“And the rulers brought shoham stones, and stones to be set, for the efod, and for the breastplate” (Shemos 35:27)

Chazal teach us that the word Nesi’im (וְהַנְּשִׂאִם) is written without a yud because the Nesi’im were lax and did not act with zerizus (alacrity) in bringing their donations for the Mishkan. The medrash relates – cited by Rashi – when the time came for the korbanos of the nesi’im, they offered them with tremendous alacrity, as an act of teshuva.

Rav Baruch Mordechai Ezrachi (1929-2023) asks, “Why do we need to discuss how they acted at a later time? Why isn’t it enough to simply tell us that they were lax when bringing the precious stones?”

He answers with a profound insight. We usually understand “zerizus” as acting as quickly and efficiently as possible, depending on the mitzvah’s deadline or demands. One may assume that different people would have different standards of alacrity in the same situation. Rav Ezrachi explains that the omission of a letter in nesi’im highlights this point: Though ordinary individuals would not have been faulted for such a reasonable delay, due to the lofty position of the nesi’im, even that delay was inappropriate for them.

Chazal explain that the nesi’im held back from donating right away so that others would have the opportunity to donate as well. This seems to be a thoughtful and responsible approach. So why was it considered improper?

Rabbi Ezrachi explains that the role of the nasi is to serve as a teacher for the entire nation. It must be apparent to all that they fulfill every mitzvah to the utmost of their ability. When people of such stature allowed others to precede them, that delay appeared as a form of laziness. Therefore, it was important to point out that by the korbanos they acted with alacrity, in order to emphasize that laziness wasn’t the issue. Rather, in light of their position, their reasoning was faulty.

This carries an important lesson regarding the true nature of alacrity. The Chasam Sofer (Rabbi Moshe Sofer 1762-1839) in his   discusses the baking of matzos in Pressburg: The dough had to enter the oven within four minutes. Although halacha permits up to 18 minutes, he insisted on greater stringency, explaining that the concept of alacrity is learned from baking matzos. Therefore, even though chometz is not an issue, we still have to act with as much alacrity as possible.

Many times people ask me questions relating to religious observances: “Is this good enough? Will that suffice?” Such questions are befitting in most areas of halacha. But when it comes to Pesach, the approach tends to be different – people generally seek the more stringent opinion. As Chazal explain, alacrity is closely linked to Pesach.

Many do spring cleaning and attribute it to Pesach. Even though there is no halachic basis for the spring cleaning, I would suggest that if someone undertakes this extra effort with the intention of perhaps eliminating even a crumb of chometz, they earn credit for zerizus in the mitzvah of getting rid of chometz. Of course, this must not come at the expense of properly fulfilling all the other Pesach-related mitzvos.

May we merit to not only remove all chometz, but also to approach our Pesach preparations — and the Yom Tov itself — with true alacrity. Let us be careful in all that we do, even adding an extra measure of diligence to ensure everything is performed in the best possible way – avoiding any missteps, and fulfilling all our mitzvos properly.