1

The Torah (Shemos 13:7) famously tells us:

וְלֹֽא־יֵרָאֶ֨ה לְךָ֜ חָמֵ֗ץ

Chametz shall not be seen in your possession.

What happens if the homeowner is blind? Do they have to hide away/lock up the chametz, or can they leave them as they are normally, if they anyway cannot see them?

4
  • 1
    He still has an obligation of בַּיּ֣וֹם הָרִאשׁ֔וֹן תַּשְׁבִּ֥יתוּ שְּׂאֹ֖ר מִבָּתֵּיכֶ֑ם doesn't he?
    – mbloch
    Commented Apr 25 at 10:04
  • @RabbiKaii - why not his own? Rambam says a person doesn't transgress the this prohibition if he has chametz hidden in a place where it can't be seen. However, the Rosh (1:9) disagrees and argues that the Torah doesn't say "You should not see chametz" but rather, "chametz should not be seen" meaning that as long as it is in a place where it could be seen, this commandment is violated....
    – Dov
    Commented Apr 25 at 10:29
  • 1
    @Moishe see my comment above....
    – Dov
    Commented Apr 25 at 13:09
  • 1
    @mbloch He should also still have an obligation of שִׁבְעַ֣ת יָמִ֔ים שְׂאֹ֕ר לֹ֥א יִמָּצֵ֖א בְּבָתֵּיכֶ֑ם.
    – Tamir Evan
    Commented Apr 28 at 7:10

1 Answer 1

2

As per my comment, the starting point would seemingly be the two contrasting opinions of the Rambam, and the Rosh.

Rambam as explained in the Kesef Mishneh, hilchos chametz umatzah 3:1 that a person does not transgress the prohibition if he has chametz hidden in a place where it cannot be seen.

והנראה בעיני דלא יראה לא משמע אלא כשהוא נראה לעינים דוקא וכן משמע בספר המצות מצוה ר' ומצוה ר"א.

And it appears in my eyes that the transgression of not seeing chametz is only implied when one sees it specifically with their eyes, and this is similarly implied in (Rambam's) Sefer HaMitzvos #200 and #201

The Rosh on Pesachim 1:9 disagrees with Rambam and points out that the Torah does not say "You should not see chametz (on Pesach)" but rather "chametz should not be seen". This means that as long as it is in a place where it could be seen, this commandment is being violated.

ואע"פ שאינו רואה דהא לא כתיב לא תראה חמץ אלא לא יראה משמע לא יהא לך חמץ במקום הראוי לראיה

Thankfully, after a bit of digging, I came across the Minchas Chinuch 20:1 who applies these two differing views to a case of a blind person. Rambam would say that he has not transgressed anything as he can't see the chametz. The Rosh, however, would maintain that it is sufficient in that, theoretically it can be seen. The Minchas Chinuch then reconsiders and concludes that the Rambam would conceivably agree with the Rosh that as the chametz are completely visible, the fact that the blind owner cannot see it is irrelevant and he has transgressed the commandment.

2
  • Can you please provide a full citation to the Rambam
    – Double AA
    Commented Apr 25 at 21:52
  • @DoubleAA - I've fixed. I apologise, I learnt pshat in the Rambam many years ago and forgot the direct source. Thanks to the Minchas Chinuch, I was able to trace it to the pshat provided by the Kesef Mishneh.
    – Dov
    Commented Apr 26 at 8:41

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .