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

Chazal tell 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 donation. Because of this, the medrash tells us and Rashi brings it, when it came to the offering of the nesi’im they did so with a lot of alacrity. Rav Baruch Mordechai Ezrachi (1929-2023) asks, “Why was it that we have to discuss how they acted at a different time. Why isn’t it enough to tell us that they were lax now when they were bringing the stones?

He answers this question with a fascinating idea. Generally, we understand the idea that doing something with alacrity means to do something as quickly and efficiently as possible. This is dependent on when the thing has to be done. We would not assume that for different people different levels of alacrity would be appropriate. He explains that the omission of a letter in nesi’im reflects that, given their lofty position, their delay was inappropriate. Ordinary individuals would not have been faulted for such tardiness. Chazal tell us that the reason that they didn’t donate away is that they wanted others to have an opportunity. This seems to be a very logical and responsible approach. So why was it considered improper?

Rabbi Ezrachi explains that the job of the nasi is to be a teacher to all people, and it has to be apparent to all that everything that they do, they do to their utmost. Therefore, when people of their stature allowed others to precede them, that delay was considered a form of laziness.

This is something which is very important for us to understand regarding the idea of alacrity. The Chasam Sofer (Rabbi Moshe Sofer 1762-1839) in his Teshuvos writes that when making matzos for the city of Pressburg, the dough had to be in the oven without four minutes of time. Even though halachically we have up to 18 minutes, he said that the idea of alacrity is learned from baking matzos, so there even if it is not a question of chometz, we still have to be alacritous as best as we can.

Many times people ask me questions about is this good enough or is that good enough. That is in all areas of halacha. When it comes to Pesach, people in general look to do like the more stringent opinion. The reason for this is as Chazal tell us, Pesach has extra stringencies, but even as the positive aspect, alacrity is closely related to Pesach.

There are many people who do spring cleaning and they blame it on Pesach. I would like to suggest that even though there is no halachic basis for the spring cleaning, if someone does it having in mind that maybe they will get rid of a crumb of chometz, they can get credit for it as being alacritous in the mitzvah of getting rid of chometz. However, that must be done not at the expense of fulfilling all the other Pesach-related mitzvos properly.

May we merit not only to remove all chometz, but also to approach our preparations for Pesach — 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.