פניני הלכה בעיון - פסח, ט – מנהג איסור קטניות

(1) Kitniyot / The Origins of the Ashkenazic Custom

(1) These are the things through which one fulfills the obligation of [eating] matza: wheat, barley, spelt, oats and rye - and the custom is to take wheat initially (Maharil) - but not rice and other types of legumes [kitniyiot], and these also do not come to be leavened and it is [so] permitted to make a cooked food from them. REMA: And some forbid [it] (Tur and Hagahot Maimoniot and Mordechai on the Chapter [entitled] Kol Sha'ah). And the custom in Ashkenaz is to be strict [about this], and one should not change [it]. However, it is obvious that they do not render a cooked food forbidden after the fact if they fall into it. And so [too] is it permitted to light with oils that are made from them and [these oils] do not render a cooked food forbidden if they fall into it. And so [too] is it permissible to store types of legumes in the home (Terumat HaDeshen, Section 113). And the seed of dill (Maharil) and anise and coriander are not types of legumes and it is permissible to eat them on Pesach, and so does it appear [correct] to me.

(2) The ḥametz prohibited by the Torah is produced from one of the five types of grain: wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye. Other species such as rice and millet, even if they rise, do not undergo the same fermentation process as the five cereal grains, and they may be eaten on Pesaḥ. Although one Tanna, R. Yoḥanan b. Nuri, maintains that rice is also a cereal grain and forbidden by the Torah in its leavened state, the rest of the Sages maintain that even if rice rises, it may be eaten on Pesaḥ (Pesaḥim 35a). This was the practice of all the great Tanna’im and Amora’im. In fact, Rava ate rice at the Seder (ibid. 114b).

(3) During the medieval era of the Rishonim (c. seven centuries ago), the Jews of Ashkenaz (Germany, especially the Rhineland) began to refrain from eating kitniyot¹Editor’s note: we have refrained from translating the term “kitniyot” since there is no precise equivalent in English, and an imprecise translation would be misleading. In earlier contexts (such as the laws of kilayim, which prohibit cultivating dissimilar species in close proximity), kitniyot referred specifically to members of the legume family. As currently used, the category of kitniyot includes species that are not legumes, and not every member of the legume family is considered kitniyot on Pesaḥ. Initially, only some communities observed this stringency, but within a few generations the custom had spread to all Ashkenazic communities.

(4) Three principal reasons for this custom have been offered: A) Since kitniyot are cooked in the same manner as grains, in a pot, there is concern that if people cook rice on Pesaḥ they will end up mistakenly cooking forbidden types of grain. B) Since kitniyot, like cereal grains, are often made into flour, if the unlearned masses see pious Jews cooking and baking foods with kitniyot flour without concern for it becoming ḥametz, they are liable to do the same with grain flour as well. The rabbis of the Talmud were not concerned about this because, in their day, Jewish tradition was clear and established. However, the tribulations of the exile and the scattering of Jewish communities gave rise to a fear that some Jews would be cut off from tradition and come to forget what is forbidden and what is permitted. Eating kitniyot on Pesaḥ would cause them to err and eat forbidden cereal grains without taking care that they do not become ḥametz. C) Grain and kitniyot kernels are similar in appearance and are kept in the same storehouses for relatively long periods. It is therefore eminently possible that wheat or barley kernels would find their way into kitniyot, and when the kitniyot are cooked the grain will become ḥametz. This concern persists today, and indeed it is possible to find kernels of grain when checking kitniyot.

(5) Another reason why kernels of kitniyot and cereal grain got mixed together was the common practice of crop rotation. Farmers often grow legumes for a year to replenish the soil of a field that had been used for growing grain for many years. However, kernels of the previous crop inevitably remain in the field. Thus, if a coriander or fenugreek crop is grown after a wheat crop, wheat will sprout among the coriander or fenugreek, and some kernels of wheat or barley will be found in the harvested crop of legumes. Experience shows that sometimes the quantity of cereal kernels in the kitniyot exceeds one sixtieth of the entire quantity. This problem applies to those species of kitniyot that physically resemble cereal grain.

(1) Kitniyot / The Sephardic Custom

(3) However, some leading Sephardic Aḥaronim have written that many pious Jews refrain from eating rice during Pesaḥ because of a case in which some wheat was discovered in rice even after it had been checked several times (Pri Ḥadash, Ḥida). The Jews of Izmir have a custom not to eat rice on Pesaḥ (Lev Ḥayim 2:94), and the Jews of Morocco refrain from eating rice and other types of dry kitniyot on Pesaḥ. Ben Ish Ḥai (Year One, Tzav 41) states that in Baghdad many laypeople do not eat rice on Pesaḥ, and those who do must first check it two or three times. Each person should perpetuate his ancestral custom. Where there is doubt or difficulty in doing so, it is best to consult a rabbinic authority.

(4) Certain spices such as cumin, turmeric, and fenugreek often have grains mixed in and should not be eaten without a prior meticulous inspection.

(5) Nowadays rice is stored in the same packing-houses as flours and semolina. Therefore, those who eat rice on Pesaḥ must buy packages that are certified kosher for Pesaḥ and then check the rice thoroughly three times (Ama Devar 1:62) .

(1) Kitniyot / Spouses from Different Communities

(2) The following question arises frequently nowadays: what should a married couple do when one spouse comes from a family that refrains from kitniyot and the other from a family that eats kitniyot? A similar matter was addressed by one of the great Rishonim, R. Shimon b. Tzemaḥ Duran (Tashbetz 3:179), who writes that they obviously cannot eat together at the same table while food permissible to one is forbidden to the other. Therefore, the wife must adopt her husband’s customs, for “a man’s wife is like his own body.” If the husband dies, it depends: if she has a child from him, she keeps his custom; otherwise, she reverts to her family’s custom.

(3) R. Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe OḤ 1:158) adds that the wife’s status is similar to that of one who moves to a place where the accepted custom is different from his own. If he intends to settle there, he relinquishes his previous custom and accepts the custom of his new home (based on SA YD 214:2, OḤ 468:4, and MB 14 ad loc.). When a woman marries, it is as if she moves permanently into her husband’s house, and she must therefore adopt his customs.

(4) Accordingly, if an Ashkenazic woman marries a Sephardic man, she may eat kitniyot during Pesaḥ and need not perform hatarat nedarim (annulment of vows) because she is acting in accordance with the law that a woman adopts the customs of her husband. Nevertheless, some poskim recommend that she perform hatarat nedarim.²Igrot Moshe OḤ 1:158 proves that this is a Torah law from the fact that the Torah exempts a married woman from the obligation to honor her parents, since this mitzva would require her to actively clothe and feed her parents if necessary, and her obligations to her household take priority (SA YD 240:17; obviously if there is no clash between the two obligations, she is commanded to honor her parents). Thus, according to the Torah, a woman’s place is in her husband’s home.
Igrot Moshe also asserts that she need not perform hatarat nedarim. MB 468:14 states that one who moves from one locale to another must behave according to the custom of the new place. It is implied that since this is the halakha, there is no need for hatarat nedarim. This is also the opinion of Kaf Ha-ḥayim 468:43. Additionally, in extenuating circumstances even Ashkenazic communities did not accept the custom of refraining from kitniyot and can therefore be lenient in situations of famine or sickness (MB 453:7). Similarly, two different customs in one household would certainly cause tension, and thus she changes her custom without performing hatarat nedarim. Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 16:13 states that she must perform hatarat nedarim, and Ḥazon Ovadia (p. 56 and n. 10) states that it is better to perform hatarat nedarim.
May Ashkenazim perform hatarat nedarim and eat kitniyot? Kaf Ha-ḥayim 453:15 states that according to Mahari Levi (§38), one who refrained from eating kitniyot because he thought they are ḥametz may perform hatarat nedarim, but one who knew, or whose ancestors knew, that kitniyot is merely a stringent custom may not perform hatarat nedarim. Thus, Ashkenazim may not perform hatarat nedarim and eat kitniyot. According to Pri Ḥadash §468, one need not perform hatarat nedarim to annul a custom that originated in a mistake, so even one who knew that kitniyot is just a stringent custom may annul his vow and eat kitniyot. However, we need to examine whether he would apply this reasoning to a custom accepted by an entire community; perhaps even according to Pri Ḥadash hatarat nedarim would not be effective in such a case. Ḥatam Sofer OḤ §122 upholds the opinion of Mahari Levi. This is in fact the customary practice: we find that Ashkenazim do not perform hatarat nedarim and eat kitniyot except in the case of a sick person. Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 16 n. 47 and in the addenda quotes some who believe that kitniyot originated as an enactment (“gezeira”). According to this, even an Ashkenazic woman who marries a Sephardic man would not be permitted to eat kitniyot. Nevertheless, we do not follow this opinion, and an Ashkenazic woman should follow her husband’s customs.

(1) Kitniyot / Prohibited Species

(2) The familiar foods included in this custom are: rice, alfalfa, peas, millet, sorghum, chickpeas, fenugreek seeds, sunflower seeds, mustard, buckwheat (kusemet, not to be confused with kusmin – spelt – which is a forbidden cereal grain), cumin, vetch, black-eyed peas, arum, soy, mung beans, lentils, fava beans, lupin beans, poppy seeds, flaxseed, pulse, caraway, hemp seeds, common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris), sesame seeds, lupine seeds, corn, clover seed, and tamarind fruit. Products made from kitniyot – corn flakes, corn flour, and rice cakes, for example – are also included in the custom.

(3) Saffron was originally called “karkom” in Hebrew and is included in the prohibition. Turmeric, the Modern Hebrew karkom, is permitted.

(4) Mustard and flaxseed are not kitniyot, but the custom is to forbid them because they grow in pods like kitniyot.

(5) Rema writes that it is permitted to eat dill and coriander because they are not kitniyot. Nonetheless, Aḥaronim write that they must be examined well because they often contain wheat (MA, MB 453:13).

(6) There are differing customs regarding peanuts. In Jerusalem and many other places people refrain from eating them (Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:60), but in Greater Lithuania they were customarily eaten. One who does not know whether his family was stringent in this regard may eat them (Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63).

(7) Potato flour is permitted on Pesaḥ. There is no contention that based on the customary prohibition of kitniyot anything from which flour can be made should be forbidden. Rather, the custom only includes what the great Ashkenazic Rishonim forbade. Since potatoes had not yet arrived in Europe then, they are not included in the prohibition (ibid.).

(1) Kitniyot / Rules Governing This Custom

(2) People who adhere to the custom of not eating kitniyot may keep them in the house during Pesaḥ and derive benefit from them, for example, by lighting a lamp with kitniyot oil (Rema 453:1).

(3) One who does not eat kitniyot on Pesaḥ may cook them for somebody who does, but it is recommended that he use some sort of reminder that he is not cooking for himself (Kaf Ha-ḥayim 453:17; Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 16:8). It is likewise permissible for a storeowner to sell kitniyot during Pesaḥ; however, if there could be wheat grains among the kitniyot that make up more than one sixtieth of the mixture, the storeowner may not sell the kitniyot, because this could cause customers to transgress the ḥametz prohibition. It would be better to sell such kitniyot along with the ḥametz.

(4) If kitniyot fall into a cooked food, they should be removed, and whatever cannot be removed is batel in the majority of the dish. If, however, such a large amount of kitniyot falls in that they become the majority, the dish is considered a kitniyot dish and its consumption is forbidden (Rema 453:1; MB 8-9 ad loc.).

(5) It is permissible for one who does not eat kitniyot on Pesaḥ to eat from and cook with utensils that belong to one who does eat kitniyot, provided that 24 hours have elapsed since kitniyot were last cooked in them. If food was cooked in such a utensil before 24 hours elapsed, the food remains kosher.³Kitniyot in a mixture are batel in a simple majority (batel be-rov). Although the implication of Terumat Ha-deshen is that it is only batel be-shishim, the Aḥaronim rule that it is batel be-rov (SAH 453:5; Ḥayei Adam 127:1; Ḥavot Ya’ir §6; Eliya Rabba §4; and Kaf Ha-ḥayim 453:25, which also adds more sources). All of this only applies when one found that kitniyot had been mixed with permissible food, but it is forbidden to mix kitniyot with permissible food intentionally, contrary to the opinion of the Pri Ḥadash that one may intentionally add kitniyot to a mixture as long as they do not become the majority of the mixture. If one who does not eat kitniyot visits one who does eat kitniyot and there is nothing else for the guest to eat, he may, if absolutely necessary, eat the non-kitniyot food from a mixture containing kitniyot. For example, he may eat potatoes and zucchini from a dish containing kitniyot, even though the food he is eating absorbed some flavor from the kitniyot.
Even those who abstain from kitniyot are permitted to eat food cooked in a pot in which kitniyot had been cooked within the prior 24 hours, since the taste of the kitniyot is a very small minority. If 24 hours elapsed since the cooking of the kitniyot, one may cook food in the pot even le-khatḥila, since the taste of the kitniyot in the pot has already turned foul, and kitniyot are technically kosher for Pesaḥ anyway (Pri Ḥadash 496:24 and Responsa Maharalbaḥ §121). If one is in doubt whether or not 24 hours passed since the cooking of the kitniyot, he may still use the pot le-khatḥila because of the principle that most pots have not been used in the past 24 hours. See also Kaf Ha-ḥayim 453:27, which lists additional sources.
Some maintain that the prohibition of kitniyot begins at the onset of Pesaḥ (Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato 16:10 n. 42), and in time of pressing need one can rely on this opinion. In practice, however, the mainstream opinion is that the custom of kitniyot corresponds to the prohibition of ḥametz. Thus, kitniyot are forbidden from the time that ḥametz is prohibited (Ḥok Yaakov 471:2; Responsa Maharsham 1:183; Shevet Ha-Levi 3, 31).

(1) Kitniyot / Kitniyot That Never Touched Water and Kitniyot Oils

(2) We are not stricter with kitniyot than we are with the five cereal grains, so whatever is acceptable regarding these grains is kosher for kitniyot, too. Thus, kitniyot that have not come into contact with water, or that have come into contact with water but were not left for more than 18 minutes before being cooked (like matza), may be eaten. Some poskim are stringent in this respect, but most are lenient.⁴Most authorities are not stricter about kitniyot than about the cereal grains (SAH 453:5; Ḥayei Adam 127:1; Responsa Maharsham 1:183; Be’er Yitzḥak §11; Responsa Marḥeshet §3; and Rav Kook’s Oraḥ Mishpat §111). Some, however, are more stringent (Sho’el U-meishiv 1:1:175 and Ma’amar Mordechai §32). Their rationale is that no one would understand these distinctions since kitniyot do not become ḥametz. Additionally, they were concerned that making the kitniyot exactly like the cereal grains would mislead people to think they could use kitniyot to fulfill the mitzva of matza. As noted, though, most poskim are lenient, and in any dispute about a custom the halakha follows the lenient opinion.

(3) The poskim disagree about oils and whiskeys made from kitniyot. Those who rule leniently contend that the kitniyot prohibition does not apply to oil extracted from them, while those who rule stringently maintain that kitniyot oil has the same status as the kitniyot themselves. There is a middle position that asserts that if the kitniyot had been rinsed in water (for example, as part of the malting process) they become forbidden, and the oil extracted from them is prohibited. However, if they are ground and made into oil without having been moistened, they do not have the status of kitniyot.⁵Terumat Ha-deshen §113 explains that oil extracted from kitniyot is prohibited because the kitniyot are first malted. This is also the opinion of Rema 453:1. The implication of Terumat Ha-deshen is that if the kitniyot were not malted, their oil would be permitted. R. Yitzḥak Elḥanan Spektor in Responsa Be’er Yitzḥak §11 rules even more leniently, explaining that if the kitniyot were checked to ensure that no grain seeds were mixed in, the oil extracted from them is permitted, since the act of checking proves that the person is familiar with the prohibition. Similarly, Responsa Emek Halakha §134 permits whiskey distilled from kitniyot, as the prohibition applies to kitniyot themselves, not the liquid extracted from them.Conversely, other Aḥaronim maintain that oil extracted from kitniyot is prohibited even when the kitniyot are not malted (Nishmat Adam §33 and Avnei Nezer OḤ §373). However, Terumat Ha-deshen and Rema imply that such oil is permissible. This raises an apparent difficulty, since the oil will eventually be mixed with water, a process that would be forbidden to apply to grain. Thus, according to these authorities, the custom is to prohibit kitniyot in their seed and flour state, but not in their oil state. One need not be concerned that grain kernels got mixed in with the kitniyot, which would turn to ḥametz when the extracted oil is mixed with water, since any oil extracted from the grain is batel be-shishim and is not ḥozer ve-ne’or on Pesaḥ (SA 447:4). Additionally, it appears that even liquid that is exuded by grain does not become ḥametz, as explained in Oraḥ Mishpat §§111-112 and Responsa Marḥeshet §3. Tzemaḥ Tzedek permits this for poor people, provided that the kitniyot did not come into contact with water while in seed form.
Rav Kook has a well-known ruling (Oraḥ Mishpat 108-114) in which he broadly permitted sesame oil since not only are the seeds not malted, but the oil is also fried, which would prevent cereal grain from becoming ḥametz and is certainly enough to alleviate the problem of kitniyot. This idea is echoed by Avnei Nezer OḤ §533 with regard to rapeseed oil (this responsum appeared in 5458, 11 years before Rav Kook’s responsum). The Hasidic-Ashkenazic rabbinical court in Jerusalem vociferously opposed Rav Kook without any regard for the honor of Torah or of all of the poskim who had previously ruled even more leniently than Rav Kook on this matter. Rav Kook responded to them sharply, with erudition, and with strong proofs. As part of his response, he wrote (p. 123): “In truth, the path of my righteous and ingenious mentors, may their merit protect us and all of Israel, whom I merited to serve, was not to incline toward stringency when it was possible to be lenient, especially regarding issues without a strong basis in the words of the talmudic Sages. It is sufficient that we do not budge, God forbid, from the customs we accepted at the guidance of our rabbis, the poskim. But as for the details that can be argued one way or the other, certainly one who inclines toward a lenient ruling in an effort to be wise and benevolent is praiseworthy, as long as his words are based on the profundity of halakha and sound reasoning…” Furthermore, one who adds prohibitions to a prohibition that is not rooted in the law may violate a prohibition implied by a positive commandment (“lav ha-ba mi-khlal aseh”) according to Rashi’s comments in the first chapter of Beitza. As Rav Kook wrote (p. 126): “That which the Talmud often states, that we do not make decrees on top of other decrees, is derived from the following verse: ‘You shall safeguard my observances’ [‘u-shmartem et mishmarti’ – Vayikra 18:30]: make safeguards, i.e., enact decrees, for my observances, that is, for the Torah. But do not make safeguards for safeguards; do not make decrees upon decrees.” Against the claim that we must be increasingly stringent nowadays, Rav Kook writes: “I know the character of our contemporaries well: it is precisely when they see that everything that can be permitted based on the profundity of halakha is permitted, they will understand that when we do not permit it is based on the truth of Torah law. Consequently, many people will adhere to the Torah and heed the words of the Sages, God willing. On the other hand, when they discover that there are things that can be permitted according to the letter of the law, but the rabbis were not sensitive to the travails and hardships of the Jewish people and leave these matters in their prohibited state, it will cause a terrible desecration of God’s name, Heaven forbid. Ultimately, there will be an increase of outbursts saying about core elements of the Torah that if the rabbis want to permit it, they can; thus, the law will be perverted” (p. 126).

(4) Soybean, cottonseed, and canola (rapeseed) oils are not included in the prohibition. Many are stringent about soybean and canola oils, but whoever wishes to be lenient may be so. The widespread custom regarding cottonseed oil is to be lenient.⁶Soybean oil is produced without moistening the soybeans, so according to Rav Kook and most poskim it is not forbidden. Furthermore, it is questionable whether soybeans were even included in the prohibition of kitniyot, since they did not arrive in Europe until about 100 years ago. Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63 writes that only what has customarily been accepted as prohibited is included in the custom. This is also the opinion of R. Dov Lior, the rabbi and head of the rabbinical court in Kiryat Arba.Regarding cottonseed oil, Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:60 is lenient, citing a ruling attributed to R. Ḥayim Soloveitchik of Brisk. Sidur Pesaḥ Ke-hilkhato (16:4) rules leniently in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein. However, Minḥat Ḥinukh 3:138 is stringent.
Peanut Oil: We learned in section 4 above that in Greater Lithuania the custom was to eat peanuts, as per Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63, since only items that are known not to have been eaten because of kitniyot are prohibited. Peanuts, which were discovered later on, were not included in the original prohibition. On the other hand, Mikra’ei Kodesh 2:60 and Ḥelkat Yaakov §97 prohibit peanuts but permit peanut oil. This is also the opinion of Melamed Le-ho’il OḤ §88. Seridei Esh 2:37 also echoes this idea, and quotes that Avnei Nezer OḤ §383 prohibited peanut oil, as did Minḥat Elazar. Practically, if one is unaware of a family custom to be stringent, he may be lenient, since this is an unclear custom.

(5) Lecithin extracted from rapeseed and added to chocolate is not included in the kitniyot prohibition, though some are stringent.⁷The Badatz is strict about lecithin derived from rapeseed. Halakhically there is nothing wrong with this substance; however, there are many uncertainties that mitigate toward leniency. Firstly, rapeseed is not a legume (the technical meaning of kitniyot), but a member of the Brassicaceae family of crucifers, whose fruit grips the stalk and whose seeds grow in pods, much like the mustard plant. Oil is extracted from these seeds. According to Igrot Moshe OḤ 3:63, we do not forbid anything that was not explicitly prohibited by custom. Additionally, it is debatable whether the status of kitniyot can be applied to the seeds of a plant when it is clear that the plant itself is not kitniyot. However, according to Avnei Nezer OḤ §373, rapeseed oil is considered kitniyot, just like mustard (although even according to Avnei Nezer, if one boiled the seeds they would be permissible, as explained in §533). Moreover, we already saw that there are opinions that permit oil produced from any type of kitniyot. According to Maharsham 1:183, rapeseed oil is kosher for Pesaḥ since the oil is extracted without malting the seeds, and we have seen that most poskim are lenient in these situations, akin to the case of sesame oil. Finally, the oil is batel be-rov before Pesaḥ. According to Be’er Yitzḥak, any oil that was added to a mixture before Pesaḥ is batel. Ultimately, when there are so many uncertainties regarding a custom, we rule leniently. This is the ruling of R. Mordechai Eliyahu, as cited in Responsa Ama Devar 1:62.

(6) Chocolate and candy labeled “Kosher for Pesaḥ only for those who eat kitniyot” are technically permissible even for those who do not eat kitniyot, because the kitniyot in these products are added before Pesaḥ and are batel be-rov. In addition, these products generally contain kitniyot oils, which, according to several leading poskim, are not included in the custom to prohibit kitniyot. In practice, however, many people are stringent in this respect, and kosher certification agencies therefore label them as kosher for Pesaḥ only for those who eat kitniyot.⁸According to Rema 453:1 and MB 9 ad loc., even if kitniyot were mixed in on Pesaḥ, they are batel be-rov, although clearly one may not do so le-khatḥila. In this case, the mixing took place before Pesaḥ, and not for the purpose of nullifying the prohibited ingredients in the majority of permissible ingredients, since they may be eaten according to Sephardic custom. Therefore, since they were batel be-rov before Pesaḥ, the mixture may be eaten on Pesaḥ. Additionally, R. Yitzḥak Elḥanan Spektor writes in Be’er Yitzḥak §11 (quoted in n. 4 above) that the prohibition of kitniyot does not apply to kitniyot oil that was checked before Pesaḥ. This is the opinion of R. Lior and R. Rabinovitch.
R. Lior also rules that string beans and fava beans in their pods are kosher for Pesaḥ, since in this state they are considered vegetables and not kitniyot. They were never included in the original prohibition since all of the concerns that were mentioned as the reason for the custom of kitniyot never applied to them.

(1) Kitniyot / Extenuating Circumstances, the Sick, and Babies

(2) Clearly, the Ashkenazic custom to refrain from kitniyot cannot be stricter than the prohibition against ḥametz itself. Therefore, in extenuating circumstances like drought or famine, leading halakhic authorities permitted eating kitniyot. In actuality, rabbis have often disagreed whether the need was pressing enough to permit eating kitniyot. Some rabbis were inclined to be lenient, others to be stringent, and still others to permit kitniyot to the poor alone, requiring the wealthy to buy other types of foods. On such matters, one must follow the ruling of the accepted local rabbinic authorities.

(3) Some Aḥaronim write that when applying these leniencies to kitniyot, it is better first to permit kitniyot that do not resemble cereal grain, and only permit rice, millet, and buckwheat when there is no choice (Nishmat Adam). Additionally, some Aḥaronim state that when applying these leniencies, one should first scald the kitniyot in boiling water, since scalding prevents even cereal grains from becoming ḥametz. Even though in practice we do not permit scalding cereal grains on Pesaḥ, when it is necessary to be lenient with kitniyot, it is best to take precautions as much as possible (Ḥatam Sofer OḤ §122; MB 453:7).⁹Ḥayei Adam (127:1) permits eating kitniyot in truly extenuating circumstances, like if one has nothing else to eat. See also Nishmat Adam §20 and Mor U-ketzi’a (which assert that ideally the custom of kitniyot should be abolished altogether). Ha-mo’adim Be-halakha’s chapter on kitniyot states that Teshuva Me-ahava, Ma’amar Mordechai, and Mahariz Enzil maintain that one may not eat kitniyot even in an extreme situation. Conversely, Maharam Padua of Brisk (§48) permits kitniyot in extenuating circumstances. Divrei Malkiel 1:28 and Sho’el U-meishiv 2:4:158 rule leniently for poor people only. Ḥatam Sofer OḤ §122 does not oppose the lenient authorities but notes that they should require scalding the kitniyot before eating. Nishmat Adam §20 states that one should first permit kitniyot that do not resemble cereal grain, and only as a last option permit those that resemble grain. MB states that one may certainly be lenient in extenuating circumstances and cites Ḥatam Sofer and Ḥayei Adam that scalding is required before eating. AHS 453:5 states: “They explicitly accepted that if there would be famine and the poor would be starving for food, all of the local sages, led by the chief rabbi, would permit kitniyot on that Pesaḥ.”

(4) One who is ill and needs to eat kitniyot may do so, even if he is not dangerously ill. For example, one may swallow flaxseed with water as a laxative. One may likewise feed rice to children who need it (Ḥayei Adam 127:6), though special utensils should be set aside for this. Anytime one acts leniently, the kitniyot should be thoroughly inspected to ensure that they contain no cereal grains.