The Machine Matzah

Debate
By Rabbi Joshua Flug

For technical information regarding use of

.this document, press ctrl and click here
I. Introduction-Machine matzahs were initially introduced by Isaac Singer in 1838 as a
mechanical system that was operated by hand to expedite the kneading of matzah. It has
now evolved into an electrical process that is almost completely automated. This shiur
outline will discuss some of the halachic, hashkafic and historical issues relating to
machine matzah.
a. Click here to access ‫מודעא לבית ישראל‬, a collection of teshuvos opposing machine
matzahs and ‫ביטול מודעה‬, a response to these teshuvos advocating the use of machine
matzahs.
b. Article by Jonathan Sarna on the history of Manischewitz and the popularization of
square matzah
c. Article by Meir Hildesheimer and Yehoshua Leiberman on the social, halachic and
economic implications of machine matzah.
d. Article by Chaim Gertner on machine matzah as a tool for defining Orthodox identity.
e. Click here to watch how Streit's matzahs are made. Click here for another video of
machine matzahs being made in Yerushalayim.
II. The Halachic Issues
a. Do Machine Matzahs fulfill the requirement of ‫?מצה שמורה‬
i. The Gemara derives from the verse ‫ ושמרתם את המצות‬that matzah has to be
guarded ‫לשם מצת מצוה‬. This is why matzahs that were made for the purpose of
a korban or something else are invalid. {}
ii. The Gemara discusses whether ‫ שמירה‬must take place for all aspects of the
preparation or just for the baking. The conclusion is that ‫ שמירה‬must take
place (at least) for the kneading and the baking. {}
iii. What is required for ‫לשמה‬/‫?שמירה‬
1. Rabbeinu Asher (c. 1250-1327) quotes a machlokes among the geonim
as to whether a non-Jew can be involved in the process. According to
R. Achai Gaon (8th century) and R. Kohen Tzedek (10th century), one
may not use a non-Jew and according to R. Hai Gaon (939-1038), as
long as there is a Jew standing and watching, the matzah is valid. {}
2. Rambam's position is less clear.
a. Rambam writes that from ‫ ושמרתם את המצות‬our rabbis taught
that one must take precautions from the time of harvesting that
the grains don't come into contact with water. {}
b. Rambam also writes that matzahs made for other purposes are
invalid because of ‫ושמרתם את המצות‬. {}
 c. R. Moshe Soloveichik (1879-1941) is quoted as saying that
according to Rambam, there is no active requirement of
producing matzahs for the purpose of the mitzvah. Rather, if
the matzahs are produced with some other intent, they are
invalid. {}
d. R. Ya'akov Betzalel Zolty (1920-1982) is of the opinion that
Rambam has two different standards of ‫שמירה‬. One must take
extra precautions to ensure they don't become chametz.
Furthermore, one must produce them for the purpose of the
mitzvah. {}
e. R. Ya'akov Reischer (1661-1733) seems to adopt the approach
of R. Moshe Soloveitchik because he cites Rambam's
comments in ch. 5 as the source that the requirement for ‫לשמה‬
is only rabbinic nature, implying that there is only one halacha.
{}
3. Mishna Berurah follows the opinion of R. Achai Gaon that there must
be active ‫ לשמה‬in the production of the matzah and therefore, it is not
enough for the Jew to watch over. Nevertheless, in a pressing
situation, one may rely on the lenient opinion. {}
iv. Can ‫ לשמה‬be produced by a machine?
1. The Gemara states that one cannot slaughter an animal using a water
mill unless the animal is slaughtered by the first revolution of the
water mill. The reason is that the first revolution is considered ‫כח גברא‬
or ‫ כח ראשון‬and the second revolution is considered ‫ כח שני‬or ‫גרמא‬. {}
2. R. Avraham Teomim (Teshuva authored in 1863) writes that machines
are valid for making tzitzis strings which also must be produced ‫לשמה‬
because there is no requirement of ‫ כח גברא‬when it comes to producing
tzitzis. It only applies to shechitah and netilas yadayim. {}
a. R. Chaim Ozer Grodzenski (1863-1940) follows the opinion of
R. Avraham Teomim. {}
3. R. Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz (Chazon Ish 1878-1953) writes that if
the beginning of the process is produced ‫לשמה‬, the rest of the process
is automatically ‫לשמה‬. However, he gets the impression that this idea
is not accepted by other Acharonim. {}
a. As a matter of practical halacha, the Chazon Ish felt that one
should not use machine matzah for the mitzvah of achilas
matzah. {}
v. How the poskim addressed machine matzah specifically:
 1. R. Shlomo Kluger (1783-1869), the main objector to machine matzahs
in ‫מודעא לבית ישראל‬, felt that it was obvious that the matzahs are not
considered valid for the mitzvah of achilas matzah. He went further
than that and felt that they should be prohibited throughout Pesach out
of concern that someone may use them for the Seder. {}
2. R. Yosef Shaul Nathanson (1808-1875) the main proponent of
machine matzahs in ‫ביטול מודעה‬, writes that it is not comparable to
matzahs produced by a ‫חש"ו‬. These machines are not magical, they are
operated by humans. {}
3. R. Mordechai Landa argued that there is no requirement for ‫כח גברא‬
and therefore, there is no issue. {}
4. R. Shalom Mordechai Schwadron (1835-1911) writes that even those
who allowed machine matzah (i.e. R. Nathanson et. al) only permitted
the mechanical machines that were hand operated. Machines that are
totally automatic are invalid according to all opinions. {}
a. This may depend on the reasoning for permitting the hand
operated machines. R. Nathanson may agree to R.
Schwadron's assertion because he considers the human to be
using the machine as a tool. When we are dealing with electric
machines, the human is not really using the machine.
However, R. Landa will argue that there is no problem with a
totally automated machine because we don't require ‫כח גברא‬.
b. Are there specific chametz concerns in producing machine matzah?
i. Shulchan Aruch lists a number of precautions one must take in producing
matzah: {}
1. It can't go for eighteen minutes without working on the dough.
2. There cannot be any heat produced by the process. Therefore, the
kneading shouldn't be near the oven.
ii. R. Shlomo Kluger objected to machine matzahs because we don't have proof
that kneading by machines constitutes ‫ עסק‬and therefore, the dough is more
likely to become chametz. Furthermore, the machines produce heat and they
cause the dough to become hotter than normal. {}
iii. R. Avraham Yenner responds that if they would see the machines, they would
admit that there are no concerns at all. He further proves that there is no
difference between using metal tools and using wood or one's hands. {}
c. Is there a problem with square matzahs?
i. The original machine matzahs came in sheets and the operators (presumably
to make the matzahs look more traditional) would use a cookie-cutter-like
 device to make them round. The objectors to machine matzah argued that this
presented two problems.
1. The edges that weren't baked or that were place back into the machine
are likely to become chametz.
a. R. Nathanson notes that the facts are that there is no concern of
chametz because the entire process, including the baking of the
edges, takes a maximum of five minutes. {}
2. The Gemara states explicitly that one cannot make shaped matzahs out
of concern that it will take too long and become chametz. One cannot
use a mold to make these shapes because people won't be able to
distinguish between the two. {}
a. Maharil (c. 1365-1427) writes that one may never use a mold
for matzah. {}
b. R. Shlomo Kluger cites this Gemara as a source that one cannot
mold the dough into circles. {}
c. R. Mordechai Landa writes that cutting the dough into circles
is not a violation of the prohibition against molds. He explains
that Maharil's understanding of the Gemara is that the rabbis
prohibited molds because they are hard to clean and therefore,
even if one can make the first few batches without any concern
for chametz, the rest of batches will be chametz. However, the
tool used to create the circles do not qualify as "molds"
because they are very easy to clean. {}
3. There were some prominent rabbis who were in favor of machine
matzahs, but not cutting the dough into circles:
a. R. Eliezer Hurvitz (of Vienna) would only permit machine
matzahs if they were left as squares. {}
b. R. Avraham Shmuel B. Sofer (Kesav Sofer, 1815-1871) writes
that he allows circle matzahs but he would prefer if they
remained square. {}
ii. R. Yehuda Assad (1794-1866) writes that one may not use square matzahs for
the mitzvah. He contends that when the Torah states "‫ "מצות עוגות‬it refers to a
type of matzah that is round. {}
1. While not addressed in ‫מודעה לבית ישראל‬, R. Avraham Yenner alludes
to an objection that in general, all lechem mishneh, including the
matzah must be round. He shows that this is not the case as we find a
minhag to have square hand matzahs in certain places and to use a
 peculiar looking bread on Shavuos as a remembrance of the shtei
halechem. {}
2. As mentioned previously, there were rabbonim who preferred square
machine matzahs over circular matzahs and they did not seem to have
any problem with the fact that they were square. In fact, Kesav Sofer
notes that the square is a remez to the gathering of the exiles from the
four corners of the Earth.
III. The Hashkafic Issues
a. Man vs. Machine
i. One of the underlying themes of the debate is whether machines can serve as a
tool to make the work of man easier or whether machines are a threat to our
culture and way of life. This has been an ongoing challenge since the
scientific revolution and continues to have applications until today.
ii. R. Moshe Sofer (1762-1839) was known to say many times "‫החדש אסור מן‬
‫התורה בכל מקום‬," referring to any type of innovation in Judaism. {}
iii. His son, the Kesav Sofer, alludes to this issue as a challenge in permitting
machine matzah. Nevertheless, he writes that the quality and the standards of
machine matzah are much better than hand baked matzahs and therefore, they
require serious consideration. {}
1. While not addressing how the issues are resolved, he alludes to the fact
that ‫ חדש אסור מה"ת‬means proceed with caution but an open mind to the
benefits of the new technology.
iv. R. Shlomo Kluger alludes to the fact that machine matzahs are only accepted
in Germany because they are generally more open to innovation. {}
v. R. Ya'akov Etlinger (1798-1871) notes R. Kluger's hesitancy to introduce
innovation but adds that we are simply using technology to improve our
observance of Judaism and not as an affront to observance. {}
b. Capitalism and the plight of the poor
i. R. Shlomo Kluger states that his main concern with machine matzahs is that it
will take away jobs from the poor who traditionally were employed at the
matzah bakeries. {}
ii. R. Mordechai Landa disagrees and asserts that you can't mix business and
tzedakah. We must find the most efficient way to produce matzah and this
will help the poor by providing them with cheaper matzahs. We don't
consider tzedakah when figuring out how best to produce matzah and we will
find other ways to take care of the poor. {}
IV. Historical Tidbits
a. Chaim Gertner's article gives biographical information about some of the lesser
known authors in ‫ מודעא לבית ישראל‬and ‫ ביטול מודעה‬and how this issue interfaced with
the types of congregations they were serving.
b. Jonathan Sarna's article notes the case Manischewitz v. Commissioner of Internal
Revenue where the Manischewitz Company was questioned for writing off as a
business expense donations to the Yeshiva they founded. Their claim was that they
got involved in the yeshiva for the purpose of removing the stigma of machine
matzahs and producing the next generation of rabbis who would endorse machine
matzahs.
c. In the source sheet, you will find some of the advertisements in HaPardes for machine
matzahs. {} The readership of HaPardes consisted of rabbonim and talmidei
chachamim and the purpose of the ads was to get rabbis on board to the idea of eating
machine matzahs. Each of the ads mentions the rabbinic endorsements and the high
standards of kashrus.
‫‪ .6‬רשימות שיעורים סוכה ט‪.‬‬ ‫‪ .1‬פסחים לח‪-.‬לח‪:‬‬

‫‪ .2‬פסחים מ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .7‬משנת יעבץ או"ח ס' לח‬

‫‪ .3‬רא"ש פסחים ב‪:‬כה‬

‫‪ .4‬רמב"ם הל' חמץ ומצה ה‪:‬ט‬

‫‪ .8‬חק יעקב תס‪:‬ב‬

‫‪ .9‬משנה ברורה תס‪:‬ג‬

‫‪ .5‬רמב"ם הל' חמץ ומצה ו‪:‬ט‬

 ‫‪ .13‬חזון איש או"ח ו‪:‬י‬ ‫‪ .10‬חולין טז‪.‬‬

‫‪ .14‬דברי יחזקאל שרגא עמ' טו‬ ‫‪ .11‬חסד לאברהם תנינא או"ח ס' ג‬

‫‪ .15‬מודעה לבית ישראל תשובה ראשונה‬

‫‪ .12‬אחיעזר ג‪:‬סט‬

‫‪ .16‬ביטול מודעה תשובות הגרי"ש נתנזון עמ' ג‬

‫‪ .17‬ביטול מודעה מכתב הרב מרדכי לנדא )עמ' כד(‬

‫‪ .18‬שו"ת מהרש"ם ד‪:‬קכט‬

 ‫‪ .22‬ביטול מודעה תשובת הגר"י נתנזון דף ג'‬ ‫‪ .19‬שלחן ערוך או"ח תנט‪:‬א‪-‬ב‬

‫‪ .23‬פסחים לז‪.‬‬

‫‪ .24‬מהרי"ל הל' עסק המצות‬

‫‪ .25‬מודעה לבית ישראל תשובה ראשונה‬

‫‪ .20‬מודעה לבית ישראל תשובה ראשונה‬

‫‪ .26‬ביטול מודעה מכתב הרב מרדכי לנדא דף כו‬

‫‪ .21‬ביטול מודעה מכתב הרב אברהם יענר )דף כ(‬

‫‪ .27‬ביטול מודעה תשובת הרב אליעזר הורביץ דף יח‬

 ‫‪ .32‬כתב סופר תשובה ב' בסוף חלק או"ח‬ ‫‪ .28‬תקנות הכתב סופר )סוף שו"ת כת"ס חלק או"ח(‬

‫‪ .33‬מודעה לבית ישראל תשובה ראשונה‬

‫‪ .29‬שו"ת יהודה יעלה או"ח ס' קנז‬

‫‪ .34‬ביטול מודעה מכתב הגר"י עטטלינגר‬

‫‪ .35‬מודעה לבית ישראל תשובה ראשונה‬

‫‪ .36‬ביטול מודעה מכתב הרב מרדכי לנדא )עמ' כו(‬

‫‪ .30‬ביטול מודעה מכתב הרב אברהם יענר )דף כ(‬

‫‪ .37‬הפרדס תרצ"ח )‪(1938‬‬

‫‪ .31‬שו"ת חתם סופר יו"ד ס' יט‬