Shemurah Matzah

A common practice on Pesach is for people to use shemurah matzah at the Seder, while for the rest of the Pesach to eat regular matzah. What is shemurah matzah? And, why do people differentiate between the two types of matzah on Pesach?

The term shemurah matzah derives from the phrase u-shmartem ha-matzot, Shemot 12:17. In modern Hebrew, the term shamor is understood to mean to watch, but, as we discussed in our commentary on Devarim (The Decalogue in Shemot 20 and Devarim 5) in the Torah, the phrase often means to remember, and hence the simple sense of the phrase in 12:17 is that the people are to remember to eat matzot, see Hizkuni on 12:17. However, Chazal (Pesachim 38b) understood the phrase in the sense to watch, that there is an obligation to watch the matzot.

(Thus, I understand that this obligation is a rabbinic enactment, which accords with the Rambam, Laws of Hametz and Matzah 5:9. However, see discussion in Biur Halachah, Orah Chayyim, beginning of 460, ein, where the Mishneh Brurah argues that for some stages of the production of matzah the obligation to watch is biblical based on the Rambam, Laws of hametz and matzah 6:9. Yet, this is probably a separate law just relevant to sacrifices, see Menachem Kasher quoted below.)

Once there is an obligation to watch the matzot, the question is what does it mean to watch matzot? The Talmud (Pesachim 40a) discusses whether one has to watch from the time of kneading the flour and water or sometime before. Rashi (1040-1105, on the page, also on Gittin 10a and Hullin 4b) explains that this watching is that one must perform the acts of preparing the matzah while having the intention to fulfill the law of eating matzah. On the other hand, the Rambam (1135-1204, Laws of hametz and matzah 5:9, also Rav Hai Gaon and the Rif) explains that the watching is to ensure that no water falls on the wheat or flour in order that that the matzah does not become hametz. Menachem Kasher (Torah Shelemah, on 12:17, 368) explains that the difference between Rashi and the Rambam is due to a difference in the text of the Talmud with regard to the statement by Rava that one must flip the stalks, either for the mitzvah (Rashi) or for the matzah (Rambam). (Also, see discussion in Arukh Hashulchan 453:12-23.)

A second and independent question is from what stage in the production of matzot does one have to watch the matzot? One possibility is from the time of kneading which the Tur (453) quotes in the name of an anonymous Gaon. The Torah Temimah (on Shemot 12:17, 154) points out that a Yerushalmi (Betzah 1:3) seems to follow this opinion and Daniel Sperber (1990, vol.1, p.92) writes that this possibility was the most prevalent opinion in the times of the Talmud and the Geonim.

A second possibility is from the Rif (1013-1103, pages of the Rif, 12a, also Ibn Ezra on 12:17) who writes that the watching is from the time of reaping, and this definition is accepted by the Rambam, Laws of hametz and matzah, 5:9. However, Daniel Sperber (p.97) has pointed out that based on Roman agricultural practices it seems that the statement in the Talmud that is the basis for the Rif's opinion is only referring to a special case where the wheat stalks got drenched from the rain and is after the time of reaping. Yet, maybe the Rif and Rambam understood that the conclusion of the Talmud (Pesachim 40a) is that the watching needs to be prior to kneading, and reaping is before the kneading.

A third possibility for watching the matzot is from the time of milling when the wheat is turned into flour. This possibility is quoted by the Rosh (on Pesachim 40a, 1250-1327, Germany) who writes that the practice in Germany and France was to watch the matzot from the time of milling since the mills were powered by water. The Arukh Hashulchan (253:13-15) suggests two ways of understanding this position. One that the conclusion of the Talmud is that watching from kneading is enough but that there was a change in the way the wheat was grounded from the time of the Talmud to the Middle Ages. The Arukh Hashulchan writes that in the time of the Talmud the grinding of wheat was done by hand or animals and hence there was no water around so the watching could begin by the kneading. However, in the Middle Ages, the grinding was done through water power so then the watching had to begin at this point. The second way of understanding this approach is that this approach agrees that the conclusion of the Talmud is that the watching must before kneading and milling is considered a satisfactory stage before the kneading.

Why were the Ashkenazim in France and Germany not more stringent and watched the wheat from the reaping instead of just from the milling? One possibility is from the Bach (towards end of 453) who quotes from the Semak (France, 13th century) that the Jews then did not have access to the fields. (I was told by Yitzhak Filler, whose father has a matzah factory in Mexico, that to this day the Jews in Mexico do not have access to wheat fields, and hence their shemurah matzah is from the time of milling just like the Ashkenazi Jews in the Middle Ages.)

The Shulchan Arukh (1488-1575) combines all the different positions. He writes (253:4) with regard to watching that it is best to watch from the time of reaping that no water falls on the wheat, but if that is not possible, then one uses matzah that was watched from the time of milling and if one is stuck then one can buy flour in the street and watch it from the time of kneading. The Shulchan Arukh also requires (260:1) that the kneading and baking of the matzot to be done with the intention to fulfill the law of matzah following Rashi's position.

The Mishnah Brurah (453:24, end of 19th century) writes that today one is not allowed to buy flour that had not been watched at least from the time of milling even for regular matzot since the processing of flour has changed. Thus, today all matzah is shemurah matzah. What we call shemurah matzah today is matzah that is watched from the time of reaping, while regular matzah is watched from the time of milling. Furthermore, today's regular matzah was the shemurah matzah that was eaten by Ashkenazim (as reported by the Rosh) at the Seder in the Middle Ages.

We can now return to our initial question, why do people eat shemurah matzah at the Seder, while during the week they eat regular matzah? The matzah at the Seder is unique since this is the only eating of matzah that one fulfills the commandment to eat matzot. (With regard to other meals on Pesach, Chazal learned that there was no obligation to eat matzah only that it is permissible, see Rambam, Laws of hametz and matzah, 6:1 and our discussion below, Eating matzah and sitting in the sukkah for seven days.) Thus, it is possible that at the Seder we are stringent and follow the Rif and Ramban's approach that matzah must (should?) be watched from the time of reaping instead of just from milling. This is probably the correct interpretation of current practice since as explained above all of our matzah is shemurah matzah.

In addition this is also the explanation of the Sefardi practice in the Middle Ages. The Maggid Mishneh (Spain, 14th century, on Rambam, Laws of hametz and matzah 5:9) writes that in his time the practice was to eat matzah that was watched from the time of reaping at the Seder, and for the other meals on Pesach to eat matzah that was watched from the time of kneading. Thus, the Sefardim were being stringent on the Seder not to use matzah that was only watched from the time of kneading.

However, this idea of being stringent is not the correct explanation for the Ashkenazi custom in the Middle Ages who at the Seder ate matzah that was watched from the time of milling, and for the other meals would eat matzah that was not watched at all. It seems that in the Middle Ages there was a conflation between the Rambam and Rashi's positions with regard to the definition of what it means to watch the matzah. Again, according to Rashi, the watching is that one when makes the matzot one must have in mind that he is doing so to fulfill the law of matzot. This requirement is only relevant to matzah that is eaten by the Seder since by the other meals there is no obligation to eat matzot. From this position, it also developed that the obligation to watch the matzot even with regard to water was only relevant to the matzah that is eaten on the Seder night, see Bet Yosef (453) quoting Rabenu Yerucham (1280, France – 1350, Spain), the Ran (Spain, 1290-1375, pages of Rif, 12a, me-hu), and Arukh Hashulchan 453:19. Thus, Ashkenazim in the Middle Ages, would even take dough from non-Jews, which was obviously not watched even from the time of kneading, if they were sure that it had not become hametz, see Rashi on Pesachim 40a, and Haghot Maimonides on Rambam, Laws of hametz and matzah 5:9. Thus law is codified by the Tur (end of 454) but not by the Shulchan Arukh, who follows the Sefardi approach that all matzah needs watching at least from kneading, see Biur Halacha (560, matzot mitzvah).

In conclusion, all matzot today are watched at least from the time of milling so they are all shemurah matzah. However, because there developed the idea that the obligation to have shemurah matzah only exists by the night of the Seder, we call the matzah we eat at the Seder shemurah matzah, and the other matzah regular matzah.