JFS Bet Midrash Pre-Pesaḥ 5784

Halakhot of Pesaḥ
What are the actual eight miṣwot of Pesaḥ?

1) To not eat ḥameṣ on the 14th of Nisan from midday onwards

2) To remove all leaven from the 14th of Nisan
3) To not eat ḥameṣ all seven days of Pesaḥ
4) To not eat a mixture containing ḥameṣ all seven days of Pesaḥ
5) To not have your ḥameṣ be seen in your property all seven days of Pesaḥ
6) To not have your ḥameṣ be present in your property all seven days of Pesaḥ
7) To eat maṣṣa on Pesaḥ night
8) To tell of the exodus from Egypt on the night of Pesaḥ

How does one destroy ḥameṣ on a Biblical level?

And what is this destruction stated in the Torah? ‫ב ּוַמ ה ִה יא ַה ְׁש ָּבָת ה זֹו ָה ֲא מּוָר ה ַּבּתֹוָר ה‬
It is that he must nullify the ḥameṣ in his heart ,‫הּוא ֶׁש ְּיַבַּט ל ֶה ָח ֵמ ץ ִמ ִּלּבֹו ְוַיְח ֹׁשב אֹותֹו ֶּכָע ָפ ר‬
and consider it as dust,
And set upon his heart that there is no ḥameṣ in .‫ְוָיִׂש ים ְּבִלּבֹו ְׁש ֵא ין ִּבְר ׁשּותֹו ָח ֵמ ץ ְּכָלל‬
his possession at all,
And that all the ḥameṣ that is in his possession – ‫ ֲה ֵר י הּוא ֶּכָע ָפ ר ּוְכָד ָבר ְׁש ֵא ין‬,‫ְוֶׁש ָּכל ָח ֵמ ץ ֶׁש ִּבְר ׁשּותֹו‬
behold, it is like dust, and like something for ‫ּבֹו ֹצֶר ְך ְּכָלל‬
which he has no need at all.
- Maimonides, Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Ḥameṣ Umaṣṣa 2:2

The ‘Five Species’ of Grain

The lies of the OU (and normative Judaism):

There are five species of grain: wheat, barley, rye, oats and spelt. Rye is considered a sub-
category of wheat, while oats and spelt are considered sub-categories of barley. These five
species, when in their stalks, are called “tevuah.” After being threshed and winnowed, they
are considered grain. After they have been milled and the resulting flour has been kneaded
and baked, they are called bread.

What are they really? (Don’t trust it, it’s from Wikipedia)

‫ – ִח יָּט ה‬wheat
‫ – ּכּוְס ִמ ין‬spelt, but modernly taken to refer to emmer wheat
‫ – ְׂש עֹוָר ה‬barley
‫ – ִׁש יּבֹוֶלת ׁשּוָע ל‬oats or two-rowed barley. The name literally means "fox ear". Rashi holds
this to be oats, and Maimonides holds it to be a type of "wild barley," while Rabbi Nathan
ben Abraham called it by its Arabic name sunbulat al-tha'alib (Fox's spike).
‫ –ִׁש יפֹון‬rye, oats, or spelt. Its Arabic cognate, šūfān (‫ )ُشوَف ان‬refers to oats. Rabbi Nathan ben
Abraham I translated shifon into Judeo-Arabic as sāʾfeh (‫)סאפה‬,[6] which Zohar Amar
claimed is synonymous with an archaic Arabic word for oat, dowsir (‫)دوسر‬. Rashi translated
shifon as seigle (‫)שיגלא‬, indicating rye (Secale cereale), which is not endemic to Israel, but
was grown nearby. According to Dr Yehudah Felix, shifon is spelt.[8]
JFS Bet Midrash Pre-Pesaḥ 5784

Halakhic Probabilities

If one left nine bundles of maṣṣa and one bundle ,‫י ִה ִּניַח ִּת ְׁש ָע ה ִצּבּוִר ין ֶׁש ְּלַמ ָּצה ְוֶא ָח ד ֶׁש ְּלָח ֵמ ץ‬
of ḥameṣ
And a mouse came and took [one], but we do not ,‫ ְוֹלא ָיַד ְע נּו ִא ם ָח ֵמ ץ ִא ם ַמ ָּצה ָנַט ל‬,‫ּוָבא ַע ְכָּבר ְוָנַט ל‬
know whether it took a bundle of maṣṣa or a
bundle of ḥameṣ
And it went into a house that had already been ‫ְוִנְכַנס ְלַבִית ָּבדּוק‬
searched for ḥameṣ
One must check again, for every qavua (fixed) is .‫ ֶׁש ָּכל ַה ָּק בּוַע ְּכֶמ ְח ָצה ַע ל ֶמ ְח ָצה‬,‫ָצִר יְך ִלְבֹּדק‬
like half against half (50%).
- Maimonides, Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Ḥameṣ Umaṣṣa 2:10

Two bundles, one of ḥameṣ and one of maṣṣa, and ‫ ּוְׁש ֵני ָּבִּת ים‬,‫יא ְׁש ֵני ִצּבּוִר ין ֶא ָח ד ָח ֵמ ץ ְוֶא ָח ד ַמ ָּצה‬
two houses, one searched and one unsearched, ‫ֶא ָח ד ָּבדּוק ְוֶא ָח ד ְׁש ֵא ינּו ָּבדּוק‬
And two mice came – one took the ḥameṣ and one ,‫ּוָבאּו ְׁש ֵני ַע ְכָּבִר ים ֶזה ָנַט ל ָח ֵמ ץ ְוֶזה ָנַט ל ַמ ָּצה‬
took the maṣṣa, but it is not known into which ‫ְוֵא ין ָידּוַע ְלֵא י ֶזה ַּבִית ִנְכַנס ֶזה ֶׁש ָּנַט ל ֶה ָח ֵמ ץ‬
house the mouse which took the ḥameṣ entered;
And similarly, two searched houses, and one ‫ ּוָבא‬,‫ ְוִצּבּור ֶא ָח ד ָח ֵמ ץ‬,‫ְוֵכן ְׁש ֵני ָּבִּת ים ְּבדּוִק ין‬
bundle of ḥameṣ, and a mouse came and took it, ‫ ְוֵא ין ָידּוַע ְלֵא י ֶזה ַּבִית ִנְכַנס‬,‫ַע ְכָּבר ְוָנַט ל‬
but it is not known into which house it entered;
Or it is known into which house it entered, and one ‫ ְוִנְכַנס ַאֲח ָר יו ּוָבַד ק‬,‫אֹו ֶׁש ָּיַד ע ֶׁש ִּנְכַנס ְלֶא ָח ד ֵמ ֶה ן‬
entered after it and searched, but found nothing, ‫ ּוָמ ָצא ִּכָּכר‬,‫ְוֹלא ָמ ָצא ְּכלּום; אֹו ֶׁש ָּבַד ק‬
or searched and indeed found a loaf of bread;
In all of these cases, one does not need to search a ‫ְׁש ֵא ין ָּכאן‬--‫ ֵא ינּו ָצִר יְך ִלְבֹּדק ַּפ ַע ם ְׁש ִנָּיה‬,‫ְּבָכל ֵא ּלּו‬
second time, for there is no qavua. . ‫ָק בּוַע‬
- Maimonides, Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Ḥameṣ Umaṣṣa 2:11

Spot the Difference

Regarding out of reach ḥameṣ: If there is bread on a high beam, which you cannot reach by hand,
you must climb a ladder to remove the bread. However, if there is bread at the bottom of a deep pit,
which you cannot reach by hand, you do not need to descend a ladder to remove the bread.
Why is the halakha different between the two cases?