Prohibition of enjoyment of property?
Hello Rabbi. I don’t understand the necessity of saying that while leaven is forbidden to us in enjoyment, we don’t have ownership of it in order to abolish it.
Since when does the prohibition expropriate ownership?
As is known, the first Jews disagreed regarding the prohibitions of enjoyment, whether or not there is ownership over them.
For methods that do not have ownership in the Isvahn, then chametz is not an exception. The assumption here is that if you do not have any possibility of permissible use, then there is no ownership here, and de facto it expires. Chametz is an exception only in the sense that the Torah defined it as my possession even though it is not mine, so that I may pass over it without being seen or found.
For methods that have ownership of an iswahn, truly in chametz there is a newness that is exceptional and not at all mine (except to go over it). This can be understood in several ways: a. In every iswahn there is a dimension of limited ownership and in chametz this is enough to go over Babylon without fear. b. In chametz there is a special innovation that is not at all mine (like other serious things that are in chametz).
See, for example, a discussion on these topics here: http://asif.co.il/?wpfb_dl=911
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
