In our days, most communities—Ashkenazi and Sephardic—arrange a Chamets-selling system in which the community members empower the rabbi to sell their Chamets.

This procedure is a Halakhic leniency done to avoid people from keeping “expensive” Chamets at home during Pesach.
Obviously, the validity of this selling should not be questioned, since every rabbi leads his community according to what he considers best for his congregants.

Personally, I don’t sell my Chamets, and I encourage other Sephardic Jews to do the same.

Historically, Sephardic Jews did not practice the mekhirat Chamets (=selling of Chamets) procedure.
They simply got rid of their Chamets before Pesach began, fulfilling the Mitsva of tashbitu.

The only exceptional case in which Sephardic rabbis authorized selling the Chamets was the case of a food store owner. In this case, a non-Jew would make a down payment for the total of the merchandise, and from the moment he made that payment, the Chamets merchandise would belong completely to the buyer, and he would be entirely responsible for the goods if damaged, stolen, etc.

So, for example, if the goods were stolen during Pesach, the buyer would have to pay for them to the seller after Pesach.
The buyer would also rent the store where the merchandise was stored for the duration of Pesach, and he would keep the store’s keys, which granted him total and unrestricted access to the premises of the store.
The non-Jewish buyer had the right to use, consume, or even trade the Chamets merchandise during Pesach. And if he wished to, he could pay the balance and keep the merchandise for himself.
As you can see, although the clear intent was that the seller would eventually buy back the Chamets after Pesach, the selling transaction was real, legal, and binding.
The rabbis would not have accepted any phony selling transaction that did not comply with Jewish and local law, because obviously, they took very seriously the prohibition of owning Chamets during Pesach.

Except for food business owners, the Sephardic community would not sell their Chamets. What would they do with their leftover Chamets food?

1. First, before Pesach, people would buy just whatever was necessary until Pesach, avoiding having extra Chamets-food close to Pesach.

2. Second, whatever leftovers of Chamets, if in good condition, would be given to a non-Jew as charity or as a gift. If that was not possible, it would be disposed of. Disposing of Chamets leftovers the day before Pesach is a Biblical Mitsva. So this is not considered “waste” (bal tashchit).

3. If some Chamets had accidentally not been detected, then the bitul Chamets—the formula of renunciation of our ownership of any unseen Chamets in our properties—would prevent the transgression of owning Chamets during Pesach.

If one follows these simple steps, then there is no real need to “sell and buy back” any Chamets.
I would obviously encourage Sephardic Jews to preserve the ancient Minhag and not sell their Chamets, but get rid of it.

To clarify  the technical problems involved in the mekhirat Chamets procedure, see below 

Remember that you only have to get rid of Chamets which is a food item (for human or animal consumption).
You do not need to sell your pots and pans, or anything that might contain “invisible” Chamets (Chamets balua’). Just put those utensils away during Pesach.

Medical pills, perfumes, cosmetics, or any non-edible items can be kept, regardless of their composition.
Food items: you can keep anything as long as you make sure that it does not contain any of these five grains: wheat, barley, oats, rye, spelt. (FYI: anything that contains gluten is Chamets. Check online!)

Conclusion:
Selling or not selling your Chamets is, at the end of the day—like any other Halakhic leniency or stringency—a personal choice made in consultation with your community’s rabbi.

Those who wish to keep their valuable Chamets products (whiskey, vodka, or liquors made from grain alcohol, etc.) should arrange the selling of the Chamets through their local rabbinate and avoid online selling.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

One of the best and most informed documents to learn all the details and debates around the modern selling of Chamets is a response written by Rabbi Eliyahu Zini, a famous Sephardic rabbi who is also a professor of Mathematics at the Technion, Haifa. I first heard about this article in a lecture given on the subject of Mekhirat Chamets by H. Joseph Mosseri, נ״י (the original article cannot be found online anymore)

Rabbi Zini explains that the precedent for selling Chamets is learned from a Tosefta that says that if a Jew is on a ship, bringing with him some Chamets goods, and his ship is late and will not arrive before Pesach as planned, the Jew could give his Chamets to a non-Jew, and he is permitted to acquire the Chamets back from him after Pesach is over.
This case was considered by the rabbis an exceptional case, since this person is in the middle of the ocean and has no other resource than to sell all his merchandise.

Rabbi Zini brings many sources, especially from the time of the Geonim, which sustain the opinion that the Tosefta refers to an exceptional case. He points out, for example, that the Mishna and the Gemara discussed at length all the different ways to dispose of Chamets (burning, throwing it into the sea, feeding it to birds, etc.) and never mentioned, discussed, or conceived selling the Chamets as one of the ways of disposing of Chamets.

Moreover, following the modern way of selling the Chamets, all the rules the rabbis instituted—like bediqat Chamets or bitul Chamets—would be meaningless and unnecessary.

Following the Tosefta, Sephardic rabbis authorized a food store owner to sell his Chamets to a non-Jew, since it is an exceptional case, and even then, they authorized it under very specific conditions.

Rabbi Zini also explains that in the case of the Tosefta, there was a transference of the goods from the Jew to the non-Jew. In other words, the non-Jew takes possession of the Chamets goods (meshikha), which is an unequivocal legal act of acquisition.

Rabbi Zini brings several sources which assert that if the goods would remain in the house of the Jew, that is an unequivocal sign of ha’arama (in this case, “a bogus sale”).

This requirement—that the goods be transferred to the house of the non-Jew—is brought as a prerequisite for the valid selling of the Chamets by Terumat haDeshen, which is the source of the Bet Yosef.

Once and again, Rabbi Zini brings the Geonim and Rishonim, who, quoting the Tosefta, emphasize that the selling would be valid only if it is not a phony sale (ubalvad shelo ya’arim).

The next element which would be considered a sign of ha’arama, or a bogus transaction for most rabbis, is that the Tosefta discusses an exceptional case where a person is in the middle of the ocean, in a ship that was probably delayed for a few days and could not arrive at home before Pesach.

And, as Maimonides points out, higi’a sha’at ha’hamishit—the time for getting rid of Chamets had arrived—and this person has no other resource.

In halakhic terms, this is known as she’at hadahaq, extreme and unpredicted circumstances, the equivalent of bedi’avad.
However, when one deliberately plans to sell the Chamets every year as a way of circumventing the Mitsva of disposing of Chamets, according to Rabbi Zini, this is an unequivocal sign that the sale is insincere and therefore invalid.

Another point brought by Rabbi Zini is that, when valid and binding, this selling transaction implies that the buyer owns the Chamets and is entirely responsible for it.

The whole point of the sale is that once the non-Jew pays the down payment, the Chamets belongs to him. The balance is made into a debt (similar to a promissory note), and the fact that the buyer did not pay the balance yet does not affect his ownership of the Chamets.

In these conditions, the entire responsibility for those goods is the buyer’s.
Thus, for example, if during Pesach the whisky that I sold to the buyer and kept in my house was stolen or broken, I should not care, because the goods are under the buyer’s responsibility and therefore he will pay me back for those destroyed goods once Pesach is over.

As we know, this is not the case in practical terms with the modern selling of Chamets. Most people would definitely care that the Chamets (“their” Chamets) not be stolen or damaged, which again is a sign that they consider this Chamets their property.

The main opinion among modern Halakhic authorities who accepts as valid this selling of the Chamets was the Hatam Sofer (1762–1839). And as we said, relying just on this opinion, against the opinion of most rabbis, would be an exceptional leniency—especially for Sephardic Jews who never followed this practice.

Even among Ashkenazi rabbis, this type of sale was criticized. The champion of this cause was no other than the Gaon of Vilna (1720–1797), who considered that whoever sells his Chamets with ha’arama is violating two Biblical prohibitions (bal yera’e and bal yimatse) and failing to comply with one positive Biblical commandment (tashbitu).

Algunas Objeciones A La Venta Del Jamets.

En mi opinión, uno de los textos mejor documentados que nos permite comprender los       detalles y el debate alrededor de la venta de Jamets que realizamos en nuestros días, es una responsa, (del latín: Respuesta) escrita por el Rab Eliyahu Zini, un rabino que es también profesor de matemáticas en el famoso Instituto Technión de Haifa. Oí por primera vez, acerca de este documento, en una conferencia que, sobre el tema de Mejirat Jametz, dio el Sr. Joseph Mosseri, en Brooklyn, NY.

El Rab Zini explica que el precedente para la venta del Jamets se aprende de la Toseftá que dice que, si un judío, se encuentra en un barco y lleva con él mercancía Jamets, en el caso que su barco se atrase y no llegue a puerto para Pesaj, como estaba planeado , el Yehudí le puede dar o vender su Jamets, a un no judío, y se le permite, al término de Pesaj, comprar nuevamente el Jamets de él  .

Este caso fue considerado por los rabinos como excepcional: una persona que está en medio del océano y no tiene otro recurso más que vender toda su mercancía. Rab Zini trae muchas fuentes, especialmente del tiempo de los Gueoním, que sostienen que la Toseftá se refiere a un caso excepcional. Indica por ejemplo que la Mishná y la Guemará, desarrollan ampliamente el tema de las diferentes maneras de deshacerse del Jamets (quemarlo, echarlo al mar, alimentar con él aves, etc.) pero nunca se menciona, se discute, ni se considera el concepto de la “venta” del Jamets como una de las maneras de desechar el Jamets. Más aun, siguiendo la lógica del método condicional de venta de Jamets en nuestros días, todas las reglas que los rabinos instituyeron respecto al Jamets, como la búsqueda de Jamets y la anulación de Jamets, se vuelven insignificantes y completamente innecesarias. Siguiendo la Toseftá, los rabinos sefaradíes autorizaron la venta de Jamets a no judíos en casos excepcionales, como por ejemplo el caso de una tienda de alimentos, y solamente bajo condiciones muy estrictas, como veremos a continuación.

Por ejemplo, en el caso de la Toseftá, hubo una transferencia de la mercancía del judío al no judío. En otras palabras, el no-judío tomó posesión de los productos Jamets (משיכה).El Rab Zini cita varias fuentes que afirman que, si la mercancía permaneciera en la casa del judío, eso sería un signo inequívoco de ha’rama, o transacción ficticia. Este requerimiento, que los      productos sean transferidos a la casa del no judío, se trae como prerrequisito para dar validez a la venta de Jamets por el Terumat HaDeshen, quien es la base del Beth Yosef en este tema. El Rab Zini también menciona a los Gueoním y Rishonim que mencionan la Toseftá, enfatizando que la venta de Jamets tendría validez únicamente, en caso de ser real (ובלבד שלא יערים).

El siguiente elemento que también es considerado un signo de הערמה, “ficción” (una ficción jurídica, porque la verdadera intención no es lo que indica la transacción) por la mayoría de los rabinos, es que, como ya dijimos, la Toseftá menciona un caso excepcional, dónde la persona estuvo en medio del océano, en un barco que tuvo un retraso probable de algunos días. Como indica Maimónides,הגיע השעה החמישית , el tiempo en la víspera de Pesaj llegó y esta persona no tiene otro recurso. En términos Halájicos este tipo de situaciones se conoce como: “Sheat Hadajac”, un caso extremo, que es un equivalente de:“Bedi’abad”, “si ocurrió que…”, pero, cuando uno planea deliberadamente vender su Jamets para eludir la Mitsvá de desechar el Jamets, para estos Posqim, es un signo inequívoco de que la venta no es sincera y por lo tanto carece de validez.

Otro punto que trae Rab Zini es, que una transacción de venta válida, implica que el comprador es enteramente responsable por la mercadería que compra. Es decir, una vez que el comprador no-judío paga el anticipo del valor total, el Jamets le pertenece. La diferencia de dinero queda como una deuda (imagine que A le paga a B con su tarjeta de crédito y después A le paga al banco).  El hecho que el comprador no ha liquidado su deuda, no afecta su derecho y responsabilidad sobre la mercadería en cuestión. En estas condiciones, la responsabilidad total por la mercancía debería ser del comprador. Por lo tanto, si durante Pesaj, el Jamets que yo vendí al comprador y mantengo en mi casa, p.e., una botella de whisky, es robado o se quiebra, no debería importarme, ya que de ser una venta real seria responsabilidad del comprador y él debería pagarme por la mercancía destruida una vez que termine Pesaj. Como sabemos, este no es el caso en los términos prácticos de la venta de Jamets. El comprador no tiene una responsabilidad legal en la practica  por los productos Jamets, lo cual representa una señal que no considera el Jamets como propio.

La principal opinión entre las autoridades halájicas que aceptan como válida una venta legal pero ficticia del Jamets es la del Jatam Sofer (1762–1839). Como dije, apoyarse en esta opinión, contra la opinión de la mayoría de los rabinos que exigen deshacerse realmente del Jamets vendiéndolo sin intención de recuperarlo , sería una lenidad excepcional, especialmente para los judíos sefaradíes que nunca adoptaron esta práctica. Aún entre los rabinos Ashkenazim este tipo de venta ficticia fue criticada. El principal portavoz de esta crítica, fue, no otro que, el Gaón de Vilna  (1720–1839) que consideró que, quien vende su Jamets con הערמה, viola, dos prohibiciones bíblicas (bal yera–é, bal ymats–é) y no cumple, con el mandamiento bíblico positivo (tashbitu).

Para leer el artículo completo del Rab Zini (Hebreo), dirigirse al enlace:

Http://www.orvishua.org.il/heb/files/art/1144659147.pdf.

Agradezco la ayuda del la Sra M.A. de Panamá por la traducción de este articulo (YB).

Rabbi David ben Zimra, known as the Radbaz (רדב”ז aka Ridbaz) was born in Spain in 1479. At the age of 13, when the Jews were expelled from Spain, his family moved to Israel and settled in the city of Safed (צפת). There, rabbi David learned with Rabbi Yosef Zaragosi, the Rabbinical leader of the Jewish community of Safed at the turn of the century. In 1517 he moved to Egypt where he was appointed as the Hakham Bashi, or Chief rabbi of Egypt, a position that he held for over forty years. He rejected to work for the community professionally because he feared that if his sustenance would depend on the community he would not be able to rule with objectivity. The Radbaz then dedicated himself to commerce and became a very successful merchant, dealing with wheat and leather in the international market. He amassed a great fortune, which allowed him to be financially independent form the community and even to found and support his own Yeshiba.  Some of the students of that Yeshiba were great luminaries, like rabbi Isaac Luria (the Ari haQadosh), rabbi Betsalel Ashkenazi (שיטה מקובצת), and the Radbaz’s most prominent student and spiritual heir, Rabbi Ya’aqob Castro (מהריק”ש), one of the most famous rabbis in Egypt at the time .

Upon attaining the age of 90, the Radbaz resigned the chief rabbinate in Egypt and moved to Erets israel. He settled in Safed and became an active member of the rabbinical court of rabbi Yosef Caro. The Radbaz died in Safed in 1573.  His inheritance, by his request, was distributed among the poor, making a special provision for Tora scholars.

The Radbaz wrote many books and close to 3000 rabbinical responsa (Questions and answers)

 One of his most far reaching responsa was the one that deals with the origin of the Jews of Ethiopia, which he considered as descendants of the tribe of Dan, one of the lost Ten Tribes.

For many centuries the Rabbis have heard about a tribe in Ethiopia, which claimed being of Jewish ascendant. But for the rabbis this questions was always a theoretical question, and never a practical one. In the time of the Radbaz this question became a practical matter when a group of African captives was brought to the slave market in Egypt. A woman , with her two sons, claimed that she was Jewish, from the tribe of Dan.

The Radbaz writes (She-elot Utshubot haRadbaz, 4:219): “Once there was a Cushite woman from the land of Cush, otherwise known as Habbash [=Ethiopia] who was taken prisoner along with her two sons, and she was bought by one Reuben.   We asked her what her status was, and she answered that she had been married and these were her sons by her husband, whose name was so-and-so, and this son was so-and-so. [She said that] the enemy came and killed all the people who had been in the synagogue, and the women … they took captive…”

For the purposes of this and another fascinating investigation [i.e., the origin of the Nile] the Radbaz studied the testimonies of Ethiopian scholars and he collected evidence from two Jews, one of them coming from Ethiopia, Rabbi Isaac al-Habbashi, and the second testimony from a local Egyptian merchant who had traveled to Ethiopia and met these “Jews” in their land.

The Radbaz analyzed this case from many different angles. For example, he found that these Jews did not keep some regular Mitsvot, like lighting candles before Shabbat. His argument was that the Jews from Ethiopia, they either came to their land before the rabbis issued the decree of hadalaqat nerot, or that they were descendants of the baytosim, Jews who rejected the oral tradition.

Finally, he says that the status of the Ethiopian Jews is similar to the Karaites Jews:  they should accept to follow Jewish tradition, and should come under the law of redeeming captives, (pidyon shebuim), thus, the Falash Mura should be bought from the slave market and set free.

Four hundred years after the passing of the Radbaz, and based on the Radbaz’s responsa the Falash Mura were once again considered as Jews, and brought into the State of Israel.

The rabbi who made this ruling was no other than Rabbi obadia Yosef z”l. In February 9, 1973, Rabbi Obadia, then Chef rabbi of Israel, wrote an historical responsa in which he said that “based on the Radbaz… the Ethiopian tribes Falasha or Falash Mura, should be considered Jews… they should be saved from assimilation, rescued and brought to Israel under the laws of return [an Israel law that guarantees Israeli citizenship for every Jews], they should be reeducated to follow Jewish tradition, and participate in the rebuilding of our Holy Land, thus [fulfilling the words of the prophet :] “and the sons will return to their land”.

These are the original words of the responsa of rabbi Obadia Yosef

בהסתמך על הגאון הרדב”ז בתשובה (שאלות ותשובות דברי דוד הלכות אישות סימן ח) שאלו הפלשים בלי ספק משבט דן, ורק מפני שלא היו ביניהם חכמים מבעלי הקבלה תפסו להם פשטי המקראות, ודינם כתינוק הנשבה לבין הגוים, ודינם כישראל שאנו מצווים לפדותם ולהחיותם לכן באתי למסקנה שהפלשים הם צאצאי שבטי ישראל שהדרימו לכוש…והחלטתי כי הם יהודים שחייבים להצילם מטמיעה ומהתבוללות, ולהחיש עלייתם ארצה, ולחנכם ברוח תורתנו הקדושה, ולשתפם בבניין ארצנו הקדושה ושבו בנים לגבולם

Today, in a great part thanks to the Radbaz, more than 125,000 Ethiopian Jews live in Israel.