Translation by Yehudah B. Ilan
Rabbenu codifies the halakhah as follows (and not like others who quote him that merely say “the Rambam wrote”):
"There is no prohibition due to hamets on Pesah except with regard to the five species of grain alone, which are hitah and kusemet and the three species of barley, which are s`orah and shibbolet shu`al and shifon. But kitniot like rice, millet, beans, lentils, and other such things, have no prohibition of hamets associated with them. Rather, even if one were to knead rice flour or other such things with boiling water and cover it with a cloth until it rises like a lump of dough that has become leavened - behold, this is permitted to be eaten on Pesah because this is not himuts, but is rather sirahon (i.e. the decay of the flour)."
(Hilkhot Hamets Umatsah 5:1, Makhon Mosheh edition, Qiryat Ono)
It is this that we (i.e. the Temanim) have accepted and follow, and our fathers - may their souls rest in peace – did not see a need to become strict about something which is explicitly permitted. And this position of theirs is in contradistinction to a few of the poskim from Ashkenaz who forbade the eating of kitniot. Each of these poskim kept their exact reasons for prohibiting it to themselves (i.e. since there is no clear reason given by them for prohibiting kitniot). Among Ashkenazi Jews in recent times, this custom is related to as if it were a law of the Torah itself and "it shouldn't be changed" (אין לשנות) and "it is good to be strict" (טוב להחמיר) and other recommendations; recommendations that arise from concern for the opinion of this "Gadol" or that "Gadol" who is supposedly greater than the first. And there are also cases of "tzvai dinim" (צווי דינים) brought by them – a concept that appears to be completely new in the world of halakhic methodology.
The author of the commentary on the Shulhan `Arukh called Sha`arei Teshuvah (OH, siman 453), Rav Haim Mordekhai Margoliot, brings the opinions of a number of scholars on the subject of kitniot on Pesah (i.e. opinions to forbid them). In the course of his comments there he writes:
"...and in one place several of the scholars stood up who wanted to overturn (לפרוץ גדר) this custom (i.e. to allow the consumption of kitniot), but they were not successful because scholars of the generation from among the Gedolei Ashkenaz who rushed toward them (this is the language of conflict between scholars in the world of customs and halakhah), stood in their way (עמדו בפרץ), and upheld the words of the Sages, ruling to continue the
prohibition (i.e. these scholars ascribed to this custom the force of an actual halakhah to forbid kitniot) in these countries. And one should not learn from the practice of those places that have permitted kitniot from time immemorial since they only permit them because the decree of the Gedolim never reached them regarding this, and it is comparable to the prohibition against marrying two women (look at the extent that they have taken this to!)...and one Gadol was even strict about coffee (What have we come to? May God protect us!). Even though it is certainly a tree fruit and not a grain at all, it seems that he wanted to be strict about it because the general populace did not know exactly what it was and thought that it too was species of kitniot and he feared that if coffee were to be permitted, then eventually all kitniot would be permitted and they would overturn (ויפרצו גדר) the ruling of the early authorities..."
Later on he writes that there is also a problem with tea, etc. (See there)
Perhaps it can be demonstrated that the general populace did not learn or understand while the scholars of Ashkenaz recognized the problem and therefore surrounded the people with many humrot. That kind of ingnorance may be understandable for the general populace, but where do these Torah scholars come from who are so ignorant, it seems, that they cannot even recognize the shape of the letter alef?
The author of Sha`arei Teshuvah is correct with regard to the general populace of his time. It seems that there was a societal reality in this regard that began in the 13th Century because at that time the humrot on the subject of kitniot became widespread, as well as the ideas of "it shouldn't be changed" (אין לשנות), "it is good be strict" (טוב להחמיר), "blessing will come to the one who is strict" (והמחמיר תבוא עליו ברכה), etc. These concepts occupied a central place among those who obviously did not learn well enough, for the words of the Talmud "the force of leniency is superior" (כוחא דהיתרא עדיף – b.Bessah 2b) are well known and one who does learn a subject thoroughly prefers to be strict (see Rashi's comments there).
The basis of the humrot instituted by the scholars of Ashkenaz is the opinion expressed by Rav Yohanan ben Nuri who held that rice was a species of grain to which the prohibition of hamets applied (b.Pesahim 35a). But the halakhah is not like him, but rather like the Sages (i.e. "...we do not care about the opinion of Yohanan be Nuri" ולית דחייש להא דר' יוחנן בן נורי – see b.Pesahim 114b). It seems that they were concerned that perhaps there might possibly be a kernel of wheat or barley mixed into the rice in Ashkenaz and that the general populace, not knowing the difference between them, would not check properly (i.e. "we are not experts..." אנן לא בקיאינן) and so they became divided over humrot. Rabbenu Yeruham, a student of the Rosh, famously writes that those who have the custom to abstain from eating kitniot on Pesah are following "a stupid custom, beside the fact they are placing strictures upon themselves and I do not know why" (and we also do not know why...).
Rav Yosef Qaro in the Shulhan Arukh rules that it is permitted to eat rice and kitniot on Pesah (OH, siman 453a). And despite his ruling there are many Sefaradim who are strict and have adopted Ashkenazi custom to forbid them because of the words of the Rema "there are those who prohibit" (ויש אוסרין). But even the Rema states regarding the custom to forbid rice and kitniot that if it should happen that some should fall ( bedi`avad) into a dish, the dish is permitted to be eaten and it is also permitted to keep kitniot within one's house on Pesah and that there is no prohibition to do so (see there). And we ask: If it is permitted then why is it forbidden?
Rav Ovadyah Yosef permits the eating of kitniot and rice, but requires that they be carefully inspected to make sure that there is no wheat or barley in them (Yalqut Yosef, Vol. 5, page 353, section 3).
And we (i.e. the Temanim) thank the Omnipresent, Blessed be He, for the manifold kindnesses that He has poured out upon us and like a faithful and loving father He has granted us the privilege of rising early in the morning to learn Mishnah and halakhah. We do not spend our Sabbaths and festivals reading "kosher" newspapers and newsletters, rather we rise early and go to bed late due to our study, not being satisfied with the occasional lessons from rabbis who give homiletic speeches (i.e. devoid of any real halakhic discussion). And this level of dedication is proper and good for the holy descendants of Israel. Blessed is the One who has chosen us and separated us from the loud and noisy crowd that appears to be going from bad to worse.
It would not possible to complete our discussion without bringing before the readers the words of our teacher, Rav Yosef Qafih, who soul rests in Gan `Eden, on that which is written in the Sefer HaMinhagoth that, namely that "the entire world" has the custom to not eat grains of any kind on Pesah since they become hamets, etc.
He writes:
"And as for that which is written in the Sefer HaMinhagot (by Rav Yitzchak Isaac Tyrnau, near the end of the 14th Century) that the 'entire world has this custom': it is an error and these words are simply not true. The majority of the Eastern lands did not have a custom to prohibit kitniot and in Yemen they ate all types of kitniot on Pesah in accordance with the truth of the Torah. And that which he wrote, that kitniot become hamets because they are called himtsi – these words are ridiculous because himtsi is not a name for all kitniot, but only a type of kitniot which is called humus in Arabic and himtsi in Aramaic (i.e. chickpeas). And if we are going to derive prohibitions from names then we would need to prohibit eating the Fallow Deer (היחמור) – which is a kosher animal – because it's name is similar to the word humrah. Such a thing could never be said. And regarding that which he wrote: 'We do not eat kitniot on the festival because it detracts from the joy of the holiday' – these words are even more ridiculous since if he had seen lahuh d'rah (לחוח ד'רה) with sesame oil and two eggs cracked over it, he would have put down his stale bread with holes in it and run with all of his strength to obtain this delicacy. He would have done the same for a dish of rice, meat, and bone marrow, and he would have said like we do, 'Is there a greater pleasure on the festival than this?'"
(Rambam, Hilkhot Hamets Umatsah 5:1, comment 1).