PROGRAMFOR 16

1/2-18 YEAR OLDS

Learn basic construction,

farming, and more!

Daily Shiurim

Wilderness Outings

Wholesummer

only

Only13 slotsavailable!

DIRECTED BY RAFOEL FRANKLIN AND FAMILY Call 845-425-1670

Only

7 slotsavailable!

Separate program devoted exclusively to

Intense Wilderness Outingsfor Yeshiva Boys ages 16-17 years

HEADING INTO OUR 3RD GREAT SUMMER...

orders and were not able to take on morework. When the last tailor turned himdown, the frustrated servant asked ifthere was anywhere he could turn. Hewas told that the only tailor in town whomay have the time to make a suit onshort order was Reb Fishel. The servantimmediately took Fishel to measure theporitz, and take the cloth for the suit.

After frantically working on thesuit, Reb Fishel returned to the portiz,who was so impressed by his work-manship that he offered Reb Fishel asteady job as his house tailor, and pro-

vided him a room in the manor to workon clothes for his family and servants.

The Apter Rav congratulated Fishelon his new position, and all seemed fine,until one day, Fishel frantically knockedon the Rav’s door. Fishel revealed to theRav that servants in the poritz’s house-hold had told him that the poritz wasactually a Jew – a meshumad who hadconverted to Christianity! The Ravtold him to investigate more carefully.When Fishel returned with the confir-mation that the poritz was indeed alapsed Jew, the Rav asked him to prom-

ise that he would never make a suit ofshatnez for the poritz.

Fishel gave the Rav his word, but soonafterwards, the poritz presented himwith new material for a suit. Thematerial was clearly shatnez. RebFishel left the material on his table. Afew days later, when the poritz inquiredas to his progress on the suit, Fishelreplied that he had not even started.When Fishel explained to his angry mas-ter that his refusal was based on theorders of the Rav not to make him clothesof wool and linen, the poritz traveledto the house of the Oheiv Yisroel.

The poritz asked the Rav, “ What doI have to do with your laws?”

The Oheiv Yisroel replied that theTorah teaches us, “ A Yisroel, even if hehas sinned, is a Yisroel.”

The poritz told the Rav that he eatstreif, married a non-Jewish woman, andworships as a Christian. “Do you meanto tell me,” he asked indignantly, “thatdespite that, the Torah cares whether ornot I wear a garment of wool and linen?”

The Rav replied that this is indeedthe case. Chagrined, the poritz said, “IfI had known this before, perhaps my lifewould have been different. In my youth,I performed some terrible aveiros andwas sure that I had gone too far toreturn. I decided to convert toChristianity and succeed in this worldon its terms. Had I known that despitewhat I had done the Torah still caresabout me, I may have reacted differ-ently.”

The Rav reassured him that it wasnot too late, and helped him return toa life of Torah and mitzvos.

FEAR OF HYPOCRISY

Often, the distancing effect of anaveira stems from our ingrainedrejection of hypocrisy. The baal

aveira thinks: “How can I put on tefill-in, or learn, or go to shiur, after what Ihave done (or while I want to performthe aveira again)?” In his or her eyes, itis better to drop these mitzvos and be“honest” or “consistent,” instead ofbeing a hypocrite.

The Nesivos Shalom quotes Rabbi

12 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

Dedication Opportunities

718.368.1404Registration & Information

718.368.1333

MESIVTA & BAIS MEDRASH OF

MANHATTAN BEACH

ayhc iyvbn’s arsn ,hcu t,ch,nYE S H I VA BA I S SH I M O N

When we first opened our doors, we set out to build a first class, out-of-town yeshivah - including a mesivta, bais midrash and kollel. Weselected only superb mechanchim for our limudei kodesh staff. We

accepted the applications of only the finest talmidim, high caliber bnei Torahwith excellent midos and a desire to “shteig” in learning. We established a solidRegents-accredited general studies program. And the Mesivta flourished.

Since then, we expanded our facilities twice. Finally, we purchased a largebuilding and launched a campaign to prepare it for our future needs.

But the future has caught up to us. We ran out of spaceright in the middle of our building campaign.

For this year’s pressing needs, we renovated three floors for our dormi-tory. We are now in Phase II of the campaign, which will give us a new beismidrash, kitchen and dining facilities, classrooms,multi-purpose rooms, offices and much more.

Reserve your share in the mostexciting new Torah institution in theNew York area.

Moshe of Kobrin:“ A Jew who transgressed the worst

possible aveira and is not able after-wards to stand in tefilla and pour hisheart out to Hashem, has not only notentered the doorway of Chassidus, butnot even the doorway of Judaism.”The Kotzker is quoted as having said

that “a mentch is one minute a Malach,one minute a Galach.” The realities ofhuman nature are such that a personwho one moment angelically servesHashem with all of his heart can, at thenext moment, serve avoda zara like apriest! The chiddush (novelty) of theKotzker’s insight lies not simply indescribing the phenomenon, but inexplaining that both sides of the phe-nomenon are real. A person who hasundergone a “Galach” episode assumesthat if he was capable of falling to suchlow depths, then any “Malach” episodesin his past could not have been authen-tic. This pressures him to “end the cha-rade.” He also feels that he cannotconceivably perform a mitzva as a“Malach,” since he has discovered thathe is a “Galach.”

These feelings can overwhelm ayeshiva bachur who loved learning andnow finds himself longing to surf forhours through the cesspools of theInternet, or the Beis Yaakov girl who wasexcited about mitzvos, and finds herselfdrawn to “chat” with anonymous men.An oveid Hashem must understandthat just as the danger of being a“galach” is always present, regardless ofthe lofty madreigos he has reached, so toodoes the opportunity to serve Hashemas a malach exist, no matter which depthshe has fallen to.

The Tolner Rebbe a”jyls ofYerushalayim related the followingstory:

When he was a young Chassid of theBeis Yisroel of Ger, he received a letterfrom a friend who was learning inLakewood. His friend was approachedby a bachur, who confessed that he hadbeen troubled by thoughts of “kefira(apostasy).” Consequently, he wasunable to learn or daven properly.Since he was embarrassed to discuss thiswith anyone in the yeshiva, he asked his

friend to present his problem to theGerrer Rebbe, the Beis Yisroel l”xz. Sohe sent a letter to his friend inYerushalyim, and asked him to deliverit to the Rebbe.

When the Beis Yisroel read the let-ter, he was visibly moved and asked theyoung Chassid to bring him a MasechesShabbos. He pointed to a line (on daf119b) and asked him to read it:

“Whoever answers ‘Amein yeheiShemei rabba’ with all of his strength,his gezar din (decree) will be torn up….Rabbi Chiya bar Abba says in the nameof Rabbi Yochanan, ‘Even if there is ashemetz (smattering) of avoda zara inhim, he will be forgiven.’ ”

“Itchele,” asked the Rebbe, “tell mewhat you see from this Gemora.”

“I see the power of ‘Yehei Shemeirabba,’” his young Chassid replied.

“True,” said the Rebbe, “but I seesomething else. I see that even someonewho is troubled by thoughts of avodazara is capable of saying ‘Yehei Shmeirabba’ bechol kocho, with all of hisstrength!”

The answer was relayed to thebachur in Lakewood, and provided himwith the necessary encouragement.

US AND THEM

Another destructive aspect of“post-aveira despair” stems frommistaken assumptions about our

own tzidkus.We often decide that in orderto serve Hashem with simcha, we needthe self-confidence that results from feel-ing that we are tzaddikim. We divide theworld into “us” (the tzaddikim), and“them.” If we transgress in ways that wecannot overlook or excuse, we cannotcope with our inability to classify our-selves as tzaddikim.

The Rambam in Hilchos Teshuvaexplains that only Hakadosh Baruch Huknows the true evaluation of tzidkus andrishus (virtue and degredation). Theworld of Torah and mitzvos is not theexclusive domain of tzaddikim. With thedawning of each day, all Jews, young andold, tzaddikim and resha’im, are obligatedto fight the yeitzer and fill the day withTorah and mitzvos.

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 13

THE LESSON OF THE LETTER “HEI”

Armed with this encouragement,even a person who suffers alapse can still strive to be count-

ed amongst the ovdei Hashem. At thesame time, he must be keenly aware ofthe realities of the “post-aveira” world.The Gemora (Menachos 29b) tells us thatthe letter “Hei” represents Olam Hazeh– This World. The open bottom of theletter represents the possibility of fail-ing, of falling through the space intooblivion. What, then, asks the Gemora,

is the purpose of the opening in theupper corner of the “Hei”? This repre-sents the ability to do teshuva, to returnto an active, productive life. If so, asksthe Gemora, why can’t the baal aveirasimply return through the openingfrom where he fell? The Gemoraanswers, “Lo mistaya milsa – It won’twork.”

The baal teshuva cannot allow him-self to be broken by the realization thathe cannot simply return to his previousstate. The experience of committing anaveira changes us in many ways. Torah-

imbued experiences that we used to enjoymay now feel like a burden. Lifestyles thatused to repel us now attract us. AdamHarishon describes the experience of eat-ing from the Eitz Hadaas – the forbid-den Tree of Knowledge – with the word“va’ochal.” The form of the word actu-ally implies the future tense. Rashi citesthe Midrash that explains the connota-tion of this expression as “achalti,va’ochal od – I have eaten, and I will eatagain.”The Midrash is puzzling. How canone account for such chutzpa and lackof contrition on the part of Adam? TheKotzker l”xz explained that AdamHarishon was expressing not defiance,but a cry for help that emanated fromhis understanding of his post-aveiraworld.“I have eaten, and despite all thathas happened, I feel in myself thedesire to eat again!”

The pathway of the baal teshuva tothe upper opening of the “Hei” requiresnew tactics, combined with time,patience and effort. Nonetheless, he mustremember that the teshuva processcannot simply lead him to where he wasbefore, but to a state in which the aveirosperformed intentionally can be trans-formed into zechuyos – a source of merit,for inspiring him to reach up for thathigher opening.

THE SPECIAL TASK OF PARENTS

Yetzias Mitzrayim reminds us thata Jew is always a child ofHakadosh Baruch Hu, and that this

fact will never be altered by any behav-ior. Much of life is mashal and nimshal– allegory and the reality it brings intoone’s reach. In this manner, the rela-tionship of parent and child can serveas a mashal, an allegory; and our rela-tionship with Hashem is the nimshal, real-ity. A child must be convinced that themashal is true in order to accept thenimshal. Parents, without blurring rightand wrong, must transmit to each childthat no matter what happens, he or shewill never cease to be their child, and thatthey, as parents, will never cease to lovethem with an “ahava she’ayna teluyabedavar – a love that is not dependenton anything.”When a child believes that

14 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

Yes! I would like to help Ezras Torah's needy.Enclosed is my tax deductible contribution for:

❏ $18 ❏ $36 ❏ $50 ❏ $100 ❏ $180 ❏ $250 ❏ $360 ❏ $500 ❏ $1,000 ❏ $____________

Method of payment: ❏ Check ❏ Visa ❏ M/C ❏ A/E Ac. #:_______________ Exp. Date: ___________Please contact me regarding establishing an Ezras Torah Endowment Fund for a:

❏ Free Loan Fund ❏ Medical Emergency Fund

Please send me an Ezras Torah Halachic Pocket Calendar & Guide, for the current year. (checkedbelow, contributionenclosed)

❏ Pocket-sized Hebrew Luach ❏ Pocket-sized English Luach ❏ Wall-sized Hebrew Luach

Name Tel. ( )

Address City State Zip Please make check payable to: Ezras Torah, 235 East Broadway, New York, NY 10002 • (212) 227-8960 JO

s”xc

DW

DES

IGN

S8

45

-36

2-8

22

7

“What gives us success in war?The spiritual fortresses of Torah.”

Rabbi Yehoshuah ben Levi (Makos)

For thousands of years, the Torah has kept AmYisroel alive.Keep the learning of Torah alive.Due to further severe reductions of up to 80% inIsraeli government subsidies, Yeshivas and Torahfamilies are turning to us with ever-increasingrequests for assistance. We cannot let them down.Ezras Torah now more than ever needs your help.Become partners with Ezras Torah and send inyour generous contribution today!

E S T A B L I S H E D 1 9 1 5

E S T A B L I S H E D 1 9 1 5

Please use my donation to:• Help a young Choson-

Kallah get married!• Give a Torah scholar in

need of surgery peaceof mind!

• Enliven the lives of aTorah family with a YomTov grant!

• Help provide a homefor a newlywed couple!

• Endow a Free LoanFund or MedicalEmergency Fund!

DEDICATED TO KEEPING TORAH ALIVE!Ezras Torah is a tzedokkah fund endorsed by Gedolei Hatorah

“if my parents knew what I was doing,they would hate me and abandon me,”it becomes far more difficult for him toaccept the nimshal – that he is always achild of Hashem, and “He always lovesme and waits for me to return.”

Obviously, lessons in the power ofteshuva must be transmitted carefully, soas to avoid encouraging a lifestyle of“echta ve’ashuv – I will sin, and then doteshuva.”Despite this, the danger of ignor-ing the Torah’s message of teshuva far out-weighs the risks.

While the commandment to remem-ber Yetzias Mitzrayim applies each day,Pesach – the Yom Tov of “Vehigadta levin-cha – And you shall relate it to your son”– enables us to transmit the message ofYetzias Mitzrayim from generation to gen-eration. The light of Yetzias Mitzrayimreappears each Pesach, providing us withsiyata diShemaya to believe in our rela-tionship with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, tofree ourselves from our own personalMitzrayim, and to proceed to the puri-fying days of Sefiras HaOmer, which leadto the climax of Kabbalas HaTorah. ■

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 15

2600 OCEAN AVENUE, BROOKLYN, NY 11229 4 718.769.8160 4 FAX: 718.769.8640

W hy should I choose the New Seminary/Adelphi program over other options?

There are many reasons!4 The vchcx - a Bais Yaakov environment.4 Close relationships with the Hanhala & faculty.4 The Adelphi degree offers wonderful opportunities.4 Your earning power increases dramatically.4 High rate of acceptance to leading graduate schools.

Just one year at...

Our students have been acceptedto the finest graduate schools!

4 Speech Pathology4 Education4 Special Ed.4 PT/OT4 Social Work4 Business

REBBETZIN SORA F. BULKA, ,kvbnRABBI YESHAYA LEVY, kvbn idx MRS. GITTIE NEUFELD, ASST. PRINCIPAL

vcuy vruacAdelphi U. has

established Academic

scholarships in addition

to regular Financial Aid

PELL, TAP, ETC.

SEMINARY SCHOLAR-SHIPS AVAILABLE

APPLY EARLY FOR

MAXIMUM BENEFITS

THE NEW BAIS YAAKOV SEMINARY

...opens the door to a lifetime of possibilities!

Name ______________________________________________________

New Address ______________________________________________

City, ______________________________________________________

State, ________________________________Zip ________________

Date Effective ______________________________________________

Send addresschanges to:

ARE YOU MOVING?IS YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PRINTED

INCORRECTLY ON THE JO MAILING LABEL?We need your help to ensure proper delivery of the Jewish Observer to your home. Please attach current mailing label in the space below, or print clearly your address andcomputer processing numbers that are printed above your name on the address label.

Affix old label here

The Jewish ObserverChange of Address42 Broadway, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10004

Please allow 4-6 weeks for all changes to be reflected on your mailing label. We will notbe responsible for back issues missed unless you notify us 6 weeks prior to your move.

THE USUAL STEPS

When we sit down at the seder tofulfill the mitzva of eatingmatza, we lean to the left, make

a beracha, and take a bite of the brittlematza. But rarely do we think about thecomplex steps that brought that piece ofshemura matza to our table or the greathalacha debates that have accompaniedit. The traditions surrounding the processthat takes the kernels of wheat and trans-forms them into unleavened bread for themitzva are as old as the Exodus fromEgypt, but some of the details of theprocess may be relatively new.

Initially, the hand-made matzoswere soft and thick, resembling pita. Theflour and water were quickly mixed andplaced in a mud oven or on hot bricks,and the soft dough inflated due to mois-ture trapped within it. Until today, theYemenite Jews bake their matza in anoven called a tabun, and they are soft.Many other Sefardic communities alsoeat soft, thick matzot. Due to thefresh, warm, and non-brittle nature ofthese matzot, they taste stale andunpleasant if they are not made daily.As a result, these communities tradi-tionally bake their matzot as needed dur-ing the week of Pesach. This historic factis recorded by the Aruch Hashulchan:“It is known that in the early times, theydid not bake all of their matzos beforePesach, but rather they would bake onevery one of the days of Pesach breadfor that day”2.

Matza continued to be manufacturedlike this for many years. By the time ofRabbi Moshe Isserlis, the Rama (1520-1572 CE), things were changing, and he

ruled that “the matzos should be madelike ‘rekikin – crackers’ and not thickbread like regular bread, because therekikin do not quickly becomechametz”3. The reasoning was thatbecause even the slightest chametz is for-bidden during Pesach, any activitythat could cause chametz should be min-imized. As a result, the Ashkenaziworld adopted the tradition of thin, dry,hard matzos that are all baked beforePesach begins.

When the flour and water are mixed,a chemical reaction occurs due to theenzymes and starches naturally presentin wheat, and that process creates carbondioxide gas. That gas is what causes theswelling that we recognize as leavening.

Chazal stated that the dough becomeschametz after 18 minutes, assumingthat the temperature is not particularlyhot, a factor that would speed up this reac-tion. How does one mix the flour andwater, place the dough in the oven, andyet prevent it from rising? The answer isin the ubiquitous little holes punched inAshkenazi matzos that allow the moiststeam to leave the mixture withoutcausing the dough to inflate.

THE FIRST OF ITS KIND

For most of Jewish history, allmatza was hand-made, and formany that is the way they fulfill the

mitzva today. For some people, howev-

20 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

Ari Y. Greenspan and Ari Z. Zivotofsky

Rabbi Zivotofsky is trained as a shochet, has a Ph.D.in biomedical engineering and teaches in Bar IlanUniversity. He lives in Beit Shemesh, from wherehe writes widely on Jewish topics. His last appear-ance in these pages was in “Torah Shines Forth fromNew Haven… and Cleveland” (Dec. ’03).Dr. Greenspan is a practicing shochet, mohel, andsofer. He lives in Efrat and has a private dentalpractice in Yerushalayim. His last appearance wastogether with Rabbi Zivotofsky in “Living theLaw” (Dec. ’02).1

The two have been chavrusos and partners in“halachic adventures”for over 20 years, and are cur-rently researching a book on the history of matza.They are collecting relevant stories and pictures.

er, the modern machine matzos are seenas a hiddur, the ideal way to fulfill themitzva, because the automated processleaves little room for human error, andhence almost no chance of any chametzbeing made.4 In fact, some people actu-ally will not eat hand matzos out of a con-cern that some chametz might have beenintroduced into the dough. The paradoxof the change in status of that which wasonce the hiddur and now is seen by manyas not, requires further attention.

This radical change in the tradition-al baking process was introduced as aconsequence of the IndustrialRevolution, and engendered a majorhalacha debate at the turn of the 57thcentury (mid-19th century CE). Thechange was introduced slowly. The firststep in the genesis of machine matza wasa machine made in 1838 that simplyrolled dough for matza. This machine,which indeed eased the production ofmatza, merely facilitated one of the stepsin the process, and did not cause a greatuproar. It was only when furtherautomation was introduced that thehalacha debate ensued.

Due to the social environment of theIndustrial Revolution, which influencedbusinessmen to find quicker and moreefficient ways to do things, furtheradvances were inevitable. In addition,geographic and cultural norms due tothe movement from the shtetl to largeurban centers played a role, as well.Whereas previously, in every smalltown, families baked their own matzosin a communal oven, now, very largecities had to find a way to bake the mas-sive amounts needed for all of the Jewswho had migrated from the countryside.

The first major argument emerged inCracow, Poland, in 5617 (1857). In thatyear, a number of businessmen wantedto import a matza-making machine tothe city, but did not get rabbinic per-mission before Pesach. In the beginningof the following year, they sent repre-sentatives to Shlezia to observe the work-ing machine, “and when they returned,they announced that the matter does notcontradict the halacha.”5

Rabbi Chaim Nathan Dembitzer(1820-1892), the head of the Beis Din of

Cracow,6 and others were not so con-vinced, and sent a letter to RabbiShlomo Kluger (1783-1869), one of themajor, senior poskim of the time and oneof those who had given RabbiDembitzer semicha, to ask his opinionon the matter. Rabbi Shlomo Kluger,known as an illui (genius) as a child, andlater as Rav of Brody for almost 50 years(from 1820), was a gadol hador, who hadpenned hundreds of teshuvos, and is saidto have written many sefarim, of which15 were published during his life and 15posthumously.7

DIFFERENCES OF OPINION

Rabbi Dembitzer described thedetails of the machine’s operationto Rabbi Kluger, who had never

personally seen the apparatus. In hisdetailed report, he explained the oper-ation:

“This is the manner in which themachine works: Immediately upon thecompletion of the kneading of the mixby the workers, the dough is placed inthe machine and it makes the doughinto thin matzos that are cut into

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 21

Beis Yaakov Jewish High SchoolBeis Yaakov Jewish High SchoolMenahel: Rabbi Y. Goldblatt. M.A. (Oxon) P.G.C.E.

This dynamic growing school, located in the centre of the charedi community in manchester, is moving soon, into new premises anda new state-funded framework

Successful candidates will be able to show

• understanding of and commitment to the ethos of the school

• ability to work as a team to foster a warm upbeat and positive atmosphere

• professionalism skill and creativity as a teacher

• a desire to give to young people, and to grow as a ,fbjn

The Charedi community in Manchester is one of the fastest-growing in Europe. There are facilities and opportunities for individuals and families. There are arsn h,c and ohkkuf,training programmes for ohfrct who want to go into lubhj,employment possibilities within the community, a strong supportive vkhve, ohruga and other facilities for ladies, and many other ,ukgn.

If you find the challenge appealing, want to broaden your experience by spending some time in England, like the idea oflife in a Charedi small town where the “Big City Syndrome” is less conspicuous, please contact Rabbi Goldblatt at the above address.

e-mail: jhsforgirls@onetel.net.uk (emails should be titled “ad in JO”)

Join us in an exciting new venture!

10 Radford Street Salford, M7 4NT

Tel: 44 161 792 2118 Fax: 44 161 792 1733

s’’xc

We are looking for professional and enthusiasticteachers to complement the existing ase hsunk team

squares, and can also... be maderound.”8

Utilizing this description, RabbiKluger decided that the use of themachine was prohibited. Later author-ities followed his lead. The Avnei Nezer,writing nearly 40 years later (in5655/1895), wrote:

“Although I have never seen themachine…since the great ones who pre-ceded us have prohibited it andstormed against those who permittedit, for whatever reason it may be, theymust have had correct cause for doing

so. Who would breach the boundariesset by the earlier authorities who arelike angels, and not fear being burnedby the coals!”9

Rabbi Kluger had a number of rea-sons for prohibiting the machine-madematzos. He argued that many poor peo-ple waited all year for the work thatmatza-baking provided for them. Usinga machine “is as if they annul the mitz-va of tzeddaka and maos chittim ofPesach.”10 Another very practicalhalacha concern was that bits of doughwould get stuck in the machine and

become chametz, and then becomeincorporated into the matzos beingmade. He was thus concerned about actu-al chametz. Finally, halachos of lishma(intent) and koach gavra (humanpower) – both binding conditions in bak-ing matzos-mitzva – were raised as issuesagainst machine matzos.

At about the same time, Nissan5618/1858, the same question was putto Rabbi Yosef Shaul Natanson (1808-1875), renowned Rav of Lvov(Lemberg), known as the “ShoeilU’meishiv,” and also considered one ofthe poskei hador. After scrupulous per-sonal observation of a trial run of amatza-making machine in Lvov, hisresponse, unlike Rabbi Shlomo Kluger’s,was that the machine is permissible.

An anonymous person sent the var-ious letters for and against machine mat-zos to Hamaggid. Hamaggid, the firstHebrew newspaper, which had begunpublication in 5616/1856, in Lyck, east-ern Prussia, published them in itsPesach edition. The articles in Hamaggidelicited a host of angry letters from itssubscribers. For example, a certainRabbi Chaim Kara of Paradan wrote:

“It is clear that he [Rabbi ShlomoKluger] is a fool and rough of spirit inhis decision that is meaningless andminor, therefore it is correct to stretchhim on the pole of scorn.”11

As a result, Rabbi Dembitzer urgedRabbi Kluger to make his opinionwidely known and to publish hisresponse. Rabbi Kluger agreed andwrote:

“G-d forbid, I did not have intentto glorify myself with another’s down-fall, but since he [Rabbi Natanson]printed [his letter] with full aware-ness… what motivated him to publishit, knowing it will cause the public tostumble? Thus we, too, are also obli-gated to print and publicize that noteveryone agrees with him.”12

FULL-FLEDGED MACHLOKES

The time was now ripe for a full-fledged machlokes. In 5619/1859,Rabbi Kluger published ten letters

in a pamphlet called “Moda’a L’Beis

22 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

It feels better just to talk about it. That’swhy we’re here. Our staff is made up of

caring and sensitive individuals. Together,we can help you explore your options. Wecan refer you to recognized professionals

for counseling, legal advice or help infinding a safe environment. We can alsoput you in touch with some very special

Rabbis. But in order for us to reach out toyou, you must first reach out to us.

Confidential Hotline

Do it for yourself.Do it for your children.

1 . 8 8 8 . 8 8 3 . 2 3 2 3( To l l F r e e )

7 1 8 . 3 3 7 . 3 7 0 0( N Y C A r e a )

Shalom Task Force is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization

Yisroel – An Announcement to theHouse of Israel,” which strongly con-demned the use of machine matza. Thename alone indicates his feeling that thehalacha was clear and that the entirenation was obligated to refrain fromusing machine matzos. The pamphlet,as he writes, was a collection of

“letters from geonim and greatrabbis of the generation to forbid thematzos that are made by a machine forthe Pesach holiday, so that the Houseof Israel should know to be careful andstand by their lives so as not to stum-ble, G-d forbid, with the prohibitionof chametz on Pesach, and with the con-cern of a beracha levatala, and theyshould conduct themselves in the tra-ditional manner as in years past.”13

The letter writers against machinematza included some of the greatestposkim and talmidei chachamim of thegeneration – Rabbi Moshe Zev Itunga(author of Magein Giborim on ShulchanAruch, often cited in Mishna Berura) andRabbi Meir Auerbach (Kalisher Rav) –as well as notable Chassidic leaders fromPoland and Galicia. Among them weresuch luminaries as the Sanzer Rav(Rabbi Chaim Halberstam, the DivreiChaim, who declared machine matzosto be “chametz gamur – purechametz”),14 Rav Yitzchak Meir from Gur(the Chiddushei Harim, living inWarsaw), and Rabbi Yehoshua HeschelAshkenazi of Lublin. The opening teshu-va was from none other than RabbiDembitzer himself.

Some of these opponents argued thatall innovation is objectionable, andleads to reforms and the uprooting ofhalacha. Harsh words were used againstthe innovators. Rav Yitzchak Meir fromGur wrote:

“May Hashem save His nationfrom those people, messengers of theyeitzer hara, students of Yeravam benNevat, who seek to chip away from eachmitzva a little at a time, and their intentis to eradicate it all….”Even the matza’s shape – round vs.

square – entered the debate. 15 Much later,the Sdei Chemmed16 cited a clever retortby the Av Beis Din of Lvov in defense ofsquare matzos. He suggests that just as

the maximum thickness for somethingto remain non-chametz is learned fromthe lechem hapannim (Pesachim 37), sotoo should the shape be derived from thelechem hapannim, and they were square(Menachos 25).

IN DEFENSE OF THE MACHINE

Rabbi Natanson resolutely dis-agreed with the decision of RabbiKluger to forbid the usage of

machine matzos. His collection of twen-ty letters, exactly double that of RabbiKluger’s, was published the same year andcalled “Bittul Moda’a – Annulment of theProclamation.” The purpose was clear –

to “annul the questioners of theaction of the device, also called themachine, through which matzos forPesach can be made, who proclaimeda proclamation in a pamphlet to pro-hibit the machine, so that the Houseof Israel should know that their wordsare not correct.”17

Many of these letters were written byrabbis from central and western Europe.The writers included Rabbi YisroelLifschitz of Danzig (author of TiferesYisroel), Rabbi Avraham Binyamin Soferof Pressburg (the K‘sav Sofer), RabbiYaakov Ettlinger (the Aruch La’ner), andRabbi Yitzchak Dov Bamberger ofWurtzberg.

Rabbi Natanson insisted on person-

ally observing the machine run. Hisaccount of his first trial run with themachine is all the more poignant, sincehe described its failure due to the bittercold and the lack of experienced hands.Having learned from their mistakes, how-ever, their second try proved fruitful and“we found the machine in workingorder.”18 His explanation of the techni-cal process is clearer than that given toRabbi Kluger:

“The workings of the machine areas follows. The flour is kneaded in bowlsby hand, as has been done from timeimmemorial. Afterwards, the dough istaken and placed under the wheel, andtwo strong men turn the metal wheel,

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 23

FOR

THE FINEST

IN

PHOTOGRAPHY

AND VIDEO

WEDDINGS &BAR MITZVAHS

Since 1966

623 CORTELYOU ROAD(Off Ocean Parkway)

BROOKLYN NY 11218

(718) 941-5500USA / ISRAEL

similar to rolling pins, which is madefor this. The dough is thus rolled, asit is done in other places, with wood-en rolling pins. Other than this, herethe dough is prepared in one action,and it is a large amount. Therefore, around knife was made, and with it,round matzos are made in the shapeof our matzos, and the remainder ofthe pieces of dough is run through themachine again. After that, the matzosare passed to the hole makers, two orthree people; from their hands, they goto the oven to bake. The entire proce-

dure from the mixing to the oven doesnot take more than three minutes forzealous workers, and even if they arelazy it does not take more than five min-utes, and all of this is with cleanlinessand purity, and no dough remainsstuck.”19

Rabbi Natanson seemed frustrated bythe claim that the machine introduceda dramatic change in the tradition ofmatza production. He also was upset thatRabbi Kluger had not seen fit to observethe machine before he determined thehalacha.

“I don’t know of what he speaks.Does he think that the machine workswith magic, that one throws the doughthere and it rolls on its own and cre-ates a large dough?… Many strong peo-ple are needed to turn the wheel untila matza is made. Is this worse thanrolling with wooden rolling pins? Is thewooden rolling pin smarter than themetal one [used in the machine]?Anybody who hears this will laugh athis dreams and words.”20

Rabbi Simon Shvabcher in the BittulModa’a deals with the claim that doughsticks in the nooks and crannies of themachine, and writes:

“The machine is made of metal andis smooth without a crack or groove,and it can easily be cleaned afterevery time…there we find this is theideal way to make matzos mitzva”21

[Today, many of the machines are madewith non-stick Teflon. A.Z.]One of the major criticisms of the

machine matza was the fact that whenmaking the traditional round matzos, theexcess that was trimmed off was thenreused and put through the machineagain. The reused dough could be recy-cled several times and become chametz.The only recourse was either to forbidthe use of the corners or to make squarematzos and have no waste. That is howsquare machine matzos came to be.

Rabbi Natanson and his supportersdeflected all of the arguments present-ed against the machine. For example, theypointed out that matza baking is not acharitable enterprise, but a means ofpreparing matza for Pesach. Some ofthem even noted the preferability ofmachine matza in that it is all done uni-formly, rather than by teams ofuntrained helpers who cannot be ade-quately supervised.

EVOLUTION OF THE DISPUTE

It is worth noting that matzamachines have continued to evolveand improve. Unlike the above

description, today the kneading is doneby machine, and there is no need for twostrong men because the rolling is alsoautomated. There are also almost no fac-

26 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

www.cucumber.com 1.800.CUCUMBER

2.9¢ PER MINUTE

STATE TO STATE, CANADA, & UK

INTRASTATE NJ 3.9¢, NY 5.9¢, PA 5.5¢

LOCAL SERVICE ONLY $21.95 WITH 14 FEATURES

5.9¢ TO ISRAEL AND MOST MAJOR DESTINATIONS IN EUROPE

NON INTERNET LINES · NOT PREPAID · BILLING IN SIX SECOND INCREMENTS · INTERNATIONAL CELL RATES HIGHER · $1.50 FOR UNLIMITED LOCAL · $4.00 FOR VOICE MAIL · $3.45 FOR INSIDEWIRE MAINTENANCE · PLAN IS NOW AVAILABLE TO NY, NJ, & PA RESIDENCES AND WILL SOON BE AVAILABLE IN OTHER STATES · NO SWITCHING FEES · NO PICC FEES · MONTHLY RATE DOESNOT INCLUDE TAXES AND REGULATORY CHARGES (FEDERAL, STATE, & LOCAL) INCLUDING UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND FEES · YOU MUST BE A CURRENT CUSTOMER OF BELL OPERATING COM-PANY OR RESELLER THEREOF. DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE 65¢ PER CALL · DOES NOT INCLUDE DATA CALLS · CALLER ID EQUIPMENT REQUIRED · FREE VACATION VOUCHER AFTER 90 DAYS

For those who dotry our IQcumber flat rate plan for only

$48.99 per month with 14 features.

Direct D

ial!

tories today that make round matzos, andthose that do, do not reuse the extrapieces. In light of the significantimprovements in the technology ofmachine baking and its wide halachaacceptance today, Rabbi Kluger’s argu-ments may seem less cogent. In his time,however, they were very applicable.Issues of dough sticking to the equip-ment and causing chametz to fall intolater batches were a very serious concern.Moreover, the Divrei Chaim’s unequiv-ocal p’sak is still honored by Chassidimto this day.

As for Rabbi Natanson’s dismissal ofthe contention that the baking provid-ed charity to the poor, for Rabbi Klugerthat was a real halacha consideration.Another problem that occurred as theentire process became automated was thefact that as the slowly moving rack car-rying the dough approached the ovenentrance, it was exposed to increasedwarmth before entering the oven’s hotbaking environment. That warmth, asnoted above, could have initiated achametz process before the dough wasbaked. That problem was later dealt withby using chilled moving belts andblown air at the oven entrance to keepthe external temperature down.

While the controversy eventuallysubsided, it never fully disappeared. Asrecently as the eve of World War II, inthe well-known Lithuanian shtetl ofEishyshok, only hand matza was per-mitted.22

DIFFERENCES IN JERUSALEM

The European debate took longerto reach the Holy Land.23 The firstmatza machine was brought

from Trieste to Jerusalem in 5623/1863by Rabbi Yisroel Ozlaner, formerly a Ravin Minsk, and founder of Yeshiva EtzChaim in Yerushalayim. The machinewas used without opposition for severalyears, during which time Rabbi ShmuelSalant was a Rav in the city. EvenJerusalem resident Rabbi Auerbach,author of the Imrei Bina and a con-tributor to the Moda’a, refrained fromhis opposition, possibly because he nowsaw its operation first hand. But even-

tually, a feud broke out here, as well.In 5663/1903, the still-functioning

Matzos Cohen-Halperin was founded inJerusalem, and for Pesach 5666/1906, theybegan using machines. The localPerushim not only accepted the machinematza, but viewed it as mehudar (pre-ferrable)24. On 21 Adar 5666, the Badatzof the Perushim issued a letter that wasendorsed by Rabbi Shmuel Salant to theeffect that the machine matzos werekosher “lemehadrin meihamehadrinwithout any concern at all.”A mere threedays later the Badatz of Jerusalem’sChassidim issued a flyer called “Moda’aGeluya,” listing all of the rabbis who for-bade machine matzos.

Quiet reigned for a year, but in5668/1908, the poster (pashkavilim)war erupted. The opening salvo was thepublicizing of a letter by Rabbi AvrahamBornstein (the Avnei Nezer) that forbademachine matza. This was met several dayslater by a public letter from Rabbi NaftaliAmsterdam, a leading disciple of Rabbi

Yisroel Salanter, that not only wasmachine matza permitted, but that dayhe had baked his own machine matza,and a day later by another letter that invit-ed all to come watch the machinematza being baked for Rabbi ShmuelSalant. The Perushim further notedthat the residents of Jerusalem shouldrefrain from heeding the rulings com-ing from abroad, and should follow thelocal authorities, who had permitted it.

The following year, the exchange wasrenewed. The intensity of the debatesometimes led to misquoting. One of theChassidic proclamations againstmachine matza quoted the Maharshamof Brezhan as prohibiting it. In responseto a query, he stated that the printing ofhis letter was hevel vera’us ruach(absurd). It seems that he not only per-mitted, but accepted machine matzos foruse at the seder.25 After a while, the debatesubsided and the status quo, withmachine matza being produced and pre-ferred by the Perushim and shunned by

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 27

the Chassidim, prevailed.Both in Europe and Eretz Yisroel, the

debate was sometimes heated. It mustbe emphasized that the arguments onboth sides were cogent and were offeredby gedolei haposkim. There were indeedproblems with the machines, and therewere problems with hand matza. Therewere halacha advantages for each, andeach poseik weighed the factors, reach-ing his own conclusion.

THE AMERICAN SCENE

With the exploding Jewish pop-ulation in the US, machinematza quickly found its way

into acceptability, and no major debateoccurred on US soil. As it became clearthat, in the U.S., the possibility did notexist to use hand matza only, and thatthe machine was here to stay, theRabbanim decided not to fight the con-cept but to improve on it. One exampleis Rabbi Yosef Rosenfeld of St Louis, MO.,

who in 1903 published a booklet on thekashrus concerns of a matza bakery. Hewrote:

“I was forced to leave my home andcome to this land, and I became awarethat here they make matzos bymachines. All the rabbis, and at thehead, our leader, our Rabbi, RavYaakov Yosef, the head of the UnitedCommunity in New York, permitsthem. I studied the process and saw thatif the factory is large and welldesigned, the dough isn’t heated up[before being placed in the oven]…. Irealized that to uproot and annul theproduction of matzos by machine is animpossibility…. I therefore decided thatmy efforts would be to fix what wasneeded and possible.” 26

By the late 1800s, there were a num-ber of matza factories in the UnitedStates. In 1886, Dov Behr Manishewitzemigrated to Cincinnati, Ohio, fromPrussia. After a stint as a shochet, he start-ed his factory that exists to this day. He

revolutionized the process of matza bak-ing. No longer were machine matzos sim-ply rolled out in a press. The entireprocess was automated, baked radical-ly with gas heat, not wood. The entireoven was a patented belt device thatmoved the matzos though a long tun-nel, and produced perfectly baked, con-sistent matzos. By 1903, theManischewitz company was using threedifferent machines to automate three dif-ferent aspects of the process. Theyeventually held more than 50 patentsrelating to the process, and in 1920, theyclaimed that they were capable of pro-ducing an astonishing 1.25 millionmatzos a day. It should be noted, how-ever, that even though the recom-mended procedure always called forcleaning the machines after every use,for many years, this safeguard was hon-ored in the breach. Beginning 50-60 yearsago, yeshiva bachurim and other groupswould reserve the first baking of the dayfor their supervised matzos, which last-ed 18 minutes. Before starting, theywould carefully clean clumps of doughfrom the machinery. Today, as men-tioned, the machines are coated withnon-stick Teflon. Other groups – suchas the K’hal Adath Jeshurun (ofWashington Heights, N.Y.C.) – have foryears made a practice of reserving a dayfor their matza baking, when they stopproduction every 18 minutes to clean themachines. This same concern began tobe applied more exactingly to hand mat-zos some 50 years ago, and is still hon-

28 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

A Yeshiva for teens at risk, boys 15 & upDEAN - RABBI YAACOV ORIMLAND

• located in the holy city of Tzfas, away from the big city distractions• the boys receive endless care, love & devotion from our highly pro-

fessional & dedicated staff• we rebuild their self esteem which has been lost in the

mainstream system• offering individualized shiurim catered to the interest of each

student • learning one on one with Rebbeim• GED prep, computers, music• gym, barbecues, kumsitz, swimming, recreational activities• pshycologist on staff• lots of ruach in a warm & caring environment

SUMMER PROGRAM includes biking, snappling, kayacking,snorkling, jeeping, overnites & much much more

• Now in its 7th year

• Now acceptingapplications forthe upcomingzman & ourexpanded summer program

• The only Yeshivaof its kind that’s open all year round

• Now in its 7th year

• Now acceptingapplications forthe upcomingzman & ourexpanded summer program

• The only Yeshivaof its kind that’s open all year round

For further information call:

011-972-4-692-4894 or

011-972-50-704938

email:

gevaldik@012.net.il

www.nishmatshlomo.com

E n d o r s e d b y p r o m i n e n t R a b b o n i m , e d u c a t o r s & t h e r a p i s t s

Dov Behr Manishewitz

ored: stopping all activity and cleaningrolling pins and other equipment every15 minutes or so, and using rolls of dis-posable paper covers on the marble tabletops for each batch of dough.

The present-day Manishewitz facto-ry is under the hashgacha of the OU.Every aspect of the automated processhas been thought through and controlled.As a testament to his genius, the processoriginally developed by BehrManishewitz has not radically changedin the last 120 years, and his oven designhas become the standard of all com-

mercial baked goods.The New York-based Horowitz

Brothers & Margareten Company wasalso expanding, and established a namefor itself in the early part of the 20th cen-tury. Its reputation was such thatEdward Carlin of the Department ofIndustrial Exhibits sent a letter toFredrick Margareten in April, 1938 sug-gesting that a model of their bakerywould make for “a most interestingexhibit” at the New York World’s Fair.Horowitz Brothers & Margareten’sresponse was only lukewarm, and there

is no evidence that a matza bakery wasexhibited at the fair.27

“LISHMA”: A REMAINING CONCERN

In the six machine-matza factories thatwe have visited, the attention to detailand the meticulous care to avoid

chametz is more than evident. That hasremoved most of the concerns that exist-ed with the early machines, but were inreality extrinsic to the concept ofmachine matza. What remained were theissues that were inherent to a machine

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 29

pathway to prayerPlease join us at

The SixthL’Chaim

ShidduchSymposiumfor Women

Keynote SpeakerRabbi Pinchos Jung

Menahei RuchaniBeth Rochel High School for Girls, Monsey

Educational Director, Partners in Torah

Meeting Success as a ShadchanGuidelines for Today’s World

Date

Sunday May 2nd, 2004

Place

Shulamith School for Girls1277 East 14th Street, Brooklyn, NY(off Ave M, enter on Chestnut Street)Municipal Parking Lot E. 17th & Ave. M

Time

Registration 9:15-10:00AM

Program: 10:00AM - 4:00PM

Network, Participate inbreak-out sessions.

All ages, all backgroundsFollow-up revised directory

Early Registration Fee – $25.00(received by April 26)

Registration at the Door – $30.00

Brunch will be servedFor more information

and Registration Form contact:Suri Herzog 845-425-7926

Marcia Holczer 845-356-6667Fax 845-362-3205

E-mail: rkevents@hotmail.com

This program is not for singlesrepresenting themselves

product, and that has brought an addi-tional question to the fore: May one ful-fill the mitzva of eating matza the firstnight of Pesach with machine matza? Thematza used for the mitzva must be “she-mura matza,” i.e. guarded against anywater, and baked l’shem mitzva, purelyfor the sake of the mitzva of matza.Because of this, the She’iltos, and in itswake, many others, including theShulchan Aruch, ruled that if a child or

an imbecile kneaded the dough, that theresulting matza is not acceptable for theseder. It would seem that a machineshould be no better. It certainly cannothave the proper intent. Rabbi Natansonhad already addressed this question, butit continued to come up.

Rabbi Yonoson Shteif l”xz, whoheaded the post-World War II VienerKehilla in Brooklyn (Adath Yereim),brought its traditional approach to

machine baking to America. Everystage of the process was initiated witha hands-on, human action: flour andwater were mixed together manuallybefore the mechanical mixer took over;workers placed a chunk of dough on thesurface where it was rolled into flatsquares by machine; and they laid thematzos on the conveyer belt feedingthem into the oven. Each action wasaccompanied by a declaration “l’sheimmatzos mitzva.” The process wasstopped every 18 minutes for cleaningthe equipment.

Rabbi Yechiel Michal Tuketchinsky(d. 5716/1956) dealt with the “lishma”issue differently, and concluded that,indeed, for the first night, it is prefer-able to use hand matza. 28 If it is unavail-able, however, a beracha may be recitedon machine matza. He offered two rea-sons. First, he developed a novel sug-gestion that the “watching” is notintrinsically linked to the baking, andmay be done by an observer.Alternatively, he relied on a suggestionof the Minchas Chinuch that the prob-lem with observing an unqualifiedperson knead is that one cannot ade-quately supervise that which is in thehands of another. That does not pre-clude “watching” a machine. Finally,Rabbi Tuketchinsky notes that there arethose who want to argue that intentwhen the button is pushed is sufficientto carry through for all of the process-es that the machine performs as a con-sequence of that press of the button. Heessentially rejects this third, weakerrationale.

The concept of intent, kavana, dur-ing the button push is used in many fac-tories today, where the workers areinstructed to have in mind the mitzvawhen they push the button to start themachine. Furthermore, many years afterRabbi Tuketchinsky, Rabbi Ovadia Yosefused that as his main argument for jus-tifying the use of machine matza,although he, too, advises that, ideally, oneshould use hand matza. 29

Although the concerns of chametzhave become minimized, an addition-al problem with machine matza wasraised. Assuming it is not chametz,30 there

30 The Jewish Observer, April 2004

MESIVTA GEDULAS MORDECHAI is a new Mesivta located in the heart ofFlatbush, named for Reb Ephraim Mordechai Ginsburg zt”l, Rosh YeshivasMir, and headed by his son, the renowned Mechanech, Rabbi MosheGinsburg, Rosh Mesivta. The Mesivta is offering a unique blend of theold and new, tailored to the needs of today’s Bachurim, striving to emu-late the strengths of the Yeshivos of yesteryear.

RAV ELIEZER GINSBURG, RABBINICAL ADVISOR

For information, application & interview, please call 718-382-8863

ARE YOU LOOKING FOR A MESIVTA.... with a strong historical Mesorah, steeped in the Mirrer tradition of

,usnuk, rxun and vkhp,

. whose mission is the personal growth of every Bochur, ready to bemolded into a Talmid Chochom infused with new leadership and spirit

. with limited class size and strong Rebbe/Talmid interaction

. that aims to produce well rounded Talmidim with a love of learning

——————————————————

hfsrn ,kusd t,ch,nMesivta Gedulas Mordechai——————————————————t,ch,n atr ,druczbhd van wrR AV M O S H E G I N S B U R G , R O S H M E S I V TA

Cit

icom

! 718-6

92-0

999

was still a fear that because machinematza uses so little water, there may besome unbaked flour in the mix. Thus,the Chassidic custom of not eatinggebrochts, wet matzos, may have moreof a basis for a person eating machinematza. The fear is that unbaked flourwould get wet and then become leav-ened on Pesach.

Thus we have come full circle. The

Sha’arei Teshuva conjectures that the ori-gin of not eating gebrochts was becausethick matzos were then commonlyused, and there was a real fear ofuncooked flour.31 By his time, it seems,matzos were thinner and crispier, thusalleviating the fear. Today, with the wide-spread use of machine matza, the rea-son may again be applicable for reasonsof its own.

So as you prepare to take the bite andhear that crunch, remember that thepiece of matza you are eating, whethermachine or hand, comes from process-es rooted in hallowed antiquity. Andwhile it may appear that it has seen somedramatic innovations and changes in thelast 120 years, the basic mesora of AmYisroel on matza and its various relevantconcerns remain with us. ■

The Jewish Observer, April 2004 31

1 The authors thank Professor Jonathan D. Sarnaand Rabbi Moshe Kolodny (of the Orthodox JewishArchives) for their help in researching this article.2 Aruch Hashulchan, Orach Chaim 459:3.3Rama, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 460:4.4 See Daniel Schwartz, Pulmos Matzot-Ha’m’chonab’Yerushalayim, Sinai, vol. 122 (5758), note 31, thatRabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach l”xz ate onlymachine matza his entire life.5Bittul Moda’a, page 706 Or so he claimed. His detractors claimed thathe was never a dayan (Bittul Moda’a).7Encyclopedia Judaica 4:1110-11118Bittul Moda’a, p. 1039Avnei Nezer, Orach Chaim I, 372 10Moda’a L’Beis Yisroel I

11 Hamaggid 14: 5 – an organ with maskillim

among its founders.12 Moda’a L’Beis Yisroel p. 16

13 Moda’a L’Beis Yisroel Hakdama14 Interestingly, in his letter, he stated that in these

matters, one should not reveal the reasons, but sim-ply issue the definitive ruling. His letter was alsopublished in Divrei Chaim, Cheilek I, Or.Ch., 23.15 Bittul Moda’a 2b, 14a.16 Maareches Chametz U’matza, vol. 7, page 400.17 Bittul Moda’a, Shaar18ibid p. 7019ibid20ibid p. 7121ibid p. 7722 Yaffa Eliach,There Once Was a World, 1998,p.430.

23 For the details of this debate, see Schwartz, pages

113-128.24 See Rav Moshe Sternbuch, Hagadah shel Pesach,

Moadim Uzemanim (5740), p. 22.25 Printed in Tzohar (ed. Rav Elyakim Dvorkes),

vol. 5 (5759), page 412.26St Louis 1903 Sefer Yoseif Tikva, Hakdama27 Eve Jochnowitz, Feasting on the Future: Foods

of the World of Tomorrow at the New York World’sFair of 1939-1940. MA thesis, NYU, 1997.28 Printed in Tzohar (ed. Rabbi Elyakim Dvorkes),

vol. 5 (5759), pages 407-411.29 Yechaveh Da’as 1:14. Printed in 5737(1977).30 The issue of “lishma,” positive intent, is only

relevant on the first (two) night(s).31 Or. Ch. 460:10.

When it comes to mortgages for overseas investors, only the Bank of Jerusalem MORFOR® mortgage features all of the following:

❚ Mortgage specialists whose native language is English;❚ Peerless expertise in Israeli mortgage law; ❚ A sterling reputation in real estate financing for over thirty-five years; ❚ A special personal service branch in the heart of Jerusalem’s hotel district; ❚ Custom-tailored loans with no additional collateral or guarantors; ❚ Flexible payment terms and no prepayment penalties.

Discover a comprehensive world of world-class international banking services including: Time deposits and variable term CDs in various currencies,foreign exchange, global securities and brokerage services, and foreign currency mortgages. If your standards call for nothing less than 100%discretion, please contact Stuart Hershkowitz at 972-2-6774777.

...Your only real choice when it comes toForeign Residents’ Mortgages in Israel …

and a great deal more

Bank of Jerusalem Ltd. Internat ional Division

18 KEREN HAYESOD STREET ■ JERUSALEM 92149 ■ PHONE 972-2-6774777 ■ FAX 972-2-5671601GENERAL OFFICE HOURS: SUNDAY - THURSDAY 8:30AM - 4PM CASHIER: 8:30AM - 3PM