The Torah commands in the Book of Shemot (12:15), “Ach Ba’yom Ha’rishon Tashbitu Se’or Mi’batechem” – that we must eliminate Hametz from our homes “on the first day” of the festival of Pesach. While this command at first seems to require eliminating Hametz from our homes only on the first day of Pesach, the 15 th of Nissan, the Gemara (Pesahim 5) explains that in truth, it means that the Hametz must be eliminated by the onset of the first day of Pesach, and thus this is required already on the 14 th of Nissan, Ereb Pesach. This Misva, of course, like the other commands relevant to Pesach, are observed for the purpose of commemorating the great miracles that G-d performed for our ancestors at the time of the Exodus from Egypt. This command applies in all places, and even after the destruction of the Bet Ha’mikdash. It is binding upon both men and women. One who does not eliminate Hametz from his home on the 14 th of Nissan is in violation of a Misvat Aseh (affirmative command). If he leaves the Hametz in his home during Pesach, he violates as well the Misvat Lo Ta’aseh (Torah prohibition) of “Se’or Lo Yimaseh Be’batechem” – that Hametz may not be present in one’s home during Pesach. Although Misvot Lo Ta’aseh (Torah prohibitions) are generally punishable with Malkut (lashes), one is not liable to Malkut for violating this prohibition, because it entails no action, and one is liable to Malkut only for violating a Misvat Lo Ta’aseh that is transgressed by committing an action. The Minhat Hinuch, in discussing the command of “Tashbitu,” notes that this Misva might perhaps be treated differently than other Misvot Aseh. He cites the discussion of the Ran (Rabbenu Nissim of Gerona, Spain, 1320-1380) in Masechet Yoma (4 in the Rif) regarding the case of an ill patient who is in life-threatening condition on Shabbat and urgently requires food. Needless to say, Pikuah Nefesh (saving a human life) overrides Torah law, and it would thus be permissible to cook food for this patient, despite the prohibition against cooking on Shabbat. The Ran writes that even if readymade non-kosher food is available, it is preferable to cook kosher food for this patient. He explains that the transgression of cooking on Shabbat is violated through just one action, whereas the prohibition against eating non-kosher food is violated through each and every act of eating. Therefore, it is preferable to violate once the severe transgression of Shabbat desecration, even though it is punishable by death, rather than have the patient repeatedly violate the less severe prohibition of eating non-kosher food. According to the Ran, repeatedly violating a lower-level prohibition is treated by Halacha with greater severity than a one-time violation of a higher-level prohibition. By the same token, the Minhat Hinuch posits, one might argue that the Misvat Aseh of eliminating Hametz, which one violates at every moment he allows the Hametz to remain in his home, should be considered a stricter command than other Misvot Aseh, which one violates only at one moment. For example, the moment Rosh Hashanah ends, one who did not hear the Shofar blowing has transgressed the Misva at that moment. In the case of “Tashbitu,” however, one transgresses the Misva repeatedly, every moment the Hametz is present in the home. The Minhat Hinuch proposes two practical applications of this theory. First, it will affect the question of how much an expense one must incur in order to fulfill this Misva. Generally, Halacha requires one to spend even all his money if necessary to avoid violating a Misvat Lo Ta’aseh, but requires spending only up to one-fifth of one’s assets for the sake of fulfilling a Misvat Aseh (Shulhan Aruch, Orah Haim 656). When it comes to the Misvat Aseh of “Tashbitu,” however, one might argue that since this Misva is violated every moment it is not performed, its status is that of a Misvat Lo Ta’aseh, and thus one would be required to spend any amount of money necessary for t